HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-11/01/1990 HEARING c ,
1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : 'STATE OF NEW YORK
2
------------------------------------X
3
4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Cc; M O `J ls
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING >>
5 NOV l 41990
o�
6
Town Hall
7 53095 Thin Road
P.O. Box 11.79
8 Southold, New York 11971
9 November 1, 1990
7:30 P.M.
10
11
B E F O R E
12'
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,
13
Chairman.
14
15 BOARD MEMBERS:
16 -CHARLES -GRIGONIS, JR.-
17 SERGE DOYEN, JR.
18 JOSEPH H. SAWICKI - Absent
19 JAMES DINIZ.IO, JR.
20
21 ALSO PRESENT: LINDA KOWALSKI , Board Secretary
22
23
24
25
\ I
i
2
2 THE CHAIRMAN: This is the regularly
3 scheduled meeting of the Southold Town
4 Zoning Board of Appeals. We welcome
5 everybody here..
6 The first hearing on the agenda is on
7 behalf of Andrew-.Burkard,. Appeal- number
8 3969. The legal notice reads as follows:
9 (.Legal notice read off record. )
10 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of the
11 survey, . dated.August 10-, 1988, produced by
.12 Roderick, Van Tuyl , P.C. , indicating a one-
13. family dwelling almost perfectly centered on
14 the property, with a garage in front of the
15 house attached, extending 48 feet to the
16 property line on the front yard. I have a
17 copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map
18 indicating this and surrounding properties
19 in the area.
20 Is there somebody that would like to
21 be heard? Could you please use the mike.
22 How do you do, sir?
23 MR. .-BURRARD:- .Andrew Burkard.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anything you
25 would like to say for the record?
3
2 MR.. .BURKARD: Well , the ..only .thing
3 was in doing this house I changed the garage
4 around and for aesthetic reasons, instead of
5 having a garage door face the street, I
6 changed it to the other way and put a window
7 in and in doing so I didn't realize that I
8 encroached on the 15 feet and that really is
9 basically what happened.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have a
11 breezeway in between the house?
12 MR. BURKARD: Yes, I do.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: That also probably
14 adds a little bit to the footage which is
15 -- I think it is 7 foot, 7 inches, but that
16 breezeway is a part of the foundation and
17 the garage, that was also poured at the same
18 time that happened.
19 MR. BURKARD: You know, I -- not
20 realizing when I turned the garage it was
21 instead of 23 feet one way, it was .20 feet
22 -- 20 feet the other way and I lost a foot
23 and they surveyed it. I think they may have
24 lost a few that way.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: We have a unique
4
�1
2 situation in the respect -- I looked around
3 to the left and to the right of me to
4 measure the houses on each side and, of
5 course, there aren't any to the left and
6 right of me.
7 MR. BURKARD: There is nothing out
8 there, -really.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: 3o we will see how
io it's going at the -hearing. I am sure you
ii want to continue construction.
12 MR. BURKARD: What is the process
13 now?
14 THE -CHAIRMAN: Well , normally we
15 won't -make a decision tonight. We will wait
16 until the special meeting on November 15th.,
17 but possibly we will discuss it with the
18 Board after the ,hearing and see if we can do
19 something for you. Thank you so much for
20 coming in.
21 Is there anybody else. that would like
22 to speak in favor -of this application?
23 Anybody that would like to speak against the
24 application? -luny .questions from Board
25 members?
5
2 MR. DINIZIO: No.
3 THE CHAIRMAN: In light of the
4 situation and the fact that winter is
5 coming, I make a motion approving this as
6 applied for.
7 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
8 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
9 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
10 MR. .DOYEN: Aye.
11 MR.� DINIZIO: Aye.
12 THE CHAIRMAN: Granted.
13 (Time noted: 7:34 P.M. )
14 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is
15 Number 3974, in behalf of Donald L. Osani.
16 The legal notice reads as .follows:
17 (Legal notice read off record. )
18 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of the
19 sketch of a survey with the name cut off of
20 the survey, but indicating a lot on the
21 corner of Bayview Road and Reydon Drive, and
22 approximately 150 by 219.85; and the next
23 lot in -- 150 by 238.40. I have a copy of
24 the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this
25 and surrounding properties in the area.
1
2 Is there anybody _that would like to
3 be heard.,on this application?
4 MR. . OSANI: Donald :Osani..
5 THE .CHAIRMAN: Is there anything you
6 would like to say?
7 MR. OSANI : Yes,., I pretty much have
a everything there. These two parcels have
9 been separately approved already by the
10 Suffolk. County Board of Health. They were
11 originally separate parcels that .the Board
12 merged somehow,. because. the, owner never knew
13 it was merged.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: You bought both of
15 them?
16 MR. OSANI : I am in .the process of
17 buying both.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: They-:are approximately
19 34 to 35,000. square feet each.
20 MR. OSANI: Yes:
21 THE CHAIRMAN: It. seems the. .square
22 foot -it gives --. and for some strange,
23 reason --
24 MR. OSANI : I have a.better . survey
25 here. The surveyor, by the way, is Peconic
`o,
7
2. Surveyors, ' right here in town, the one that
3 surveyed it.
4 MR. DINIZIO: They are on the
5 application.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a letter from
7 the .Planning Board which states that the.
s Planning. Board -- dated.October 17, 1990
9 -- the Planning Board is in favor of the re-
in separating of the two .undersized lots that
11 have .been merged in this R-40 zone. The
12 lots in .-question.-are 84 and 87 percent of
13 the required lot size, thus are marginally
14 undersized. . . . . . .
15 Thank you so :much.
16 MR. OSANI: Thank you.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else
18 that would like to speak in favor of the
19 application? Anybody that would like to
20 speak against the application?
21 What is . your time limit on this? Are
22 you looking to close in- a very., very short-
23 period of time?
24 MR. OSANI : There is no- special -time
25 limit, no, sir.
8
2 THE CHAIRMAN: If, we render a
3 decisiom around the 15th of November, that
a should be .okay?
5 MR. .OSANI : Yes. Sure.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: We thank you very much
7 for coming in.
g I make a motion reserving decision
9 until later.
10 MR. DINIZIO: Second.
11 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
12 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
13 MR. .DOYEN: Aye.
14 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
15 (Time noted: 7 :38 p.m. )
16 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is in
17 behalf of Virginia Olga Lee, Appeal Number
18 3980. The legal notice reads as follows:
19 (Legal notice read off record.)
20 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a
21 sketch of_ a survey. It appears to be dated
22 October 22, 1982, by Roderick Van Tuyl ,
23 P.C. , indicating Lot Number 91 of the
24 original subdivision shown, which there is
25 placed a one and a half story frame home of
9
2 5 feet or less- to�-Inlet Way, which is a
3 private road within that subdivision. The
4 nature of this application is a deck which
5 is being' eatended to the north of the
6 present, dwelling. I .have a copy of the
7 Suffolk- County Tax Map indicating this and
8 surrounding properties in' the area.
9 Is there anybody that would like to
10 be heard?.
11 MS. LEE: I am Virginia Olga Lee.
12 The, original house was built in the forties,
13 I guess; and the side of ' the house next to
14 the road is not in alignment to the road.
15' So when the deck was added to it, the corner
16 of the deck was closer to the road. - I was
17 not aware of this tradition, at the time. I
18 -have some photographs, if you would like to
19 see.
20 THE CHAIRMAN: Surely. Yes.
21 (Ms.. Lee- handing above-mentioned
22 photographs to the Board. )
23 MS. LEE: The deck is 7 foot' 2 by 25
24 foot 10.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. Just for the
10
2 record, the pictures that were presented are
3 pictures indicating the deck and .in its
a present status which has .a sun visor type of
5 roof over it with columns for .the purpose, I
6 assume, of sun protection.
7 Is there anybody else that would like
8 to speak in favor of this. .application?
9 Anybody that would like to speak against the
io application? Any questions from Board
ii members?
12 Hearing; no further questions, I make
13 a motion .closing , the hearing and reserving
14 decision until later.
15 MR. DINIZIO: Second.
16 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
17 MR. DINIZIO: . Aye.
18 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
19 MR. GRIQONIS: Aye.
20 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much
21 for coming in, ladies. We hope to have a
22 decision for you in the near future.
23 . (Time noted: 7:44 p.m. ) -.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is in
25 behalf of. Donald Swahn, Appeal -Number - 3978.
� 11
2 The legal notice reads as follows:
3 (Legal notice read off record. )
4 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a
5 survey, dated February 19, 1968, by Van Tuyl
6 and Sons, indicating the nature of this
7 application, the Park Avenue side house --
8 approximately 100 by 200 in size, with a
9 one-story frame house on it, almost centered
10 on the .property - 105 feet from Park
11 Avenue; and a one-story frame home almost in
12 the center or skewed a little bit more to
13 the west side on Peconic Bay, in the nature
14 of an easement-type of right-of-way through
15 the first parcel , assuming the Board is
16 going along- with this particular decision or
17 application, of approximately 1.39 acres.
18 That would be approximately 100 by 400, that
19 parcel -- 100 by 475 -- and I have a copy of
20 the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this
21 and surrounding properties in. the area.
22 Is there anybody that would like to
23 be heard in behalf of this application?
24 MR. PARKEN: Jay Stanley Parken.
25 All .I know is that Donald and Dorothy wish
1 12
2 to subdivide, split this particular property
3 off.. The northern end of the property he
4 built for his -father and mother many years
5 ago, back in the forties, and while I do not
6 know whether he contemplates sale, there
7 would be some time in the future when he may
8 want .to move out of - he just wants to --
9 the property lots as you know very well are
i0 very, very; very long. They are about 825
ii feet, and he shares a 130 . foot lot with Vern
12 Drew (phonetic spelling) , who lives next-
13 door about --
14 THE CHAIRMAN: Do .you think it would
i5 be beneficial to have him come to the
16 hearing? We can recess the hearing, if you
i7 want to, until they come back.
18 MR. PARKEN: I don't know, Jim. If
19 there is anything more to add to this, it
20 seems to .be something in order.- There are
21 -- as you are probably very familiar --
22 along Park Avenue -- this kind of situation
23 where people have built smaller cottages on
24 Park Avenue. They have two pieces on --
25 then two parcels on the one property.
,AP,
13
2 THE CHAIRMAN: Are there existing
3 CO's on both houses?
4 MR. PARKEN: I understand. there are.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: How old would you' say
6 the houses are?
7 MR. PARKEN: I think he acquired this
8 one --- acquired the piece of property
9 somewhere around 1948 let's say. His
10 parents lived in Jersey at the time. They
11 were quite aged. He brought them in to
12 Mattituck and built the little cottage for
13 them, as did his neighbor next-door for the
14 same reason. So that house, let's say, was
15 built .in the 19501s. His parents died --
16 passed away in the sixties, and he has been
17 renting. that cottage ever since that point
18 in time. That's all. I can give you,. Gerry.
19 Gerry, I don't whether he could add
20 much more. I rather doubt it.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: We want to thank you
22 very much.
23 MR. PARKEN: Thank you.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: Anybody else that
25 would like to speak in favor of this
1 14
2 application? , Anybody that would .like to
3 speak against the application?
4 Seeing .no' hands,.. I make a motion
5 closing the hearing and reserving decision
6 until.. later.
7 MR. DINIZIO: Second. ,. .
g THE CHAIRMAN: . Al-1 in favor?'
9 MR. .GRIGONIS:
10 MR. -,DOYEN: Aye.
11 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
12 (Time noted: 7:50 .p.m.: )
13 THE CHAIRMAN: . The next appeal is in
y—J 14 behalf "of Valerie .M. Kramer, Appeal Number
15 3971., The 1 egal notice reads .as ,f of l ows:
16 (Legal notice read off record. )
17 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy, of the
18 survey,• .most ..recen.t .date September .5, 1989.
19 It appears ,it is a ..Van Tuyl. survey
20 indicating a parcel --of approximately 110
21 feet on Manhanset Avenue and quite irregular
22 in reference to size, with approximately 30
23 feet on Robinson Road and approximately 50
24 feet on ' the diagonal of Sterling Creek. I
25 have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map
15
2 indicating this and surrounding properties
3 in the area.
4 Is there anybody that would like to
5 be heard in behalf of the application?
6 MR. KRAMER: John Kramer. I am
7 Valerie's husband. I just wanted to add, we
8 bought the lot with the expectation it is
9 buildable. In the last 25 years all the
10 other lots of similar size have been getting
11 building permits. I think this is one of
12 only three vacant lots left in the
1 13 subdivision shown.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: When did you buy the
15 lot, Mr. Kramer?
16 MR. KRAMER: I think it was 1980.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: And 'the nature of the
18 size of the house you are anticipating
19 putting on, I see it is 1,962 square feet;
20 is that. approximately the situation?
21 MR. KRAMER: Yes.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: It is a two-story
23 house?
24 MR. KRAMER: Approximately one and a
25 half.
1 16
2 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any of
3 shimmying in that house in reference to
a width, so that we could get a little more
5 distance. from the bulkheads?
6 MR., KRAMER: As you .can tell from the
7 map, it 'is a triangular lot and -- there is
s not very much face there. I don't think we
s are doing .anything that is -- you know, more
10 recently there was a house built right on
11 the --. not .a house, but something right on
12 Manhanset, right on the water.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: That was the nature of
14 a lawsuit before this Board.
15 MR: KRAMER: If I go any further
16 back, then I am going onto Manhanset, .which
17 is a very busy street. I am saying the
18 triangle gets bigger .towards Manhanset, and
19 I want to get it towards Robinson. So I am
20 losing the apex in getting tighter towards
21 Robinson:
22 THE CHAIRMAN:. I wouldn't have any
23 objection to that. I would rather see you
24 shim the side yards more if you've got to
25 Robinson. My concern is the 21 feet from
o
1 17
2 the existing-bulkheads right now. In other
3 words, if you are holding -- you have a 10-
4 foot side yard, at this particular. time. to
5 the north -
6 MR.. RRAMER: Yes, it is approximately
7 to the north.
8 . THE CHAIRMAN: Meaning closer to the
9 north side.
10 . . .MR. -KRAMER: Closer to the west. .
11 Moving it down .further may give us greater
12 distance, for,. the diagonal , for the bulkhead.
13 Well ,- it is- a tiny parcel and Manhanset is a
14 very busy road. I would like to stay as
15 much .off that 'as possible.
16 THE ,CHAIRMAN: I - couldn't agree with
17 you .more.
18 MR. KRAMER: I don't think we are .
19 going to -do anything to the bulkhead. It is
20 new and it would- be ecologically sound and
21 certainly aesthetic.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Would you dome a
23 favor? Could you reduce the side yard and
24 give us 'a sketch, reducing the. side yard on
25 the south side, which is the side closest to
18
2 the water and to the Troyan (phonetic
3 spelling) property, to 12 feet, moving the
4 house closer to Robinson's Road and see if
5 we can get an idea what that would look like
6 in reference to distance from the bulkhead?
7 MR: KRAMER: How much closer would
8 you want. .that? .
9 THE CHAIRMAN: Well , you are 16 1/2
10 now. Reduce it to 12 and bring the house
11 closer to Robinson Road. Maybe we could get
12 a better distance .from the bulkhead, moving
13 it towards the -west, sliding it all this
14 way.
15 We will leave the hearing open until
16 the special hearing we are having on the
17 15th and" if you give it to us before then we
18 can take a look at it and we can run back
19 down. I will be there Saturday. I will
20 take more measurements when I go down there.
21 MR. KRAMER: Do you want me to stake
22 that out?
23 THE CHAIRMAN: It is not necessary.
24 We can get an idea.. I am just concerned
25 that. we are trying to. maximize as much
19
2 distance from the -bulkhead, as much as we
3 possibly can.
4 MR. KRAMER: Okay. Thank you.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else
6 that would like to speak in favor of this
7 application? Anybody that would like to
8 speak against the application? Questions
9 from Hoard members?
10 I make a motion reserving the hearing
11 to the next regularly scheduled special
12 hearing, on November 15th.
TI 13 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
15 MR: GRIGONIS: Aye.
16 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
17 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
18 (Time noted: 7:58 p.m. )
19 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is
20 Number 3976, on behalf of Marian and Thomas..
21 Santacroce. The legal notice reads as
22 follows:
23 (Legal notice read off record. )
24 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a
25 survey showing a two-story house. The
20
2 nature of this application is a ground sign
3 in the northwest corner approximately, which
4 is the corner of Shipyard Lane and Main
5 Road. I have a copy of 'the. Suffolk County
6 Tax Map indicating this and surrounding
7 properties in the -area.-
8 Who would like to be- heard in behalf
9 of this application?
