HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-11/08/1989 HEARING 1 1
2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD : COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
3 SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
----------------------------------------
4
5
6
7 AGENDA
8
9 REGULAR MEETING
10
11 WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1989
12
13
14
15
16
17 BOARD MEMBERS:
18
19 Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman
20 Serge Doyen, Jr.
21 James Dinizio, Jr .
22
23
` 24
25
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 2
2 MR. GOEHRINGER: The regularly scheduled
3 bi-monthly meeting of the Southold TBA is now in
4 session.
5 The first hearing on the agenda is on
6 behalf of Richard and Patricia Snow. Legal
7 notice reads as follows:
8 Application number 3867 , variance to the
9 Zoning Ordinance, for permission to construct a
10 fence, exceeds permitted 4 feet, Article XXIII ,
11 Section 1000-231A, Property Location: 1585 Long
12 Creek Drive , Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000 ,
13 Section 55 , Block 07, Lot 03.
14 I have a copy of a survey. The most
15 recent date is July 21st 1987 . It indicates a
16 one and-a-half story framed house and garage
17 somewhat centrally located on the property .
18 The nature of this application appears to
19 be two six foot stockade fences which run the
20 distance of actually the rear yard of this
21 property . Although we have two front yards, one
22 is on Laurel Avenue and one along Creek Drive
23 and I have a copy of the Suffolk County tax map
24 indicating the surrounding properties in the
25 area.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 3
2 Is there somebody that would like to be
3 heard?
4 MR. SNOW: I 'm Mr . Snow.
5 MR. GOEHRINGER: I ' ll ask you to use the
6 microphone, if you wouldn' t mind. Is there
7 anything you' d like to say for the record
8 concerning this?
9 MR. SNOW: I believe I put everything in
10 the appeal that ' s necessary. Essentially the
11 story is that it' s a dead end street. It goes
12 no place and there ' s no one bothered by the
13 height of the fence other than a lot of parkers
14 who park on the side street and it' s necessary
15 for us to clean up the facility of bottles, food
16 wrappers, et cetera. And after doing this
17 several times we decided to have a fence put up.
18 Now the problem was that I had the fence
19 company take care of getting a permit before
20 erecting a fence , or at least they said they
21 would do so, and they did not do so. And they
22 erected the fence without getting a permit or
23 looking into the regulations. So the fence
24 actually exists where it should not be on the
25 side yard now six feet high. So the Building
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 4
.�` 2 Department suggested rather than have the fence
3 company rip it down or move it or something that
4 we ask for an appeal first to see if it can
5 remain as is. So that' s essentially the story .
6 MR. GOEHRINGER: What' s the purpose of the
7 fence on the east side of the property because
8 we have it on both sides?
9 MR. SNOW: Well, it' s property that' s not
10 presently built on and there ' s all kinds of
11 debris and pilings in there and it ' s unsightly.
12 That ' s all .
13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you think that bushes
14 would act as a limiting buffer , you know, in the
15 same manner as a stockade fence would have acted
16 or does act?
17 MR. SNOW: We considered that, yes, but it
18 was just a lot more money.
19 MR. GOEHRINGER: You mean in reference in
20 getting that height and length?
21 MR. SNOW: Absolutely. I looked into
22 putting up pine trees of a sufficient height and
23 it would cost a lot more money. That' s all. -
24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Does this fence violate
25 any covenants and restrictions within the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 5
` 2 subdivision?
3 MR. SNOW: No, it does not.
4 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay.
5 We ' ll see what develops tonight from your
6 neighbors or any neighbors. I know that the
7 neighbors -- it' s not a completely built
8 subdivision particularly in your area?
9 MR. SNOW: I have submitted a letter from
10 the only neighbor involved and he has no
11 objection to do it.
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: I thank you very much,
13 Mr . Snow. We will not be making a decision on
14 this tonight. I just want you to be aware of
15 that. It depends upon the length of the hearing
16 as they go tonight. I seriously doubt it but
17 we ' ll get to it within the next few weeks .
18 MR. SNOW: All right. In other words I ' ll
19 be notified by mail?
20 MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes .
21 MR. SNOW: Thank you.
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
23 Is there anybody else who would like to
24 speak in favor of this application?
25 Anybody who would like to speak against
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
o��F�ovf�v •
{ . : Southold Town Board of Appeals
cJ7 ..�:.,u. l r�� �7
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE(516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN November 8 , 198 9
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI S.E.Q.R.A.
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3867
Project/Applicants: RICHARD & PATRICIA SNOW
County Tax Map No. 1000-55-7-3
Location of Project: 1585 Long Creek Drive , Southold
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Construct fence excessive permitted four feet.
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line -variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617.2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809.
tr
Southold Town Board ®f Appeals
,�'"" , MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., J.Y. 11971
y TELEPHONE(516) 765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO, JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No, 3867
Matter of RICHARD AND PATRICIA SNOW - Variance to the
Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, Section 231A, for permission to
construct a fence . exceeds permitted 4 feet. Property
Location: 1585 Long Creek Drive, Southold, County Tax Map. No.
1000, Section 55, Block 07, Lot 03 .
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of RICHARD AND PATRICIA SNOW,
under Application 3867; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; 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 . The premises in question is located along the north
side of Long Creek Drive, Town of Southold, Suffolk County Tax
Maps as District 1000, Section 55, Bloc 07, Lot 03 .
2. This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article XXIII, Section 100-231A, for permission to
construct a fence, proposed fence will exceed permitted 4 feet.
Page 2 - Applo. No. 3867
Matter of RICHARD AND PATRICIA SNOW
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
3. Article XXIII, Section 100-231A, Fences, walls, hedges,
or other live plantings within five ( 5) feet of the property
lines may be erected and maintained, subject to the following
limitations: A. When located in the front yard along the front
lot line, the same shall not exceed four ( 4) feet in height.
4. In considering this application, the Board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the fence in any other location on the
premises will require other variance relief;
(c) . that the area chosen for the fence is not unreasonably
located;
(d) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health;, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied.
Accordingly on motion by Mr. Dinizio, Seconded by Mr.
Doyen, it was'
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of RICHARD AND PATRICIA SNOW as applied under Appeal
No. 3867 for the placement of a fence 6 feet in height.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Doyen and Dinizio, (Absent Joseph Sawicki) . This resolution was
duly adopted
df
GERARD P. GOEHR NGER, OHAIRMAN
1 6
2 this application?
3 Questions from board members?
4 Hearing there is no questions , I make a
5 motion to reserve the decision until later. All
6 in favor?
7 THE BOARD : Aye .
8 MR. DOYEN: All right. The next appeal is
9 on behalf of Fred and Carol Hiddink . Appeal
10 number 3885. Legal notice reads as follows:
11 On application 3885 variance to the Zoning
12 Ordinance, for permission to construct an
13 accessory inground pool , proposed construction
14 will exceed permitted lot coverage in this R-40
15 Zone District, Article III A, Section 100-30
16 A.3 , . Property Location: 614 Bailey Avenue,
17 Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000 , Section 34 ,
18 Block 04 , Lot 05 .
3
19 I have a copy of a survey. The recent
20 date is August 25th 1989. It indicates a two
21 story framed house approximately 33 feet from
22 Bailey Avenue and appears to be a framed garage
23 of approximately 16 by 20 . And the nature of
-I 24 this application in the rear of the house is a
25 proposed swimming pool of 16 by 36. There' s a
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 7
2 copy of the Suffolk County tax map indicating
3 this and surrounding properties in the area.
4 Would you like to speak?
5 MRS. HIDDINK : Yes, I would. I guess I
6 just have - to say basically what I said to you
7 already. I have a diabetic child and I have an
8 autistic child and that ' s basically why we want
9 to do this . And also we have a cut off date on
10 it and, also they' re going to up the price on
ll this if we don' t get this approval . That' s
12 basically it.
13 MR. GOEHRINGER: We thank you for the lot
14 coverage figures. When I was dealing with them
15 I was dealing with it on the basis of a rear
16 yard only and that ' s the reason why our figures
17 were higher than yours as opposed to just total
18 lot coverage , which I concur with evaluation of
19 your property . Hopefully tonight it will afford
20 us tonight to make the decision on this
21 application.
22 MRS. HIDDINK : Okay. I ' d appreciate it.
23 Thank you very much.
24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
25 Is there anyone else who would like to
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
oS�FFOU�
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y' 11971
Ol TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN November 8 ,. 198 9
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI S.E.O.R.A.
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3885
Project/Applicants: FRED & CAROL- HIDDINK
County Tax Map No. 1000- 34-4-5
Location of Project: 614 Bailey Avenue , Greenport
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Construct accessory inground pool excessive lot coverage .
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental - -
Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617 .2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809. -
tr
... : :,..� Southold Town Board of Appeals
o .,' ss
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
i
TELEPHONE(516)765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 3885
Matter of FRED AND CAROL HIDDINK. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, for permission to construct an accessory inground
pool, proposed construction will exceed permitted lot coverage
in this R-40 Zone District, Article III A, Section 100-30 A.3 .
Property Location: 614 Bailey Avenue, Greenport, County Tax Map
No. 1000, Section 34, Block 04, Lot 05.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of the Application of FRED AND
CAROL HIDDINK, under appeal 3885; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; • 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. The premises in question is located along the west
side of Bailey Avenue, Town of Greenport, and is identified on
the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 34, Block
04, Lot 05.
2. This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article III A, Section 100-30 A. 3, for permission to
construct an accessory inground pool, proposed construction will
exceed permitted lot coverage.
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3885
Matter of FRED AND CAROL HIDDINK
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
3. Article III A, Section 100-30 A.3, no building or
premises shall be used and no building or part thereof shall be
erected or altered in the Low-Density Residential R-40 District
unless the same conforms to the requirements of the Bulk
Schedule and of the Parking Schedule, with the same force and
effect as if such regulations were set forth herein full.
4. The subject premises for the proposed pool is known
and referred to as being 16' x 36' in width and length, 3 ft.
from the north property line and 20 ft. from the east property
line.
5. In considering this application, the Board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed pool in any other location on
the premises will require other variance relief;
(c) that the area chosen for pool is not unreasonably
located;
(d) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the Safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted below.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, seconded by Mr.
Doyen, it was
Page 3 - Appl. No. 3885
Matter of FRED AND CAROL HIDDINK
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of FRED AND CAROL HIDDINK as applied under Appeal
No. 3885 for the placement of a 16' x 36' pool, SUBJECT TO THE
FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That -the- existing house, garage, and pool not exceed
the twenty-five percent+- ( 250) lot coverage.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goerhinger, Doyen, and
Dinizio, (absent Joseph Sawicki and Charles Grigonis) . This
resolution was duly adopted. `
df
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
1 8
2 speak in favor of this application?
3 Anybody who would like to speak against
4 this application?
5 Seeing no hands -- any questions from
6 board members?
7 THE BOARD : No.
8 MR. GOEHRINGER: Seeing there ' s no
9 questions, I make a motion to reserve the
10 decision until later .
11 MR. DOYEN: Second.
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
13 THE BOARD : Aye .
14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Next appeal is on behalf
15 of Herbert Macomber, appeal number 3877. Legal
16 notice reads as follows:
17 Appeal number 3877, variance to the Zoning
18 Ordinance, for permission to construct a deck
19 with ramp, proposed construction will have
20 insufficient side yard setbacks , Article XXIV,
21 Section 100-244 B . Property Location: 250
22 Anglers Road , Greenport, County Tax Map No.
23 1000 , Section 36, Block 2 , Lot 1 . I have a copy
24 of the survey most recent date July 28th 1989
25 indicating a one story framed house. And the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 9
2 nature of this application is a concrete
3 approach to a deck and I assume that' s close to
4 the south side of the house , which the nature of
5 the application is its proximity to that
6 particular property on its side. And I have a
7 copy of the Suffolk County tax map indicating
8 this and surrounding properties in the area.
9 Which one of you would like to speak?
10 MRS. MACOMBER: Seeing this is mostly my
11 problem, I should have something to say. We
12 built our deck because we needed it right away.
13 We couldn' t wait for the board to approve it and
14 it is built over the sidewalk that was there
15 and it is close to the property . And I believe
16 you have a letter from Mrs. Claven Ryneford
17 approving of the deck only wishing it was in her
18 yard instead of mine. But otherwise nobody else
19 has disapproved of it and it' s a necessity as
20 far as me that I can' t walk up the steps.
21 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. We thank you very
22 much for coming tonight, Mrs . Macomber .
23 Is there anybody else who would like to
24 speak in favor of this application?
25 Anybody who would like to speak against
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y ' 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. November 8 ,. 1989
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI S.E.0.R.A.
JAMES DINIZIO, JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3877
Project/Applicants: HERBERT MACOMBER
County Tax Map No. 1000-36-2-1 '
Location of Project: 250 Anglers Road , Greenport
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This. Board in this Project:
Construct deck with ramp insufficient side yard setbacks .
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617 .2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other.
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at f
(516) 765-1809.
tr
Ln
Southold TownBoard of
Appeals
�% MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE(516)765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO, JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 3877
Matter of HERBERT MACOMBER - Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article XXIV, ' Section 100-244 B, for permission to
construct a deck with ramp, proposed construction will have
insufficient side yard setbacks. property Location: 250
Anglers Road, Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 36,
Block 2, Lot 1:
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of the Application of HERBERT
MACOMBER, under Appeal No. 3877; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; 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. The premises in question is located along the east
side of Manhasset Avenue, Hamlet of Greenport, and is identified
-on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 36,
Block 2, Lot
2. This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article XXIV, Section 100-244 B, for permission to
construct a deck with ramp, proposed construction will have
insufficient side yard setbacks.
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3877
Matter of HERBERT MACOMBER
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
3 . Article XXIV, Section 100-244 B, 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 or a company regularly doing such work in Suffolk
County or by a corporation duly licensed to examine and ensure
title to real property in Suffolk County and shall contain a
certification that no contiguous property was owned by an owner
of the property involved since the date of any previously
applicable Zoning Law. Such lot shall be granted relief for
front side and rear yard dimensions as follows:
4. In considering this application, the Board finds and
determines:
( a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed ramp in any other location on
the premises will require other variance relief;
(c) that the area chosen for the ramp is not unreasonably
located;
(d) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied.
