HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-12/13/1984 �o��FFo��oG
o
Southold Town Board of Appeals
• �' MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
() MEMBERS
GERARD P, GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI M I N U T E S
REGULAR "MEETING
DECEMBER 1"3 , 1984
A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board of .Appeals was
held .on Thursday ; "December '13 , 1984 at 7 : 30 .o ' clock p .m. at the
Southold Town Hall , Main Road , .Southold ; New York .
Present were : Gerard P . Goehringer , Chairman ; Charles
Grigonis ; Jr . , Membe.r; Serge Doyen , J.r .. , Member; Robert J . Doug-
lass , Member; and Joseph H .' Also present were
Victor Lessard , Building-Department Administrator , Mrs . Barbara
Strang , part-time stenographer of the public hearings , and
approximately 12 persons in the audience at the commencement of
the meeting.
The Chairman opened the meeting at 7 : 30 p .m. and proceeded
with the public hearings , as follow:
7 : 35 p .m. Public Hearing was held in the Matter of K. .& L
PROPERTIES , INC . (G . DUCHOW) . Rudolph Bruer , Esq . appeared in
behalf of the applicant ; and the statements of the public hear-
ing have been recorded electronically by Mrs . Strang and have
been prepared under separate cover , to be filed simultaneously
herewith at the Office of the Town Clerk . Following the public
hearing , the following action was taken :
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki , it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the
Matter of Appeal No . 3292 , K & L PROPERTIES , INC . ..
r
Southold Town Board of .Appeals -2- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
7 :45 p .m. Public Hearing was held in the Matter of 'JOSEPH and
ARLENE LESTINGI . Mr . . Kape;ll , agent for the applicants , requested
a recess of this matter since he was not able to attend . The Chair-
man opened the hearing to receive testimony ; however , no one spoke ..
concerning this particular application . Since it is the board ' s.
normal policy to grant one recess , the following action was taken :
On motion by Mr . Goehringer , seconded by Mr . Douglass , it was
RESOLVED , that Appeal No . 3296 , Matter of JOSEPH 'AND 'ARLENE
LESTINGI be and hereby is. RECESSED 'as - requested until- our January 17 ,
1985 , Regular Meeting..
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
7 :49 p .m. Public Hearing was held in the Matter of :DESPINA
and 'PETE 'MARKOPOULOS , Appeal No . 3297 . The statements ,_ pro and con ,
were recorded electronically and prepared under separate cover by
Mrs . Strang , the original._ of .which . is to be filed simultaneously.
herewith alt -the Town Cle._rk ' s. Office . Following the public hearing ,
the following action was taken :_
On motion by Mr . Goehringer , seconded by Mr . Douglass , it was
RESOLVED, to close 'the 'hearing and reserve decision in the
Matter of Appeal No . 3297 , of DESPINA AND 'PETE MARKOPOULOS.
Vote of .the. Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This. resolution was adopted 'by unanimous. vote
of all the members .
(See Conditional Action , .infra . )
8'iO.O .p .m. Public Hearing was held in the Matter of JOHN 'BERTANI
(and Al Koke ) by_ Rudolph H .. Bruer , Esq . Appeal ' No. 330_0.. The
statements of .this hea.ring. have b p..een ' repared _under separate cover
by Mrs . Strang and filed simultaneously herewith at the Office of
the Town Clerk for _re_ference .... Following the hearing , the following
action was taken :
On motion by Mr. Goehringer , seconded by Messrs . Grigonis and
Sawicki , it was .
t 3
Southold. Town. Board. of. .Ap.p.e::a.l s -3- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No . 3300 - JOHN BERTANI 'and 'AL' 'KOKE, continued: )
RESOLVED , to close the hearing and 'reserVe decision , pending
deliberations , int he Matter of JOHN 'BERTANI , Appeal No . 3300 .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by, unanimous vote
of all the members .
APPEAL NO . 3304 - MARGARETHE D. CLEMPNER. _ On December 6 , 1984 ,
Environment East , Inc . , ' ag.ent for .the. applicant, submitted a wr..itten
request withdrawing the subject ap.plicajo. n , wh.ich wa.s .filed wi.th
the Town Clerk on October 29 ;. 1 984 .__, Accor.di n,g`ly , 'the _.-.owing�fo,l action
was taken :
On motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr. Goehringer , it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3304, application made for MARGARETHE D.
CLEMPNER by Environment East , Inc . BE 'AND 'HER.EBY 'IS W.ITHDRA.WN 'WTTHOUT
PREJUDICE AS REQUESTED.
Location of Property: Inlet Lane Extension , Greenport , NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No . 1000=.36-2-24 .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
8 : 13 p .m. Public Hearing was held in the Matter of ARNOLD AND
MARY BEHRER by William Jacobs , as agent , in Appeal No . 3301 . The
statements of this hearing have been recorded electronically and
prepared under separate cover by Mrs . Strang , to be filed simul -
taneously herewith at the Office of the Town Clerk for reference .
Following the hearing, the following action was taken :
The board made the following findings and determination :
This is an appeal from Article III , Section 100-32 of the Zoning
Ordinance which requires all accessory structures to be located in
the rearyard area . Applicants have requested the placement of a
22 ' by 28 ' accessory garage structure to be located in the easterly
frontyard area , located approximately 185 feet from Nassau Point Road
and not less than four feet from the northerly side property line .
The premises in question consists of an area of 69 ,400± sq . ft.
Southold Town Board of Appeals -4- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No . 3301 , ARNOLD AND MARY BEHRER, continued: )
with 150-foot lot width and an average depth of 462 . 50± feet. Exist-
ing ont he premises is a one-family dwelling centered thereon . Due
to the unique character of this lot , having frontage on both the
west and east sections along streets , there are technically two
"front" yards . The board agrees with applicants ' reasoning .
In considering this appeal , the board has also determined : (1 )
that by allowing the variance , no detriment would be created affecting
adjoining properties ; (2 ) that no adverse effects will be produced
on available governmental facilities of any increased. population ;
(3 ) the variance will be in harmony with and promote the general
purposes of zoning ; (4) the circumstances of this appeal are unique ;
(5 ) the relief requested will be in harmony with and promote the
general purposes of the zoning ordinance ; (6 ) that the interests
of justice will be served by allowing the variance , as indicated
below.
Accordingly , on motion by Mr . Goehringer , seconded by Messrs .