10 MR. SANTACROCE: Thomas Santacroce.
11 I would like to have permission for the
12 sign.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: How big is the sign in
TJ 14 reference to size?
15 MR.. SANTACROCE: Approximately -- I
16 don't have my- paper work with me.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: That's all right. You
18 have always give us .a 'call tomorrow. We've
19 got 23 by 46. I assume that is in inches.
20 MR. SANTACROCE: Yes. .
21 THE CHAIRMAN: That is not a lighted
22 sign, nor does it have iridescent or
23 incandescent letters that light up at night?
24 MR. SANTACROCE: - No, sir.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: That is a sign that
1 21
2 reflects a business which is presently
3 located in Riverhead.
4 MR. SANTACROCE: Yes, sir.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: And what is the
6 purpose of this sign, other than for
7 advertising purposes?
8 MR. SANTACROCE: That's it.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: All right. We thank
10 you very much.
11 MR. SANTACROCE: Thank you.
12 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else
13 that would like to speak in favor of this
14 application? Anybody that would like to
15 speak against the application? Questions
16 from Board members?
17 Hearing no further questions, I make
18 a motion closing the hearing and reserving
19 decision until later.
20 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
22 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
23 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
24 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
25 (Time noted: 8:03- p.m. )
1 22
2 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is on
3 behalf of Petrol Station Ltd. , Appeal Number
4 3972. The legal notice reads as follows:
5 (Legal notice read off record. )
6 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a
7 survey, dated January 12, 1987 , by John
8 Metzger, Land Surveyor, indicating the
9 nature of this application which is, I
10 assume, Lot Number 4, which is 25,603 square
ii feet, containing a one-story frame house. I
12 have a copy of the Suffolk' County Tax Map
13 indicating this and surrounding properties
14 in the area.
15 Is there somebody that would like to
16 be heard?
17 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Good evening. My
18 name is Kevin McLaughlin, Esquire. I am
19 here in behalf of the Petrol Station, as I
20 think our application indicates .
21 We are basically here at the
22 direction of the Planning Board. We filed
23 an application for the minor subdivision.
24 The Planning Board, upon reviewing that
25 subdivision, decided they would prefer to
s
1 23
2 see the lot line of Lot Number 4, which is
3 the lot closest to the road, to coincide
4 with the existing zone line within the RO
5 District and the R-40 District. They
6 requested that we come before this Board to
7 obtain a variance to allow us to have that
8 undersized lot. That is basically why we
9 are here these evening.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: What is the nature of
11 the existing garage at the lot line?
12 1 . MR. McLAUGHLIN: It is just for
13 storage right' now.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: What will happen to it
15 if the lot line continues through? Will it
16 be destroyed or moved from one side to the
17 other? You will leave it where it is? It
18 is .with the encroachment on --
19 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Probably, unless we
20 have problems with the sale of the next lot,
21 but otherwise we will just leave it there.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Who is the owner of
23 this house, the former, owner for the
24 record, if you know?
25 MR. McLAUGHLIN: I think I have a
24
2 deed here that probably would indicate -- I
3 will be happy to provide that information to
a you. I don't seem to be able to find the
5 deed right now.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: Is the house presently
7 lived in or rented?
g MR. McLAUGHLIN: It is presently
s being used for a real estate office.
10 Correct? .
>> MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE: (Nodding
12 yes. )
13 THE CHAIRMAN: Kevin, the right-of-
J is way- into the property is not clearly
15 defined; is that correct?
16 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Not clearly defined?
17 THE CHAIRMAN: In other words, is
is there a. driveway which actually extends into
19 these four lots?
20 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Not that is
21 proposed. That is part of .the minor
22 subdivision.
23 THE CHAIRMAN: That's why I 'm having
24 trouble finding it.. I will go back down
25 there and .measure it this time, and make
1 25
2 sure I know exactly where the parcel starts
3 and stuff . Thank you very much.
4 Is there anybody else that would like
5 to speak in favor of this application?
6 Anybody that would like to speak against the
7 application?
8 MS. SAWASTYNOWICZ: Good evening.
9 Nancy Sawastynowicz, and I have a petition I
10 would like to hand to the Board. That is
11 the original and copies.
12 (Ms. Sawastynowicz handing copies of
13 petition to the Board. )
14 MS. . SAWASTYNOWICZ: "We the
15 undersigned do not want an area variance for
16 Lot Number 4 which does not contain the
17 minimum lot area required. Tax Map Number
18 1000-109-01-23. Owner's names: Petrol
19 Stations,. Ltd. at Cutchogue.
20 The purpose of zoning is to protect
21 our Town from being overdeveloped. To allow
22 the minimum lot size requirement to be down
23 zoned will set a precedent for other
24 developers.
25 To quote from Southold Town Code,
1 26
2 Residential Office (RO) District.
3 'The purpose of the Residential
4 Office (RO) District is to provide a
5 transition area between business areas and
6 low-density residential development along .
7 major roads which will provide opportunity
8 for limited nonresidential uses in
9 essentially residential areas. "'
10 We feel to down zone this lot will
11 make a tremendous -problem there because in
12 the summertime you cannot get out on the
13 road from Alvah's Lane now, and the people
14 of the surrounding area -- I have 100
15 percent of them signing this petition.
16 That's all I would like to say.
17 Thank you.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: Anybody else that
19 would like to speak against the application?
20 Any comments?
21 MS. SAWASTYNOWICZ: I have a
22 notarized letter from one of the neighbors.
23 You don't want me to read it?
24 THE CHAIRMAN: No.
25 (Ms. Sawastynowicz handing letter to
27
2 the Board: )
3 MR. McLAUGHLIN: As far as the
4 argument for the undersized lot, ,basically
5 we don't care whether that lot was.
6 undersized or not. Our original application
7 to the Planning Board was for a larger lot
8 there. However; they felt that the lot
9 should coincide- with the existing lot line.
10 At this rate, we have more than .sufficient
11 area for the minor subdivision we have in
12 mind. The other lots are all , if you will ,
13 oversized. They are all well in excess of
14 the minimal.-lot requirement for these lots.
15 We are simply here because the Planning
16 Board feels that this front lot should have
17 a lot line that is coexisting with the
18 zoning line there.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: That is an R-40 zone.
20 MR. McLAUGHLIN: . In back of the' RO is
21 the R-40 zone. That is correct.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: In effect, Lot Number
23 1 and 2 could be reduced in size.
24 MR.. McLAUGHLIN: Could be -- sure.
25 THE .CHAIRMAN: Is that what you
28
2 originally had submitted to the Planning
3 Board?
4 MR. McLAUGHLIN: Actually, what we
5 submitted was a three lot -- originally, the
6 minor subdivision application we filed with
7 the Planning Board showed Lots 1 and 2 to be
8 approximately two and a half acre lots. But -
s again, while Lot 4 simply is an undersized
10 lot and that is what was proposed. - . That's
11 why .we are before you tonight. The rest of
12 the lots are well in excess and I don't see
13 that there is going to be any difference
14 between the amount of traffic, whether or
15 not . this -Lot 4 is as continued and as
16 applied -for or whether or not you move the
17 lot line back any further. You are still
18 going .to have the .same use there, whether or
19 not there are 1,500 square feet to it .or not
20 -- 15,,00.0 -- excuse me.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: In the past, we have
22 had some discussion with the Planning Board
23 in situations like this. If you would allow
24 me to recess this hearing to go to the next
25 regularly scheduled meeting, I would like to
29
2 meet with the Planning Board and ask them
3 specifically why they chose to go this
4 route. We know the reason why they chose to
5 go this route but I would like to meet with
6 them, either formally or informally, if you
7 wouldn't mind, rather than me close the
s hearing tonight.
s MR. McLAUGHLIN: We have no
10 objection.
11 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. I think that is
12 what I am going to do at this point. Thank
13 you very much.
TJ 14 Yes?
15 DOROTHY OVISINAK: They would have to
16 make a right-of-way for this; am I. correct?
17 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes.
18 MS. OVISINAK: You .know we have had
19 quite a few accidents already by Alvah's
20 Lane and it is very bad there now, and to
21 make a right-of-way into this is going to
22 only cause a major problem there especially
.23 with Manor Hill (phonetic spelling) and I
24 just. feel , at this time, I don't think it
25 would be feasible to make a right-of-way. I
1 30
2 hope the Board will take this into
3 consideration.
4 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.
5 MS. SAWASTYNOWICZ: I would like to
6 say .one more thing. When you are asking
7 about what is in that house, there is also
8 another business on that property of an
9 architect in the barn. There are two
10 businesses. in that lot. I think that is
ii illegal -in the code. I would like to Board
12, to look into that, too.
13 MR. McLAUGHLIN: For the record, we
14 have received site plan approval for the
15 architectural firm that is in the garage.
16 THE CHAIRMAN: There are two existing
17 CO's on the property?
18 MR. McLAUGHLIN: I believe so. There
19 are two existing CO's for the two separate
20 businesses.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no
22 further comments at this hearing, I make a
23 motion recessing this to the next regularly
24 scheduled hearing which we will have an
25 information discussion with the Planning
. 31.
2 Board on this:
3 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
4 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor.
5 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
6 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
7 MR. DINIZIO: Aye..
8 THE CHAIRMAN: Thanks very much,
9 everybody, for coming in.
10 (Time noted: 8:15 p.m. )
11 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is in
12 behalf of Betty J. Copin, Appeal Number,
13 3977. The legal notice reads as follows.:
14 (Legal notice read off record. )
15 THE CHAIRMAN: I have .a copy of the
16 survey, dated June 15, 1976, by R. Van Tuyl
17 and Sons, indicating a one and a half story
18 or two story frame home, approximately
19 centered on the property. The nature of
20 this .application is a new two-car garage,
21 approximately 54 feet south of this
22 particular dwelling, approximately 10 feet
23 from the southerly property line -- I have
24 south,. actually, southeasterly property line.
25 I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map
32
2 indicating. this and surrounding properties
3 in the area.
a MR. CURT .MEYHOEFER: . We .had seen a
5 garage in the paper, before August 1st, and
6 I came down *..to the Building Department and
7 had no line --' no distance from the property
8 line at _that .point - and .our intent was to put
9 the .garage up. in the fall . And I checked,
10 and August lst .they came in .with a property
11 line and .we would just just like to put the
12 garage where-.we had. originally .wanted it,
13 which was 10_ feet from the property line.
14 THE -CHAIRMAN: How were. you' going to
15 get , into. the garage is .the question. That
16 is a rather dangerous .turn, on .Albertson
1 7 Lane. How are .you.=-
18 MR. .MEYHOEFER: .The, guard .rail was
19 put up some time ago and .they were .working
20 on . therailroad bridge. . :Prior. to that they
21 didn't .have. one there. . . I .brought .a picture
22 in. Basicall.y, : I: .am not . one hundred percent
23 sure as to how . I was going to get in there,
24 ,because .the. property had. been subdivided. by
25 same- and there are. two .parcels . now-.
33
2 First I would -like' to take down --
3 take a section of the guard rail out. I
4 spoke to the -Highway Department and they
5 didn't seem that that would be too much of -a
6 problem. Then 'for a basic -- the property
7 is very pretty and I. don't want to lose
s anything from there. So.' I was thinking
9 maybe. a circular driveway from. the front of
10 the house down the side.
11 THE :CHAIRMAN:. You mean taking
12 the --
13 MR. MEYHOEFER: . The existing garage
14 from the .driveway and just coming in front
15 of the house and then going across and then
16 down the side.. . .
17 THE CHAIRMAN: I would have no
18 objection to that, being perfectly honest,
19 but I would have an objection to. taking the
20 guard. rail out. I think that is going to
21 cause a problem. . - It is a fairly dangerous
22 area, not in reference to the fact that- you
23 get- a tremendous amount of traffic .on the,
24 road, but. I have been down that road when
25 there was ice on the road in the wintertime
1 34
2 and I think-;from- a. hazard point of view you
3 are better off leaving the guard rail in.
4 MR. .MEYHOEFER: . .Finej. fine. We have
5 no problem even. -swinging around the.back of
6 the .house using :the existing driveway and as
7 it comes over to. the side, just goes .right
8 around the back of - the house and comes up
9 and goes into the garage. Ve •have no
10 problem with- that.
ii THE CHAIRMAN: Which .way are-the
12 doors going .to be facing?
13 MR. MEYHOEFER: They would be -facing
14 east, -towards the road. The have to. face
15 that way for the simple fact that they have
is a . --. looking at this, there .is a tree that
17 was brought back from the west coast which
is is a redwood tree and it is 25 years. old and
19 only -God can make .a tree and 1-hate to move
20 it . or take it .down. The only trees .we have
21 . been moving or taking down,-are ones that
22 have been destructed by -storms.. ;
23 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay.
24 MR. .,MEYHOEFER:. Thank -you.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: Just one other
i 1 i i
35
2 question.. - How -tali is- the garage. from grade
3 to actual ridge?
4 MR. MEYHOEFER: 'I t is a kit and .off-
5 hand, I put in for 25 feet, but I believe it
6 is somewhere- 'around 22.
7 THE COURT: - ' An& upstairs the.
8 structure- will be' used for what, storage?
. 9 MR. MEYHOEFER: Storage, because we
10 can't , store.-anything. There is no basement
11 in the house, and this otherwise .-- the
12 other piece was -- that was split is rented
13 from time to time and we try to-have those
14 people. have at- l east. their privacy-.
15 THE -CHAIRMAN: What is the greatest
16 amount--of,-utilities -that would be' in the
17 building?..
18 MR. MEYHOEFER: Electric.
19 THE*CHAIRMAN: * Just electricT
20 MR. MEYHOEFER: ..Right
21 THE CHAIRMAN: The size of the
22 building is 24 by 32?
23 MR: MEYHOEFER: Yes, sir.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: The .type of roof that
25 would be on that would be barn type?
1 36
2 MR. MEYHOEFER: No. To -match the
3 coinciding building, it would be apex.
4 THE CHAIRMAN: I .thank you so much.
5 Is there anybody else that would .like
6 to speak in favor -of the application?
7 Anybody that would like to speak against the
8 application?
9 MS. ONGIONI : I am Marie Ongioni
10 (Esquire) , 218 Front Street, Greenport. I
11 represent .the adjacent property owner,
12 Marie Cassidy.
13 Mrs. Cassidy- asked me to make an
14 appearance in her behalf in opposition of
15 her application. I prepared a memorandum,
16 which I would like to submit to the Board at
17 this .time.
18 (Ms. Ongioni handing above-mentioned
19 memorandum to the Board. )
20 MS. ONGIONI : I am not going to
21 reiterate the contents of the memo. That is
22 now part of the record and the Board will
23 have the opportunity to review it carefully,
24 I am sure. Essentially, my client objects
25 to this, to the granting of this variance;
1 37
2 number one, because this is in essence a
3 self-imposed hardship. Primarily, this
a particular parcel had been one large lot in
5 1976. The -owner applied to this Board for a
6 variance to set off the backyard of the lot
7 and -also - to create an access road from
s Albertson -Lane in order to reach the
9 interior lot which doesn't have any front
10 road frontage: So essentially, this is a
11 second variance for this particular parcel .
12 If, both applications had been made
13 simultaneously in 1976, it would seem to me
14 that the Board would have found that this
15 particular garage could have been located
16 elsewhere on the .parcel so that the code
17 requirements would have been met, because
18 that backyard was set off 14 years ago: and
19 the applicant is now before this Board for
20 the variance from the side yard setback.
21 That . in itself is- a self-imposed -hardship.
22 Additionally, it appears that this
23 garage, .even with the configuration of this
24 lot, the garage could be located elsewhere
25 on the property which would comply with the
38
2 codes and would . obviate the need for this
3 Board's granting a variance. In addition to
a the fact that this is a self-imposed
5 hardship, the applicant has not shown the
6 practical difficulties which exist in having
7 to locate- the.-garage at this particular
8 location-. I would submit to the Board that
s there are. alternatives available to the
10 applicant that would enable him to comply
11 with the code.
12 THE. CHAIRMAN: How close is your
13 applicant's house or dwelling -- is the
14 principal structure to this property?