Accordingly on motion by Mr. Dinizio, Seconded by Mr.
Doyen, it was
"age 3 - Appl. No. 3877
Matter of HERBERT MACOMBER
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a variance in the matter of the
application of HERBERT MACOMBER as applied under Appeal No. 3877
for placement of a deck and ramp.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Doyen and Dinizio (Absent Joseph Sawicki) . This resolution was
duly adopted.
df
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
1 10
2 the application?
3 I should really pause in between, I
4 apologize.
5 Hearing no further comments I 'm making a
6 motion to close the hearing reserving the
7 decision until later. All in favor?
8 THE BOARD: Aye.
9 MR. GOEHRINGER: Next appeal is on behalf
10 of Dr . Fredrick Stern and Diane Stern. Appeal
11 number is 3880 . The legal notice reads as
12 follows:
13 Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, for
14 permission to construct a deck addition to
15 existing dwelling , proposed construction will
16 have insufficient rear yard setbacks , Article
17 XXIV, Section 100-244. Property Location: 2100
18 Sigsbee Road , Mattituck , County Tax Map No.
19 1000 , Section 144, Block 1 , Lot 17. I have a
20 copy of a survey produced by Young and Young
21 indicating an existing one story framed house
22 placed approximately in the center of lot number
23 42 of this particular subdivision map. And
24 indicating a proposed deck of approximately 18
25 by 22 showing an insufficient rear yard of 29
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 11
2 feet and basically encroachment into this rear
3 yard of about 6 feet. And I have a copy of the
4 Suffolk County tax map indicating this and
4
5 surrounding properties in the area?
6 Would you like to be heard?
7 MR. STERN: When we decided to have the
8 deck built we had the builder down there. He
9 filed for the permits and meanwhile put in the
10 frame and the peers so that when the inspector
11 came out there he could see that everything was
12 down to the proper depth. When the inspector
13 came down there everything was stopped because
14 of having 35 feet it was 6 feet too long instead
15 of 35 feet. Nothing has been done since that
16 time .
17 Unfortunately the position of that house
18 is the furthest setback of the one on the west
19 side of the street. Therefore if I put a deck
20 up to the limit it would not be functional at
21 all . So that is why we would like to make it 6
22 feet more. Neither neighbors have any
23 objections. The property in back of me is the
24 99 acre farm of John Hausing. Abutting the rear
25 property line is a group of scrub trees with
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516 ) 727-3168
1 12
2 land on the other side that is lined fallow with
3 nothing back there whatsoever.
4 MR. GOEHRINGER: Doctor , is this deck
5 going to be roofed in any way?
6 MR. STERN: No.
7 MR. GOEHRINGER: It will remain open?
8 MR. STERN: It is the closest to ground
9 level that we can get on the side. That is more
10 I believe than 18 inches high there will be a
11 fence put. The other side is within the limits
12 where a fence is not needed. There will be no
13 roofing.
14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. We thank you very
15 much, sir .
16 MR. STERN: You' re welcome.
17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who
18 would like to speak in favor of this
19 application?
20 Anybody who would like to' speak against
21 this application?
22 Questions from any board members?
23 THE BOARD: No.
24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Hearing there is no
25 further questions , I make a motion to close the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
• S�FFo�co
Z0;! ' rµ_,,';kx G�
Southold Town Board of Appeals
�4Y=
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1806
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. November 8 , 1989
SERGE DOYEN, JR. S.E.Q.R.'�.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3880
Project/Applicants: FRED AND DIANE STERN
County Tax Map No. 1000- 144-1-17
Location of Project: 2110 Sigsbee Road , Mattituck
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Construct deck addition to existing dwelling insufficient
rear yard setbacks .
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617.2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809.
tr
,A Southold Town . Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I.,"N.Y. 11971
�l TELEPHONE(516)765-1809
FAX No. (516)766-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
'
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 3880 ,
Matter of FRED AND DIANE STERN. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244, for permission to
construct a deck addition to existing dwelling, proposed
construction will have insufficient rear yard setbacks.
Property Location: 2110 Sigsbee Road, Mattituck, County Tax Map
No. 1000 , Section 144, Block 1, Lot 17 .
WHEREAS a public hearing was. held and concluded on November
8, 1989 in the matter of the Application of FRED AND DIANE STERN
under Appeal No. 3880; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; .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. The premises in question is located along the west
side of Sigsbee Road, Town of Mattituck, and is identified on
the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 144, Block
1, Lot 17 .
2. This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article XXIV, Section -100-244, for permission to construct
a deck addition, proposed construction will have insufficient r`
rear yard setback.
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3880
Matter of FRED AND DIANE STERN
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
3. Article XXIV, Section 100-244, a nonconforming 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 or a company regularly doing such work ' .
in Suffolk- County or by a corporation, duly licensed to examine
and ensure title to real property in Suffolk County and shall-
contain a certification that no contiguous property was owned by
_an owner of the -property involved since the date of any
previously applicable zoning Law. Such lot shall be granted
relief for front side and rear yard dimensions as follows.
4. The subject premises from the proposed deck is known
and referred to as being 29 feet from the west property line,
and the deck will be 18 X 22 feet.
5. In considering this application, the Board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed deck in any other location on
the premises will require other variance relief;
(c) that the areachosen for -the deck is not unreasonably
located;
(d) that the variance- will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted below.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, Seconded by Mr.
Doyen, it was !f .
Page 3 - Appl. No. 3880
Matter of FRED AND DIANE STERN
Decision rendered on November 8, 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of FRED AND DIANE STERN as applied under Appeal NO.
3880 for placement of a 18' x 22' deck, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
1. That the deck remain unroofed.
2. That it not be any .closer than 29'+- from the west
property line.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Doyen and Dinizio. (Absent Joseph Sawicki) . This resolution was
duly adopted.
df
-' GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, HAIRMAN
1 13
2 hearing and reserve the decision.
3 I should mention this before people leave.
4 You are very welcome to call our office tomorrow
5 after ten o' clock. Tomorrow we ' ll give you the
6 determination of the board. We ' re going to try
7 to do the best we can in reference to making the
8 decisions tonight. I have no idea how lengthy
9 the series of hearings is going to be , but we ' ll
10 do the best we can.
11 All in favor?
12 THE BOARD: Aye.
13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for
14 coming in.
15 Next appeal is on behalf of Richard and
16 Joan Gibbs, appeal number 3871. Legal notice
17 read as follows: Application number 3871,
18 variance to the Zoning Ordinance , for permission
19 to (construct an accessory building in front yard
20 area, Article III A, Section 100-30 A. 4,
21 (Article III, Section 100-33) . Property
22 Location: 2140 Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck ,
23 County Tax Map No. 1000 , Section 123, Block 4 ,
24 Lot 4 .
25 A copy of a survey is here with no
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 14
2 specific date on it. The property is presently
3 a one story stucco house with a small patio
4 area, which is somewhat secured toward the
5 northerly property line. It lies approximately
6 100 feet from Depot Drive. The applicants
7 proposes to place a storage building of 16 by 20
8 approximately in the area of the gravel
9 driveway, equal distance between the house and
10 Depot Drive and somewhat centered on the
11 opposite side of the lot.
12 I have a copy of this survey and a copy of
13 the Suffolk County tax map indicating this and
14 surrounding properties in the area. The Gibbs
15 are from Westport Connecticut. I do not believe
16 they' re here tonight; is that correct?
17 Is there anybody else who would like to
18 speak in favor of this application?
19 Anybody who would like to speak against
20 this application?
21 Questions from board members?
22 THE BOARD: No.
23 MR. GOEHRINGER: All right. The only
24 thing I don' t see is a distance from Depot
25 Drive. We ' ll have to scale it and we ' ll leave
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
S�FFQ�c
Southold Town Board.- of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN November 8 , 1989
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR. S.E.().R.A.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO, JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3871
Project/Applicants: RICHARD AND JOAN GIBBS
County Tax Map No. 1000-123-4-4
Location of Project: 2140 Deep Hole Drive , Mattituck
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Accessory building in front yard.
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617.2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 . 2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809.
tr
T Southold- Town Board of Appeals
'f'.jiol �•a�� MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE(516)765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. y
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appeal No. 3871
Matter of RICHARD AND JOAN GIBBS. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A. 4. , (Article III,
Section 100-33) as disapproved, for permission to construct an
accessory building in front yard area. Property Location: 2140
Deep Hole Drive, Mattituck, county Tax Map No. 1000, Section
123, Block 4, Lot 4.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of the Application of RICHARD AND
JOAN GIBBS under Appeal No. ;3871; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded;, 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. The premises in question. is located along the south of
Deep Hole Drive, Town of Mattituck, and is identified on the
Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 15, Block 1.
Lot 3.
2. This is an applicatlion for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article III A, Section 1DO-30 A. 4, (Article III, Section
100-33) , for permission to cdnstruct an accessory shed in front
yard area. � .
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3871
Matter of RICHARD AND JOAN GIBBS
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
u
3. Article III A, Section 100-30 A. 4, Accessory buildings
shall be subject to the same requirements as 100-33 of the
Agricultural-Conservation District. Article III, Section
100-33,. In the Agricultural-Conservation District and Low
Density Residential R-80, R-120-; R-200 and R-400 Districts,
accessory buildings and structures or other accessory uses may
be located in -the required rear yard, subject to the following
requirements:
4. In considering this application, the Board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises, and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed accessory shed in any other
location on the premises will require other variance relief;
(c) that the area chosen for the accessory shed is not
unreasonably located;
(d) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted below.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, Seconded by Mr.
Dinizio, it was
i
Page 3 - Appl. No. 3871
Matter of RICHARD AND JOAN GIBBS.
Decision Rendered on November 8, 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of RICHARD AND JOAN GIBBS as applied under Appeal
No. 3871 for placement of a 16' by 20' Accessory Shed, SUBJECT
TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS• _ .
1. That the Storage Shed not be any closer than 42 feet
from Deep Hole Drive.
2. That the Storage Shed not be any closer than feet
from the east- property -line.
3 . That the Storage Shed not exceed 16' by' 20' in size
and only be used for storage purposes.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Doyen, and Dinizio, (Absent Joseph Sawicki) . This resolution
was duly adopted. ..
9c 9c k
df
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
1 15
2 it on that particular basis.
3 Hearing no further comments, I make a
4 motion to close the hearing and reserve the
5 decision until later.
6 MR. DINIZIO: Second.
7 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
8 THE BOARD: Aye.
9 MR. GOEHRINGER: This appeal is on Warren
10 and Susan Cannon. Legal notice is as follows:
11 Upon application, the applicant number
12 3869 , variance to the Zoning Ordinance, for
13 approval to construct poolhouse, pool and
14 accessory garage in front yard area in this R-80
15 Zone District, Article III, Section 100-32.
16 Property Location: 4625 Aldrich Lane,
17 Extension, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000 ,
18 Section 112 , Block 01 , Lot 14. I have a copy of
19 a survey produced by Young and Young. The .most
20 recent date is September 22 , 1988. The nature
21 of this application is a 20 by 40 foot swimming
22 pool in the front yard area and in front of
23 that, still in the front yard area, a proposed
24 garage in the front yard area of 24 by 45. And
25 I have a -- I should mention that the lot is an
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 16
2 extensively large lot of approximately 4 . 319
3 acres on the Long Island Sound. And I have a
4 copy of this and a copy of the Suffolk County
5 tax map of this and surrounding properties in
6 the area.
7 Is there somebody who would like to be
8 heard?
9 MR. CANNON: Yes. My name is Warren
10 Cannon.
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Hi . How are you tonight?
12 MR. CANNON: Very well , thank you.
1 13 There are five houses located there.
14 They' re all oriented toward the sound. The
15 front of the house, as we see it, is toward the
16 sound, but technically that ' s the backyard and
17 the only entrance through the property is what
18 is technically the front yard. All other houses
19 have accessory, also technically the front yard
20 because that' s about the only way for doing it.
21 Our house is situated about a hundred and
22 five feet from the bluff line and the topography
23 of the land is such that even if we could, we
-I 24 would not want to put anything between the house
f
25 and the water because that' s why we ' re there.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. November 8 , 1989
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI S,E.n.R.A.
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3869
Project/Applicants: WARREN AND SUSAN CANNON
County Tax Map No. 1000-112-1-14
Location of Project: 4625 Aldrich Lane Extension , Mattituck
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Construct poolhouse , pool and accessary garage in front yard area.
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law 444-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617 .2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s int-erest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809.
tr
L0 .
Southold Town Board ofAmpeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
1
TELEPHONE (516)765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 3869
Matter of WARREN AND SUSAN CANNON. Variance to the Zoning .
Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-33 C, for permission to
construct poolhouse, pool and accessory garage in front yard
area in this R-80 Zone District. Property Location: 4625
Aldrich Lane, Ext, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section
112, Block 01, Lot 14.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of the application of WARREN AND
SUSAN CANNON, under Appeal No. 3869; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; 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. The premises in question is located along the north
said of Aldrich Ext, Hamlet of Mattituck, and is identified on
the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 112, Block
0]., Lot 14 .
2. This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article III, Section 100-33 C, for permission to construct
poolhouse, pool and accessory garage in front yard area.
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3869
Matter of WARREN AND SUSAN CANNON
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
3 . Article III , Section 100-33 C, .In the Agricultural-
Conservation District and Low-Density Residential R-80, R-120,
R-200 and R-400 Districts, accessory buildings and structures or
other accessory uses may be located in the required rear yard,
subject to the following requirements: C.-All such buildings in
the aggregate shall occupy not more than forty percent ( 400) of
the area of required rear yard.
