Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-03/06/1996 HEARING r � ) m TRANSCRIPT OF PUBLIC HEARINGS WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6, 1996 SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS The Chairman read the application and legal notice for each new hearing. 7:33 p.m. Application #4353 (A & B) - ESTATE OF LORETTA SENKO, by Richard F. Lark, as attorney. The applicant has filed two applications based upon the December 11, 1995 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector, in which applicant was denied a building permit to construct a one-family on vacant land for the reason that lot nonconforming in lot size and has not been held in common ownership since July 1, 1983: Application A: An area variance is required under Section 100-25 (and 100-24) based upon a claim of practical difficulties in the event a waiver is not granted under Section 100-26. The subject lot is shown to be adjoining another lot in common ownership improved with a single family dwelling on a 15,857 sq. ft. (See proposed Set-Off map dated Nov. 13, 1995, amended Feb. 12, 1996. ) Subject parcels identified as County Tax Map Parcels No. 1000-104-4-10 and 11 Sterling Road, Nassau Farms, Cutchogue, NY. Application B: A waiver is requested under Section 100-26 for the lot as created by deed dated 2/21/58 at Liber 4432 page 170, and further deed dated 9/24/90 at Liber 11155 page 543, for parcel containing 20,297 sq. ft. in area and 100.0 ft along the south side of Sterling Road, at Nassau Farms, Cutchogue, identified as County Tax Map #1000-104-4-10. CIIAIRMAN: In both A & B files I have survey dated November 13, 1995 by Roderick Van Tuyl pc indicating the house lot which is approximately 75 by 211.88 and the lot which is the nature of this application also, which is lot #1 which is vacant, which is 20,297 sq. ft. or 100 by 195 variable. I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Lark, how are you tonight? MR. RICHARD LARK: Fine. Chairman: So nice to see you, how are you? MR. RICHARD LARK: OK. My name is Richard Lark, Main Road, Cutchogue, NY. On behalf of the applicant. If I could I'd like to talk about the application fee which is the waiver application first. If the board grants that is won't be necessary to go onto the variance application. The reason also is that the land that this application falls squarely within the four criteria that are listed in the Zoning Ordinance for a waiver. Not to be redundant because the board I think has a complete picture in the variance application, application A as well as in application B, but I'd .just like to cover a few of the basic facts not to reread the application or the request for the zoning. Page 2 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Thanks MR. RICHARD LARK: Variance or the waiver, ok. The lot in question was purchased in 1958, that's exhibit 3 as a separate lot. When lot sizes under the zoning ordinance in the Town of Southold at that time were 12,500 square feet. Zoning hadn't gone into effect until 1957. This lot in question which were asking for set off or the waiver merger is 20,297 sq. ft. , and so at that time the title or merger was not an issue. In 1981 the lot size became an issue because the zoning changed to R40 or 40,000 square feet, and the lot size being an issue. The owner's Peter and Loretta Senko came to yours truly, to get a separate deed transferred which was done. You have that as exhibit 4 which was transferred to Peter Senko, and the main reason for that was to avoid a merger. However, in 1990 Peter Senko became extremely ill. At that time he was 76 years of age. I have his Son here tonight who will talk about that, having lived with his father at that time. Mr. Senko, the elder Mr. Senko became extremely worried and preoccupied with the notion that he was going to die. He wanted everything simplified for his wife. In fact, he wanted to avoid all types of probate and everything, and in his confusing 14 days prior to his death, he had a family member who was a newly admitted Attorney fix up the deed which is exhibit 5, transferring the title back to him and his wife. Which of course at that time, automatically merged the property, and this transfer's what is being asked tonight in the application for a waiver. That the board in fact, wavered as far as zoning is concerned. On the original lot lines, that were separate lots prior to that time. I believe situations like these must have come up and then envision, come up before this board before, and been envisioned by the Town father's, when they adopted 100.26 of the zoning ordinance, to allow the waiver of this legal merger because as I said, the fact pattern of this property does fit squarely within the four listed criteria. 1. There will be no significant increase in the density of the neighborhood. That's obvious what you have in the site plans there. There can be only one more house established on that lot. 2. To be granting of the waiver would recognize this lot whose size is consistent with the majority of the lots whose also going out into Bay avenue and if you will, Skunk Road in this neighborhood, for which the waiver is being requested. If the lot as I said before is 200,297 sq. ft. and the board in visiting and looking at this, it's viewed on exhibit 6, can verify the undersized lots is the norm of the majority of lots in this particular neighborhood. 3. The granting of the waiver will avoid economic hardship to the heirs of Loretta Senko. It is obvious, due to the size of the lots in the neighborhood but the merging with this vacant lot with the improved parcel which the house is on will not add principally to it's value. The real estate broker you see, there is an contract of sale to sell the improved lot, and the real estate broker is here tonight also to testify that the vacant lot added to it, will not significantly improve the value. Exhibit 7 which is what would be proposed there, with the setbacks off the street. It shows the location of the proposed wells and cesspools and so on. It shows that a house can be built on this big parcel f A 1 Page 3 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals without changing any of the contours of the land. Nor will it require any fill. Nor will it effect the natural drain which is in the rear of the property, and on the adjacent property. So, it's submitted that it will not be in the environmental impact by allowing a house to be built on this. So considering that in mind, any further adieu, I suggest to the board that this application does fall squarely within the criteria, and if the board has any questions I, Mr. Senko or the real estate agent can answer any questions we will, on that particular phase of the presentation. CHAIRMAN: When was the house built. MR. RICHARD LARK: The house. CHAIRMAN: Prior to 63. MR. RICHARD LARK: Oh yes, the house on the adjacent lot was built, I think the lot was purchased on 1952, and the house was built shortly thereafter. The house was constructed.prior to zoning, yes. CHAIRMAN: Thank you MR. RICHARD LARK: There is an addition put on after zoning, with a deck in the back. That was done later on the house itself, and I think you have copies of the certificate of occupancy. CHAIRMAN: Right MR. RICHARD LARK: On the variance application. CHAIRMAN: OK, we'll start with Mr. Villa. Mr. Villa, do you have any questions. MEMBER VILLA: Well, you said something about value. Do you want to put that into the record? MR. RICHARD LARK: OK, I was going to do that on the variance application but I can do it here. There is a contract to sell the existing house as it situates there on the lot next door for $115,000.00. When the, Mrs. Senko died, Loretta Senko, died the estate appraisal for the vacant lot was $65,000.00. The real estate agent tells me that if the vacant lot was added to the improved lot, it would only bring up the price of about the whole kit and caboodle to $125,000.00 as strange as that may be, because you couldn't use it for anything if the lots were merged. So, it's fairly clear and the broker can talk about that more in length if you want Mr. Villa, but it's fairly clear then. You've got a $55,000.00 spread here, based on appraisals, and what there is and outstanding valid contract to sell the one family dwelling. MEMBER VILLA: I just wanted the numbers, that's all. MR. RICHARD LARK: OK, I was going to put that in if you wanted me to go through the criteria of the variance application. Do you want to do that now? t = Page 4 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Well, let's go down the line first. Mr. Dinizio. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I don't have any questions. CHAIRMAN: No questions. Mrs. Tortora. MEMBER TORTORA: One of the things that you had said on your application that deals with the contour, and that little dip on the property in the back. Is that, the new building envelope would follow the lot, you know the setback of the existing house adjacent to it, the existing house, and I wondered if you had any problem as putting that in as a condition. MR. RICHARD LARK: No, none whatsoever, none whatsoever. MEMBER TORTORA: No filling. MR. RICHARD LARK: No, that's not a problem either, because I did talk to both Peter Senko who's here with me tonight, and the surveyor who I have located, and he said, there would be no problem locating it. In fact, the actual construction of the house practically from a foundation standpoint would be very similar to the house to the West. The back yard portion, the foundation would be mainly exposed. You would be digging into the hill if you would. That type of thing. MEMBER TORTORA: As long as you wouldn't have any objection to making that a condition. MR. RICHARD LARK: No, I said no. No they would not. CHAIRMAN: Serge MEMBER SERGE: No. CHAIRMAN: Now you may continue if you wouldn't mind. MR. RICHARD LARK: OK. Now the application A which was started and that was really mainly on the behest of the building inspector, because he insisted that a variance be done, because the waiver requirements were not finalized at that time. So originally, we applied for area variance, and if the waiver is not granted by the board which I submit. That would be the most practical solution to this problem. Then the request is for an area variance due to this inadvertent merger that took place when Mr. Senko right prior to his death, did this deed. To grant an area variance as the board is aware, the statute under the Town law 267 has been changed, and you must take in the following criteria. The benefit to the applicant in this case. The estate of Loretta Senko. If you grant the variance by allowing two lots as originally envisioned, the benefit is obvious, and there mainly economic. As I just explained to Mr. Villa. The estate is presently under contract to sell the original lot, which is improved by one family dwelling for the sum of $115,000.00. , and the contract of course is contingent on the board granting a variance. As I explained, that there was an estate appraisal for the vacant lot, which is $65,000.00 so the economic benefit. This economic w t t Page 5, - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals benefit weighted• again the detriment to any of the health, safety or welfare of the neighborhood. It would be for the board to determining in granting the variance. I submit that there is no detriment considering the criteria, five criteria set forth in the statue. Whether the first one, whether an undesirable change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood, or a detriment to the neighboring property, if a variance is granted. I submit, there is no detriment by granting this variance, and permission to build an additional house which was visually envisioned, and primarily enjoyed by the rest of the neighborhood, which is today undersized lots. If the variance is not granted there is no other feasible method to grant the petitioner relief, unless of course, the board does grant a waiver, and it's submitted that the request for an area variance is not substantial when you consider the neighborhood. I The two lots are undersized by the R40 or 400,000. square foot requirement, being 20,297 feet. The vacant lot and the improved lot 15,857 square feet. So when you look at the undersized lots in the neighborhood, these two lots fit, are very compatible with the size. Are more or less an average size considering both Sterling Road, and the lots running on Bay avenue, because the lots size run all over the place. But the 20,297 square foot lot is very average, and the 15,857 is only slightly undersized when you look, when you average a square footage of the lots. 4. It is submitted that there will be no adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in this neighborhood by the allowing of the construction of a one family dwelling on a vacant lot. 5. Sure the difficulty of this merger was a self imposed or self created. But when you consider the circumstances of this sick elderly man Peter Senko, without competent counsel, doing what he did. I think the board as the statute said, although relevant it is not necessary preclude the granting of a variance. It was written right into the statute by a Legislature. So, I respectfully submit that in the interest of substantial justice that a variance be granted. In other words, using the balancing test which the statute creates by setting forth this criteria, I believe considering all of the factors as stated in the full petition, which you have before you, and considering the neighborhood itself. I believe it proper for you to grant the petition for a variance. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there someone else that would like to speak, either the real estate broker or Mr.Senko? MR. PETER SENKO: Yes, I would like to say a few words. CHAIRMAN: OK, Good evening Sir, how are you. MR. PETER SENKO: Good evening. Good evening everyone. I'm going to be brief. I'll tell you who I am. I'm Peter Senko, and I've lived in Cutchogue most of my life, my young life. I'm a graduate of Southold High School in 1964. I'm going to get right to it. This merger that occurred, was news to my family, and only became known to us after our mother's death. Not after my Father's death. My Mother dies, it will be two years in September. She died in September of 1994. My Father died in 1990, i r Page 6 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals October 8, 1990. My mother in the period after my Father's death, failed, and she failed quite rapidly. At one point, knowing that we would need alot of money to take care of her, as she started to deteriorate. I hadn't a clue that this had occurred. We always thought that that lot, was a separate lot, a building lot. At one point I even listed it for sale, thinking in the future I was going to need monies to take care of my Mother as she grew progressive worse. Finally, my Mom passed away, and my brothers and I decided that we wanted to sell her house, and I proceeded, and it was only brought to my attention within the last year, that these lots have been merged, and that brings me to the point that. Whatever my Dad did at the end of his life unknown to anyone in the family. He engaged an Attorney who is his niece in Brooklyn, and it must have been on his mind that it would be simpler for my Mom to carry on, without going through whatever machinations go on in real estate, that everything was hers, and put back in her name. It was a big mistake. I'm begging your indulgence in overlooking that, and grant this disclaimer. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Let me see, does anybody have any questions? Any questions of this gentlemen? No, thank you so much MR. PETER SENKO: Thank you CHAIRMAN: Anybody else Mr. Lark? MR. RICHARD ABATELLI: Yes, I'm Richard Abatelli from Abatelli Real Estate. Yes, we do have a contract as Mr. Lark stated for $115,000.00, and I am a licensed and certified appraiser for the State of New York. Although Mr. Lark has a separate appraisal indicating what the value is, for the lot. Either it was not merged. I can attest that this is fair value $65,000.00 for a separate lot, and if in fact the lot were merged, the value would be minimal above what the value of what I received in the contract presently. A fair value of about $10,000.00 is a fair representative of what the increase, what the improvement would be on the property behalf. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this application? Is there anybody that would like to speak against this application? I know there is one letter in the file. You're very welcome to use the mike if you would. If it's not an imposition. Just state your name. MR. WILLIAM WAGENPHASS: My name is Richard Wagenphass. I live on Sterling Road. I take exception to Mr. Lark's categorization of the lot being a typical size lot on Sterling Road. My lot is in excess of 60,000 square foot, three lots away. Now I'm sure you have an overall map which indicates --. This probably shows the school ( ) on the map. There a numerous other houses on the block, several which are larger than mine. I don't think that the lot in question is typical at all on the block. When you say average, although I haven't looked at every house. Is it correct that both lots in combinations fall short of the R40, the current R40, 20 and 15. CHAIRMAN: It looks like it to me. That is correct t 4 Page 7 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. WILLIAM WAGENPHASS: It would seem to me --. Also, is there an indication of the wetland involved, with the pond and the birds and all that sort of thing. CHAIRMAN: Your welcome to make your own determination. Here's the map. MR. WILLIAM WAGENPHASS: No. MEMBER TORTORA: Is it on the property in question? MR. WILLIAM WAGENPHASS: Part of the grade, part of the water flow from the lot into the pond. That's a very sharp picture. MEMBER TORTORA: Do you want to take a look at it? CHAIRMAN: It's down in the corner. MR. WILLIAM WAGENPHASS: Where the pond shows in the lower left hand corner. CHAIRMAN: That's correct MR. FRANK ANDERSON: Well, right now. MR. WILLIAM WAGENPHASS: You're not showing the pitch. CHAIRMAN: It's not a ( ) . MR. FRANK ANDERSON: It's evidentially here, but it looks like it's much deeper or more of a pond right now then what shows on the map. MR. RICHARD WAGENPHASS: There's alot of water in there. That's all I wanted to say. CHAIRMAN: OK, thank you. MR. FRANK ANDERSON: I also live on Sterling Avenue. MR. RICHARD WAGENPHASS: He also has a lot considerably larger than R40. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak against. Sir. MR. KENNETH POLIWODA: My name is Ken Poliwoda and I live west of that lot that's being divided, and I find it --. They had alot to say here tonight but alot of it was said because. It's just not right what they are doing. They're taking a lot or a whole street of lots on this size, which according to a lot. Let's say this size, an average size, and now they are breaking it up into this size lot. Where actually they breaking one into one third, and two thirds next to me. They are trying to get it as big as Page 8 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals possible so that they can get a buildable lot out of the whole deal, and it's just not right. Especially, now that you have a wetland involved, and a pond which is behind my house, and probably consumes half my property. Maybe 20 feet are there's. That's a considerable grade and there is alot of wildlife in that pond. There are ( ) , red hawks, all kinds of frogs, all kind of animals, and so by building on this lot, I can't see how they can't be environmentally impacted. By taking away from the natural flow of the water in that pond. On my deed it says, that pond is there. It's natural drinking water. It's not that. I gave a phone call to DEC, and they came up with. That it's going to be analyzed, but as right now that has salt water marsh. So they must be--. They figure salt water intrusion into that pond plus, fresh water drinking water underneath. By their laws that--. I don't know if this lot has been subdivided yet. I don't know if that one( ) but under the salt water division, subdivision is in the salt water territory, and it required 300 feet of new building, unless you get a special permit. As for fresh water, it's a 100 foot boundary. It's just considered ( )fresh water. I believe the Town has a 75 foot boundary. CHAIRMAN: That's correct. MR. KENNETH POLIWODA: So, therefore that would be three permits right there they'd need if this lot was considered fresh water and salt water parcel, and I think it's just not right what they are doing. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Anybody else would like to speak against. OK, thank you. I do have one letter in the file also, that's against. Mr. Lark anything you would like to wrap up. MR. PETER SENKO: Right, I'd like to say a another couple of words here regarding that pond. The area of the property first of all dries up every Summer, and I recall the lot in back of the property that we're talking about. It's now owned by the Marcin family, I believe it is. It used to be owned by a family by the name of May, and I would think that half of the back yard of the Marcin parcel came out of that runoff in the Summer. Mr. May would go there, and dig out the dirt, and use that top soil for his garden. He had a big, big garden in the back there. To me, it's a run off. It dries up in Summer time, and the house that's to the West of that lot. My goodness, I know that house and I've been in that house and if you're talking about not doing the right thing. That house sits right on that pond with about maybe 10 feet from the edge of that runoff. So, I object to that, and that characterization as to what we want to do. We would be way far away in our construction. Whereas the people objection to this, is right on top of it. I don't quite see the logic. That's what I want to say and I want it to be known that that dries up in Summer. There is no question about it. CHAIRMAN: Thank you Mr. Senko. Yes Mr. Poliwoda, could we keep this relatively brief. MR. KENNETH POLIWODA: Yes, I just like to rebuff that. It doesn't dry up. It's actually, on my map of my deed it's 10 feet, two spots in that pond so in no way it dry up. It forms a green moss which is very healthy. y A Page 9 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Thank you, ok. Hearing no further comment I make a motion. Anybody have any other questions before I make a motion. MEMBER VILLA: Close the hearing CHAIRMAN: I make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. All in favor. 8:03 p.m. Amended Appli. No. 3649 - CHRISTOPHER CONNORS. This is an application for a variance based upon a disapproval issued by the . Building Inspector dated 2/8/96 for a building permit to construct single-family dwelling with an insufficient front yard setback, Article 111A, Section 100-30A.3. , and the subject to obtaining approval from the Southold Town Trustees and other appropriate agencies, concerning premises known as 350 West Drive, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-59-5-29.3 CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a survey indicating a proposed house to be constructed approximately 26 feet from the public road, and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Connors, how are. you tonight. MR. CONNORS: Good CHAIRMAN: Pleasure to meet you. Mrs. Connors, how are you. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Yes, I am Chris Connors and this is Eileen Connors, my wife. CHAIRMAN: This has been a long process. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Oh, has it ever. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: That's an understatement. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: It's been a 9 year old deal, and we hope the board will grant us this variance so we can finally build a house that we planned on doing about 9 years ago. I'm sure, as the. board is aware. I've been really working with the Trustees on this application, and the DEC, and they finally --. Together we finally, I guess, agreed on this location after many different proposals of scaling back the house, and the location, and we spent clot of money on this project, and an awful lot of time. I hope that you'll see it. Be able to see it, and give us this variance. CHAIRMAN: The establishment of placing this house in this position is basically a -- MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: To culminate the Trustees position on minimizing the impact on the fresh water wetlands that are located on the property. CHAIRMAN: OK, thank you for saying that. Let me just see if there are any questions from any board members. We'll start with Mr. Doyen. Page 10 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. DOYEN: No. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora. MEMBER TORTORA: This has to ( ) in the front. How high will that be. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Three and one half feet. There is a retaining wall that is going to, proposed to go around the cesspool, is three and one half feet high. MEMBER TORTORA: So, it will be three and one half feet high, and how high will the house be, the elevation of the house. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: The base elevation has to be about 11 feet above mean sea level, and then from there --. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: It can't go higher than 35 feet so we're hoping to build it within all the zoning laws. MEMBER TORTORA: So you'll be able to put two story, and it will be 11 feet from the structure from there. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: Yes but, the property line, the property grade is higher than, it's a little higher. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: It's three feet. It's based three feet to start with. It's the property, and then we have to come up with an eight foot piling, eight foot, piling is what it is, and then from there you begin to start to level, the base level of the house. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: That's the two story house. CHAIRMAN: So it's going to be driven piling as opposed to permanent foundations. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Yes CHAIRMAN: Which is still permanent but I'm just saying. I'm saying enclosed. OK, thank you. Mr. Dinizio. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I have no questions. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Villa MEMBER VILLA: You're saying that the wall is going to be three something. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Three and one half approximately, yes. MEMBER. VILLA: Because it say's that the top of the wall is something like 7.3 according to the map here. Elevation on the corner is 3.1, so that would make it four foot something, and that's going to be right on your front property line, right. Page 11 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: It's on the property line. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: It's on the amount of property line. It was seven. The property is 3 and it was 7.1 . The surveyor told me, it was 3 and one half foot, and he is the one that proposed it, and I asked him how high or low, and he said three and one half feet. MEMBER VILLA: Does anybody have any records of wells being as deep as I see this well proposed to be. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Of the 85 foot well. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: Well, we had a house on Lincoln Drive and that was about 80 feet. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: That was about 80 feet down. We lived around the corner from this location about 10 years , and the well there was --. MEMBER VILLA: I see the Health Department is requiring the well to be 85 feet into ground water. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Right MEMBER VILLA: Because it's not the 100 foot separation. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Correct MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: Correct MEMBER VILLA: On the cesspool and I was just wondering. You're pretty close to the Sound and I was just wondering if were going to --. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: We were closer to the Sound on Lincoln Drive. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: ( ) You know, dealing with the various agencies, whether it be the Health Department and the Trustees, you know. We tried to accommodate anybody the best that we can, and we tried to coordinate. But it really wasn't that easy of a process because you know. It took us nine years between the DEC and the Health Department and the Trustees. But, we did whatever we possible could to accommodate anybody so we could just get on with this project. MEMBER VILLA: Just for the record. Out of a 20,000 square foot lot you got 13, 500 square feet that are wetland. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Well, at the time I bought this property I researched it with the Building Department, and unfortunately it just --. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: It did not come to light until after we purchased it. After we had tried to start the process of trying to build a house, is when that all came about. A Page 12 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. CHRIS CONNORS: I wasn't aware. Obviously if I would had known anything or the Building Department. All I did was ask them whether I could build on this lot. It was checked into--. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: This lot was part of a larger parcel that was subdivided in 1972. That was approved by the Zoning Board for to be separate singles lots. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes that's true. I did check that. Do you have copies of it, by the way. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: This was subject to what was issued a vacant land seal, which was explained to me at the time by the Building Department which means. You can build a house on this lot. In actuality, when push comes to shove, because we've had Attorney's with VanCort and you know. ' It says subject to on it, and other approvals and other agencies. That's why we've been involved with the other agencies. We try to make the best out of a bad situation. CHAIRMAN: Anything else Bob MEMBER VILLA: Well, I just think it's 26 feet from the road with a four foot wall, and a house sticking up 35 feet. It's going --. The lot shouldn't really be built on it to be perfectly truthful. I know where there coming from, and I know the problems they've had. But, it's really a lot that should have never been built on. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Well, if I had my choice. This wasn't really our proposal. It was really the Trustees that told us. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: We came to this proposal based on what we were allowed to do. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: I've never been in a bargaining position from day one on this, and I'm just trying to follow the best that I can, all the needs that are given to me. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: What we're asking for is to be able to bring the house up 14 feet from what the Zoning code is. MEMBER. VILLA: Yes, and your bringing in 500 and some yards of fill to --. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: That's for the cesspool. It's required by the Health Department. We're bringing in the minimum. Everything on this project really bare bones minimum. From the Health Department, from the Trustees, we've got it down to inches, and you know it's lean as it possibly, really that I could think of, that I could get. MEMBER VILLA: Well, I don't know how the decision going to go, but if it gets approved, when you build those walls, you better be sure they're waterproof because I was part of the Health Department before, and I saw many walls that had sewage seeping through the side of them, and it's not a � 1 Page 13 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals happy situation. So, if you're going to be living there, you better see that that is done right. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: This project has been under a magnifying glass for the nine years since we've been doing it. So everything we do, is going to be strict, you know, to the letter of the law, and everything is going to follow that, and I know I have alot of people that have been following it. Different agencies and then making sure what I do, everything exactly proper. MEMBER VILLA: It's going to be a year round house. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: It's for my parents as well. They initially were going to retire out of this house. That was, as I said it was nine years ago. What they intend to do now, I --. It was initially a year round house. What we're going to do with it now. It's a combination of both, my family. I have several kids and my parents as well. You know, it's going to be a year round house. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: We intend it to be year round. CHAIRMAN: I can attest to the long hard road that you've had. It's unbelievable. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: That it is CHAIRMAN: We don't have any further questions. We'll see what emanates from the hearing. Oh I'm sorry, go ahead. MEMBER TORTORA: What's the total square footage of the house. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: 20,000 SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: The house. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: It's about 1700, 25 feet from what we're proposing. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: The base of the house is 25 by 40, which is 1,000 square, and we're proposing putting like, three quarters from the top. We figured out 1725. CHAIRMAN: Good MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: 1750 . MEMBER TORTORA: 1750. MRS. EILEEN CONNORS: There about. CHAIRMAN: OIL, thank you again. MR. CHRIS CONNORS: Thank you 1 Page 14 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor of this. Any members of the family, no, ok. Anybody like to speak against the application. OK, I guess that's it. We thank you for coming in. We will address it this evening hopefully, and your welcome to stay around and listen to the battle. So on that note I will make a motion closing the hearing, and reserving decision until later. All in favor. 8:12 p.m. Appl. No. 4364 - B RUNO A. KAWECKI. This is an application for a variance based upon a disapproval issued under Article 111A, Section 100-30A.4 (100-33) by the Building Inspector dated 2/14/96 for a building permit to construct one-story accessory garage in a side yard at premises known as 605 Knollwood Lane, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-107-6-8. (Location in a rear yard with a 15-ft. setback is required. ) Jason Leonard, of Bohn Contracting as agent.. CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a survey dated May 18, 1989 indicating this one story frame house, and penned in on the side of this home is a 19 by 25 foot garage, which is the nature of this application. I have a copy of a Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Who would like to be heard? How are you tonight Sir. MR. JASON LEONARD: All right CHAIRMAN: Could you state your name for the record. MR. JASON LEONARD: My name is Jason Leoarard. I am a contractor for Mr. Kawecki. CHAIRMAN: Is this building a one story garage? MR. JASON LEONARD: Yes CHAIRMAN: What's the maximum height would you say? MR. JASON LEONARD: The maximum height should be approximately 15 feet. CHAIRMAN: Great. What kind of utilities are you planning to put in the garage, other than electricity? MR. JASON LEONARD: Nothing, just electric. CHAIRMAN: OK, is there a particular reason why you chose this location, or he chose this location. MR. JASON LEONARD: Basically because he does not have the room in the back yard without getting involved in more work, as far as the foundation. CHAIRMAN: OK. We'll start I think with Mr. Villa this time, Mr. Villa. MEMBER VILLA: No, I have no problems with this. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dinizio Page 15 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER DINIZIO: No, me either. CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora MEMBER TORTORA: No CHAIRMAN: No, this is unbelievable. MEMBER TORTORA: It's very easy tonight, I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN: I think you've got a shoe in on this one. Let's see what happens. Mr. Doyen: You said no. MEMBER DOYEN: No CHAIRMAN: Any words. You don't want to ask this gentleman any questions. MEMBER DOYEN: It happens. CHAIRMAN: OK, while your, -- what. MEMBER DINIZIO: I'll make a motion. CHAIRMAN: Wait a minute. I have to go through the hearing first, all right. Trying to cut .the chase or what. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor other than this gentlemen? Anybody against? OK Mr. Dinizio MEMBER DINIZIO: I'll make a motion granted as applied. CHAIRMAN: Containing the only utility is, electricity. MEMBER DINIZIO: The only utility is electricity, right. CHAIRMAN: I'll seconded it. All in favor. 8:17 p.m. Appl. No. 4365 - JOSEPH A. POTTGEN. This is an application for a variance based upon a disapproval issued under Article XX111, Section 100-239.4B by the Building Inspector dated 2/8/96 for a building permit to construct a rear deck addition within 75 feet of existing bulkhead. Location of Property 550 Blue Marlin Drive, Southold; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1.000-57-1-27. 