15 MS. ONGIONI : My client's house is
16 not directly contiguous to this parcel .
17 Mrs. Cassidy owns some vacant land adjacent
18 to .this parcel . She had it subdivided about
19 six or seven years ago and the tax map,
20 which is attached to the memorandum as
21 Exhibit 1; attached to the memorandum the
22 area in- question is circled, you will see,
23 and the Copin lot, the interior lot is shown
24 and. the large parcel -- I guess. it would be
25 to the south of the Copin property, is not
I
4 I
f 1
39
2 now --that large open space as shown on
3 this tax map is now four lots -- four one- '
a acne lots. So the location of 'that garage
5 would be very- close -to that first 40,000
6 square foot - lot and would be to 'the
7 detriment of that lot and the future
8 configuration, of the house on that lot.
9 Also, it - is a very large garage. It
10 is a two-car garage. It has a hobby shop
11 and a storage space. At the very least, it
12 would seem the garage could be scaled down
13 in order- to comply with the code.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
15 Is there- anybody else that would -like
16 to speak against the application?
17 Do you have anything, sir, in
18 rebuttal you would like to say?
19 MR. MEYHOEFER: I have nothing to
20 say.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. .
I
22 MR. MEYHOEFER: . I leave it in the
23 hands of the- Board.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: The only thing - I want
25 to ask you is, .would you like to be
1 40
2 represented by counsel or .would you like me
3 to close the hearing based upon the
a information we have received? In other .
5 words, I have given you the opportunity to
6 recess the. hearing to the next regularly
7 scheduled hearing if you would like to be
8 represented by counsel , bearing in mind
9 there is an objection to the variance.
10 MR. MEYHOEFER: I 've never done this
11 before and I really don't know the
12 procedure..
13 THE CHAIRMAN: I am opening it up to
14 you, to try and .explain to you from this
15 point. Certainly if we close the hearing at
16 this point, we couldn't enter any other
17 testimony into the hearing. Would you like
18 to get back to Mrs. Copin and tell here
19 there is an objection to this variance, and
20 maybe she would like to seek some legal
21 assistance concerning this?
22 MR. MEYHOEFER: In that case, I would
23 like to get back to Mrs. Copin.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: All right. What we
25 will do is we will reschedule this for the
41
2 next regularly scheduled hearing, the 29th
3 of November. You can come back and tell us
4 or someone else can come back and. tell us
5 whatever you choose to do concerning the
6 application:-
7 MS. CAROL CASSIDY: Why isn't Mrs. ..
s Copin here?
s THE CHAIRMAN: I can't answer that
i0 question: I will direct that to the agent.
ii Do you have any idea why Mrs. Copin
12 is not here tonight?
i3 MR. MEYHOEFER: She didn't feel it
14 was necessary for her to be here tonight .
15 THE CHAIRMAN: Bearing that in mind,
16 we .will reschedule the hearing. I recess
i7 this hearing to the next regularly scheduled
18 hearing, which is November 29th. We thank
19 you all for coming in and for the courtesy.
20 I offer that as a resolution.
21 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
23 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
24 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
25 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
42
2 . . (Time noted: 8:30 p.m. )
3 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is
a Appeal Number 3979, in .behalf ofThomas J.
5 Gorman. The legal notice reads as follows: _
6 . (Legal notice read off record. )
7 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of the
g survey, - from Young and Young, dated June 5,
9 1990, indicating the nature of this
10 application which is. a frame shed and
11 aluminum shed equally distanced between the
12 existing garage which is in the front yard
13 area and the two-story frame. dwelling which
14 'is on. Laurel Lake. I have a copy of. the
15 Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this. and
16 surrounding properties in the area.
17 Is there somebody that would like to
is be heard?
is MR. KEVIN McLAUGHLIN: I am here in
20 , behalf of Mr. Gorman. Basically, this is a
21 waterfront parcel , and so there is always a
22 bit of discussion as to what .is..the front
23 yard and what is- the rear yard. Both of
24 these sheds have been on this property, I
25 think one prior to the construction of the
F
1 43
2 house in the sixties and one subsequent to
3 the construction of the house in the
a seventies. I think that if you take a view
5 of the property, you will notice that both
6 neighboring properties, one on each side,
7 also have similar sheds on what seems to be
8 the front yard area, and it is very common
9 for sheds to be put in what is deemed to be
10 the front yard area on the waterfront-type
11 of properties in order so as not to
12 interfere with the view of the water.
13 Like I said, I think there are -- in
14 addition to each property on each side
15 having similar situations -- there are many
16 areas that have sheds or other structures on
17 what is deemed to be the front yard.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any
19 utilities in any one of the sheds?
20 MR. McLAUGHLIN: No. They are
21 basically storage -- small sheds.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Yesterday I was down
23 there -- great spot. No question about
7 24 that. We thank you very much, Mr.
25 McLaughlin.
44
r-
2 Is there anybody else that would like
3 to speak in favor of the application? Is
a there anybody that would like to speak
5 against the application?
6 Hearing no further comments, I make a
7 motion reserving decision until later.
8 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
10 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
11 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
12 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much
14 for coming in.
15 (Time noted: 8:33 p.m. )
16 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is in
17 behalf of Irene R. Miller, Appeal Number
18 3968. The legal notice reads as follows:
19 (Legal notice read off record. )
20 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of the
21 survey,. dated -- looks like a copy of the
22 surveyor's -- dated July 24, 1990,
23 indicating a dwelling of approximately 30 by
24 60, just inside of the top of the bluff on
25 this particular parcel , and I have a copy of
1 45
2 the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this
3 and surrounding properties in, the area.
4 I believe Mr. Fitzgerald is
5 representing --
6 MR. FITZGERALD: Jim Fitzgerald,
7 Property Services .
s Mrs. Miller has owned the property
s for 25 years and now she would like to build
10 a house on it in that area, the place which
11 would make .use of the ,property is the
12 location that is indicated on the drawing
13 and for which we seek the variance. If the
14 house was much further back from the bluff
15 that magic view of the water would be lost
16 and the front line of the proposed building
17 was obtained by drawing a straight line
18 between the most seaward portion of the
19 structures on either side of the property.
20 THE CHAIRMAN: So what. you are saying
21 is that the structures on either side have a
22 similar setback as to the one proposed.
23 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: I assume there will be
25 a full basement in this house?
1 46
2 MR. FITZGERALD: That is correct.
3 There would be a 12-foot -- the actual size
4 of the basement is. 32 by 44, and the 44-
5 foot being parallel to the line in the bluff
6 and there will be a 12-foot deck which means
7 that the basement would be -- the concrete
8 would be another 12 feet back from the edge
s of the bluff.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. To which side,
11 the east or west?
12 MR. FITZGERALD: No. The north side
13 -- to the seaward side.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: What you are saying in
15 that the 30 by 60 that we are looking at
16 right. now is extended -- within that
17 envelope -- is a 12-foot deck -- 12 by 30?
18 MR. FITZGERALD: That is correct.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: That is not elevated
20 above the house?
21 MR. FITZGERALD: On the same level as
22 the first floor.
23 THE CHAIRMAN: But not to protrude
24 any further than what is presently shown?
25 MR. FITZGERALD: It would be inside
47
2 the envelope. .
3' THE CHAIRMAN: Wonderful . Okay. You
a did see our letter from the Soil 'and Water
5 Conservation?
6 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.
7 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have any
8 comments about that?
9 MR. FITZGERALD: No. I think it is
10 obviously a very thoughtful study and the
11 insteps that are required during the
12 construction to minimize or eliminate the
13 potential for runoff into the wrong places
14 will be taken, of course, and the structural
15 integrity of- the edge of the bluff .will be
16 retained. '
17 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have any
18 objection to placing straw bales in front of
19 the proposed structure?
20 MR. FITZGERALD: You mean during the
21 construction?
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes.
23 MR. FITZGERALD: I think it is a good
24 idea.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: Of course, I know
48
2 there is an angle this way that we are --
3 that the sloping effect is, of course,
4 towards the road and so there is probably no
5 reason to address that particular issue 'in .
6 the decision in the respect that you are
7 -- probably are in no way going to change
s that except there would be no disturbance,
s assuming the Board went along with the
10 established setback. We will go back there
11 and readdress both next-door neighbors. We
12 thank you.
13 MR. FITZGERALD: Excuse me. Mrs.
14 Miller is here, by the way.
15 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else
16 that would like to speak in favor of this
17 application? Anybody that would like to
18 speak against the application? Questions
19 from Board members?
20 MR. MOORE: Bill Moore (Esquire) . I
21 am representing Dr. Heskel Haddad. Dr.
22 Haddad just wanted me to inform the Board he
23" withdraws his opposition to that
24 application.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have any idea
1 49
2 how close his house is to the bluff?
3 MR. MOORE: I was up today taking a
4 look around. The .bluff is very -- slightly
5 -- approximately, say -- guessing -- 15
6 feet, but there is .a concrete patio and the
7 house -- if I remember correctly -- I would
8 say 15 feet.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no
10 further comments, I make a motion closing
11 the hearing and reserving decision until
12 later.
13 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
15 MR.. DOYEN: Aye.
16 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
17 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: I 'm'sorry. I am
19 terribly sorry.
20 MR. SULLIVAN: William Sullivan. I
21 dive in New Suffolk. The reason that I am
22 speaking .is my cousin called me. She
23 couldn't make it. . She is completely
24 familiar with this whole situation. She was
25 concerned about the variance, that evidently
k ,
1 s0
2 it is a two-story structure going. up. I
3 think ,maybe she feels it might block her
4 view and she wanted to comply with the law.
5 What is the law, 100 feet back? That was
6 one thing.
7 Another thing was the -- I didn't see
8 the survey map,.. but how close it was to her
9 property .line or something.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: I am going to give you
11 time to do that. What we are going to do,
12 at- this point, I am going to lay the file
13 right down here and let you review it. We
14 will take a five minute break. You can
15 review, and any other questions you would
16 like to.-add, you will be -- you can add.
17 MR. SULLIVAN: That's fine.
18 MR. FITZGERALD: I can tell you it is
19 going to be a one-story structure.
20 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr.
21 Fitzgerald, for clearing that .up.
22 MR. SULLIVAN: I thought I heard a
23 two-story structure. . May you mentioned it.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: I might have.
25 MR. FITZGERALD: You are going to
1 51
2 take a break?
3 THE CHAIRMAN: With everybody's
4 indulgence we will take a five minute break
5 so this gentleman can review the file. I
6 need a motion, gentlemen.
7 MR. DOYEN: Second.
8 THE CHAIRMAN: So moved. All in
9 favor?
10 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
11 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
12 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
13 (Recess commenced at 8:43 p.m. , .and
14 said hearing resumed at 8:52 p.m. )
15 THE CHAIRMAN: We need' a motion to
16 reconvene.
17 MR. GRIGONIS: So moved.
18 (Mr.' Sullivan .showing document to the
19 Court. )
20 THE CHAIRMAN: The question is the 10
21 feet on the west side of the property. That
22 is the issue that Mr. Sullivan is
23 addressing, at this particular point.
24 MR. SULLIVAN: My_ cousin had said
25 they wanted at least 15 feet. I don't know
1 52
2 what the .laws are. You have to tell me on
3 that, but .that is. an issue for her -- that
a one. —The 100-foot bit, that's the . law. The
5 variance will have to override that.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: There is a resolution
7 on the one side of 2210.
8 MR. SULLIVAN: Can anything be done
9 about that?
10 THE CHAIRMAN: You are raising that
11 issue. Sure. We can address that to the
12 agents.
13 (Inaudible statement. )
14 MR. FITZGERALD: This was a
15 theoretical house, .30 by 60. The house
. 16 actually with the deck will 44 by 44 -- with
17 the deck. So that would permit more setback
18 on each side.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: The house is going to
20 be 44 by 44.
21 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes, and the 44 this
22 way includes 12 feet of deck.
23 THE CHAIRMAN: So the 32 by 44 is the
24 actual size of the house.
25 MR. FITZGERALD: Of the concrete,
53
2 yes.
3 THE CHAIRMAN: Because we do have a
4 size yard situation of 20 and 15 for a total
5 of 35. This is very simply what we refer to
6 as the postage stamp for the DEC purpose; .-is
7 that correct?
8 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: So in effect, the
10 house is going to be something like that.
11 It would have to comply with the side yard,
12 because you are not denied for the side
13 yard.
14 MR. FITZGERALD: Yes.
15 MR. SULLIVAN: That would be over 15
16 feet.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: It will have to be 20
18 feet, at least 20 feet. Thank you very
19 much.
20 MR. SULLIVAN: Thank you.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else
22 that would like to speak on this
23 application? .
24 Hearing no further comments, I make a
25 motion closing the hearing and reserving
1 54
F2 decision until later.
3 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
a THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
5 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
6 MR DOYEN: Aye.
7 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
8 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much.
9 (Time noted: 8:56 p.m. )
10 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is a
11 Appeal Number 3975, in behalf of Arthur G.
12 Carlson. . The legal notice reads as -follows:
13 (Legal notice read off record. )
14 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of what
15 appears- to be a minor subdivision at one
16 time, in which includes this particular lot,
17 which is Lot Number 5 of that minor
18 subdivision, which has a rather large two-
19 story frame home on the premises at the time
20 and at least two barns, one .of .which is on
21 the westerly line and one on the northerly
22 line -- property line of the premises. The
23 accesses for the premises are on Lower Road
24 and Ackerly Pond Lane, and I have a copy of
25 the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this
' I
55
2 and surrounding properties in the area.
3 Would you like to be heard, Mr.
4 Carlson, or are you represented by. counsel?
5 MR. CARLSON: Arthur Carlson, the
6 applicant. This is a family business. It
7 has been in existence for over 25 years and
8 -- both working on the water as baymen and
9 continued on to where we were buying
10 products and outbuying from other fishermen
11 -- local Southold Town fishermen --
12 lobstermen, scallopers.
13 We created a facility that didn't
14 exist before 'in town. The lobstermen that
15 catch for us, there is no other facility in
16 town that could handle their products. They
17 have to go out of town to sell them, which
18 would be money going out of town. We take
19 it out of town and sell it, and bring the
20 money back into town. The conchs, there was
21 no market for them until we created a market
22 for them. They had shops for these. There
23 are scallop shops, all licensed and
24 inspected, really by the DEC and the
25 Department of Agriculture.
1 56
2 Everything is totally cleaned and
3 disinfected every working day. There are no
4 odors. People remark how clean we keep the
5 place. They wonder how we can do it and we
6 are -- great financial hardship on myself
7 and my son's family and many, many baymen if
8 this was denied. Thank you.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: Before you leave me or
i0 leave us, we of course have been up and
ii toured your facility and you were kind
12 enough to have Mr. Dinizio come up at the
13 time when you were processing conchs --
14 actually steaming them at that time. What
15 is the earliest possible time that someone
i6 may deliver fish to you?
17 MR. CARLSON: We are bordered by
is Lower Road on the front, with the cemetery
19 across the street, a farm on the west side,
20 north side is my son's property, and on the
21 east side there are three gardens that back
22 up and touch our fence which is on the
23 furthest part of my property -- the east
24 -- a few hundred feet.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: what would be the
1 57
2 earliest possible time that someone may
3 deliver fish to you, and the latest possible
4 time?
5 MR. CARLSON: Normally they come
6 during the afternoon or early evening.
7 THE CHAIRMAN: What would be the
8 latest time they come at night, past eight
9 o'clock?
10 MR. CARLSON: Six or seven o'clock.
11 We normally close at six.
12 THE CHAIRMAN: When you process the
13 fish, do you physically take those fish to
1a the market to sell them or does someone pick
15 those up?
16 MR. CARLSON: What 'do you mean?
17 THE CHAIRMAN: Either the lobsters,
18 conchs or whatever.
19 MR. CARLSON: We .put them in our,
20 truck and deliver them out of town.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: So there are no
22 tractor-trailers coming to your site?
23 MR. CARLSON: You couldn't get a
24 tractor-trailer in my site.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: The largest truck used
58
2 would be the truck we see there that has a
3 box on it, or a pickup truck?
4 MR. CARLSON: . That's it.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: Does that particular
6 truck have a freezer on it or a unit on it?
