Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-09/19/2002 HEAR SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD SEPTEMBER 19,2002 (Prepared by Paula Quintieri) Present were: FI EPChairman Gerard P. Goehringer Member Lydia A.Tortora Member George Horning Member Ruth Oliva —"- Member Vincent Orlando Paula Quintieri, clerk PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:36 p.m.Appl.No.-5160—MIRIAM REALTY CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The first hearing on the agenda is 5160,Miriam Realty. Who would like to be heard? Are you speaking for or against sir? UNKNOWN GENTLEMAN: Against. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay,we're not there yet. UNKNOWN GENTLEMAN: Oh,I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We're going to let the case be presented. There was something you wanted to give us sir? And you are,the architect? GEORGE KONNARIS,ARCH.: My name is George Konnaris. Right,I am the architect. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We just need you to spell your name into the microphone so that we can speak it up. Would you give us that again? GEORGE KONNARIS,ARCH.: It's George Konnaris—K O N N A R I S. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you,it's a pleasure to meet you sir. What would you like to tell us? GEORGE KONNARIS,ARCH: Well, in regards to this matter,we would like the Board to reconsider the the objections that we have from the Building Department and if there is anymore information that I could submit to the Board to understand better,the situation,I would be more than happy to. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have to tell you I have,we have an updated Notice of Disapproval dated September 16t",is that correct? GEORGE KONNARIS,ARCH: That's correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And we are now at 22.7%. MEMBER TORTORA: 37%. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:No,we have a new,I don't know if you ladies have it but, Page 2,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Yes,I do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, 9.16, it says on the back although the applicant has certified the lot coverage to be 22.7%, the Building Department has determined the lot coverage to be 37+-%. I believe the architect will explain to us that situation of how they arrived at that and the determination of the patio area, which I think,is the reason why we're at 37%. GEORGE KONNARIS,ARCH: That's correct. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. I just want.to deal with a couple of issues and I'm not stealing your presentation from you sir. I've been to the site three times, and I've stayed at the site at some great length. It is probably the first time that we have sent a letter to Soil and Water Conservation. Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation is basically an organization that gives us a free evaluation of, and we're not going to refer to this as a bluff, we're going to refer to this as a dune area because that hill is really a dune even though it is almost totally constructed upon and in fact, it is totally constructed upon, because of the house that is just being constructed on Summit Road or just off of Summit Road on that right-of-way just up the street from you. I'm going to say that 90—95% of that entire dune area is now constructed upon. The last time I did my last inspection was Sunday morning, and of course I knew that no one was in the house and that was conceivably the situation why I stopped there. On Thursday or Friday I had asked our staff to send a letter to Soil and Water Conservation to evaluate the dune. They are going to give you a free evaluation hopefully. As I said, it is the first one that we have ever asked for in a non-waterfront situation. But, one of the major concerns that I have is that we have a pretty vertical drop off of that dune. And I know that there are houses down below. I cannot tell you do I know exactly where the property lines go and how far down that hill or how straight that goes to a vertical. I mean, you're the architect and that's not a sarcastic statement. But you need to re-nurture that in some way. Something has to be done there,for us to continue with this hearing. So this hearing will be continued and we will be, and when we are in receipt of that we'll send you a copy of it prior to the commencement of the next hearing. But let's go back to the issue of lot coverage so that everybody is aware of it. GEORGE KONNARIS, ARCH: The coverage, we shouldn't, we filed for a 27% coverage. I had some discussions with the owner and we agree to 22..7%. We made the swimming pool smaller and the back habitable area much smaller. So we can down to 22.7%. The Building Department came up with 37% actually because he saw on the plans that we have a couple of steps in front of the patio and he considered it as a raised patio therefore, it is part of the coverage. But I assure you that we're going to be, the patio is going to be at the same level as the back yard. It's going to get the same grade. It won't be a raised patio at all. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Is that going to change the December 26'l', 2001 Site Plan which refers to A-0 or any of the other changes of the February 22nd 202A-1 and so on and so forth? Because if it is we'd like some revised plans and in this hiatus period that we're working between these two. GEORGE KONNARIS, ARCH.: I just received the fax today. I didn't even get a chance to advise the client,but I spoke to your Building Department and I explained to Mr.Damon and he understood and he is expecting this revised plan. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Let me just ask you the last question. The wall that the Pappas built,is that on their property totally? GEORGE KONNARIS,ARCH.: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is the footing totally on their property? In your educated opinion? GEORGE KONNARIS, ARCH.: Now, I am not 100% sure, I guess we have to do a probe you know, to find out whether it is an eccentric footing or is it t Page 3,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals I CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In your opinion, how far does the property line go out to the dune? In other words, where does the neighbor's property start down below? Are you familiar with that or would you have to research that? GEORGE KONNARIS, ARCH.: I would have to look at the survey. I will give you the answer right now if you permit me. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, you want to look at this survey? Hold that question until we go through the entire Board and we'll give you the survey and then when this gentleman speaks, then you can look at it and then give us your opinion on that okay? It is nice of you to come by the way because we appreciate that. So we'll start with Mrs. Oliva. Mrs. Oliva do you have any questions at this point? Remember this is going to be preliminary. MEMBER OLIVA: How many feet from the edge of that slope or whatever you want to call it is the swimming pool? GEORGE KONNARIS,ARCH.: It would be 80 feet. MEMBER OLIVA: 80 feet from the top of that bluff? GEORGE KONNARIS:From the front? MEMBER OLIVA:No,I want to know how far the swimming pool is from the,in the rear of the property. GEORGE KONNARIS: That's correct,it's 80 feet away from the rear lot line. MEMBER OLIVA: Rear lot line,but we don't know where that rear lot line is and how far down the slope it goes. I want it to the top of the bluff. GEORGE KONNARIS: Well,it's indicated on the drawings. MEMBER OLIVA: According to your survey it's just to the top of the dune, not to the property line but the top of the dune is about 27 feet to the pool. GEORGE KONNARIS: I know that the pool is going to stay away 80 feet from the property line. MEMBER OLIVA: But we don't know where that property line is and how far down that slope it goes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:. What we need, we need dimensions sir to that area where the property starts to scallop or drop down. I have to tell you that we are extremely familiar with this and work with it every hearing on the Long Island Sound. This again,I'm referring to is a dune,my colleagues don't have to refer to it as a dune. It is a dune, in my opinion. But I'm not trying to influence them in any way. But we have to know that information that's very important for us to know. Because when we start chipping away or moving things back toward the house that increases that footage. GEORGE KONNARIS: I'm sorry, but the issue about the dunes just came up just right now, I wasn't aware of it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It's a preliminary hearing, so don't worry about it. We're giving you food for thought. MEMBER OLIVA: And also, the one car garage that's going to be how far away from the property line? Zero lot line. GEORGE KONNARIS: It's a zero lot line. Page 4,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Healing Zoning Board of Appeals MEMBER OLIVA: It's a zero lot line. And if something happens, if you have to get something back here, emergency equipment, how are you going to do it with it, the garage just about runs into your patio, your extension. It presents kind of an emergency equipment problem. If you have a fire in the house,how are you going to get it through? GEORGE KONNARIS: You mean the backyard? MEMBER OLIVA: Yes. GEORGE KONNARIS: It's an open area. MEMBER OLIVA: Well,with the new extension,which comes just about to the garage. GEORGE KONNARIS: Well,we have the driveway that we can bring in through the back. MEMBER OLIVA: How wide is that driveway? GEORGE KONNARIS: It's through the one-car garage straight through the front. MEMBER OLIVA: How many feet? GEORGE KONNARIS: Excuse me? MEMBER OLIVA: How many feet from the,how many feet wide is the garage? GEORGE KONNARIS: The driveway is 9 ft. 9 in. and it's approximately 120 feet from the front,from the road. MEMBER OLIVA: And on the other side,how many feet to the property line,about 7? GEORGE KONNARIS: Approximately. MEMBER OLIVA: So you need variances for both of them. GEORGE KONNARIS: Actually yes. MEMBER OLIVA: And how high is your structure going to be,your whole house? GEORGE KONNARIS: It's a two-story house. MEMBER OLIVA: And what is the height of the ridgeline? GEORGE KONNARIS: I think it's 35 feet. MEMBER OLIVA: 35 feet. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mrs.Tortora? MEMBER TORTORA: .The property involves four variances; lot coverage,both side yards and zero single car garage. It's a lot of variances for a very small piece of property in my mind. It's a very big house for a very small piece of property. The property is only 50 feet wide. It's a two-story house; it looks like you have 10-foot ceilings? GEORGE KONNARIS: No it's 9 and 8. MEMBER TORTORA: 9 and 8,that's 17? And how do we get to 35 feet? Page 5,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals CIrEORGE KONNARIS: We have a pitched roof on top,which is at the very top is a little,less than 35. MEMBER TORTORA: I see now that you were originally one-story,but it looks like it's a story and a half now. GEORGE KONNARIS: The first story is about 4 feet above grade level. The first floor elevation. I would be more than happy to give you a rendering so you can understand it. MEMBER TORTORA: I don't need it personally. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That would be wonderful. MEMBER TORTORA: I know the area. I know the house, the 50-foot wide piece of property that you have, you're virtually wall-to-wall building. .When you look at this house from the road, you are going to see nothing but a garage and a house all the way over the other property line and there's nothing going to be in between,35 feet tall. GEORGE KONNARIS: What we do in the side yards, we do increase the nonconformity of the house. We extend the house and one covers the back about 6 feet only on the north side and 18 feet to the south side. We took away the rear deck and extended even further than that. MEMBER TORTORA: But with the long extension is to put a 35-foot house, tall house, 7 feet from the property line and what amounts to zero lot line on the other side. And there is no way to get a fire vehicle back there. Quite frankly, if there is a fire in the back of that house I don't know how you're going to be able to get a fire truck back there. GEORGE KONNARIS: We have about thirty feet between the rear of the house to the garage and all that space is side yard. MEMBER TORTORA: On the other side of the house you're at 7 feet right now and that's where you've got the balcony that comes out and the gazebo and the new extension. My comment stands. It's a very big house for a very small lot and that's why you're here for four variances and it's too much. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Konnaris, that slab, is that a monolithic pour to code, or is that just a slab for the garage that presently exists? GEORGE KONNARIS: It's just a slab. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay,I think what my colleagues were alluding to was the fact that we,it's a precedent of this Board not to close up the side yards. I personally don't have any particular problem unless the neighbor has a problem, with the gazebo on the other side pool where it encroaches a little into the side yard. But I think we have a problem with the garage in that location. MEMBER TORTORA: And the height. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the height, of course. But, only because of the activity that may or may not occur and as you know the next-door neighbor had some major faults with that wall and that, of course,now that we have the construction of this massive cement wall adjacent to your client's property or contiguous to. Hopefully that will make it more stable in years to come. But we still don't know what the lip of the dune is going to do which is what Mrs. Oliva was referring to when she asking you those questions before. So I'm not in favor of it,from a health, safety,welfare point of view and it doesn't appear my colleagues to my left and to your right are. So we'll move on to Mr.Orlando. MEMBER ORLANDO: To expand on the garage/slab. What is your guesstamation or thickness of that slab? Page 6,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals 'GEORGE KONNARIS: It's 6 inches. MEMBER ORLANDO: Six inches thick,reinforced? GEORGE KONNARIS: I'm not sure. MEMBER ORLANDO: It was done before you go involved? GEORGE KONNARIS: That's correct. MEMBER ORLANDO: Because I also see the challenge of just constructing that garage, doing the siding on the side,you'd have about 8 inches to swing a hammer or,it's challenging. GEORGE KONNARIS: It is a challenge. MEMBER ORLANDO: And if there's a rake off the soffit, the drainage problem, I mean- I could go on and on. So,that seems to be the problem right there. No other questions. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr.Horning? MEMBER HORNING: Sir, we'll continue with the garage for a moment. Who-sited the proposed garage site,the architect firm? GEORGE KONNARIS: We did,sir. MEMBER HORNING: You did, okay. And how did you get the slab poured, with or without a Building Permit? GEORGE KONNARIS: Again, the, slab was there prior to me getting involved in the project. So I can't answer that question. MEMBER HORNING: I don't quite understand that,if you folks sited it? MEMBER ORLANDO: He just threw it in,but he didn't design it. GEORGE KONNARIS: What we were going to do is, we were going to take out the slab, modify or whatever it takes to get a new slab down, probably according to New York State Building Code, foundations put in and so forth. MEMBER HORNING: Did your client have any ideas of attaching the garage if they felt they needed a garage to perhaps the front of the house where that curved concrete porch area is perhaps? I don't know why they wouldn't,why they would want to put a garage way back there? GEORGE KONNARIS: My client said that if he can't have the garage back there, he wouldn't have the garage at all. MEMBER HORNING: I see. GEORGE KONNARIS: The only reason why I suggested to put the garage there it was the fact that there was a slab there at some point and to my mind,that area was dedicated to a garage. So I continued with the same basis and I attached it to a wall because again, if you leave it away from any wall it would create more problems,and that's why I designed it that way. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Page 7,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals MEMBER HORNING: One question on the pool,then. You're proposing to dig the hole for the pool with a large piece of equipment says,a backhoe in there? GEORGE KONNARIS: Yes,sir. That's prior to erecting the garage. MEMBER HORNING: And you will remove the soil and put it where? GEORGE KONNARIS: That's something the contractor will have to, that's part of his job, he has to tell me that. He has to dispose of the dirt according to those regulations and regulations. MEMBER HORNING: And you feel comfortable getting this equipment through that less than 10-foot wide passage way that is the proposed driveway? GEORGE KONNARIS: I spoke to a couple of people and they don't see any problem with it. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't see any problem with it, as long as the garage isn't there. That's the problem. So what you're going to do for us between now and the next hearing very simply is to check all the notes and make sure that the new plan is going to conform to your 22.7 right? GEORGE KONNARIS: My plan now conforms to 22.7. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. GEORGE KONNARIS: Except that the patio in the back. The Building Department did it as a raised patio because of the steps that I indicated on the plans. But the plan I didn't have a chance to revise because of the correspondence it was so fast. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: But you're going to do that? GEORGE KONNARIS: But I indicated to them that this is on grade, it has no steps, or will have no steps whatsoever and the coverage,which includes the addition to the house, the swimming pool,the gazebo and the porch. That is 22.7%. That is very accurate. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Just as we see it now, depicted on the December 26`h, 2001 Site Plan that you've given us. Is that correct? GEORGE KONNARIS: Yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, I have to say I keep on saying that because a lot of times we don't get architects. Fortunately we have an architect now, as yourself, that can tell us that. Because usually we are standing here with people that don't have those qualifications,just so you are aware of that situation. All right, so we are going to be waiting for the comments from Soil and Water Conservation. I would ask you possibly to bring an engineer in and let him evaluate the steepness of that slope and how you can keep that's slope in its present condition. And whatever engineer you intend to use,we would appreciate a copy of that report from them because of the nature of the swimming pool and the pressure on the swimming pool and so on and so forth. And the fact that there are houses down below. MEMBER OLIVA: Just the weight of that wall too on that whole area there. It is eroding CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. GEORGE KONNARIS: Can I answer that question? We already hired an engineer who went to the site and saw the slope and the situation back there. And also the owner already I think contracted or has been r talking to a builder who did retaining walls in the area, and he is doing,he is taking actually some measures right now,I.don't know to what stage it is,but I think he already saw it,planned it and I think he is going to do a retaining wall back there. Page 8,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals 'CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We need to see that. MEMBER TORTORA: Yes, that could be a real big problem, because a retaining wall that was put up right in that neighborhood eroded so badly that it had to be reinforced during the winter months. And it isn't just your property. There are properties below the bluff. If there's a fallout, it's going to come down on them and I don't know that pushing your property line and coming in and backfilling all that and building it up as much as you can and then slamming a retaining wall is going to help. Frankly, it could hurt. Because what you're doing is it has a natural slope now, and if you're going to backfill it up so that it comes like this, then you're going to put even more at risk the houses that are below right now where there is a very obvious signs of erosion. GEORGE KONNARIS: Well, I'm not an engineer, that's why we hired one. And the information we got from him was that we better stabilize the ground, the slope that exists right now because it already, some of the dirt washed down to the other neighbors and their suggestion was to stabilize it immediately. That's why we hired, or we talked to a builder who did retaining walls in the area, not just to retain our dirt from going to the other properties,which is according to the engineer, the most proper thing to do. And also the adjacent property has to be the same and I think that the neighbor, and my client talked about this. I'm not sure what the outcome is. But the goal here is to safely retain the ground from washing down to the other properties and without a retaining wall it's going to be a disaster. MEMBER TORTORA: Could you give us the engineer's report or the builder's report please? GEORGE KONNARIS: There was no engineer's report. But there is a builder that we talked to and I would be more than happy to give .you, to have him talk to you. I think he talked to the Building Department already and they told him it wasn't necessary to obtain the permit. The most critical thing was to stabilize there- MEMBER OLIVA: Excuse me for interrupting but there seems to be somewhat of an attempt at one time or another to stabilize that bluff by putting boards down there but there's so much sand on there that there's nothing that you could plant on that, that is going to stabilize it. It's a very difficult situation; really, very difficult. GEORGE KONNARIS: It's very dangerous. MEMBER OLIVA: It's going to go right down to those people that are below. GEORGE KONNARIS: It is very dangerous. I'm not an engineer,but it is a hazardous condition and what information we got, it makes sense, and I think it's the best thing to do is to stabilize the slope immediately - otherwise it's going to be a disaster if the ground gives it's going to be a problem. So we have to put a retaining wall one-way or the other. It's a big expense on my client; he doesn't want to do it. He wants to just keep the natural grade,but it's a problem and all the neighbors there, they all agree. So if you need us to do further analysis on it- MEMBER TORTORA: We do. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We do. MEMBER TORTORA: We do,that's a problem in that area. GEORGE KONNARIS: Do I have to give the builder a call and just contact you? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No,we need a report. And we're going to send you the report and we need you to give that to the builder once we get the report from Soil and Water. Hopefully,they'll evaluate it. Page 9,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals MEMBER TORTORA: Where the retaining wall is and why; some of those retaining walls that have been ;put up in there have caused more problems than they solved. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The problem that we have sir is that we are totally booked for the next hearing in October. So we have no other choice but to put you on for early November. So what we're saying to you over the next four or five weeks, please do whatever you can to get us any information that you have. And as soon as we get this report,we're going to forward it to you. GEORGE KONNARIS: Okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sir? I need you to stand up and use the microphone and state your name if you would sir. MEMBER HORNING: Could I make a comment to the architect please? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you just hold that question one-second sir. Go ahead, Mr. Horning has a question for you. MEMBER HORNING: I put up the suggestion for that rear, depending upon how much, what the distance is between where the grade really drops off and the actual property line; a series of terraces might lend in rather than one massive retaining wall. If you made two or three terraces and adjusted the grade, it might make a more stable situation than just a big drop-off. GEORGE KONNARIS: I will take that up with the engineer, and I guess that's a good thing, whatever he says. I'm not the engineer. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have a couple of really super engineers from the south shore that deal with erosion on the ocean, and they come out with some pretty good reports on some of the applications we have on the Long Island Sound. So we hope that the person you contact is someone that deals with those types of things,not just the constructor of the wall. And I'm just pointing that out to you because it is very important that we get this thing done. GEORGE KONNARIS: I understand. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Sir.? NICK LEIMONE: My name is Nick Leimone. I live at 5050 Sound Beach Drive. We've owned the house there for thirty years. I have letters here to show what has really transpired in the last six months. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I just have the spelling of your last name again? NICK LEIMONE: L E I M"O N E. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you.And where do you live in reference to the property sir? NICK LEIMONE: Right beneath the property. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, is there anybody else that would like to speak for or against this hearing? Please remember this is a preliminary hearing. MEMBER HORNING: Can I ask this gentleman a question? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: If he wants to answer a question. MEMBER HORNING: I'm glancing at this letter so; far you're talking about 10 or 12 trees cut down and bushes. Page 10,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals C NNICK LEIMONE: Thirty years of growth was cut down on my property. MEMBER HORNING:What's your estimate of the height of the 10 to 12 trees? NICK LEIMONE: Probably between 10 and 15 feet. MEMBER HORNING: What variety? . NICK LEIMONE: No,I really don't.We didn't have any erosion problems until they took those trees out. MEMBER HORNING: And then they just disappeared? NICK LEIMONE: Which is on my property. MEMBER OLIVA: Was this in the winter that they took those trees out,February? NICK LEIMONE: Right. And I came to the Building Department. Went to the Police Department and I have all the letters there.. And I know someone went out to inspect it from the Building Department and the Police Department. MEMBER ORLANDO: How far did they encroach onto your property with removal? NICK LEIMONE: Thirty feet. MEMBER ORLANDO: So it's a significant distance then. NICK LEIMONE: Yes. They tried to put a wall up and they stopped. I don't know why they stopped. MEMBER OLIVA: There are some boards there. NICK LEIMONE: Right. And then further down is my property. Those boards, that's their property up to there. But all the barren sand below that is my property. MEMBER TORTORA: The thing that I'm concerned about, Mr. Leimone, is when you have a naturally sloping piece of property. Their property goes like this and it drops right down. And on their property, if they put a retaining wall to the edge of the property here and then they backfill in that, the pressure of that is going to undercut it;just like it did with the Pappas the middle of last winter. They were fighting to save that entire bluff from coming down on the houses below. NICK LEIMONE: Well both of my neighbors are concerned. I'm surprised they are not here tonight. The one neighbor to the east of me has a retaining wall, but they made it out of wood. So actually sand can come through the wood. I guess that's the pressure reasons. I don't know. MEMBER TORTORA: It's okay as long as you don't backfill and put it a right angle on that. If you leave a natural slope and that's what I think,why I'd like to get an engineer's report on those. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well they're not going to proceed until we do. That's it. NICK LEIMONE: Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I'll make a motion closing,is that all right George do you have another question? MEMBER HORNING: No I don't. Page 11,September 19,2002 Transcript of Public Hearing Zoning Board of Appeals CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I'll make a motion recessing the hearing until November 14rh SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION r, �y Transcript of Hearings BOARD OF APEALS Thursday, September 19, 2002 Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Lydia A. Tortora,Member '--- George Horning, Member Ruth D. Oliva, Member Vincent Orlando,Member PUBLIC HEARINGS: 6:36 p.m. Appl.No. 5160 Miriam Realty. George Kormaris, Arch.: We would like the Board to reconsider the objections from the building Department. If there is any more information that I could submit at this time, I would be more than happy to. Chairman: I have to tell you that we have an updated notice of disapproval dated September 161h. Is that correct? Mr. Konnaris: That is correct. Chairman: We are now at 22.7% lot coverage. It says on the back, although the applicant has certified the lot coverage to be 22.7% the building department has determined the lot coverage to be 37+/- %. I believe the architect will explain to us, that situation. Of how they arrived at that and the determination of the patio area. Which is the reason we are at 37%? Mr. Konnaris: That is correct. Chairman: I just want to deal with a couple of issues. I have been to the site three times. I have study the site at some great length. It is probably the first time that we have sent a letter to Soil and Water Conservation. Suffolk County Soil and Water Conservation basically is an organization that gives us a pre-evaluation. We are going to refer to this as a dune area. That hill is really a dune, even though it is almost totally constructed upon. In fact it is totally constructed upon because of the house that is just being constructed on Summit Road on that right-of-way up the street. I am going to say that 90 to 95% of that entire dune area is now constructed upon. The last inspection was Sunday morning. Of course I knew that no one was in the house. On Thursday or Friday I had asked our staff to send a letter to Soil and Water Conservation to evaluate the dune. They are going to give you a pre-evaluation. This is the first one that we have ever asked for in a non- waterfront situation. One of the major concerns that I have, is that we have a pretty vertical drop off of that dune and I know that there are houses down below. I cannot tell you ,do I know exactly where the property lines go? and how far down that hill and how far out straight that goes to a vertical. You are the architect. You need to re-nurture that in some way. Something has to be done there for us to continue with this hearing. This hearing will be continued and when we are in receipt of that,we will send you a copy of it Pagr2Ul-% ZBA Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 prior to the commencement of the next hearing. Let's go back to the issue of lot coverage so everybody is aware of it. Mr. Konnaris: We applied for 27% coverage. I talked to the owner and we agreed to 27.7%. We made the (inaudible) smaller and the patio much smaller. We came down to 22.7%. The Building Department came up with 37% today because they saw on the plans that we have a couple of steps going out to the patio and he considered it part of the coverage. I assure you we are going to have the patio as the same level as the back yard. It is going to be the same grade. It won't be a raised patio at all. Chairman: Is that going to change the December 26,2001 site plan which refers to A-0 or any of the other changes of the February 22, 2002 A-1 and so on? If it is we would like some revised plans. Mr. Konnaris: I just received the fax today, so I didn't even get a chance to revise the plans. I spoke to the Building Department and I explained to him. He understood it. He is expecting to get some revised plans. Chairman: O.K. Let me just ask you the last question. The wall that the Pappas' built, is that on their property totally? Is the footing totally on their property? Mr. Konnaris: That I am not 100% sure. I guess we have to probe in order to find out whether it is an extended footing or if it is a... Mr. Chairman: O.K. In your opinion,how far does the property line go out to the dune? In other words, where does the neighbor's property start down below? Are you familiar with that or would you have to research that? Mr. Konnaris: I would have to look at the survey. I will give you the answer right now, if you permit me. Chairman: Hold that question until the Board speaks and this gentleman and then we will give you the survey and you can give us your opinion. We will start will Mrs. Oliva. Member Oliva: How many feet from the edge of that slope is the swimming pool? Mr. Konnaris: I would be 80' from the rear lot line. Member Oliva: I want it to the top of the dune. Mr. Konnaris: It is indicated on the drawings. Member Oliva: According to the survey to the top of the dune it is about 27'. Mr. Konnaris: I know the pool is going to be 80' from the property line. Member Oliva: But we don't know where that property line is and how far down the slope it goes. Chairman: What we need is a dimension from that area where the property starts to drop down. We are extremely familiar with this and work with it every hearing on the Long Island Sound. This again I am referring to this as a dune. We have to know that information. It is very important for us because when we start chipping away or moving things back towards the house,that increases that footage. Mr. Konnaris: I am sorry. The issue of the dunes just came up right know, I am not prepared for it. Mr. Chairman: It is o.k. It is a preliminary hearing.We are giving you food for thought. Member Oliva: Also the one-car garage. That is going to be how far away from the property line. Mr.Konnaris: It is a zero lot line. t i Page 3 of 29 ZBA Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 Member Oliva: If something happens and you have to get something back there in an emergency, how would you do it? It presents some emergency equipment problems. If you have a fire in the house,how are you going to get threw. Mr. Konnaris: It is an open area. Member Oliva: You have the new extension that comes just about the the garage. Mr. Konnaris: We have the driveway that we can continue into the back. Member Oliva: How wide is that driveway? Mr. Konnaris: It is from the front of the garage and straight to thv.front. Member Oliva: How many feet wide is the driveway? Mr. Konnaris: The driveway is 99" and it is approximately 120' from the road. Member Oliva: On the other side of the house, how many feet to the property line? About T? Mr. Konnaris: Approximately. Member Oliva: So you need a variance for both of those? Mr. Konnaris: Yes. Member Oliva: How high is your structure going to be? Mr. Konnaris: It is a two-story house. I think it is 35'. Member Tortora: The property involves 4 variances, lot coverage, both side yards and the single car garage. It is a lot of variance for a very small piece of property. It is a very big house for a very small piece of property. The property is only 50' wide. The two-story house, looks like you got 10' ceilings? Mr. Konnaris: No, it is 9 and 8. Member Tortora: That is 17,how do we get to 35'? Mr. Konnaris: We have a pitched roof on top, which the very top peak is a little less that 35'. Member Tortora: I see know you were originally one-story. It looks like it is a story and a half now. Mr. Konnaris: The first floor is 4' above grade. Member Tortora: When you look at this house from the road you are going to see nothing but a garage and a house all the way over to the other property line, 35'tall. Mr. Konnaris: We extended the house towards the back about 6' only on the north side and 18' to the south side. We took away the rear deck that extended even further than that. Member Tortora: I know but on the whole extension it is a 35' tall house, 7' from the property line and what amounts to 0 lot line on the other side. There is no way to get a fire vehicle back there. If there is a fire in the back of that house, I don't know how you are going to get the fire department back there. Mr. Konnaris: We have about ten feet between the rear of the house to the garage. All that space is side yard. Member Tortora: On the other side of the house, you are at 7' right now. That is where you have the ( ) that comes out and the gazebo and the new extension. My comment stands. It is a very big house for a very small lot. That is why you are here for four variances. It is too much. Chairman: Mr. Konnaris, that slab, is that a monolithic pour to code or is that just a slab for the garage that presently exists. Page-4 of 29 ZBA Ilearing"transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 Mr. Konnaris: It is just a slab. Chairman: I think what my colleagues were alluding to was that the fact that we...it is a precedent of this board not to close up the side yards. I personally I don't have any particular problem with, unless the neighbor has a problem, the gazebo on the other side of the pool were it encroaches a little into the side yard. I think we have a problem with the garage in that location and the height. Only because of the activity that may or may not occur. As you know the next door neighbor had some major faults with that wall. Now that we have the construction with this massive cement wall adjacent to your clients property, hopefully that will make it more stable in years to come. We still don't know what the lip of the dune is going to do. Which Mrs. Oliva was referring to. I am not in favor of it from a health, safety, well point of view and it doesn't appear that my colleagues to my left are. Member Orlando: To expand onto the garage slab, what is you guess on the thickness of that slab? Mr. Konnaris: It is 6". Member Orlando: 6"thick,re-enforced? Mr. Konnaris: I am not sure because it was done before I got involved. Member Orlando: I also see the challenge of just constructing that garage. Doing the siding on that side,you will have about 8" to swing a hammer. Mr. Konnaris: It is a challenge. Member Orlando: That seems to be a problem for right there.No other questions. Member Horning: We will continue with the garage for a moment. Who sited the proposed garage site. Mr. Konnaris: We did sir. Member Horning: How did you get a slab poured,with or without a building permit? Mr. Konnaris: Again, the slab was there prior to me getting involved with the project, so I cannot answer that question. Member Horning: I don't understand that. If you sited it... Member Orlando: He just drew it in. Mr. Konnaris: What we will do is,we will probably take out the slab or whatever it takes. Put the new slab down according to New York State Building Code. Foundations, footings and so forth. Member Horning: Did you client have any ideas of attaching the garage if they felt they needed a garage to perhaps the front of the house with that curbed concrete porch area is perhaps? I don't know why they would want to put a garage way back there. Mr. Konnaris: My client said if he can't have the garage there, he wouldn't have the garage at all. The only reason why I suggested to but the garage there, there was a slab there at some point and in my mind that area was dedicated for a garage. I continue the same on that basis and I attach wall (?)and if you leave it away from a wall(?), it would create more problems and that is why I designed it that way. Chairman: O.K. Member Horning: One question on the pool. You are proposing to dig the hole for the pool with large piece of equipment? Mr. Konnaris:Yes sir.That is prior to erecting the garage. Page 5 of 29 ZBA Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 Member Horning: And you will remove the soil and put it where? Mr. Konnaris: That is up to the contractor to remove. That is part of his job. He has to determine that. Whatever are the town regulations. Member Horning: You fell comfortable getting this equipment through that less then 10' wide passage way that is the proposed driveway? Mr. Konnaris: I spoke to a couple of people and they don't see any problem with it. Chairman: I don't see any problem, George, as long as the garage isn't there. That is the problem. What you are going to do for us, between now and the next hearing, is very simple is to check all the notes and make sure that the new plan is going to conform to your 22.7. Mr. Konnaris: My plan now conforms to 22.7. Except that the patio in the back. The Building Department viewed it as a raised patio, because of the steps that I indicated on the plans. I didn't have a chance to revise because of correspondence went so fast. I indicated to them that this on grade and there is no steps whatsoever. The coverage will includes the addition to the house, the swimming pool, the gazebo and the porch. That is 22.7%. That is very accurate. Chairman: Just as we see it know, the depicted on the December 26, 2001 site plan that you have given us. Is that correct? Mr. Konnaris: Yes. Chairman: We are going to be waiting for comments from Soil and Water Conservation. I would ask you possible to bring an engineer in and let him evaluate the steepness of that slope and how you can keep that slope in its present condition. Whatever engineer you intend to use, we would appreciate a copy of that report from them. Because of the nature of the swimming pool and the pressure on the swimming pool and so on and so forth. The fact that there are houses down below. Member Oliva: Just the weight of that wall to on the whole area there. Chairman: Right. Mr. Konnaris: To answer that question. We already did higher an engineer. Who went to the site and saw the .slope and the situation back there. The owner already contracted a builder who did retaining walls in the area and his taking some measures right now, I think his doing a plan with soil, plant and wall. Chairman: We need to see that. Member Tortora: That could be a real big problem, because a retaining wall that was put up right in that area eroded so badly that it had to be reinforced during the Winter last year. It isn't just your property. There are properties below the bluff. If there is a fall out, it is going to come down on them. I don't know if pushing your property line out and coming in and backfilling all that, building it up as much as you can and slamming a retaining wall, is going to help. Frankly, is can hurt. What you are doing, it has a natural slope know. If you are going to backfill up so comes like this, then you are going to put even more at risk, the house that below right now. Where there are very obvious signs of erosion. Mr. Konnaris: I am not an engineer, that is why we hired one. The information we got from him, was that we better stabilize the ground, slope that existing right now. Because it already has started to wash down. There suggestion was to stabilize it immediately. 