4. The subject premises for the proposed pool is 20' from
the west property line and referred to as being 20' by 40 ' in
width and length, the proposed garage will be approximately 4'
from the east property line and will be 24' by 45' , the proposed
cabana will be 8' from the west property line and will be 10' by
12' by 15' by 81 . ,
5. In considering this application, the board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed pool, poolhouse and accessory
garage in any other location on the premises will require other
variance relief;
(c) that the area chosen for the pool, poolhouse, and
accessory garage are not unreasonably located;
(d) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served. by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted below.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, Seconded by Mr.
Doyen, it was
J
Page 3 - Appl. No. 3869
Matter of WARREN AND SUSAN ,CANNON
Decision rendered November 8, 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of WARREN AND SUSAN CANNON as applied under Appeal
No. 3869 for placement of a pool, poolhouse and accessory
garage, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1 . That the accessory garage be used only for storage
purposes.
2: That the poolhouse be placed on location of the survey
Dated: September 22, 1988, revised July 13 , 1987 and be used for
limited storage (of pool supplies) , not to be used for habitable
use or sleeping quarters.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Doyen, and Dinizio, (Absent Joseph Sawicki) . This resolution
was duly adopted.
df
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
1 17
2 So that' s the problem. I believe its been
3 staked out since roughly July. I believe you
4 have had a chance to take a look at it.
5 MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes, I have. I didn' t
6 want to leave there.
7 MR. CANNON: It' s pretty nice. But in the
8 meantime, winter is approaching and the
9 opportunities for outside work is getting
10 smaller and smaller so we ' d be grateful for your
11 help.
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: We thank you very much
13 for coming in.
14 Is there anybody else who would like to
Y Y
15 speak in favor of this application?
16 Is there anybody who would like to speak
17 against the application?
18 Questions from board members?
19 THE BOARD: No.
20 MR. GOEHRINGER: If there are no further
21 questions , I ' ll make a motion to close the
22 hearing and reserve the decision until later.
23 All in favor?
24 THE BOARD : Aye .
25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Next appeal is appeal
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 18
2 number 3876 on behalf of John P. Dewar. The
3 legal notice reads as follows:
4 Upon application the applicant number
5 3876, variance to the Zoning Ordinance, for
6 approval to construct an attached deck , proposed
7 construction will have insufficient front yard
8 setbacks in this R-40 Zone District, Article
9 XXIV, Section 100-244, Property Location: 4420
10 Oaklawn Avenue, Southold, County Tax Map No.
11 1000 , Section 70 , Block 9 , Section 46 .
12 A copy of a survey has been provided
13 indicating an existing house approximately 37
14 feet from Oakland Avenue. The nature of this
15 application appearing to be a deck, it does not
16 show the actual length of the deck but the depth
17 is approximately 8 feet affixed to the front of
18 the dwelling and I ask the applicant the size.
19 It encroaches into the front yard to a minimum
20 distance to 29 feet. So it would probably be an
21 encroachment of approximately 6 feet. And I
22 have a copy of the Suffolk County tax map
23 indicating this and other properties in the
24 area.
25 Is there somebody here who would like to
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 19
2 be heard on this application?
3 MR. DEWAR: My name is John Dewar. The
4 contractor doing the job is on vacation right
5 now and he' s got the paperwork .
6 MR. GOEHRINGER: The only thing I don' t
7 see is the width and the actual length of it.
8 it ' s 8 by --
9 MR. DEWAR: I think it was 8 by 12.
10 MR. GOEHRINGER: You ' ll be happy if we
11 approve an 8 by 12?
12 MR. DEWAR: Yes.
13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay . You' re sure it ' s
14 12 or 13 or 14 or close to that? You know what,
15 give us a call tomorrow.
16 MR. DEWAR: Give you a call tomorrow?
17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes.
18 MR. DEWAR: I ' ll have to call him and find
19 out.
20 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. It looks like it' s
21 just fitting into a certain area there.
22 MR. DEWAR: It is in front of the living
23 room.
24 MR. GOEHRINGER: So before we actually
25 make the decision, it would behoove you to give
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 20
i 2 me that.
3 MR. DEWAR: I ' ll get in touch with him and
4 I ' ll call you.
5 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much.
6 Is there anybody else who would like to
7 speak in favor of the application?
8 Anybody who would like to speak against
9 the application?
10 Questions from board members?
11 THE BOARD: No.
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: If there are no further
13 questions, I ' ll make a motion to close the
14 hearing and reserve the the decision until
15 later.
16 MR. DOYEN: Second .
17 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
18 THE BOARD: Aye.
19 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay . We have
20 approximately five minutes here. I have eight
21 o ' clock. The next appeal is 8 :05. I guess
22 we ' ll take a five minute break at this juncture .
23 I ' ll make a motion.
24 MR. DOYEN: Second.
25 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
Urnt ,; Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN , ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD. L.I., N.Y 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD "
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN November 8 , 1989
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR. S.E.Q.R.A.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3876
Project/Applicants: JOHN P . DEWAR
County Tax Map No. 1000- 70-9-46
Location of Project: 4420 OaKLAWN Avenue , Southold
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Construct attached deck insufficient front yard setback .
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating -that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617 .2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, . affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .233*
-
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809.
tr
on
5. . , a
Southold Tows Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE(516) 765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO, JR.
-NCTZON OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 3876
Matter of JOHN DEWAR. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance,
for approval to construct an attached deck, proposed
construction will have insufficient front yard setbacks in this
R-40 Zone District, Article XXIV, Section 100-244, Property
Location: 4420 Oaklawn Avenue, Southold, County Tax Map No.
1000, Section 7, Block 9, Lot 46.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of the Application of JOHN DEWAR,
Under Appeal No. 3876; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; 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. The premises in question is located along the west
side of Oaklawn Avenue, Town of Southold, and is identified on
the Suffolk county Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 70 Block,
9, Lot 46 .
2, This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article XXIV, Section 100-244, for permission to construct
an attached deck, proposed construction will have insufficient
front yard setbacks.
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3876
Matter of JOHN DEWAR
—� Decision .rendered on December 7 , 1989
3 . Article XXIV, Section 100-244, 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 or a company regularly doing such work in Suffolk
'County or by a corporation duly licensed to examine and ensure
title to real property in Suffolk County and shall contain a
ce:rt.ification that no contiguous property was owned by an owner .
of the property involved since the date of any previously
applicable Zoning Law. Such lot shall be granted relief for
front side and rear yard dimensions as follows. ,
4. In considering this application, the board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
�= uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed deck in any other location on
the premises will require other variance relief;
(c) that the area chosen for the deck is not unreasonably
located:
(d) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above .factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted below.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, Seconded by Mr.
Grigonis, it was
Page. 3 - Appl. No. 3876
Matter of JOHN DEWAR
Decision rendered on December 7 , 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of JOHN DEWAR as applied under Appeal No. 3876 for
placement of a deck, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That the deck remained unroofed.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
and Dinizio (Absent Joseph Sawicki and Serge Doyen, Fishers
Island) .
9c k 4c
df
GE'RARD P. GO RING-, CHAIRMAN
I
1 21
2 THE BOARD: Aye .
3 (whereupon, a recess was taken. )
4
5 (whereupon, after the recess, the hearing
6 continued as follows: )
7
8 MR. GOEHRINGER: I ' d like to make a motion
9 to readjourn.
10 Appeal number 3878 Robert Potdevin.
11 Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, for permission
12 to construct an addition to existing one family
13 dwelling, proposed construction will have
14 insufficient side yard setbacks and is within 75
15 feet from the bulkhead, Article III A, Section
16 100-30 A.3 , (Article XXIII, Section 100-239d
17 (B) . Property Location: -4250 Peconic Bay
18 Boulevard, Laurel , County Tax Map No. 1000 ,
6
19 Section 128, Block 4 , Lot 23. Copy of a survey
20 amended May 17 , 1989 indicating the particular
21 position of the two proposed applications and
22 the deck , which is basically in the rear yard of
23 the house and does not show a distance on the
24 survey to the actual bulkhead, but we ' ll ask the
25 questions of the applicant. And a copy of a
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 22
2 Suffolk County tax map indicating this and
3 surrounding properties in the area.
4 Is there somebody who would like to be
5 heard on this application?
6 MR. SCOTT: I 'm Richard Scott. I 'm the
7 designer for Mr . Potdevin. I have a couple of
8 documents I ' d like to submit. One is a D. E. C.
9 letter of no jurisdiction which was expedited
10 for us by intersigns in Bridgehampton. Another
11 is a copy of the board of the town of trustees
12 approval and a copy of the tax map you said you
13 have, so I ' ll hang on to that.
14 Mr . Potdevin ' s lot is a pre-existing
15 non-conforming lot which he' s owned since 1959.
16 Of zoning which occurred as I understand last
17 January requires 150 feet street frontage . Mr.
18 Potdevin' s lot has 100 feet on the street but
19 the lot is actually only 80 feet wide.
20 The totaled required side yard is only 35
21 feet and we ' re requesting a total side yard of
22 25 feet. The 35 foot side yard would be about
23 23 percent of conforming lot, which would be 150
24 feet, and our side yard , which we ' re asking for
25 25 feet, would be about 31 percent of the 80 .
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 23
2 So in terms of the percentages we ' re doing
3 pretty well.
4 Under the zoning laws applicable until
5 last January, 25 percent was the total required
6 and. if the parcel were part of the legal
7 subdivision now, we would not even have to be in
8 front of the board.
9 With regard to the neighborhood on the
10 west side, the neighbor' s house is 6 inches from
11 the property line. On the east side the
12 Goodwins received a variance in 1986 for a 12
13 and-a-half foot west side yard and his addition
14 is approximately 35 feet from the bulkhead. I
15 have a copy of Mr . Goodwin' s appeal that I ' d
16 like to submit.
17 With regard to the design of the addition
18 we try to keep a low profile of a one story
19 addition and sensitive to the proximity of the
20 neighbors from the site lines to their houses.
21 And although the required side yard does require
22 variance , it extends no further towards the
23 bulkhead than the existing house and the deck.
24 And the proposed deck will be approximately 45
25 feet from the bulkhead and the addition to the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 24
2 house will be about 60 feet away.
3 With regard to the difficulties, in adding
4 to the house in a conforming location, if we
5 added the same square footage it would be
6 extremely difficult to add that same square
7 footage without extending passed the front wall
8 on the bay side. It would end up being a very
9 awkward and strange room. We would only have
10 five feet on the north wall of the addition.
11 And any other additions we put on there would
12 still be non-conforming with respect to the
13 distance to the bulkhead and a non-conforming
14 addition because of the addition. We do a
15 number of things that would be more
16 objectionable, I think. First it would destroy
17 the existing view of the house and it would
18 interfere with the view of the neighbor ' s house.
19 It would almost eliminate the usable backyard
20 space of the existing dwelling and we think it
21 would create a dangerous relationship with
22 respect to the distance to the bluff. It would
23 also have the potential to accelerate some of
24 the erosion that occurs along those bluffs.
25 We ' re only requesting the 5 yard relief
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 25
2 from the existing side yard, and we don' t feel
3 that it' s that substantial essentially in terms
4 of percentages and lot widths. We ' re not going
5 to increase the density of the area or the
6 number of people even using the property.
7 We have no detriment to the adjoining
8 properties and the difficulty can ' t be done by
9 any other solution. And due to the existing
10 character of the neighborhood and the Goodwin
7
11 variance and the difficulty of the site, we
12 think the interest of justice would be served by
13 granting the variance.
14 MR. GOEHRINGER: You stated that the deck
15 was going to be approximately 45 feet from the
16 bulkhead?
17 MR. SCOTT: Yes.
18 MR. GOEHRINGER: It appears that that --
19 well, there are two basic additions including
20 the deck . Are those going to be part of the
21 habitable dwelling?
22 MR. SCOTT: Just one addition.
23 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay.
24 MR. SCOTT: The deck is an addition to an
25 existing deck and added floor space to the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 26
2 existing house .
3 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay . So the addition
4 that we have that there will be a portion of
5 this proposed addition will be a part of a
6 habitable dwelling?
7 MR. SCOTT: Yes.
8 MR. GOEHRINGER: And that' s the part
9 primarily on the southwest side?
10 MR. SCOTT: That' s correct.
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: The deck sticks out or
12 protrudes farther than the deck that just runs
13 along the front of the house, which is the part
14 on the southwest side. Is that 45 feet at its
15 close,st point to the bulkhead or is the deck in
16 front of the house 45 feet?
17 MR. SCOTT: The proposed addition, the
18 addition that we ' re proposing for the deck is 45
19 feet. The existing deck is close to that. I
20 think it may be even closer than 45 feet.
21 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay .
22 MR. SCOTT: The addition of the living
23 space is 60 feet away , which is actually further
24 than the existing .
25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Let me point something
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 27
2 out here. If you wouldn' t mind stepping up here
3 for a second just so we get this thing right.
4 This is an addition to the deck right in here?
5 MR. SCOTT: That' s correct.
6 MR.. .GOEHRINGER: This distance from here
7 to here you' re saying is 45 feet?
8 MR. SCOTT: Yes .
9 MR. GOEHRINGER: Is that correct?
10 MR. SCOTT: That' s correct.
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: And this is the proposed
12 addition which is the nature of this side yard
13 inadequacy, so to speak?
14 MR. SCOTT: Yes.
15 MR. GOEHRINGER: And there' s the part of
16 the habitable dwelling and this is the portion
17 of the main house which will be an addition to
18 the habitable dwelling?
19 MR. SCOTT: Yes.
20 MR. GOEHRINGER: If this board so
21 indicated as in not making this deck any closer
22 than the existing deck and we draw a line across
23 here, what would be the distance between here
24 and here?
J 25 MR. SCOTT: Well, I measured this.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
fi' Southold Town Board of Appeau, ls
VA �1
�
•�. I ,�,y
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y ' 11971
O� TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD "
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. November 8 , 1989
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO, JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3878
Project/Applicants: ROBERT POTDEVIN
County Tax. Map No. 1000- 128-4-23
Location of Project: 4250 Peconic Bay Boulevard , Laurel
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Construct addition -to. dwelling insufficient side yard setbacks
and 75 feet from bulkhead .