7. MR. CARLSON: No. They are all
8 insulated and we use ice that we make there.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: So then -- there is no
10 noise emanating from a truck that would be
11 stored on the site with a refrigeration unit
12 on --
13 MR. CARLSON: Definitely not.
14 THE CHAIRMAN: There is one other
15 question. How old is the largest barn which
16 sits to the west side of the property?
17 MR. CARLSON:. It dates back to the
18 original part of the house.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: You .merely added on to
20 the barn?
21 MR. CARLSON: A couple of feet a few
22 years ago, yes.
23 THE CHAIRMAN:. I don't think I have
24 any further questions at this time, Mr.
25 Carlson, but we will see what develops
r
1 59
2 throughout the hearing.
3 Is there anybody else that would like
4 to speak in favor of the application?
5 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Claude Carlson,
6 Arthur's son and I am in the family
7 business. We have lived there our whole
8 lives in the fishing business, working on
9 the water and dealing with our relatives and
10 some friends in town here. And I am just
11 trying to go over what he might have missed
12 that I would like you to know about.
13 That he did mention we have gone
14 through the process over the years as his
15 business has grown, that we have complied
16 with all regulations, to get all permits
17 that are required when we added our barn
18 onto -- in the beginning we got all DEC
19 permits or agricultural permits. So we
20 followed all procedures as we thought they
21 were -- we were supposed to properly.
22 We feel -- I :personally, feel that we
23 are like farmers of the water. We work on
24 the bays and we bring stuff .in, and we need
25 a place to store it in our coolers till we
1 60
2 move it back out of town. We can't keep
3 lobsters alive without keeping them
4 somewhere .in the .cooler, for instance, and
5 that we are not running any type of retail
6 business. All we are trying to do is handle
7 all of our products that we catch ourselves,
8 in our family -- family members and some of
9 the ones that we deal with -- some of them
10 going as far back as approximately 20 years
11 that have caught . lobsters for us. We have
12 only been at that location 18 or 19 years,
13 but, you know, we have been in the same kind
14 of business for our whole lives in this
15 town.
16 THE CHAIRMAN: You live .on Lot Number
17 2, which is a ranch house that faces Ackerly
18 Pond?
19 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Right. So the
20 barns are in his backyard and they are also
21 in my backyard.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: When somebody delivers
23 something to you, do they use the Ackerly
24 Pond access or the Lower Road access?
25 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: They use both.
1 61
2 We haven' t had any problem as far as I know.
3 The closest neighbor to us on my side has
4 been very good friends to us and we have no
5 complaints.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: For the record- -- so
7 let me just mention for the record that both
8 accesses are either of sand or they are
s unpaved.
10 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Gravel .
11 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anything else
12 you would like to say?
13 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No. That's
14 about it. I just wanted you to realize what
15 effect this would have .on both our families.
16 THE CHAIRMAN: Is this the sole
17 support of your income, this business?
18 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Yes.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: And your father?
20 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Yes, both our
21 families and our kids in college. This is
22 our family business we built together and it
23 just has fallen into place over the years.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: How many people would
25 you say you are in contact with that -- or
1 62
2 that avail themselves .,of , your business?
3 MR:: CLAUDE CARLSON: Probably 50 or
a 60 local people- in ..town, ..but it ..is -- every
5 year it varies. For instance, some years we
6 handle bait- mussels. People catch .bait
7 mussels. They bring them to us: We buy
8 them-and s.tore . them. -I also have mussels,
9 the different years. The last few years
10 have been very difficult because we haven't
11 had any .mussels, any bait .mussels because of
12 the brown tide. Striped bass has been taken
13 away - just -given back to us. this year on a
14 limited basis. .
15 We .have had hard times over the. last
16 few years trying to keep things together in
17 this business, to begin with. But to answer
18 your question more fully, there are about 50
19 or 60 people. but over a- given. year maybe 30
20 or 40 because we have ten lobster boats that
21 bring lobsters to us. This year, for
22 instance, we had a dozen scallop boats. The
23 other years we.. had as many as 20. people
24 scalloping and selling- us their products.
25 As far- as conchs go, we. probably have about
63
2 eight..' or.. ten boats that catch conchs for us
3 in town.
4 I would like to mention one other
5 thing, talking about processing -- is that
6 originally-, we- created- a market for, conchs.
7 You are not. allowed- to throw them back.
8 overboard.-. They- are shellfish. predators.
9 They are not supposed to be thrown
10 overboard. We looked for the`market . and
11 created the market for : them originally.'by
12 busting.:them out of the. shell . We found by
1 13 steaming them: for a short time- we could take
14 them: out .of . the shell without going through
15 the work -of busting them. We only pack
16 shellfish. Lobsters, scallops, and conchs
17 are .our basic- business. We-don't-handle
18 fish, - except-. for what fishing I do:
19 THE CHAIRMAN: How would you compare
20 your..-operation- to .a farmer?
21 MR.- CLAUDE CARLSON: . I _would say- we
22 are very .similar to a .farmer in one aspect
23 of .what we do on our own, but it would be
24 like having neighbors . or other farmers .or
25 relatives that .we handle packing their stuff
64
2 to take out of town for sale.
3 .. .THE CHAIRMAN: Do you change the
4 physical characteristic of , the products you
5 use, that you have?
6 MR., CLAUDE CARLSON: -No.
7 THE CHAIRMAN: Do .you slice the
s conchs to a point they are sold en masse, in
g one piece? .
10 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No. We don't
11 have .any .kind of final processing type of
12 operation. All we. are trying to. do . is
13 market a product in the bulk form. .
14 THE CHAIRMAN: So the greatest degree
15 of processing .that you would .do- would. be to
16 extract the eye of the scallop out of its
17 shell?.
18 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Exactly, extract
19 the conch out of the shell .
20 THE CHAIRMAN: You wouldn't be
21 extracting lobster .meat but of the- lobster,
22 would you?
23 MR. CLAUDE- CARLSON: No. We don't
24 want to deal with .lobster meat. We just
25 deal . with live lobsters.
65
2 THE,CHAIRMAN: - We thank ,you .very
3 much, Mr.. Carlson.
4 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Thank you..
5 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else
6 that would like to- speak in favor of this
7 application?
8 MEMBER OF THE AUDIENCE: Yes.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: State your name for
10 the record, please.
11 MR._ DeMAULA: My name is Anthony
12 DeMaula. I am one -of the original fishermen
13 that . started. with Mr. . Carlson, when Claude
14 was still in school playing baseball . Sandy
15 and I .have done business for 25 years at
16 other locations and at this one here. I
17 supplied him- with conchs. I supplied him
18 with lobster mainly, and occasionally fish
19 when he had special orders..
20 The fishing industry, as you all well .
21 .know, is, in kind of a low .ebb. in our. end ,of
22 the community here.` Mr. Carlson, in , his
23 business, is an absolutely vital part of
24 this . community, as far- as fishermen are
25 concerned. . , The competitiveness of several
• 1
66
2 buyers -- . we-have George Braun. We have
3 other small. markets in Greenport that do buy
a the products, but the -amount of -product that
5 is handled• by Mr. Carlson is relatively too
6 vast, for. .the . local. market. George Braun
7 would probably be the closest thing that
s could handle it, but he has his own fishing
s boats -- .gentlemen that deal with him, •and
10 if .yowtook the -people that deal with Mr.
11 Carlson and- kind of turned those .loose on
12 the market -here, , it .would be detrimental not
13 only to the -gentlemen doing business with
14 these other- people-because it would cause a
15 glut in- the _market and-repress-our prices.
16 We al 1 .know that• this -business is a
17 supply and demand business. It would cause
18 -- if we had• to,. we would have to transport.
19 We would -have to lose fishing time by
20 transporting our product down ,the Island, to
21 Connecticut, or other. places like that, and
22, try to develop our own market• which• is very
23 difficult when you are a fisherman: You are
24 either a fisherman or- a wholesaler. -and
25 dealer like Mr: Carlson. So .he has provided
1 67
2 not only my family, but many families with a
3 guaranteed safe market of fish -- a fair
4 safe market for over 25 years.
5 For this type of a -- Mr. Chairman,
6 for this type of a situation to .come up,
7 where he has been a long-standing business.
s in this area, 'is to me a little bit
9 ludicrous. It is here and we are addressing
10 it as such. I honestly believe as far as
11 the hardship goes, it would be of a
12 tremendous hardship to the men, especially
13 the lobster business at this particular
14 time. Mr. Carlson and his son move a
15 tremendous amount of lobsters provided by
16 the 10 -- 12 -- 14 boats depending on the.
17 time of year and without his business there
18 to help us move our products, .we all . would
19 be -- we would have some very difficult
20 times. We either have to lose fishing time
21 and go peddle our products or we would have
22 to hire somebody to drive our truck and to
23 create our own markets. We just couldn't do
24 that. Fishing or farming and tourism is the
25 mainstay of 'Southold Town, and this man has
1 68
2 helped the fishing end of it and to create a
3 good market.
4 I thank you very much.
5 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir.'
6 Is :there anybody else that would like
7 to speak in favor of the application?
8 MR. WENCZEL: Peter Wenczel . I am a
9 commercial fisherman and I also am president
10 of the Southold .Town Baymen's Association.
11 I would just like to speak for both
12 myself and the baymen in the Town of
13 Southold, generally, and just say that Mr.
14 Carlson's business is. very important for all
15 the fishermen in Southold. I personally
16 have relied on it for 13 years now, and .
17 there are a lot of people who are -in the
18 same situation.
19 The conch processing is very
20 important., It is not something that you .can
21 do yourself. You have to have a facility
22 set up and get all the permits and .all that,
23 and it is just -- it is essential for
24 anybody that does that kind of fishing.
25 The bay scallop processing is
1 69
2 becoming the .same kind of thing. It used to
3 be. a kitchen industry. Everybody used to
4 shuck at home. Now, because of all the DEC
5 regulations and the Department of Health
6 regulations, it is almost prohibitive cost-
7 wise to set up a shop of our own if. you do
s it right.
9 So his operation is very important to
10 all- -of us, and I just want to say I.. .think
11 the variance should be granted.
12 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much,
13 sir.
14 Is there anybody else that would like
15 to. speak?.
16 MR. LATSON: Steve Latson:. I am
17 secretary to the Baymen's Association, also
18 chairman of. the Water Revitalization
19 Association. And obviously, from what has
20 been said, that Sandy's business is very
21 important for the fishermen in this town.
22 And next: year when you have the scallops
23 coming back; it is going to be.. extremely so.
24 I- think he has the only legal opening shop
25 left in the whole .town.
1 70
2 . . . From the .standpoint of Waterfront
3 Revitalization, I think it is really
a important to .start looking at the .zoning
5 code in Southold Town. Currently, . I land my
6 scal.lops ,in the Town creek at my mother's
7 dock. That is actually illegal . That. is
8 illegal : . We have got a lot of code
9 problems. I think starting with the .
i0 variance here .is a .good. place to start. .. We
ii work on .it with the Waterfront Revitaliza-
12 tion, working on the problem that the code
13 doesn't address fishing as being really an
14 existing industry at this point,. -.but you .do
15 hear about it when the politicians start
i6 talking.
i7 . . I think that is about all I .have to
is say. I. think. it is really important that
i9 his variance be granted,. and I think. also it
20 is really .important that you .guys get
21 together .with the people and involved with
22 the committee and. start .altering the codes
23 to .start helping the fishermen because we
24 keep hearing about the fishermen and how
25 important he is; and he is, but really,
1 71
2 basically, ..we:.are. getting shut out of the
3 town. Thank you.
4 . . . THE .CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
5 Is. there .anybody that would like to
6 speak against the application?
7 Mr. 'Flynn?
8 MR. FLYNN: I am F. M. Flynn,
9 resident of the Town of Southold.
10 The grievous nature .and scope of this
11 application is such that I .would like to
12 address it in detail.. My purpose is to
13 create a record for .the future .should such
14 be .required.
15 .. THE CHAIRMAN: How long do. you think
16 this will take you, Mr. Flynn?
17 MR. FLYNN: I .would say upwards from
18 five to ten minutes.
19 Here, again, we are confronted with
20 yet another transparent attempt to rezone
21 via variances. What -is asked for here can
22 only -be -accomplished by means of a rezoning.
23 May. .I remind you that Chapter 100 of
24 the Town .Code Zoning states,, as . one of :its
25 purposes, The gradual elimination of non-
1 72
. 2 conforming uses." This is hardly consistent
3 with their .creati.on, proliferation,
4 expansion or. ultimate approval by this
5 Board.
6 Now .there .is a basic question here.
7 The legal motice said we are involved with
g Lot 13.2.. I :hear reference .now .also to Lot
9 13.4 which is not part of the legal notice.
10 THE- CHAIRMAN: . I t.._is .not -part- of. this
11 application.
1
12 MR. FLYNN: Then_ it .is not part of
13 the legal -notice which brought me inhere.
14 THE 'CHAIRMAN: Lot 13.2 is the only
15 one that .has this -particular operation -on .
16 it. His -son lives. on 13.4. I assume that
17 is the one you are raising. His son has a
18 one-family dwelling on that piece.
19 MR. FLYNN.: '. .It appears to me that
20 part of the existing operation is on 'Lot
21 13:4.
22 : ,THE CHAIRMAN:- :.No.'..
23 MR. FLYNN: At any rate, that's not
24 really'a problem enrolled here.. The subject
25 lot, -Lot -Number 13.2,. is one acre .in area in
1 73
2 an :A-C. or 2-acre district. . It is by- Town
3 Code- definition a nonconforming lot.
4 ... . . :With respect to use, the applicant
5 seeks a veritable melange of uses classified
6 by him as maricultural , to wit:
7 l) Delivery and storage of seafood.
8 -2) Packaging
s .:.3). Freezing and/or:preparation -of
10 raw or .cooked ..seafood processing. .
11 4): : Shipping
12 5). Sales for off-premises
T� 13 consumption.
J 14 None of these uses is .permitted in an
15 A-C District..
16 Mariculture is .a. .permitted use in
17 MII .Districts- only, with a two-acre minimum
18 lot size. Specifically, fish processing is
19 permitted only .as a Special-.Excep.tion,. as
20 are fish. markets.
21 Each such use requires a plot of two
22 acres. There is also a question of the
23 other uses cited as requiring industrial- -or
24 business zoning with their attendant plot .
25 minimums
1 74
2 In short, the- app.licant proposes to
3 locate .a long list of non-conforming uses,
a each with its .individual .plot . size
5 requirements, on a one-acre parcel .
6 I.t should .be noted .that the Town Code
7 specifically prohibits uses emitting noxious
s odors in all districts.
s With. respect to the above, there .is a
10 possibility, :even .perhaps . the probability,
ii that were these variances granted, the
12 subject .property would be operated in
13 conjunction with Lot 13.4 in the same block.
14 Lot 13.4, is also a nonconforming lot
15 on.which.-a. reputably nonconforming and,
i6 possibly illegal , use is conducted.
i7 Neighbors already complain about noxi-ous .
18 odors. emanating. from. this. lot.
19 I .might add that Lot 13..2 abuts at
20 least . four residences.
21 What is sought here. are. multiple
22 rezonings. far beyond the strict.. letter of
23 the regulations and the spirit. of the. Zoning
24 .Chapter. of the- Town Code.
25 The spirit of the chapter is clearly
1 75
2 expressed by the Town Board's limiting these
3 uses to MII Districts. The further intent
4 or spirit, is further expressed in Section
5 100-120 of the Town Code which states that
6 MII use is intended to provide: "a
7 waterfront location for a wide range of
8 water-dependent and water-related uses which
s require or. benefit from direct access to or
10 location in ,marine or tidal .waters .and
11 which, in general , .are located on major
12 waterways, open bayfronts or the Long Is.land
13 Sound."
TJ 14 So much for MII uses.
15 By law, in seeking a variance, the
16 burden .of proof is on the applicant.
17 He must submit, for an area variance,
18 "dollars and cents" proof that his property
19 is virtually valueless as zoned. This is -
20 hardly the case in view of the permitted
21 residential use and the abutting residential
22 use.
23 To grant an .area variance, the Board
24 is enjoined by the courts to consider:
25 1). How substantial the variance is
1 76
2 relative .to the requirement.
3 2) Whether substantial change will
4 be produced in the character of the
5 neighborhood. .