50 or 52 is requested. CHAIRMAN: I have a sketch of a survey indicating a one story frame dwelling. The nature of this application is deck in the rear yard, approximately 52 feet from the bulkhead. I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Who would like to be heard? How are you tonight Sir? OK, your on. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: First I'd like to amend the application to read 51 feet, instead of, I think it reads 52 or 3. c Page 16 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: 52. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: 52 MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN : 52. I needed two more feet. The reason I'd like to amend it, I guess from 52 to 50 because it's the one figure that I didn't have when I submitted everything for the Building Department, and since I submitted a scale drawing, the lady just took out the ruler and measured so I use this, and didn't have to go back and came up with that number, 52 feet. In actuality, when I went out to measure it, it came out to just a couple of inches over 50 feet. There are other decks that have been constructed in the area that range from 49 feet to 53 feet. I'm trying right in the middle of that, either 50 or 51 feet. I know what you told me the other day Mr. Doyen, and I pleaded my case with you. I hope you'll hear me out before you make a decision. I just moved to Southold in August 14, and we like the Town. It's a nice area. I believe in supporting my Town in fact, .I had alot of work done to my house. The plumber I hired was a Southold plumber, so I'm supporting the Town. The electrician I hired is a Southold electrician, ( ) because I want to support my Town. I had a new heating system put in again, by a Southold contractor. I had air conditioning put in by a Southold contractor. I had contractors do extensive landscaping in the Spring by a Southold contractor. So, I believe in supporting my Town, and I hope when you review the file here. I think I've included everything that needs to be. That you'll consider and support me in my request to amend the ( ) . I know it doesn't sound like alot. I'm not sure why Mr. Villa deemed it, kind of really significant. But you know, it doesn't interfere with any of my neighbors as far as their view. It doesn't hinder any water views on either side, and the fact that there are four other properties really close by, because it's not. a very big street. That, to have that street from the bulkhead or the height water line, a new range from --. I think I have it in there. One is 48 feet, another one is 49. One is 51, there's another one 53, and I feel like I'm kind of falling right in the middle of that. If you would grant me this variance I'd be able to proceed with the original plans I had for the deck. CHAIRMAN: Now, I know you. Some of us have talked to you. Is this an open deck? MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Yes CHAIRMAN: Not unroofed. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN Oh, it will never be roofed. I think I included that in my application. CHAIRMAN: All right. We'll start with Mr. Doyen, any questions. MEMBER DOYEN: No CHAIRMAN: Mrs. Tortora: I was very impressed on how you documented all of your neighbors variances as it were. Page 17 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR.. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Oh, thank you. MEMBER TORTORA: Why would this be a hardship for you, if it's not granted? MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Well, I'm not sure how I feel because, it's just a first appearance I've ever made for any kind of variance with the Town, and I just want to be able to enjoy a way of life that I expected to enjoy with guests and family. We have a large family. I don't see how it would effect any numbers of the neighbors in any adverse way, because our other decks that are of the same size, from 48 to 53 feet. I guess I could say gee, I don't need a deck at all, and I would survive and I would get along, and I would live. But I just would like to maintain the same standard of living that some of my other neighbors enjoy who have decks too within 48 feet. Did I answer that right. MEMBER TORTORA: You did fine. CHAIRMAN: Are you still asking questions. MEMBER TORTORA: Just one more. One of the things that the board is asking for, is that we consider the minimum to grant the minimum variance, and in this case, where you are clearly going toward the bulkhead. Would you be opposed if we came back to the deck a little bit? Instead of 50 feet, 46 feet. Reduce the size of the deck. Could you still --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: You mean 56. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: 42 MEMBER DINIZIO: It's 52 now. MEMBER TORTORA: Which would mean, to reduce the deck area. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: So the setback would be greater. 60 feet setback. Is that what you mean? MEMBER TORTORA: I'm not saying a specific number, I'm asking. You could still use the deck and enjoy it, if it were --. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Well, I just wouldn't be able to use it to the extent that I would have used it, if it were -- MEMBER TORTORA: It's a 1,000 square foot deck as it's proposed, correct. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: I'm sorry . MEMBER TORTORA: A 1,000 square foot deck as proposed. MR. JOSEPG POTTGEN: It's probably a little bit under that. Page 18 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, that's what the Trustees had granted for a deck. MEMBER TORTORA: My question was. If we came back on that which increased the distance from the bulkhead. Instead of 1,000 foot deck, we had an 850 foot deck. Would you still be able to enjoy it? MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Not to the extent that my neighbors are now enjoying theirs, who are only 49, 48, 51 and 53 feet from the bulkhead. I can't stand here and say no. I won't be able to enjoy my deck. I'd be lying to you. I'm not going to try to pull the wool over your eyes, or try to get cute with birds. Honest to God. I guess if I had a 10 foot deck out there, I'd probably find a way to enjoy that. You know what I mean. MEMBER TORTORA: OK MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: It's not a question of less enjoyment. It's a question of, I guess. Being properly equipped to entertain as much as we do for a large family. We do have alot of friends that we invite over, and I guess that was my idea, and it kind of fit right into the plan that I had for the entire house. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I just want to mention one thing. You said your neighbors have 49 feet, 51 and 53. That's by variance from the Board of Appeal, correct. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Or is that from --. A couple of them are variances. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Well, I have --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I just want to clear that for the record. MEMBER. DINIZIO: Right MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: I have one here on ( ) .Pacifico and Marieo Palebre. They have a wood deck and a pool. The pool itself is only 52 feet from the bulkhead, but the deck is only 49 feet from the bulkhead. I measured that one myself. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That was one that got a variance. That was 53 feet, right. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: There was another one. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: : I think it was Pacifico and then Kelly was another one. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Kelly. That was approved for 53 feet. So we have one at 49, and one at 53, and I'm asking for 50 or 51. Page 19 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: And I think Pacifico got a side yard variance, but at the time the bulkhead law was not in effect or something there, so they didn't need a variance for the setback from the bulkhead. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Pacifico, that whole bunch. They were really involved. CHAIRMAN: Ok, we'll go on to Mr. Dinizio. MEMBER DINIZIO: I'm just somewhat confused here, about the measurements. It's not as applied for here that you're asking for tonight. But rather, I see 52 feet written here on this survey. CHAIRMAN: He needs 50 feet 6 inches approximately. That's what he's requesting. MEMBER DINIZIO: 50 feet. CHAIRMAN: He's asking us to modify it to 50 feet. MEMBER DINIZIO: 6 inches. CHAIRMAN: Around 50 feet. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right. Now you know, I think I'm probably thinking along the same lines as Bob. You know, I'm looking at this deck and it's twenty two feet. In all honestly Sir, my house is that size. I just wanted to --. You have these two jets sticking out. What the distance is of that, and if you could just maybe square that off, would that be a problem? I mean, I don't know if there three feet, two feet, whether they stick out. I can't from anything here, envision what that could be, that it couldn't be straightened out. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: This is my wife Jacqualine. MRS. JACQUALINE POTTGEN: I've gone up and down the walk ( } and we have checked it out, all the houses and the decks. The deck that we're proposing is to enhance our property as well as the neighborhood, and what your probably looking at and I think what you're talking about is. We're going to octagon one area of the deck. Is that --. MEMBER DINIZIO: There are two pieces that stick out. MRS JACQUALINE POTTGEN: There's two octagons. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: It's a visually appealing way --. MRS JACQUALINE POTTGEN: Rather than just make it straight. Just make the two octagons on either end, I think is just going to enhance the whole thing. MEMBER DINIZIO: What about doing that two feet or three feet earlier than Page 20 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. JACQUALINE POTTGEN: Yes, it's a personal thing. Do I like a deck with two octagon's rather than just a straight deck. MEMBER DINIZIO: But what I'm saying is how about cutting three feet off of that, or two feet 6 inches. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: If I would hold them between the 49 and the 53 feet, and kind of hold right between there, why wouldn't that be granted if I just kind of averaging in the middle of four or five houses that are there. That are really 48 to 53 feet. That's, I know what I'm asking for. It's not going to --. I can't think of a single reason, hearing the negative fashion, why it would do anything to the neighborhood, to the neighbors, to the property because of that extra ( ) on there. MEMBER DINIZIO: Other than the fact that, you know we have setback laws and you know, you're asking to vary it. We try to look for the minimal. I'm personally trying to look for something to hold on to. You really haven't stated that you would be unhappy if we did restrict it to anything. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: The reason I'm still standing up here trying to plea my case if because, I'd be really disappointed. In fact, I said I can't see at the bottom. Mr. Villa, last night I said to my wife. What good reason could there be. I'm not disturbing anybody, anybody's property. There is no visual objections. I can't understand why --. MEMBER VILLA: Well, let me jump in here. The reason why --. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Everybody on the street already has a deck just about. I think there must be one that doesn't. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, if we used that argument, then all of Southold would have a --. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Oh no, no. MEMBER TORTORA: Setback back from the bluff, and there are instances when or bulkheads, and there are clearly instances when there are not other alternatives. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Yes MEMBER. TORTORA: And there are clearly instances when that is merited. There are other instances when it's not. What we're all saying and I think we're all saying the same thing. If you want to come out 22 feet, cut that back. You don't have to come out 22 feet. You don't have to have, a 1,000 square foot deck. We want to preserve the integrity of that line and of the law. Also, under the law we are required to grant the minimum variance necessary. That's a New York State Law. MEMBER DINIZIO: I for one think we're dealing in a very minute thing. I agree with you. But I do again, if we have to argue this thing. You know, I would like to have some indicating as to the reason why you feel Page 21 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals compelled to have a 22 foot deck, as opposed to a 20 foot deck. You know, there is some particular reason why that extra two feet. You must have that extra two feet. You know, I personally would feel I'd like to know that reason so I could state that reason if I was so inclined to grant it. If you can't come forward with that, I don't know that, looking at 1,000. Looking at 1,000 foot deck would do that. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: I would enjoy my property and the deck the way I could have. It would choke me but I would learn to live with it I guess. But it would trouble me that I'm asking for 51, and there are other properties that have been approved at 48 or 49. MEMBER. VILLA: Let me address that. We'll address that on the basis that I don't know when those took place. The only one that was granted since I've been sitting on the board in that area is 53 feet, and that's what I said to you. I'd like to stick with 53 feet, because if we go to 50, then the next one comes in wants 48, and the next one comes in wants 45 and they keep. Where do you stop? I said, we've had situations where people have a 10 foot deck and you ask then to cut back four feet. They say we can't, because we only have six foot of deck. We can't enjoy it. You're still going to have 19 feet of deck. You're asking for a 50% relief from the code. The code says, 75 feet. You're asking for 50. That's not a minor variance. That's 50 0 of the code. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: Well, but Pacifico got 49 feet out on it. How did MEMBER VILLA: Those are years back. Things change. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: I exist in the neighborhood now. What exists in the neighborhood now are decks that are 48 or 53 feet. MEMBER VILLA: The last one we granted was 53, and I normally would sit up here and be arguing for the 75. I said, I would stay with 53 because that was what we granted. Personally, I not about to vary off 53 feet. We've got to drawer the line someplace. Yes, if you had a 10 foot deck that's one thing. You have a 22 foot deck you're requesting. CHAIRMAN: Could I just say something Bob? The issue of the what we refer to as a one sided octagon is 4 feet 6 inches in actual depth, ok. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: It was supposed to be four. CHAIRMAN: OK, if it's four. I mean, I think they're talking to reduce that to two. I think that's what they're saying, ok or there about. MEMBER VILLA: It's two feet from the ( ) path so I don't care what shape it is. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes CHAIRMAN: You know, that's basically what we're. talking about. I mean, Page 22 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: I requested 52 feet so you wouldn't approve it, 50 or 51. Would you consider a 52 on my request on my original application. CHAIRMAN: Well, we're going to recess it, and we'll kick it around and probably. I hate to use that phrase but we will. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: You mean, research it. CHAIRMAN: We will deliver upon it in the next hour or two. So, there is just one more hearing and we have only one extensive decision to make, and then it's been here since December 6 th. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: You don't mean recess Jerry, do you. CHAIRMAN: No, I said close the hearing and recess. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Close the hearing, you said recess but ok, you meant close the hearing and we'll continue later, ok. MR. JOSEPH POTTGEN: OK. CHAIRMAN: OK Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like to speak in favor? Anybody that would like to speak against? OK. You're very welcome to stay, we'll be here. Hearing no further comment I make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. All in favor. 8:35 p.m. Appl. No. 4366 - Theresa Kilduff. This is an application for a Waiver under Section 100-26 of the Zoning Code, based upon a disapproval issued under Section 100-30A.2 and 100-31A (1) dated 2/15/96 for a building permit to construct a single-family dwelling on the grounds that this is one lot (and only one dwelling is permitted per lot) . Property referred to as Lot G on the "Map of Lots of Raymond T. Graham" shown on survey dated March 27, 1957, and containing 20,000 sq. ft. in area is shown to be in common ownership with Lot B, also containing 20,000. square feet. Also referred to as part of Lot Nos. 56-59 on the "Map of Nassau Farms, County File #1179. County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-104-2-3 (shown for 30+ years on separate assessment property cards as 98-1-11 and 104-2-3. CHAIRMAN: I have a survey produced by Roderick Van Tuyl pc dated December 21, 1976 indicating the house parcel of property, and then I have a copy of the Map of Raymond T. Graham indicating file lots B and G which appears to be the lots that we are referring to here. I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Does somebody like to be heard? How are you tonight Madam. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: I'm Theresa Kilduff. CHAIRMAN: How are you. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: I'm fine thank you. How can I help. I think you have all the papers that you need. This goes back to 1935 when Mr. Page 23 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals Graham designated four acres from East to West. In 156 he changed them with the approval of the Town, I guess to eight half acres. CHAIRMAN: Yes MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: You have Van Tuyl survey at 57. In 176 I built the house. 