Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-04/30/1991 HEARING � J PANITSwRIPT OF. HEARINGS SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING OF TUESDAY, APRIL 30, 1991 Board Members Present: Chairman Gerard P. Goehringer Members: Grigonis, Dinizio and Villa Members Absent: Doyen (Due to Serious Illness) Linda Kowalski, Z.B.A. Secretary and approximatelye30 persons in the audience. Appl. No. 4015 Applicant(s.) : Melvin and Mollie Kurs Location of Property: 360 Miami Ave, Peconic, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-67-6-16 The Chairman opened the hearing at 7: 33 pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey produced by Roderick Van Tuyl P.C. on January 29, 1981 indicating a two story frame house on a lot of approximately 48 feet 4 inches by 140 feet 4 inches and I have somewhat centrally located a little more toward the easterly side of the property and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Are the Kurs here? How do you do sir? Could I ask you to use the mike if you wouldn't mind. MR KURS: May I give you a couple of pictures? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Surely. MR KURS: These are of the interior, that' s the entire total floor. Now the westerly side of the house is up against a private dirt road which Ray Jacobs of the transportation department ascertained, I don' t know if he sent over a fax today, he- said he would. .CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes I have it, thank you. MR KURS: That it is not a Town road and the Assessor' s Office said that they would be sending you a communication to the fact that it' s not on the tax rolls and they said that you should be getting that in another two or three days and I understand that you would reserve decision on our application for the variance pending that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure. No problem sir. Page. 2 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Melvin and Mollie. Kurs Southold Z.B.A. MR KURS: Alright. It' s just, we' re new to the area here. This is our second year, we love it here, we find the house is a little small. We have three children, they and their spouses and the seven grandchildren fill up that downstairs, we are really, we are appealing for the variance. CHAIRMAN GOEHRING_ ER: Mr Kurs before you sit down what is the actual side yard on that side, I can't read it off the survey, is it 16 feet 2 inches? MR KURS: Yes it is. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And you are looking to build 14 feet? MR KURS: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, so you are looking for a 2 foot side yard? MR KURS: That' s right. That is up against that wooded area, it doesn' t have ingress, it. doesn't have egress and it' s, we feel it wouldn' t be inconveniencing anyone. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I just want to tell you, this Board has never granted a 2 foot side yard. MR KURS: I was aware of that,. really, but that patch of woods will never be anything other than a patch of woods. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Did you ever attempt to acquire any of that property from the Town or who? MR KURS: No we haven' t. CHAIRMAN. GOEHRINGER: Okay. MR KURS: We, in time, ,I mean we are new to the area and we would love to look into it and see about doing that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any particular reason why you chose to put this addition on the side yard rather than the rear yard or whatever? MR KURS: Well the house is one long house now. It' s small but it' s long and if we put it in the back two things, the kitchen area is in the way, there' s a kitchen and bathroom against that back wall and it would greatly add to the expense in order to do that and also it would give us a very elongated house. - -age 3 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Melvin and Mollie Kurs Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. I thank you sir. We' ll see if any other questions develop. MR KURS: Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You're welcome. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Is. there anybody who would like to speak against the application? Is there any questions from Board Members? Bob. MEMBER VILLA: Who owns the right of way next to it? Soundview. Ave. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I think Mr. Kurs has mentioned and. MEMBER VILLA: It' s not on the tax roll. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. It' s probably unknown owner. Probably unknown owner. Because it is shown as a paper street. MEMBER VILLA: Because I know in many cases .where it' s an unopened street and it' s not necessary you can seek abandonment of it and usually the property owners on both sides of the land end up dividing that piece of property. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR KURS: If that works out that would be fine, but again we wouldn' t be encroaching on anybody to do what we want to do now and seek to do that in the future. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright we thank you again. Hearing no further questions I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until we receive the correspondence. All in Favor- AYE. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for coming in. MR KURS: Thank you so much. Page 4 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Jessica W. Barnard Southold Z.B.A. Appl No. 4014 Applicant(s) : Jessica W. Barnard Location of Property: 4240 Paradise Point Road, Southold NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-81-3=7 The Chairman opened the hearing at 7 : 40 pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of the survey indicating a parcel that fronts on Little Peconic Bay and has a substantial amount of road frontage on Robinson Road. The applicant wishes to place a garage of approximately 24 by 36 approximately 100 feet from Robinson Road and approximately 80 feet from the southwesterly property line and I have a copy of the survey indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Boyd, would you like to be heard? MR BOYD: Good evening Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board. Edward Boyd, Southold NY for the applicant. I believe this application breaks down into two separate parts. The first part has to do with the placement of the structure itself. This is one of those properties that has no rear yard as the statute would normally set it forth, because the rear yard is the area between the house and Peconic Bay and is absolutely no space to build a garage or any thing else ' in that portion of the premises. So we are coming before you asking for permission to construct in the front yard of this particular house between the house and the road, Robinson Road which is an extension, a private extension of Paradise Point Road. The secondpart of the application will deal with the height of the structure. Mrs. Barnard, the owner' of the premises is going to construct a garage, it is of a modular type and the plans call for a building that is approximately 21 feet along the ridge line and some 23 feet to the top of the cupola and this is higher than 18 feet that is permitted under the Southold Town code. So we are coming to also ask for permission to go a little bit higher then is strictly allowed by the l code. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Where is, what is the upstairs. of the garage going to be used for? MR BOYD: If you would permit me, I.'m going to allow Mr. Barnard, the applicants husband to speak to this, because he' s the person who intends to use the upstairs. and he could answer better then I can. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mr. Boyd. MR BOYD: Douglass Barnard. Page 5 - Apri1. 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Jessica W. Barnard Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do sir? MR BARNARD: Good evening ladies and gentlemen. I intend to use it as an office and sort of a hideaway. . I retired last year and I have found that my wife and I have been residents out here for 24 years and we've been married for over 30. In retirement I 've got to get out of her hair and she out of mine and I need sort of a place to go, if you will, and I'm doing this back, in the west end, I 've rented a little office over a hardware store and I spend a good part of my day there. In the summer months I want to duplicate that same opportunity if I can and the Yankee Barn Company of Eastern New Hampshire puts up these shed carriage houses, if you will, that it' s actually designed to be a studio apartment upstairs over the garage. My intent would be to use it as an office pure and simply. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you for your candor in this. My question is what type of office? What would you be doing up there? Let me just give you an example and I do this .occasionally and I apologize for answering the question, asking a rhetorical question and answering it before. But maybe it may help you. We have told people. that accessory structures in the Town of Southold can be used for such things as the storage of automobiles, for changing of oil in you own automobile, and so on and so forth. If you don' t choose to do that in this particular case, you choose to use it for whatever private reason you want to use it for just tell us what the private reason is. MR BARNARD: Yeah, well I 'm still, I 've been an oil tanker for all my life and I'm still on an consultancy with my company and I have a fax machine and a phone line to that office. I do my own typing and what not, it' s a one man show, I don' t have a secretary or anybody assisting me. And also doing a little bit of trading in the market place, if you will, just to keep my hand in. So that' s the extent of it. I usually spend the morning, sometimes early afternoon, but then I 'm out of there.. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Assuming you had a room in your house and you chose not to use this, and you chose to put the fax machine and the telephone in the room in your house, you would be in effect doing the same exact thing in the room in your house. MR BARNARD: It doesn' t work. I 've tried it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. I don't mean, I know it doesn't work but I -mean that you would be doing exactly the same Page 6 - April 30, 19-91 Public Hearing - Jessica W. Barnard Southold. Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: thing is that correct? MR BARNARD: Oh yeah sure. I just wanted a place that I ' ll see her after lunch or what have you and I leave and this strikes me as being an ideal attainment of that object, if you will, I have an office over the garage, plus I do want the garage, the 24 years we've been there we get sap on the cars and I should have built the garage years ago, so this seems to be a good common purpose if you will. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, the only other question I have is what kind of utilities would be included other then electric in this building? MR BARNARD: Water for a bathroom. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Upstairs or downstairs? MR BARNARD: Up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What about heat? MR BARNARD: Yeah I think I would correct a mistake made in the original structure which is a summer cottage, we do have baseboard heating in the house but we' re, to try to stay there in the winter time is impossible you're heating the bay, so I think the way Eastern constructs these modular homes they have a R-30 5 or 6 factor in the insulation, so that would go a long way to assisting and just baseboard. heating could take the chill off . I wouldn' t have the same problem, but yes I would want heating in it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Electric or hot water? MR BARNARD: I 'm not sure yet, I haven' t discussed with them in detail which they recommend. Whatever they would recommend I think I 'd go for. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Just let. me give you the reason why I 'm asking you or grilling you in a nice way concerning these questions. Assuming you were to sell the house and the barn was entirely set up as an apartment., it could be utilized. that way assuming we granted it and that.' s what concerns me, because what you are actually doing is building a second structure on the same premises or asking us to approve one and that' s the issue that I've, it' s a border line issue and that' s what we are trying. . . MR BARNARD: I would tell you this, we have already set up a. will structure where my son and daughter are going to inherit Page 7 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Jessica W. Barnard Southold Z.B.A. MR BARNARD, cont'd: the house after we go on, so we intend. to keep it off the market, if you will, and in the family because the kids have all grown up there and I don' t want to see it leave the family. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I see. Okay. Well I thank you very much, before you sit down, I just want to ask my fellow Board members if. they have any questions. Jimmy, Bob, Bob. MR VILLA: Well I have the same concerns you do that it would end up being a second dwelling. If you are looking at it 24 by 36 is 864 square feet which is more than the minimum size of a house in the Town. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well it' s times two Bob. MR BARNARD: Well I would point out another thing is, a garage with a workshop area on the side and that takes up quite .a bit of that square footage and it' s built in a, what do you call it when the back slopes off? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Saltbox. MR BARNARD: Saltbox design and that again negates from some of the room upstairs.. MR BOYD: Do you want to show them a picture? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh, I have one in the file. Yes, it' s very tastefully done, there' s no question about it.. We did grant one similar to this only .it' s a gambrel in, on Jackson Street in New Suffolk and a very interesting situation because again we have the long lot that leads to the bay, this of course is much more visible because it' s closer to the road. However, there was no utilization of the upstairs. We thank you very much sir for coming in. We' ll see what else develops, thank you Mr. Boyd it was nice to see you again. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anybody who would like to speak against the application? Hearing no further questions, I make' a motion closing the hearing and rendering decision later. All in Favor - AYE. Page 8 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. Appl. No. 3988 `Applicant(s) : Antonio Vangi Location of Property: 645 Glen Court, Cutchogue, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-83-1-7 The Chairman reopened the hearing at 7:47 pm. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The next appeal is an appeal that we had opened two meetings ago. We were waiting fo-r a survey and we see the survey is in the file, we' ll ask Mr. Scaramucci if there' s any thing he would like to add to it. MR SCARAMUCCI: Yes. The survey that you have indicates a proposed addition of 28 foot in length, 12 foot in width. My application, it showed a 31 ,foot long extension. I told the surveyor about that and he hasn' t gotten me a revised 31 foot. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are actually looking for it for the full width of the house, is that correct? MR SCARAMUCCI : The depth of the house, yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. MR SCAR.AMUCCI: And if you have any questions I have nothing else to add. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That 5. 8 feet is what, is that the closest point it will be to the westerly property line? MR SCARAMUCCI : Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: ' Okay. And the 17 feet is to the house? MR SCARAMUCCI: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. MR SCARAMUCCI : That' s the existing setback now, 17 feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: If we are at the actual corner of the house as we stand in front on the left hand side, or the westerly side, the encroachment in the side yard could be even greater than 5 . 8 feet because of the diagonal of the property line, is that not correct? I mean we could in effect it could be 5. 2 feet or whatever it' s going to be right? MR SCARAMUCCI: Excuse me. I asked the surveyor to work it out at the closest possible point. A , Page 9 - April 30, 1991' Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. But my point is, if you go another 3 feet toward the front of the house. MR SCARAMUCCI: Or if you had brought the front of it out, yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In other words, you were going to hang the other 3 feet o€€ the back of the house. MR SCARAMUCCI: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh, okay, so this is where we are, we are cut and dry with this right now except for the depth_ going 3 feet more. MR SCARAMUCCI: Right, our encroachment on this side yard is . at the maximum, you must have got the wrong information from me for some reason or another but the proposed addition was. supposed 'to be 12 'by 31 feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right, okay, but the 31 feet will be protruding.. . . . MR SCARAMUCCI.: To the north. 'CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: To the north, okay. MR SCARAMUCCI: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, thank you. MR SCARAMUCCI : Your welcome. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have any questions of Mr. Scaramucci before this? MEMBER VILLA: I had a. question, it came up at the first hearing, that the framed shed that exists, on that back corner on the bluff, that had been down at the bottom of the bluff and the contractors raised it up when they did the bulkheading? MR SCARAMUCCI: I 'm not sure how -far down the bluff it was. But I know it was below the elevation of the back yard now. It looks to from looking over the, there' s a new bulkhead in the back now so I can't tell you exactly what the backyard looked like before, but it looks to me there have been some . kind of a garden or a work area part of the way down the bluff in the past. You can see some garden planter type railroad tie terraces., so I think it must have been down Page 10 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. MR SCARAMUCCI, cont'd: there, and it' s like 12 foot lower than the backyard -now. But I don' t know how the slope was in the original backyard, you know, if it was gradual or if it was very steep or what. You can tell it was lifted by a crane because there is cables still around it and it' s all crushed in on the sides. MEMBER VILLA: I just wondered because they said, you know, he wants to use it for storage, the garage for storage of lawn mowers and that and I wondered where he stored it before, his lawn mower if that was down below the base of the cliff, over the bluff, he couldn't have used it fora lawn mower. MR SCARAMUCCI : I know, again. I said I don't know how steep that bluff was before. MEMBER VILI.,A: Okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SCARAMUCCI: Your welcome. MEMBER DINIZIO: Excuse me. Could I ask a question? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure. MEMBER DINIZIO: Could you give me a measurement then from the top of the bluff to where the proposed back of the building will be? MR SCARAMUCCI: It' s exactly as it shows on the drawing. MEMBER DINIZIO: I thought you were going to move 3 feet back. MEMBER VILLA: Well it' s still the line of the house. MR SCARAMUCCI: 3 feet would bring it in line with the house. Whatever that, I think that' s, it' s not on here, I think it' s 55 feet. . Measuring from the retaining wall, the new retaining wall now to the back of the existing house and I don' t think changes. I think that' s pretty parallel. MEMBER DINIZIO: Could you get that for me? MR SCARAMUCCI: Sure. MEMBER DINIZIO: Thank you. Page 11 - April 30 ,. 1991 Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Thank you. MR SCARAMUCCI: Excuse me, do you want that done by the surveyor, or can I tape it off for you? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You can tape it off. MEMBER DINIZIO: You can tape it off. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure, that' s not necessary. Okay, is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor- of this application? Ms. Ongioni, you'd like to speak against? MS ONGIONI: Yes. I have a letter which I would like to submit to the Board, I reviewed the minutes of the last hearing and. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I know you don't agree with me. MS ONGIONI : You are right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why don' t you agree with me. MS ONGIONI: Well which portion? Which portion are you referring to Mr. Chairman? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The portion that states that people who live on the water do have a problem with accessory structures. MS ONGIONI: Well I made my position clear at the last hearing and that is that this is a self-imposed hardship. This was a structure that was constructed a number of years ago, it had a garage in the original building. The owners. decided to convert that garage which still has garage doors showing on the exterior of the building, they decided to convert that to living space, they now want to add an addition to the building to create a garage, which doesn't comply with the current zoning requirements. That is a self . imposed hardship and I think the law requires that .if the hardship is self-imposed that a variance be denied. Whether or not there .is not issue of an accessory building right now, or a detached building as you suggested at the last hearing. You have before you now an application for an addition to the existing structure. The purpose for this addition has been created because in the original structure the garage that existed was converted into other space and I think that precludes this Board from granting a variance and I've stated that in the memo that was submitted and I 've reiterated it in the letter that I've just submitted to you. Page 12 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you for answering that, my only questions is, the question I made if I can recollect it was, that if the Board were to deny a person the right to house his or her car, then they do have the right to come back with an application as any person has the right to come back with an application for an accessory structure. • MS ONGIONI : That' s correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The problem that we have is it blocks people waterview which we cannot prevent in any way, matter or form and that might be another avenue that the applicant might have. MS ONGIONI : But I, well that isn' t before the Board at this time. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand that, that was just a statement I made. Go ahead. MS ONGIONI: And if that application were made to the Board, well then the Board would be in a position of considering all the factors weighing into a decision and it would seem to me that an accessory building would be too close to the bluff. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The only reason why. . MS ONGIONI : It probably wouldn' t be permitted because it would be too close to the bluff. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The only reason why I raised that issue. is because this building could be surgically detached from this dwelling as it is in two houses down from this one. And that' s the reason why I raised that issue, but go ahead. MS ONGIONI : I think that would be something to be taken up in a separate application. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. MS ONGIONI: Okay, and to anticipate that that.' s going to be. the next step is not really the. . . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh no, I wasn' t anticipating it, but I thank you for your opinion.' MS ONGIONI: Now I have a question about the survey that was just discussed by the agent for the owner, he states that the setback is 5. 8 feet. My calculation shows 5 feet. Page 13 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. MS ONGIONI: I don' t, I 'd like some explanation as to the discrepancy and let me explain how I .arrived at 5 feet. The survey shows that the distance between the current building line and the property line is 17 feet and the proposed addition is 12. My math Comes up with 5 feet. How do we get 5 .8? I have that. I have this. I don' t understand the calculation. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you do me a favor though, could. you call the surveyor and then get back to us? MS ONGIONI : Do you see the same discrepancy? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well I do except. that I don' t know if it' s, if the 5 . 8 feet is on a straight line or if it' s on a curved line and that' s basically the reason why you could end up like that. MS ONGIONI: And the same would apply to the back to the northerly line. It shows that the setback is 11 feet and my calculation was 10.8. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. But .will you, call the survey and gives us, if that what he' s referring to, I 'm not going to question. . . . MS ONGIONI: If you would like me to I certainly would. CHAIRMAN -GOEHRINGER: Yeah, you have the question and I can't answer that question to be honest with you, because we are not surveyors. I'm not, that' s not a derogatory statement. MS. ONGIONI : No, I understand that. I think. that really sums. . up what my position is regarding the law on the matter, I think however my client either Dr. Yannos or Mrs. Yannos would like to say a few words to the Board. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER.: As long as what is said is not counter productive, okay, we were getting into personalities. MS ONGIONI : I don't believe it' s going to, that that' s going to happen, Dr. Yannos, would you' like to say a few words? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do Dr. very nice to meet you. DR YANNOS: Mr. Vangi built a big house for a He built a garage but he decided to use it as a , you J Page 14 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. DR YANNOS, cont' d: gentlemen can solve this problem right of way by denying the variance. to build a new garage and. request to him to use the old garage. Mr. Vangi, a few years ago he built a shed, next he tried to build the shed on my bluff because he like Mr. Scaramucci like two. to the left, west and I protest it and they decided to build it at the present space. That obstructs on my view on the right side of the Sound. The surveyors who came and surveyed my property, ,they put sticks but Mr. Vangi threw them away and they told me that he put the well too close to my property. I hope- that you decide to, you come to a just decision and make it right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir, pleasure speaking. MRS YANNOS: I don' t want to take too much of your time, but my children instructed me to tell you these gentlemen,. as you well know zoning laws are made for a purpose, to maintain the aesthetic quality of a community and. to secure the safety of its residents. The legal aspects of the this case indicates that a total of 35 feet must exist on both sides of a house in this area. If you grant this variance, the measurements will be drastically reduced, thus, degrading the character of the neighborhood. Gentlemen, nobody wants that garage to be built there, it' s the only open space left that overlooks the Sound. Mr. Vangi has inflicted his own hardship and the -law says as Mrs. Ongioni has pointed out, he cannot even apply for a variance. In making your decision you must also take into account the series of violation notices this gentleman has had. But there is more at stake then measurements. There are unwritten laws that have been violated. Laws dealing with peaceful coexistence, consideration and. integrity. We just finished fighting a war defending them, for god sakes. Furthermore., the demographics indicate. that Long Island population is shifting toward this area. Unless you take stringent measures concerning the zoning laws you will be creating a serious problem. The North Fork is the last remaining outpost of natural beauty in the entire New York, Metropolitan. area. We have to be careful to preserve the laws and rules that can protect this quality of life on Long Island. If anyone for his own whim or ego can be allowed to violate these principals then there will be nothing to stop this little incident from multiplying a thousand times and transforming the North Fork into another citified congested area. So in making your decision, please consider also the moral and environmental aspects of this case as well as the legal. ones. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mrs. Yannos. Is there anybody else who would like to speak against this J , Page. 15 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Antonio Vangi Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: application? Seeing. 'o hands I' ll make a motion recessing the hearing with- no more oral testimony until. Ms Ongioni gets back to us. after her contact with the surveyor and we will then close the hearing at our special meeting in approximately two weeks. Is that alright with everybody? Is that alright with you Mr. Scaramucci? MR SCARAMUCCI: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further questions. I' ll offer that as a motion gentlemen. All in Favor - AYE. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for coming in. Thank you for contacting and we' ll get back. to you. Appl. No. 4020 Applicant(s) ; Keith Harris Location of Property: 265 Freeman Road, Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-139-3-37 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:00 pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey produced by Roderick Van Tuyl and Son on. June 15, 1971. Indicating a one story frame dwelling approximately 40 feet from Freeman Road. The nature of this application is again a setback. An addition to said structure on 'the. westerly side as closest point 6 feet to the north and 8 feet toward Freeman. Road and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Keith would you like to be heard? MR HARRIS: I would just like to say that I would like to ) know if we have to go back and change the plans, that the reason I'm going as close as I can to the line, the house was put in the wrong place to begin with by the builder and that' s my problem, but I would like to put a mudroom, I call a mudroom, a washing room inside and that way I have to move the whole garage section over a little ways so I can get the car inside. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: what is the approximate size. of the garage you are proposing?, MR HARRIS: I believe it was 24 wide and 2.5.6 deep. I 'm offsetting it towards the back and I wanted to go back further, but the roof line, I wanted to stay with the same Rage 16 - April 30; 1991 Public Hearing - Keith Harris Southold Z.B.A. MR HARRIS, cont'd: roof line and I have a pool and decks in the back and I would have to move everything in the back in order to do that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, in situations of this. nature we usually if we do allow a side yard reduction of this nature there would be a restriction, there would be no further side reduction on the opposite side so as. you could gain access to your rear yard. MR HARRIS: I have, I believe it' s either 16 or 17 feet on the other side. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I just wanted you to be aware of that.. The height of the garage is going to be one story? MR HARRIS: Yes. It' s not going to be quite to the main ridge. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It would be dropped a little bit? MR HARRIS: Just a little lower then. that.. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Have you got a guesstimate on what height that would be? Would it be 12 feet approximately? MR HARRIS: I think it was 16 from the border up. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay from the, lowest, from the ground? MR HARRIS: Right, because the way I would like to set it up, I want to go 18 inches from where the siding is now down because that' s where the property and I' ll start the garage floor from that. and that can offset 2 1/2 feet to. the back. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you just check that for us, so that we know exactly what the height is when we get to a decision and give us a call. It will be two weeks before or at least ten .days. before we address it sir. MR HARRIS: Okay, so I just call here. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Call Linda' if you wouldn't mind. Thank you very much. You guys have any specific questions on this? No, okay. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor, anybody against. Hearing no further. questions I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. All in Favor - AYE. Page 17 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Charles Krepp Southold Z.B.A. Appl. No. 4019 Applicant(s) : Charles Krepp . Location of Property: 1235 Island View Lane, Greenport NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-57-2-18 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8: 05 pm and read. the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey with' the cont'd: surveyor' s name not on it. Indicating a kind of a dog leg lot with a one story frame dwelling placed, almost equally distant between the retaining wall and the front property line. The nature of this application is a 12 by 25 foot deck, which is presently proposed off the rear of the dwelling, more toward the northerly portion of the dwelling and a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody who would like to be heard? Is there somebody here representing the Krepps? How do you do? Could you state your name for the record please? MR TORKELSON: My name is Torr Torkelson, President of Torkelson Builders.. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do? MR TORKELSON: I had reconstructed the house before as to code in Southold. The problem that the Krepps have with their property is two-fold.. One is by leaving the marsh land the way it was and bringing his bulkhead back, there' s two neighbors, each one has built up the area in the two sides which he hasn' t done to preserve the integrity of the area. Which makes it difficult for him now to have an area to sit in. Being that. the house is raised, we' re 10 feet from the top of' the foundation to the mean high water which it requires of But we' re sufficiently high enough that' s inconvenient to, if you've seen the property the floor is much harder then the grade so for them to use the backyard with any kind of area for a barbecue or what have you, is almost impossible, so we decided on coming back 12 feet enough so they can have a picnic table and a barbecue incorporated right on the deck. An area to sit out and entertain. I really didn't see any other way that it could possibly be done and the deck is still way above the. 8 foot mark, it would be off the 10 feet again, above the high water mark and it shouldn't effect the environment or the integrity of the marsh land around that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, it' ll be coming out right from the main story? Page 18 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Charles Krepp Southold Z.B.A. MR TORKELSON: It will be coming out from the main story. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The only thing I don' t have is the., and I didn' t have my. tape with me when I was down there, was the actual. distance from the retaining wall to the deck. It' s not necessary for you to give it to us tonight, but could you measure it for, us please. and give us a call.. MR TORKELSON: . Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I appreciate that and the deck will remain open? MR TORKELSON: The deck will CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There will be no roof on it? MR TORKELSON: No roof on it, no.. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you. MR TORKELSON: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to be heard in behalf of this 'application or against? Seeing no hands, I ' ll make a motion closing the hearing, reserving decision until later. All in Favor - AYE. Appl. No. : . 4016. ,_Applicant(q) : _. Julius and Katherine; Ragusin_ Location of Property: 215- Hummel Ave, Southold, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-63-2-14 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:07 pm and read the' notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey produced by Anthony Lewandowski on September. -15, 1990 indicating the one family frame home and the framed garage in the rear of the property and the proposed addition off the back of the house of approximately 16 x 20 and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Would you kindly state your name for the record. and how do you do? MS DOTY: How do you do, my name is Deborah Doty and I'm an attorney in Cutchogue and, I represent the Ragusins. The Ragusins are basically seeking two variances, one a coverage Page 19 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Julius and Katherine Ragusin Southold Z.B.A. MS DOTY, cont'd: variance of about 6% from what exists now and another one in our rear yard setback variance of approximately 15 inches. Their lot is small, to say the least; its only about 5400 square feet, the house is :about, is less than 1000 square feet and they are seeking a small addition to the back of the house to serve solely as a living room. Their current living room faces Hummel. Ave, they look out over the big red buildings of Southold Lumber and they are seeking more space in which they can live. They, going upstairs is not feasible for the Ragusins, they are in their 70.' s and they can' t climb stairs. With respect to the magnitude of the variance, it' s not very large, it' s only about 6%. And the rear yard is virtually insignificant, it' s 15 inches. It' s not going to change the character of the. neighborhood, which is semi-residential, I guess you could call it.. On one side of street being commercial, the other being residential. There is no impact on the health or safety or traffic and there is no other feasible alternative for them to expand their living quarters, but an addition on. the back of the house. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you, let' s see if there is any questions. Do any of the Board Members have any questions? MEMBER DINI2IO: What is the entire lot coverage with the addition? MS DOTY: With the addition? MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah. MS DOTY: Approximately 31%. Right now it' s about 25. I provided the Board with a fairly detailed map. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It' s probably one ok the best ones I've ever seen. MS DOTY: Oh, well thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I wanted to let you know. MS DOTY- I hope the numbers are right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well I did say to Mr. Ragusin and I know he is sitting there and he is a very nice man,, that the maximum" we usually go is about 28%, so what you are actually doing is, that. was on a 50 X 45 foot lot. What you are in effect doing is asking us to go approximately another 3%.. MS DOTY: That' s correct, but the problem here is, it' s such Page 20 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Julius and Katherine Ragusin Southold Z.B.A. MS DOTY, cont'd: a small lot that there is nothing they can do. I mean they are 18. 6% just the house alone without the garage. We would encourage the Board to grant both of the pages. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anybody who would like to speak against the application? Questions from Board. Members? No further questions.. I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. We hope to have a decision for you in about ten days. Thank you very much for coming in. All in Favor - AYE. Appl. No. : 3998 Applicant(s) : Henry and Mary Raynor Location of Property: Peconic Bay Blvd, Laurel, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-126-4-1, 2, 5 The Chairman reopened the hearing at 8:15 pm. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: .•-On the Boards own motion, reopened at the last regularly scheduled special meeting the purpose of further information concerning this particular project and we thank you Mr: Raynor for coming back down. We thank you for . the maps, clearly delineating the. area that was in question and if you have anything you would like to add to the record I would be very happy to take it. If not, I ' ll ask the Board if they have any questions. MR RAYNOR: No Mr. Chairman I have other maps available if the Board requests them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Gentlemen? No. Hearing no further questions, I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. All in Favor - AYE. Appl.. No. : 4012 _Applicant.(s) : William and Viola Deluca. Location of Property: Luthers Road, Mattituck, NY 11952 County Tax Map No. : 1000-99-2-18 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:16 pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey from Roderick Van Tuyl P.C. dated July 16, 1987 indicating a house lot as Page 21 - April 30 , 1991 _ Public Hearing - William and Viola Deluca Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: it presently, actually as it is to be set- off at 53,758 square feet and the lot to be set-off at 53,768 square feet and I have a copy of the Suffolk. County Tax. Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Is there somebody who would like to be heard concerning this? Mr. Raynor, how are you? MR RAYNOR: Good evening, again. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Board, my name' s Henry Raynor, I represent Mr. . and Mrs. Deluca. The variance before you is to create two lots from the existing parcels situated on the west side of Luther' s (Breakwater) Road. As you are aware the parcels exist of approximately two and a half acres, it' s bounded. on the south by lands of Deluca and parcels are. approximately the size of the lots that we are proposing to create. Bounded on the west by the subdivision, Captain Kidd' s Estate on which the lots are approximately a third of an acre in size. On the north by property of Mattituck park district and on the east by Luther' s (Breakwater) Road. Mt. and Mrs. Deluca occupy the residence for over thirty years, the house which they are living in was rented from Irving Kahn from 1956 to 1986 at that time they were able to purchase the parcel. They then proceed to rebuild the house and are living there on an semi- permanent basis, weekends in the winter and full-time in the summer. This parcel was originally deeded into Mr. Kahn, dressing it up as two parcels which later became merged. It' s the applicants desire in this case to construct a home for their daughter Viola, so that she may eventually have a year round residence for herself out here in Mattituck. This is the only way their daughter can continue to live by her parents * as they grow older. Both in a financial viewpoint, they have the daughter and the caring that is necessary as parents grow older. To leave the parcel unique, and that is . the only parcel in the immediate neighbor of its size and with division of the parcel it would still be within keeping of the neighborhood character as well as the intent sphere in the ordinance. We fully realize if should the Board grant this request, the Southold Town Planning Board would still have to grant a minor subdivision on this property. I would be happy to answer questions the Board. may have on this. application. I thank you for your consideration. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I ' ll ask my fellow Board Members if they have any particular questions concerning it. MEMBER VILLA: Yeah. I have a question. You say it' s the only lot in the area of that size. I 'm just looking at a tax map and I , just going down .Naugles Road a little bit, I see three or four lots that would also be subject to be divided along a similar line, if you chose to go that way. Page 22 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - William and Viola Deluca Southold Z.B.A. MR RAYNOR: ' In viewing all the structures to the west, as well as to the south, it would be smaller parcels, this is by far the largest. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is. correct. You said that Mr. Kahn had owned this property and they had rented it from him. -MR RAYNOR: They had rented the parcel for over thirty years they had been farming and, . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And finally in 86 when they purchased. . . MR RAYNOR: Finally in 86 they were able to purchase it and that is when they rebuilt the home and settled down. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Interesting. I don' t have any particular questions, Mr. Raynor. I am well aware of the property. I ride by there every day. Of course I live in the area and they have made the existing dwelling a very beautiful structure, .a very beautiful building at this particular point. And that's all I really can add to the record at this point. MR RAYNOR: Okay. Thank you very much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anybody who would like to speak against the application? Questions? No further questions. I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. .All in Favor - AYE. . Page 23 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing —Charles Bleifeld Southold Z.B.,A. Appl. No. : 4017 °Applicant(s) :- -Charles. Bleifeld -,. Location of Property: 1115 Private Road, Southold. NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-90-4-19 & 20 The Chairman opened the hearing at 8: 23pm and read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a survey by Peconic Surveyors, I don' t particularly see the. date on. it. but I ' ll find. it, it' s over here. April 4, as revised 1991 and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Could. I ask you to state your name for the record sir. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: Certainly, Robert F. Kosniakevicz. I'm from Peter S. Law Office, here for the applicant. Preliminary I 'd also like to note that should the Board have any questions concerning the architectual design, why the concept was chosen, we have the architect Bob. Long here as. well today. And finally Dr. Bleife.ld, the applicant, one of the applicants and one of the owners is also present to ask questions, should you feel a desire to chose so. Also one preliminary question, I have some. exhibits I'd like to introduce to the Board and I would like to do that in my' presentation unless the Board would like to- do so otherwise. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, that' s fine. We very .rar.ely ever review anything unless it' s, you know, at this particular time. We' ll review it later I 'm sure. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: Okay fine. The property itself is a unique parcel, I heard the Board refer to another parcel. as. dog leg, this is much more than a dog leg because of the property being bisected by Orchard Lane, we have in essence a L shaped or inverted L shaped or, a right angle which forms two front yards on a parcel. In addition, the parcel is on. the south or the east and the south side which is bordered by Cedar Beach Harbor. The application or that has been an application to D.E.C. as shown on. the survey before the Board which shows the flag wet lands. There is a considerable amount of flag lands and meadow land on the property. The property is actually two tax map parcels that were purchased on January 4, 1990 by the owners in fee from Mr. & Mrs. Spitaliere and from Joseph Spitaliere. Incidentally Mrs. Swimmer is one of the owners of the property to the west side and-from what I understand has no opposition to the project. Also with respect property, we note that is located in a R-40 zone, however because of its size, the fact it is only total area of 30,561 square feet,. we actually fall within the Page 24 - April 30, 19.91 Public Hearing - Charles Bleifeld Southold Z.B.A. MR KOSNIAKFi!CZ, cont'd: guidelines of 100-244 of the Town code. We also would bring to the Boards attention that due to the extensive amount of wet lands in this case, we have calculated the actual area of upland of the wet lands to be 22,189 feet. The legal notice that is before the Board is a little bit inaccurate in that based upon some further consideration and believe me, this plan has been thought out very thoroughly and in many different concepts have been brought forth. We initially came in with a plan that. showed a detached garage, a open pergola, which would have had a pool and garage in side yards, attached garage in side yard. That plan also called for a variance to the front yard of 20 feet which is still the same and a variance for side yards of 10 and 15 or a total of 25. The revised plan or the updated survey, which Mr. Chairman you referr.,ed to, has been revised and we've made a lot of cut backs and we feel we' re at the limit of what we can do. The garage is now attached and therefore we no longer require a variance .for that aspect. The pergola has now been replaced by the residents, which runs to the garage. The. bulk pool has been located to the rear yard, likewise no variance is necessary. The variances for the side yards have been cut back and are now 10 feet and 20 or a total side yard of 30. The side yard variance of 10 feet is in essence a variance seeking approximately 330. The total side yard variance of 30, I calculated to be approximately 160 of a variance. The front yard is, although at the closest point will be 20 feet, the interesting point that the owner wished me to bring out is that we initially looked at many of the, at the property and prior to his purchase D.E.C. had been already applied. to and at that point and time had mandated a setback of 50 feet, based upon the fact that he purchased both lots and. the new application they pushed him back another 5 feet and as you can see. from the plans, he' s now 55 feet from the flagged wet lands. The proposed residence, because of its unusual configuration is, well I 'm going to let the architect do that aspect if you do want to get into that, be answered by Mr. Lund. Instead the other arguments. The total square footage of the house, incase the Board wants to know, is 4,367 feet. We arrived at that as follows: the footprint for the house is 2,053 , the garage is 490, the pool is 348 and the deck, which is located. to the south of the residence is 1, 476. The building area thus taking into consideration the wet lands is less than 200. We would respectfully ask the Board to approve the application inasmuch as we feel that the unusual shape of the property, coupled with the D.E.C. mandate and the Town Trustee mandates as well as the L shaped front yard causes a practical difficulty that is uniquely associated to the property and not something that is personal to the owners in this case. The, I don' t recall, I mean I do note that a Page 25 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Charles Bleifeld Southold Z.B.A. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ, cont'd: letter we make mention. of the fact the Board of Trustees have been applied to. In fact we had previously sent a letter and I would like to also make that part of the evidence before the Board today, that we have received Trustees or Board of Trustees approval for this project. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I was just going to ask you for that copy. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: We also have re-applied to the Board of Trustees just for the sake of making sure that the new plan as just recently revised is not going to run into any problems with the Board of Trustees. I can' t see how it would, in essence the size of the structure is less and we' re still the same distance from the D.E.C. or from the wetlands as flagged by the D.E.C. I 'd also asked that the Board. make part of the record today, a D.E.C. approval dated February 20, 1991, which sets forth the conditions and also shows the plan that was approved by D.E.C. and again for the record, that plan shows all structures 55 feet from the west lands as flagged. In addition, I'd like to make part of the record today this Board' s action on the application of Joseph Spitaliere, the appeal number for the moment eludes me, but in that application Mr. Spitaliere had applied for a variance to this very Board for a front yard setback of 30 feet in lieu of 35 feet. I will point out to the Board in that action that in paragraph number one on page one, the side yards in that instance were 10, 15 feet. Apparently at the time the application was made, the zoning requirements were different from those now, but I point that out to show to the Board that: the project is not in., or out of conformity with the character of the neighborhood. We also would like to draw to the Board' s attention. the fact that we have taken two tax maps and created one, thus creating a benefit. for society, health, etc. And that in lieu of two residential applicants or two separate residences coming to this Board perhaps you will only have one in such that 50o demand on water, sewer, etc. I also have a sketch today from Bob Lund which gives the birdseye view of the proposed. structure and I 'd like to make that part of the record. Here' s the D.E.C. I didn't recall if. you had that. Board of Trustee' s approval, the letter we just drafted to the Board of Trustees and the application of Joseph Spitaliere approving a 30 foot front yard and also the reference there to the 15 and 10 feet for your viewing so you get an idea of what' s being proposed, this can be for the missing Board Member. There is one other point I know that, I believe the Board is aware of it, but I just wanted to make it part of the record. Orchard Lane is shown on the survey as 30 feet in width, in actuality Page 26 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - April 30, 1991 Southold Z.B.A. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ, cont'd: there was a 280A access previously filed by Mr. Spitaliere and part of that approval, the right of way as it exists at the southernmost end or as it touches. upon Lot 42 as shown on the Cedar- Beach Park map, it will be only 8 feet in width. That application they also have a copy, we ask that be made part of the hearing minutes and exhibit today. We feel that' s important because in essence what it does is the house will be at a greater distance from the traveled roadway than what is actually shown on the survey and I think aethetically it' s more pleasing . in. that it will be further away and again I'd like to make that part of the record. Thank you. MEMBER VILLA: Can I ask a question on that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure. MEMBER VILLA: You say it' s only going to be 8 foot wide but that is also going to be providing access to lot 43 is it not? MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: That is correct. MEMBER VILLA: So therefore, I mean you know, that' s going to have to be provided, possibly widened at some time in the future or become a wider thoroughfare than the private driveway for this. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: Well as I was pointing out, it was part of the prior application to the Board. At that time it may become necessary to be widened, but. at this point based upon the prior approval and the condition I think the 8 feet would be sufficient. MEMBER VILLA: Could I ask another question, if you know it. Lots 43 and 44, do you know if they are in common ownership? MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: Could you refer to the Suffolk County Tax Maps for me, because I don' t happen to have the Cedar Beach Park. MEMBER VILLA: It would appear to be lot 14. MR SPITALIERE: Do you want me to answer that, I 'm the owner? MEMBER.VILLA: 18. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: It would be lot 18 is owned by Camillus Spitaliere. Page 27 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Charles Bleifeld Southold Z.B.A. MEMBER VILLA: How about 14? MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: That' s by Jose.ph .Spitaliere. MEMBER VILLA: So they are checkerboard. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: I believe I'm correct. MR SPITALIERE: They're single and separate, yes.. MEMBER VILLA: Because I was wondering if they were in common ownership, if we couldn't just pull Orchard Lane back to the beginning of lots 43 and 42 and just end it there and abandon that part of the road and you'd have it as part of your . lot? MR SPITALIERE: If . I could make a suggestion on that, Dr. Bleifeld, I believe is going to bring his. driveway in way up north on the property line, so he actually won't be utilizing the road to get to his property. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: It would be to the northeast. MR SPITALIERE: Right, but he' s not going to really use that last 80 feet of his road, if I understand it properly. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: That' s the wag .the plans indicate. MR SPITALIERE: Well as far as I 'm concerned on my side, I would be pretty much doing the same thing. For the aesthetics of it, because of having a long driveway going in. Whereas I don' t have to have access right to the end of the existing road to turn in.. MR VILLA: But as long as lot 43 is in single ownership you are going to have road frontage to it. If 43 and 44 were combined, then you pull that road back and abandon part of it, but as long as you have 43. MR SPITALIERE: What I'm saying is I only need. 20 to 25 feet. possibly of lot 43 for access. There' s 100 foot frontage on the road.. We. would only need the last 20, 25 feet.. MEMBER VILLA: Well that you would have to see with the. Planning Board. on this. MR SPITALIERE: Well. I.'m just saying you know for my personal use. MEMBER VILLA: Okay, thank you. Page 28 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Charles Bleifeld Southold- Z.B.A. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: Does the Board have any other questions.? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yeah, I have one other question in reference to the original decision of the 280A. The decision that was rendered said that the width would be 12 or 1.4 feet in width and you're referring to 8 feet. MR KOSNIAKEVICZ: Well at the very end 'of the decision where it refers to the roadway "Leading down to what would be Suffolk County Tax Map .parce1. 1000-90-4-19, or I believe, let' s see if I have these, lot 42 it also goes on to mention that it would be reduced. to a variance of 8 feet. It goes on further. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, down into that particular. Okay. Thank you. Who else would, you have someone else that is going to speak. You are going to have the. . . . . . MR KOSNIAKEVICZ.: If you have any architectural questions as to what' s proposed or the concept. The wing that runs up along the easterly side, the L shaped or the long part of the L, will in essence be one room and a series and we feel that because of that in fact that needs access from one end to the other we can' t reduce it in size and because of the wetlands pushing us back and the front yard pushing us this way, if I could with the, leaves very little area in which to construct a house without coming into some type of variance. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I just would like to ask the architect one question if you wouldn' t mind. Which is not necessarily the nature of the front yard setback, but it could. be. The. actual width of the overhang or the soffat area is. approximately how much? MR LUND: One the eastern wing? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well., an average around the house. MR LUND: On the south side we have 4 feet for shade., but on the areas under question, we' ll have about 6 inches on each side for gutters. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That' s it? MR LUND: That' s about it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Where is the water run off going to be toward the water side? Will that be into any sort of storm. drain? Page 29 - April 30, 1991 Public. Hearing - Charles Bleifeld Southold Z.B.A. MR LUND: 'Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It will be. MR LUND: In the dry well. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. And so the nature of the 20 foot, setback is not taking into consideration. that 6 inches. Is that correct? Well I notice you have 20 foot -6 inches on there. MR LUND.: The 20 foot setback is to. the foundation wall. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is to the foundation wall. MR LUND: Right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you very much. You are Mr. Lund, is that correct? MR LUND: Yes, that' s correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: - Thank you sir. Does anybody else have any questions? Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this. application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Yes sir. State your name for the record. please. MR MOSS: My name is Robert Moss, I live in Cedar Beach. I'm neither in favor or opposed to this. Just. a statement. At. the time Mr: Bie.ifeld pur.chased. as I under.stand. i.t, the . Board of Trustees had outlined an envelope where the structure would have to be within and the purchaser obviously knew this at the time and I just want to make a comment that I hope that' s being adhered to. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:: It' s an interesting point, normally under 239.4 had there been a bulkhead there, we would have addressed on this parcel, we would address the setback,, but somewhere along the line when the new zoning code was put in place, we noticed that there was overlapping jurisdiction between the Town Trustees and ourselves and we then yielded. to the Trustees in areas where there is no bulkhead.. So the 55 foot setback is a setback that the. Trustees are dealing with and as for the front yard setback that is an area that we are going to be dealing with and we: will go back and re-inspect it based upon the revised maps, prior to making. a decision. And we' ll take everything that we possibly can into. Page 30 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Charles Bleifeld Southold Z.B-.A. MR MOSS: That' s all I ask. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much for coming in sir. MR KOSNIAKL&'VICZ: I missed the gentleman.' s name but just two comments with respect to what he asked.. The original. application to the Board of Trustees was far plan A, or the original plan and as I pointed out it in fact came closer to the one side yard and in all other respects, is the same. So - the building envelope has been complied with. The other point I also wanted to make which was apparently not perfectly clear. When he originally contracted to buy the property, the owners that . is, D.E.C. was only mandating a 50 foot setback, subsequent. there to and based upon. their combination of two tax maps., D.E.C. pushed them. back to 55, so they actually have come back from the wet lands a little bit further. Okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank. you. Hearing no further comment,. I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later. All in Favor - AYE. Page 31 - April 30 , 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. Appl. No. : 4022 ,. .Applicant(s) : Cellular Telephone Company Location of Property: 415 Elijah' s Lane, Mattituck, NY County Tax Map No. : 1000-108-4-11. 3 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank. you very much for coming in, it' s pleasure meeting you gentlemen. Are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are you going to sit here or are you going to leave? MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I 'm going to leave. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. MEMBER DINIZIO: I just want to make a public statement that I work for a company that perhaps could compete with you gentlemen so I would like to beg off if you don' t mind. I 'm going to leave the room. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a declaration and in the file, also for Mr. Smith that I have a Metro One Telephone. Do you have any objection to that, to my sitting on this hearing, please voice your opinion at this point. The Chairman opened the hearing at 9: 48 pm and. read the notice of hearing and application for the record. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties and I have a copy of a plan produced for Metro One indicating the one story framed barn that presently exists and the concrete building as it presently exists. and we will ask Mr. Smith if he would like to continue. MR SMITH: Thank you Mr. Chairman for the record my name is Allen Smith, I appear as counsel to William D. Moore the Attorney of record in this matter.. Mr. Moore has had the good fortune of having the local Rotary Club sponsor his trip to Europe and God bless him. He even took his wife. who is a rotarian and their baby of less than six months I think or SO. For the record this evening, I have with me to address various aspects of this application, Christopher Resavy, Glenn Witte both are engineers with Metro One and both of which I have supplied the resumes for, to you. Mr. Ronald Petersen is an engineer with AT&T and can and will as this matter progresses address any radiological effect questions. Mr. Peter Papay is a licensed engineer who deals with the Page 32 - April 30•,, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: issues of the pole, its ability to withstand wind and the like. Mr. .John Nickles is a local appraiser in this particular matter and I will introduce his opinion letter in a moment., relative to the effect that the proposed use on the neighborhood. And lastly Roger Grutzmacher 'is the architect who will address those issues attending to the visual aspects of- the proposed use. I will admit readily how provincial I am relative to Metro One. and/or Cellular Telephones. The first time that I became aware of the importance of Cellular Telephone was about four or five years ago. Some of you know I'm a member of the Red Hook and. Ladder Company of Riverhead Fire Department. As you may recall, all of us in the fire service were called to a rather large brush fire during the tenure of Chief Richard Gadzinski when the Pine. Barrens burned between Eastport and Riverhead. It was at that particular time that they called out our truck 629, which had a Metro One type device in it, in .that all the trucks that were responding to the area were unable to communicate, because everybody was. stepping all over everybody and on both of the channels that were available to us. You may know that the fire service moved a comparable. unit to 62.9 on the west end of the fire and in fact that particular fire in our locality was coordinated through the use of the cellular telephones ,. because our ordinary radio communications were so messed up they were ineffective. That experience in. talking to these gentlemen and the equal at Metro had been duplicated for instance in the Avianca crash. The plane took down all. the standard land lines that were. available and in. fact at. the varying units responded and they cluttered the airways yet again, but for the fact that the citizens in that particular area and the chiefs .in Nassau County generally have cellular, telephones in their chief cars communications was handled in that particular regard. Another particular example was the. San Francisco earthquake that we all witnessed. during the World Series. Again if there was not a cellular network to coordinate the emergency response there would have been. no response because of the severing of all cables. on the ground. I have on occasion used car phone, as maybe some of the rest of you have, calling fires. I recall. calling in a signal. 13 at the Walsh asphalt plant one day. The paint of all of this is to say that although this technology is coming to Southold it is not a new technology. It is very much a cart of the utility system both of our area and San Francisco, Nassau County and other places. I find that in the examination of the fire safety manual for the , county of Nassau that most of the police in Nassau county and the ambulance service in Nassau County have cellular now. I know that the Wading Department has cellular in every chief' s car. In fact as you. may know the 911 system is integrated into the Metro service; Page 33 - April 30, 1991 Public. Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold .Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: such that as we .travel up and down the road with our cellular telephone we do not have to know the particular phone number for.' the Southold P.D. if you will or this tower up, we would simply punch in 911 and we would end up with Southold P.D. Of I suppose the last point in dealing with where this technology is and how integrated it has gotten into our society is to point' out how it has become part of commerce and industry of our area. Of one of the customers of Metro One is one of the off-shore boats. As you may know he cannot use his ship to shore to radio for the purposes. of commerce, because it violates the rules among other things and if he did he would populate the airwaves to the detriment of everyone else. This particular captain uses about $500 a month in services from Metro One. Essentially coming .off the towers in the south fork, so that he knows the market, where he should bring his boat in with his catch, when to bring it in, things of that particular nature. Which he cannot do with the ordinary ship to shore radio. All that being said, I have one tape to show you should you wish, and I 've raised the one issue that brings these. people here as exemplified. by the coverage issue. At the: moment if I. were to get into my car this evening and see an accident on the North Road and I dial in 911 the chances. are that I would not get a local police station. I would bounce over to Connecticut. There is a gap. in. service with reference. to the Metro One system, this is within their franchise area and that is why they are here and that is why they are building a tower at the police station in Peconic and they propose to build this tower in Mattituck. I have a tape, it' s not a good tape, I can save it for the end, I can show it now. What it shows on the tape, if you are in fact interested, is a testimony of why a police chief in New Jersey, whose radio tower was struck by lightning and he tells you as one: municipal board to another how much more in fact that. he had cellular capacity. He would have been out of service and out of touch with his cars, but because he had cellular and the redundancy that it provided to his vehicles that he was able to function. The other one: that you see is the technology that' s coming into the fire service where a particular town in New Jersey is installing the Metro One service with fax machines, such that as we get an alarm and. we respond on our trucks that the fax, there will be pre-plans, say the old. Perkins Motel in my community such that pre-plans will be fed into the fax machine by the dispatcher and they would turn out on the trucks as we responded to the alarm. Lastly, on this particular tape, and again I' ll play it if you wish or I ' ll hold it till the end, is the .testimonial by the people in East Hampton, who are doing very much the same thing that the Town of Southold was doing with Metro One at the police station in terms, in Southampton they've already done it, Page 34 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont,'d: where Metro One has in fact built a tower and has brought the police communications up onto the tower. I suppose the last thing that I would say in that particular regard is not a. fire service thing. It relates to the, I think 'it' s called A.L.S. System, that is now part of our ambulance service and is becoming more a part of our ambulance service, advanced life support system. As those E.K.G. ' s and the other more sophisticated monitoring systems come into the ambulances as our E.M.T. ' s and A.M.T. ' s respond. from areas such as Southold and Riverhead. to Good Samaritan Hospital, I think you understand that all of that telemetry is not done on the radio wave it is. done over cellular, just simply because of the capacity and-the refinements that cellular technology affords as opposed to the standard emergency treatments we simply operate. The issue. before you this evening has been properly defined by the chairman and by Mr. Moore and I 'm to deal in. this first instance with the special exception nature of the application. Many of us know Judge Stark, who' s probably one of the better or best judges that we have in Suffolk County, and is someone that grew up here in this particular community and as. Mr. Moore has. provided to the chairman a particular: decision where Judge Stark writes about the special nature of dealing with a public utility structure and a zoning ordinance. He wrote, public utility structures: serving the entire community have historically been recognized as reasonable and proper uses in all types of use districts, because of the technical and engineering requirements particular to such structures in the area serve. That' s the whole issue that' s before us on the special, exception nature. I have for you, I will hand out your decisions some years ago, with reference to the AT&T towers in the community. As the Board Members will note, one of the Board Members was in fact present during these particular decisions, at the bottom of the first page that I have handed up to you, Mr. Douglas recites, that we couldn' t find any reason to attempt to obstruct you in the communications here, we have very strict rulings in fact to go by in the State of New York rulings on public service utilities, etc. There were two hearings that particular evening. On the last page that I have handed up to you, Mr. Douglas immediately prior to that particular resolution. Again I make a statement that we are controlled very strongly by law and public utilities with that as our guidelines. I will again make a motion, etc. So, although I am dealing somewhat with a new technology in terms of the cellular, aspects of what -is before the Board this evening, it is not an a new issue to this particular Board. . There is a certain logic that is inherent in dealing with utilities in. this particular regard. as it relates to zoning. I suppose the easiest example would be to deal with electric utilities and 1 Page 35 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: if in fact height restrictions, architecture review and things of that nature were to apply in the strictest sense to electric utilities, in some of your more restricted residential zonings, we could not supply people with electric utilities, the. sewer, water, things of that particular nature have this special kind of special exception, if you will, such that the