Sawicki and Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED , that the relief requested. under Appeal No. 3301 , in
the application made by ARNOLD AND MARY BEHRER to locate accessory
garage structure of a .size 22 ' by 28 ' in the frontyard area with a
minimum four-foot sideyard setback , BE AND HEREBY IS 'APPROVED , 'SUB-
JECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS :
1 . That it be used for storage purposes accessory and incidental
only to residence (and not for living or sleeping quarters ) ;
2 . That it be not closer than four feet . to the side property
line .
Location of Property : 5730 Nassau Point Road , Nassau Point
Subdivision Lot 141 and Part of 142 , Cutchogue , NY; County Tax Map
Parcel No . 1000-111 - 12-2 . 1 .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution wa_s adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
8: 20 p .m. Public Hearing was held in the Matter. of FRANK A .
FIELD REALTY , INC . , Appeal No . 3303. (Statements of this public
hearing have been recorded electronically and prepared under
separate cover by Mrs . Strang , to be filed simultaneously herewith
at the Office of ' the Town Clerk for reference . Following the
public hearing , motion was made by Mr . Goehringer , seconded by
Mr . Sawicki , as follows :
Southold Town Board of Appeals -5- ' December 1j , 1984 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No . 3303 - FRANK FIELD REALTY , continued: )
BE IT RESOLVED , that Appeal No . 3303 , public hearing in the
Matter of 'FRANK 'A.' 'FIELD REALTY , INC . be and hereby is RECESSED
until THURSDAY , JANUARY 17 , 1985 , pending further research as to
the history of the parcels and improvements existing .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
8 :40 p .m. Public Hearing was held in the Matter of ANTHONY
AND SALLY PIRRERA, .by Ira Haspel as agent , Appeal No . 3306 .
Statements of this public hearing have been recorded electronically
and prepared under separate cover by Mrs . Strang , to be. filed
simutalenously herewith at the Town Clerk ' s . Office and attached
for reference . ) Following the public hearing , the board made
the following findings and determination :
This is an appeal from Article III , Section 100-32 , which requires
all accessory buildings to be located in the rearyard area . Applicants
have requested the placement of a proposed 8 ' by 24 ' shed attached to
a 24 ' by 24 ' carport in the front , southerly yard area of the premises
in question . These Ipremises is located on - the north side of C. R . 48 ,
and is improved with a one-family , two-story dweiing and accessory
swimmingpool ( in the northerly rearyard) . The proposed shed-carport
structure is to be located 160± feet from C. R. 48 with a minimum set-
back from the westerly side. property line at five feet .
It is the opinion of the board in considering this appeal : (1 )
that the relief requested is not unreasonable since the rearyard is
limited for construction due to its characteristics (bulkheading ,
elevations , etc. ) ; (2 ) that the circumstances are unique ; (3 )
that the variance will not adversely affect adjoining properties
since there are structures existing at setbacks similar to that
proposed in this immediate vicinity ; (4 ) the variance will be in
harmony with and promote the general purposes of zing ; (5) that
the relief requested will be within the best interests of justice
particularly in view of, the fact there has been no opposition .
Accordingly , on motion by Mr . Goehringer , seconded by Mr .
Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED , that the relief requested under Appeal No . 3306
for ANTHONY 'AND SALLY 'PIRRERA by I . Haspel , for permission to
place accessory shed-carport structure of, 24 ' by 32 ' in size
in the frontyard area with a minimum five-foot westerly sideyard
setback and 160± feet north of the C . R. 48 , BE AND HEREBY IS
GRANTED 'SUBJECT TO THE 'FOLLOWING CONDITIONS :
I
f
Southold Town Board or Appeals -6- December ij , 1984 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No . 3306 - ANTHONY AND SALLY PIRRERA, continued : )
1 . That this accessory building be used only for storage
purposes (as permitted by Section 100-32 ) ;
2 . That the carport section remain "open , " as applied.
Location of Property : 57305 C. R. 48 , Greenport , NY ; County
Tax Map Parcel No . 1000-044-02-003 .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
8 : 45 p .m. Public Hearings�wereheld in the Matter of Appeal
Nos . 3286 and FL . 15 for JOSEPH GRASSO , by Donald Denis , R.A.
(The statements of this public hearing have been recorded electroni -
cally and prepared under separate cover by Mrs . Strang , to be
filed simultaneously herewith at the Town Clerk ' s Office , and
attached hereto for reference . ) After..r. ecei'Ving:.all testimony
concerning these applications , the following action was taken :
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki , it was
RESOLVED; to declare the hearings . closed for Appeals No. 3286
and FL . #15 , i'n. the Matters of JOSEPH GRASSO ,
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
TEMPORARY RECESS: On motion by Mr. Sawicki , seconded by Mr.
Goehringer , it was
RESOLVED, to recess for ten minutes , at which time the meeting
will reconvene .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
RECONVENE: At 9 : 05 p .m. , on motion by Mr . Goehringer , seconded
by Mr . Sawicki , it was
RESOLVED, that the Regular Meeting reconvene . This resolution
was unanimously carried.
r `
Sout.ho.ld. Town.. Board. of. Ap.p.ea.1s -7- December 13 , 1984. Regular Meeting
9: 05 p .m.
RESERVED DECISION : Appeal No. ' 3297 :
Upon application of :D-ESPINA AND P.ETE 'MARKOPOULOS , 222-08 43d
Avenue , Bayside , NY 11361 , for a Variance - to the: Zoning Ordinance ,
Article III , Section 100-31 , Bulk Schedule , for permission to locate
new dwelling with insufficient sideyard setbacks at premises , Sound
Beach Drive , Mattituck , NY; Cpt. Kidd Estates Map 1672 , Lot T6 ;
County Tax Map Parcel No . 1000-99-01 -24 .
The public hearing was held earlier this evening , at which time
the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations .
The board made the following findings and determination :
This is an appeal from Article III , Section 100=31 ,- Bulk Schedule
of the Zoning Ordinance_- which requires a minimum of .10- and .15-foot
setbacks , for a minimum of 25=foot total sideyards for new one-family
dwellings in the A-Residential and Agricultural Zoning District . It
is applicants ' request to construct a new one-family dwelling of a
size 28 ' wide by 42 ' deep , leaving a 12 ' setback from the westerly
side line and 10 ' setback from the ea.sterly side line , for a tota-1
of 22 feet for both sideyayds .
The premises in question fronts along Sound Beach Drive. 50 feet
in .length and has a depth of 150 .feet. This parcel is known and
identified as Lot 16 of Captain Kidd Estates Subdivision established
January 19 , 1949 .