This "Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law 444-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment .(Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617.2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .233J
.
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809. !I
tr
t r,
Southold Town Board ®f Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I.', N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE(516)765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO, JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 13878
Matter of ROBERT POTDEVIN. Variance to the zoning
Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A.3, (Article XXIII,
Section 100-239d (B) . for permission to construct an addition to
existing one family dwelling, proposed construction will have
insufficient side yard setbacks and is within 75 ft from the
bulkhead. Property Location: 4250 Peconic Bay Boulevard,
Laurel, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 128, Block 4, Lot 23 .
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of the Application of ROBERT
POTDEVIN, under Appeal No. 3878; and
WHEREAS; at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; 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. The premises in question is located along the south of
Great Peconic Bay Boulevard, Town of Laurel, and is identified
on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 128,
Block 4, Lot 23.
2. This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code Article III A, Section 100-30 A. 3, (Article XXIII , Section
100-239d (B) , for permission to construct addition to one family
dwelling, proposed construction will have insufficient side yard
setbacks and is within 75 ft. from the bulkhead.
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3878
Matter of ROBERT POTDEVIN
Decision rendered on December 7 , 1989
3. Article III A, Section 100-30 A. 3, No building or
premises shall be used and no building or part thereof shall be
erected or altered in the Low-Density Residential R-40 District
unless the same conforms to the requirements of the Bulk
Schedule and of the Parking Schedule, with the same force and
effect as if such regulations were set forth herein in full.
Article XXIII, Section 100-239d (B) , All buildings
located on lots upon which a bulkhead, concrete wall, riprap or
similar structure exists and which are adjacent to tidal water
bodies other than sounds shall be set back not less than
seventy-five (75) feet from the bulkhead.
d
4. In considering this application, the Board finds and
determines:
( a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed addition in any other location
on the premises will require other variance relief;
(c) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted, that the
addition to the dwelling be no closer than 18ft. to the west
property line, so as to provide emergency fire access and
alternate access to rear yard of premises.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, seconded by Mr.
Goehringer, it was
Page 3 - Appl. No. 3878
Matter of ROBERT POTDEVIN
Decision rendered December 7, 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of ROBERT POTDEVIN as applied under Appeal No. 3878
for placement of a addition, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That the deck be no closer than 18 ft. from the West
side yard.
2. That the addition from the closest point be no closer
than 70+- ft. from the bulkhead.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
and Dinizio (Absent Joseph Sawicki and Serge Doyen, Fishers
Island) .
df
�ERARD P. GO RINGER, HAIRMAN
1 28
2 Instead of taking this distance from the edge
3 here, which is an obtuse angle, but to go on a
4 perpendicular from here , in this case we ' re not
5 any closer.
6 MR. GOEHRINGER: Because of this angle?
7 MR. SCOTT: That ' s correct.
8 MR. GOEHRINGER: I understand. Thank you
9 very much.
10 Is there anybody else who would like to
11 speak in favor of this application?
12 Anybody who would like to speak against
13 this application?
14 Questions from board members?
15 THE BOARD: No.
16 MR. GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further
17 questions , I make a motion closing the hearing
18 reserving the decision until later?
19 MR. DOYEN: Second.
20 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
21 THE BOARD: Aye.
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for
23 coming in. Have a safe trip home.
24 All right. The next appeal is appeal
25 number 3883 on behalf of Best and Syverson. The
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 29
2 legal notice reads as follows :
3 On application number 3883 , variance to
4 the Zoning Ordinance, for permission to
5 construct alterations, additions and conversion
6 to .year round use to existing dwelling, proposed
7 construction will have non-conforming uses in
8 this R-40 Zone District, Article XXIV, Section
9 100-241 A. Property Location: 420 Private Road
10 #17 off of Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck , County
11 Tax Map No. 1000 , Section 123, Block 6, Lot 17 .
12 I have a copy of a survey with the most
13 recent date being revised August 23rd 1988. The
14 nature of the application is not the existing
15 two story framed house but the one story framed
16 house , the one and-a-half story, which sits
17 equally distant between the house on the water
18 and the framed garage. All of which are located
19 on the southerly end of this particular piece of
20 property, which is approximately variable 89 by
21 602 feet. And I have a copy of a Suffolk County
22 tax map indicating this and surrounding
23 properties in the area.
24 Would the Bests like to be heard or you ' re
25 being represented by counsel?
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 30
2 MR. ROSS : Good evening. Dan Ross of
3 Wickham, Wickham and Bressler on behalf of Mr .
4 Syverson in support of the application.
5 Basically it' s a simple application. We wish to
6 reconstruct and approve the existing house on
7 the premises so it can be used as a retirement
8 home. Mrs. Syverson and Mrs. Best, who are
9 sisters , inherited the property from their
10 grandfather. Mrs . Best lives in the big house,
11 as you may call it, year round. Mr. Syverson is
12 there from time to time and wishes to improve
8
13 the other house so she can live in it full time
14 in her retirement. The house has been used year
15 round in the past and it' s used from time to
16 time now by friends and relatives of the Bests
17 and Syversons. There' s a non-conforming
18 certificate with respect to it.
19 Basically we ' re seeking to improve and
20 reconstruct this building for residential use
21 and in a residential zone. The hardship here is
22 the house is in disrepair. Basically it needs
23 improving and without the relief we ' re seeking
24 the result will be a continued depreciation of
25 the house.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 31
2 We submitted plans to the board.
3 Harrington and West are our local builders and
4 are prepared to proceed. They' re here tonight
5 if you have questions for them. Mrs . Syverson
6 and Mrs . Best are here if you have questions for
7 them.
8 MR. GOEHRINGER: Are we increasing this
9 house by more than 50 percent of what this house
10 is worth?
11 MR. ROSS: I haven' t done the calculation
12 on the square footage. I 'm willing to do those
13 and submit them.
14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Primarily the actual
15 figures also to support your documents. Also
16 just to support your documents , in reference to
17 drawing in on the site plan so that we can get a
18 better idea of the whole project, if you
19 wouldn' t mind. And you said that the house is
20 presently heated. How is that heated, do you
21 know?
22 MR. ROSS: I didn' t say it was heated. I
23 said it' s presently used from time to time .
24 It' s been used in the past. I understand
25 there' s a fireplace there and there has been
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 32
2 space heaters used.
3 MR. GOEHRINGER: So it ' s really a seasonal
4 dwelling?
5 MR. ROSS: It ' s been used full time in the
6 past. Right now it ' s used from time to time
7 because of the state of . repair.
8 MR. GOEHRINGER: I understand.
9 MR. ROSS: I wouldn' t want to characterize
10 it as a seasonal .
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. Is the well hooked
12 up to the existing well on the other house or is
13 there a separate well?
14 MR. ROSS : Separate well .
15 MR. GOEHRINGER: And is the sanitary
16 system hooked up to the main house or is it
17 separate also?
18 MR. ROSS: Separate.
19 MR. GOEHRINGER: It' s hooked up to the
20 main house?
21 MR. ROSS: No, it' s separate. I
22 understand it' s a new sanitary system for one of
23 the houses. That was just done.
24 MR. GOEHRINGER: So is the same with the
25 electrical system, separate meter?
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
Lr) :g r �`t`,, Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y'' 11971
1 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS November 8 , 1989
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR. S.E.O.R.A.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. ' 3883
Project/Applicants: BEST AND SYVERSON
County Tax Map No. 1000-123-6-17
Location of .Project: 420 Private Road #17 off Mineola Road , Mattituck
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Construct alterations , additions and conversion to year round
useto exisi.tng dwelling having non-conforming uses .
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law *44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617.2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809.
tr
L sr....�
Southold T6wn 'oard of Appeals
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
J
TELEPHONE(516)765-1809
FAX No. (516) 765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 3883
Matter of ADLYN SYVERSON AND MARGARET BEST, Variance to the
Zoning Ordinance 'Article XXIV, Section 100-241 A, for permission
to construct alterations additions and conversion to year round
use to existing dwelling, proposed construction will have
non-conforming uses in this R-40 Zone District. Property
Location: 420 Private Road #17 off of Camp Mineola Road,
Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 123, Block 6, Lot 17.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
November 8, 1989 in the matter of the Application of
BEST/SYVERSON,. under Appeal No 3883; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; 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. The premises in question is located along the south
side of Park Avenue, Town of Laurel, and is identified on the
Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 128, Block 4,
Lot 23 .
2. This is an application for Variances from the Zoning
Code, Article XXIV, Section 100-241 A, for permission to
construct alterations and additions, proposed construction will
have non-conforming uses.
Page 2- Appl. No. 3883
Matter of BEST/SYVERSON
Decision rendered December 7 , 1989
J
3. Article XXIV, Section 100-241 A, Except as provided
herinafter, nonconforming use of buildings or open land existing
on the effective date of this chapter or authorized by a
building permit issued prior thereto, regardless of change of
title, possession or occupancy or right thereof, may be
continued indefinitely, except that such building or use:
A. Shall not be enlarged, altered, extended,
reconstructed or restored or placed on a different portion of
the lot or parcel of land occupied by such use on the effective
date of this chapter, nor shall any external evidence of such
use be . increased by any means whatsoever.
4 . In considering this application, the board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and placing the proposed addition in any other location
on the premises will require other variance relief;
( c) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and/or order of the Town;
(d) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors , the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted below.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. G.rigonis, Seconded by Mr.
Goehringer, it was
Page 3 - Appl. No. 3883
Matter of BEST/SYVERSON
Decision rendered December 7, 1989
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of ADYLN SYVERSON AND MARGARET BEST as applied under
Appeal No. 3883 , SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That the total square footage not exceed 640 sq. ft. ,
1280 sq. ft. inclusive to the exisiting structure.
Vote of the Board,: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
and Dinizio (Absent Jospeh Sawicki, Serge Doyen, Fishers
Island) . This resolution was duly adopted.
df
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,. CHAIRMAN
f
1 33
2 MR. ROSS: Everything is separate.
3 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
4 MR. ROSS : Thank you.
5 MR. GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who
6 would like to speak in favor of this
7 application?
8 Anybody who would like to speak against
9 the application?
10 Any questions from the board?
11 THE BOARD: No.
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: In closing this hearing
13 we ' ll be closing it pending a receipt of the
14 information .requested from the attorney Mr. Dan
15 Ross and I ' ll offer that as a resolution.
16 MR. DOYEN: Second.
17 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
18 THE BOARD : Aye .
19 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for
20 coming in. Have a safe trip home.
21 Next appeal appears to be the last appeal
22 except for the opening of a prior hearing which
23 is in behalf of Compass Transports, appeal
24 number 3872 . The legal notice reads as follows :
25 For application variance to the Zoning
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 34
2 Ordinance, for approval of site plan before any
3 Certificate of Occupancy or building permits can
4 be issued in this Hamlet Business Zoning
5 District (HB) , Article XXV, Section 100-250 .
6 Property Location: . 175 Boisseau Avenue,
7 Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000 , Section 062,
8 Block 01 , Lot 16. Copy of a survey which ends
9 up to be the closest thing to a site plan
10 property appearing to be approximately 75 by 80 .
11 It is improved by a one story framed building of
12 approximately 1 ,547 square feet. I believe it
13 was the nature of Legion Hall at one time, and
14 we have here many of the aspects of the site
15 plan process shown on this particular map. I
16 have a copy of the Suffolk County tax map
17 indicating this and surrounding properties in
18 the area. The map, by the way, was done by
19 Peconic Surveyors. The most recent date was May
20 25th 1989 .
21 Mr. Packman, would you like to speak?
22 MR. PACKMAN: Yes. My name is Howard
23 Packman. I am the attorney for Compass
24 Transports. My address is 366 Veterans Memorial
25 Highway, Commack, New York .
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 35
2 The principal of Compass Transports is Mr .
3 Markakis . This application comes to you by
4 route of the planning board.
5 As you have said, this building has been
6 in existence for some time. In 1983 where the
7 V.F.W. no longer used that building, the
8 planning board approved that site for five
9 parking spaces and there was a resolution to
10 that effect and I have a certified copy of the
11 resolution.
12 Now at that time based upon that approval
13 of five parking spaces a Certificate of
14 Occupancy was issued for the premises and I have
15 a copy of that for you too, Mr. Chairman. And
9
16 the site was approved and was operated as a
17 printing shop. In 1987 the printing shop was
18 discontinued, and yes, the site plan had showed
19 the five parking spaces. I have a copy here
20 also.
21 As you can see the five parking spaces are
22 on the north side of the building. When the
23 operation stopped, Mr. Markakis , on behalf of
24 his ownership on the property, decided that he
25 wanted to put in at that time, which was a
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 36
2 permitted use under the then existing ordinance,
3 a fast food operation to sell Greek delicacies
4 on site and off site. He found out that the
5 then zoning ordinance permitted parking for each
6 one car, for each three spaces -- excuse me, one
7 car for each -- one for each five seats. He had
8 five spaces so he submitted an application to
9 the Department of Health in Suffolk County for
10 25 parking, a restaurant of 25 parking spaces,
11 25 seats to accommodate the parking that was
12 permitted.
13 As this board knows and I think you' ll
14 take judicial notice that doing business with
15 the Suffolk County Department of Health takes
16 some time. And after almost two years of
17 submitting revised applications, he did get
18 approval of the seating capacity of 25 seats
19 based upon the five parking spaces and the
20 Health Department granted approval on June 16th
21 19 89 .
22 Prior to that in December of 1988, he made
23 an applicat-ion under the then zoning ordinance
24 prior to which changed to the Building
25 Department of the Town of Southold for
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 37
2 renovations on this building so it would
3 accommodate the use that he proposed, the
4 delicatessen fast food operation. And he
5 received the necessary building permits to build
6 this subject to his getting the Health
7 Department, which was still pending before the
8 Health Department and that application with its
9 receipts and permits is here for your
10 information.
