Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-08/07/2003 HEAR r SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS SPECIAL MEETING TRANSCRIPT OF HEARINGS HELD AUGUST 7,2003 (Prepared by Jessica Boger) Present were: Chairwoman Lydia A. Tortora Member Gerard P. Goehringer Member Ruth D. Oliva Member Vincent Orlando Clerk Paula Quintieri Absent were: Member George Horning 6:45 p.m. Appl. No. 5317 FREDERICK and JOAN FROHNE (continued from 6/19/03). Request for a Variance under Section 100-239.4B, based on the Building Department's February 3, 2003 Notice of Disapproval. Applicant proposes additions and alterations to dwelling in a location at less than 75 feet from the bulkhead. Location of Property: 4700 Paradise Point Road, Southold; CTM #1000-81-3-4. POSSIBLE RESOLUTION TO consider 7/31 letter from P. Moore, attorney for P. Cooper, for adjournment. Also letter from G. Strang,Architect for applicant objecting to adjournment. CHAIRWOMAN: Is someone here who would like to speak on behalf of the application? GARRETT STRANG, ARCH: Good evening, my name is Garrett Strang, architect, representing Mr. and Mrs. Frohne, the applicant. CHAIRWOMAN: Just one moment. We have some last minute correspondence apparently. I'm sorry, could you continue, Mr. Strang? MR. STRANG: Certainly. I'll be brief, I promise. Once I apologize for having to submit the lengthy dissertation. It's not something I enjoy doing. And I'm sure it didn't make for much of an interesting read,but I did have to set the record straight. Since the adjournment last time, obviously I did submit that particular rebuttal and some additional documents. In addition, I believe the ZBA has been in receipt of correspondence from Mr. Scalia, the neighbor to the opposite side. And a letter also from the applicant, Mr. Frohne. I submitted today, which unfortunately I only received today, a letter from the Paradise Point Association (PPA),which essentially indicates that there's no violations to their C&R's based on our original application. And I also submitted an altered site plan showing an alternative reduction in the size of this open porch. Although our preference would be to have it as original.applied for or as we mentioned at the last hearing, reduce the 12'to be sensitive to Mr.Cooper. But we have considered the size 10' Page 2 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing as well. With respect to the submittals I made, I'm not sure the board has any questions at this time to clarify. CHAIRWOMAN: So the new plans, I'm sorry we didn't get a chance,the correspondence that came in on the 7 ',we're just kind of getting it now. MR. STRANG: Okay. CHAIRWOMAN: So the new plans would bring us,how far,how much closer? MR. STRANG: The new plan would reduce, the original application was for a 16'open,roofed over,but open. At the testimony last time, I offered a 12' and that was in response to Mr. Cooper's suggestion. And in further consideration with my client,we're bringing it back to 10' at this point, which I believe, you have a site plan in front of you, I believe brings it 54' off the bulkhead. And it's obviously much further from the high water mark,but that's where we are this point. MEMBER OLIVA: And it would be open,not closed? MR. STRANG: It's open to remain open,unenclosed. We are receptive to a condition if the board wants to put such on it,that it's not to be enclosed at any point in the future. I know there was a point, and if you haven't read my submittal,there's a point that was brought up in the documents submitted by Mr. Cooper that he felt that if this relief were granted, or alternative relief were granted, that it would open the door for an addition on the house. What we are submitting now having established a setback. And we're offering that we would be willing to accept a condition by this board that if there were to be any additions to the house in the future, that it would have to come back to this board for review. So that wouldn't establish a precedent on our particular parcel. i MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Do we know that he was referring to additions as meaning the enclosure of this particular application or was he referring to multiple additions that might be on the house? MR. STRANG: My understanding of having read that particular document he submitted was that they were concerned that it would, the way the code reads, if I understand it correctly that this setback has to be landward of an established setback. And I believe his position was if this variance were granted and we built the screen room, it would establish the setback and we could put an addition on the house. Again, using that as the established setback, and be landward of that. But it would obviously be a massive encroachment on the setback. And we are willing to say, we wouldn't do that without coming back to this board, if the board so chooses to put that condition on. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Mr. Strang, one other question, that 54' at 10' from the house in depth, which you are proposing at this point, that is to the lowest bulkhead. Is that correct? Page 2 of 13 Page 3 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MR. STRANG: There is only 1 bulkhead. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: There's a lot of tiers in that area because of the steepness of that area. MR. STRANG: That is a bulkhead that's been established. It's a wooden bulkhead that's down at the bottom at the foot of the bluff. There is a well vegetated and stable bluff at the top. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: How is that measured by the way? Is it measured straight out, and up like this? MR. STRANG: That is correct. It is. It's a horizontal dimension view. Took the bulkhead line and came vertical with, and measured horizontally to the proposed addition, that would be it. We're not measuring the hypotenuse of the... MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I just didn't know if there was another bulkhead buried in there and that's the reason I asked. MR. STRANG: Not on our property. I believe on the adjacent property, the Coopers have several terraces that are built into the bluff that they, I guess the previous owner before Cooper, had excavated. CHAIRWOMAN: Ms. Oliva? MEMBER OLIVA: No, I don't have any further questions. CHAIRWOMAN: Mr. Orlando? MEMBER ORLANDO: No questions. CHAIRWOMAN: The only thing I would like to know for the record is that the attorney for the adjoining neighbor has requested that this hearing be postponed, as the attorney is going to be out of town. And you have written a response to that letter. What is the board's pleasure? MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I think we should just leave the time open for the attorney to reflect any concerns she may have. Then we go from there. She has the plan. There's no reason to continue it. CHAIRWOMAN: Verbally or in writing? MEMBER GOEHRINGER: In writing. CHAIRWOMAN: The only problem with that is then we get into final rebuttals. Page 3 of 13 I Page 4 j 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing i MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No. All the final rebuttals have to be in by the 21 st,by the next meeting. And we officially close the hearing. And that's it. MR. STRANG: My only challenge with that would be if the rebuttal from Mr. Cooper's attorney arrives within a short timeframe of the date you've established. CHAIRWOMAN: At 4:00 on the deadline date? MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Then we'll extend it for you, Garrett. CHAIRWOMAN: No, no. MR. STRANG: I have a philosophical challenge with the attorney's request for the fact that she was here at the last meeting,we all agreed to the date. There was no challenge at that time. She had when she could oppose it. She had ample opportunity shortly thereafter to ask for an adjournment, which, you know. But to come in a week, or less than a week before the hearing and ask for an adjournment, for the purpose of the fact that she's on vacation, I really have a philosophical challenge with that. In my position,my feeling is that's an affront to this board. This board asks for,is this date agreeable to you? We said "yes". You've taken the time to put it on your calendar. And I think for the attorney to take a vacation,knowing full well that she had a commitment and an obligation to stay, is not nice. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Can I make a suggestion? I can take care of this whole thing. CHAIRWOMAN: You're not the chairperson. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I understand that. CHAIRWOMAN: Please let me do that. I'm not really in favor of(inaudible) I really... MEMBER ORLANDO: Close it. MEMBER OLIVA: Close it. CHAIRWOMAN: I don't see any reason to continue it anyway. There's no, I mean, there's absolutely no... MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You've got the time limit to do that. You can give her until next Friday, and then Mr. Strang has until the meeting if there's any rebuttal. It's very easy, you have 2 weeks. MEMBER OLIVA: Close it. Page 4 of 13 Page 5 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I'm just saying. CHAIRWOMAN: I mean,we could do that,but what's the purpose? MEMBER GOEHRINGER: As I said in the beginning of the hearing,there really is no purpose. Because Mr. Strang has already submitted, she is aware of this 10'. CHAIRWOMAN: Exactly, she has... MR. STRANG: She has been given, everything that the board was given was given to her. CHAIRWOMAN: If she wasn't given a copy of the plans, then that would be different. I make a motion to close the hearing,reserving decision until later. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Just reflect, for the record, that I would keep it open until the 21 sc MR. STRANG: Appreciate your consideration. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION Page 5 of 13 Page 6 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing 7:00 p.m.Appl.No. 5355 -TOWBEE,LLC (continued from 6/19/03).Amended Request for Variances under Sections 100-142, 100-143A, and 100-143C,based on the Building Department's February 19,2002 Notice of Disapproval, amended June 19,2003. Applicant proposes two new buildings in this LI Industrial Zone District with: (a) side yard setbacks at less than 20 feet, (b)rear yard setbacks at less than 70 feet, (c)building linear frontages greater than 60 feet along two average of 90 feet from the front lot line, and (d) a portion of the new construction will be greater than the code limitation of 2-1/2 stories.Location of Property: 700 Hummel Avenue,Southold; CTM#1000-63-2-30.1. CHAIRWOMAN: The next hearing is on behalf of Towbee. Is there anyone here who would like to speak on behalf of that application? ABIGAIL WICKHAM,ESQ: Good evening. Abigail Wickham, for the applicant. We're not going to repeat everything that we went through last time. But I do want to just refresh the board's memory because it's been a long time. And you've had a lot of intervening matters that we are seeking to replace. An existing concrete block building,which is right on the Hummel Avenue line with 2 structures and refurbishing of a 3rd existing structure. If you recall,the maps you had at the last meeting have not changed. I did put in new maps today. I'm sorry they came in so late. But they are pretty,they are exactly what you looked at before with the exception of additional information in the way of drainage and that type of thing. CHAIRWOMAN: There's no change in the placement... MS. WICKHAM: There's no change in the placement of the setbacks, no. A little more parking has been provided and a little more detail on the square footage. But there was some confusion at the last hearing as to which were the right maps. I just want to be sure we were all looking at the same thing. In any event, the new office building,if you recall is 60x80 sq. ft. office building of 58 more or less feet from Hummel Avenue. And 70 to 117'from Boisseau Ave. The 2nd new building is the warehouse,which is 70x40. A single story structure with a setback of 5' from the rear line at the closest point, 7 %a' at the furthest point, and 6.3' from the side yard, which is the applicant's side yard. The applicant owning the adjoining property. And 5' at the closest point from the rear yard. The setbacks which are on the Hummel Avenue side, which are nonconforming to the 100' average setback, are certainly not out of character with what's in the neighborhood now. If you recall, the building at the western end of the block is right on the line. And it's a very long building. Our office building on Hummel is an average of 59' from Hummel. If you average all of the buildings,because it is considered a single structure, it's 85'. There is no, there is an excess of setback from Boisseau Avenue as it's proposed. That's not a problem. The setback from Hummel, while it's 59', which is under the standard, is certainly an improvement over the setback of that ugly, existing, concrete block building,which will be removed that has a 4' setback. It's also a much nicer looking building, and is certainly much further away than the buildings in the neighborhood. The old Southold Savings Bank on the corner near the RR tracks is about 36'back from Youngs. So this is much further setback than Page 6 of 13 Page 7 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing that. I would like to also mention, as I said, the side yard setback is a significant reduction,but it does abut the applicants other property. So they are not going to be impacting strangers. And the rear yard reductions,which are significant are on the RR side, and well within the fence. And we've discussed fire access and that type of thing. Also, if you recall, it says here on rear elevation,that would be the elevation facing the RR tracks, there are no buildings, no windows, proposed. So there will not be an impact on privacy to the extent that 2nd story would overlook onto the Colonial Village property. So those people will not be worried about people looking over into their yards. One thing we did not address specifically last time was the 3rd story for which the Notice of Disapproval was amended. It would, as I understand the code,be considered an attic, except for the access,which is proposed,which is not only by a stairway,but also by an elevator. And the reason,well, first of all, the attic space,which is considered a 3rd floor under the code, is less than half of the actual floor area of that upper floor. It is just under 2000 sq. ft. less whatever area is taken up by the elevator and the stairway. It is going to be used, and the reason the elevator is going up there is first of all, they have to put an elevator in there anyway. And they need to do monthly storage and periodic retrieval of records for their thousands of memberships and reports. They keep them seven years. And the access by the elevator will not only facilitate getting them up and down,but will also assist with handicap clerical employees that would be able to accommodate that section of the building. It will not be used for office space. The file storage is in sealed, fireproof, locked, files. And that's the only furniture that would be up there other than maybe a file system of some sort. The appearance of the building is the same whether it's interior space that's considered a 3rd story or not. It's just part of the roof. And we'd like to