It is the opinion of the board in considering this appeal that :
(1 ) the relief requested is not substantial in relation to the
zoning requirements , being 11 % of a variance ; (2 ) that this request
is not unreasonable under the circumstances ; (3 ) the circumstances
are unique particularly in light of the dimensions of this parcel ;
(4 ) the variance will not adversely affect adjoining properties since
the request is minimal ; (5 ) the variance will be in harmony with
and promote the general purposes of zoning ; (6 ) and in light of
the fact that no one appeared testifying that it was important for
the health , safety and welfare of this area that the relief be
denied , it is .determined to be within the best interests of justice
to allow the variance , as indicated below.
Accordingly , on motion by Mr. Goehringer , seconded by Mr .
Douglass , it was
S-outhold Town Boara of Appeals -8- December is , 1984 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No . 3297 - Pete and Despina Markopoulos , continued : )
RESOLVED, that the relief requested under Appeal No .
3297 concerning premises known as Lot 16 , Map of Captain Kidd
Estates , County Tax Map Parcel No . 1000-99-01 -24 , for PETE AND
DESPINA MARKOPOULOS , for permission to construct one-family
dwelling with insufficient sideyards of 10 feet and 12 feet ,
BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED , SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS :
1 . That the sideyards not be reduced to less than 10 feet
on the easterly side and 12 feet on the westerly side ;
2 . That the stairwell n.ot be wider than . three feet into
the sideyard area .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
RESERVED DECISION : Appeal No . 3292 :
Application of K & L PROPERTIES , INC. , c/o R. H . Bruer , Esq . , Main
Road , Southold ,. NY for a Variance - for approval of access , New York Town
Law , Section 280-.A over a private right-of-w.ay located at the east side
of Indian Neck Lane , Peconic , NY , to premises. known as County Tax Map
Parcel No . 1000=.86-05=11 .
The public hearing on this matter was held earlier this evening ,
at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations .
The board made the following findings and determination :
This is an application for approval of access over a private
right-of-.way. located on the east side of. Ind_ian Neck Lane approximately
958 . 82 feet- south from the Main Road (S .'R. 25 ) . The right-of-way in
question has a legal width of 15 feet , 'a traveled -width of 10± feet ,
and a length of 643,. 96 feet to premises having. receiving conditional
subdivision approval , #221 , on 4/27/81 by the Planning Board. The _.
portion of the right-of-way outside of the subdivision is under . con-
.sideration by this board .
A copy of deed recorded at Liber 9610 .cp 313 dated 7/12/84
has been submitted for the record indicati.ng conveyance by ' Herodotus
Damianos to K & L Properties of the rights-of-way to the 5 . 3± acres
in question .
The right-of-way is in fair condition and consists of hard
packed sand and gravel . There. are a few small pot holes and depres-
sions throughout . Test holes indicate 5"± of. sand and gravel . It
Southold Town. Board of Appeals -9- December 13, 1984 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No . 3292 - K & L PROPERTIES , continued: )
is the opinion of this board that certain improvements be made for
suitable accessibility by emergency .vehicles .
Accordingly , on motion by Mr . Grigonis , seconded by Mr .
Goehringer , it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No . 3292 , application for K & 'L: PROPERTIES ,
INC . be and hereby is GRANTED approval of access in- accordance with New
York Town Law , Section 280-A, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS :
1 . The right-of-way be widened and improved a minimum width of
12 feet
2 . The potholes and depressions be filled with bankrun sand and
gravel ;
3 . A compacted 3" top course of 3/4" stone blend be placed on
the corrected surface ; -
4 . This approval is granted only for the existing five parcels
having legal access over same ; and any_ further new subdivision (_s ) will
require, new application (s ) for consideration accordingly.
Location of Property to Which Access is Requested : County Tax
Map District 1000 , Section 86 , Block 5 , Lot 11 ; Minor Subdivision
#221 of 4/27/81 ; . E/s Indian Neck Lane , Peconjc , - NY.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Douglass ,
Grigonis and Sawicki . This resolution w.as adop.te.d by un_ani'mous vote
..of all the members .
ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONS : On motion by Mr . Goehringer,
secondedb y Mr; Grigonis , it was.
RESOLVED, to declare the following Environmental Declarations
indicating negative effects on the _environment for the reasons as
indicated in accordance with Article 8, of the N . Y . S . Environmental
Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local
Law #44-4 :
Southold Town Board of Appeals -10- December 13, 1984 Regular Meeting
S.E.Q.R.A.
NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
APPEAL NO. : 3313
PROJECT NAME: SERGE J. DOYEN, JR. --
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing
regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental
Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local
Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
This board determines the within project not to have a signifi-
cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated
below.
Please take further notice that. this declaration should not be
considered a determination made for any other department or agency
which may also have an application pending for the same or similar.:
project.
TYPE. OF ACTION: , [X] Type II [ ]. Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Lot set-off with instfficient area
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: Fox Ave. , .. Fishers_..Island, NY
County Tax Map Parcel #1000-006-06-001
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment. in the ,short form has been
submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to
the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple-
mented as planned;
(2) The property in question is not located within 300 feet of
tidal wetlands or other critical environmental area.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary,
Southold Town Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Southold, NY 11.971; tel. 516-
765-1809 or 1802 ..
Copies -of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted
on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board.
Southold Town Board of Appeals - ] 1 - December 13 , .1984 Regular Meeting
S.E.Q.R.A.
NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
APPEAL NO. : 3311
PROJECT NAME: CELIC REALTORS
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing
regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental
Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local
Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
This board determines the within project not to have a signifi-.
cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated
below.
Please take further notice that this declaration should not be
considered a determination made for any other department or agency
which may also have an application pending for the same or similar.
project.
TYPE- OF ACTION: [X.J Type II [ ]. Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: To construct addition with insuff-icient
side and rear yard setbacks .
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County .of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: S/s Main Roa,d , _.Southold , NY; 1000-143-03-001 .
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been
submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to
the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple-
mented as planned;
(2) The property in question is not located within 300 feet of
tidal wetlands or other critical environmental area .
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary,
Southold Town Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. 516-
765-1809 or 1802 .
Copies of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted
on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board.
Southold. Town. Board. of Appeals -12- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
S.E.Q.R.A.
NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
APPEAL NO. : 3307
PROJECT NAME: - ADELE V . DECKINGER
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing
regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental
Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local
Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
This board determines the within project not to have a signifi-
cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated
below.
Please take further notice that this declaration should not be
considered a determination made for any other department or agency
which may also have an application pending for the same or similar
project.