11 On June 20th of 1989, June 14 , the town
12 changed this ordinance , and as a result of the
13 change of the ordinance the parking ratio
14 changed from the previous one for five to be one
15 for three or one space for every 100 square
16 feet.
17 When he went to the board of the
18 application before the planning board, they said
19 that based upon the existing zoning ordinance as
20 it exists now, we cannot grant you the site plan
21 approval because you don' t have a sufficient
22 number of parking spaces .
23 Now gentlemen, you would understand that
24 if this application, the Health Department had
25 come in and approved this application any time
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 38
2 before the change of ordinance in January of
3 1989 , this would have been a perfectly
4 acceptable use. The planning board could not
5 turn it down because the parking ratio and the
6 number of seats that would be required would be
7 adequate under the ordinance .
8 When he ascertained that the number of
9 parking spaces was in inadequate for its use, he
10 revised his interior site plan to provide the
11 number of seating tables inside would no longer
12 be 25 but it would be 15 to accommodate the
13 existing number of parking spaces that he has.
14 And he established an interior plan which you
15 will notice calls for six tables with two chairs
16 per table and three stools at the counter which
17 equals the 15 necessary seats which would
18 accommodate itself because of the necessary
19 parking.
20 Another important observation that this
21 board should realize that this site has been in
22 single and separate ownership since its
23 existence , and he' s unable to purchase or get
24 any land on any side that surrounds it because
25 it' s in different ownership and it' s been
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 39
2 developed to its fullest extent.
3 I have from the Chicago Title Insurance
4 Company a certificate of single and separate
5 ownership certifying that this parcel has been
6 in single and separate ownership, and even
7 though it doesn' t meet all the current
8 requirements of the zoning ordinance, it would
9 meet all of the single and separateownership
10 requirements.
11 The current ordinance as it stands is not
12 very clear as to the requirements with reference
13 to restaurants of this nature. This is not a
—J 14 fast food restaurant, so it falls under the
15 category of restaurant accepted drive which I
16 said was one space per three seats or one space
17 for 100 feet of floor space. That' s very
18 important to realize, this term floor space.
19 If you look at the balance of the parking
20 ordinance, it talks about floor area, not floor
21 space. Now floor area is defined in the
22 ordinance as being the sum of the gross of
23 horizontal area. I don' t have to tell you what
10
24 it means. You people are familiar with it and
25 it talks about the total building as the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 40
4 2 totalsquare foot area. But there ' s nothing that
3 talks about floor space and that' s important.
4 Because if you look at the interior design plan
5 that I gave you, the actual floor space that
6 will be utilized for the customer area excludes
7 the area behind the counter, the walk-in cooler
8 and the kitchen. So the very small area that
9 exists around the counter is approximately under
10 500 square feet, I ' ve been advised.
11 Sounder the current code if you use the
12 square foot area or you use the number of seats,
13 the five parking spaces will be accommodating
14 the number of chairs that Mr . Markakis intends
15 to use which is 15. So under all circumstances
16 he meets the requisite requirements of the
17 ordinance.
18 The biggest problem is that again if the
19 current ordinance is strictly construed, the
20 unique hardship and the special conditions that
21 exist to him is different than all the other
22 places in the area.
23 Now if you look at all the other stores
24 generally in the Hamlet area, generally around
25 this particular site, very few of them have
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 41
2 adequate , if at all , on-site/off street parking .
3 Most of the area here is basically people who
4 are parking in the streets. We will be able to
5 put our cars on site. It' s tight, it is an area
6 which is built because of the existing building
7 but it is adequate to meet the required parking .
8 I have some photographs here to show you
9 how the five cars meet the ordinance and are
10 adequate for the needs .
11 (Handing of photographs. )
12 So the parking is adequate for its needs
13 and does meet the requisite requirements of the
14 ordinance.
15 MR. GOEHRINGER: By the way, I just want
16 to mention to the audience that we 'll take a
17 break during the, actually I hate to use the
18 word middle part but the center part of this
19 hearing and we ' ll be very happy to share with
20 the audience everything that has been submitted
21 tonight and we ' ll lay it right out on the table.
22 And we ' ll take a five minute break for anybody
23 who would like to look at it and we ' ll reconvene
-� 24 at this particular portion of the hearing if
25 anybody would be interested in the information
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 42
2 that was presented to us tonight.
3 Thank you, Mr. Packman.
4 MR. PACKMAN: I would reserve any comments
5 by way of rebuttal .
6 . MR. GOEHRINGER: The only thing I would
7 like to have, I realize that this is drawn to
8 scale, but can you give me something that ' s a
9 little more certified in reference to total
10 area. You don' t have to do it right this
11 minute. I ' ll be perfectly honest with you. I
12 do not specifically want to close this hearing
13 tonight. I want to go down and study this. I
14 want to discuss the area of floor space and the
15 definition that you have given us with the
16 planning board and their definition of floor
17 space.
18 MR. PACKMAN: Well their definition of
19 floor space , I don' t think they have defined it
20 adequately and the ultimate person, the ultimate
21 who can define floor space is this board here.
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: I understand that but
23 just in their determination of what they did and
24 I ' ll ask you that question at this time. How
25 did it end up back here?
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 43
2 MR. PACKMAN: That ' s a fair statement,
3 sir.
4 MR. GOEHRINGER: But let me just finish
5 this statement though. Can you give me
6 something a little more in the area of
7 approximate square footage of these area?
8 MR. PACKMAN: We ' ll get that area
9 certified.
10 MR. GOEHRINGER: You can send it to us.
11 MR. PACKMAN: I 'll have Mr . Markakis bring
12 it in.
13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Just if you would.
14 MR. PACKMAN: But we ' re talking about, Mr .
15 Chairman, so I can understand so there' s no
16 confusion. If I may, I 'm going to give you the
17 square footage of this area here.
18 MR. GOEHRINGER: You can give me the
19 square footage of the kitchen.
20 MR. PACKMAN: You want each one of those
2� three items square footage?
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: And the actual seating
23 area and the counter.
24 MR. PACKMAN: Okay.
I
25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 44
2 MR. PACKMAN: No problem.
3 On May 19th of 1989 a letter was sent to
4 Mr . Markakis indicating that there was a
5 resolution of the planning board which said :
'6 Whereas , the planning board has reviewed
7 the engineer' s reports, they had gotten an
8 engineer ' s report, the report states that the
9 maximum allowable parking which could provide is
10 limited to three spaces , which unfortunately is
11 contrary to what their own planning board having
12 approved five spaces on that location. The
13 report also states that these three spaces could
14 be used by a majority of vehicles if caution is
15 exercised entering and exiting.
16 Whereas the required number of parking
17 spaces for a restaurant described in Article 29
18 of the Town Code is one space per three seats ,
19 one space per 100 square feet of floor space,
20 whichever is greater , the building area for the
11
21 proposed site is 1 ,547 square feet thus
22 requiring 15 parking spaces. The proposed plan
23 is for 15 seats thus requiring five parking
24 spaces as per the code 15 spaces are required.
25 Whereas the restaurant in this use creates
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 45
r-
2 a large volume of vehicular and pedestrian
3 traffic for this particular use. It is not
4 possible to design the site so as to insure that
5 the individuals will use the site with caution
6 while exiting , entering and driving around the
7 site. It is also not possible to restrict cars
8 which are larger than the majority of cars from
9 using the parking area.
10 And whereas based upon the planning
11 board ' s review of the. engineer' s report on a
12 number of parking spaces for the site, the board
13 feels that there' s insufficient parking for the
14 proposed use .
15 And therefore the planning board denies
16 the application.
17 Obviously we take the view that there are
18 adequate spaces. We don' t need relief from the
19 board, but if so we do come to this board for
20 relief of a variance of the number of parking
21 spaces from 15 to 5 because 5 already exist.
22 Five in our opinion are all that are required,
23 and we don' t necessarily agree with the planning
24 board as to the statement that you need 15
25 spaces under the new ordinance. We say we
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 46
2 comply with the five spaces because the floor
3 space is the area, not the floor area as defined
4 in the statute. It is the area where the
5 customers actually go and not to the kitchen
6 area or the refrigerator area. No people go
7 into those spaces or behind the counter. They
8 generate nothing .
9 Now as you know , the area to the south of
10 this property is the Wayside Market. We ' re on
11 Boisseau Avenue. To the north is a residential
12 house which exists across the way. Directly
13 opposite on the left to the north are
14 residences. To the south bordering on the east,
15 northeast corner is the Thompson Emporium and
16 the Thompson Sportswear. There is off street
17 parking in that particular site. In fact ,
18 that ' s only one of streets between Boisseau and
19 across the street which is Hobart. On the
20 southeast corner is the Quiet Man and to the
21 east of that is the Plymouth new sales car
22 operation, and to the southwest corner is the
23 Main Street Beverage . Slightly to the west of
24 that is Joe Anthony' s and then there ' s some
25 other buildings on the south side of Route 25A.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 47
2 So this is a very tight Hamlet business
3 area. These are old buildings. They have been
4 here for some time. Old uses that have been
5 here for some time and for many period of time
6 the adequate parking is not the same that you
7 would have when you build a new shopping center
8 or a new store or a new area where you can
9 afford to put off street parking on.
10 And therefore we ask the board for relief
11 based upon the various areas in the
12 neighborhood. As I said there may be some
13 people here who oppose this application and
14 before . I proceed any further I would like to
15 hear what they have to say and request the right
16 to give rebuttal .
17 MR. GOEHRINGER: I have only one other
18 question. This gentleman was asked to be
19 restricted to three parking spaces. What is
20 your interpretation or what is your opinion
21 concerning the actual seating capacity of this
22 proposed restaurant?
23 MR. PACKMAN: I 'm sorry, Mr . chairman. I
24 don' t follow you.
e
25 MR. GOEHRINGER: You said that this
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 48
2 planning board says that all that can be
3 accommodated there are three parking spaces.
4 Then what would be the nature of the seating
5 capacity in this restaurant?
6 MR. PACKMAN: If it only were allowed
7 three?
8 MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes.
9 MR. PACKMAN: We would have to reduce it
10 on the current ordinance.
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Right.
12 MR. PACKMAN: We would have to reduce it
13 for one for every three. We would have to
14 reduce it to nine.
15 MR. GOEHRINGER: And you ' re basically
16 looking for 15?
17 MR. PACKMAN: 15 .
18 MR. GOEHRINGER: All right. I thank you.
19 Is there anybody else who would like to
20 speak in favor of this application?
21 At this particular time I request that we
22 take a five minute recess. We ' ll take this
23 information that has been submitted to us along
24 with the file and place it on the table. We ask
25 you to place everything back in the areas that
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 49
2 have been submitted to us .
3 And I ' ll ask for a motion to recess.
4 MR. DOYEN: So moved.
5 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
6 THE BOARD: Aye.
7 MR. GOEHRINGER: I guess we ' re ready to
8 reconvene .
9 THE BOARD: So moved.
10 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor?
11 THE BOARD : Aye .
12 (Whereupon, a recess was taken. )
13
14 (Whereupon, after the recess, the hearing
15 continued as follows: )
16
17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody who
18 would like to speak against this application?
12
19 MS. COCHRAN: Mr . Chairman and members of
20 the board. I 'm Jean Cochran speaking as a
21 private citizen.
22 Although my husband and I do not own
23 property directly adjacent to the property
24 that ' s being discussed this evening , we do own
25 property and live across the street from this
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 50
2 establishment.
3 If this variance is granted we are very
4 concerned to adding to an already serious
5 traffic condition. As you are aware, Boisseau
6 Avenue is the last major north/south road'
7 heading east until you come to Albertson Lane.
8 All traffic traveling northeast between these
9 two points use Boisseau Avenue.
10 When the V.F .W. occupied this building and
11 they held an affair, cars would park on both
12 sides of the road and with the width of the road
13 the way it is , the highway many times becomes
14 one lane. We have already had this experience
15 and are well aware what will happen if off
16 street parking is not adequately provided.
17 During the busy months cars are often
18 backed up on Boisseau as far as my driveway
19 waiting to exit on to the main road, which also
20 adds to the congestion.
21 Another problem that exists are when
22 parking is heavy on Boisseau, our driveways are
23 blocked by inconsiderate people. If there is an
24 emergency the proper vehicles could not get
25 through to our homes. Adding to the congestion
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 51
2 is the exit drive from Thompsons on Boisseau .
3 Another problem that exists that effects the
4 traffic flow is cars coming out often Boisseau
5 and for some reason they think that my driveway
6 is the entrance to Thompson Emporium. Suddenly
7 they realize their error and whip back on to the
8 highway and this happens every single day.
9 My husband and I are both village people
10 having both been brought up near the villages
11 when we were children. I in Riverhead and Pep
12 in Southold. When pop gave us the land 39 years
13 ago, we were well aware that businesses would be
14 our neighbors. And we have never had a problem
15 with that. We like living near the village .
16 The limited parking presently provided on
17 the site in question is not conducive to use.
18 To exit this property would be worth your life
19 with traffic conditions and parked cars . Your
20 vision would be greatly hindered. Therefore ,
21 most customers would park on the highway.
22 In all the time that this shop served as a
23 printing shop, there was not one car, to my
24 knowledge, that pulled in and parked behind the
25 fence, nor does the owner himself.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 52
2 Another question, where will the employees
3 park? I urge the board to consider the
4 conditions as they exist as it will cause a
5 hardship to many people using Boisseau Avenue As
6 a route. It will cause a hardship to the
7 businesses and the surrounding residences and it
8 will heavily add to a very bad existing traffic
9 problem.
10 Thank you, Mr. chairman.
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
12 Is there anybody else who would like to
13 speak against this application?
14 MR. BEDNOSRY: My `name is Wes Bednosky,
15 Junior , and I own the property immediately to
16 the north of this proposed restaurant.