1 ZBA Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 That is why we talked to a builder that did retaining walls in the area. Not just to retain our dirt from going to the other property, which is the most proper thing to do. Also the adjacent property has to be the same. My client talked about this, I am not sure what the out come is, the goal here is to safely retain the ground from just washing down to the other properties. And without a retaining wall, it is going to be a disaster. Member Tortora: Could you get us the engineers report and or the builders report,please? Mr. Konnaris: There is no engineers report, but there is a builder that we talked to. I will be more than happy to tell him to talk to you. I think he talked to the Building Department already. They told him that it was not necessary for him to obtain a permit. The most critical thing was to stabilize. Member Oliva: Excuse me for interrupting, but it seems to be some attempts at one time or another to stabilize that bluff by putting boards down there. There is so much sand on there, that there is nothing that you can plant on that that is going to stabilize it. It is a very difficult situation. Mr. Konnaris: It is very difficult and it is very dangerous. I am not an engineer,but it is a hazardous condition and what information we got, it makes sense. I think it is the best thing to do. We have to put a retaining wall. One way or the other we have to do it. It is a big expense for my client he doesn't want to do it. He wants to keep the natural grade. It is a problem. All the neighbors there agree. If you need us to do further analysis. Chairman: We do. We need a report. Once we get a report from Soil and Water, we need you to give that to the builder. Hopefully they will evaluate it. It is no cost. The problem that we have sir, is that we are totally booked for the next hearing in October. We have no other choice but to put you on for early November. What we are saying to you over the next 4 or 5 weeks, please do whatever you can to get us any information that you have. As soon as we get this report, we will forward it to you. Mr. Konnaris: O.K. Member Horning: I put up the suggestion for the rear depending on the distance between were the grade actually drops off and the actual property line, a series of terraces might blend in rather then one massive retaining wall. If you made two or three terraces and adjusted the grade. It might make a more stable situation then just a big drop off. Mr. Konnaris: I will take that to the engineer. Chairman: We had a couple of really super engineers from the south shore that deal with erosion on the ocean. They have come out with some pretty good reports on some applications we have had on the Long Island Sound. We hope that the person you contact is someone that deals with those types of things. Not just to construct the wall. It is very important that we get this thing done. Mr. Konnaris: I understand. Chairman: Thank you. Sir. Nick Leimont: My name is Nick Leimont. I leave at 505 Sound Beach Drive. We have own the house there for 30 years. I halve letters here to show what is really transpired in the last six months. Member Horning: I am glancing at this letter so far. You are talking about 10 or 12 trees 3 cut down. Mr. Leimont: 30 years of growth has been cut down on my property. t t'ngC / of Z`) ZBA Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting oPSeptember 19,2002 Member Homing: What is your estimate of height of the 10-12 trees? Mr. Leimont: Probably between 10 and 15'. There was a lot of bushes. We didn't have any erosion problems until they took those trees out. Which is on my property. Member Oliva: It was this Winter that they took those trees out? Mr. Leimont: Yes. I came to the Building Department. Went to the Police Department. I have all the letters there. I know someone from the Building Department and the Police Department went out to inspect. Member Orlando: How far did they encroach onto your property with removal? Mr. Leimont: 30'. Member Orlando: A significant distance. Mr. Leimont: Right. They tried to put a wall up and then they stopped. Member Oliva: There are some boards there. Mr. Leimont: Right. Then further down is my property. Where those boards are is their property up to there. But all the baron sand below that is my property. Member Tortora: The thing that I am concerned about is when you have a naturally sloping piece of property. There property goes like this and sharp right down. On their property, if they put a retaining wall to the edge of the property here and they back fill it. The presure of that is going to under cut it. Just like it did the Papas' in the middle of last Winter. They were fighting to save that entire bluff from coming down from the houses. Mr. Leimont: Both my neighbors are concerned. I am surprised they are not here tonight. The neighbor to the east of me has a retaining wall. They made it out of wood. So sand can come through the wood. Member Tortora: It is O.K. as long as you don't back fill and but it at a right angle to that. If you leave a natural slope.That is why I would like to get a engineers report on this. Chairman: We are not going to proceed until we do. That is it. Mr. Leimont: Thank you. Chairman: I make a motion recessing the hearing until November 14th. Orlando: Second. All ayes. 7:10 Appl.No. 5183 Helen Booth Artie Foster: Good Evening Ladies and Gentlemen. I am Artie Foster on behalf of the applicant, Helen Booth. I am here as her friend and her neighbor. I am sure you are all familiar with application. For the benefit of the record I just wanted to mention a few pertinent things. Helen is asking for a variance to construct a new dwelling with an insufficient side yard according to the present code. It borders a paper road which has no tax map number and probably would never be built on. She has maintained this property unopposed for some 30 years. Since 1974 that I am aware of. Mrs. Booth previously lived in a mobile home which really disguised by some plywood siding and a peak roof that was put over the top of it. It has well surpassed its life expectancy. It really needs to be torn down. It still sits on its original steel frame. Helen would like to have a real house and I don't blame here. Everybody in the neighborhood would like her to have a real house. It certainly would benefit the neighborhood as well=as Helen. All the other residence that I have spoken with are all in favor of it. It would be good for the Town, 1'agc 6 of 19 ZBA lleariug Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 good for the neighborhood. I urge the board to give this application great consideration so she could have a good home. Thank you. Chairman: Any questions of this gentlemen anybody. Member Orlando: I have one question. Is Helen still on well water or is it County water? Mr. Foster: We all have wells. Chairman: It is 3' on the Sound Ave. side I see to the property line? Mr. Foster: The garage would be that close. Chairman: 9'8" on one side and 3' on the other. It appears to me in reviewing the tax map that those lots on the other side of it look like they are virtually unbuildable. You are probably correct in saying that this would probably never be improved. Mr. Foster: I think this is a 50'right-of-way. Member Oliva: Mrs. Booth told me she has been trying to purchase that property and has been unable to do so. Mr. Foster: It shows no owner in the tax map and it has no tax map number. It is virtually no mans land so to speak. That road goes through as Soundview Ave. and there is another Soundview Ave. off of Henry's Lane that that is suppose to link up to. But there is a house now that has been built right in the way of that. That could never happen anyway. As I said Helen has maintained that since 1974 that I know of. Member Horning: Sir to your knowledge, is there a full foundation under the existing dwelling? Mr. Foster: No it is a house trailer and it still sits on the original frame. However, the frame is sitting on cement block skirting foundation. It is only about 4 blocks high. Member Horning: The proposed new structure will... Mr. Foster: It will have a full basement. It is going to be a regular real home. Chairman: Just for a point of reference, the issue of a paper street. Mrs. Booth could approach the Highway Superintendent and request the road be abandoned. They may split it right down the middle and give half to Mrs. Booth and give half to the neighbor on the west side. Mr. Foster: There is something in her deed in reference to that. She goes into 50%. Chairman:, Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else who would like to be heard on this application? Seeing no hands I will make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. Mr. Orlando: Second. All ayes. 7:15 Appl.No. 5166 Christine McEnaney Chairman: I was down a couple of weeks ago and I saw your house. Mr. Horning, any questions? Member Horning:No I don't have any questions at this time. Member Tortora: The porch is...? Mrs. McEnaney: 36.4"X 52". 1 did not deduct the existing stoop area. Member Tortora: The existing front yard setback would be 352"? Mrs. McEnaney: Yes. Chairman: With the new proposed addition it would be 30 even. Member Oliva:No questions. . t t'agc 9 ul _`l ZBA Hearing transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 Member Orlando: No questions. Member Horning: Can you tell us briefly how you feel this will enhance your house? Mrs. McEnaney: 1 don't know if you have the picture of the house as it exist. Member Horning: Yes. Mrs. McEnaney: It would make the house look better. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak for or against this application? Seeing no hands I make a motion in closing this hearing and reserving decision until later. Member Horning: Second.All ayes. 7:20 Appl.No. 5165 Suzanne M. Egan Jennifer Gould: My name is Jennifer Gould I am representing Mrs. Egan who is here tonight if you have any questions. You can see we are not as far along as we would like to be. Chairman: Ms. Gould there was some concern on a prior hearing which has nothing to do with this hearing except that the fact that the board members cannot physically see the structure in its completed fashion. So what we did in that particular application was it just happened to be last month, was to but a coveat or addition to the application so that the board reserves the right to review and inspect the premises prior to the issuance of a C.O. Ms. Gould: Upstairs will be the B&B portion. Three bedrooms each with its own bath. Downstairs will be the master bedroom and bath. As you can see it is a nice piece of property. It is 28 acres that goes all the way back to the Sound. The development rights have been purchased by the Town on all of the parcel excepts of the 2 acres which all the buildings are within that parcel. Chairman: You are going to provide on site parking? Ms. Gould: Yes. We have proposed 5 spaces. It is on the site plan. We have plenty of room for parking. Member Oliva: The window will be at the proper size and you will have at each bedroom window that there is a rope ladder from the second floor. Just incase of a fire. Ms. Gould: That is no problem. I think the building department does its own separate inspection for a B&B. They different requirements. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor or against this application? Hal Poshman: Hal Poshman, I am from Orient. I have a question about the map. There is a figure that represents a rectangle with a dotted line and there is another line identified as a proposed property line. I would like to know what the dotted rectangle represents and I would like to know what events will make the proposed property line a natural property line. Ms. Gould: Part of the problem here was, what you are seeing is from the south. We have a big map I can show you out side. This is not the property line per say. This is part of the property that has development rights intact.The rest of it that goes out,no building can be in that part. Mr. Poshman: And this... Ms. Gould: I can show you on the map. Ms. Gould showed Mr.Poshman the map. 1 t Pabe tU of l9 ZBA hearing" ranseriptS Regular Meeting of September 19, 2002 Member Orlando: According to the survey we have know, there has been some moves of some of the barns and sheds. Ms. Gould: All with permits. Member Orlando: They are not going to get any closer to the parking then? Ms. Gould: No. This has been moved closer, but I don't think they are encroaching on the parking area. Member Orlando: Is there an intended use for the third floor. Ms. Gould: It will remain attic. Member Orlando: Not habitable. Ms. Gould: No. Just storage. Member Tortora: The parking, spots 4 & 5 are about 20' from your property line on the main road. Ms. Gould: The architect did the proposed parking. I think what he is saying is the entrance in will be 20'up the drive. To go to the actual parking spots. Member Tortora: It looks like the width of the drive he is proposing is 20' and then if you look to the right of that, see the 20'. Maybe you can put some kind of shrubbery. To buffer. Ms. Gould: I think that is part of the whole plan, to landscape. Mrs. Egan: We would be happy to create a screen of trees if that is what the board would like. Member Tortora: Some kind of buffering, to keep the residential charactor of the neighborhood. Mrs. Egan: Certainly. We will do everything to make it look nice. Nora Konant: I live in Green Acres. My property is adjoining it. My question is what would be the access to the rear property to the guess and how would they get there. Mrs. Egan: It is my assumption that the guest would walk. The existing roads are farms roads. I will have driving ponies on the property eventually. They could have a ride. The road is really a walking bath. Except where Terry Farms property is. It is in use as a farm road, currently for the fields that he does farm. Ms. Konant: Would the pony's be on the 26 acres or the 1.8 acres. Mrs. Egan: The stable for the ponies will be on the 1.8 acre parcel. I assume that the corral would be on the 28 acre parcel.Not near your property. Mary Ryder: I also live in Green Acres. I am the property that has been cleared to. There was natural landscaping all the way to my property line. Is anything in the making for that? Mrs. Egan: Yes. We are going to put a screen of fur trees along there. Mary Ryder: How close in proximity will the horses be strolling. Mrs. Egan: Not within 100' of your property. Waste of said ponies will not be stored there. Ms. Gould: I just wanted to say to Mrs. Ryder that there are code previsions on how close the horse can be to your property line. It is at least 50'. Chairman: Anybody else like to speak. Hearing no further comment, I make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving a decision. Member Orlando: Second.All ayes. Page 1 I of 29 ZBA Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 7:35p.m. Appl. No. 5168 - Antone and Geraldine Berkoski. Tony Berkoski: I have a 2 acre parcel on Cox lane. I need an accessory barn because there is no attic space. I work on tractors as a hobbie. I need someplace to put them instead of laying out in the yard. My property is next to Leib (the vineyard). A huge Morton building in back of me. Dave's old Morton building across the street. I am trying to beautify my area. That is basically it. Chairman: How big is the barn? Mr. Berkoski: 30 X 40. Chairman: How tall is it? Mr. Berkoski: I think it is 28'. Chairman: You need to check the height with the Building Department. Mr. Berkoski: Maybe it is 18. Whatever the Building Department wants it. Chairman: What are you going to have in there? Electricity and heat? Mr. Berkoski: Down stairs Electricity and heat. Member Horning:No questions. Member Orlando: No questions. Member Oliva:No questions. Member Tortora:No questions. Chairman: Is there anyone who would like to speak? Seeing no hands a make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. Member Horning: Second. All ayes. 7:40 Appl.No. 5164 Vicki Toth Vicki Toth: Vicki and William Toth. I have some letters from our neighbors. When my husband was siting the location for the foundation, I don't know how it happened, but as you can see from our survey our rear property line is at an angle. We situated the barn to be more then 40' from the rear property line. In fact it is only impacting the rear right corner of the actual barn itself. It is off by 3 1/2'. It is 18 sq.ft. The rear of this structure is not where the horses are housed. The rear of the structure is where we store all our garden equipment, tools. My husband does construction and he has some of his equipment in there too. The horses are not actually housed anywhere at the rear of the barn. They are in front of the barn and there is a wall that divides the actual stable area from where we keep our tools and equipment. Chairman: These things happen from time to time. I understand that. I have no objections. Mrs. Oliva Member Oliva:No Member Tortora:No. Member Orlando: I live down by your area. I have seen the evolution from the house to -fences to the barn, so I comend 'you for your dilegents. William works on it 24/7. Basically by himself. He has done a great job. It is nice to have a neighbor like that. No questions. Chairman: What do you have in the barn? Just electricity and water? Mrs.Toth: Right. i P a-C I-) of _Y ZBA Hearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19.2002 Member Horning: How many horses and other animals? Mrs. Toth: 3. It is a four stall barn. It is not something that we are renting out or anything. It is strictly for our pleasure. Both my daughters ride. They show and wanted the horses home since we have own them. Member Horning: You are abiding by all the Town Ordinances regarding the number of animals and such? Mrs. Toth: Yes we are. Chairman: Is there anybody else who like to speak in favor or against this application. Seeing no hands a make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving a decision until later. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. 7:45 Appl.No. 5170-Fotios and Fotini Kikiras. Fotios Kikiras: Handed in letters from neighbors to Chairman. Chairman: O.K. The purpose of your temporary structure, I assume, is to house your cars. Fotios Kikiras: (inaudible-low voice) Chairman: Is there any particular reason why you chose the location? I know it is closer to the house and to the driveway. Mr. Kikiras: It is closer to the house and it is the only section on the property where we have black top. When we bought the house, there was a small indentation where it sits on. The previous owner us to park is cars there. It is the only part of the property that is sheltered from the winds that are coming off the Sound. The back part of the house is exposed. Chairman: What are you going to do with these cars? Are you eventually going to repair them? Mr. Kikiras: In audible. Chairman: Is there any period of time that this canvas will last. I have been on this Board for 23 years and we very rarely ever grant temporary buildings, which this is. I would like to put a time limit on it. Is there going to be a time when they may be running and you may build a more permanent structure? Mr. Kikiras: There is. Financial not now. Also eventually we are going to put something more permanent. Member Tortora: The only thing I am concerned about is that it does have a life expectancy. When you do rebuild it in a conforming area, you wouldn't have to build it in the front yard. Mr. Kikiras: Yes when we build something we will build it with a foundation and so on. Member Oliva: You do have room in the rear of the house. Member Tortora: In other words, if we where to grant you a variance to allow you to have this structure here, it would be for only this structure. It would not be for a perminant structure. Mr. Kikiras: This is only a temporary structure. When we are able to build something more permenant, then we will go around the back. As far as this structure goes,there isn't any where else we could put it. , Member Orlando: How long has this been there? 11age 13 of 29 GBA Flearing Transcripts Regular Meeting of September 19.2002 Mr. Kikiras: It has been there about a year. Before we did put it up we seeked approval from the Building Department. (in audible). Member Oliva: Do you have any idea of the time frame? Mr. Kikiras: It is not going to be to long. Member Orlando: So the town didn't ask you to come in for this permit? Mr. Kikiras: No, the did. Almost 2 months after it went up. I have had people in the building department tell me I wouldn't need anything. That is where it started. Otherwise I wouldn't put it up. Member Orlando:No other questions. Member Horning: How is this structure attached to the ground? Mr. Kikiras: It is metal piping and six anchors on each side. Member Horning: How deep is it? Maybe 4' deep. Mr. Kikiras: Probably a bit more.There is a cable there attached with it.... Member Horning: What is the expected life expectancy of the top of that structure? Mr. Kikiras: They told me it was guaranteed for 5 or 6 years. I don't think it will hold out. Member Horning: If we put a time limit on the structure of 5 years or less you would have no objection to that? Mr. Kikiras:No. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak for or against this application? In the back? Mrs. Moisa: Susan Moisa. Mr. Moisa: I am Eugene Moisa.We are adjoining neighbors to the property. To the east. Mrs. Thomas: I am Jan Thomas. I live across the street from Gene and Sue. Mrs. Moisa: I have pictures here for you. The structure itself is not a good looking structure. When the wind blows it makes alot of noise and it is not a proper place for it. Mr. Moisa: In the Winter time with there is no foliage it really stands out. The picture of the fence is from my back yard. I have to look at that thing every day. I would say it has been there almost a year and half,not a year. Mrs. Thomas: I just like to say that it is basically an eyesore. It is ugly to look at and you do see it. At a time when everybody is trying to do the best they can despite financial conditions to make their properties beautiful, it just doesn't seem right that that is plopped right in front of the house. They do have a nice big piece of property. Chairman: Any questions. Mr. Moisa: I had an accessory building out back, which John from the Building Department inspected. My neighbor came over and he told him that that was an accessory building which did not conform to the town code. Chairman: That is why they are here. It will be up to this board to make a determination one way or another. If it is going to stay for a short period of time or it is not going to stay. Mrs. Moisa: It was my understanding that a structure of that kind could not go in front of the house anyway. Member Tortora: It can't unless the Board gives it approval to do it. Mr. Kikiras: Concerning the ugliness of the building, I have no problems putting evergreens around it. Concerning the date that it went up. This is a receipt of when it was ZBA llearing Traiisuripls Regular Meeting of Sehtemher 19: 2002 purchased. It was purchased the 24th of August. It didn't go up until maybe 2 weeks after we purchased it. It is just over a year old. The reason that we are here tonight is because we did come to the Town Hall and we did ask whether we could but the structure up in that spot before we bought it. We were told that we didn't need to apply for a permit. They didn't even know what type of application to give to us. Then after it went up and after the complaint went through we got a visit from another inspector. Chairman: Are you sure there is no other location that you can put this? Mr. Kikiras: There really isn't. You are more then welcome to come take a look. The back part of the house is completely open in the Winter time. It is the only place that we have black top. If we were to move any where else we would have to put down concrete somewhere. It would be something more permanent. Member Horning: You have the chance to move this structure as maybe an attached garage and something that would be conforming to the code. Chairman: I will be out to reinspect it. Any questions? Seeing no questions, I make a motion closing the hearing and reserving the decision until later. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. 8:00 p.m. -Appl.No. 5169 Northeast Overseas Trading Co. Ms. Mesiano: My Name is Cathy Mesiano. I am here on behalf of the Northeast Overseas Trading Corporation. We are here requesting a variance for an as built deck. The deck is considered to be non-conforming because we are maintaining a rear yard setback of 10.3'. The required rear yard setback is 35' . The existing house has a non-conforming rear yard setback, for which there was a variance granted a number of years ago. We are here tonight on the issue of the deck. I first like to ask you if you have questions. Chairman:The question of course is how did the deck get built? Ms. Mesiano: I don't have a good explanation for that because when I asked the owner. He said I just thought because I walked out the back door right straight on to it, it was at grade at the back door. I didn't know I needed a building permit. So he put up the deck. I can understand why he would want a deck. This is in an area just south of Kenny's Beach and in that dune like area. That whole property is sand. The only landscaped area is in the front yard by the septic system. Which is naturalized. The entire back yard is just sand. In order for them to have any use of the yard what-so-ever, some type of platform would be necessary to use it. I was glade that he at least used wood instead of brick or patio blocks or something like that. I think that would have caused an erosion problem with the water running on it. As far as the existence of the deck... Member Orlando: When was it constructed? Ms. Mesiano: It was constructed of the first couple of years of the house being constructed. I think it was around 1997 or 1998. 