. TYPE OF ACTION: [X] Type II [ ] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Approval of inground pool and accessory
building in frontyard .
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: Soundview Ave , Mat.tituck ,... NY ; 1000-94-01 -20 .
REASONAS) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been
submitted "ich indicates that no significant adverse effects to
the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple-
mented as planned;
.(2) The premises in question is at an elevation of- 10 or more
feet above mean sea level .
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary,
Southold Town Board of Appeals,._ Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. . 516-
765-1809 or 1802 .
Copies -of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted
on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board.
Southold Town. Board of Appeals -13- December -133 1984 .Regular Meeting
L
S.E.Q.R.A.'
NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
APPEAL NO. : 3308
PROJECT NAME: LAUREN KRUG ;
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing
regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental
Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local
Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
This board determines the within project not to have a signifi-
cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated
below.
Please take further notice that this declaration should not be
considered a determination made for any other department or agency
which may also have an application pending for the same or similar.
project.
TYPE OF ACTION: [X] . Type II [ ] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: To construct addition with insufficient
rearyard setback
LOCATION OF PROJECT:. Town of Southold, County of. Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 200 Horton Rd. , Southold,_ NY
County Tax Map Parcel #1000-104-01-012
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has- been
submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to
the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple-
mented as planned;
(2) The property in question is not located within 300 feet of tidal
wetlands or other critical environmental area.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary,
Southold Town Board of Appeals,._ Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. 516-
765-1809 or 1802 .
Copies of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted
on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board.
Southold Town Boara of Appeals -14- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations , continued : )
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
ADDITIONAL PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR JANUARY 24 , 1985 : On motion
by Mr . Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, that the following matters be and hereby are
scheduled for public hearings to be held THURSDAY , JANUARY". 24 , 1'985 ,
at a::Regular�: Meeting commencing at 7 : 30 p :m. , and the Secretary is�
hereby authorized and directed to publish notice of same pursuant
to law in the local and official newspapers , The Suffolk Weekly
Times and The Long Island Traveler-Watchman , Inc . :
Appeal No . 3296 - Joseph Lestingi ;
Appeal No . 3307 - Adele Deckinger ;
Appeal No . 3309 - Henry Smith and Son , by R.. Bruer;
Appeal No. 3308 - Lauren Krug ;
Appeal No . 3310 - Gary Doroski ;
Appeal No . 3311 - Celic Realtors ;
Appeal No . - Serge Doyen ( if P . B . received by 1 /7/85) .
Vote of .the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This... resolution wa.s adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
APPR.OVAL `OF 'MINUTES : On motion by Mr. Sawicki , seconded by
Mr . Douglass , it _was
RESOLVED, to approve the Minutes of the November 29 , 1984 .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and.. Sawicki . This resolution _wa_s adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
Southold Town Boara of Appeals -15- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARINGS JANUARY 10 , 1985 : On motion by Mr . Goehringer ,
seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, that the following matters be and hereby are scheduled
for public hearings to be held at the January 10 , 1985 Regular Meeting
of this board commencing at 7 : 30 p .m. to be held at the Southold Town
Hall , Main Road , Southold , NY ; and that the Secretary is hereby
authorized and directed to publish notice of same pursuant to law in
the Suffok Times and the L . I . Traveler-Watchman :
Appeal No . 3295 - Fleet ' s Neck Property Owners/Wade ;
Appeal No . 3302 - Gus Wade .
Voterof .the .Boar.d : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
It was noted that Marie Patterson ' s hearing is to be reconvened
same date of 1 /10/85 without re-notice . in the newspapers since it
was recessed with a date .
MISCELLANEOUS : The board noted the status of the following
matters , and further direction ,,li.if any , :.was noted for each :
Appeal No . 3214 - Hanuaer and Bagley - Receipt of correspondence
from Trustees indicating their jurisdiction . Copy of same to be
forwarded to A. Wickham, Esq . as attorney for the. applicants .
Appeal No . 3206 - Henry P. Smith , W/s Peconic Lane , Peconic .
Await further instructions from attorney Ofrias . Letter to_ Mr .
Ofrias as to status of same .
Appeal No . 3294 - Peter and Margaret Troyano . Await certifica-
tion and add.i'tional maps .before scheduling for hearing .
Appeal No . ' 3251 - Renate Riedel . Await DEC amendments and
amended survey plans .
Appeal No . 3216 - Eugene Davison . Await amended proposal .
Appeal No. 3274 - Best , Schmitt , Syverson . Division at R70-W
off E/s Camp Mineola Road , Mattituck . Pending DEC & Co . Health .
Appeal No . ' 3205 - John DiVello . Await R-0=W easement agreement
as amended . ,.
a
Appeal No . 3183 - Mary N . Code . Await applicant ' s response .
Appeal No . 3196 - Wal.ter...Hairston . Await response . Letter
to the Estate advis.ing them of this pending file .
Southold Town Board of Appeals -16- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
Appeal No . 3191 - Herbert Mandel . Request whether applicant
wishes to proceed as filed or withdraw.
Appeal No . 3249 - Donald Brickley . Await DEC and Co . Health .
Appeal No . 3252 - John Charles and M. Sledjeski . Await DEC and
Co . Health responses .
Appeal No . 3033 - B. Crystal . Await requested survey plan .
Appeal No . 3268 - Await DEC response .
Appeal No . 3035 - C . Georgiopoulos . Await status update from
applicant ' s attorney , A. Wickham.
Appeal No . 3215 - Helen and William Coster . Await status
update from applicants .
Appeal No . 3259 - Nicholas Aliano . Await Village Contract.
Appeal No . 3305 - Robert and Aldona Norkus . Await DEC per
Part 661 , Tidal Wetlands Land Use Regs .
Appeal No . 3298 - Port of Egypt Enterprises . Await additional
documentation ; also await_ Co . Health , DEC and Flood Law requirements
or proposal thereunder .
Appeal No . 3299 - Douglass Miller . Await Co . Health and
DEC responses before hearing .
It was further noted that upon receipt of the above informa-
tion , public hearings will be required accordingly pursuant to law .
PENDING CLOSE OF HEARING : Appeal No . 3234 - Arthur Trucken-
brodt , et al . /Abbott and Swanson property , Orient .