boards state, this Board in particular have granted the right under the ordinances to examine the particular application and make a determination on the particular application whether or not there is an adverse effect on the environment, neighborhood, all the criteria that! s spelled out in your special exception prevision. The last thing I would say with reference to the public utility issue is this, that I have for you and I will introduce later on if ' it' s of interest to you, some of more precise definition of! the longitudes and latitudes that are called out, in licensing the papers that you have been given by Mr. Moore, but in; fact these people are compelled as a matter of law to serve their franchise area. They and NYNEX in this particular instance. There are two franchisees., if you will, for the Town of Southold. If it were true that the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town. of Southold were. to deny to NYNEX or to Metro One any right to engineer if you will, these towers again they must do so considering the neighborhoods, the effect of. the tower and all the rest of that. You could as a' local zoning bo,ard. or a local zoning , ordnance frustrate the franchises that have been given by the public service commission of the. State of New York. to this entity and to NYNEX and by the. F®C.C. to these two entities to serve this particular area and I suppose I don't have to give you a citation necessarily but such a .result might. be. contrary to either common sense or to the federal system under which we work. IAll that being said I would introduce the architect and I have asked him to please depict for you the existing conditions and. as the site will appear with the tower. MR GRUTZMACHER: Good evening. My name is Roger Grutzmacher for the record,. I 'm an architect, these drawing are prepared under my supervision in my office. As part of the, I' ll keep the presentation brief., I' ll. just go quickly to where we' re locating the tower in a brink, show you some exhibits that show existing and proposed conditions. Metro One primarily needs two items in order to ,operate. One is a relatively high spot in which to locate their antennas., in this case we are .proposing a monopole tower, the other is an equipment room, to house theirlequipment which is an. accessory structure for that antenna. In this 'particular site we' re locating both of those facilities, the tower and the building to the rear of this one story framed building which is. Page 36 - April 30, 1951 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A ti MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: located toward, if there is a front yard, certainly towar& the front yard of what we' re proposing. ' Access to our facility in the rear which is a modification to an existing building, it is not a new building, we' re merely going to give it a face lift and recondition the interior to meet our purposes. The actual building is shielded from the front by this existing frame and access will be by a road toward the rear, we' ll also be introducing two parking spaces back here.. We don't really need a lot of parking because visits to the site are on a nature of possibly two' times a month to check equipment. The actual room itself is unmanned. I think. at this point I would like to show what this existing structure looks like currently and what. we propose to do to it. The building, it' s about 720 square feet, it' s a block structure. It is shielded by some natural vegetation. and landscaping.. The building, structurally sound is a bit lacking ascetically certainly, we do also have. to put a new roof on this. structure. We are going to give it a total face lift and I' ll show you what I mean by that. This is a rendering of that same scene. Let me put them next to one another so you can really see it. The, what we would do to just quickly go through it, the building we know it' s structurally sound, we would sound the block and make sure that .it' s cleaned up and which then we could apply the new stucco finish which is here. Colors, it' s very flexible, we would chose an earth tone brown because it seems to fit in with the area a bit more appropriately than some thing that might be a more in the primary colors or what have you. As I said it' s an existing building, we will not be extending it at all. We are merely giving it a face lift. The building to operate it _requires no sewage. There is no water to this site, the utilities that we do bring into the site is. telephone and power, electricity. That is all. And it is brought in through ground lines, it would be buried, there are no overhead lines here that we would be adding or bring into the site. Let me show you now the mono-pole. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody in the audience that wishes to see these., we could move the, what I ' ll ask you do is just move the easel back. a little bit. Maybe you want to change your set over to this side. MR GRUTZMACHER: Okay, as I mentioned there is an existing, the two existing structures. This is our equipment room which we're are proposing the face lifting for. This is the existing barn structure towards the front and this is the proposed 100 foot mono-pole. I believe it' s actually 102 feet. Chris is that correct? Okay. Give me an idea, this is pretty accurate because we've transposed it onto an actual i Page 37 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR GRUTZMACHER, cont'd: photograph of the site, we've rendered on the new finish here and we've located the mono- pole to scale. To give you an idea of scale, trees in the background are in the ! ar.ea. of 45 to 50 feet in height and as I said the mono-pole is about 102 feet in height. Both structures are located to the rear, again, I ' ll give you some dimensions on the mono-pole at the base it's about, and. Pete I guess you could bail me out is this an eight foot base mono-pole? 14R PAPAY: The actual base of the steel mono-pole itself would be 37 inches in' diameter. But the concrete foundation will be in the neighborhood of six to eight. feet. MR GRUTZMACHER: The platform at the top is approximately, it' s three sided, it' s a triangle, each side would be about 12 feet in width. The actual size of the antennas -of which there will be nine mounted on the top about four feet in height. If you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: ! Do you have questions Bob? Do you. want me to go, okay: There will be some lighting on top of this? . MR GRUTZMACHER: That/ s, we could check into that. METRO ONE: Do you want me to address- that now or? MR SMITH: We'll get you up in a second I' ll answer it now and then we' ll answer it again. The lighting is subject to . an F.A.A. approval the consulting engineer, not this particular gentlemen but he can testify to it. It says that there shouldn' t, the striping and lighting aspects are. not required but this gentlemen will address that in a moment.. Whatever the Board does as in the other applications that I have in the east end,. I will produce for you and I would have to in any event before any building permit would be: issued the F.A.A. determinations relative to lighting and striping if any. They don' t believe at this particular moment that it would be required.. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Because of. height. Allen? MR SMITH: Height is one of the considerations where they actually file with the F.A.A. and. different places they don't have to. For instance, the one that' s somewhat higher nearer the Banks is not going to be particularly lighted because they don't, it does not effect aviation. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What is the width of the actual i Page 38 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: antenna on top of the mono-pole? MR GRUTZMACHER: It' s approximately 12 to 14 inches in that range. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And what is the length? MR GRUTZMACHER: Four feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet total? MR GRUTZMACHER: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Four feet in height? MR GRUTZMACHER: In height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay what is the width this way? MR GRUTZMACHER: Well the whole triangle, the platform, there are three of those antennas mounted on each triangular leg. It' s about twelve feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are there steps leading to that antenna. in anyway? MR GRUTZMACHER: What' s usually located. on mono-poles are they' re little struts that run up the pole. If. Pete, Mr. Papay the structure engineer, he' s more familiar with the actual tower design, but generally the workmen that come out to maintain and actually install the antennas. have these legs that they will put in as they go up. Some are located on, but to- a certain height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So no one will. climb. MR GRUTZMACHER: That' s correct. And the compound we' re going to secure as well with a fence around the entire perimeter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Have any of these been constructed in an area that we could visit within the next couple of weeks? MR RESAVY: The closest mono-pole we currently have constructed is Laurelton which. is right out the JFK Airport. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: ; Right outside JFK? MR RESAVY: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would. it be easily, could I just have Page 39 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN, cont'd: your name for the record. . MR RESAVY: Christopher Resavy. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Would it be easily depicted if I was to see it bearing in mind- that there are many antennas near Kennedy Airport. MR RESAVY: Yes you can "easily depict. which sideit is. We can give you exact directions on how to get to the location. That particular pole I believe is only 75 foot and the. F.A.A. has requested we put a marked red light on the top for observance features only. It' s not a requirement, but they've asked us to do that as a. cour.tesy. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Very good. Thank you. Do you have any thing else that you'd like. Great thank you. MR SMITH: Mr. Resavy, this young man is. the. engineer for., together with__his comrades on my left who can, explain to liberal arts students like myself how .these things work and why you need one in Peconic and you need one in Mattituck and you need another in Northville and one ,over in. Montauk. It is somewhat technical on, I thoightT"about reducing it to writing and. trying to submit it to you. It just would go on. forever. I 'm going to let him try .to explain to. you how this system works and why they have multiple sites. and probably just try to answer. your questions there.' MR RESAVY: For the record my name is Christopher Resavy, I 'm the engineering manager for Metro One. If I can I want to use some exhibits to try to give'.you an idea of how the cellular works. The map that's located on this board is the_ entire area that Metro One is licensed to serve from the. F.C-.C. The areas of New York that are outlined here is what' s granted to us both- by the F.C.C. and the New York C.P.C.N. to give you public utility status in the State of New York. Cellular is based upon the ability to reuse frequencies and some of you are. aware, mobile telephone service has been in operation for many, many years. - The first service actually started in 1946 with the Hobocki.n police, the first ones to use mobile radio as a form of communication. From that it has grown to a mobile telephone service that you needed an operator, operators assistance in order to place a call. A few years later, that was replaced with an automatic type system with one transmitter, located with very high power, "with one receiver. From that you could have unlimited amount of"users on, because I. believe at that time it was only four channels still and that was in the early fifties. From that grew the next generation of mobile Page 40 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY, cont'd: telephone service in which there was: still only one high powered transmitter but the service was enhanced to twelve channels and at that time it was. also invoked or developed in a point that there was multiple receiver locations because what they found was although that high powered transmitter could. get out long distances,. the weakest link between the mobile and that transmitter was the received passed back to the people, so they set up a system of multiple receiving locations. so that the conversations. could be a lot clearer than what they were in the- past. Although in about the mid sixties Bell Labs, Motorola, spun the idea of cellular and. that' s where it really started and that was the ability to reuse frequencies in a multiple. pattern over and over and over again. While working with the F.C.C. , and going through many, many, many years of development and trials and measurements. and. things that they were trying to do, lone about the mid seventies the F.C.C. granted Bell Labs permission to do trials in a few areas of the system, of the country to get some actual measured data in a much unused, unutilized frequency ban. That frequency ban correlates to what used to be on a lot of the older T.V' s and that was channel 67 to channel 83 on your UHF dial.. If you remember those two step dials that we used to have, I still have one in my house although. I can' t tune into. a 'frequency I don't know why. Selectively. of the channel I guess. They were re-allocated later to cite. The trials that I mentioned, they were done I think in four parts of the country, one was in Newark, Chicago, L.A. , and I believe some place in Texas, I'm not sure were. But from that cellular was born in 1976, where they actually started to invoke and develop all the specks and. everything else that goes into what we have today as you know is cellular. I was lucky enough and I'm not., I 'm luckily still. a young person. I think, but I was lucky enough to get into cellularr back in 1981, so I got to learn from some of the best designers and engineers of this system, how this. stuff actually worked. To give you a little idea, they went through numerous generations of what kind of polyarn was the most regular reuse. thing to use, they tried squares, they tried pentagons, hexagons, and it came up that one of the Bell Labs engineers. actually wrote a paper on beehive study that he had preformed and he was doing something for the military on, structural support. Well it happened that one of the other engineers in Bell Labs. was working 'on Cellular, so that pattern that he had put together and it was so regularly shaped. that after a little bit of work with that it was then determined and accepted. that a hexagon would be the most regularly reused shape: to use for cellular. From that, you can reuse frequencies in a regular patterned shape. We have depicted hereon the board is a hexagon in many forms abutting each other and as you can see Page 41 - April 30, 1991 Public Dearing —Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY, cont'd: they can be readily reused. What we currently have is a situation on the North Fork of Long Island where we have a new site that we are beginning construction in Southold and Peconic, the proposed location. here in Mattituck which would be our missing cell site and. some of our existing locations. We go back to the ability to reuse these frequencies, this missing cell. .locati.on here would be the Mattituck site. This could. be the site down on the bottom here, site 71, down here site 72 could be out here and this could be Riverhead out here which by way is our water tank, it just happened to fall that .way in the plan. The ability to reuse frequencies comes in a regular type . pattern, in our particular system, , it' s like a- chess move, the ability to read it' s frequency and that' s a knight move if anybody remembers that. The knight takes two steps up and one over. So, the same type of example here, one, two over, these two locations would read it' s frequencies.. With this site missing, this signal is stretched into this ,ar.ea, thus stretching it' s ability to reuse its frequencies. This guy has a greater potential for interference in here and if anybody is familiar with C.B. ' s, when C.B. 