1 don't have the exact date. Member Orlando: Why does he want to come into compliance now? Ms. Mesiano: He sold the house. The requirement under the contract of sale was to provide a C.O. He provided a C.O. and it came into light that he didn't have a C.O. for the deck. When he came into the Building Department for the C.O. for the deck, he learned again that he did in fact need this permit and that it didn't need the required setback. Member Orlando: So the owners bought it even though it didn't have a C.O. for the deck? i • 1 Na-c 15 of 29 ZBA Fiearinji I ranscripts Reeular Meeting of September 19. ?00'' Ms. Mesiano: I was not involved u1 that. I don't have any idea what there agreement is or what there expectation is. Member Orlando: Northeast Trading is the previous owner'? Ms, Mesiano: Yes. Chairman: There is no indication that the deck is going to be enclosed in anyway? Ms. Mesiano: No. It is not that type of structure that would accommodate enclosure without a lot more work. Member Tortora: The reason I have problems with this is that the last time we saw this application was in 1999. When we originally saw it, the house was under construction and the house, the foundation instead of being 35' from the rear property line was 32. He came for a variance and we granted it. These things happen. Three years later,here we are again.This looks like a big mistake. What is the size of the deck? Ms. Mesiano: It is 24 X 26. Member Tortora: It is 24 X 26 and it is 10' from the property line. The property behind you is vacant? Ms. Mesiano: Yes. It is an L spaped piece of property that wraps around this piece of property. There is not another parcel behind us that would constitute a buildable lot. We did go through an excercise before this house was even built to attempt to purchase the land behind this from the neighbor. (TAPE CHANGED) Ms. Mesiano: I would like to submit photos to the board. Chairman: Anyone on the board have any further questions? Member Oliva: I would like to know why you couldn't cut that deck back to make it in compliance? Ms. Mesiano: The whole thing would have to come off. If there where a way to bring it into compliance that certainly would be an option that I would have recommended. Member Horning: What is the maximum height from grade? Ms. Mesiano: It is between 6 & 8". That is at the eastern most section at the house. It is basically at grade. I have taken pictures that show that. You step out the back door, there is no step. It is set on a 2 X 8 which is set on what looks like 2 X 6's. The 2 X 6's are set in the sand. At the point where it attaches to the house, the 2 x 8 is basically covered with sand. It is basically at grade. Chairman: Anybody else have any questions? Member Horning: She has said nothing else would be done if we granted the variance? It would never be increased in size? Chairman: We would put a restriction on it. Ms. Mesiano: I have no problem with that at all. Chairman: O.K. Is there anybody else in the audience that would like to speak for or against this application? Seeing no hands, we thank you, Ms. Mesiano. Thank you for the pictures. I make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. Pagc i o of 29 ZBA 1-1ca1-iug 1 raiwCripi, Regular Meeting of Septemher 19,2002 8:16 p.m. Appl. No. 5175 Thomas and Karen Uhlinger. Mr. Uhlinger: My name is Tom Uhlinger. I am here to request a front yard setback for the construction of a new front porch. Chairman: I have inspected the property and this was the original Hannabury house. The house is relatively old, is that correct? Mr. Uhlinger: 1888. Chairman: It is probably somewhat similiar front porch? I may have been replaced once or twice? The increase you are asking for. Mr. Uhlinger: 2'. Chairman: I don't have any objection. Member Horning: No questions. It is pretty simple. Chairman: It is going to remain open? Mr.Unlinger:Yes it is.It is not going to have a solid bottom. It will have ballest. Member Orlando:No questions. I stopped by. It is time for repair. Mr. Unlinger: Yes it is. Member Tortora:No questions. Member Oliva: It is a beautiful place. Chairman: Is there anybody who would like to speak for or against this application? Seeing no hands. Member Horning: I make a motion to close. Chairman: I seconded it. All ayes. 8:20 p.m. Appl.No. 5167 Robert J. and Maureen C. Voelkel. Robert Voelkel: I am Bob Voelkel. Chairman: Good evening. I had the pleasure of being over at your place about a week ago. Do you want to tell us what you are doing? Mr. Voelkel: Yes, we would like to request a variance to put an addition on the house. We would like to relocate our garage to the east side of the property or the east side of the existing structure. We are going to convert our existing garage into a den. We would also like to put in a circular driveway, so that we have better access off of the street. Right now we back out onto Pine Tree Road. I am trying to keep everything as far away from Skunk Road as we can. Chairman: This is merely a setback situation, is that correct. Mr. Voelkel: Correct. We want to stay on the existing building line. The existing structure is approximately 33' from the road on the Pine Tree Road side. We are going to maintain that existing setback. Member Oliva: No questions. Member Tortora:No questions. Member Orlando: With.haves two front yards, it kind of limits you right there. If this was a side yard, you would be within the code here. Options are limited.No other questions. Mr. Voelkel: We are trying to stay of the Flood Zone and my neighbor has a Winter water view and if we put anything in front we would obstruct his view. Member Horning: So the Flood Zone goes right through the existing structure? ' ZBA 11caring Transcripts Regular Meeting oPSeptember 19.2002 Mr. Voelkel: Basically, yes. Member Horning: Any problems? Mr. Voelkel: No. We moved in right after the Halloween storm of 91. There was some water the on the property, not near the house. December 1 I th, 92 there was a little more water on the lawn, but we have not had any problem in the house. Member Horning: Is that a full basement? Mr. Voelkel: Yes it is. Member Horning: Underneath the garage? Mr. Voelkel: Not underneath the garage,just the rest of the house. Member Horning: The garage has a slab? Mr. Voelkel: Yes. Member Horning: It will remain that way. Mr. Voelkel: It will remain that way. Member Horning:Thank you. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor or against this application? Seeing no hands I make a motion to closing the hearing and reserving decision until later. Member Tortora: Second. All ayes. 8:23 p.m. Appl.NO. 5158 Martem Management,Inc.by Artemios Marinakis. Mrs. Moore: Pat Moore for the applicant.To give you a little history here. In 1981 we had applied for this tennis court on the parcel that my client owns behind lot 23 on the map of High Point in East Marion. The neighbors objected to the placement of the tennis court there. My client owns the road. We did proceed through with abandonment and got it. That road is can no longer be used as a road. He owns the piece to the south. The location that was recommended at the time, was in this area because it seemed logical. Keeping that as an open lot as it presently is. We have progressed through that process. It has taken a year to get here,but we are here. Chairman: Can you move the tennis court on to the property a little bit more? Mrs. Moore: We do own lot 21. I guess we could move it a little bit. I will check with the client and I will see if he wouldn't mind moving it over. Any recommendations. Member Oliva: As close as possible. Mrs. Moore: The tennis court needs a fence. So you don't want to block out access around the house. Member Oliva: He is kind of maxed out. Mrs. Moore: It is kind of close now. I think we should maintain at least a 15' set back from the house. To keep emergency vehicles access around the structure. Member Orlando: Maybe they can shrink the whole thing. 120 is a little long. I think the last one we did was 110. 'Member Tortora- And that was with aback "splash: The 60 x 120 is just the fence area. Mrs. Moore: That is just the fence. I will confirm that.The surveyor.drew it. Chairman: We just took a substantial amount of testimony on one in Southold. We have found that these clay courts seem to be much more effective in reference to the noise level. Could you please ask your client how this court is to be constructed. t � I'agc iJ ul _� ZBA 1-leariiib I rau�cnpts Regular Meeting of September 19.2002 Mrs. Moore: 1 will check. Clay courts are also very expensive. Chairman: It is £I new type Of Situation. It IS not a Clay Court. It IS a composite material. We understand that. We know what clay Courts. Mrs. Moore: O.K. Size,material and setback. Member Horning: Mrs. Moore where the adjacent neighbors properly notified? Mrs. Moore: To my knowledge they were. We are actually the adjacent neighbors. We owner 23 and 21. I double checked the tax map and we sent to the people we where able to send to . Member Horning: Is there an issue with lighting? Mrs. Moore: I don't believe this is going to be lit. Member Horning: The other letter refers to lighting. Mrs. Moore: I didn't have any notes asking for lighting. I assume it is not going to be lit. I haven't ask for lighting. Member Horning: You will assure us that it is not lit? Mrs. Moore: I will confirm. In the past lighting was required to be included in the variance. Member Horning: Right. Thank you. Chairman: Do you suspect that we could clear this up, since this has been going on for more then a year. We realize that the road abandonment issue took some time. For the members of the Board that were not here when this application was with us, it was an application one of those legal lots. Which meant that only the tennis court would be the only structure on that lot. That is when I had suggested the road abandonment. Possible we could wrap this up on October 3rd at our special meeting. I would like to do that rather then take any more time. You could get our answers from your client. We could inform these people that we are going to reconvene it on October 3rd. Mrs. Moore: That is fine. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak at this hearing before we recess it. Emanual Karivanos: I am Emanual Karivanos. I own a home on Stars Road, East Marion. My property is maybe 2 or 3 lots from Marinakis property. Just for a point of information, Mr. Bombiediere, who is not here today, he did not get a letter. He saw the notice that was posted on the property. I got the notice late myself, so I am not prepared as I would like to be.Nevertheless,I am currently the secretary of the Stars Road Beach Association. Mr. Bombiediere, is the President and Gary Parker, who is not here, he is the vice- president and Kay Falkowski is our treasurer. I spoke to the board last night. There is 27 of us the road. I tried to canvas as many as I could about this issue. I apologize about the lighting. I thought there was lighting. I reached ten.people.(He named the ten people). Without a doubt we where very upset a few years ago when an acre and a half or so was cut down of trees on that property. You must wonder why you would put a tennis court after cutting down the most beautiful' road in East Marion. Why didn't you consider putting the tennis court in the wooded area so it is not obtrusive and out of the way. I think that it is not appropriate to put a tennis court on Stars Road. I think it would be very unsightly. The polo grounds in Greenport is where the tennis court belong. Certainly it should have done when there was woods there.Before all the woods where cut down. 11ag� U of L11 Z13A H -1 ranscripts Regular Meeting ol'September 19.2002 Chairman: Could you give us a letter of all the people you have contacted? So we could have that for the record. Mr. Karivanos: Yes. I will send a letter with the people who made the objection. Some of the here today. Member Oliva: When did you get your notification? Mr. Karivanos: I got it through a friend because is was posted. I don't have to get a letter notice because I am not adjacent. Chairman: I just wanted you to be aware that we had an application in Mattituck down by Wolf Pit Lake. These where somewhat larger lots and there was concern by the neighbors there regarding a tennis court. Woods can be created. Landscaping can be created. I am not saying that I am in favor or against this application. Through landscaping anything can be created. We are talking 160 feet of abbreviaty in one direction and about 240 feet of abbreviaty in the opposite direction. To a maximum of height of 6 to 8' high continuously maintained. So I am just telling you that maybe the board wants to consider some type of landscaping or screening as a part of an approach. Mr. Karivanos: That would sound alot better. I just want to make one other point. At the time when the trees were cut down, if it was for a neighbor calling the Town and saying that do you know that this is being cut? A permit was done after the fact. I believe there is a 40% rule of trees being retained or something like that. We will raise the objection. I think we will have everyone one the board on Stars Road here.Thank you. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak. Dorothy Rose: I live on Stars Road. The tennis court itself where it is supposed to be, I am directly infront of the two lots that he just cleared out, across the street. The tennis court where it is going to be will not be right next to me. The big thing that I want to make sure is that there is no lighting. I wouldn't want that to be going on 10, 11 O'clock at night. Bing,bang,bang. The reason I bought this property is because it wooded. Why he bought wooded land and took all the trees down is beyond me. Because right behind him, he could have bought the same property and got an acre for what he paid for a half an acre. It had no trees, it was all farm land. Thank you. Chainnan: Last call before we recess. Seeing no hands I make a motion recessing to 7:20 or there abouts on October 3. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. The Board took a ten minute break, and returned. 