On motion by Mr. Sawicki , seconded by Mr . Douglass , it was
RESOLVED, that the hearing in the Matter of Appeal No . 3234 ,
ARTHUR'. TRUCKENBRO.DT; 'ET AL . be and hereby is DECLARED OFFICIALLY
CLOSED , ' pending deliberations and further resoar`ch.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen , Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was adopted by unanimous vote
of all the members .
c1
Southold Town. Board of Appeals -17- December 13 , 1984 Regular Meeting
OTHER MATTERS FOR HEARINGS : The board reviewed each of the
following new files and it was the consensus of the board to
field inspect each one prior to determining SEQRA status and
advertising for public hearings : ('It ..was tentatively agreed:Ithat
the hearings on these matters would be expected for Thursday ,
February 7 , 1985 . )
Appeal No . 3312 - Louise Wilson Estate - (Await Planning Board
action and S.EQRA) ;
Appeal No . 3314 - Joseph and Patricia Stiefer;
Appeal No . 3315 - Cutchogue Free Library (variance ) ;
Appeal No . 3316 - Cutchogue Free Library ( special exception ) ;
Appeal No . 3317 - Thomas Perillo;
Appeal No . 3291 - Anthony Pagoto ;
Appeal No . 3294 - Peter Troyano ( if documentation received by 1 /7) .
* * *
"DATE FOR SPECIAL MEETING: The board tentatively agreed to-
meet December 18 , 1984 at approximately 6 : 00 p .m. for a Special
Meeting concerning pending deliberations and other transactions .
* *
There being no other business properly coming before the board
at this time , the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned . The
meeting adjourned at 10 : 00 p .m.
Respectfully submitted ,
Linda Kowalski , Secretary
�--� Southold Town Board of Appeals
Ap roved - J nuary 1 , 1985
Gerard P . Goehring Chairman
*The verbatim minutes of the public hearings only are prepared under
separate cover by Mrs . Barbara Strang o beb.ElITVe,-,,
f- wi h�h'eC1erk accordingly . R.ED AND FAIL %- � .1
THE SOUTHEOLD TOG`11-
IDATE No Up, ,3 purl
Town Clerk, Too�x ,.off:„vOliz d
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
MINUTES
Thursday, December 13 , 1984
#32.92 At 7 : 35 p.m. - Public Hearing was held in the matter of
K & L PROPERTIES for approval of an access , Suffolk County
Tax Map #1000-86-.05-811 .
RUDOLPH BRUER: Mr . Chairman, Members of the Board, actually there
is a c/o for the existing house based on pre-existing use.IThe
right of way serves this existing house and Mr. Pontino' s property.
The right of way when it is improved, will actually service an
additional three more plots and I think the application is well
worth the merits and should be granted. The applicant bought
the property knowing that it was an improved, minor subdivision
by the Southold Town Planning Board; he knows that he .has to
meet the requirements of the Planning Board with respect to the
roadway inside the subdivision, and he knows that he will have
to meet the standards that this Board sets to build the road.
I understand that your engineer has already been out there,
and has made certain recommendations .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have a copy of that?
RUDOLPH BRUER: Yes I do. Our clients are aware of it and we
request that this application be granted as asked for . If you
have any questions , I will be happy to answer them.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. I have no questions . I am aware of
the property. I will see if the Board does . Thank you. Is
there anybody else. who would like to be heard on behalf of this
application? Anybody like to speak against the application?
Questions from Board members?. Do you have any idea how long
the Duchow house has been there., Mr. Bruer? I am sorry to
make you get up again.
RUDOLPH BRUER: The present covenants with respect to the pro-
perty state that for instance, that the one furthest away from
the house that one can only be built on in 1985 and there would
be another year before another could and another year before the
one next to the house. Mrs . Duchow lives in the main house and
does have a life estate there.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That' s in lot #1.
RUDOLPH BRUER: Yes , the house . there. Ofcourse, the improvements ,
whatever we do: would help her; access for emergency vehicles to
her and Mr. Pontino' s house.
ZBA 12/13/84
Page Two
K & L Properties Hearing - Continued
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What is your timing on this application?
Are you contract vendee? Are you purchasing this property. . .
RUDOLPH BRUER: We have closed .on it and are the owners .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have not discussed the merits of the
engineer ' s report at all.
RUDOLPH BRUER: And they paid a substantial price for it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What I am saying is that I , please do
not expect a decision tonight. It will be in the near future.
RUDOLPH BRUER: That' s fine. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Would anybody like to be
heard on behalf of the application before I close the hearing?
Questions from .Board Members? Hearing no further questions , I
make a motion closing the hearing, reserving decision until
later .
-------------------------------------------------------------
#3296 - At 7 : 45 Public Hearing was= held. in=the-matter of
JOSEPH AND ARLENE LESTINGI for a variance to place a garage
in frontyard area, Suffolk County Tax Map #1000- 33 -04-01.
Hearing was recessed until January 17 , 1985 .
-------------------------------------------------------------
#3297 - At 7 : 50 p.m. Public Hearing was held in the matter of
DESPINA and PE.TE MARKOPOULOS for a variance for a dwelling with
insufficient sideyards , Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-99-1-24 .
MRS MARKOPOULOS: We would like to have that. My English is
not very good.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any reason you have a house 28 '
in width, rattier than a house that would conform to present
zoning requirements?
MRS. MARKOPOULOS: We have a large family and something less
is too small.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I am correct in that you are proposing
10 ' on the east side and 12 ' on the west side as sideyards ,
is that correct?
MRS. MARKOPOULOS: Yes.
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Three
MARKOPOULOS Hearing - Continued
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So, basically 22 ' instead of 25 ' , so
it' s a 3 ' variance, right?
MRS. MARKOPOULOS : Right.
CHARIMAN GOEHRINGER: There won' t be any changes on this?
MRS. MARKOPOULOS : No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Thank you. Anybody else like to
be heard on behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak
against the application? - Would you state your name please?
WILLIAM HOLDEN: My name is William Holden, and I am an attorney
from Huntington and I represent my sister-in-law, Agnes Holden.
who has .the property on the west side. Our presence here is not
to object to the request, I don' t wish to have a misunderstanding.
It' s more of an inquiry as to the plans, which we were unable to
make out. The west side indicates a staircase, leading to a patio
or sundeck and we couldn' t make out the width of the outside
staircase, which would be an additional encroachment beyond 3 ' .
I believe it' s indicated on the papers submitted. Can-L'--t tell
if it' s 3 ' or 5 ' .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It appears to be 3 on my papers , but I will
ask the Building Inspector . Victor , did you want to take a look
at that? What did you say your name was?