6 3) Whether the difficulty can be
7 obviated .by some method feasible for the
g applicant to pursue other than a variance.
s 4) Whether, in view of the matter in
10 which the difficulty arose, the interest of
11 justice will be served by allowing the
12 variance.. .
13 It is significant that, throughout,
14 variance .is used in the singular. It is
15 obvious that the courts did not contemplate
16 a series of variances, the scope of which is
17 tantamount to rezonings.
18 I submit that the only difficulty
is here arises. from the outrageous. demands of
20 the applicant and that such "difficulty" can
21 be obviated by utilizing the property for a
22 permitted use.
23 The substantiality of the variances
24 sought is. obvious in view of their variety,
25 intensity and obnoxious nature, as well as
1 77
2 the nonconforming size of the property.
3 The change in the character of the
4 neighborhood which the proposed changes
5 would bring about, should be apparent to all
6 but the most prejudiced.
7 Justice involves justice to all
8 including the neighbors rights to the "'quiet
9 enjoyment" .of their properties incorporated
10 in. their "Bundle .of Rights" and whose
11 properties. would be devalued. for. the
12 applicant's profit. These variances would
13 effectively constitute spot zoning.
14 Two of- the principal uses. sought
15 require Special Exception.
16 With respect to Special . Exceptions,
17 the Town Code states(in part) that the ZBA
18 must find and' determine:
19 That ,the proposed use. will not
20 prevent the orderly and reasonable use of
21 adjacent properties or of properties in
22 ad.jacent. use_ districts.
23 That the safety, the health,. the
24 welfare, the comfort, the convenience or the
25 order of the town will not be adversely
'i
78
2 affected by the proposed use and its
3 location.
a That the use'.will be in harmony- with
5 and promote the general purposes and intent
6 of this chapter. (Chapter 100 - Zoning)
7 That, the use will be compatible with
8 its surroundings and with the character of
s the neighborhood and. of the community in
10 general particularly with regard to.
11 visibility, scale and- overall- appearance. .
12 Section 100-264 of the: Town Code..
13 recites matters to. be considered by this
14 Board in granting Special . Exceptions. . It is
15 too lengthy: to. quote here verbatim, but I
16 commend its study to anyone interested in .
17 the outcome of this proceeding. In general ,
18 factors .to .be considered are: the character
19 of the district; the conservation of
20 property. values; effects of. traffic.; . the
21 availability of water and facilities for the
22 treatment .of sewage. and other effluents; the
23 question. of the emission. of obnoxious gases,
24 odors, : etcetera; whether the plot. size is
25 sufficient: and appropriate for the. uses;
79
2 whether -the proposed site is particularly
3 suitable -for the uses; whether there is risk
4 of pollution of ground or surface waters,
5 etcetera. .
6 Here again, these considerations
7 envisage only .a single use. and due to .the
8 manifold variance .any .adverse. effects are
9 obviously intensified.
10 In conclusion, there is .absolutely no
11 justifiable basis on which to grant these
12 variances and, . in the interest of justice
13 and to prevent further waste of the
14 taxpayer.'s money, I call for a summary
15 dismissal- of this application.
16 If. it belongs anyway, it belongs as a
17 change-of.- zone application before the Town
18 Board. Thank you.
19 MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: I would like to
20 ask Mr. . Flynn a question. -- a couple of
21 questions.-
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Before you do - that,
23 let me ask- you a question. . I don't know if
24 you sat in on the prior hearing.with, the
25 garage application, but there are certain
1 80
2 issues. that have been raised here concerning
3 the code and so on and so forth. At the
a completion of -the hearing ,for the evening,
5 . would you like us to recess it so you may
6 seek legal counsel and possibly come back in
7 the November meeting or- December meeting or
8 whatever -- how long you feel it is going to
s take you. to _ address .the specific issues that
10 were mentioned?
11 . First of all , we have afforded to us
12 a. copy o€- the issues that Mr.- Flynn has
13 before us. Some don't have to wait until
'14 they are transcribed. however, .we. can give
15 you a copy .of .that so you can talk to your
16 attorney': That is an issue I want you to
17 think about.
18 MR. CARLSON: Can I ask a ,couple of
19 questions of Mr. Flynn? I want .to know if
20 he represents someone. What is .his interest
21 in this?
22 Bumber. two -- before he answers that
23 -- you people have visited the site.-. . There
24 are no noxious odors there.
25 Number -thr.ee, our water .is tested --
1 81
2 requiredto be tested. by the Department of
3 Agriculture every two years. We drink that
a water in our families. We are not ground
5 polluti.ng any water. We. use very little
6 water in our operation.
7 MR. FLYNN: It is obvious that
8 somebody has to serve as- some form of
9 ombudsman if these applications are not to
10 slip by unchallenged; two, some of the
11 neighbors or at least one of the neighbors
12 -- I should .correct .that -- has complained
13 about the. emission of odors from that.
14 property; . and three, whatever the situation
15 with groundwater is now, certainly the
16 possibility. for contamination is going to be
17 increase manifold by the expansion of the
18 operation of these uses onto another lot.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
20 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: I would just
21 like to clarify a couple of things that were
22 just brought up here that I am not sure if
23 everybody -- there is no. possibility of
24 pollution. We are not using any kind of
25 chemicals. . Everything is natural . We are
1 82
2 taking natural, shellfish, taking :them out of
3 the shells for sale out- of town, and taking
a the shell -to the dump.
5 That is the basis of our operation,
6 of what we are doing. We are not expanding
7 anything. We have been doing this-. for many
8 years and we haven't had any problems.
9 There were other problems that arised
10 ' because- of. friction between neighbors that
11 had nothing to. -do with that.
12 THE CHAIRMAN: I have before me the
13 minor subdivision of Lots 1, 2 and 3. Your
14 father's lot .is Lot Number 3, where the
15• entire operation occurs; is that correct?
16 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: That is correct.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: There is no. operation
18 in your garage or on your premises, where
19 your house is?
20 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No,, my property
21 goes across the back of his property.
22 THE CHAIRMAN: So we are limiting
23 this discussion primarily to your father's
24 property. ,
25 MR. CLAUDE- CARLSON: Yes. There are
83
2 na -plans of any kind of expansion: ' All we
3 want to do is continue what we have ,been
a doing for so many years.
5 THE CHAIRMAN:' Thank you very much.
6 Appreciate it.
7 MR. FLYNN: May I just 'comment
8 briefly about this question of the
9 identification of the property? Lot Number
10 13.2 fronts on 'Lower Road.
11 THE CHAIRMAN: That is correct.
12 MR. FLYNN: Lot Number 13.4 fronts on.
13 Ackerly Pond Road. The improvements are on
14 the lot fronting on Ackerly Pond Road.
15 THE CHAIRMAN: No.
16 MR. , FLYNN; At l east some of the
17 improvements.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: No. The only thing
19 that is on Ackerly Pond Road, Mr. Flynn,
20 -- so we get this straightened out, .because
21 I had a problem here, too, . -- Mr. Claude
22 Car'lson's house -- Mr. Carlson's son's house
23 fronts on Ackerly Pond Road. ' Mr. Sandy
24 Carlson, who is the applicant before us in
25 the nature of this application, his house
84
2 faces on 'Lower Road, The entire operation
3 -- I have a survey here. .-- is on Mr. Sandy
4 Carlson's or Mr. . Arthur .Carlson's parcel of
5 property, which .I have before me as 13.2. I
6 mean, we can afford you any copies of the
7 fil.e or .-anything...
g MR. FLYNN: It doesn't alter the
g nature -of my objection.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: No, it doesn't. I
11 just want to clear .it up with you.
12 Mr. Carlson, Mr. Arthur Carlson, or
� . 13 Sandy, we come to the question and I asked
14 you when 'you stood. up, - I personally am not
15 making any suggestions . to you, but you tell
16 me what you want to do. We can close the
17 hearing based on the record, or we will
18 allow you to come back- and. have you bring
19 counsel with you.
20 MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: How soon will
21 the decision .be made?
22 THE CHAIRMAN: Well , if we,-close.-the
23 hearing 'tonight, we have 60 days from
24 tonight to make a decision, which would mean
25 we would, be making a decision .before �
85
2 Christmas. -
3 MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: I think, Gerry,
4 we have .presented our case very well arid -we
5 stated all. the facts. You people have
6 visited the site, and we stand on what we
7 are doing .as neat as we can do it, and it
s certainly- is a help to .the town. . I think we
9 would like to go ahead and close it.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a particular
11 problem.in the respect .I want to talk to the
12 Town Attorney regarding ,this application.
13 So I . might recess it to the next regularly
14 scheduled meeting. for the sole purpose of my
15 discussing it with. the Town Attorney.
16 MR. DINIZIO: . I. would .like to know
17 the right-of-way that goes to Ackerly Pond,
18 is that -.in the deed for your property?
19 MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: Both on our
20 properties. It is 15 feet right-of-way.
21 going from my driveway, continuing around a
22 90 degree bend, deeded to both Claude.'s
23 property and my property,- and enters. on --
24 exits- or. enters on Ackerly, Pond.
25 : THE CHAIRMAN: Just so we have it for
1 86
2 the record, what initiated this particular
3 . hearing? What caused you to come before us?
4 MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: A complaint,
5 which is a sour grape thing.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: That was a complaint
7 by a neighbor?
g MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: One neighbor.
s THE CHAIRMAN: That's what brought
10 you to this particular hearing?
11 MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: I could say
12 more, but maybe I shouldn't.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: It is counter-
14 productive, and we thank you, Arthur, and I
15 will suggest .to the Board that we recess so
16 we might discuss . it with the Town Attorney
17 and then you will be back. So we will . see
18 you back here on the 29th. We will restrict
19 the testimony to five minutes, and we will
20 close the hearing and that will be the end
21 of it.
22 MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: Thank you.
23 THE CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further
24 questions, I make a motion recessing it to
25 the next regularly scheduled hearing for the
87
2 purposes of limited oral testimony to the
3 extent . of five minutes on both sides after
a discussion with the Town Attorney.
5 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: All .in favor?.
7 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
8 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye'.
9 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much,
11 gentlemen, for coming in.
12 . (Time noted: 9:40 p.m. )
13 THE CHAIRMAN: The next -appeal is
14 Number 3788, in behalf of Sun Refining and
15 Marketing.
16 (Legal notice read off record. )
17 THE CHAIRMAN: Before us I have a
18 copy of the site plan from the Sun Refining
19 and Marketing Company Facility Distribution
20 Department, from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,
21 dated .12/30/87 . There may be an update on
22 that, and I have a copy of the Suffolk
23 County Tax. Map indicating this and
24 surrounding .properties in the area.
25 We .ask counsel , is that the latest ,
1 88
2 copy we .have?
3 MR. WAGNER:. . John Wagner (Esquire) .
4 I have a .revised plot plan I can hand up to
5 you tonight. I have numerous copies of it.
6 (Applicant's counsel handing above-
7 mentioned .document to the Board. )
a THE CHAIRMAN: We are ready.
s MR. WAGNER: Good evening. I am John
10 Wagner, attorney with Esseks, Hefter and
11 Angel , in Riverhead. I am here tonight in
12 behalf of Sun Refining and Marketing
13 Company, the .applicants. Sun Refining and
14 Marketing is the lessee of.*-d-Vr-at, Inc.
15 which is. the record owner of the property.
/or y raro j'
16 Sun Refining has, a .-lang-t-i-one Tease .with
17 fr@
18 I have -with me here tonight two
19 representatives -- .two representatives of
20 Sun Refining and Marketing, Jack Guarneri
21 and Radcliffe Dwyer. Also present tonight
22 is the son of the current franchisee of the
23 subject .property. His name is Ed Rafferty
24 (phonetic . spelling) and he will be operating
25 the future proposed convenience store/gas
1 89
~I
2 station use. So if you have any questions
cam $cz�
3 as to what might be done there, I -asau—r-e- you
4 can have an answer from one' of these people
5 tonight.
6 The location of the property is at
7 the northeast corner of Factory Avenue and
8 Main Road, in Mattituck, and you indicated
9 you have the tax map already before you.
10 The zone classification- of the property is B
11 General Business and the total acreage of
12 the property is. 24,139 square feet. And for
Tl 13 your help also, I have a copy of the plain
14 survey of the property without all the
15 notations on it. That might be helpful .
16 (Applicant's counsel handing -above-
17 mentioned document to the Board. )
18 MR. WAGNER: A little bit on the
19 history of the property. This particular
20 parcel that is in question here has been
21 s'im-gu17ar1-y--and separately owned since 1969,
22 and it is- single and separate from the
23 adjoining .property on the north` and east,
24 which currently contains the A & P Shopping
25 Center.
r ,
1 90
2 The character of the neighborhood
3 property. is . commercial . I.t is B General
4 Business zoned for quite a ways- on east and
5 west
Route 25. As .I said, the property is
6 surrounded on the north -and east by the
7 A & P Shopping Center which consists. of a
8 variety .of retail -uses.
9 At present . on the site we have a main
10 building which is currently containing an
11 office and motor vehicle repair facility.
12 Also, out front there are some gasoline
a��SFense,�
13 pumps, -chi-s-persvrs-, which are used for retail
14 gasoline sales.
15 Now . the gasoline service station -on
16 the operation has a Certificate of Occupancy
17 which is dated August 28, 1970, and that- use
18 . was sanctioned by a Certificate of Occupancy
19 pursuant to a Special Exception granted in
20 1969.
21 We are here tonight because .the .
' rL^�7L'SAS
22 applicant -p ese& to do something with the
23 property, specifically we would like to
.sPrlce-
24 convert the pre-existing-use now used for
c-
25 office and repair work to the convenience
1 91
2 store. We would like to relocate the gas
3 pumps on the property and also we would like
a to install a canopy over the new relocated
5 gas pumps.
6 We- have been to the Planning. Board
7 with this- proposal . There have been a lot
8 of little evolutions on the project over the
9 time. The latest evolution, which you have
10 before .you tonight, which is Revision Number
11 11 of the plot.-land -- this revision you see
12 tonight came about after numerous reviews
13 with the Planning Board over a month and a
14 half and also an inspection of the lot by
15 Victor Lessard, the Building Inspector.
16 All that we have done, the latest
17 revisions is to open the entryway on Main
18 Road a little wider to facilitate tanker.
19 truck access to the .property and open the
20 access way on Factory Avenue to allow the
21 tanker trucks to leave.. We also relocated
22 the handicapped parking space to the back of
23 the property, and once again, that is to
24 promote the movement of traffic through the
25 site.
1 92
2 When-,.the _Building .Inspector _reviewed
3 the latest plan and the- proposal that we
4 have,. he .issued..a Notice of .Disapproval ;
5 dated -October 2nd of this year, and I would
6 just like to. .summarize that . for .you,
7 briefly, :-so you :can see .what :we are. .asking
8 for .tonight of this Board.
9 In his. Notice of. -Disappr.oval ; :Mr. -.
10 Lessard poimts . to -Section 100-253rof-the.
ii Town- Code. This..provides for the site- plan
12 approval , and- the app.licant. .is presently
13 addressing. that:,through the. Planning. Board
14 channel... He .also cites Section . 100-102., ,
15 which is :the. bulk. parking. and .area . . .
is requirement and specifies that 30,00.0 :.square
17 feet -is- required for each. use.
18 Now I have .had a. discussion with Mr.
19 Lessard :as - to what :is . meant by-that_; .•and I
20 believe..Mr. Lessard's position .is that- the
Ci�Q�
21 convenience. store .is .an additional use-.on .
22 the property and requires .an .additional ,
23 30,000 square feet . over and..above the
24 gasoline- station..use which requires 30,000 .
25 square feet. So Mr. Lessard believes that
1 93
2 the site requires 60,000 square feet for . the
3 proposal .
4 : We- are- going to. take _the position
5 that the convenience store, which Mr.
6 Lessard acknowledged to- be a. permitted use
hot
7 in the B General . Business Zone, islin fact a
8 separate principal use which we believe
s requires the- 30,000 square feet per use, but
10 as proposed. it is in fact an accessory use
11 to. the .gasoline. station which pre-exists on
12 the: property.: Because of. that analysis, we
13 contend there.-is .really only one principal.
14 use: on .the property._under. this proposal and
15 there is only. 30.,000 square. feet of lot size
16 that would- be. required. under the current
17 standards. Because we have a pre-existing
18 use on - fie substandard./-use,. we are taking.