submit that given the cost of this building, it really would be an economic hardship to deprive the applicant of the use of this space. It's not a visual impediment. He has to build a roof over area anyway. And he has to build the elevator anyway. And file storage in a paper intensive business, as you are undoubtedly well aware, is really critical to a business. So they would like to be able to access it in a more economic fashion. We had mentioned briefly, last time, the fact that this business, salvage does sea rescue. And the coordination with some of the emergency response agencies is quite critical to their business. They do have a relationship with the Coast Guard. And I submitted a letter from the Coast Guard indicating that they are working closely with them. They have open discussions with FEMA in terms of possible use of this facility as some sort of emergency shelter because the facilities in this town are not what they probably could be. I'm advised that this will be considered a green building,which means it is environmentally sound. It is to qualify for lead credits for energy. And Joe can explain to you exactly what it means. But it's supposed to be built as a very sound, over, a building exceeding usual construction standards. And maybe used as a model for some future construction standards in areas where emergency shelter is important. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Where would that be done in that building? MS. WICKHAM: It's in a preliminary discussion at this point. Probably the open area would be downstairs. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: In the basement? Page 7 of 13 Page 8 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing You have a couple of floors. CHAIRWOMAN: Please state your name for the record. CAPTAIN JOE FROHNHOEFER: Captain Joe Frohnhoefer. The lead credits,by the way, are leadership and environmental design and engineering. The building is going to be built, probably to exceed any of the standards, especially in this wind zone. The loading for this wind zone, as you know, is 120 mph. We are just on the tip from Riverhead out. A lot of people are having problems with that. We are going to try to show them how to solve it. It's going to be a model building, for environmental design, energy design,we are working with LIPA,we are working with emergency management,NYS and Suffolk County. We are working with a few other people. And our communication setup within the building will be a backup facility for a number of different people. We are looking at redundancy across Shelter Island for our T1 lines. We are doing the satellite stuff from the building. And I can assure you that the antennas for those are extremely small. They have changed those, and the engineering of those has changed tremendously. As you can tell from just the TV dishes, are smaller. These probably will be smaller than that. There's a lot of things that we're looking at working with the government on. And we're exceeding, and quite far ahead right now. On the 20a', I will in Houston at Lockheed, Martin, and Nassau space center. And we are releasing some of our developments down there. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Let me just ask a question, Joe, if you don't mind. If the building is an office building on the first and second story, for FEMA to utilize this building as a headquarters, okay, they certainly wouldn't be taking over your area, so you will be utilizing probably the basement? MR. FROHNHOEFER: Yes. We would be, the basement is set up for classrooms. We would be using a combination, our communication system may be taken over. And work with them, hand in hand. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I understand. In a real significant emergency. MEMBER ORLANDO: Based on a disaster,how much they need. MR. FROHNHOEFER: Based on whatever. We are going to have a generator, 60KW generator, 200 amps to back us up. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: On natural gas? MR. FROHNHOEFER: Most likely, that or propane on the RR track side, in the back, hidden. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: And this building is fully sprinklered? MR. FROHNHOEFER: Doesn't have to be. It's a fireproof building. It has over a 4 or 5 hour fire rating. Just from the nature of it. It's poured concrete inside the insulated ICS, concrete Page 8 of 13 Page 9 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing forms. You're talking about an 8"reinforced concrete wall, 5/8's re-rod,horizontal and vertical. The floors are concrete. There's not a lot in that building that can burn. Just the paper. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Paper on the 3rd story. MR. FROHNHOEFER: That's about it. And that's in fireproof cabinets. The loading of the floors,I can tell you, is extreme. We're using 3/ re-rod in the eye beams. The eye beams are approximately 8", I think, across, 8 or 9" inches across, top on bottom. We are actually putting more re-rod into than is called for. The only engineer that's qualified for this is out of up NYS. And he's coming down to work with us on the actual, finished,product. MS. WICKHAM: I think the obvious question for the board is why do we need a building that's that big,which causes the setback reductions. Again, the setback reductions are,we think, on sides that are not as significant. And we are significantly improving the setback distance from the residential and Boisseau Avenue side. But in specific answer to that issue,the building was designed to precisely accommodate the business and represent,really, the minimum space that they've evaluated as necessary in order to house not only their employees,but their computer and office equipment. Their technological equipment, radar, sonar, and satellite tracking as well as the warehousing in the outbuildings for their products, files, and in the P building, #3, some boat configurations. As a result, they really don't feel they have any feasible alternative. If you recall other reasons we are here on this many variances is because it is a corner lot. And it is a narrow lot. So I'd be happy to try and answer any specific questions the board might have. I did, if I could just, I'm sorry, I forgot to mention, Ms. Oliva last time asked a little bit about the employee access to the building in terms of staffing levels at various hours of the day. And I gave you a chart that reflects the fact that this is a while it's a 7 day a week, 24 hour a day building in terms of employees, the staffing for most of that time is quite minimal. The staffing during the peak hours is staggered so that employees will not be coming in and leaving at the same time throughout the day and competing for spaces. So we've spoken twice now, the Planning Board about parking and we're going to be going back there again. We've presented a couple of plans. But the employees have very carefully mapped out what the office space is designed for. CHAIRWOMAN: Let's see if anyone in the audience has any questions. Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak in favor or against the application? Or who has more questions about this? MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I have more questions. CHAIRWOMAN: I don't see any hands. You have fairly well gone through the variance aspects both at this hearing and at the prior hearing. Let's see if we have any issues to be resolved. Do you have another question? MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I have 2 more questions,just of Captain Joe, if he doesn't mind. Page 9 of 13 Page 10 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing MR. FROHNHEIFER: Yes sir. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You have indicated to us the certain need for this site and I went down and inspected the RR area and I think that's certainly adequate enough to really bring in emergency vehicles and do what has to be done if anything has to be done, god forbid. Hopefully nothing has to be done. Or an access to that area. The only other concern I have are the residents that are on Hummel Ave. and anybody that might hear anything from this building. This is going to be a neighbor-friendly building. MR. FROHNHOEFER: You're not going to hear a pin drop either inside or out. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: We're not going to have any outside, loud speakers. Everything is going to be done by individual radio? MR. FROHNHOEFER: We try to keep it as quiet as we can, and as secure as we can. No. You don't hear anything now. There's no outside speakers. .It's not like Agway where you have the PA and call the guys in the back. We can hear them. Or over at Burt's, I mean that's normal for their business. They are trying to get guys in the yard. We're not working in a yard. We are working in a concrete building with 13 %2" walls all total. And our rating of R50, which exceeds anything you can even get with regular insulation. We are going to probably heat it with a candle and cool it with an ice cube. You're not going to hear anything outside. And as a matter of fact, inside, it's extremely quiet. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Let's talk about the warehouse buildings. Everything, again, is done by individual radio to the individual employees. MR. FROHNHOEFER: We do everything by phone, inside. We have intercoms, intercom phone system. The phone system alone is $200K. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: So there's not going to be any exterior speakers? MR. FROHNHOEFER: No, not unless she wants to play music at Christmas. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I had another question,but somehow I forgot it. CHAIRWOMAN: Ms. Oliva? MEMBER OLIVA: No, he answered all the questions I had. CHAIRWOMAN: Mr. Orlando? MEMBER ORLANDO: A quick one. I think it's a great structure, and I applaud you for grabbing the tiger by the tail for this project here. Just like I think Jerry tapped on it, I just want Page 10 of 13 Page 11 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing to make sure. Reservations on the 3rd floor, obviously you're going to have air conditioning up there, I would guess, maybe, for the files? MR. FROHNHOEFER: For the entire building because of the tightness of the building. We have to have air exchange. So we will be heating by air ducts and hot air enforced cooling air. All of the air conditioning will be on the backside by the RR track. It will not be heard, it's extremely quiet. MEMBER ORLANDO: Because that 3rd floor will heated and cooled just for mold control, dampness, etc. MR. FROHNHOEFER: And electronics if we have any electronics up there. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I have a question. Is there a kitchen in the building? MR. FROHNHOEFER: There is a break room. That's it. There may be a microwave. We're not talking about anything else. No sleeping. You can't sleep on duty. MS.WICKHAM: Just answer a little bit further your question on noise. You recall the 3 buildings are connected internally, so that will minimize outside interference. MR. FROHNHOEFER: Yes,but they are also separated by steel doors. Fireproof walkways in- between. MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Knowing Capt. Joe's operation,I would assume if he wanted to contact someone,then he would either by radio or telephone. MR. FROHNHOEFER: That's the way we do it. Pagers... CHAIRWOMAN: Seeing there are no other questions, do you have anything else you'd like to add? MR. FROHNHOEFER: I'd just like to,when we get it done, I hope we can get it done,invite everybody down to take a look. Because it's probably going to be the newest technology around. And the most leading stuff in the east end. Also it's going to be an example,we have people from NY coming out to take a look at it because it's that close to being explosion proof. One of the very interesting things we found,just to give you a heads up, is that with the insulated concrete forms, and the fact that it's an 8"poured concrete wall with reinforcing, they set off 30 pounds of dynamite 30' away from the building. And they found it did no damage whatsoever. It was absorbed. The impact from the explosion was absorbed by the styrofoam on the blocks. So it was the closest thing they have right now to an explosion proof building. There's a lot of people that are very interested. MEMBER ORLANDO: When's the potential start date? Page 11 of 13 Page 12 8-7-03 Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Bearing MR. FROHNHOEFER: As soon as I get approval. MEMBER ORLANDO: How long is the project going to take? A year? MR. FROHNHOEFER: It's not going to take that long. This stuff is like Lego toys. It goes up pretty quick. The biggest thing is going to be the dry time for the concrete, which goes in at 3,000 pound concrete and dries up to 5,000 pound strength because of the cure time. You've got a 2 week cure time. Seeing the form itself and it continues to build strength within the next number of months, I think 6 months, it's up to like 4,800 pounds strength. I was down there cleaning up and doing exploratory scraping to find out what we had underneath. And because every place I dig down there I run into a wall no matter where I scoop down and take a shovel. It's a 24" concrete wall, and I haven't hit the bottom yet. I don't know where it goes. It's deep and there's a bunch of them. There's 3 or 4 of them. This was the old fertilizer factory years ago. And that's all cleaned out. But the concrete walls were so thick, that middle building that exists now, that building, the walls on that are 13 or 14" of poured concrete with 6 abutments inside the basement. I could set off an explosion down there and nobody would even know it. It's unbelievable. CHAIRWOMAN: And it was built that thick? MR. FROHNHOEFER: It was built that thick and the timbers in the basement of that thing are... MEMBER ORLANDO: What's GLF? MR. FROHNHOEFER: Name of the fertilizer company, a long time ago. MS. OLIVA: Why would they build that deep? Because of explosions with the fertilizer? MR. FROHNHOEFER: They used to put the fertilizer in the basements or the buildings, and it would pick up moister and harden, and they'd take little hard sticks of dynamite to blow it up. CHAIRWOMAN: I make a motion to close the hearing so we don't have to transcribe all of this. MS.WICKHAM: There was a point to that historical segway. If on building#3 they find that this footing, or foundation is a problem, would you object to putting an alternative provision in your decision should you grant what we ask for, to move that building#3 up to, you think 3'? MR. FROHNHOEFER: 1 %2 -2'. MS. WICKHAM: Up to T further north. Page 12 of 13 Page 13 „ 8-7-03. Southold Town Board of Appeals Special Meeting Public Hearing CHAIRWOMAN: Tell you what,Ms. Wickham,here's what I would like you to do. I'd like you to just give us a couple of paragraphs, a synopsis,where it would be exactly, 3'to the north, east, south, west... MS. WICKHAM: As an alternative should construction determine... CHAIRWOMAN: Construction should not remove the remains of the fertilizer factory. MR. FROHNHOEFER: The middle building has a basement. The other does not, strictly a 4' footing, no. You're only talking about a foot, foot and a half. CHAIRWOMAN: I'm going to close the hearing pending receipt of letter from Ms. Wickham who will give us the letter by next week,Friday. PLEASE SEE MINUTES FOR RESOLUTION Page 13 of 13