WILLIAM HOLDEN: Holden, William Holden.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It ha's le.en our, interpretation and the
interpretation of the Building Inspector that stairwells are
not a part, since they .are a necessity, are not a part of side-
yards. There is a difference between a stairwell and a deck
or a deck area.
WILLIAM HOLDEN : , You mean the question whether the steps are in
the jurisdiction of the Zoning Board, is that what you are saying?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: They are not within the jurisdiction of. the
Zoning Board, they are in the jurisdiction of the Building Depart-
ment, to be honest with you They are required access, I assume.
Victor_, did you want to answer that question?
' 1
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Four
MARKOPOULOS HEARING - Continued
VICTOR LESSARD:
WILLIAM HOLDEN: Well, we have this understanding that the
additional space tothe house is . perfectly, there are no ob-
jections . The only inquiry was is there any limitation that
would be placed upon the steps leading up to the patio, could
it be 12 ' , the whole width of the sideyard? Is that what the
Board is saying? Does the Building Department have a restric-
tion as to;=the width of' this outside staircase?
VICTOR LESSARD: No, there is nothing in the construction laws
that indicate how wide you can make them, after you reach a
certain point. They have to be at least 3 ' wide. It could
be wider , of course.
WILLIAM HOLDEN: So at this moment, there is no protection on
the width of the staircase , on the outside staircase, which is
proposed in. this application?
VICTOR LESSARD: I don' t know about. .by looking at this , the
indication is that they are going to be putting a 3 ' onein
and that 's the normal practice. Anything more. than that would
require . a handrail up the center , it doesn.' t pay to go any
wider , but there' s no law that restricts that.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just say this to you,. Mr . Holden.
If . .
WILIIAM .HOLDEN: Excuse me , Mr. Chairman, I don't want Mrs.
Markopoulos , who will be a neighbor to be disturbed by the fact
that we are here to hamper her application. It is just that we
couldn't make it out and we would like to know and it would in-
volve the' side area.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me just say this , since it is the side
of the variance we are dealing with, we could put a restriction
that the stairwell not be wider than 3 ' .
WILLIAM HOLDEN: Well, that would be the only asking, 3 ' seems
to be a reasonable area, and we are dealing with a limited area,
. that' s the only concern .of my sister-in-law and I certainly
don' t want Mrs . Markopoulos to think that we are here to object
to her premises .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, we are very interested in access
to the rear yard on all properties , so it is to our benefit also.
ZBA -. 12/13/84
Page .Five
MARKOPOULOS HEARING - Continued.
WILLIAM HOLDEN: Thank you very kindly.
. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Did you have anything to say further?
MRS: MARKOPOULOS: No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to
speak in favor or against this application? Questions from
Board Members? Hearing no further questions , I make a motion
closing the hearing, reserving decision until later .
----------------------------------------------------------------
#3300- At 8: 00 p.m. Public Hearing was held in the matter of
JOHN BERTANI for a variance to establish building containing
more than one retail store , etc . , Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-
55-52-20 .
RUDOLPH BRUER: Just to complete the Board' s file, they have
received from the County, the permit to have the curb cuts pur-
suant to those plans. Gentlemen, Mr . Bertani and Mr . Koke both
bought this property last February. In April they submitted
their plan to the Planning Board for the purposes of site plan
approval, pursuant to the Code. Mr. Bertani tells me that when
he purchased the property he was under the impression that under
B-1 Zoning that he could have retail stores . The ordinance for
general business says that what you can have under light business
100-60 and that says , if you read it, that you can have retail
stores (plural) . Based upon that and a layman' s interpretation
he didn' t realize that this would be interpreted by the Building
Inspector as a shopping center . From April up until. this date,
he went through the Planning Board, revising the plans many,
many times . They complied with the requirements of the Planning
Board, made many revisions and finally through everything was
completed and it was then sent to the Building Department, pur-
suant to the rules for certification. It was then denied on
the basis that this was a shopping center . Apparently, this
is a fairly new interpretation because we are appealing .from
one of the requirements of 100-62 in that a shopping center
has to have 40 ,000 sq. ft. We have 31, 000 and change , okay.
In all other respects this proposal other than the square
footage meets with all the requirements of the code of bulk and
parking schedule and therefore, if it wasn' t for this , it would
be an automatic certification, I assume. Now Section 100-62 ,
says . '' . . . :notwithstanding any other provision of this Article,
a building or combination or buildings containing retail stores
mercantile establishments , offices , offices , banks , financial
institutions , commonly known as shopping centers may be erected
according to the following requirements . . . . " . Now as far as
the hardship goes , I think you can realize that a layman reading
the code looking to see what he can do with property he is buying,
can very honestly look around- the Town and say well look, other
people haven' t had to go through this in terms of it being deemed
a shopping center. Look around under the recent buildings
,
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Six
JOHN BERTANI HEARING - Continued
RUDOLPH BRUER. - Continued: we have 'East End Insurance with
his building which is on property 50" x 150, this is a com-
mercial office building, it is an off ice building, but as I
read to you offices are . . .'come under that 100-62 . This was
not considered a shopping center by the Planning Board. There
is the Becker property in .Mattituck., which was an existing
building with an alteration. If you recall the section of
the code talks about alterations , too, by the way. This was
considered a shopping center. by the Planning Board, but was
never referred to this Board and here you have a beauty
parlor and two retail stores. I hate to pick on a colleague
of mine, but Mr. Olsen' s building is a building that is de-
signed for more than one office and this was not considered
a shopping center . So, what I am really trying to get at
is that' a layman could come and look around and say I can
have four stores' as long as I comply with the buik..and parking
schedule and meet the site plan approval of the Planning Board
and I can have whatever stores meet the required amount of parking
pursuant to the Planning Board. I know that there was some, that
this Board is very familiar with Mr . Camminiti' s building.
The Code the. way I read it, does not make any distinction be-
tween existing buildings and vacant land with new buildings
coming up. I think maybe that the weakness here is that the
Code should be redefined, because there is no definition in
the Code as to what is a shopping center . The only definition
is what is commonly known as shopping centers and I believe
that if you follow along with the reasoning of the applicant
pursuant to the application here , we do have practical dif-
ficulties and undue hardship based upon the fact that we
honestly thought we could have four stores. if we met the
bulk requirements , based upon an honest interpretation, , our
interpretation, of the Code. I believe it is unique according
to the applicant, in that it is a new interpretation. I am
not, denying that it is a" shopp,ing center or not, I don' t think
it is . I don' t think my client actually believed that a four-
store, four .stores constitutes a shopping center in this par-
ticular instance. Again, there is nothing in the Code that
defines what is a shopping center. It is not going to change
the character of the neighborhood, in that it it. already zoned
for business; it is anticipated that businesses will go there
and that' s why it is business zoned this way; there are other
business zoned properties with structures on . them nearby, across
the street and again there are a-number of existing buildings .
that have been converted to 2 different uses that have not been
deemed .sh'opping centers and compelled to -come here.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I think the only one area that this Board
is concerned. with is , and I do agree with you that there is some
weakness in the area of the Code, is the differentiation between
types of businesses and I. will give you an example..