19 the position we require no variance from
20 even the .30,000 square: feet requirement.. We
21 take. that position pursuant to ease zoning Code.
22 Sec-I ,o 100-244, ..which. protects certain. uses. on
23 substandard.. parcels.
24 -. . . . .-.Now I . intend .to. present expert
25 tes.timony . to establish that the convenience
a
1 94
2 store as proposed is, in fact, an accessory.
3 r.ather. ,than a principal use. I would like
a to request .right .now that.. the . record -of. this
5 proceeding be kept .open,, so that .you can
6 receive this expert .testimony. The expert
7 could not be here tonight. . He had another
8 engagement .in Southampton, and I would .like
9 to .reschedul.e him- for -another night to bring
10 him back so he can present a detailed report
Ph__r;6me'744 n
11 to you on the -phenomena of convenience
12 stores -.and gasoline stations. :.
13 The next Ahing Mr. Lessard refers to
14 in his Certificate of. Disapproval .is the
fh�
15 height. of .-met proposed.canopy we :would like
16 to put on .the property. He had a question
17 as - to :whether it was conforming to the -
18 height requirements of the .Zoning Code. . Our
19 position is that. it does fully conform and
20 you can appreciate that,when you consider
21 that the-.most . stringent height requirement
22 for structures that would . apply to the
23 subject property. is . found in Town Code
24 Section 100-33.. . That section- Imposes an 18-
25 foot -height limit .on. accessory buildings.
1 95
2 The Miscellaneous Details and
3 Elevation- Plan which was submitted .with the
4 application shows . a canopy height of 17 feet
5 above the pump mat. If. you scale it out,
6 you can see it is also less than- 18 feet..
7 above the ground . level . So based .upon . that,
8 we. conclude the canopy conforms with. the
s most stringent requirements under the code
10 and we would_like .an interpretation from the
11 Board that there is no .height .problem with
12 the canopy as. proposed.
1 13 Now Mr Lessard also requires --
14 refers - to .the-provisions for .the canopy. He
15 believes that there are two. front yards
16 required .for the canopy by virtue of the
17 fact the canopy is ..on.-the.''corner' and we
18 appreciate that it is -a .corner lot and
19 therefore two fronts yards apply. In this
20 particular zone they are 50 .feet. -We .
21 believe that we have sufficient practical
22 difficulty to demonstrate that.' we should get
23 a variance .from that standard to permit the
24 canopy as. -proposed.- The 50-foot .front -yard
25 required for this particular. parcel imposes
96
2 a severe constraint on the parcel , and you
3 can't really appreciate that until you
a actually see it scaled out on the diagram.
5 So once again, to help you in this, I
6 have prepared a map of the existing
7 conditions on .the site, and I have indicated
8 in red pencil what the 50-foot setback would
9 be so you can see where the building area is
10 under the current code. You can see from
11 observing that applying the 50-foot setback
12 from Factory Avenue and from Main Road, the
13 only buildable area of this site is in the
14 northeast corner of the site. This is- an .
15 area where neither the gas pumps can be
16 placed nor anything else of value. . -. The
17 purpose of the canopy is to cover the
18 gasoline pumps. So it is really impossible
�'h e
19 to build a canopy on subjectproperty that
20 is of any value applying the setbacks.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: What is the purpose of
22 covering the pumps?
23 MR. WAGNER: The purpose of the
24 canopy is for protection from theelements.
25 People drive up in this day and age where
97
2 they have to get out of their cars and self-
Ose- -Vam b/-e-
3 service and using the pumps and fumbdj=g
4 around with the gadgets. t71s a rainy day3
5 It is not very convenient for the customers
6 to come in- and do ,that. They can appreciate
7 they might have protection from the downpour
s and: the canopy- is-: designed not only as a
9 shield, but as. a water collection device.
10 It does have drainage facilities built into
Gh.1 n n e�
11 its design that -ahaRnels=water off - and- away
12 from the area-.where the pumping. would be
13 taking place. The canopy- is nothing unusual
14 with this application. . There is one right
15 down the road. In fact, it's a Hass station
is . on the south side of the road to the•.east, a
17 �hDUs as
f ew .hundried yards down the road.
18 On the score of the canopy, I
19 mentioned before I�have some expert
20 testimony for you next time I come and I
21 would like to tell you also that that expert
22 will also testify that a canopy in this day
23 and age is a customary accessory structure
24 to a gasoline station and, again; I would
25 like .to .defer to his testimony on that
1 98
2 conclusion. I don't expect you .to take it
3 from.me at face value, and once again I
4 request the record remain open for that
5 testimony.
g THE CHAIRMAN: Are every one of the
7 pumps under , this canopy self-service -pumps?
8 MR. DWYER: That's the way it is
9 planned. However, it does not have to be
10 constructed that way. We can include full
11 service if required.
12 MR. DINIZIO: Is every pump
13 necessary?
14 THE CHAIRMAN:.- . Meaning the amount of
15 PUMPS.
16 MR. WAGNER: We have already the pre-
17 existing number of pumps.
18 MR. DWYER: Currently there are nine
19 pumps on the site. We only .pro K)rse to put
20 four dispensers in place.
21 MR. DINIZIO: They are not in this
22 configuration.
23 MR. DWYER: No.
24 MR. WAGNER: If you look carefully at
25 the. plot plan, you will see dotted lines
99
2 showing the existing pump- islands. You can
3 see there is, a designation on there- with
4 "TBR" which means "to be removed." So you
5 can get an appreciation of the existing
6 conditions as proposed. You will. find, in
7 fact, under the proposed scenario., the. pumps
8 will be moved further An from the Main Road
9 than .they are currently.
10 Now I think like I said.before, .we
11 acknowledge. that to .have this canopy, which
12 we think is necessary..to the gas station and
S'�fccc�ut-e. —�Zs►-
13 a customary accessorYA-to it, we are going to
14 need some kind. of variance from you. We
15 believe that the parcel , because it is a
16 corner parcel , it is uniquely and highly
17 constrained by these current required zoning
18 setbacks.
19 The':area variance., ..such as what we
20 are looking for, requires a showing of
21 practical .difficulty. As you know, . there is
22 a landmark case called Wachsberger versus
23 Michalis, .and this case basically sets the
24 criteria for an analysis of practical
25 difficulty on applications of this sort. I
100
2 would like .to read through the .criteria. for
3 you, directly from the court opinion.
a . ..In .a determination of practical
5 difficulty the Board should consider:
6 1) How substantial. the .variation is
7 in relation to the .requirement;
8 2):-: .the -effect- that the variance is
s allowed of the increased population density
10 thus produced :on .available governmental .
11 facilities. (fire, -water, garbage, and the ..
12 like) ; ...
am efhe�-
13 3) fir, a substantial .change .
14 will. be. produced in .the.charact.er of the
15 neighborhood or a substantial detriment .to
16 adjoining properties created;
17 A) whether the difficulty can be
18 obviated .by some method feasible for the
a
19 applicant to pursue other than the variance;
20 and
21 5) whether -in view- of the manner -in
22 which. the.-difficulty arose. and considering
23 all of the above .factors, the :iste-r st of
24 justice-will be served by allowing the
25 variance.
101
2 I will just run down these five
3 factors for you. In regard to the
4 substantial variation,• you can see on the
5 4dut plot plan before you 'I indicated what
6 the proposed setbacks are for the canopy.
7 You will find they are 29 feet both from
8 Factory Avenue and from Main, Road.
9 Therefore we- need a variance from 50 feet
10 down to. 29-, or 21 feet for the variance.
11 This works out to about a 42 percent
12 variance. However, when you consider that
13 under Town Code Section 100-244 the
14 applicant's single and separate
15 nonconforming lot is automatically entitled
16 to relief from the dimensions to allow a
17 front yard of 40 feet. The variance appears
18 less substantial . ' In viewing it in that
19 way, . we .really, are requesting 11 additional
20 feet from 40 feet or1727 .5 percent variance.
21 Now the next factor is the effect of
22 the increased population density on
23 available governmental facilities. In that
24 respect, we contend there is no such effect.
25 The reason for that, we are dealing with
1 102
2 just a canopy. This is not a . residential or
3 commercial building. It is just a bare
4 structure. It has no .demand of such
5 services.
6 The third-4r4rte-r4-a-recited by the
7 case is . substantial change in- character of
8 neighborhood or .substantial detriment to
9 adjoining properties. Again, -we. contend
10 there -is no such effect: This canopy
11 -e-Meat-s only the subject property, and the
12 effect is really a beneficial one in. that in
13 effect it protects customers of the property
14 from the elements. Because it is a canopy
15 it has no ground coverage and does not
16 obstruct- the view of vehicles and scenic
17 views that might exist. It doesn't
18 interfere with the -aEun�ing .of . the corner
19 of Factory Avenue.
20 The next -entt-e is is whether there is
/r)efh od_
21 feasible alternative methods for the
22 applicant to relieve the difficulty short of
`j a✓e
23 obtaining a variance. We -had no feasible
24 method. Without this particular variance,
25 we certainly cannot locate the canopy over
4
1 103
2 the. pumps: : The canopy is .worthless unless
3 it is over the,-pumps, and the pumps cannot
4 be' located in that extreme northeast corner
5 of the property.
6 The last a r-a is whether in..view
7 of. the .manner in 'which the difficulty: arose
fihe ��1�e�-esfs
8 and considering the above factors . erest
9 of :justice will. be served by the variance.
10 It should. be.. pointed out here that this
11 difficulty that we have arises through no
12 fault of this applicant. It is just/tthe
13 happenstance that we happen to. be on.- the
14 corner-parcel , that we are burdened by .two
15 very substantial front yard. requi.rements.
16 In addition,' this canopy. -has no..discernable
17 adverse_ .effects on the public. . In other
18 words, like I , said before, it does. not.
19 obstruct vision as an ordinary closed
20 building would do, and in fact, protects
21 those members of the public from the
22 . elements as. they are using the permitted
23 .gasoline pumping facilities on -the site.
24 For all the foregoing. reasons,. I
25 submit that the applicant 'has demonstrated
104
2 sufficient practical difficulty under the
3 standards of Wachsberger. to warrant the
a grant of ,the requested .variance.
5 At this point I would like to wrap up '
6 for the evening. I have covered 'the height,
7 the .interpretation problem, and -I have given
8 you. just about everything I have . on the
s setback requirement for the canopy. When I
10 come back again I would like my -expert -with
ii me and .he will .testify as to the convenience
12 store, the lot area requirement, and he also
13 will give you additional insight into .the
14 accessory. nature of canopies to gasoline
15 stations. So just to conclude, I would like
16 to. request the record. be kept open for him
17 at a: .later time. Thank you.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, sir.
19 Is there anyone in the audience that
20 may.. not be here at the next time that would
21 like to .raise an. opinion,. a quick opinion
22 concerning..this application? Showing no
23 hands, I make a motion reserving the hearing
24 without- a--date.-
25 MR. GRIGONIS: Second..
1 105
2 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
3 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
a MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
5 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
6 (Time noted: 10:07 p.m. )
7 THE CHAIRMAN: The next hearing--is
a in- behalf of .Dominick Sblendido and A.
9 Auricchio, Appeal Number- 3955, continuing
10 from September 26, 1990,. and I will ask Mr.
11 Cardinale if he has anything he would like
12 to add.
1 13 MR. PHILIP CARDINALE, ESQ: Yes.
1 14 Members of the Board, I will try to
15 be as brief as possible .in view of the late
16 hour.; It is our understanding that the
17 purpose of the adjournment of the hearing
18 was to -- was three-fold. One is .to enable
19 the applicant to provide certain additional
20 information to the Board required by the
21 Board.
22 I have in my possession. -- I had
23 cited at the last hearing the Wilmott case
24 recently decided by the Town of Riverhead
25 -- identical circumstances to the
1 106
2 application before you, which in effect
3 states that . two kitchens do not a two-family
4 home make. I have a copy of that decision
5 provided to me by the Town of Riverhead in
6 my possession. I would like to hand that up
7 as an exhibit.
8 (Applicant's counsel handing above-
9 mentioned document to the Board. )
i0 -MR. CARDINALE: The second purpose,
ii as I understand it, for the hearing was to
12 obtain the presence of the Building
13 Inspector, Mr. Lessard, for inquiries by the
i4 Board --and to. confirm. the sequence of events
15 I related to the Board in behalf of the
i6 petitioner at the last hearing. I do not
i7 see Mr. Lessard present. I will comment
is upon that in a moment. I will have an
i9 exhibit on that, as well :
20 The third purpose was to permit
21 myself and my clients, who are here this
22 evening, Mr. and Mrs. Sblendido and Mrs. A.
23 Auricchio, again to address the supplemental
24 memo which was submitted and subsequent
25 letter in your file dated 10/22/90 from
1 107
2 Marie Ongioni, attorney for neighbor Tober.
3 Taking. the first purpose first, to
4 provide certain additional information to
5 the Board, the Wilmott case which you have
6 in front of you now is relied upon very
7 heavily. I would suggest to the Board that
s this is an identical case recently decided
9 by a.. sister town and not only is . the
10 determination I think intelligent and fair
11 but it is also not just the determination
12 but' the entire approach and mechanics I
13 would ask. the. Board to consider. following
14 seriously in this case.
15 ..What this decision does -- if- you
16 look. at. it, it is very brief -- is they find
17 that the code of the Town of Riverhead
18 defines a one-family dwelling as such, and
19 as such the definition does not mention
20 kitchen'. or kitchens. They look to -.see what
21 the code _ ofAhe Town of Riverhead defines as
22 family. They conclude. that the definition
23 does not mention eating . arrangements.
.24 They indicate that, as in this case,
25 the dwelling had -a second kitchen installed
108
2 as part of the family ,room and they . conclude
3 that because of these findings that the code
4 of .the Town of -Riverhead does not address
5 the number of kitchens a single-family
6 dwelling may have or the eating arrangements
7 of the family and therefore, they determine
8 that two kitchens do not make a two-family
9 home and permitted the continuation of the
10 kitchen.
ii . I . ask the Board to approach this
12 problem which .you must after all .of the data
13 given to you. which is voluminous -- in a
14 simpler fashion, look at your own code,
15 Section 100-13, your definitional section,
16 the applicable or relevant provisions. of the
17 definition of a one-family dwelling, the
18 definition of dwelling..units and the.
19 definition of family. I alluded to this
20 argument last time I was here, but I just
21 want to flush it out based upon the Wilmott
22 decision.
23 A one-family dwelling is defined as a
24 detached building .containing one dwelling
25 unit only, a dwelling unit -- defined as a
1 109
2 building or entirely self-contained portion
3 thereof consisting of minimum square footage
4 containing complete housekeeping facilities
5 for one family. The entirely self-contained
6 building, or entirely self-contained portion
7 thereof, is very critical to this case since
8 in both the logical and actual sequence of
9 events here, what principal Building
10 Inspector Lessard did was ensure that both
11 floors of the structure, which you will in
12 fact be inspecting this weekend, are
13 interrelated. The hallway upstairs where
14 the bedrooms are is one long hallway.
15 Downstairs there is an interconnection
16 between the kitchen area and the great room
17 area where we seek to place another kitchen.
18 The final definition is that the
19 family which in your code is defined as one
20 or more persons occupying the dwelling unit
21 as a single, nonprofit housekeeping unit .
22 More than five persons 18 years of age or
23 older, exclusive of domestic servants, not
24 related by blood, marriage or adoption,
25 should not be considered a family.
1 110
2 It is our contention that the
3 utilization of this property by the two
4 owners, the .sisters and. the husband of one
5 sister, since 1977 , which will remain the
6 same, fits into the definition of family and
7 that the definition .of dwelling -unit is
8 consistent with what we are seeking since it
9 is -- there is only one dwelling unit here,
10 since it is, it must be an entirely self-
ii contained unit and the only thing that is
12 self-contained here in view of the
13 interrelationship between the two parts of
14 the home is. the entire. structure. In other
15 words, there is no wall between the first
16 -- within the first floor. There is no wall
17 within the second floor.
is And to get ahead just for the minute
19 at the end of a few minutes when I conclude,
20 it is clear that what you are supposed to be
21 doing under the Court of Appeals case -- a
22 recent case which I will cite, is consider
23 the actual use, not the potential .use of
24 this house. If we get into the situation
25 where we are saying we could put a wall here
� 111
2 and we could put a wall there and make this
3 into a two-family house, madness lies that
a way because that could be done in any house
5 in this town. According to the case which I
6 will cite, the Court of Appeals case,- you
7 must consider the actual not potential use.