8:55 p.m. Appl.No. 5163 -Nathaniel and Susan Kwit Tom Samuels: (tape changed, didn't get beginning) I was hired a year and a half or so ago to add on to and other wise improve this house which was originally a fishing shed or scallop shop. It was moved to the site when the creek was originally dredged, maybe the 40's. As part-of the process we were evaluating that building to see how much could happen with it. We realized there was certain limitations. Also around that time this Board had decided that pre-existing grandfathers were no longer a grandfather site (footprints).They were not longer sufficient to allow extensive renovations and additions. It became clear togethere with the condition of the building that we were going to be here 1 ZB A I Marino Oran rripts Regular Meeting of September 19,2002 anyway. It probably made sense to look at this as a new structure. When we made that determination it also made sense to us to consider moving it back further from the water front and the rear yard setback. Decreasing the non-conformity in part because it was Mr & Mrs. Kwit's preference and also in part because we thought we could conform more to the code than the existing building. The design that we came up with did do that. Not by very much, but we are further back from the water. And in all other ways conform to the setback requirements and the percentage coverage requirements. We are awaiting a letter of non-jurisdiction from the DEC. We are going to apply shortly, depending on this decision, to the Board of Trustees and have every good reason to expect a permit from the Health Department. Chairman: Mr. Samuels I know Mr. & Mrs. Kwit. I have been to the site several times. I think it is a good plan. I have not objections. Mr. Horning, to you have any questions? Member Horning: You have existing brick walkway and terrace, were you proposing as new also? Mr. Samuels: The existing brick terrace, we would like to remain. It does not encroach the existing. We would like to leave that. Member Horning: From the driveway area, what is currently in between the existing brick walkway and the existing house? Mr. Samuels: There is a little bit of this brick terrace. It comes right to there. Member Horning: Oh, it goes right to the house. Mr. Samuels: Yes. Member Horning: Could your client conceivably move the whole new structure closer to circular driveway? Mr. Samuels: I suppose it is conceivable, but we are not encroaching on that side. I don't know if it would push us back from the watersedge that much. There is established landscape,big trees. More to the point, I think it does not really increase the setback. Member Horning: How about changing the angle of the placement of the building? Mr. Samuels: I think that placement is probably is as efficient as it could be with regards to the road and that southerly boarder. Where it abuts the Tuthil property. I think that it is actually a very tight little package of a footprint there. An angling would probably only make it encroach further in certain places. It is our intention to increase the setbacks. Maybe you have a point,I am certainly be willing to... Member Horning: I mean you are not proposing to increase this very much. Mr. Samuels: That is true. Chairman: Mr. Horning let me just mention something to you. Next to this piece of property is a private marina and a parking lot. So the only real job that you have, is looking at the map where it says site plan and you see the north, there is a little jog where boats are docked. That goes down several 100'. Then there is a private residence. On the other side of this parking lot is a yacht club. There are really in this area only two houses. Mr. & Mrs. Kwits house and another private residence which is actually on the'bay, adjacent to the yacht club. I just wanted to point that out to you. Member Horning: Thank you. The floating docks in canal there are owned by the applicant? Chairman: Only the one in front of the house. ZBA lloaring Transcripts Regular Meeting oPSehtember 19.2002 Member Horning: And the ones to the right are part of that marina? Chairman: They are part of the Tuthill property that Mr. Samuels was referring to. Member Horning: Where is the marina then? Chairman: I will show you. Member Horning: Alright. Thank you. Chairman: It is a wooded lot where the marina is except for the parking area in the center. Which is grass. Mr. Samuels: There is also the private marina to the north which is the Endmen/Fisher parcel. Chainnan: Right. And across the way is another private marina. Member Horning: So there is some pre-existing factors here which have impacted this area. Chairman: Yes. Mr. Orlando? Member Orlando: No questions. But if we did approve a variance the Trustees could not give you a permit to build any way. You are aware of that. Mr. Samuels: Yes, I am aware of that. Within a 100'. 1 have discussed it with them. But yes you are right. What we are doing for the Trustees is moving the existing sanitary system 100' away from the wetlands. In my discussions with the Trustees, they felt that was reasonable mitigation. Member Orlando: No other questions. Member Tortora: How far back will the new house be from the former construction? Mr. Samuels: I don't have that in front of me. It is about 10'> Member Tortora: So it will relocated approximately 10' from...? Mr. Samuels: The best place would be to look at the site plan. The existing is 21.11 and the proposed is 32.2. So 10' is the minimum setback from this little point where the bulkhead jogs back in. Member Oliva: No questions. Chairman: Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak for or against this application? I think you have answered our questions. I thank you for coming and we will close the hearing. I make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving the decision until later. Member Horning: Second. All ayes. 9:07 p.m. Appl.No. 5174 Arlene Manos. Cathy Mesiano: I am here on behalf of Arlene Manos, the owner. Mr. and Mrs. Manos are here as well. We are before you requesting a variance swimming pool to be built in the back yard less then 100' from the top of the bluff. I believe that the proposal that you have before you represents as set back of 35'. We have revised the plan which I would like to give you a copy. We have moved the pool back closer towards the house. It is only 4' off of the house. It will now maintain a setback from the top of the bluff of 42'. This has been a difficult site to try to decide where to put this pool. We have considered the option of putting this in the front yard. The conforming location in the front yard is where the septic system presently exists. There is landscaping in the front yard and we believe we would have more option from neighbors if we attempt to put the pool in the front I'iigU ul?J ZBA l lcarinb TrLuiscripts Regular Meeting ol'Sehtember 19,2002 yard. We have scaled the size of the pool back to 16 x 32. We have moved the pool as close into the corner of the house as we can. To create as large a distance between the propose pool and the top of the bluff. I would also like to vole that the bluff is stable. Very well vegetated and it is not in an area that has been showing problems with erosion and so on. The distance from the high water mark to the top of the bluff is probably close to 100'. There is a significant bluff there. The elevation of the top of the bluff is 46'. The property rolls gently towards the road from that point. Being that the bluff is stable, well vegetated and we are proposing this structure to be tucked in a notch within the confines of the existing structure, we are only looking to come closer to the bluff then the house presently exists of about 8 - 10'. I would like to answer any questions that you may have. Chairman: I observed the bluff and I do concur with you. The only thing that concerned me was, I was almost ready not to send the letter to Soil and Water Conservation,but the existing patio I found cracks in. That concerned me, so therefore I sent the letter. We normally do it anyway, as you know. We are kind of waiting for them to come back and tell us what there opinion is when they look at it. This is certainly a better compromise. There is no question about it. Ms. Mesiano: Another thing I would just like to add to it, is that the pool is proposed as a vinyl line pool, not a gunite pool. The degree of excavation is significantly less in a vinyl lined pool. The construction itself is less significant activity. We have oriented the pool in such a way that we are running parallel. We have tried everything that we could do to get in something that is big enough to swim in. Something that will get a little bit of sunshine shining on it and not be shadows all the time. A reasonable use without creating a degradation to the bluff. Chairman: This is not a lap pool? Ms. Mesiano: This is not a lap pool. Member Oliva:No questions. I have seen what is there. Member Tortora: Where is pool filter and the drainage for the pool going to be. Ms. Mesiano: That would be landward and that would be tucked up on the westerly side of the house. As it is presently shown there is no way to get that equipment between the pool and the house. That filter would have to sit over on the side. The drywell will also have to be on the side. Chairman: In the past in situations like this,we have required these to be housed. Ms. Mesiano: In that case I would need to ask you for a side yard variance. No it would be an accessary structure,not attached. Chairman: That is correct. Member Tortora: Do you plan on having a patio connecting to the pool to the house? Ms. Mesiano: There will be some type of structure. We haven't worked out the details. The biggest question was the if we can get a variance. We haven't gone to the architect and we haven't worked out all the details. Yes there will have to be a patio of some type attaching the pool to the house so as not to have to step out of the house and step down and up again. For safety sake one would expect to walk straight out of the house onto the pool patio. There will be no change in grade,because it is only about 3'off the house. Member Tortora:What about on the sound side of the pool. 1- 1 , Page 23 of_J Z13A Hearing I rauscripts Regular N/lecting of September I Q.2002 Ms. Mesiano: Again that is up to the generosity of this board, frankly. We would hope to be able to have at least a minimal 3 - 4' at grade, permeable surface. Brick or some type of other set in sand material at grade. Chairman: It is relatively flat up there. Member Tortora: Tell me one more time why you could not locate this in the conforming area. Ms. Mesiano: The only other place we could put the pool is in the front yard. That is where the septic system is. Member Tortora: In the whole front yard? Ms. Mesiano: No it is not in the whole front yard, but then there is the issue of the driveway. We can't have the septic system under the driveway. Member Orlando: We have a water main going up there as well. Ms. Mesiano: Yes,that is correct. Member Tortora: I see. O.K. Ms. Mesiano: If we move the septic system, the only place we could put it would be closer to the road and then having the waste line coming out of the house would then be problematic because of the distance from the water line, keeping everything out from under the driveway, clearing the swimming pool. Those are the technical aspects. From the asthetic aspect, the front yard is nicely landscaped with mature plantings and as I mentioned we expect more negative outcry from the neighbors if we try to put it in front yard, then if we try to put it in the back. Member Tortora: O.K. I guess we are going to wait until we get a report from Soil and Water. Ms. Mesiano: We did consider the easterly side of the back yard. Then you would be looking at another situation where we would be closer to the side yard. We would be looking for more of a variance in that area. If one were to put in a pool, this was the only reasonable, feasable, asthetic, on-obtrusive way to do it. And economicaly to do it. Member Orlando:No questions. Chairman: Is there a basement in that house? Ms. Mesiano: Yes, a full basement. Chairman: In the interm, you just might want to talk to the Building Department regarding the placement of the pool to the degree where you want to place it. I don't what the expansion and contraction rate is. They may make you pack it with peat gravel in between. Ms. Mesiano: O.K. Chairman: I think we can recess this until October 17th. The letter went out to Soil and Water on Sept. 4th. I think we should have it back by then. Any objection? (no objection).You might be on the end,but that is the best we can do. Ms. Mesiano: That is O.K. Chairman: We will leave it at October 17th. If there is any change, we will let you know. Is there anybody else who would like to speak tonight. Speaker(in audience, name inaudible) My home is west of this proposal. I am in favor of the placement of this pool. It is in a good place. Page 24 01 2.1) G13 llcarittb l raua�ripts Regular Meeting ol'Septemher 19.2002 Chairman: Thank you. Anybody else? Seeing no hands, I make a motion in recessing the hearing until October 17th. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. 9:20 p.m. Appl. No. 5171 Stephen Sachman and Alexia Quadrani. Chairman: I was up to see the property. The applicants where home. They gratiously came out and showed me, it was early in the morning. I don't see any major changes with this application. Am I correct in assuming that? Ms. Mesiano: That is correct. There is an error on the survey. On the rear of the house proposed deck. That deck is there. It is staying. There is nothing that is going to be done with that. The survey looks as if it is a one story framed house. It is not. It is a partial second story. We are looking to expand a second story to make it a full two-story house. Chairman: We are going to call it a one and one half story at this point? Ms. Mesiano: Yes. Mrs. Tortora:You have any questions on this? Member Tortora:No. Member Orlando:.When I was there, I was looking at the deck saying the same thing. The deck is already here. My question was, left side of the house is existing second floor of the house, correct. Ms. Mesiano: Yes. The north side second story is existing. Member Orlando: So you are looking for symmetry to put the same thing on the other side. Ms. Mesiano: I have some elevations that I could offer to you. This is the rear elevation. This is existing and this is proposed. Member Orlando: It doesn't go beyond the footprint? Ms. Mesiano: The footprint does not change. There is an 18" cantalever. Member Orlando: The reason for the cantalever? Ms. Mesiano: Structural and because of the demensions of the room, they where slightly undersized and it made more sense from a practical perspective to have a little more room. Member Orlando: Is this a summer residence? Ms. Mesiano: It is used on a part time basis. It is a year round habitable house, but the owners of the house use it on a part time basis. They are out for the Summers. They are out on weekends. Chairman: What we are in effect saying is that the 14.2 is decreased by 18"? Ms. Mesiano: Yes, except that the foot print doesn't change. The shadow would, if you will. We are looking for 18" of relief in that regard. The reason for the 18" is structural to cantilever it and to gain enough extra room in that one bedroom. To have a more functional room. Member Horning: No questions. Member Oliva: No questions. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak for or against this application? Judith Simon: I am Judith Simon. My husband and I are the ones who are most directly effected by this. This structure that there is now is actually two stories. This over looks Vagc-D of ) ZBA Ilearing 1 ranscripIN Regular Meeting of'September 11). 2002 our main out door living space. Which we use constantly. We did address the issue when this property was sold, because we have been there for quite awhile. We put a line of trees in on our side of the property as well as the Sachmans' put one in on their side. We also put more trees on our property to protect our privacy from the second story of the existing building now. Our concern is with this new second floor addition, that if anything happens that they decide that they want to cut down there tree line or they sell the house and somebody else moves in there and says I don't like these trees here. And they cut it down. We want to be assured legally that there will be a line of trees to give us some aspect of privacy. Chainnan: We also use that phrase continuously maintained. If the board was so inclined to grant this variance we would also say that not only are the,trees to stay but they would have to be continuously maintained. Mrs. Simon: O.K. That would be satisfactory. I think that Ms. Mesiano called the Sachmans' and they indicated that would not be a problem and that would be fine with us. Ms. Mesiano: Whatever would be satisfactory. Mr. Simon: My main concern is the survey that we got is not really the correct survey. The house show one story.and it two story high. The deck is already built. We want to be sure that the corrected survey be printed. Chairman: I corrected on the survey right now. Ms. Mesiano: We have to do a under construction survey and a final survey of what actually is there. There is going to be numerous changes to the survey as time progresses to reflect what actually occurs. Mrs. Simon: Our main concern is our loss of privacy or the possibility of. Chairman: We will put that in the restrictions if the Board is so inclined to grant this variance. Ms. Mesiano: I spoke to Mr. Sachman and he has no problem with putting anything that is appropriate in writing and he also indicated he is going to do more plantings as well. Chairman: Is there anybody else who would like to speak? Seeing no hands, I would like to make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving the decision until later. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. 9:30 p.m. Appl.No. 5156 Robert and Barbara Taylor Mr. Taylor: Good evening. My name is Robert Taylor. We submitted a plan for a 3 car garage with a second floor. It is a little to tall. I need the three car garage, because I have large vehicles. I am a carpenter. I need the storage space which is on top for my material. Chairman: How tall is the garage? Mr.Taylor: 23'11". Member Orlando:Is it 23 to the ridge? Mr. Taylor: Yes.23.11 to the ridge. Chairman: It is 1'11" over the mean. 22 is the max. He has a steeper roof line on this. Any questions? Member Horning:You originally got a building permit based on your application? Mr.Taylor:No we have not gotten a permit because of the variances needed. Member Horning: O.K.You haven't started any construction? � f Page�o of 19 LBA Hew ing Tranzscripts Regular Meeting of September I Q.2002 Mr. Taylor: No sir. Member Orlando: No questions. Chairman: 1 guess the question I have is that the building is only going to be used for ,storage purposes and purposes in conjunction with your carpentry business? You are not planning on any apartments? Mr. Taylor: Yes. And No, I am not. Chairman: So you will have utility of electricity and what? Mr. Taylor: Water. Member Tortora: The main portion of the garage is a work shop? Mr. Taylor: Yes. And storage. Chairman: How high is the ceiling on the first floor? Is it relatively high? Mr. Taylor: Yes. My vehicles have ladder racks. Member Tortora: So you have contractor business. Mr. Taylor: Yes, I am a contractor. Member Oliva:No questions. Chairman: Is there anybody in the audience who would like to speak for or against this application? It appears that no one is commenting. We will close the hearing and reserve decision. Member Horning: Second. All ayes. 9:35 p.m. Appl.No.4778 Crazy Chinaman Corp. Chairman: I is my understanding that the fire inspector has inspected the premises. You have submitted to us a C of O for the back deck. Mr. Goggins: Yes. Chairman: Any idea how old this house is? Mr. Goggins: I believe it was built in 1910. There are sheet rock walls. But they where replaced. The original structure had plaster walls and sheet rock replaced later on. Chairman: Any idea how old the apartment is? Mr. Goggins: Probably since 1980. I believe the prior owner Fletcher Sharmers had bought the building and at some point he and his wife separated and he began using the upstairs as an apartment. Chairman: There has been no change in that size or the conformity? Mr. Goggins: There has been a change. There was no doorway at the top of the stairs.The stairway from the first floor to the second floor in the inside. They put in a door. I had the deck installed in 1998 so there would be access from the rear outside entrance. At that time I was living in the apartment for about two years. Since then Ken rented the apartment. Member Oliva:No questions. Member Tortora: I don't have an application in front of me. I will just ask you. How big is the apartment? ` Mr. Goggins: About 700 sq.ft. Member Tortora: Does it meet the code? Mr. Goggins: Yes. Member Tortora: It is an existing, correct? l Z B A HCal-iug [EtIIScripiS Regular Meeting of September 1 Q,2002 Mr. Goggins: Correct. I think the code says 450 minimum and 750 maximum. 1 believe it is within that. Chairman: This is a business zoned piece of property? Mr. Goggins: It is residential/office. At some point it was business. I haven't done the research. Chairman: So it has been RO since 89? Mr. Goggins: At least, yes. Member Tortora: The total sq. footage of the whole building? Mr. Goggins: I believe the whole building is about 1800 sq.ft. Member Tortora: O.K. Chairman: Frankly, I haven't looked at this paper work since a year ago when I submitted the application. Other then when I made arrangements to meet the fire marshal. Member Tortora: I will review the Chairman's file. Member Orlando: Since I don't have the file, who is the present owner of this corporation of the Crazy Chinaman. I am the primary stock holder in that corporation. There are other stock holders, so it is a corporation. I control it. Member Orlando: The reason you are here tonight, is that it was an illegal apartment and you are making it legal? Mr. Goggins: That is correct. It has been operating as an illegal apartment for some time now. We wanted to legalize it. Member Horning:To rent to anybody who would be a suitable renter? Mr. Goggins: Correct. Member Orlando:No other questions. Member Horning:No questions. Mr. Goggins: I will provide the information on the square footage. Member Tortora: Just put the information on the provision in the code. Chairman: We thank you for the C.O. on the deck and we thank you for the fire inspectors report. Anybody else like to speak for or against? Seeing no hands, I will make a motion in closing the hearing pending the receipt of the actually square footage of the building so we can put it in the file. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. 9:45 p.m. Appl.No. 5188 -Edward and Paula Quintieri Edward Quintieri: My name is Edward Quintieri and I would like to get a variance to build a three car garage. Chairman: We have all been down and looked at the property. This is a one story garage? Mr. Quintieri:Yes. Chairman: We know that you have a major problem because of your setbacks to the water. Mr. Quintieri:Yes. We are only 20' off the front yard setback. Chairman: As we discussed that day I met you in the yard. There are certainly other location that you would rather locate this garage, but because of the nature of that 75' to the bulkhead,you have chosen to put it in this location. It is pretty steadfast at this point. t i ZBA I Ica ring I raiiscripts Regular Meeting of September IQ. 2002 Mr. Quintieri: Unfortunately. Member Horning: Did you consider attaching it to the house? Mr. Quintieri: We did, we just decided not to. Chairman: The house has some very fancy dentals on the corners. Mr. Quintieri: The house is being clone in stucco and it has coins on the corners of the house and everything. The front of the house has a very unique look. I didn't want to interrupt it. Member Horning: You wouldn't need a variance perhaps if it was attached. Mr. Quintieri: It just wasn't the look I was looking for. Member Horning: I understand. Member Orlando:No questions. Member Tortora: The thatched part, it says to be removed. Mr. Quintieri: We are in the middle of a major construction on the house itself. The house is already built. The original house partly torn down and we put up a house. I originally applied for the house and garage in one permit. The Building Department determined that we needed a variance for the garage. So we separated it under another permit so I can go ahead with building the house. Member Tortora: Is that the closest you can get off the lot line? Mr. Quintieri: I would gladly move it closer. Member Tortora: Is that the furtherest you can get it off the lot line? Mr. Quintieri:Yes. I am already about 10'away from the house. Chairman: That road which is really a paper street, gives you the impression of being farther away. Member Orlando: I think your neighbor utilizes some of that paper street. Mr. Quintieri: To be honest with you, we both utilize it right now. Member Oliva: I don't see anywhere else the can put it. Chairman: Hearing no further comment I make a motion in closing the hearing and reserving the decision. Member Orlando: Second. All ayes. 9:50 p.m. Appl.No. 5191 Malcolm and Ethel McAllister. Richard Lark, Esq: The Board has seen the property. I am here primarily to answer questions. The Clerk Lind Kowalski had called me back right before Labor Day. And I submitted a letter clarifying the confusion the Building Department had created. They originally took the view in early July that it was in the side yard and then they reversed themselves that it was in the front yard and side. The surveyor tells me that the building inspector is satisfied now that the pool really is in the side yard. The surveyor maintained that the Building Department over years as well as the Board, the edge of the concrete is where the pool stops. The fact that you have a level deck or a grass area or something surrounding that is not considered unless it is a raised structure or something of that nature. He maintains that. I talked to him as late as today, he says the Building Department has backed off of that and the front yard is 0' from the road. The error has turned out to be environmental better. Where it was, I had questions right from the get go t Pa-c_J of �y Z13A I-icaring Trau�u iota Regular Meeting of September IQ. 2002 when I went over there originally to look at the property. It would have been a structure of its own, unless you brought in huge amounts of dirt and everything else. This way here it kind of blends right in with the front yard. In fact it is just a tad below it and it kind of blend oft with the hill there. It will require less till and everything else. Obviously they have lost the use of it for this year considering where we are today. They still can get it constructed so they can us it for next year. Rather then leave that construction which would be ashamed to be exposed to the elements. If you have any questions. Member Horning: Now you are saying that the Building Department might have revised its interpretation of the side. Mr. Lark: They have not done officially yet. My understanding from the surveyor and Linda Kowalski (ZBA Clerk) said you can apply it with both ways because it is what it is. Whether it is front yard side yard where ever it is, amend your application to cover both. That is, of course, what the legal notice and the sign posting did. Chairman: That is why I never touch those. Whatever they want to determine it to be, that is what they determine it to be, and we go from there. Mr. Lark: Right because he changed it. As you saw originally,he said it was side and then two weeks letter saying well, it is in both. I never got that until late August when somebody gave it to me and Linda called me. That is how.I got where we are today. Chairman: Any question of Mr. Lark on this. Board:No. Chairman: We think this is a pretty good location. Mr. Lark: It turned out to be the best, actually. Chairman: I make a motion closing the hearing. Member Horning: Second. All ayes. Chairman: I will make a motion granted it as applied for. Member Horning: I seconded it. All ayes. Respectfully submitted by Jill M. Doherty (Prepared from tape recordings) NOV 4 1