's first came out with 23 .channels, everybody could use it with very readily ease because it wasn't a lot out there, but as it got more and more popular people got accustom to their own home base channel as it were at the time. If it was channel two, then you had two people trying to talk in the same general location apart from each other, usually the. conversations got walked on and you couldn't hear that party that well. Cellular uses the same kind of concept. We have to keep separation distance involved in. That' s how we can't come up with our regularly spaced intervals for th.e. south side. so we currently have located here. It' s done by process of grids placed aver the map from which we develop a search area that we look and .we search for. Now we had three criteria for a cell site, availability, owners willing. to deal with us, and. that the site fits the criteria that we need for coverage. In particular the location that we have picked in Mattituck we were able to find those three criterias.. We were able. to get a piece of property that was available to us, in a zone that was pretty amenable I guess to our uses, and we were able to get a landlord that was willing to deal with us and the best case, which was the last one that worked for us. So that' s kind of the particulars about this location. MR SMITH: I 'm going to steal a little bit of his thunder and I've worked on this a little bit. What he' s leaving onset is the glass half full or half empty. Is that as you begin to move the tower to the west, he begins to fall out of these grid patterns that he has described to make the system as he moves to the east he has a similar problem. Page 42 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: As a consequence in the area where they need the town, this is within the area and as he has probably described the issue. Again I suppose the one. thing that' s left unsaid is that what makes this work as the gentlemen from AT&T will say in a moment *is that the wattages, the power involved in these things are relatively low. They don't bleed over from one area to another. You could , probably make a tower in Orient or Montauk big enough to reach all the way back into the city, but it would step on everything in between and the system would be infected. The reason that this works is that these are very low power sites and that actually the signal is transferred by telephone line from station to station and that' s what makes. it clear. True? MR RESAVY: Very true. MR SMITH: . Why don't you let these folks ask you questions. MR RESAVY: Do you have any questions? Let me clarify the F.A.A. point about light that was brought up earlier. We , initially filed this location with the F.A.A. and they came back and gave us a ruling that lighting and marking would be required. We reviewed that we questioned why, because there are particular rules that apply to part 77 for flight. aviation patterns.. So we contacted a consultant that we use,. Mr. James Hennesy a number of years ago was the head of the F.A.A. and for many years ran that organization. We gave all the particulars of this location to him for his review and his opinion.. After a very careful review and some contact with the F.A.A. it .is his opinion that we do not need lighting nor marking. On our behalf he has re-filed this location with the F.A.A. , he is right now ,seeking an interpretation of the initial ruling that. they gave for the. location. and we expect that within the next two weeks to thirty days it takes anywhere in between that to get the final answer of the F.A.A. and once we have that we will submit that to the Town, but at this time it is Metro One' s. opinion that we will not need lighting and marking. As in the case with Laurelton if the F.A.A. wishes us. to light this for safety reasons. without the marking we will do so. MR SMITH: That way we will supply that in the contents of the lights consideration. MR RESAVY: And. that would be the flashing red lights on the top. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER.: At all times or only during night time hours? Page 43 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: Whatever they specify for us. ' That is specified. by night we must adhere to it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I tell you the reason why it concerns me having flown in several small. airplanes, that is a circling area and having the benefit of having a private airport in the great hamlet of Mattituck, the tower I would assume at being 1.04 feet in height could be a hazard to pilots, I have not had the luxury of flying, either flying in or flying out of Mattituck either in early hours of- the morning prior to the sun coming up or to the sun going down. But those are the times that most concern me:. MR SMITH: Certainly if the Board wanted to call out something more than the F.A.A. would require., we would be happy to do so. Certainly we can't do less, I. guess is what I'm saying. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand.. Okay. Yes, question? (UNIDENTIFIED) : Bill and 2 live right across -the street from: the Baxter building and the flight of the planes going to Mattituck Airport is only one block away from our houses. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I know the, feeling. . There are many more questions we are going to ask here so, you know, . and it appears that these gentlemen and ladies have brought a substantial crew of people here so. METRO ONE: We' ll try to answer as many questions as we can. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Believe it or not it' s still a fairly early hour for this. Board.. Thank you. MR SMITH: I reduced Mr. Nickles' statement to writing, it will make things go a little. faster. MEMBER VILLA: Before the- engineer sits down I have a question and that. question is why do you need the height of 102 feet when you know you said the one. in Kennedy is like 75 feet? MR RESAVY: I believe the Southold tank tower is 125 feet, the proposed location out here in Northville is 100 feet. and each of the locations here we are an existing 300 footer here that we' re at 150 . feet in. Southampton, We' re on the Hampton . . Bays water tank and believe our. MR SMITH: I believe he' s asking why 104 here. Page 44 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: I 'm getting to that. According to the topology, we need vary and different heights, we, did actual drive tests in this location to determine..the lowest height that we can go for this location and it was evaluated that with the proposed location in both Northville and Southold, the 'Peconic police station that the 100 foot, 102 f.00t overall height is what Metro One would require to provide the service that we need to provide to our customers. MR SMITH: The next witness is. Mr. Nickles.. As I stated to the Chairman when I began to a degree that I could pre-file some of this testimony I would do so, Mr. Nickles is present, the aspect of the special exception that he testifes. to is the effect. The letter reads in closing, it is my opinion that the mass would not have any measurable effects upon the. neighborhoods fair market value beyond the effect of the. existing L.B. use or future L.B. uses as allowed under the Southold. Town code. In the brief, that was presented by Mr. Moore, he goes into some detail in mentioning the other possible uses of the Baxter site, Mr. Baxter is in fact present should there be any question about the existing structures and the fact that they remain vacant for some period of time and have been used for commercial purposes. If there are any questions of the Board of Mr. Nickles I can have him answer those questions.. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no specific. questions of Mr. Nickles at- this time. I do want to address a question to Mr. Baxter later. MR SMITH: This brings us to two of the health issues. Mr. Petersen' s resume has been given to you earlier, he. is an expert with AT&T Bell Labs and the, he goes into rather great detail, I 'm not sure that I understand a great deal of the detail, but in the closing paragraph, closing phrase of this particular letter. The proposed Mattituck Cellular Radio installation will not present any health problems to members of the public. He is of course referring to the nature of radio waves and light as the previous engineer stated to the Board this frequency and the strength of the signal is the same as was used in our. T.V. sets some years ago so I don' t know that this is an issue. But if anybody has a question, I' ll have Mr. Petersen answer the questions as health effects and radio waves. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My only concern is that of disruption to any particular devices that might exist in the local houses around the. antenna site. MR SMITH: That' s an engineering question that this young man. Page 45 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: can address. MR RESAVY: I can address that. We can provide. a document to the Board that we' ll give Allen Smith. We've got a letter, from the F.C.C. in charge of the New York area which encompasses all of this location that the five years that Metro One has- been in service we have not interfered with any commercial consumer device within our service area. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That includes cablevision in any form? MR RESAVY: That includes cable. t.v. , microwave ovens, t.v. service, any consumer electronic device that is made for the market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What about a hamm radio. MR RESAVY: No. The ability to reuse frequencies is also that we can. co-locate in many different areas, so as we are located on the tower in Southampton we are also co-located there with several hamm operators as. well. Several other services. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:: Thank you.. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, one of the other gentlemen has given me a copy of a letter dated February 28, 1991, of the F.C.C. which appears to be the letter that was referenced. One of the additional issues that arises here and I did not have the opportunity to pre-file it, is the structural engineers inquiries, Mr. Papay will address those, maybe to save us, all I will tell you my experience in briefing this particular matter I said to Mr. . Papay, "Can we blow this. tower down" , and he- said, "Of course we can blow the tower down..." I said. well oh isn't that a matter of concern, he says no. He says the force of the winds necessary to blow this tower down you are not going ,to worry about the tower coming because your neighbor' s car is going to be coming across your yard at the same time. But I ' ll let him say that in his -own style of engineering ease and answer any fall down questions that . anybody may have. MR PAPAY: The mono-pole itself is very similar to the light posts and transmission towers that you. all see along. the L.I.E. or what have you. The design of the tower itself forth by E.I.A. which is Electronics Industry Association to. 22D which is a national standard what has been also adopted by the American National Standard Institute. The design criteria of the tower itself "is a fifty year design storm for this part of Long Island it would be' eighty five miles an V , Page 46 - April 30 , 199.1 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. . MR PAPAY, cont'd: hour. Metro One has opted for a hundred year design storm which correlates to a one hundred mile an hour wind. 5o that would be the design wind itself of thirty three feet above the ground surface. You take that wind speed and you apply factors of the thing to basically accelerating the speed and the pressure so that you finally come up with a final design and like Allen has said, if upon failure there would be cars rolling across the landscape. It .would take. a tremendous force. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same also- with the antenna, I didn't mean to cut you off, the possibility of .the antenna blowing off.? MR PAPAY: That' s an interesting question, I would imagine that there would be possibly particles of antennas that would dislodge before failure goes out. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just tell you the problem that we've had in the past. This Board has wrestled. with. some interesting situations in reference. to wind generating towers. Now we don' t have the sophistication in wind generating towers that we have here it appears. and in no way am I enhancing or not enhancing this. particular project, however, we've had situations with the Coast Guard on North Dumpling Island in reference to height, wind velocity and so on and so forth, as to the disruption of their particular light which sits on top of an old Coast Guard station. In zones that would effect boating and so on and so forth. However, it has been this Board' s policy in the past and even with that of a prior council person who constructed a tower that if the tower should fall it would at least fall on his own persons' property. We have an unique situation here in the respect that Mr. Baxter owns the piece of property to the south, which I ' ll address in a moment. In this particular case, if the wind was to blow and if we were: to have the. tornado that we had in the early 80' s and some how dislodge this particular-tower,- we would of course land on the neighbor' s property to the north and if it did it in a very small fashion, you know, maybe ten or fifteen or twenty feet of .the tower would end up on that neighbor' s property, being ninety five feet away from the northwesterly property line so to speak. However for the tower to fall on the south side it would definitely fall on Mr. Baxter' s property since he is the current owner of the property. Is there any need for any tie backs on a tower of this particular nature? MR PAPAY: No. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why? Page 47 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR PAPAY: Because the tower itself is designed as a free standing structure. It is not designed as a guy structure. In fact you can get into complications if. you were to guy a structure that was intended to deflect under load. If a guy was to restrain it from deflecting and had failed itself, it may cause the tower to fail, where as if the tower was not guyed and was allowed to relieve itself it would not go. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How far is this tower penetrating the ground surface? MR PAPAY: The foundation itself varies depending on the soil conditions, it would be approximately six to- eight foot in diameter, would extend about twenty five or so feet into the earth. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Encased in cement, six to eight feet. MR PAPAY: That would be a concrete shell that' s reinforced with steel. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don' t have any further questions unless you do Bill. MR SMITH: I have two things. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. MR SMITH: We can develop for you the engineering relative to the affixing of the antenna, as a distinct object from the pole itself. If the fall down radius is a matter of concern, I think we can safely offer to move the pole to the south to some degree, such that if it came down it would not fall in the yard to the north at all. If that' s a. . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the other question I. would ask Mr. Baxter and I've met Mr. Baxter in the rear at one time, but I would ask him also if he would covenant his piece of property to the south to the same distance so as. during the period of. this lease that there would be no construction on that particular piece other than. it appears to be a concrete . building at this time, to the attune of 104 feet to a degree, whatever degree you move it. MR SMITH: I can discuss that with Mr. Baxter and ,I will get that back to you. The way we have expressed it in other jurisdictions when this issue has arisen, we would detail a fall down pattern and the way those have been expressed in other places, that they would not erect any structures in those areas. They could be parking lots and the like, but no Page 48 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR SMITH, cont'd: structures within the fall down area. I ' ll discuss that with him. He has counsel that represents him in dealing with the lease and that is a lease question. So I don't know that that would be fair of me ask tonight, but, I will get you an answer. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: This young man may be able to answer the antenna issue in terms of fall down. MR RESAVY: I just want to clarify one part about the antennas themselves. The affixing we can supply the details. and he can come up with the calculations for the affixing to the tower, but the antennas that we use in our system are made from a manufacturer who has supplied us a letter that they will withstand a 150 mile an hour wind. So we can supply that letter also, we had just applied that to a previous. owner of a Town so that' s readily available and we' ll forward that to Allen Smith. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: I `ve pretty much have had let the engineers. have their say and I' ll let Mr. Baxter jump to his feet in. a moment. We've come down at least through my mental recollection. of the check list in this special exception portion of the hearing. To the legal end of it, I believe that in submitting public utilities portion to the Board in advance as Mr. Moore has done with the brief, a question was raised relative to some can say in real English whether. Southold was within the franchise area and I again have Chris' statement to that fact reduced to writing and. I111 put it in the record. CHAIRMAN 'GOEHRINGER: Could I ask the question of the difference between NYNEX and Metro One, are they interrelated in anyway? Not necessarily at the remainder of the hearing, but. . . MR RESAVY: Since I used. to work for NYNEX I think I can answer that, many years ago. The F.C.C. when they created. the cellular franchises or the ability to provide cellular service, they did it a little differently than they did many years ago with the regional Bell operated companies. What they decided to do is provide for not one but two entities that could provide the service to the public.. That way there is not a monopoly on. one side of the fence:, so each company has in its guidelines of its license, operating license to provide the best quality service to its customers that it Page 49 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing -, Cellular Telephone- Company Southold Z.B.A. METRO ONE, cont'd: can and NYNEX is our competitor in this particular market place. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR SMITH: That' s pretty much the presentation, Mr. Chairman., I' ll invite Mr. Baxter up, he' s not a witness of mine in such, he is obviously interested and you can ask him any questions you wish to ask. him, he wishes to answer.. Mr. Baxter. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How, are you Mr. Baxter? MR BAXTER: Hi, can I help you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The concern of the Board is that of, my concern, not necessarily the concern of the Board is that of the antenna falling on your property. In that this particular time you do own both parcels.. If this organization intends to abide by the normal conditions. that we request, and the tower is moved another nine feet. to the south, it of course encroaches that much more on your southerly parcel. Our concern is that during the period of. the time of the lease that there be no construction. within approximately 104 feet of the, except what' s there now which we can't you know, but that there be no construction within 104 feet of that antenna to the rear of that existing cement block building that you have now and that' s basically one of the requests that we deal with and I 'm just addressing it at this point. It' s not necessarily something that you have to come up with an answer for tonight, as Mr. Smith said that you know; that this is a situation you might want to review with your attorneys. but we have found that in the past if we use that as a criteria that we start out with that it usually ends up to be pretty good all the way around. MR BAXTER: What is. the distance from the pole to our property line? MR SAMBURG: Let me see the revised statement if that' s all you have. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure no problem. MR SAMBURG: Okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the same one? MR SAMBURG: No. V Page 50 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. MR SAMBURG: They have already taken the liberty of. moving it to the south. The area we are concerned with of course is the fall down below. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Why don't you show that to Mr. Baxter. MR SAMBURG: Sure. I think he' s familiar. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have a date on that? MR SAMBURG: Yeah, this is a revised date of 4/23/91. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You can give' us a copy of that. MS KOWALSKI: We need about seven of them. MR SAMBURG: Seven? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yeah. MR SMITH: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Baxter will give you a written. reply to that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Great. MR SMITH: That is. my formal presentation, you have folks in the neighborhood and neighbors to address the Board and if they have concerns that I can answer, I ' ll try to do so. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER.: Okay. At the end of this discussion, I will then recess for about two minutes and discuss with the Board if we' re ,going to close this hearing or if. we' re going to venture up to Laurelton and. take a look at this antenna and then if we have' any other further questions and we' ll .let you know. MR SMITH: Thank you sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you gentlemen like to address the Board in anyway, feel free to do it in whatever. fashion you like, I know your concerns, you live close to the property and I would have similar concerns and in no way are we. MR SAMBURG: There are two questions I was going to ask today. V Page 51 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I just have your name for the record. MR SAMBURG.: Ed Samburg. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mr. Samburg. Do you have any other questions sir: MR SAMBURG: They answered everything very well. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I guess at this time we' ll take a short recess and I guess we' ll go over to the office and kick this around. Yes. MR SMITH: I do have that video. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh yeah, that' s right. MR SMITH: It' s . nothing much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is it a video? MR SMITH: Yes, it' s, they hate it. If you want to see it, it probably takes a couple, three minutes, it shows. how this. new technology in the fire trucks works and stuff. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well if you want to ,sure, if you want. to set it up while we' re taking the recess. (Video was shown for approximately 10 minutes concerning Lincoln Park, New Jersey safety services systems. ) MR SMITH: The .other two things, I guess that I did mention, it reminds me of it. These are now used by the police in a number of different areas within. my experience.. I tried to find out whether they used. it in the hostage negotiations. when the young man took over the place across the street in Mattituck from the theater. The reason. that they do it, they supply a discreet channel to the hostage that they can talk to with this where they don' t have everybody and their brother listening in. I 'm also told now that the fire chiefs are liking these better and so are the police when they go to a fatal, because it' s the nature of things such as all of us who have monitors that we pickup the police signal and they don't get the turnout of people when they start calling. in names and things of that nature and asking for the M.E. office, that they do when they use the fire channel to ask for the M.E. and stuff like that. And I guess you guys. know all about these things, but I mean that' s the size of it now and the fact is there is some a little smaller. Page 52 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. MR RESAVY: That' s antique at this point. They have them small enough to fit in your shirt pocket phone. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright the only last two questions that we have are, were there any other alternate sites in Mattituck that were investigated and. . . MR SMITH: Yes, the commercial areas are to the west of this. location, westerly generally at the school and up in that area. The degradation of the signal is the problem that happens to us when we get that far west. It. is this technology that the wind is testified to earlier. They have made a legitimate effort to identify parcels where they could go that would satisfy the engineering. It begs the question, we've a very similar experience in Riverhead. in trying to identify sites. The water towers in Polish. Town which is one of the sites. that.' s existing. They had to go up into essentially a residential farm area, if you will, up on the west end of town of the Brookhaven line. And the last one was in Vernon Well' s field. in Northville, towards the tanks as close as we could get. It is the dilemma that this Board faces the technology is such that it dictates. certain things if we had our brothers. we might do other wise. The problem, I guess, with zoning is nobody had this technology in mind, when we zoned either at Riverhead or Southold or the next place. That' s the. problem. , CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The other point is, I guess it' s the suggestion. of. the Board to recess the hearing and. ask you to come back with that determination if you can. give us a 104 foot circumference all the way around. MR SMITH: I have a plan for three items that I 'm getting for you. .-- I have to speak to Mr. Baxter and. solve the fall down issue, I've agreed to get you this information on the antenna. and when it comes loose., if it comes loose. from the tower itself, and. lastly we're going to-try to get f.or ,you the E.A.A. stuff . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER.:. Okay and you are. going to get us the address of the tower that presently exists, which is 75 feet high in Laurelton. MR SMITH: We shall. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. a Page 53 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing. - Cellular Telephone Company Southold Z.B.A. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Surely. MEMBER VILLA: How many of these are we looking at for the Town of Southold now. Is this going to be the last one or are we looking at more? MR SMITH: , I' ll try to answer and then I' ll. have one of the engineers answer. They' re speaking to the Village of Greenport about going up on the water tower there and are there any other sites. in Southold? MR RESAVY: At this time we don't anticipate any for the foreseeable future, that being our forecast for the next three years that we have looked at. And as technology changes that may be extended or it may be brought in. But at this time we do not see anything in the next three years., at this point. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would utilize this antenna, other than yourself. Would you rent space on this antenna to anybody else? MR RESAVY: . We will not rent space on this tower to anybody else except for the Town if they so desire to enhance their services in that area. But as a practice of. Metro One, we do not do that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. What about if the fire district in the immediate hamlet? MR RESAVY: We will be more than happy to support any of the safety net, fire safety, anything in that vain. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank. you. MR SMITH: That is already true on the tower that' s going up. -CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. We thank you very much and we hope to see you at the next meeting or so.. MR SMITH: The clerk will advise me or Mr. Moore when it will. be back? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. MR SMITH: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Hearing no further comment, I make a mo.tion. recessing the hearing. r1 7 4 Page 54 - April 30, 1991 Public Hearing - Cellular Telephone. Company Southold Z'.B.A. All in Favor - AYE. By --a6 � C,� (Transcribed by Tape) (Not Present at the Hearing) 31991 I RECEIVED AND FILED .BY THE SOUTHOLB TC W14 CLINIC DATE l I A��v I��UR 3- 1�e Town Clerk, Town of 'cuthold