8 Indeed, to consider the potential use would
s be arbitrary and capricious. When you
10 consider your definition, when you consider
11 the .Wilmott case and the actual use of the
12 house by the sister owners of the house for
13 some. 13 or 14 years, I think the analysis in
14 Wilmott could be followed .by you.
15 In the Wilmott case they insisted on
16 the covenant that this house would not be
17 used as a two-family. We suggested a
18 covenant to the Building Department in.
is December of last year, which got us going on
20 the second start of the building permit and
21 we. would certainly be willing to put it in a
22 recordable form because there is no
23 intention to use it as anything but .a
24 single-family house.
25 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there any
112
2, anticipation to put a second kitchen in?
3 MR. CARDINALE: Yes, because what we
4 are here for is the variance of the front
5 yard stoop and an interpretation that,
6 contrary to what Mr. Lessard indicates, a
7 second kitchen does not make a two-family
8 dwelling. So we seek to have ..a second
9 kitchen in .the two-family dwelling. identical
10 to the Wilmott situation and identical . to
11 some of the cases like .Baskin: (phonetic
12 spelling) , cited- to you by various - by
13 myself -and Ms. Ongioni . .
-1 14 The. second item the Board.asked me to
15 provide.was the availability of the home for
16 inspection. As I understand it, the home is
17 available to you -- (inaudible) . -
18 The third. area. of inquiry was the
19 square footage of the stoop area and
20 evidence.- of interrelationship of the. kitchen
21 and great room: Unfortunately, you have the
22 only set, of .plans. You have the set of
23 plans approved in March of 1989 for the
24 original building permit and you have the
25 set of amended plans which I handed up at
113
2 the first hearing in July, which reflects
3 the amended plans insisted upon by Mr.
4 Lessard to further interrelate the two
.5 floors of this house. So I would refer to
6 you that, and if I can be of any. further
7 help I certainly will be.
g To get to the second purpose, the
9 second purpose was to obtain the presence of
10 Mr. Lessard for any inquiry from the Board
11 and confirm the sequence of events which I
12 related. I understood he would be here. I
13 understood that based upon a letter I sent
14 on October 20th to him, which I know he
15 received, which I am handing up as an
16 exhibit, and concerning which . I discussed
17 -.- I discussed the letter with him on
18 October 19th and conferenced with him in his
19 office at which time he said he would be
20 here, and in that letter I indicated that
21 since this matter has been delayed and that
22 since my clients are anxious to get going,
23 they are considering removing, pending the
24 ZBA final decision, the offending plumbing
25 pipes from the wall of the great room in
114
2 order . so that the stop .work order may be
3 lifted -- seeking thereby to define,. as I
a indicated at the last meeting, that the only
5 argument with the Building Department in
6 this matter from the petitioner's standpoint
7 was that:
8 1) The area survey shows an average
s setback of 26 and we have . an 18-foot setback
i0 with the stoop, 30 with the house.
ii Therefore we needed to get the front yard
12 variance if we included the stoop in the
i3 plans; and
is 2) Victor Lessard's concern_, as he
15 legitimately had a right to be, about
16 whether this was a one or. two-family home,
i7 insisting that even with the interrelation-
i8 ship between the -- within the floors of. the
19 home, that we could not pipe for a kitchen
20 or even a wet bar in the great room and I am
21 seeking, as you know, an interpretation.
22 Under :the law,. I am permitted to put a
23 second kitchen as long as it is a one-family
24 home.
25 I. spoke with him about this letter,
1 115
2 indicating that request to lift the stop
3 work order, if we removed the pipes, which
4 he indicated he would do. in June. He
5 indicated to me October 19th there would be
no problem with -- if we removed that he
7 would have an inspection made and that would
8 alleviate that problem, remaining therefore,
9 only the problem ,as to the front yard stoop.
10 This is the letter of October 2nd.
11 (Applicant's counsel handing above-
_ 12 mentioned document to the Board. )
13 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
14 MR. CARDINALE: I don'.t know if the
15 Board has heard from Mr. Lessard in any
16 other capacity, but he indicated a
17 willingness to speak.
18 THE CHAIRMAN: He is ill tonight.
19 MR. CARDINALE:. And to .confirm the
20 sequence that -- he couldn't do it --. -he is
21 not here -- but to confirm the sequence of
22 events I indicated and the issues he was
23 upset about that led .to you.
24 THE CHAIRMAN: If Mr. Lessard was
25 here tonight I would conclude this hearing
1 116
2 on the 15th based upon the fact that we . are
3 inspecting . it. this weekend. I will take
4 full responsibility. for .my timeliness in
5 asking our- assistant here to call you last
6 Friday. I should have asked, her to call. you
7 last Wednesday and then we would have been
8 able to- schedule it.
9 MR. CARDINALE: You are anticipating
10 keeping it open to the 15th?
11 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, and with Ms.
12 Ongioni 's permission, I -- there are
13 specific questions that she has. I would
14 like to: give these questions to the present
15 Building Inspector that's here., and have him
16 carry them. back to Mr. Lessard so he would
17 be. able to answer the questions at the next
18 regularly scheduled hearing.
19 MS. ONGIONI :. That is fine._
20 THE CHAIRMAN: And, of - course, there .
21 may be issues that we may have. I have two
22 -or three questions that I would like you to
23 think about between now and the next
24 meeting, that _I don't understand the purpose
25 of the two front doors. That is one
l
1 117
2 question.
3 And the other question I don't
a understand is the separate tanks for the
5 heating system. And the third question I
6 have is, is. there a meter or an interrupt
7 between the existing electric meter and that
8 of the second. -- and I can' t call it a
s dwelling unit -- so I will call it . a second
10 interrelated apartment.
11 MR. CARDINALE: The first part --
12 THE CHAIRMAN: The question is: What
13 is the purpose of the two front doors if
14 they are interrelated structures? The
15 second question is the purpose of the two
16 heating systems, two oil tanks. And number
17 three, .they have -- you have already stated
18 to me that there is only one eletric meter.
19 My question is, is there an interrupt
20 meter between the two so as to calculate the
21 el,ectricity use in the second dwelling
22 structure? In other words, .the opposite
23 side -- is the wiring segregated from one
24 side to the other side in some manner or
25 fashion of which -- to -- of which the
� 118
2 applicant could calculate the electric uses
3 in the second apartment structure?
4 MR. CARDINALE: I ' ll get you those
5 answers.. Rather than give them to you now,
6 let me give them to you in writing:
7 THE CHAIRMAN: There is no reason to
s hit you.cold .with these things. That. is the
9 purpose of continuing the hearing:
10 MR'. CARDINALE: To sum up and get
11 these exhibits . out of my hand and. into
12 yours, since .the second reason for the
13 meeting will be deferred until Victor
14 Lessard can answer questions. The third
15 reason for the meeting was to . allow me to
16 address the supplemental argument and letter
17 of October 22 which has since appeared in
is your file. -
19 I would like to spend some time
20 studying both the cases and the essential
21 arguments of the neighbor Tober, and I don't
22 -- I think you suspect, and rightly so, that
23 there -- since this. house is a big house, it
24 is a two-story. house. If not a . two-family
25 house, . it is .certainly a two=story house and
1 119
2 Mr. Tober has a piece directly behind this
3 piece and the -- a lot; and therefore his
4 view will necessarily be somewhat affected.
5 Aside from whatever personal objection he
6 may have, I want to address the legal
7 objection.
g Ms. .Ongioni , for the opponent, says
9 she would like you to consider that this
10 -- her opposition as an application to
ii revoke the permit. She would -- and then
12 she would like you to have the house scaled
13 down or preferably torn down. She would
14 also ask you to declare this a two-family
15 house with or without a kitchen. I have
16 constantly stated that I had reservations,
17 and now I state I am convinced that the
is Board in this particular instance does not
19 have the authority to do that -- the
20 jurisdiction -- and it is a little bit
21 complex but here it goes.
22 We both cited the Town Law, Article
23 216, Section 267 , and the. Southold Town
24 Zoning Code, Article 27 , 100-271 -- the same
25 section. We have the appeal and review
120
2 powers. I conclude that jurisdiction is not
3 with the Board to reach any issue other than
4 the .stoop variance and the issue of
5 interpretation of a second kitchen making a
6 two-family or not. The reason I say this is
7 even looking at the cases that are recited
g by Ms. Ongioni , you cannot -- it is my
9 quarter, so to speak. I .think it is -$160,
10 this application.
11 This application, as I stand before
12 you, I have the burden of proof as the
13 applicant in establishing to you that I am
14 entitled to the variance and I am asking you
15 essentially to interpret a code section. If
16 Ms. Ongioni, on behalf .of Mr. Tober, wishes
17 to make an application, she may have the
18 status to do that but she cannot do it on my
19 application because if she were to make that
20 application the .burden of proof would switch
21 to her. For that reason alone you cannot
22 allow a piggy-back of her request or
23 application to consider this motion or
24 revoke the permit and tear down the house.
25 In the cases she cites, it was the neighbor
121
2 who was making the motion, the petition to
3 the ZBA, not the subject owner.
4 The. second issue I want to address is
5 this: I don't believe that you will in fact
6 tell - these people to tear down their house.
7 I don't also believe, as you have heard,
8 that the neighbors who have appeared on the
s first meeting even wanted that. They all
i0 ' indicated that would not be a fair
ii conclusion. I argue that you do not have
12 the jurisdiction .to do that. However, even
13 if you did -- you could not because the
14 building permit was not improperly or
15 illegally granted in the first place.
i6 Although that .was repeated numerous times,
i7 it is. just not true.
18 The argument advanced is that this
i9 building permit ' is not legal . They are
20 really quite straightforward. There are
2i about four of them. First she argues lot
22 coverage. Then she withdraws lot coverage
23 because she says it is 26. It turns out to
24 be 13.5. Then she says that we need front,
25 rear or side yard variances -we have never
1 122
2 applied for .because: it was never .necessary
3 to apply for any variance except for the
4 stoop. We never -applied for the use
5 variances. - .The, onl y thing we ever applied
6 for was an area- variance for the. .stoop. . The
7 reason for..this is we did not;need any other
8 variances. The: Building..Department; agrees,
9 with. us .here. My analysis concludes we .
10 don't. - -We see the same .section, . 100 -- for
11 opposite. purposes .-- 100.242 . of the code .
12, which says -- . I:..hate_ to ,quote the. code to
13 you- -- basically.what, it_ says is that as
14 long as you do :not increase the. non-
15 conformance you can go. ahead. We- did not .
16 increase the nonconformance. .. If you look at
17 the survey, ..you .will see our setbacks remain
18 the same.; . front, with the exception of. the
19 front. stoop, remains .the same; back remains
20 the. same; .side yard we don't need any . .
21 relief.- The only relief we. needed was the
22 . stoop. That -is the only relief we sought.
23 The other argument she brought up is
24 the tidal wetlands violation,, New York Rules
25 and Regulations. 6614B. . First of all , if you
1 123
2 look -at the map and calculate the 50 - foot
3 for the street, it ' is more than 300 feet.
4 But even if . it. were not, again we have a
5 half-presentation. In the section she
6 quotes, Ms. Ongioni, defining adjoining
7 areas under the DEC Rules and Regs, one, it
a says 300 feet landward; two says there is an
9 exception as evidenced by both a copy of the
10 regulations themselves, I am handing up, and
11 the DEC form that everyone who deals with
12 the. DEC has seen, .including this Board, that
13 a review .has been made. New York DEC
14 doesn't have jurisdiction because it is
15 landward of the substantial manmade
16 structure greater than 100 feet in length
17 constructed prior ' to September 20, 1977 .
is That is Inlet. Lane. So it is more than 300
19 feet. Even if it wasn't, the DEC is not
20 involved because of that section which
21 incidently is directly behind .the section
22 that was .quoted to you.
23 (Applicant's counsel handing above-
24 mentioned document to. the. Board. )
25 THE CHAIRMAN: I just want to ask you
1 124
2 a favor, Mr. Cardinale, and as well Ms.
3 Ongioni . We would like to conclude -- wrap
4 it up a little bit so that we have. a final
5 hearing and I would dearly like to see us
6 get out of here by 11:00 tonight.
7 MR. CARDINALE: What I am going to do
8 in this case; and it is perfect timing, is
9 to conclude at least this presentation and
10 I.' ll have another chance to speak to you on
ii the 15th.
12 The- fifth point is very important to
13 understand. Maybe you do. The only
14 variance. we ever sought here is the area
15 variance for the step, period. And it was
16 the. result of .that 300-foot setback, survey
17 requested by Mr. Lessard in December of
18 1989, six months, nine months, excuse- me,
19 after the issuance of the building permit.
20 The code section justifies 26 feet. without
21 the relief of this Board. We are seeking
22 18. No other variance was ever sought.
23 The only other thing we sought is
24 that interpretation. We had -- we make the
25 argument that practical difficulty,
1 125
2 unnecessary- hardship- and consistency with
3 the: neighborhood surroundings: Only in
4 regards to . the stoop; that is the only
5 variance we 'are applying. for. What is
6 happening in. a. lot of the responsive papers,
7 when we: are getting into things like self-
8 imposed hardship, lack o.f .good faith, we .are
9 talking about the .house.
10 We are .not asking fora variance for
ii the house. Our position is the house is
12 legal . It doesn't require variances. The
13 Building. Department never . said .to us to get
14 this. All that we are requesting, all that
15 is- relevant to the areas of hardship,
16 imposed. or otherwise, or practical .
17 difficulty or. .consistency with the
18 neighborhood, is the stoop. All .of the
is other case law has to do with convincing you
20 that the proper interpretation of the second
21 kitchen, under the case law, is .to permit
22 it.
23 I:.have a number of .cases I was going
24
to .quote. I am going to stop right there,
25 because I .can conclude the next time we meet
1 126
2. by giving .you: those cases.
3 THE .CHAIRMAN: . We are continuing this
4 November 29th, not on the 15th.
5 MR. CARDINALE: November .29th. Okay.
6 .. .. :.THE .CHAIRMAN: Mr. Fisher, would you
7 take this and hand-carry .this back to Mr.
s Lessard, and,.ask . him please to be available
s on the .29th. We will afford you the time
10 when we get to that. Thank you so much,
11 sir.
12 (Chairman handing above mentioned
13 document to .Mr. Fisher. )
14 THE CHAIRMAN: . Ms. .Ongioni, I request
15 some forbearance on your part if you could
16 waive.. any discussions tonight to -- I have
17 to- admit to you what ,the situation is. I
18 will .do it on the record. If we' go past
19 11:00, we must pay the Court Reporter much,
20 much more money. It only makes sense in
21 this fiscal economy not to do that. .
22 MS. ONGIONI : May I say two words?
23 THE CHAIRMAN: Certainly. -
24 MS. ONGIONI : I will defer to your
25 request this . evening because it is .very
1 127
. 2 late, .but my only.:-- and I will reserve my
3 comments till the next or to submit them to
4 the Board in advance.
5 My only concern is that -there may be
6 some participants here tonight who..might
7 like to make a few comments .and. they may not
s be available at .the.. next .hearing. I:don't
9 know: if there are any.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: . Is there anyone here
11 that may not make the next meeting?
12 Seeing no hands, I make a motion .
13 recessing to the next regularly scheduled
14 hearing. We thank everybody for their
15 courtesy.
16 MR. DOYEN: Second.
17 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? ,
18 MR. DOYEN: - Aye.
19 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
20 MR. DINIZIO: Aye.
21 (Time noted: 10:40 p.m. )
22 (Presiding -Chairman, Mr. James.
23 Dinizio, in the matter of'.Village Marine,
24 said hearing commenced outside the presence
25 of a Court Reporter due to circumstances
1 128
2 beyond. anyone's control . )
3 MR. CUDDY: I just indicated that we
4 are here because we . are asking for a larger
5 building and also the boat rack. We needed
6 setbacks because the lot is a small lot.
7 The lot is in excess .of 20,000 feet. It is
8 a permitted use. We. are not: asking. to
s expand to a nonconforming use. I think it
10 is important because the opposition .in part
ii -- and part of it seems to be coming from
12 the Planning Board.. I .asked last time that
13 they corresponded with this Board to have
14 the opportunity to reply. They did
15 correspond subsequent to our last hearing.