17 The statement was made a while ago that he
18 tried to purchase additional land and our family
19 has owned that property for approximately 60 to
20 70 years and no time was anybody approached
21 about buying our land or any portion thereof. I
22 just want to make that point.
23 The other point I wanted to just add on to
24 Jean' s statement about the congestion. There' s
25 already seven driveways and one fire hydrant in
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 53
2 the immediate area which adds to limit off
3 street parking.
4 Additionally, his site plan includes a
5 portion of his parking lot that is on my
6 property, and if he succeeds in gaining this it
7 will result in legal action on my part because
8 his retaining wall and fence are on our
9 property.
10 Thank you for your time .
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
12 Is there anybody else who would like to
13 speak?
14 MR. ADAMSON: Walt Adamson. I own the
15 Wayside Market property. I believe I have a
16 letter there that I sent. In being in business
17 that I have, I do not see how a man can make a
18 profit on a nine seat place. And if you want to
19 read my letter , you have read it so you know
20 what' s going on.
21 MR. GOEHRINGER: It ' s a part of the file .
22 Thank you .
23 Is there anybody else who would like to
24 speak?
25 MS. SILVONIC: Norma Silvonic. I agree
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 54
2 with everything that was said.
3 MR. GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who
4 would like to speak?
5 Okay Mr . Packman, rebuttal .
6 MR. PACKMAN: Mr. Chairman, let me do this
7 in some kind of reverse order. I don' t know if
13
8 I misspoke, I apologize . I didn' t say that we
9 attempted to buy any property in the area. I
10 said it ' s owned individually by other parties
11 and we' re not in a position to buy anybody
12 else' s land. I didn' t say we made an offer to
13 anyone or attempted to make an offer to anyone,
14 so Mr. Bednosky, no offer was made to you.
15 MR. BEDNOSKY: That ' s not what you said.
16 You said you attempted.
17 MR. PACKMAN: The record will show what I
18 said . I ' m willing to stand on what I said.
19 I don' t know about this fence problem that
20 he talks about and his retaining wall and how
21 long it' s been there .
22 Do you know how long that retaining wall
23 has been there , sir?
24 MR. BEDNOSKY: It' s been there since he
25 first started working on the property.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 55
2 MR. PACKMAN: Was it there before that?
3 MR. BEDNOSKY: No.
4 MR. PACKMAN: When was it put up?
5 MR. BEDNOSKY: Approximately four , five
6 years ago. I don ' t know the exact date.
7 MR. PACKMAN: But it' s been there since
8 that time?
9 MR. BEDNOSKY: Yes.
10 MR. PACKMAN: Thank you .
11 With reference to Mr . Adamson, I have read
12 his letter and I would sure as heck object if I
13 was running his store and someone told me
14 whether I was making a profit or not. That ' s
15 not for me to look into his pocket and I suggest
16 that he don' t look into my client ' s pocket. So
17 that' s really not issue.
18 He talks about the use of cars parking
19 using his parking lot. I find that somewhat
20 anomalous when he' s parking in the right of way
21 of the road and when he is parking on what used
22 to be the sidewalk area over there. I don' t
23 understand how he can be doing that, but if
24 that' s the way it is , I don' t think he should
25 impose upon any greater restrictions of his
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 56
2 neighbors that he already is doing himself. I
3 have some pictures of the way he parks his cars
4 and you can see that if you go to visit the site
5 and walk down the sidewalk , you see it stops by
6 my client' s property and it ' s all blacktop where
7 he parks his cars and he also parks his cars in
8 front of , the building, which is apparently also
9 in the right of way.
10 We ' re trying to operate this property.
11 This property is lawfully zoned the way it is.
12 We have the right to use this property. The
13 property has the adequate number of parking
14 spaces that were approved by the planning board.
15 The very essence of what this board does is to
16 relieve people from the strict compliance of the
17 zoning ordinance. That' s why you exist. That' s
18 why you grant variances every time you grant a
19 variance . You are varying the strict compliance
20 of the law. So my client' s application which
21 asks for a variance if one is necessary and I
22 argue that one is not necessary that it is
23 improper to say why aren' t we giving strict
24 compliance with the law.
25 It is also interesting to note that
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 57
2 several cars I am told that are either employees
3 of Mr. Adamson and the Wayside Market constantly
4 park in front of the property of my client and
5 uses that as a parking area. And I think if you
6 check the license plate on one of those cars,
7 which I think I gave you the picture, you' ll
8 find that they seem to be parked in front of
9 that building very often. Again, I think that
10 those comments and criticisms don' t go to the
11 merits of the argument and I suggest that this
12 board handle this matter on the merit as it is a
13 legitimate application being made and that the
14 use of this property is properly used.
15 Now Mrs . Cochran who comes as an
16 interested citizen who lives down the block
17 should know in her public capacity that the
18 handling of traffic is a police matter not
19 before this board of appeals . That the people
20 who park in her driveway or block her driveway
21 is not as a result of my client doing business
22 there. That ' s a result of the way the street is
23 located and where it is located, and he should
24 not be the one who is visited upon the ills
25 because there is a poor traffic flow at that
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 58
2 particular junction. He should be allowed to
3 operate his business the same way that Mr .
4 Adamson operates his business and the same as
5 Mr. Bednosky whatever he does at his particular
6 house and Mrs . Cochran getting in and out of her
7 driveway. So it should be understandable that
8 she should be tolerant of what is going on here
9 and try to make an accomodation as how we can
10 work this thing out together .
11 Now the board chairman mentioned what
12 would be the fact if we only had three parking
13 spaces there. I would suggest to you that as an
14 accommodation, if you provide for the three
14
15 parking spaces then we ask you to vary the
16 number of seats we can have from 9 to 15. So we
17 will go along with the application if that is
18 the wisdom of this board that we use three
19 parking spaces on site and permit us to vary the
20 number of seats that we can have from the 9 to
21 the 15. So we would accommodate the situation
22 to work something out to be neighborly with our
23 neighbors . And I trust that we can do that.
24 My client has expended substantial sums of
25 money, in excess of $27 ,000 buying equipment
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 59
2 with the understanding and hope, the thought
3 that he was when he got the Health Department
4 permit and we submitted the permit before the
5 Building Department that it would be approved
6 based upon the five spaces and then found out
7 that the zoning ordinance changed. Then it
8 became unfair. So he has a financial hardship,
9 which is another reason why this application
10 should be granted.
11 So I think in toto this board I know will
12 go over this carefully. I know it will listen
13 to the application on the pro side and it will
14 listen to the application of those who oppose it
15 and try to work something out which will be fair
16 to all the parties.
17 But again the strict application of this
18 ordinance, the unnecessary hardship and all the
19 requisite criteria that go into granting
20 variances have been established and do exist
21 under the very reasons why this application
22 should be granted. The adjacent properties
23 which have the uses that they have that have
24 existed for some time should not be allowed to
25 be an inhibiting factor to my client' s right to
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 60
2 use his property, which is properly zoned,
3 properly located and has the right to be used.
4 Thank you, Mr . Chairman.
5 MR. GOEHRINGER: I just want to give these
6 pictures to Mr . Adamson so that he may review
7 them.
8 MR. PACKMAN: Can I just make one
9 statement?
10 MR. GOEHRINGER: I just wanted you to
11 review them.
12 Mr . Packman, while they ' re reviewing them,
13 can I just ask you a question? It seems
14 somewhat unique to me that in the notice of
15 disapproval , and the reason I 'm addressing this
16 and this has nothing to do with prior
17 applications that you have brought before us ,
18 but definitely you do come before us with some
19 unique applications, there ' s no question about
20 it.
21 MR. PACKMAN: Thank you, sir. I accept
22 that as a compliment.
23 MR. GOEHRINGER: It ' s meant to be a
24 compliment.
25 It appears that we ' re definitely dealing
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 61
2 with site plan requirements in the notice of
3 disapproval . All right.
4 MR. PACKMAN: No. The parking requirement
5 are not site plan requirements. They are zoning
6 requirements. The number of parking spaces
7 based upon the usage and the number of seats is
8 a zoning board requirement.
9 MR. GOEHRINGER: So your contention is
10 that it is definitely a zoning board
11 requirement?
12 MR. PACKMAN: Well, we need site plan
13 approval. I 'm not suggesting that we don' t.
14 But I ' m saying to you that if you look at the
15 ordinance specifically 100-191 , which is the
16 Article 29 which sets forth the off street
17 parking requirements, that' s a zoning ordinance
18 requirement and the only one who can grant
19 relief from that is this board by way of
20 variance. And within that section it defines
21 the use and the number of spaces that are
22 required within that use.
23 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay.
l 24 MR. PACKMAN: Again I suggested to you,
25 sir , before in response that if I may amplify
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 62
2 that under the ordinance before the change the
3 number of parking spaces required was one to
4 three and no square footage requirement. And
5 again if this application, if it wasn' t for the
6 Health Department holding this thing for up to
7 two years and that application was submitted
8 before the change of zone, the change of the
9 zoning ordinance , this would have been a
10 proformer application. So therefore that ' s the
11 uniqueness of the problem and the hardship that
12 we have .
13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay . Mrs. Cochran.
14 MRS. COCHRAN: Mr. Chairman, I would just
15 like to clarify my only concern for being here
16 is not only my driveway. It is the complete
17 congestion in the area and the traffic problems
18 that we currently have. It' s already a mess.
19 You don' t knowingly add to the mess that' s
20 already there.
21 Thank you, sir.
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
23 MR. BEDNOSKY: I ' d just like to bring to
24 the board' s attention that the photographs
25 submitted would take on a little bit different
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 63
2 context if the retaining wall and the fence were
3 in their proper place because there is
15
4 approximately one foot difference on that side
5 line where he has built on our property.
6 MR. GOEHRINGER: Mr . Packman, are you
7 aware of any encroachment on their property?
8 MR. PACKMAN: No. I would like to speak
9 to my client, if I may?
10 MR. MARKAKIS : Good evening , Mr. Chairman.
11 I appreciate highly comments concerning public
12 safety . I brought matters of public safety to
13 the attention of the town board. five years ago.
14 I stood before the board right here. I wrote
15 again and again for conditions which should
16 concern the neighborhood, and for which Mrs .
17 Cochran today speaks , she was there at the time
18 five years ago, six years ago. She wouldn' t
19 speak .
20 Life threatening conditions, we have
21 experienced facts. I went before the board
22 requesting that they do the proper things to
23 obtain a traffic light at the intersection. I
24 was told this was a matter for the state, but I
-j�
25 did bring this to the board and I have a letter
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 64
2 of thanks from the supervisor on that. It took
3 a lot of pain, lots of agony. My children could
4 not approach my building and they couldn' t come
5 anymore to help me make a living because of the
6 conditions of . the traffic next door. Cars
7 backing up, injuring people . It took a lot of
8 pain until the town board decided it was about
9 time to put a dividing line across the street,
10 Boisseau Avenue, going all the way up.
11 So many years we had to see a two-year old
12 child being killed about a mile up until they
13 woke up. To divide , to put the dividing line
14 and also observe a speed limit of those cars
15 going up and down at high speeds. So life
16 threatening conditions did exist five, six years
17 ago. The sensitivity that comes to surface
18 today did not exist at the time, and I do
19 appreciate that sensitivity when it comes to
20 public safety and human. life very much. I
21 insist on that. It' s a matter of record. My
22 letters have been at the supervisor ' s office. I
23 have had some unsatisfactory answers from the
24 supervisor and from the superintendent of the
25 highways at the time. The matter was going back
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 65
2 and forth. I was trying to eliminate dangerous
3 conditions. And perhaps this left a certain
4 unfavorable flavor against me. At any rate ,
5 this is the position of life threatening
6 conditions.
7 As far as my neighbors , Mr. Bednosky' s
8 remark about purchasing the property, he does
9 not know what approaches I made to his aunt when
10 she had the title before she passed it to him.
11 When I was trying to negotiate and she felt that
12 she would rather have him take over the other
13 half. So he doesn' t know what went behind the
14 scenes. At any rate --
15 MR. BEDNOSKY: Nothing could go behind the
16 scenes when I own the property.
17 MR. MARKAKIS : At the time, sir, you did
18 not own 50 percent of the property. It was
19 Laura Young and it ' s on the record.
20 As far as monument, if you stand at the
21 entrance of the property which is 75 feet wide ,
22 you see the northern part on the right, the
23 monument, and you see the curb and the fence 18
24 inches inside my property, not outside. But
25 this is a matter of fact. All right. So I
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 66
2 won' t argue that.
3 As far as to profit making , what Mr .
4 Adamson proposed for doing business, he got the
5 answer from my attorney. The only thing I would
6 ask if you have your own nest dirty, don' t mess
7 around with the neighbors. I could elaborate.
8 I believe in living and let living.
9 MR. PACKMAN: Mr . Chairman, I have a
10 survey here which is the print of the same
11 survey which I gave you with the Health
12 Department approval on it, and I think if you
13 look at the north line where Mr. Bednosky' s
14 property is located, the survey appears to show
15 that the fence is on Mr. Markakis' property and
16 so it seems to be the law. And you have a copy
17 of that.
18 MR. GOEHRINGER: That' s correct.
19 MR. PACKMAN: Thank you.
20 MR. MARKAKIS : If I may, you know it comes
21 to mind when I first came here 23 years ago Mr .
22 Adamson just started his store. I was told that
23 even if you live here a hundred years you will
24 still be considered an outsider. I laughed at
25 the fact. Well , I don' t like to go through the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 67
2 pain and the agony I experienced and the
3 tremendous things done to me in the interim.
4 They' re a matter of records, police reports and
5 so on and so forth.
6 Thank you very much.
7 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
8 MS. COCHRAN: Mr. Chairman, if I may.
9 Some points have been raised in reference to my
10 serving as a public servant. Number 1 , in the
16
11 five years I ' ve been on the town board of
12 Southold, twice I have tried through the state
13 to get traffic lights on Boisseau Avenue . The
14 first time the letter we received they said it
15 didn' t warrant it. The one that we got last
16 year they added one sentence to the particular
17 form letter that they mail out that said a
18 traffic light would only add to the problems of
19 the intersection.