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Seven
JOHN BERTANI HEARING - Continued
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: - continued. . .an ice cream store certainly
draws more than a chiropractor,, so this is the type of situation
that this Board is concerned with. Mr. Bertani did call me, and
I did ask him, what kind. of stores are you talking about? He
did tell me he had no plans for any specific types of .stores at
this particular time.
RUDOLPH BRUER: That' s true. I would like to point out that
although we say that there will be four stores , four stores
in and of themselves they meet the parking requirements , which
is -supposed to cut down the density of the people going to the
stores , could possibly not equal what one very popular store
could generate, if you limited this to just one store. I mean
I don' t know what type it would be, maybe a 7-11 could draw a
huge amount of cars , whereas four small stores that we have there
will just have intermitent-:traffic there; we .don' t know what' s
going to be there. We are doing this as an investment and I think
you have the plans there; I think you will see that the- building
will be . a credit to the community, not something that' s a sloppy
mess and it' s been reviewed and reviewed and reviewed by the
.Planning Board and as I said, we thought this was the last step,
and we were very surprised when the denial came down from the
Building Inspector . My clients are here if you have any questions.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We will see what develops. Thank you very
much, Mr . Bruer . Is there anybody else who would like to speak
on behalf of the application? Anybody like to speak againstthe
application? Questions from Board Members? Let me just reiterate
that we are aware of the weakness in the Code that you mentioned,
Mr. Bruer, and the Board has not met, we all went out separately
and looked at this - piece of . property and we do not discuss this
application until after we have had the Public Hearing and I have
no idea on how the Board feels on this application at- all. Uniquely,
we have not had a lot of these, and you are perfectly correct.
I have no idea if there was a change interpretation, or if the
term "shopping center' has a direct significance on this appli-
cation or applications of this nature.
RUDOLPH BRUER: I would just like to say again that there is no
definition of what is a shopping center. I just ask the Board
again to read the lead paragraph of Section. 100-62 and ask your-
selves do you each have at this moment, this same definition
of what a shopping center is in your minds. I betcha you. don' t,
I maybe wrong. I betcha you all have different ones or whatever.
I don' t think two uses on a particular property should constitute
a shopping center . Again, a perfect example is the Camminiti
building. You got four or five in there and it has nothing to
do with existing structures the way the Code reads . Thank you
very much.
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Eight
JOHN BERTANI HEARING Continued
CHARRMAN GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further questions , I make a
motion closing the hearing reserving decision until later.
Thank you very much for' coming in.
------------------------------------ - -
#3301 - at 8:'10p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of
ARNOLD and MARY BEHRER for a variance to place a garage in
frontyard area, Suffolk County Tax Map #1000- 111 -12-2 . 1 .
WILLIAM J. JACOBS - Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board,
my name is William J. Jacobs of Cutchogue and I represent
Arnold and Mary Behrer of Nassau Point. As you see, since the
property is set back so deep it would not be a detriment to the
, community to have a garage out in front.. Also, if. architecturally
it wouldn' t do anything good to it, the grading is up higher on
the one side of the garage it would also mean a lot of excavation
and tree removal and that would be expensive to the homeowner .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You do not object to any restrictions on
.this garage that ,since it is going to be built only 4 ' from the
property line that it only be used for storage purposes and
never be added to the existing house attached to. . .How high
is .the garage going .to be Mr . Jacobs?
WILLIAM JACOBS: The garage will be about 13 ' or 14 ' high.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is it a one or two story garage?
WILLIAM JACOBS: It is a one story garage. Two car garage with
storage area.
CHAIRMAN .GOEHRINGER: I thank you very much. Is there anybody
else who would like to speak on ,beh.alf of this application?
Against the application?
VICTOR LESSARD: This application has no backyard, I want you
to be aware of that.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I realize that, after spending ten minutes
riding up and down Wunnewetta Road and attempting to figure out
how to enter this property. Bearing in mind that the winter is
setting in and I am sure you want to start this in the very near
future , I will make a motion approving this as applied for with
the following restrictions : 1. That the garage be used only for
storage purposes and 2 . That it not be placed any closer than
4 ' to the north property line. (Findings and determination
in official minutes filed with Town Clerk) .
I I
1
ZBA-1.2/13/84
Page Nine
#3304 -At 8: 20 Application of MARGARET.HE' D. CLEMPNER
was withdrawn at .her request.
-------------------------------------------------------
#3303 - At 8: 15 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of
FRANK A. FIELD REALTY,_ INC. for a variance to construct a two
family house in lieu of two existing structures, Suffolk County
Tax Map #1000-48-3-20 , 19 ,8 ,9 .
FRANK FIELD: 'Gentlemen, my name is' :Frank Field and I am the one
that' s proposing this . I have a letter I sent to the Board dated
October 2.6th, which . I think sums it .up, but I am here to answer
any questions or whatever .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We 'are somewhat, I am somewhat, let me
say this , what can you tell me , Mr. Field, what. is legal there
and what is not legal? What do you have c/o' s for on the
houses in there?
FRANK FIELD: Well those houses were built many, many years
ago before there were c/o's.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have certificates of use on any
of those houses, on the trailer , on the two story frame house?
FRANK .FIELD:' The trailer has a trailer permit from the Town.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Which is renewable?
FRANK FIELD: Right.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Now, assuming the two story frame house
on Linden Street,, is that being 'occupied by one family now?
FRANK FIELD: Yes , it' s just one family.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So, we assume there is somebody in there
now, so a certificate of use could be gotten?
FRANK FIELD: Right.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What about the other two houses , are they
livable?
FRANK FIELD: ` ,One house had a fire, which precipitated this
proposal.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay.
ZBA- 12/13/.84
Page Ten
FRANK FIELD REALTY, INC. HEARING - Continued.
FRANK FIELD.: The other house has a tenant there and has been
continuously rented for over ten years .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Does the house that burned or is burned
is that the one to the east?
FRANK FIELD: That-' s correct. .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And it straddles both property lines?