177 I moved in and I've been receiving tax bills which I have somewhere, here they are, for two pieces of property, which I assumed, all this time were two pieces. This past November when I heard about the Resolution merging contiguous lots. I came up to find out what I would have to do. Everybody has died off but me, and one Son in California. How do I designate these two Pots, and I found out that they're not two but they are one in Riverhead in Pat's office, because when Mr. Graham registered (all be it) he had filed the 1957 survey with the Town showing eight, half acres. He registered mine as being 400 feet instead of I by 2 and 1 by 2 which shows on this, and I'd just like to get this straightened out. My application for building a one family house was so I could get to speak to you, because I had to have a disapproval to get here. I'm not building a house. I have no inclination to, build, but I would like to have the property filed that if I wanted to sell it, I could use the money to pay the taxes on the house that I'm presently living in or maybe someone down the line, Grandchild would want to build a house. That's -- I have no plans, but I would just like to get this straightened out. Having tax bills on tax bills with no indication that there was any merger done. I also had Mr. Lessard. Something must have happened in about '88, and I came up to the Building Department and said, how does it concern me, and I was given what they call a Certificate of Occupancy for vacant land, saying it was buildable. Also, I have something here signed by C. Walls and Kirk Horton stating the unapproved situated on a certain map, Nassau Farms and so forth, and it designates the B and the G. So, that's all I have to say. That's what I assumed it was, I think. CHAIRMAN: How much are the taxes on the vacant lot Mrs. Kilduff. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Four, oh taxes. I'll have to look it up. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: ON the vacant lot that you were paying for, for 30 years. I think he means. CHAIRMAN: Yes MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: The vacant lot is 255. Assessed valuation is 400. CHAIRMAN: Ok, thank you MRS. TIIERESA KILDUFF: Because on my house it's a different story. That's a big one. CHAIRMAN: Right MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: A big tax bill because we have the school taxes. CHAIRMAN: Right Page 24 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Because there's a house on it. CHAIRMAN: Sure. We thank you very much and we'll see what goes --. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: I think Bob. Do you have something to say? MR. BOB SCOTT: OK CHAIRMAN: Mr. Scott, how are you tonight. MR. BOB SCOTT: Good CHAIRMAN: So nice to see you. MR. SCOTT RUSSELL: Thank you. I think both myself and Scott Russell, are both --. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Thank you. MR. BOB SCOTT: Came to talk in favor of Mrs. Kilduff because there has been an extraordinary circumstance here. She's asking about having two tax bills assuming that there are two lots, and when, because of the contiguous lot configuration, you know whether it's 100 by 400, whatever. On the Tax Maps for the last 30 years, it's shown, she came up or someone from her family came up and asked if they were single and separate, and they would ask the Assessor's. The Assessor's by looking at the Tax Map alone, could see that they were on two single and separate lots, and they were not attached, and so it was extraordinary that it was misrepresented by Real Property Services when they first mapped them, and the estate was carried - CHAIRMAN: What lot were you looking at. A different letter. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Different numbers. MR. BOB SCOTT: As you could see in the application here today. You got 104-2-3. CHAIRMAN: Right, right MR. BOB SCOTT: And 98-1-22. CHAIRMAN: Right MR. BOB SCOTT: There are two different maps, separated by two different lots. CHAIRMAN: OK MEMBER VILLA: That's what she was paying taxes on? MR. BOB SCOTT: She was paying taxes on what she was supposed to be paying taxes on, and luckily the people. The one lined where the house Page 25 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals was, she didn't own that lot, and the house was on the lot that she does own, all right. So, -- CHAIRMAN: Fortunately, that was on the lot. MR. BOB SCOTT: So, when she came to ask us about whether or not she had two lots, we saw by Deed she had one lot, 100 by 400. CHAIRMAN: Right MEMBER VILLA: Right MR. BOB SCOTT: All right, however because of Mr. Graham originally going East to West and then North and South, and changing around, and everything else, and somebody got it confused in the past. It appeared on the Tax Map that she had it in two different location, and that they weren't single and separate, and if we were asked if they were contiguous, and single and separate, we would have answered to her from the Assessor's office, that they were single and separate. MEMBER. TORTORA: You say on the Tax Map. MEMBER. VILLA: Because they weren't contiguous for what she was paying for. . SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That's right. MEMBER VILLA: She wasn't paying for the land that she owned. MR. BOB SCOTT: Yes, but she's on this property since 1958. MEMBER VILLA: Yes MR. BOB SCOTT: OK SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: So she believed she was. MR. BOB SCOTT: And she has asked in the past whether or not they were contiguous, and single and separate, and she was told in the past by our office, that by previous Assessors, that they were single and separate, because looking at the Tax Map you saw two different ones. MEMBER VILLA: Looking at the property card or the Tax map because I have the Tax Map going back to 30 years. MR. BOB SCOTT: OK SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: We have two separate tax cards in your packet. MEMBER TORTORA: That's the property card tax. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes Page 26 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: That is not the Suffolk County Real Property Tax Map. There is a difference. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I know but it's assessed by the same number. MR. BOB SCOTT: This is the Suffolk County Tax Map. MEMBER TORTORA: Right MR. BOB SCOTT: All right. This is the 100 by 400 lot that she owned. CHAIRMAN: Right. MR. BOB SCOTT: All right. This is what we portrayed on our property tax right, to be a vacant lot. MEMBER TORTORA: And that's in her Deed. That's the only --. CHAIRMAN: But there is half a house on that. Mr. BOB SCOTT: There's a house on half of that, but that's not where the houses that we had assessed. We had her owning this piece of property over here, but --. MEMBER TORTORA: She knew she didn't own that piece of property. MR. BOB SCOTT: She didn't ask that question. CHAIRMAN: Who would .know that by Tax Map number? She doesn't have a Tax Map in front of her. MR. BOB SCOTT: She came into our office on several occasions, including to me, and asked me if she had --. The question she asked was. I have two tax bills. Are they contiguous? Are they single and separate, and by looking at the Tax Map, we would tell her they were not contiguous, all right. So there were continuing errors is what I'm saying, and I'm saying she didn't have the opportunity to remedy a situation that she could have had in 1958 or thereafter, and she could have been able to have two lots. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes MR. BOB SCOTT: So if we're talking about a hardship I think -- SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Listen to Bob CHAIRMAN: I'm listening. SECRETARY LINDA KOWAKSKI: What he's saying is very true. MEMBER VILLA: The assessment that she was paying for the house with land, was for 100 by 400 foot lot. Page 27 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BOB SCOTT: And she was paying for-another lot. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Which she thought was hers. MR. BOB SCOTT: Which she thought was hers. MEMBER VILLA: OK, but she was paying on 100 by 400 as one lot. MR. BOB SCOTT: Right, as described by Deed, which I think Scott has over here. MR. SCOTT RUSSELL: Just to clarify the roll. I'm here tonight. You're secretary asked me to be just to clarify the facts. You know, I don't want to be in a position of advocating either way. . I can't speak for Assessor's that were in office long before we got here. I don't know what the discussions were. I will tell you that, what happened was she was receiving two tax bills for two parcels 100 by 200, 100 by 200. She took title to a 100 by 400 piece in 1958. Somewhere along the line, in around 158 that happened to be, for some reason that one Deed was portioned off to two parcels. The total net tax that she paid, was equivalent to what she took by Deed in '58 which is 40,000 foot of land. But for some reason, 20,000 square foot of that land, and another 20,000 were being paid to, two separate tax bills. MEMBER. VILLA: Well, who was paying the taxes on the 2600 foot behind her, that you weren't taxing. CHAIRMAN: It was never taxed. MR. BOB SCOTT: Nobody was paying taxes --. MEMBER VILLA: That would have been picked up by the County. CHAIRMAN: No, it wouldn't have. MEMBER VILLA: Why not. CHAIRMAN: Because there was only one Tax Map number. MR. BOB SCOTT: That's right. But what happened was, they weren't paying for the other two, 20,000 square feet. But somebody was paying the taxes on the house that we had assessed. Where she had her house, someone else was paying. We had doubled up on that particular lot, so that it was an equal amount of assessment, there something --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It balanced out, right. MR. BOB SCOTT: It balanced out. MEMBER VILLA: Somebody else was paying for her, and she was paying for someone else. Page 28 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. BOB SCOTT: Someone else was paying the assessment on the land, where we said her house was, and her house wasn't. MEMBER TORTORA: Regardless of your error. When you look at the property tax, you can tell that the lots are not contiguous on the numbers #98104. She, on the other hand knows that the property contagious, because it's in the back yard of her property. MR. BOB SCOTT: But the thing is --. CIAIRMAN: But she never asked that question though. MR. BOB SCOTT: Her question was. I have two lots. I have two tax bills. Are they single or separate? SECRETARY LINDA KOWAKSKI: And she's saying. I'm told these are my lots, and that I own them. She's told that. MR BOB SCOTT: But that wasn't the question, and the thing is. That the answer she's been receiving from me especially this time. My staff says, I can't talk. about other assessor's in the past. But by taking a look at the property record cards, and by taking a look at the Suffolk County Tax Maps, which are an two different maps, distinctly separate. I told her initially, that she didn't have one lot. She had two single and separate lots, and she didn't have to worry about it. We found out afterwards, when we took a look at the Deed, that she had one lot, and there had been a huge error someplace along the line -- CHAIRMAN: That's right MR. BOB SCOTT: Which wasn't her fault SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: She had a vacant land CO for the vacant lot also, from the Building Department. CHAIRMAN: That was done by the( ) . SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Which was valid at the time. MEMBER VILLA: I'm still confused. She had a lot which was four lots away, that wasn't hers, but she was paying taxes on it. CHAIRMAN: That's right. MR. BOB SCOTT: It was being assessed to her, with the house on it, and she didn't own that lot. MEMBER VILLA: So someone had a free ride on that for 20 years. MR. BOB SCOTT: No) no, no. Someone else is paying for that lot as well, but it just so happened that there was a side yard there, and they were paying that assessment and she was paying --. Page 29 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: That's what you call a double assessment MR. BOB SCOTT: Half and half in two different places. So, it balanced out. MEMBER VILLA: So, she --. One lot 400 feet away was being paid for twice. MR. BOB SCOTT: That's right. MEMBER VILLA: But the 200 foot lot behind her, wasn't being paid for at all. MR. BOB SCOTT: That could be the assumption that was being made. MEMBER VILLA: So how come it wasn't being picked up for tax arrears? MR. BOB SCOTT: Because this is something that just slipped through the cracks, Bob. CHAIRMAN: Bob, because -- MEMBER VILLA: Doesn't that have a Tax Map number. If it has a Tax Map number, it should have been picked up for arrears. If it doesn't have a Tax Map number it means, it's 100 by 400 foot lot. CHAIRMAN: Let me just explain something here. Lot number three where her house is, she was not being taxed for the backyard, which is the nature of this application today, ok. However, --. MEMBER VILLA: : Well, wait a minute. CHAIRMAN: Two people were paying for the taxes on the lot 400 feet down, which they thought proportionally that she owned. MEMBER VILLA: I follow that. But if the lot behind her was not being paid for, and if it was indeed a single and separate lot. It would have been picked up for tax arrears. CHAIRMAN: No way. MEMBER TORTORA: It doesn't appear as a single and separate lot. CHAIRMAN: It was one piece, like this. MEMBER VILLA: Well all right. That's what I'm saying to you. If it doesn't have at Tax Map number, it's 100 by 400 foot lot. CHAIRMAN: That's right. It had one tax number, covering the entire piece of property. MEMBER VILLA: All right. That's what I'm saying to you. Page 30 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER DINIZIO: Can I ask some questions? MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: I go back several assessor's. Recently I spoke to Charlie Watts and I asked him, should I follow this up, and get this straightened out. He said, " Terry, you own two lots. Go up and explain it." This other business of the application of my tax bills being applied somewhere else, has nothing to do with my two separate parcels that I want to keep separate. MEMBER. VILLA: Well, wait a minute. It does have something to do with it because the way I see it in the Tax Map, you have a 100 by 400 foot lot, and it's got one number. MR. BOB SCOTT: OK, can I also say that --. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: That was --. MR. BOB SCOTT: There is a further complication because she. Her 100 by 400 foot lot borders on two different streets. CHAIRMAN: That's correct MR.. BOB SCOTT: All right. So it could have been assumed by her, that she had two lots that were back to back, with both with street frontage. So that she never thought about asking any further questions since 1958. I'm just trying. I know it's confusing. It took me a long time to figure this one out too. MEMBER DINIZIO: I just want to ask some questions. MEMBER VILLA: I had been confused but the way it's been clarified to me now. The one lot is 100 by 400 and is being paid for as one parcel. CHAIRMAN: Jim, wants to ask a question Mrs. Kilduff. MEMBER. DINIZIO: May I just ask you some questions Ma'am . Would you mind? MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: All the tax stuff aside, ok. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: What appears to me is. You've gone to the Town a number of times with two separate Tax bills. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER, DINIZIO: OK, and your assumption is that these two lots were always separate. Is that correct? MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes Page 31 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER. DINIZIO: Have you ever improved. Have you ever put any cesspools, built a pool or fence on that property in the rear. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: No MEMBER. DINIZIO: Is there a house next to that property in the rear? MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: Is there a house next to your house. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: Didn't you always just assume, by the surroundings, by looking at the map, that you had two lots. Is that correct. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: And so did everybody else because there were eight half acres. MEMBER DINIZIO: OK MR.S. THERESA KILDUFF: And we all know each other, and my Tax bills stated clearly that it was for the property on Bittersweet, and the other one Bittersweet South with the neighbors names. Midwinter, Thompson, Bernstein and Wheaton. That's the way we used to get Tax bills. They would state the name of the adjacent property owner's. Somewhere along the line, they changed. Now we have alot of numbers. I don't pay attention to the numbers. I just pay taxes, and every year I pay two tax bills on two parcels which comes from this map, which the Town approved for it to be developer, and that's the eight squares in there. MEMBER DINIZIO: One more question. You also have, I just want to get all these facts clear. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: You also have a vacant land CO for a lot, a vacant lot. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes, on Bittersweet lane, yes. MEMBER DINIZIO: OK. That's all I have. The rest of it --. MRS. . THERESA KILDUFF: That's dated. I also have a survey of my lot when I built my house on Pine Tree Road, and that shows 100 by 200 foot . survey on the present lot I live on. It does not show the one in the back. So they were considered separate when the Building Department gave the builder permission to build a home on it in 1176. CHAIRMAN: RIGHT MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: So it starts in 135 and it ends in '96. I'll be 80 in August. I'm not going to have 9 years for a decision so whatever you say I'll be very happy to go along with. It doesn't matter. I just want it Page 32 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town. Board of Appeals straightened out for my heirs. I don't want grandchildren to have to come up, asking for something. If you think it's right you'll do it. If you don't, you'll tell me what to do. I know I have alot of work to do if it's deemed two parcels, because under this new Resolution, I'll have to have two deeds made up with different names. I only have one Son. CHAIRMAN: If it's granted what you have to do is generate a second Tax Map number through Real Tax Map Service, which is exactly what your saying. You have to have a deed created, that they will generate another number. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: A number. MEMBER TORTORA: I have one question. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER TORTORA: I went around, on Bittersweet. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Oh did you. Did you get through? MEMBER TORTORA: I tried to get to the lot. I couldn't get to the lot. The map shows Bittersweet going into Horton Road. MEMBER VILLA: Yes, forget it. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: But the other way, you can go in from Pine Tree. MEMBER TORTORA: I tried to go in from Pine .Tress, down Horton and hit the brushes, and couldn't go any further. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: That's right. You got as far as Midwinters house. MEMBER TORTORA: About that far. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes MEMBER TORTORA: And that was it. My question is, did you post the property on Bittersweet. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: No, I posted it on mine because nobody could get in there to see it posted. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: She asked me about that, and I said to post it on the side that her house was, because nobody was able to get access down the other street. MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: The way you couldn't get in, nobody goes in, and the other people are only there for Summer. But they were notified by mail, and I spoke to Jane McDonald on the corner house the .other day. Page 33 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: So she meets the requirements. MEMBER TORTORA: So the property in question was not posted. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well it is, because it's all merged as one lot. MEMBER TORTORA: Technically SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Technically. MEMBER TORTORA: I just didn't want to get into a confrontation -- SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: She felt she may meet the requirements. MEMBER TORTORA: With the neighbors on the other side, because the lots are substantially larger opposite Bittersweet, than they are --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: You gave notice to the neighbors across the street from Bittersweet, right MRS. THERESA KILDUFF: Yes, yes. Everybody was notified. They all assumed that I was crazy to even be bothered with this, because what does it matter anymore. But I think I should be doing it. That's the advise I got all along the line. If it's two separate, keep them separate. That it would be beneficial to myself or whatever I leave, if there is anything left. All my dues or duties ok, whatever you say. CHAIRMAN: OK, thank you. Is there anybody else that would like to speak in favor? Is there anybody that would like to speak against? Any further questions? We thank the chairperson, chairman, and the Member of the Assessor's office come in, and explain this to us. It was a pleasure to see you Gentlemen. I realize that it was a situation --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It was awkward. CHAIRMAN: It was a little difficult but you did a great job. Thank you. MEMBER. DINIZIO: In light of the fact that the Assessor's did come in and explain and go for, I guess, certainly, you know. I don't know how you would say it, continued by many many people in the Town, assuming things. I would like to make a motion that we grant it as applied, in light of the fact of the evidence that she presented. MEMBER VILLA: Well, I think we should have a discussion. MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I'm offering that motion, certainly -- CHAIRMAN: I'll second that motion, and I'll call for a vote. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Serge MEMBER DOYEN: Aye Page 34 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Member Tortora MEMBER TORTORA: No CHAIRMAN: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye CHAIRMAN: Bob. MEMBER VILLA: No. CHAIRMAN: Do you want to record --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: The motion is three to two, and passed, granted as applied. Appl. 44356 - MARTIN and CHRISTINE KOSMYNKA. (Carryover from Jan. 10, 1996 and, Feb. 7, 1996) This is a request based upon the December 6, 1995 Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector, in which applicant was denied a building permit to construct an accessory garage building in the required front yard at less than 35 feet at 1985 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue; Parcel #1000-98-1-11.2. This parcel consists of a size under 20,000 sq. ft. , and the principal front yard setback is shown under Article XXIV, Section 100-244B. RESOLUTION adopted to postpone (as requested by applicant, without a new date - until early Fall 1996 or laterupon notice by applicant and re-advertisement) . Page 35 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals DELIBERATIONS: LOUIS MOORE BACON (hearing held earlier tonight) . Robins Island. Commencement of discussion on reading of draft Conditions offered and prepared by . Board Secretary (after her discussions with individual Board Members at different times) . SECRETARY L. KOWALSKI: Jerry, do you want me to mention what I've done first, or do you want to explain where we are? I don't mean to interrupt you. You go ahead. CHAIRMAN: No, you go ahead. I don't care, do it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: (For the record) I just want to mention- that I gave all the Board Members eleven pages of a draft proposal for their consideration tonight, and there are some findings of fact regarding the history of the property, and there are also, three or four pages of conditions that would cover areas that would be of concern for visual, buffering and for height limitations, occupancy of the accessory buildings, temporary quarters for staff and security personnel. And I want to mention, in that draft on two pages there are two small errors. On page 7 of the Board Members' copies, go down to letter D where it says, to the greatest extent practicable, possible. The word "possible" should be "practicable." MEMBER VILLA: On what page is this? SECRETARY: Page 7, paragraph "d". CHAIRMAN: Practicable. I like that word. Ok, what else is there? SECRETARY: The other is on page 9, letter "d" - I'm just mentioning these for now and then we will talk about them. At letter "d", where it says, right after the underscore in that paragraph, where it says "status report", after that. "If additional time is necessary to commence any portion of the project." CHAIRMAN: OK. SECRETARY: I just would ask the board if they could talk about whether they are giving a time period to start the project. There is nothing mentioned in there. But we can talk about that later when we get to it. So just put a question mark there. i CIIAIR.MAN: The time limit is, when all approvals are -- MEMBER TORTORA: "Starts to run from the time all permits are in hand." SECRETARY: No, I mean after that. MEMBER DINIZIO: The issuance of a building permit. MEMBER TORTORA: As per code. ' Page 36 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY: No, that not what I meant. I meant a time limit after they receive all agency approvals, in order to start construction. Suppose they get all agency approval, and five years later they still didn't do the "Plan?" CHAIRMAN: One year. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK, so you want to say, "start or commence it, one year after receiving all agency approvals." Ok? MEMBER DINIZIO: Let's discuss that. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK, we'll talk about that. OK. Then down on "e" on the same page, page 9. MEMBER VILLA: What page are we on. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Page 9. CHAIRMAN: Page 9. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: When you go down to E, I crossed out, you'll see a wavy line that says licensed by the New York State, that should be left in. CHAIRMAN: OK. Leave in. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Across a couple of lines up from that it says, "Town Code" - there should be a period after Town Code, and delete, "and licensed by the State of New York." I had it in there twice, and there is no reason to put it in there twice. So the rest is for you, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN: OK. Going back to that 9-d. What were you anticipating Jim? What word, what period of time would you rather have? MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I would just like to know, just what we're discussing. Are we saying to this person, go out and get all your approvals, and if some reason or another they don't do it. CHAIRMAN: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: I don't know, for whatever reason within a certain amount of time. Is that what we're saying. MEMBER TORTORA: What we're saying after you get your approval, you have one year to commence construction. MEMBER DINIZIO: OK, why are we saying one year? MEMBER TORTORA: It's the same clause that's in the code Jim. In other words, they could, that is renewable, isn't it. Page 37 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well there is nothing in the code for variances, only for special exception. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right. MEMBER TORTORA: Well, we could make it renewable Jim. MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I'm just wondering why we're doing that. What if the person takes two years to get financing. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well that's possible. CHAIRMAN: What would be the shortfall if we left it out? MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, that one I'm asking. MEMBER TORTORA: Then it's an open ended permit. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, the variance -- MEMBER DINIZIO: Well I agree, I agree. It could be an open ended permit. CHAIRMAN: Well, normally we put three years in the variance proposal, ok. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes CHAIRMAN: We normally put three years. That's the period of time that we normally put. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: In major projects we do. MEMBER DINIZIO: That's certainly better than one year. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK, so we want to say --. MEMBER TORTORA: Bob, what do you 'think? MEMBER VILLA: Well I think if this project requires three years for financing, it's in deep trouble. MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I'm saying in total. - We're not supposed to assume that. That's not our plan here. We're not supposed to say that this person can afford to do it, so go ahead and do it. You know, we're Hooking to be practical and certainly this plan I would want to see. I would want to see this Island tied to this plan forever, if that's it. Let's face it. This is the best plan that Southold is ever going to get, at this poing in time. MEMBER VILLA: You're arguing it two ways because the person that we are trying to put a limitation on it. In the beginning we were saying we would give it a conditional approval. When they were saying that they wanted to get going very quickly. You know, we've been hastening this thing so that we can get their spade in the ground. So what's, what's the big problem. Page 38 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY: Then leave it out. So don't put anything in on a time limit. Trust what --. MEMBER TORTORA: Why don't we put, one year renewable. CHAIRMAN: There's really no reason to put anything in quite honestly. MEMBER VILLA: If we stick to the code. The code says one year. MEMBER. DINIZIO: The code doesn't say one year. SECRETARY: As long as you receive a status letter every two years. MEMBER VILLA: Why was that changed. Why was that changed to two years? SECRETARY: It's a compromise I'm offering, because if you do every year. A building permit is good for two years. If you do it every year, you're asking for more updates than the Building Department would get, and more frequent updates. MEMBER VILLA: This is a different kind of a situation. All we're asking is a status report, that's all. SECRETARY: Variances are not permits though. If the project is commenced, and they're working under that permit, then there would be no reason to ask for a status report, because the status is on file with the Building Department for the inspections. MEMBER TORTORA. Do you have any objections to a status report (directed to Kevin Law who was in the audience during the whole session)? KEVIN LAW, ESQ. I think it would be preferable to do it every two years, because sometimes you know, a year goes by and you know. Things sometimes take longer than you want, to get something done, and I think we could all sit here and think. Where did the last year go by. So, we figured two years `would be more reasonable. We would have more things to report to you, every two years. MEMBER VILLA: By the same token though. If you're having a problem, it would be nice to know why you didn't do it. We're not --. KEVIN LAW, ESQ: If your looking for a short written status report on an annual basis, I don't think that's objectionable. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: On the proposed plan and buildings that are the subject of the variance. Just that portion of the plan. KEVIN LAW ESQ: It say's on here, subject to the variance. That would be reasonable, and to the extent that you were looking for some type of detail status report. I just thought would make more sense every two years. But to the extent that you're looking for a short brief report on an annual basis. I don't think that's an unreasonable request, and I think we'll go along with it. page 39 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK CHAIRMAN: Two years, then. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: So we're going to say then --. MEMBER TORTORA: Every year. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Every year. MEMBER DINIZIO That's, that's -- MEMBER TORTORA: He has no objections. Why do you ask? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I 'll say annually. MEMBER DINIZIO: Because I object to it. I object to the fact that we have to subject these people to a one year-- SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Every year. MEMBER DINIZIO: Number one, who is going to say how detailed it's going to be? Is this person supposed to come to us with something, and someone on the board is going to say, oh no, I want to know this, and he has to go and come back. MEMBER TORTORA: We're leaving that --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: How about a brief if we add the word brief in there then. Brief construction status. MEMBER DINIZIO: Would you define brief for me in the contents of Government? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: What would you define brief as in the Law dictionary? MEMBER VILLA: Would you outline what you want every two years. How much detail do you want every two years? MEMBER DINIZIO: I want to approve it. I want this man to stand by the laws, and stand by the conditions, and if he doesn't, be brought up to whatever charges need to be brought to, and taken care of accordingly. According to the laws and rules of the Town of Southold. Not come to the Board of Appeals that has plenty of other things to do, and issue a report on the status that the Town Building department is supposed to be taken care of. If it doesn't apply, if it doesn't apply to this variance, he's supposed to inforce that, not us. After this, after we've agreed to his concept, I don't see where we have to have any say in this. MEMBER VILLA: Why do we have things come back to us every year, accessary apartments and different things like that. We've granted those, and they have come back every year for a permit. Page 40 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Serge, we need your comment on this. You're the only member left, and it will make a difference. Do you think it's necessary to have a letter every year, or every two years? CHAIR-MAN: ( inaudible) MEMBER DOYEN: I think I would say, every two year. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: And Jerry you said? CHAIRMAN: I don't really care. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Originally you said it should go out. So does that mean you want two years, as an alternative? CHAIRMAN: I'll go with two years. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Jim, would you go with two years. MEMBER DINIZIO: I won't hold the project up because of this. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, no. We agreed --. MEMBER DINIZIO: I'm not satisfied with this -- MEMBER VILLA: Nobody is holding the project up. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, can we add that in. MEMBER VILLA: It's a simple status report. CHAIRMAN: OK, is there anything else Linda? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well actually, you mentioned that. There is nothing else that I have to say. Everything that's underlined was added by me, just has corrections after speaking with the Town Attorney, and my own doings. CHAIRMAN: Ok. Page 5, Ladies and Gentlemen. The Board determinations conditions. 1. Height sizes, more existing proposed buildings. A2. Boathouse 'buildings, maximum height 29 feet 6 inches. Lane House maximum height 25 feet at 2 and one half story. C1 Recreational building, maximum 45 feet, height 2 story's. Caretaker's cottage 25 feet, maximum 2 story's. Family Vacation home limited 45 feet, height maximum 2 and one half story's. D. Garage Building with staff quarters, that's D4, height 25 feet, 2 story's. Subject to the following shall be permitted as unattached, and to be subordinate accessory to the principal building so far as described, and we're referring to those area's of the findings from page 6. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: On number 1 there on that page, page 6 where it say's, 11 1, a, b, c, and d". Page 41 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Where it's kind of consolidated in one paragraph. See where I have it underlined, where it says, the garage with Staff quarters building. CHAIRMAN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: With sleeping accomidations and allowable microwave cooking. CHAIRMAN: Yes SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Rather than a permanent kitchen facility. CHAIRMAN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: For periodic, and it should say after that, Vacation house staff use. CHAIRMAN: Right, ok. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Ok, and cross out, up to the number of months per calander year because, Mr. Bacon doesn't know how frequently he's going to be living in his Vacation home, whether it's three days or 365 days. CHAIRMAN: OK SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: He only needs his vacation house staff there, when he's there. That's why we said periodic. CHAIRMAN: I offered the rest of the conditions as a part of the findings of this decision. If the decision is completed and we have it available, I will make it available to the press at 10 o'clock this Friday morning. So, you'll have plenty of time to put it in the paper, for the following week. MEMBER VILLA: Are we going to act on this tonight or what? CHAIRMAN: I'm going to act on this, right this second. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, let's continue. CHAIRMAN: I'm going to put it to bed. MEMBER VILLA: Well, you know --. CHAIRMAN: Go ahead. MEMBER. VILLA: We were furnished draft's, and we made changes, and made suggestions. This was handed to us tonight. I think,we should at least have the courtesy to reading it. Page 42 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Well, the findings of the decision are based upon what we put into the decision. We have maximized --. MEMBER VILLA: What do you mean when you say we? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, my discussion. CHAIRMAN: Myself SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, it's not Jerry. It's myself with each individual board member, and Bob you did see this previously. I drafted this over the last several weeks. MEMBER VILLA: I don't want to be a bad guy, but this is such a big project. We should at least have the courtesy of reading it before we act on it. CHAIRMAN: This is the 11 th draft, that we did. MEMBER VILLA: Yes, and don't you think you should at least read it. CHAIRMAN: You can read it, we'll read it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I thought that we could have had an appearance earlier tonight, so that we could read. But if we need another month to read it. CHAIRMAN: We're not going to need another month. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Then we'll need another month to read it. CHAIRMAN: We're not going to need another month. We'll read it after the deliberation, 'and we'll vote on it in approximately an hour, so to speak, ok. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK. I just wanted to ask one question here. MEMBER TORTORA: Linda, just give ma a page on that. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It's page 7E. CHAIRMAN: Go ahead MEMBER TORTORA: Thank you CHAIRMAN: E ok. All right. Going back to Connors. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I only ask that if you read and make changes on your draft, if you would please give me your copies with your notes on them, and I will put them in the record, so that we can come up with a final draft again, rather than redoing it every day for the next two weeks. Page 43 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK CHAIRMAN: OK MEMBER VILLA: That's my point. If there is going to be changes and everything. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, we have five board members, and every time we talk, there's five different things to be cahnged, and I'm asking you to please note it on your copy, because I can't do five a day, every time something is changed. It's impossible. I don't have a staff of 30 people. CHAIRMAN: We will go to page 6 on, on the conditionsof the colmination and deliberations tonight, and we'll go shot for shot. I don't care if we're here till 2. We'll finish it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Alot of these changes were in there, that Bob, you asked for. I don't understand what need --. I don't understand it. CHAIRMAN: I don't want to be here ( )in the morning, but I'll do it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well you don't understand Linda. I made suggestions and you went along with them. I've seen some things have been changed after --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Do you know why it was changed? Because some of it had to be changed because they were so unreasonable, and that's why we're talking about it Bob, and if we can't talk about it here at a meeting, then when do you want to talk about it, tomorrow. MEMBER VILLA: No, I'm not saying that. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Let's talk about it now. MEMBER VILLA: Jerry was going along and was going to approve it, and I just felt, let's at least have a chance of reading it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: But you did have time to read it. You know I was going to have it, when I talked to you yesterday. MEMBER VILLA: You gave it to me at 20 after 7. . SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Jim came in twice today. Jim came in twice yesterday. Lydia came in twice yesterday. CHAIRMAN: We've had 11 redrafts on this. The decision is 11 pages long. Page 44 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER VILLA: Three times today, you went into the room out there before and made changes, while we were in here. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Ten written changes which were about ten words. **** seems to be an error or duplication above. Check CHAIRMAN: OK, could we please continue. These people have been here nine years. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: We're going to go on nine years with this project. CHAIRMAN: Nine years they have been here. I wanted to say on the record, and I hope you don't mind me saying it Mr. Connors. But when I saw you nine years ago, your hair wasn't gray, and I had alot more hair, ok. That's what I wanted to say on the record, but I didn't say it on the record, and I hope you don't mind me saying that to you. Mrs. Eileen Connors: He hasn't found the same nutritionist I have. Mr. Chris Connors: It's the hardest single thing I had to do in my life. It really is. CHAIRMAN: I'm sure, ok. Connor's up for deliberation.- Anybody. Robin's Island (continued) Chairman: 1A, B2 is the number of the cottage. The principal building, I'm sorry. Building as a extension of use shall be subordinate accessory to the principal building, with a living area and a single kitchen. B1. Lane cottage building as a extension of a subordinate, and accessory principal use for living area and single kitchen. C7. Caretaker's cottage building as an extension with use of subordinate accessory of principal building, and living area and single kitchen. D4. Garage staff quarter's building as an extension with subordinate accessory principal building, and with sleeping accommodations allowable, microwave cooking around the permanent kitchen facilities for periodic vacation house staff, and guest use. We are agreeing to the word," and guest use". SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, which one. No, we can take guest out, if you want. CHAIRMAN: Guest use is out, good: OK, and so on as it's written. 2. Boathouse building shall be limited to an office lounge area for the security personal and staff etc, as stated there. 3. C4 Agricultural maintenance compound building use, shall be limited to periodic sleeping accomidation, and a single chaired kitchen. facility for up to four persons. Agricultural staff in this compound only etc. as each stated there. Page 45 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals C. Future enlargement or expansion on non conformity containing those building, containing extended use for accessory buildings for habitable quarters, in addition to what was requested in this application, shall require written notification to the Zoning Board as stated there. D. To the greatest possible practicable, to the greatest extent practicable. MEMBER TORTORA: Practical, should be. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Practicable is very simular to practical, it just --. CHAIRMAN: The present, presently existing natural vegetated 20 foot deep buffer, between the vacation home, and the top of the bluff, shall be replaced only if necessary.. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, shall be maintained. CHAIRMAN: Excuse me. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: and replaced. CHAIRMAN: Shall be maintained and replaced. MEMBER DINIZIO: OK CHAIRMAN: Oh yes, I see that. And replaced only if necessary, due to the Environmental conditions, unless otherwise determined by the Board of Appeals, at a future date. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: On that word determine --. CHAIRMAN: Who shall be -- MEMBER TORTORA: Linda, that's not clear. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK MEMBER TORTORA: In other words it's --. Do you mean that replaced only due to Environmental conditions? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, if it's damaged by Environmental conditions, yes. MEMBERR TORTORA: Well let's say, and replaced only if it is damaged. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Only if it is damaged. Only if necessary, due to damage. MEMBER TORTORA: Only if necesary if it is damaged because --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: How about just putting in the word, damaged by Environmental conditions. Page 46 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Exactly. CHAIRMAN: Yes, ok. Wait a minute, if it is --. MEMBER TORTORA: Replace only if necessary due to damage --. CHAIRMAN: Damage SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: By CHAIRMAN: By SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Environmental conditions. CHAIRMAN: Good, ok. The rest is etc. ok. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That word determined. CHAIRMAN: Oh yes, wait a minute. That word determined. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I just want to clarify it for the record. That also means, any alternative that might be necessary, whether it's 20 years from now, or 200 years from now, you know. We - may have alternatives based on the soil conditions. I don't know 200 years from now, what the Island is going to look like. It may be under water I guess, you never know. But whatever alternative, if necessary that would include any changes, approvals, or waiver's. CHAIRMAN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK MEMBER TORTORA: You're still referring to the bluff and the vegetated area. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, yes CHAIRMAN: OK SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: The board may want a deeper buffer. There may be some circumstances involved. They may want a lesser buffer. It depends on the circumstances at that time in the future. MEMBER TORTORA: OK CHAIRMAN: OK. E. The setback or the family vacation home shall be at 100 feet or more from the top of the present -- MEMBER TORTORA: At a minimum CHAIRMAN: Yes Page 47 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That's what 100 feet or more is. It's a minimum. CHAIRMAN: Yes, that's a minimum. Under bluff area's. F. All building structure should meet or exceed Town reguirements, and regulations for setbacks for _ bluff's and beaches as required by appropriated Enviromental agency's Trustees, and DEC etc. G. All fencing for the tennis court shall not exceed a total height of 10 feet above grade, and I think we get down to. Unless a written request for -- what's the word. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, Bob wanted occasional after dark use of the tennis court, and the rest of it there but, I was curious. What if the family were going to have maybe, a barbeque every Thursday, and they wanted to have a tennis match at night? Bob, did you want him to come back by letter for each night that they do it, or can they do several nights in one letter? MEMBER VILLA: Well, it's not supposed to be lighted permanently, right. So how are they going to do this? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, the intent of it is, so that it doesn't disturb neighbors; and Robin's Island doesn't have neighbors. The tennis court is in the middle of the Island, so who is it going to disturb at night. That's why it's a little bit unique. CHAIRMAN: Leave the word occasional. That's fine. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, but do you want to say every time. MEMBER DINIZIO: I think you've got to do something one way or the other. You're saying occasional for after dark use, and then you're saying, for events. CHAIRMAN: Unless a written request for after dark use of the tennis court in the future is requested--. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: For certain events. CHAIRMAN: You have the word occasional, for after dark use. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Just say, for after dark use. CHAIRMAN: Yes MEMBER DINIZIO: My preference would be that they just come back, and ask for a waiver. CHIARMAN: I'd leave the whole sentence out, the whole thing. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, but if they have five barbecues in a month, they got to come back five different times? Page 48 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER. DINIZIO: No, I'm saying that we should just take this out, and if they want to have lights on the tennis court -- SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OH, oh MEMBER DINIZIO Come in and prove that they need to have lights on here and prove that -- CHAIRMAN: That's what I said. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Unless you get a variance, because they have unique circumstances. MEMBER DINIZIO Right CHAIRMAN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I see what you're saying. MEMBER TORTORA: So what are we doing? CHAIRMAN: Take out unless. Everything from unless on. MEMBER TORTORA: You mean that whole --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: The underscore. CHAIRMAN: The underscore. SECRETARY LINDA KOPWALSKI: Is that what Jerry and Jim are offering. MEMBER DINIZIO: I just feel this is another thing where they have to come in. If someone across the way sees the lights on, there going to go out and check to see if this guy has a permit for that day. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, yes. CHAIRMAN: OK, H. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Serge, Lydia, you're agreeable. MEMBER TORTORA: That's fine SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK MEMBER VILLA: How is this going to end it. MEMBER DINIZIO: They can come back later on. This is not going to end it. As of now, they can't have lights on the tennis court. MEMBER VILLA: OK CHAIRMAN: I have no objection --. Page 49 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: But Bob was doing that, to try and make it possible that they could have night lighting, without filing a formal application. CHAIRMAN: Well, the way they can have night lighting is simply, take all the four wheel drive, and put it on the tennis court, and leave the engins running. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: And it's legal. CHAIRMAN: Let's drag a generator over, ok. MEMBER, VILLA: Don't shoot the Deer. CHAIRMAN: Yes SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Would you prefer to have that in. MEMBER DINIZIO: No SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Or leave it out. CHAIRMAN: Leave H in, it's fine. MEMBER TORTORA: On that H. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: H, yes. MEMBER TORTORA: Technically the family vacation home is the principal building. The principal use is residential, correct. CHAIRMAN: Correct, always. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes MEMBER TORTORA: Right. It says the principal. use. Vacation home is the principal use. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK, we'll say residential after principal. MEMBER TORTORA: Is the principal building, and the principal use, residential? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes. CHAIRMAN: So you have to put principal use. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Principal residential building and use. CHAIRMAN: OK Principal residential and use, ok 5. Family Vacation home building as principal use, will be permitted to be constructed, a mean height of 45 feet. Page 50 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: 2 A is ok, the way it is and B. CHAIRMAN: Yes, it's fine. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Anybody else have any comments on A, B or C. MEMBER. TORTORA: This is the ( ) . This is what was in there before. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, yes. These will stay the same. CHAIRMAN: Same conditions. MEMBER TORTORA: Let's stop off, and take action when it's jurisdiction, it deems necessary. That deems necessary under the circumstances. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Under the circumstances would mean, under the circumstances of the change. In other words, if the change is a minor change that does the angle of a wall of a building, changed by a few degrees or something. Suppose that instead of having a straight wall, they decided to have a bay protrusion of some type. The board would decide that it's not necessary to have a hearing on it, because it's not really changing their plan or their purview of the whole building. You know what I mean. MEMBER DOYEN: Yes. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That's a minor change. Minor changes are up to the board, whether to have a Public Hearing or not. MEMBER TORTORA: I must say that, the Board of Review is to require a new Public Hearing, and take action under it's review, and take action under it's jurisdiction. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: As it deems necessary period. MEMBER. TORTORA: That's pretty well written in the code right now, Linda.. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: All right. We'll take the rest of that sentence out then. CIAIRMAN: OK. Then we'll start with a new sentence. MEMBER DINIZIO: Other considerations. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Nothing shall be. MEMBER TORTORA: Read all the way down,to "parcel" MEMBER DINIZIO: Other considerations which relate to the general --. Page 51 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER VILLA: From where ? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Start with "Under the circumstances Bob, to parcel". Then you start again with the word "nothing". CHAIRMAN: OK. B. The owner must obtain applicable agency approvals including, to understand. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: We added Town Board there. CHAIRMAN: Yes, ok. ( ) How does that relate? MEMBER TORTORA: Town Board, yes. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Town Board, I understand is going to move the Helipa.d, and I'm not sure if there is anything else. Is there anything else, besides the Helipad? OK CHAIRMAN: OK C. Approval is required by the Southold Planning Board and other, in the event that the property is demed proposed, for a subdivision. That's understandable. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Paragraph C is. I put a notation there. I'll cross out my note there and --. CHAIRMAN: Good SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: All right. CHAIRMAN: So C is out, right. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: C is in. CHAIRMAN: C is in, ok. D. We agreed to that commence any portion of, we agreed to that. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, OK. Commencing, that the time we have to talk about. Are we --. What did everybody decide to do on that paragraph, because there was --. CHAIRMAN: In addition -- MEMBER TORTORA: In view of the fact that I'm the only female on the board, you should let me have my way once, and give me an annual status report. It doesn't have to be anything lengthy but just let us know how it's coming along. I don't think that is an unreasonable request. We're not asking for --. CHAIRMAN: Kevin agreed to that when we asked him. So, I don't see any problem. Page 52 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold 'Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: So, come on boys. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I'm sorry. I choose to treat you equally Lydia, and respectfully. For I have to disagree. That the Zoning Board shouldn't be doing the Town's Building Department job MEMBER DOYEN: Only in this way. In a formal way. I think, if you ask them. Even if you write a letter for an annual report, because we're interested, because we're not the Agency that inforces this document after it passes. So therefore, we shouldn't ask them for something that we don't have any legal imput afterwards. I think it's very nice, and I'd like to know what happened. CHAIRMAN: So leave the whole sentence out. MEMBER VILLA: Can I ask a silly question? How did we get involved with shrubs in the buffer zone, if we don't have any involvment after we've approved this. CHAIRMAN: They have already agreed to let us go over each phase with the Building Inspector, and review it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It's being repetitive really. MEMBER. DINIZIO: We're perfectly intitled to review it any time we want. Go down to the Building Department and review it. CHAIRMAN: How do we know their pictures will be as nice as ours. MEMBER DINIZIO: I don't know. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Serge has suggested, you leave it out. That whole sentence there. MEMBER DINIZIO: I do too. CHAIRMAN: Who needs it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Jim, Jerry you too, all right. That's three votes. It goes out then. Your taking out that whole paragraph. CHAIRMAN: No, if additional time is necessary. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, the first sentence Jerry, on D. Every year construction status plan, that whole sentence. CHAIRMAN: I thought we were on the bottom. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, we're on D. CHAIRMAN: All of D. Page 53 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That's what Serge is suggesting, and Jim is agreeing. Lydia is with Bob, so your the sway vote CHAIRMAN: Oh boy. MEMBER DINIZIO: Oh boy, decisions. That's why you can --. CHAIRMAN: Leave it in. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: What date do you want to use, Lydia? CHAIRMAN: Two years, leave it just the way it was. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Lydia and Bob want every year. CHAIRMAN: Then change it to every year. I don't care. MEMBER TORTORA: What a guy. MEMBER DINIZIO: You're a sexist. That's Jim Dinizio talking to Jerry. MEMBER TORTORA: At least somebody is on this board, Thank God. CHAIRMAN: This will cost you, big time Lydia. MEMBER TORTORA: OK MEMBER DINIZIO: You can say that again. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: But the rest of that, ok --. CHAIRMAN: It all stays in there. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: If the additional time is necessary to commence any portion -- CHAIRMAN: Yes, I knew you were going to bring that --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Within three years after receiving all agency approvals-- CHAIRMAN: It should be three years because that's what everybody--. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Of the proposed plan. Does that stay in. CHAIRMAN: Yes. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Can I ask you --. CHAIRMAN: Commence portion of. Page 54 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Why is that going in? I'm just . curious because if --. CHAIRMAN: I asked to have it pulled out. SECREATARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Oh, all right. CHAIRMAN: I have a ( ) to have it in. Everything from "if additional time is necessary" I had taken all that out. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK, sorry. I. had it here, so I'll cross it Out. CHAIRMAN: Is that all. MEMBER TORTORA: So we're going to delete from "if additional time". SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes. CHAIRMAN: All the way out. MEMBER. TORTORA: Agreed SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Because you'rd doing it every year, and there is not need --. CHAIRMAN: OK, good. All of that is good. Now, lets go down to E. MEMBER DINIZIO: Wait a minute, wait a minute. I'd just like to make, maybe I know. I'm probably knit picking here. Maybe we could set some criteria as to what this report, that we're going to receive every year -- CHAIRMAN: One page report. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: How about a letter. MEMBER DINIZI0: OK CHAIRMAN: A letter. MEMBER DINIZIO: What is it going to contain. What are we --? What is it going to contain? CHAIRMAN: It is goping to say. We finished working on the Mackay house, and we commensed construction or reconstruction of the Lane house. MEMBER TORTORA: We hope to start such and such in five days. CHAIRMAN: That's all. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: And there are no major place -- Page 55 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Just a brief construction, a brief. Use the word brief, make you happy, Jim? MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, again I defer, I'll say. Define for me in Government terms, what brief means. We just sat here and watched a lady here go through 20 years of the Town telling her, that she had two separate lots, to the fact that she had to apply for $300.00 to get her ( )lot. CHAIRMAN: And she did it very briefly. MEMBER. TORTORA: And she didn't care. if she got it or not. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Actually. MEMBER. TORTORA: I'm curious as to what this thing is going to look like. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Actually, do you know what Jim is really saying, Lydia. How can it be brief when you're saying, of any changes. I mean, there could be a hundred fifty minor changes. MEMBER TORTORA: It an annual, it's an annual. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Of immaterial things. Yes, but the thing is, it says any changes. CHAIRMAN: Look, if we don't like what it says, we can always write and say --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: What kind of changes do you want in the letter. That is what I'm asking you. CHAIRMAN: Linda, you know that we run into changes all the time with --, and you just clearly stated one. We have a person, we make it a ten foot setback. We know ---. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, the ones that you don't want in there. Tell me one or two, that you don't want in there. That you're really not interested in, cause they are so minor and so immaterial that you don't want them in there. CHAIRMAN: I don't care what they say over there. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: What. MEMBER VILLA: You know, you're carrying on like a bunch of kids here. For goodness sake. A status report I would say. MEMBER TORTORA: That's all it is. MEMBER VILLA: You have an Attorney here, and he's going to address this thing, all of the items that we've gone along with. What is he asking Page 56 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals for. He's asked for six or seven different things. He's going to, say -Mackay cottage completed. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: All right. I have an idea then. OK, good. See where it says in writting, put period. Right after "in writing" put period. MEMBER VILLA That's what they are paid for. When we ask for a status report, that's what they are going to give us. MEMBER TORTORA: Fine, Linda. MEMBER VILLA: Holy mackerel. MEMBER TORTORA: We all understand. Let's move. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I don't understand. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Jim has a point, and I think it says too much. MEMBER DINIZIO: I really think that you guys are really just holding this to a higher standard that needs to be, and we have people in the Town that supposed to monitor the progress of this whole project. Just as they monitor every project that they do and they do a very good job of it lately, and I don't see why we should be subverting them. I'll put that in. I agree to it. I hold up to that. CHAIRMAN: Your not putting in there, about the Deer are you. MEMBER. DINIZIO: Well no, but I'm am going to say this. That, I think your holding to a different standard, then your holding other residence. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Can I ask one question on D. There' s a bottom part of that, the last sentence. Jerry, you skipped over it. That's staying in. CHAIRMAN: You could leave it there. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, the Board of Appeals and the representative, reserved the right to inquire as to the status. Does that go out? MEMBER TORTORA: We haven't gotten to that yet. CHAIRMAN: Yes, I actually skipped over it.: I don't care if it's in there or. not. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Well, we just need. It either stays in or stays out. Page 57 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: We all agree, we all agree. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Leave it in , ok. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes CHAIRMAN: OK, E. The new family residence is referred to as a vacation house, shall be principal residential building, and not be leased or rented separately from any of the accessory buildings, unless otherwise agreed to by the Board of Appeals. The rest of it is --. MEMBER. TORTORA: ( ) formal. CHAIRMAN: We already did it, ok. F. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: F. Went out. CHAIRMAN: So we're renumbering. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes MEMBER TORTORA: So G is F . SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: G is the correct letter actually, yes. CHAIRMAN: Oh, G is correct. MEMBER TORTORA: Where's F. CHAIRMAN: What happened to F. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I think I already --. MEMBER TORTORA: Oh E became --. I get it. CHAIRMAN: Oh, ok. You're moving everything up. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes, yes. MEMBER TORTORA: The Board of Appeals becomes E etc. CHAIRMAN: In light of the historic use of the property, unique access issues of the Island and the desire to see Building Department restore the Lane house, ok. I don't have any problems with it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK CHAIRMAN: H may be for the new ( ) showing the accessary building. I have no problems with that. I. The existing( Jerry read to himself) . Anybody have any problem with I? MEMBER DINIZIO: Would that be after a hearing? When they come back and ask us, and say to us? Page 58 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Well, in the status report it would be indicated that they had chosen not to build a Vacation house so it would be an automatic reversion back to Mackay house. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Unless the CBA determines otherwise. But he means, is a letter ok, or do we have to have an application. CHAIRMAN: I don't think we have to have an application. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: OK, and we'll say, designates by letter or otherwise. MEMBER TORTORA: Linda, when you think of that. If it does revert back, it is a change that may require Public Hearing. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No really, because the code requires it to revert back. CHAIRMAN: Sure, it doesn't have to. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It's a code requirement so the ZBA designated otherwise. I'm not sure why that's in there. I'm trying to remember. I think there might have been another proposal maybe. Suppose the owner didn't want the Mackay cottage to be the principal building, and suppose another house. CHAIRMAN: Then he would have to. If he wanted to make the Lane house. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right CHAIRMAN: Which is the next assumed one. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Yes CHAIRMAN: Because I mean, it's a much more palatial building. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Would we need a public hearing for that, is what Jim is asking. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, no. I think I'm asking, unless the ZBA designates. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Designates otherwise. MEMBER DINIZIO: I'm asking, how do we designate otherwise, if we don't have a hearing. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Can we add in there, by letter or other --. MEMBER TORTORA: I don't think you can do it without a public hearing. MEMBER DINIZIO: I think you should just take it out. CHAIRMAN: Take what out? Page 59 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBRR DINIZIO: Unless the ZBA designates otherwise. MEMBER DOYEN: There is another possibilty. MEMBER TORTORA: I don't think you could --. Jim, I think it could revert back to --. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: How about if we put in there --. MEMBER TORTORA: I don't think that --. You cannot designate another building as a principal building without a Public Hearing. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I have an idea. How about "Unless the code provides otherwise". MEMBER TORTORA: What does that mean? SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That means that the Zoning Code says, if the Lane Lodge meets all the setbacks, and heights, and everything else, then that could be the principal building. MEMBER TORTORA: You can't do it without a Public Hearing. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, yes you can. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: The code allows it. CHAIRMAN: The Building Inspector can do it without a Public Hearing. MEMBER DINIZIO: That's why I'm saying -- CHAIRMAN: They did determination, and the Mackay house was the principal house. MEMBER DINIZIO: That's why I'm saying. Why is the ZBA involved? MEMBER DOYEN: There's another possiblilty as long as we want to knit pick. Suppose he decides he wants another principal house, rather then the Mackay house. Never mind any other resistant structure. Suppose he doesn't want to do the one that's proposed here. Then what do he do. MEMBER DINIZIO: He applies for a building permit, and gets denied or whatever. The ZBA gives a. determination and we go from there. MEMBER. DOYEN: OK, so then he automatically --. MEMBER Villa: Let's- keep it to our sites available, that he can build other houses on it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: No, he can't do it without changing the plan, and to change the plan he has to come back. MEMBER DOYEN: OK, so that's what I'm getting at, so. Page 60 - Verbatim Transcripts • Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I assume --. MEMBER DOYEN: Are you just going to put that in too. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: They understand that if the plan changes, they have to come back. So let me just check that. MEMBER DOYEN: They understand it, but it's not written here. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It is. It's written in another paragraphs. MEMBER DINIZIO: It is MEMBER DOYEN: OK, then I stand corrected. I was just thinking, suppose they want to change it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Exactly. MEMBER DOYEN: They'll say, well I want to put it somewhere else. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: You understand, you have to come back if the plans change anyway, right so --. Mr. Kevin Law: It's not a problem. CHAIRMAN: OK SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Are we going to take that out or just leave it there. CHAIRMAN: Just leave it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Just leave it, ok. CHAIRMAN: J. Agricultural machines shall be permitted for agricultural additional housing equipment maintains: ( ) storage, dormintory quarters for buildings use for sleeping accommodations with shared kitchen for overnight stays for( ) . No problem. Recreational buildings, shall be an accessory building. OK, no problem. Owner agreed to allow Building Inspector as authorized representative. No, that one. OK, it looks like we're coming down to home stretch here. M.- Zoning Board of Appeals conditions ( ) inaudible. Who wants to make the motion. { MEMBER VILLA: I have one silly question? You're probably going to tell me it doesn't apply to us, or we don't have any control over it. But, in the hearing -- CHAIRMAN: Right. MEMBER. VILLA: Mr. Bacon agreed that he would never send any children to the school and that's not addressed anyplace. Should that be a condition? CHAIRMAN: It's not an issue that we have ever --. Page 61 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: We would never, never agree to that. CHAIRMAN: We were not turned down for that. MEMBER VILLA: It was brought up at the hearing. CHAIRMAN: Right MEMBER VILLA: That the assurance was given. CHAIRMAN: Right SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: Only if you're relying that, and I don't think your relying that. MEMBER DINIZIO: I don't think he said that. CHAIRMAN: It's a good point Bob, but it's not an issue that really within our purview. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It's not related to the variance. MEMBER DOYEN: I don't get it. So what, suppose he did want to send them, so what. MEMBER DINIZIO: He's paying taxes, he's intitled to. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, to me that's an unreasonable condition. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: It's not germane to a height variance or occupancy variance. MEMBER DOYEN: Jerry, there's a question. CHAIRMAN: Yes Jim MR.. JIM THOMPSON: I think with respect to Mr. Villa, there was testimony in the hearings about transport of people --. MEMBER DINIZIO: Right. CHAIRMAN: Right. MR. JIM THOMPSON: To New Suffolk, and we did allege and testified that we would be willing to forgo any obligation on the part of the Town, to transfer children --- CHAIRMAN: Right. JIM THOMPSON: Or other people to the Island to the Mainland. CHAIRMAN: That is correct, and it was assummed that there is a possiblity that you may hire a Caretaken, that may have children. Page 62 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals JIM THOMPSON: We wouldn't want to forgo the right of those people --. CHAIRMAN: Right. MR. JIM THOMPSON: As members of the community to attend the school. CHAIRMAN: Right MEMBER DOYEN: Exactly. MR. JIM THOMPSON: But we more than certainly be willing to have recorded, the transport issue. CHAIRMAN: Sure MEMBER. VILLA: I think it might be good to have it there, because the school board is going to take you up on it. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: That's different MEMBER. TORTORA: That's different CHAIRMAN: The transports are different. MEMBER TORTORA: No objection. MEMBER VILLA: -- item. Other than that, I don't have any problems. SECRETARY: Well, there is no objection. So where do you want to have it. CHAIRMAN: Let's put it at the end. "The owner has agreed," MEMBER TORTORA: "In the event that the applicant has children," CHAIRMAN: No, "The employees of the applicant have children" MEMBER TORTORA: The applicant or employees or anyone of the island has children. SECRETARY: No, I would say, "The owner agrees to provide transportation," CHAIRMAN: ". . .For any and all. children of school age to the mainland." Ok. Who wants to make the motion? SECRETARY: ". . .At his own cost and expense." CHAIRMAN: Right. MEMBER VILLA: I'll make the motion. How's that. CHAIRMAN: Holy - Page 63 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER, VILLA: I'll shock you out of your pants. MEMBER DINIZIO: Well Bob, I'll second it then. SECRETARY LINDA KOWALSKI: I think he was testing us tonight (jokingly) let us believe he wanted to go till the next meeting. CHAIRMAN: Did you want to ask something before we vote on it? ATTORNEY KEVIN LAW: Can I ask something about your discussion on Condition (d) on page 7? I was confused by what you agreed to. CHAIRMAN: Condition (d) (Chairman read outloud again) . SECRETARY: Letter (d) where it says, "To the greatest extent practicable, the word possible should be practicable." MEMBER. VILLA: What page is that? Page 64 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals NOREEN, WE NEED TO CHECK TAPE STARTING ABOVE TO BE SURE THE REST IS IN RIGHT SPOT. It seems to be on Page 35 to (?) already, so I may have typed from wrong spot on the tape. CHAIRMAN: Practicable. (Everyone noted in on their draft copies. ) CHAIRMAN: Ok, what else? SECRETARY: Ok, on page 9. On (d) , I'll just mention it first and then we can talk about it. On letter (d) . Where it says - night after the underscore in that paragraph, where it says "status report." After that, "if additional time is necessary to commence any portion of the project, I just would a-sk the Board if they could talk about whether they are giving a time period to start the project. There's nothing mentioned in there but" we can talk about that later when we get to it. So just put a question mark there. CHAIRMAN: The time limit is when all approvals are -- MEMBER TORTORA: It starts to run from the time all permits. . ." CHAIRMAN: Starts to run from the time all permits are in hand. SECRETARY: No, I mean after that. MEMBER DINIZIO: The issuance of a building permit. MEMBER TORTORA: As per code. SECRETARY: Well, no. That's not what I meant. I meant, a time limit after they receive all agency approvals in order to start construction. Suppose they get all agency approvals and five years later they still didn't do the "Plan." CHAIRMAN: One year. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, one year. SECRETARY: Ok, so you want to say start or commence it one year after receiving all agency approvals. Ok. MEMBER. DINIZIO: Well let's discuss that a little. SECRETARY: Ok. Let's talk about that. Ok. Down on number (e) on the same page, page 9. When you go down to (e), I crossed out - where you see a wavy line that says "licensed by the New York State. . .", that should be left in. CHAIRMAN: Ok. Leave in. SECRETARY: And across, a couple of lines up from that it says, "Town Code." There should be a period after Town Code and delete "and licensed Page 65 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals by the State of New York." I had it in there twice and there's no reason to put it in twice. CHAIRMAN: Ok. SECRETARY: And so the rest is for you; Chairman. CHAIRMAN: Ok, going back to that 9-d. What are you anticipating, Jim (Dinizio) . What word, what period of time would you rather have? MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, I just would like to know just how, what we are actually discussing. Are we saying to this person, go out and get all your approvals and if for some reason or another they don't do it, I don't know, but for whatever reason within a certain amount of time, is that what we are saying? MEMBER TORTORA: No. We're saying after you get the approvals, you have one year to commence construction. MEMBER DINIZIO: Ok, now, why are we saying "one year?" MEMBER. TORTORA: It's the same clause as in the code. In other words, that could - it's renewable, isn't it Linda? CHAIRMAN AND MEMBER VILLA: Yes. SECRETARY.: Well, there's nothing in the code for variances on a time limit, only for special exceptions. MEMBER DINIZIO: That's right. MEMBER TORTORA: We can make it renewable, Jim. MEMBER DINIZIO: I'm just wondering why we are doing that. What if the person takes two years to get financing? SECRETARY: Yes, you see, that is possible. CHAIRMAN: What would be the short fall if we left it out. MEMBER DINIZIO: That's what I'm asking. MEMBER TORTORA: Then it's an open-ended permit. MEMBER DINIZI0: I agreed. It could be an open-ended permit. CHAIRMAN: Normally we put three years in a variance proposal. That's the period that we normally put. SECRETARY: In major projects we do. CHAIRMAN: Yes. Page 66 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER DINIZIO: That's certainly better than one year. SECRETARY: Ok. So we want to say -- MEMBER TORTORA: Bob, what do you think? MEMBER, VILLA: Well I think if this project requires three years for financing it's in deep trouble. MEMBER DINIZIO: At the same time on the same token, we're not supposed to assume that. That's not our plan here. We're not supposed to say if this person can afford to do it, so go ahead and do it. We're looking to be practical. And certainly this plan, I would want to see. I would want to see this Island tied to this plan forever if that's it. Let's face it. This is the best plan that Southold is ever going to get at this point in time. MEMBER VILLA: You are arguing it two ways because at first we're trying to put a limitation on it, in the beginning we were saying we would give it a conditional approval, and they were saying they wanted to get going very quickly, and you know, we've been hastening this thing so they can get their spade in the ground. So what's the big problem. SECRETARY: Then leave it out. Then don't put anything in it for a time limit. Trust their -- MEMBER TORTORA: I would like to see one-year renewable. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, no. CHAIRMAN: There's really no reason to put anything in quite honestly. SECRETARY: No there isn't. MEMBER VILLA: If we stick to the code and the code says one year. MEMBER DINZIO: The code doesn't say one year. MEMBER VILLA: Well. SECRETARY: As long as you receive a status letter every two years - MEMBER. VILLA: Why was it changed from the two years -- SECRETARY: It's a compromise I'm offering because if you do it every year, and a building permit is good for two years, if you do it every year you are asking for more updates than the building department would get. More frequent updates. MEMBER VILLA: This is a different kind of a situation. All we're asking for is a status report. That's all. SECRETARY: A variance is not a permit though. n 1 Page 67 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER VILLA: It's not tied to a building plan. SECRETARY: If the project is commenced and they are working under that permit, then there would be no reason to ask for a status report because the status is on file with the building department for the inspections. MEMBER TORTORA TO KEVIN LAW: Do you have any objections to a yearly status report? KEVIN LAW, ESQ: I think it would be preferable to do it every two years because sometimes a. year goes by and it's, you know, things sometimes take longer than you want, to get something done. And I think we could all sit here and think "where did the last year just go by." And so we figure two years would be more reasonable, we'd have more things to report to you every two years. MEMBER VILLA: By the same token though, if you're having a problem, it would be nice to know why you didn't do it. MR.. LAW: If you're looking for a short written status report on an annual basis, I don't think that's objectionable. SECRETARY: On the proposed 'Plan' and the buildings that are the subject of the variances. Just that portion of the 'Plan.' MR. LAW: Just those that are the subject of the variances. Yes. That would be reasonable. And to the extent that you're looking for some type of detailed status report, I just thought it would make more sense every two years. But to the extent that you're looking for just a short brief report on an annual basis, I don't think that's an unreasonable request, and I think he may go along with it. MEMBER TORTORA: Let's go for that. Good. CHAIRMAN: Two years then? MEMBER. DINIZIO: Yes. MEMBER TORTORA: "Every. year. MEMBER DINIZIO: No, that's-- MEMBER TORTORA: He has no objections. Why do you have objections? MEMBER DINIZIO: Because I object to it. I object to the fact that we have to subject: these people to a one-year, every -- number one, who is going to say, how detailed it has to be. Is this person going to come to us with something, and someone on the board is going to say, "Oh, no, I want to know this." And then he's going to have to go back and-- MEMBER TORTORA: We're leaving that to the-- Page 68 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY: How about adding the word "brief" in there, "brief construction status." MEMBER DINIZIO: Would you define brief for me in the context of government? SECRETARY: What would you define brief as in the "Law" dictionary? MEMBER VILLA: Would you outline what you want every two years, how many details do you want for every two years? MEMBER DINIZIO: I don't. I want to approve it, I want this man to stand by the laws, stand by the conditions, and if he doesn't, be brought up to whatever charges need to be brought up to, and taken care of accordingly, according to the laws, rules of the Town of Southold. Not come to the Board of Appeals that has plenty of other things to do, and issue a report on the status that the Town Building Department is supposed to be taking care of. If it doesn't apply, if it doesn't apply to this variance, he's supposed to enforce that. Not us. We have no-- After this, after we have agreed to his concept, I don't see where we have to have any say in this. MEMBER VILLA: Why do we have things back to us every year, Accessory Apartments and different things like that? We've granted those, they've come back to us every year for a permit. SECRETARY: Serge, we need your comments on this. You're the only member left and it will make a difference. Do you think it's necessary to have a letter every year, or every two years-- CHAIRMAN: A five-year plan. MEMBER DOYEN: I say it's reasonable every two years. SECRETARY: And Jerry you said how many years? CHAIRMAN: I don't really care. SECRETARY: Originally you said it should go out, so does that mean you want two years as an alternative? CHAIRMAN: I'll go with two years. SECRETARY: And, Jim, will you go with two years? MEMBER DINIZIO: I won't hold the project up because of it, no, I'm not satisfied with two years. SECRETARY: No. No. Would you agree with -- MEMBER VILLA: Nobody is holding the project up. All we want is a simple status report. Page 69 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY: Can we add that in and go on to the next thing for now? CHAIRMAN: Ok, it there anything else, Linda? SECRETARY: Well, actually, you mentioned that. There's nothing else that I have to say. Everything that is underlined was added by me just as corrections, and just after speaking with the Town Attorney, and my own doings. So. CHAIRMAN: Page 5, ladies and gentlemen. "Board Determination and Conditions. No. 1. Height, sizes, . . ." (Read draft into the read, continued to page 6.) SECRETARY: On number 1 there on that page, page 6, Jerry, where it says la, b, c, and d, where it's kind of consolidated in the one paragraph? See where I have it underlined, where it says the "garage with staff quarters building with sleeping accommodations and allowable microwave cooking. . ." CHAIRMAN: Yes. SECRETARY: Rather than a "permanent kitchen facility" for periodic, and it should say after that, "for vacation house staff" use. CHAIRMAN: Right. SECRETARY: And cross out "up to number of months per calendar year" because Mr. Bacon doesn't know how frequently he's going to be living in his vacation home, whether it's three days, or 365 days, and he only needs a. vacation house staff there when he is there. So that's why we said "periodic." CHAIRMAN: Ok. I offered the rest of the conditions as a part of the findings of this decision. If the decision is completed and we have it available, I will make it available to the press at 10 o'clock on Friday morning, this Friday, so you'll have plenty of time to put it in the paper, you know, for the following week. MEMBER VILLA: Are we going to act on this tonight, or what? CHAIRMAN: I'm going to act on it right this second. MEMBER VILLA: You know, we were furnished drafts, and we made changes and made suggestions, and it - this was handed to us tonight, I think we should at least have the courtesy of reading it. CHAIRMAN: Well, the findings of the decision are based upon what we put into the decision. We have maximized -- MEMBER VILLA: What do you mean when you say "we?" SECRETARY: Well, my discussions - Page 70 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6., 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN: Myself. SECRETARY: No, Jerry. It is myself with each individual board member, and Bob you did see this previously. MEMBER. VILLA: Yes, I did! SECRETARY: We have been going over this the last several weeks. And I think that -- MEMBER VILLA: I don't mean to be the bad guy, but this is such a big project, we should at least have the courtesy of reading it before we act on it. CHAIRMAN: This is the eleventh draft that we did. MEMBER VILLA: Yes. And it is draft, after draft. Don't you think we should at: least read it? CI-IAIR.MAN: We are. You can read it. SECRETARY: I thought we would have had an appearance earlier by Board Members who arrived after 7 so that we could read it together, but if we need another month to read it -- CHAIRMAN: We are not going to need another month. We will read it after the other deliberations and vote on it in approximately an hour, sort of speak, ok? SECRETARY: Ok. I just wanted to ask one question here. MEMBER TORTORA: Could you give me a page on that? SECRETARY: It's page 7, e. MEMBER TORTORA: Thank you. (Approximately an hour later, after going to another file for deliberations, this matter reconvened - Louis Bacon project. ) CHAIRMAN: Ok, Robins Island. SECRETARY: I only ask on your drafts if you please give me your copies with your notes on them, and I will put them in the record so that we can come up with another final draft again, rather than re-doing it every day for the next weeks. CHAIRMAN: Right. MEMBER VILLA: Well, that's my point. If there's going to be changes in there -- CHAIRMAN: There are no changes (only minor changes) . Page 71 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals SECRETARY: There are five board members, and every time we have talked there's five different things to be changed. We are asking you to note it oil your copy (now) because I can't do it five times a day, every time something is changed. It's impossible. We don't have a staff of 30 people. CHAIRMAN: We will go from page 6, on, under the conditions at the culmination of deliberations tonight, and we will go shot for shot. And I don't care if we are here until two a.m. , we will finish it. SECRETARY: A lot of these (minor) changes were in there, Bob, that you asked for. I don't understand what needs to be -- MEMBER VILLA: What you don't understand, Linda, is I made suggestions and. you went along with them, and now I've seen some of the things that were changed after you and I had agreed to it. SECRETARY: You know what was changed? Some of it had to be changed because they were so unreasonable, and that's what we are talking about it, Bob. If we can't talk about it here in a meeting, then when do you want to talk about it? Tomorrow? Then let's talk about it now. MEMBER VILLA: Jerry was saying all along he was going to approve it. And I felt we should at least have a chance of reading. SECRETARY: But you did have time to read it. You knew that I was going to have this done because I talked to you yesterday. MEMBER VILLA: You gave it to me 7:20 p.m. (approximate time when members arrived) . SECRETARY: Jim came in twice today. CHAIRMAN: We have had 11 re-drafts on this. SECRETARY: Lydia came in twice yesterday. CHAIRMAN: The decision is 11 pages long. MEMBER VILLA: If I came in three times today, you went out in the room before and made a change while we were -- SECRETARY: By adjusting 10 words - minor words. CHAIRMAN: Ok, could we please continue. These people have been here nine years (Connors) . SECRETARY: We're going to go on for nine years with this project (jokingly) . CHAIRMAN: I wanted to say on the record, and I hope you don't mind me saying it, Mr. Connors, but when I saw you nine years ago, your hair wasn't gray and I had a heck of a lot more hair. That's what I wanted to say off the record, and I hope you don't mind me saying that. . .- Page 72 - Verbatim Transcripts Regular Meeting of March 6, 1996 Southold Town Board of Appeals MR. CONNORS: This is the hardest single thing I have ever had to do in my whole life. CHAIRMAN: I am sure. Ok. I open Connors for deliberations. (Silence) Anybody? (to be continued when time permits. Remainder of discussions were not part of hearing, but continued as part of deliberation discussions amongst board members only. ) The Above is a Draft Transcript - comments made at Regular Meeting and Public hearings, as recorded by machine. (Not proofread or finalized due to transition between employees and extensive discussions, requiring many hours of additional typing. ) Draft Typed by Noreen Frey from tape recordings; continue to next meeting tapes which are also behind at this time. i RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK DATE l allllq� HOUR 1 : 15 e &ownClerk, Town of Southold