20 As far as lines being painted down the
21 road, I believe I asked the superintendent of
22 highways to paint them along with asking for the
23 guardrails up by the post office , along with
24 many many other things you do as a member of the
25 town board to try to alleviate dangerous
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 68
2 situations .
3 It' s very unfortunate that Mr . Markakis as
4 he did at the planning board hearing stand and
5 make accusations and falsehoods. None of us
6 that live on Boisseau Avenue recall injuries
7 because of the parking. Everyone is
8 particularly careful because of the conditions .
9 Nor do we recall a two-year old child being
10 killed up the road. So it' s unfortunate .
11 Thank you.
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: Mr. Packman, can I ask
13 you a question?
14 MR. PACKMAN: Yes.
15 MR. GOEHRINGER: Toward the rear of that
16 survey that you have just showed me , is it not a
17 fact that it could be an encroachment on say the
18 last few feet of that property with that chain
19 link fence? It appears that it runs over the
20 line in one area back there. Do you see that
21 one little spot in the back maybe ten feet or
22 so?
23 MR. PACKMAN: That' s a stockade fence .
.� 24 That' s a different fence, sir .
25 MR. GOEHRINGER: That' s a different fence?
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 69
2 MR. PACKMAN: Yes, the way I look at it
3 it ' s a wood plank fence.
4 MR. GOEHRINGER: Let me point to you .
5 MR. PACKMAN: Maybe I 'm looking at the
6 wrong spot,. sir .
7 MR. GOEHRINGER: All the way to the rear
8 right back here?
9 MR. PACKMAN: I don' t think he' s
10 complaining about that.
11 MR. GOEHRINGER: But I ' m just saying that
12 so that would be construed to be an
13 encroachment.
14 MR. PACKMAN: That' s not where the parking
15 problem is .
16 MR. GOEHRINGER: I understand .
17 MR. PACKMAN: I can see that, sir .
18 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. Now as you know ,
19 Mr . Packman, we are empowered and we have in
20 prior hearings sworn people any and all persons
21 involved. My only statement to the applicant is
22 does he feel that he could operate this business
23 with five parking spaces on site with absolutely
24 no parallel parking on Boisseau Avenue? Does he
T 25 feel that that could be the case?
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 70
2 MR. PACKMAN: I can ' t answer that, sir .
3 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you feel that you
4 could operate this business with five parking.
5 spaces on site with. no parallel parking?
6 MR., MARKAKIS : Yes, sir. This is not a
7 first class restaurant. This is not a
8 restaurant, in per se. It ' s going to be a
9 coffee shop with some ethnic delicacies for the
10 community. If some of our neighbors want to go
11 buy a pound of feta cheese, he wants the genuine
12 stuff, he has to go to Astoria. I want to bring
13 it here, olives, olive oil and this kind of
14 stuff. So there would be a good number of take
15 out verses sit in.
16 MR. PACKMAN: That' s why he suggested,
17 sir, that if we wanted to reduce the number of
18 parking spaces to three, give us the benefit of
19 still permitting us the number of chairs and
20 then we would then be able to have the best of
21 both worlds.
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: And the other question
23 that I have is that the ingress would be on the
24 north side and the egress would be on the south
25 side?
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 71
2 MR. PACKMAN: That' s the way it goes. I
3 have pictures of that.
4 MR. GOEHRINGER: I can see it. There
5 appears to be enough room to get around the
6 buil.ding.
7 MR. MARKAKIS: It ' s natural for the people
8 as you drive, unless you are left handed, to go
9 the other way . But the majority of the people
10 find it easier to go from right to left than the
11 other way, and I found it through experience to
12 ' be more careful . That' s why I provided this
13 way. I can go the other way but it ' s not so
14 convenient.
15 MR. PACKMAN: Here' s the truck coming out
16 on the south side. You can see the clearance .
17 And here' s a van on the east side showing the
18 clearance. Here again is another turn around
19 showing the clearance and here' s another one
20 showing the clearance. So you can see that' s a
21 very big vehicle so it has room to maneuver.
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. Are there any
23 further comments from anyone that may not be
24 here .
25 MS. COCHRAN: Will the board be inspecting
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 72
2 the site?
3 MR. GOEHRINGER: I have inspected the site
4 twice Mrs . Cochran. I ' ll be back inspecting it
5 and I may ask Mr . Markakis to let me in as well
6 as any board member that might want to look at
7 that. As you can see tonight we have two board
8 members out of state.
9 MS. COCHRAN: Yes , I am aware of that.
17
10 MR. GOEHRINGER: I called the town
11 attorney today and informed him that I was not
12 planning on closing this hearing until the next
13 regularly scheduled meeting. I ' ll ask you
14 however at the next regularly scheduled meeting
15 to limit your comments to five minutes ,
16 considering that. we have spent quite some time
17 on this. I 'm never trying to restrict anybody
18 from any comments that are pertinent concerning
19 a case , but we don' t know how the other two
20 board members will react. Both of them are from
21 the Hamlet of Southold. They' re well aware of
22 this particular property. They probably
23 attended many weddings as I did in this
24 particular building and it would be unfair of
25 me. At the same time I do want to discuss the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 73
2 nature of these parking requirements with the
3 town attorney. And so I 'm going to make the
4 suggestion that we hold this particular hearing
5 over and recess it with the date of November
6 30th. We may change that date to the following
7 week , but we' ll readvertise and inform not only
8 the people that have spoken tonight and that is
9 yourself and Mr. Adamson and the other gentleman
10 and the lady in back of him by the nature of the
11 advertisements in the paper. We ' ll make you
12 aware of the fact that it is going to be
13 continued on either November 30th or the
14 following date of which we should have a full
15 board there at that particular time. And as I
16 said I ' ll get the rest of the information. I
17 want to extract either from visiting the site as
18 well as the board members visiting the site and
19 from my discussion with the town attorney.
20 MS. COCHRAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
21 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you have something
22 else Mr. Packman?
23 MR. PACKMAN: No.
24 MR. GOEHRINGER: I offer that as a
25 resolution.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 74
2 MR. PACKMAN: I 'll be present during that
3 time.
4 MR. GOEHRINGER: All right.
5 MR. DINIZIO: Second.
6 MR. GOEHRINGE.R: Yes, Mr. Bednosky.
7 MR. BEDNOSKY: I would just like to
8 reiterate one thing that was mentioned before.
9 What about employee parking?
10 MR. GOEHRINGER: That is not a question.
11 MR. BEDNOSKY: There is no parking on that
12 street. If anybody parks in front of my
13 property does so illegally because there' s a
14 fire hydrant and two driveways right on the
15 property.
16 MR. GOEHRINGER: While you' re still
17 standing , I just wanted to mention that that was
18 the purpose of my question to the applicant.
19 Can he operate this business with five parking
20 spaces.
21 MR. BEDNOSKY: Which includes not only the
22 tables but the help.
23 MR. GOEHRINGER: I 'm restricting it to
24 five parking spaces.
25 MR. BEDNOSKY: I made a mistake before.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 75
2 When I said seven driveways it' s eight
3 driveways . I 'm sorry. I made a mistake .
4 MR. GOEHRINGER: Before you sit down,
5 that' s why I asked the question. Because there
6 is a great possibility, and we have had in the
7 past made a recommendation to, not on this
8 project or any other project that is in this
9 immediate vicinity, we have asked the highway
10 superintendent to paint lines in front of
11 properties indicating no parking zones, and that
12 is the reason why I asked that question. That
13 is an option that we have had in the past and we
14 have imposed that option in the past.
15 Unfortunately, one we imposed on the state
16 highway and the state refused to do it, but we
17 have done it on town roads also and that is
18 again no parallel parking in front of the
19 properties alongside the sidewalk , so to speak .
20 MR. BEDNOSKY: But it doesn' t say the
21 adjoining properties because when the V.F.W. had
22 their functions we had people parking in front
23 of our driveways. When he had family parties
24 there they parked in the middle of the highway
{
25 and made it a one lane road, okay, and in front
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 76
2 of the fire hydrant and in front of the
3 driveways and in the middle of the highway when
4 they had the parties there and this is the same
5 man that I 'm referring to that had family
6 parties in that place.
7 MR. PACKMAN: If you read the ordinance , I
8 know you ' re familiar with it where extra parking
9 is required for employees. The ordinance
10 specifically says it. There is no specific
11 additional parking required in the wisdom of
12 this ordinance for employees. The requirement
13 is clear and set forth so many parking spaces
14 based upon stools or square footage. Where it
15 talks about fish markets or training facilities
16 for employees or other areas where the employees
17 go in, the ordinance specifically sets forth
18 additional parking for employees. So I just ask
19 you to take judicial notice of your own
20 ordinance.
21 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. All in favor?
22 THE BOARD: Aye .
23 MR. GOEHRINGER: Now again, the statement
24 for the purpose of the people that are here ,
25 we ' re recessing this hearing with a date at this
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
_ Southold Town Board of Anneals
s
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y.- 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN November 8 , 1989
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR. S.E.Q.R.A.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMES DINIZIO,JR.
TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION
Appeal No. 3872
Project/Applicants: COMPASS TRANSPORTS (Markakis )
County Tax Map No. 1000-62-1-16 •
Location of Project: 175 Boisseau AVenue , Southold
Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project:
Approval of site plan before issuance of Certificate of
Occupancy.
This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the
implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S.
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental
Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted
with the subject application indicating that no significant
adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be
project be implemented as planned.
It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction
concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this
application to fall under the established list of Type II
Actions. Pursuant to Section 617 .2jj , this Department is
excluded as an involved agency.
This determination shall not, however, affect any other
agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .2jj .
For further information, please contact the Office of the
Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at
(516) 765-1809.
tr
>r r
IV, Southold Town hoard of Appeals
O X
MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.1., N.Y. 11971
r
TELEPHONE(516)765-1809
FAX No. (516)765-1823
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
JOSEPH H.SAWICKI
JAMS DINIZIO, JR.
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Appl. No. 3872
Matter of COMPASS TRANSPORTS. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article XXV, Section 100-250, for approval of site
plan before any Certificate of Occupancy or building permits can
be issued in this Hamlet Business Zoning District (HB) .
Property Location: 175 Boisseau Avenue, Southold., County Tax
Map No. 1000, Section 062, Block 01, Lot 16.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held and concluded on
December 19, 1989 in the matter of the Application of COMPASS
TRANSPORTS, under Appeal No. 3872; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; 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. The premises in question is located along the north
side of Main Road, Route 25, Hamlet of Southold, and is
identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000,
Section 062, Block 01, Lot 16.
2. This is an application for Variances from the zoning
Code Article XXV, Section 100-250, for approval of site plan
before any certificate of Occupancy or building permits can be
issued, (Article XIX, Section 100-191) .
Page 2 - Appl. No. 3872
Matter of COMPASS TRANSPORTS
Decision rendered January. 9, 1990
3 . Article XXV, Section 100-250. This article shall apply
to every land use that is permitted in the. Town of Southold
except the single family home use on a single and separate lot
as set forth in Article III, 100-31A, and customary
nonagricultural accessory uses to a single-family residential
home use as stated in the Town Code. Any change in use or
intensity of use which will affect the characteristics of the
site in terms of parking, loading, access, drainage, open space
or utilities will require site plan approval. In all cases
where this chapter requires approval of site development plans
by the Planning Board, no building permit shall be issued by the
Building Inspector except upon authorization of and in
conformity with the site plan approval by the Planning Board and
all other public agencies involved.
4. In considering this application, the Board finds and
determines:
(a) that the circumstances of this application are
uniquely related to the premises and its established
nonconformities;
(b) that there is no other method for appellants to
pursue; and the premises will require on site parking that will
require other variance relief;
(c) that the area chosen for the on site parking is not
unreasonably located.
(d) that the variance will not in turn cause a substantial
effect on the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience.
and/or order of the Town;
(e) that in carefully considering the record and all the
above factors, the interests of justice will be served by
granting the variance, as applied conditionally noted below.
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, Seconded by Mr.
Goehringer, it was
i
Page 3 - Appl. No. 3872
Matter of COMPASS TRANSPORTS
Decision rendered January. 9, 1990
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance in the matter of the
application of COMPASS TRANSPORTS as applied under Appeal No.
3872 for site plan approval, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That there be no more than 400 sq. ft. in dining
area, exclusive of restroom area.
2. That there be 4 parking spaces provided on site.
3 . That the applicant have a maximum 12 stools or chairs
in dining area.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Doyen and Dinizio (Absent Joseph Sawicki) . This resolution was
duly adopted.
df
GERARD P. GOEHAINGER CHAIRMAN
1 77
2 particular time. It is our opinion that the
3 date is going to be November 30th. That date
4 could change one week later. We 'll know
5 approximately ten days before which is around
6 the 20th of November and we ' ll then readvertise
7 in the paper and we ' ll of course inform the
18
8 applicant and Mrs . Cochran in the same
9 situation.
10 We thank you all very much for your
11 courtesy and have a save trip home.
12 I have before me the Port of Egypt file in
13 somewhat a scattered order. We had recessed
14 this hearing on the 21st of September and we
15 came back the following meeting. We had a
16 special meeting and we advertised for a date
17 which is tonight, and therefore by the nature of
18 what I have just stated, I ' m opening the hearing
19 and I 'm asking Mr . Lieblein if he would like to
20 address the board?
21 MR. LIEBLEIN: I have submitted in writing
22 a copy of this letter. I don' t know if that
23 eliminates the necessity of the copy that I say.
24 I thought it might save the town some money .
I�
25 I have a letter dated November 8th 1989
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 78
2 addressed to Mr . Gerald Goehringer, Town Board
3 of Appeals , Southold Town Hall, Southold, New
4 York 11971 .
5 Dear Mr . Goehringer, We appreciate the
6 board' s recessing the last meeting to allow us
7 to respond to the questions raised by Mr . Flynn
8 at that time. We received a copy of the
9 transcript on October loth. Mr. Flynn' s
10 comments cover from Page 92 to 112 and they
11 cover many different subjects. I will try to
12 respond to them in a logical manner.