16 I wrote this Board. I believe my letter is
17 part of . the Board's file.
is I today have been made aware of the
19 additional letter from the Planning Board
20 claiming that effectively the proposed plan
21 with the additional parking violates five
22 different sections of the code. They are
23 speaking of Section 100-210, 100-212, 100-
2a 213, 100-214 and 100-215 -- are sections
25 having to do with landscaping and buffers.
129
2 The first section is a purpose
3 clause. . It says the purpose is to improve
4 and beautify, and I think quite- frankly that
5 is part of -what our application is.
6 Section 212 has to do -with
7 landscaping in the front yard. The front
s yard is 37 feet. It is blacktopped. It has
s been that way for years. It is next to the
10 Hess gas station. . If we put in a grass area
11 it would probably be about 15 feet by 15
12 feet. It .would seem to me that that's going
13 to be of no consequence or of no effect
14 whatsoever.
15 So the other section. talks about
16 transitional buffer requirements. It has to
17 do with when- there is a lot in a residential
is district that backs onto our lot. We Are in
19 a situation where there is a right of way.
20 That situation doesn't apply to us.
21 214 is . a parking area requirement.
22 It. has: to do with landscaping and paved
23 parking. We don't have paved parking in the
24 rear or the side of our building. It
25 doesn't apply to us.
r t t
t
1 130
2 215 has to. do . with shoreline erosion.
3 It has to. do with vegetation and plantings.
4 We have a-.bulkhead which -was .simply designed
5 to save erosion. Virtually none of the
6 things -- and I 'm sort of disappointed the
7 Planning Board would go to the length it did
8 -- and yet this letter i.s. not germane to the
9 application. They talk . in this letter about
10 the proposed boat rack that is located in
11 the transitional buffer area. That is not
12 true. I have with me tonight, Mr.
13 Glueckert, the architect, who is going to
14 address some of the questions about parking.
15 I have Mr. Young, who would like to
16 reiterate his concern about the boat rack,
17 to explain to you why it is needed.
18 I would point out simply to this
19 Board that I am surprised at the opposition.
20 The opposition is simply saying we should
21 not have a marina. That is not. really the
22 function of what we are here before .as I
23 understand the Zoning Board of Appeals. It
24 is a legislative body. It is- a-. quasi-
25 judicial body. No one here is saying do I
4 1
1 131
2 like this or don't I like this. At least, I
3 hope they are not because I don't think
a that's what this is all about. .
5 What this is about is my clients
6 attempting to take a situation, which is not
7 necessarily onerous, but certainly would be
8 improved upon. He has a building that.
g requires attention. It also requires
i0 additional size because he doesn't. have
ii additional size. He can't take the boats-
i2 out of his yard. If he takes the boats out
13 of the yard and puts them in the building,
14 he can then get parking improved and take
15 the cars off the street. I only see this as
16 a plus. I. cannot see this as a minus in any
i7 sense.
is If we are defeated in this appl.ica-
i9 tion -- to be permitted to use the property
20 just as it is -- and I don't see that that
21 is going to benefit the Town. I would very
22 much hope the .Board considers the fact this
23 i`s an. improvement. It is not a detriment.
24 I would ask Mr. Glueckert to address
25 the parking questions to the Board.
1 132
2 'MR. GLUECKERT: . .Bruce..Glueckert, of
3 Gluecker.t and Wieber, Architects.
4 I . would .like to just .point out one of
5 the paragraphs in the Planning. Boar.d's
6 letter, which indicates certain stall
7 parking. The stalls do not have a 22-foot
8 aisle behind them. There..are three spaces,
9 or four spaces, .that have a 20-foot backup.
10 I. would .1-ike . to point out that this ..is a
11 small site, odd-shaped site, and difficult
12 to work-parking in at.-all : I managed to put
13 29 stalls: on. .
14 However, if we look -at this, .this is
15 not a typical retail operation. where there
16 is constant traffic flow on the site. The
17 cars will be parked there for the day, most
18 of the day, and will not .be. moved and
19 generally the people . who .will :be. visiting
20 the site will have been to the site .before
21 and will continue to visit the site and. will
22 know the parking layout. .Thank you.
23 THE CHAIRMAN: Anybody else?
24 MR. . CUDDY: I would also ask David
25 Young, who is the operator of the business.
1 133
2 MR. YOUNG.: . : My name is David Young.
3 I operate Village Marine. I would just like
4 to. reiterate what Mr. . Cuddy said.-, that this
5 is definitely not an expansion. We are only
6 trying to take down a ramshackle.•building
7 and improve the appearance of the yard and
8 the Village Marine itself, and give us more
9 room to park in and make it a more
10 attractive marina.
11 THE CHAIRMAN: Can I ask you one
12 thing? The building itself, is that going
13 to be used for storage or boats -- mostly
14 repair?
15 MR. YOUNG: Just repair.
16 -THE CHAIRMAN: You are not. going- to
17 have racks in there?
18 MR. YOUNG: No. No -- building is
19 just going to be mainly to get us. inside.
20 For instance, this evening we .had a boat
21 that a sign painter was coming in to letter
22 and it wouldn't fit into the existing
23 building and the guy came down there. There
24 was dew on the outside of the boat. and he
25 couldn't letter it.
1 134
2 It:s . just --., we go through added
3 expenses. It is very restrictive to do
4 business in the way the operation is set up
5 now. It is not 1950 anymore, as far as
6 marinas and in order to make ends meet you
7 have to do a littl.e bit more. We are trying
8 to streamline it and make it look better.
9 THE CHAIRMAN: More is not
10 necessarily more boats in the water.
11 MR. YOUNG: Not at all . We don't
12 plan. on expanding the marina or putting more
13 boats in the water. We are only doing it to
14 neaten the yard up. The rack would be in
15 order to clear along the bulkhead side so we
16 can have. parking. for our customers along the
17 bulkhead, and the building is so that we can
18 work inside in the wintertime.
19 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank ,you.
20 Is there anybody else?
21 MS. MARRINER: Jeanne.Marriner. I
22 also am co-chairman of the Peconic Bay
23 Association Task Force. I am putting some
24 additional comments because. I have had a
25 chance to review the record. I do not see
1 135
2 the changes. So this won't apply to the
3 changes that are not in the record.
4 As the Southold Town Planning Board
5 has stated for the record, the Bay Avenue
g Village Marine property is already
7 overdeveloped and parking requirements
8 cannot be met with off-site parking because
9 this is always subject to change. Not only
10 is the property overdeveloped, but the lot
11 itself is also nonconforming because it does
12 not meet .the requirements of the district in
13 which it is located. Furthermore, because
14 it is located in the Peconic Estuary
15 Critical Environmental - Area, it is- a Type I
16 action and requires a long form
17 environmental assessment to filled out by
18 the applicant, which has not been completed.
19 To grant further variances, clearly
20 runs counter to the expressed purpose of the
21 Zoning Code of the Town of Southold as
22 stated in Section 100-240 - Nonconforming
23 Uses and Buildings. The purpose of said
24 article and section is to "reduce or
25 minimize impacts of uses and buildings which
1 136
2 do not -conform to the use or -bulk
3 requirement as set forth 'in this chapter."
4 (Article XXIV)
5 Furthermore, Section 100-242, Non-
6 conforming. Buildings With -Conforming Uses,
7 does not .provide for the demolition- of a
8 buil.ding. It also prohibits the- creation .of .
9 new nonconformance through remodeling-'and
10 reconstruction. The applicant seeks to add
11 a storage rack which would accommodate 30
12 additional boats and further add to the . lot
13 coverage. Plus .the parking. requirements for
14 the additional boats alone, would, if
15 adhered to, cover one-half of the entire
16 property. The storage rack is considered a
17 structure.
18 In addition, .it .appears .that .the 20
19 percent landscaping requirement required has
20 been completely ignored, thus adding further
21 to the nonconformity. And the landscaping
22 is for mitigating purpose, to. control runoff
23 into the tributary of the estuary: --
24 regardless of whether there is a bulkhead or
25 not. A proper -site plan should have
1 137
2 provided for approximately 4,000 square feet
3 . of landscaping. , . -
4 The proof required for an area
5 variance, to be provided by the applicant,
6 is .that:
7 1) There will be no substantial
8 change .in the character of the- neighborhood;
9 . 2) the degree. of the variance will
10 bring minimal change to the property;
11 3) the difficulty cannot be obviated
12 by other methods such- as off-site location;
13 4) justice will be served by .
14 granting the variance.
15 The practical difficulties might be
16 obviated by the applicant moving repair work
17 to. an office location such as the one
18 currently available next to the landfill ,
19 which, as I understand it, was built to
20 assist local businesses with nonconforming
21 problems.
22 I believe the Board of Appeals has.
23 heard many complaints about the traffic and
24 safety problems at the corner of Bay Avenue
25 and Main Road. This is .fact. There was an
1 J
138
2 accident there just .this Sunday. There. is
3 someone in the hospital right now.
4 Therefore, it is neither serving justice nor
5 is it in the interest of the safety and
6 welfare of the community to allow further
7 expansion which will bring increased traffic
8 hazards.
9 Under Section. 100-271 of the Code. --
10 Powers and Duties of the Board of Appeals,
>> it states that the Board of Appeals must
12 consider ,.the. effect. on the community. and
13 must bear in mind .that the burden of proof
14 that there is no threat to safety rests on
15 the applicant, who must produce concrete
16 evidence to counter the. negative .impact.
17 It would appear that the only
18 practical difficulties that exist are. those
19 self-created by the applicant .who wants to
20 further. expand development on an already
21 overdeveloped, over-varianced property. The
22 New York State Enabling Act. for Town Zoning
23 states: "The granting of variances is to be
24 sparingly exercised. " If the ZBA does not
25 exercise its powers sparingly, the Board
1 139
2 leaves itself•-and- the-Town open to
3 litigation.
4 Thank you. I would like to ..give you
5 each a copy of the booklet produced by. the
g Peconic Bay-Task Force, which. might. help you
7 in understanding what more development on
8 the waterfront that is not property
9 mitigated, how it- can- effect the estuary.
10 . (Ms. Marriner handing above-mentioned
11 document to the Board..)
12 MR. FLYNN: - F. - M. Flynn, • resident of
13 the Town. I have several -objections to this
14 application but due to the lateness of the
15 hour and in the interest of conserving
16 funds, if you will accept my objections in
17 writing, - I- will be glad to submit them in
18 that fashion. I . would like to .make .one
19 comment, however. This property is a non-
20 conforming property by- definition of Section
21 100-13 of the Town Code. It has to be
22 considered in the context of a nonconforming
23 property.
24 -. -Now may I submit my objections. in..
25 writing subsequent to this evening?
1 140
2 THE CHAIRMAN: Certainly.
3 MS. JOHNSON: My name is Sherry
4 Johnson and I am currently serving as the
5 Program Coordinator for the North Fork
6 Environmental Council . I would like to take
7 this opportunity to reiterate the. NFEC11s
8 position on this matter, which was stated at
9 a previous hearing held on September 26th.
10 The NFEC is opposed to the granting
11 of the variances requested by Village
12 Marine. . The site is already in,
13 nonconformance with the M-I District in
14 respect to lot size and width. A lot of at
15 least 40,OOO - square feet that includes a
16 width of 150 _feet is required. The
17 applicant .is asking .now for further relief
18 from parking and landscaping requirements
19 and for increased lot coverage. The
20 proposed structures will bring the .
21 percentage of lot coverage up- to 20.8
22 percent of the site. The coverage allowed
23 under the Bulk Schedule is 30 percent, based
24 on a 40,000 square foot lot, which this is
25 not. In fact, the Zoning Code itself states
t �
1 141
2 that "no building shall be used and no
3 building or part thereof shall be erected or
4 altered' in the M-I District unless the same
5 conforms to the Bulk Schedule".
6 Instead of adding further to the
7 traffic and congestion at this location and
8 to the further degradation of James Creek,
g the NFEC asks you to deny this application.
10 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. You will
11 furnish us with copies of that?
12 MS. JOHNSON: Yes .
1 13 THE CHAIRMAN: Anybody else wish to
14 make any comments?
15 MR. CUDDY: I have several comments .
16 First is if Mr. Flynn is going to have the
17 privilege of putting something in writing
18 after the hearing, I would like to respond.
19 I assume he can do that within a reasonable
20 amount of time.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: I would like to have
22 it before the next. scheduled meeting
, which
23 would be the 15th. That is, any written
24 comments.
25 (Inaudible)
J
k
1 142
2 THE CHAIRMAN: The loth, is that
3 okay, Mr. Flynn?
4 MR. FLYNN: I will be glad to submit
5 them in writing within the next week.
6 THE CHAIRMAN: Is that agreeable to
7 you? . The 15th will be final comments.
8 Final-- comments would have to be in by the
9 15th, by you or anyone else. Would . that be
10 okay?
11 MR. CUDDY: Yes. The other point I
12 would like to make, without belaboring, is
13 the reason that we are here is because the
�1 14 lot .is smaller than we would like it to be.
15 One of the practical difficulties is that we
16 have a ,unique situation in that we have a
17 lot that has been for more than 35 years
18 that size and it is a permitted use. The
19 legislative body of this Town has said, you
20 can have a marina at that site, and we are
21 here because we are trying to do something
22 we think is improving that marina. That is
23 precisely the reason the application was
24 made. Everybody is telling us something
25 that I think is. self-evident, that the lot
I�
1
w
1 143
2 is small and doesn't conform. I believe we
3 meet the criteria that is listed.
4 ( Inaudible)
5 I think it is similar in this
6 application to the Port of Egypt
7 application.
8 (Inaudible)
9 THE CHAIRMAN: If you made an
10 application to this Board, how many boats
11 could you store on that property right now?
12 What would your limit be? Would you have a
13 limit as to how many boats could be parked
14 on that property?
15 MR. CUDDY: There is physically --
16 there is a limit to the size of the lot .
17 Mr. Young probably would say to you that he
18 stores "V number of boats there. I would
19 say that certainly perhaps he can store more
20 than 30 boats there.
21 MR. YOUNG: When we bought the place,
22 before we bought it the Markowitz (phonetic
23 spelling) had boats all the way to the fence
24 where you couldn't drive into the driveway.
25 What we did when we went through there was
S-
1 144
2 -- one of the first things we did was rent
3 an external piece of property in order to
4 store boats so we could alleviate the boats
5 out in the yard. This has been our
6 direction all the way along.
7 , MR. CUDDY: He doesn't store. boats.
8 What he does is he has boats that they
g repair. In other words, there is no storage
10 that takes place. And I think he testified
11 last time, he takes the storage boats off
12 the site.
13 THE CHAIRMAN: What I was getting at
14 is if no application was made, he would have
15 every right to store boats on that piece of
16 property. That 's all I have.
17 If I don't hear anything more, I
18 would like to close the hearing. I make a
19 motion to close the hearing.
20 MR. GRIGONIS: Second.
21 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor?
22 MR. DOYEN: Aye.
23 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.
24 (Time noted: 11:00 p.m. )
25
1 INDEX 145
2
3 APPEAL PAGE
NUMBER APPLICANT NUMBER
4
3969 ANDREW BURKARD 2
5
3974 DONALD L. OSANI (for GEORGE
6 BRUDERMANN, JR. ) 5
7 3980 VIRGINIA OLGA LEE 8
8 3978 DONALD and DOROTHY SWAHN 10
9 3971 VALERIE M. KRAMER 14
10 3976 THOMAS and MARIAN SANTACROCE 19
11 3972 PETROL STATION LTD. 22
12 3977 BETTY J. COPIN 31
13 3979 THOMAS J. GORMAN 42
14 3968 IRENE R. MILLER 44
15 3975 ARTHUR G. CARLSON 54
16 3788 SUN REFINING and MARKETING 87
17 3955 DOMINICK SBLENDIDO and
A. AURICCHIO 105
18
3938 VILLAGE MARINE 128
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1 145A
2
3
4 C E R T I F I C A T I O N
5
6
7 I , GAIL ROSCHEN, do hereby certify that
8 I am an Official Court Reporter and that the
9 foregoing constitutes a true and correct
10 transcript of the Town of Southold Zoning
11 Board of Appeals hearing of November 1, 1990,
12 according to my stenographic notes .
13 0 lJ a
GAIL ROSCHEN
14 Official Court Reporter
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25