13 As I read the transcript I got the
14 distinct impression that Mr . Flynn feels that I
15 and my family are sly, sneaky, devious
16 businessmen and all the other owners of marinas
17 are probably like us. I refer here to the
18 comments on Page 94 about other lots I may own
19 on Page 102 where he refers to the "Slips
20 Available" sign which he insinuates I removed
21 when I realized he would use it against me. And
22 on Page 108 where he refers to a "trick
23 involved" implying that some attempt has been
24 made to cover up the fact that I have an
25 interest in the property on which the motel is
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 79
2 located.
3 My family has been operating the Port of
4 Egypt since February 1946 -- over 43 1/2 years .
5 I worked there part time all through grade and
6 hi.gh school and full time since February of
7 1969, or over 20 years . During all these years
8 we ' ve worked at building up the business so it
9 could support all the family members as well as
10 non-family members who work there. At the same
11 time we ' ve been good neighbors in the community
12 and have provided services that are needed.
13 That' s why I resent the implication that we are
14 bad people. Like most other small businessmen,
15 we have invested money, time and energy into our
16 business with the hope of making a profit. We
17 always face the risk of losses due to changes in
18 the economy or hurricanes like Carol in 154 or
19 Gloria in 185 .
20 The reason we want to build the new
21 storage building is to allow us to fullfill a
22 demand for service, primarily winter storage at
23 this time, and increase our income base so we
24 will be less susceptible to fluctuations in the
25 boat sales end of our business.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 80
2 Having stating my position, let me address
3 the comments made by Mr . Flynn.
4 On Page 93 , Mr. Flynn makes reference to
5 the property on which the motel is located.
6 This property was purchased in 1984 by myself,
7 my wife, her brother and his wife. Since we are
8 all equal shareholders, I own 25% , if it is
9 assumed that I can convince my wife to go along
10 with my wishes, then I control 50% .
11 We purchased the property through the
12 Suffolk County Industrial Development Agency.
13 On Page 108 Mr. Flynn implies that this was a
14 bit of trickery on our part, as I mentioned
15 earlier. In addition he throws in a zinger at
16 the bottom of Page 108 in which he states that
17 by using the IDA, hiding behind the IDA, we are
18 tax exempt. I use the term "zinger" here
19 because Mr. Flynn is trying to show or prove
20 that we used devious means to get the money to
21 buy the property and we don' t pay taxes besides.
22 Let me state the real facts here. The
23 purpose of an IDA loan is to help new businesses
24 start and existing business grow by making money
25 available at a reduced rate and providing some
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 81
2 tax breaks. We actually borrowed the money from
3 North Fork Bank and Trust Company to purchase
4 and refurbish the property, which was extremely
5 run down. The bank loaned us the money at 11%
6 which was a lower rate than usual because they
7 are exempt from income tax on the interest
8 income they receive .
9 We are not exempt from property taxes. We
10 make a payment in lieu of taxes. This year we
11 paid $24 ,907.00 .
12 We bought the property because we thought
13 it was a good investment. However , primarily
14 because of brown tide, it has not been such a
15 great investment. There are no scallops so the
16 scallop shop closed down. The fish in the bays
17 were not so numerous so sales of fish and
18 fishing tackle are down, and tourists have not
19 been overabundant, so the motel revenue is down.
20 At the present time we ' d like to sell but
21 the real estate market is down too.
22 I now state that in evaluating the
23 requests for variances with regard to our
24 permit, the motel property should not be
25 considered. I 'm sure the town attorney can rule
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 82
2 on that.
3 By the way, with reference to Albertson
4 Marine on Page 109 , Albertson Marine leases the
5 marina sales store on the property .
6 Let ' s go back to Page 102 where Mr. Flynn
7 refers to our "Slips Available" sign and draws
8 the conclusion that there is no demonstrable
9 demand and this is all an exercise in futility.
10 This year we never quite filled all our slips.
11 We had about ten open and we had about ten
12 openings in high and dry. Based on the increase
13 in demand for slips and high and dry space , next
14 year we expect to be at 100% . Next year , if we
15 have not rented all our slips over the winter,
16 we will put the sign out again.
17 No growing business waits until it is at
18 capacity before it expands to meet demand. It
19 tries to anticipate demand. Providing available
20 high and dry slips is a logical step on our
21 part.
22 We, in fact, have a present demand for
23 inside winter storage which greatly exceeds our
24 capacity. We now have a waiting list. By
25 Christmas our present building will be
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 83
2 completely filled, as it has been for the
3 previous two winters . It was this demand that
4 caused us to decide to erect a new building
5 three years ago. By the way, our first meeting
6 with town representatives took place two years
7 ago November.
8 On Page 105 Mr. Flynn makes reference to
9 the winter storage needs of boats in the marina
10 as well as those of area boaters who keep their
11 boats near their homes. It is the needs of
12 these boaters that have created the immediate
13 demand just mentioned. And providing winter
14 storage is one of a marinas key income sources.
15 We could not survive without it.
16 There are some key factors that should be
17 brought out here. Some of the boaters who dock
18 their boats in the water take their boats home
19 for the winter as Mr. Flynn properly stated.
20 The same is true of people who keep their boats
21 in high and dry. Over the years , we have
22 observed that as high and dry boats leave, we
23 fill in with winter storage of boats .
24 One of the problems we face when we fill
25 our building to capacity is that we cannot get
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 84
2 at those boats to work on them, that is to
3 conduct maintenance requested by the owners .
4 When we are trying to get this work done and
5 thus keep our employees working, we have to do a
6 lot of boat juggling which is time consuming and
7 expensive. The new storage building will
8 relieve this pressure.
9 On Page 105 Mr. Flynn states that 1000 to
10 1250 square feet are required to store boats
11 when a travel lift is used. Even a 10 by 30
12 boat only takes 300 square feet, not 1000 to
13 1200 . We don' t use a travel lift, but even
14 yards with a travel lift use the space between
15 large boats to store small boats. So no space
16 is wasted.
17 One of the plus sides of a storage
18 building is that it allows three to four times
19 as many boats to be stored on the area of upland
20 which should be considered a very positive
21 benefit.
22 On Page 102, Mr . Flynn raises the question
23 of how we can stack boats three high with a 25
19
24 foot eve height. I don' t know what that has to
25 do with the request for a variance, but it
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 85
2 happens that we will be able to stack boats
3 three high and if the boats are small, four
4 high.
5 He also states that the building is
6 dangerous on Page 103 . Similar structures exist
7 all over the country. There have been a few
8 fires. That' s certainly one of the big fears of
9 every marina owner. We all take as many
10 precautions as possible and the risk is minimal .
11 When there is a fire, the boats don' t explode .
12 They burn and the building collapses on top of
13 the boats--and it' s a big mess. That' s one of
14 the risks we take in the business. In this case
15 we propose to erect the building in an area not
16 adjoining dwellings. There ' s a 60 foot buffer
17 to the marina on the west and over 60 feet to
18 the chicken restaurant and offices to the east
19 with a septic system in between. So nothing
20 would ever be built there. So it would appear
21 to be as safe a place as one could find in the
22 area.
23 On Page 98 Mr. Flynn gets into a lengthy
7 24 analysis of parking. It is my understanding
25 that that question is in the hands of the
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 86
2 planning board. However , I ' d like to address it
3 for the record. Based on our experience over
4 the past 20 years, we never have had even 500 of
5 our boats in use on any given day. In our
6 proposal to the planning board, we have
7 dedicated all our land on the north side of
8 Route 25 to parking. We don' t anticipate that
9 we ' ll ever need this area and, in fact, we hope
10 that in the future a realistic figure will be
11 placed on parking requirements, which will allow
12 us to use that land for something else.
13 We would like to point out that on an
14 occasion when parking requirements were in
15 excess of spaces shown on the plot plan, we
16 could park cars in the bottom bays of the
17 building which would take care of 40 cars
18 instantly. And we could always resort to
19 stacking the cars in the boat racks or use valet
20 parking inside .
21 As the board probably knows, Southold Town
22 conducted a survey this summer at all the
23 marinas in town to see what parking requirements
24 really were. The results of the survey showed
25 that even on the busiest weekends, requirements
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 87
2 were only about one car for three boats .
3 Our application is before this board for a
4 ruling on three variances. We need the side
5 yard variance so as to allow the maximum parking
6 on the west side of. the new building. This will
7 also minimize the reduction of the view towards
8 the water from the road and the existing
9 restaurant, Armando' s.
10 We need the front yard setback to give the
11 most maneuvering area on the south side of the
12 building by the water. The building will be
13 further off the road than existing buildings
14 on the property and its location will not change
15 the character of the neighborhood.
16 Gentlemen, we have tried to analyze all
17 the various calculations of Mr. Flynn from Page
18 92 through 101 unsuccessfully. We certainly
19 could not see why the concrete washing pad in
20 front of the building would be considered a
21 building by Mr . Flynn, I 'm referring to Page 96 .
22 There is no attempt at 'segmentation of our
23 property. We had Van Tuyl Surveyors calculate
24 the area o fall the land belonging to Port of
25 Egypt Enterprises on teh south side of Route 25
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 88
2 and that area is 216 ,058 square feet. It does
3 not take into account the basin. The actual
4 area of each building was also calculated and
5 the total is 66,498 square feet. The total
6 building are is 30 . 78% of the total land area.
7 Since this is only slightly over the limit of
8 30 % we ask for the waiver on that percentage
9 coverage also.
10 We would like to add that we are presently
11 negotiating with the New York State Department
12 of Transportation to purchase or lease, at a
13 minimum, the area directly in front of the
14 restaurant. If and when that occurs, we will
15 have at least 9240 square feet of additional
16 land which will reduce our lot coverage to
17 29 .5% . It certainly appears likely that this
18 will occur since the Department of
19 'Transportation in its letter to the planning
20 board dated June 29th 1989 says that they will
21 require us to lease the land.
22 As stated above, it ' s a fairly simple
23 calculation of land area and building are and
24 the figures speak for themselves.
25 We thank the board for taking the time to
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 89
2 allow us to respond to Mr. Flynn' s comments. If
3 as a result of any further comments made by Mr .
4 Flynn or anyone else , the board needs further
5 information from us, we will be happy to provide
6 it. We have with us the deeds requested at the
7 last hearing. We ask that the board review the
8 facts and make a decision on our request as soon
9 as possible.
10 Sincerely, William H. Lieblein,
11 President, Port of Egypt.
20
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: The only question I want
13 to ask you is do you own the title to the basin,
14 the under water lands?
15 MR. LIEBLEIN: Good question. We own the
16 land and we dug the hole. If you dig a hole and
17 let the water in, I don ' t know if that means you
18 don' t own the land anymore. I think you still
19 own it .
20 MR. GOEHRINGER: That doesn' t mean that
21 you have exclusive control over it, as you know,
22 but you probably feel that you have title to the
23 land?
24 MR. LIEBLEIN: Yes.
25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 90
2 I just wanted to mention to you what we
3 will do is we won' t be closing this hearing and
4 more or less a proformer act at the next
5 regularly scheduled meeting and we ' ll be doing
6 that in case there ' s anything forth coming .
7 MR. LIEBLEIN: I understand and I didn' t
8 expect a decision tonight.
9 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well, we have a quarum.
10 MR. LIEBLEIN: All your members aren' t
11 here.
12 MR. GOEHRINGER: No. We don' t know if Mr .
13 Flynn is going to come in and ask for a copy of
14 this which you have supplied us with and he may
15 make a comment or two and at that time you may
16 want to make a following comment, and if we
17 close the hearing we can' t take anymore
18 comments.
1
19 MR. LIEBLEIN: So you can' t close the
20 hearing tonight?
21 MR. GOEHRINGER: I want to close it at the
22 next regularly scheduled meeting which is
23 November 30 th.
24 MR. LIEBLEIN: Okay. I don' t have any
25 control. You ran an ad and you said we ' re going
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 91
F7 2 to have a meeting. If you have any questions .
3 I ' m asking that you close the hearing and make
4 your decision.
5 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well, let me ask the
6 board .
7 MR. DINIZIO: I ' m for closing the meeting.
8 MR. LIEBLEIN: We ran an ad and everyone
9 who wanted to come had an opportunity to speak
10 and it' s page 92 to 112 . Maybe he didn' t get a
11 chance to say everything at that meeting . I
12 don ' t know.
13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Let' s see if there' s
14 anybody else who wants to speak .
15 MR. LIEBLEIN: Fine. Thank you.
16 MR. GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who
17 would like to speak either in favor or against
18 this application, this is Port of Egypt. It is
19 a building 25 ,000 square feet.
20 MR. LIEBLEIN: No, 27 ,000 square feet.
21 It ' s a big building for storing boats.
22 MR. GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further
23 comment, I make a motion to close the hearing.
24 All in favor?
25 THE BOARD: Aye.
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 92
2 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much and I
3 thank you for coming.
4 MR. LIEBLEIN: Thank you for your
5 patience .
6 MR. GOEHRINGER: No problem. Have a safe
7 trip home .
8 (TIME NOTED: 9 : 25 P. M. )
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
1 93
Y
2 CERTIFICATION
3
4 I , BARBARA J. ZILNICKI a Shorthand
5 Reporter and Notary Public in and for the State
6 of New York , do hereby certify:
7
8 THAT the foregoing is a true and accurate
9 transcript of my stenographic notes .
10
11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my
12 hand this day of 1�Cefflje,,—, 1989 .
13
14
15
16 BARBARA J. ILNICKI
17
18
19 Respectfully submitted ,
20
... . .. .. . .
21
Acting Clerk of the
22 Board of Appeals
23
24
25
RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168
RECEIVED AND FILED BY
THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK
DATE 5l1 B 1�o HOUI q o3'P.M
Town Clerk, Town of Southold