FRANK FIELD: That' s correct.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So basically you would be taking that
house down, plus the house next -to it, which has been rented for
ten years .
FRANK FIELD: It has begin rented for ten years .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:' And then placing this two family dwelling
on the south property?
FRANK FIELD: Right, facing Brown Street.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any specific reason why you
don' t want. to rehabilitate the house that was destroyed?
FRANK FIELD: Those. houses , one house is on locust posts
and the other house is partially on locust .posts and par-
tially on a foundation, to rehabilitate, I would like to do
it right. It would be very expensive to rehabilitate the one
that had the fire. And the thought was .instead of putting
money into something that was halt on .lucust posts and half
on a foundation, why not make a proposal to the Town and the
Zoning Board and say, hey we get rid of. two old houses and
get one nice one.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Has the house that had the fire been
destroyed more than 50%?
FRANK FIELD: I would say no, but this could be argued.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Have you ever entertained the thought of
moving just those two structures over onto the separate lot--
and rehabilitating those?
FRANK FIELD: No I haven' t looked into that. I just thought
new construction would be better because you have proper
insulation, latest wiring code, right number of outlets . .
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Eleven
. FRANK FIELD REALTY, INC. HEARING - continued
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Let' s see what develops
throughout the hearing. Is there anybody else who would
like to speak on behalf of this application? In favor of
this application? Anybody like to speak against the ap-
plication? Kindly state your name.
PAUL DINIZIO: My name is Paul Dinizio, residing at 637
Brown Street, Greenport, New York. I just have a few
questions for the Board. Was there a .special exception
granted in this application?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The question is should be , and I am not
correcting you, the question should be was there a special ex-
ception applied for , No.
PAUL DINIZIO: Okay. Has the site plan been approved by the
Planning Board?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I would say that' s up to the Building
Inspector to make that determination.
PAUL DINIZIO: That was my next question, has the Building
Permit been granted or approved?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: - No, definitely not, it had to be brought
before this Board first. The only thing I can read to you is
a disapproval, part of the legal notice which I read, if I can
find it here in a second. It says "Please take notice that
your application dated October 17 , 1984.,. 'and refers to the
permit number and so on and so fortH' has herewith been dis-
approved on the following grounds , Article 3 , Section 100-30A-1
and 131 bulk and parking variances required by. the ZBA to allow
a two family dwelling on undersized lot. Now that' s the only
thing that precipitated this particular application. I will ask
the Building Inspector why a special exception is not required
in this particular case?
VICTOR LESSARD: A two family house is permitted in an A-zone
provided .you meet the criteria set down by the code book.
There' s no special exception required for that. A special
exception is to allow something in .an area that' s. not allowed
to be there. We are talking about a house in an A zone that
is. permitted. Now, the catch is a .requirement set down . by
the Code require, a variance which can be met. That' s why you
are here.
PAUL DINIZIO: I ask you, Mr. Lessard, why Appeal #p3198 was
denied by the Building Department? I am speaking on behalf
of my wife.
ZBA-12/13/84
Page Twelve
FRANK FIELD REALTY, INC. HEARING _ Continued
CHAIRMAN' GOEHRINGER: You are referring to the application
around the corner where the buildings .were -moved on to that
property and. . .
PAUL DINIZIO: Yes , Mr . Chairman.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER He' s referring to the buildings that. .
VICTOR LESSARD: This Board acted on it. I certainly haven' t
got the right to tell this Board what to do, sir.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, no, he' s saying, I believe he' s
saying that.. . . .
PAUL DINIZIO: Excuse me , Mr . Chairman, can I read this . .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let- me clear this so he understands .
When Second Street Corporation was given those buildings ,
and I believe the Community Development Director in Green-
port was involved or our Community Development Director
was involved. They. were moved on to the property, I assume,
of your wife? Is that what you are referring to? He is
saying that a special exception was then applied for and
denied for a two-family use on the. . .
VICTOR LESSARD I believe the area that 'the house was put
was a business zone. Again, I don' t know, I have gone through
a thousand cases . But I am pretty sure it was in a business
area and it didn' t belong in there , that's why the special
exception.
PAUL DINIZIO: Well, anyhow, in the actions of the Board that
my wife had received . . . it states here that the Building Depart-
. ment disapproved the application. . Okay, there' s a couple
more things., too. Why myself and my wife and I speak on
behalf of my parents, my grandmother and my brother also,
that there is :not. enough lot area for a two family house.
I don'-t know of any other two family houses in the area,
from the tracks to the bay. I might be corrected on that,
. but I don' t know of any. And another reason is that my
brother and I have spent thousands of dollars trying to
solve a drainage problem on that street. All the water
from Linden Street, Brown Street comes through either
Mr. Field'.s property or down Seventh Street and ends
up lying between both of our properties , which sometimes
floods my brother ' s basement out. So I think that this is
a consideration that the Board should solve before letting
something like this go through. I mean, we spent thousands
of dollars building a house. We have spent thousands of dollars
trying to .prevent the problem of flooding basement, of our
own money. The Town has helped by putting some drains in, but
it is just not enough; it just doesn' t handle the water.
That' s about it. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Anybody else like to speak against the
application? Mr . Field, when I was down to the property,
I did not attempt to gain access to any are of these structures
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Thirteen
FRANK FIELD REALTY, INC. HEARING - Continued
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:- Continued because I. assumed that the
trailer and the two story frame house in the front were in-
habited. I did not know that the other two houses , one of
which is and one of which is not, and in the house that was
burned, is entry able to be gotten in that particular dwelling?
FRANK FIELD: Yes , . we have a padlock on it, and we have it.
all sealed up. W� can make arrangements.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Supply us with .a key to that or make
arrangements to meet us there sometime, so we may go back
and reinspect that?
FRANK FIELD: Sure.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I can' t tell you with the holidays right
now, but .it will probably be sometime in the latter part of
December right after Christmas . Maybe that Saturday after
Christmas week or the following Saturday after . New Year' s ,
but we will get back and inspect that.
FRANK FIELD: Do you have my phone number.? It' s 477-2433
and I have a recording there so if there' s no answer, just
let it ring and leave a message.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Very good. Thank you. Yes , sir.
JOHN DINIZIO: On the building he was talking to Mr. Field
about , the burned out one, after the fire .I believe my father
came 'up here spoke .to the Building Inspector and. he promised
my father that the building would be torn down in thirty (30)
days and we are now talking nine months ago.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I am aware of what you are referring to
in reference to the difference to the special exception that
you had mentioned and this particular application. I believe
and I am not speaking for the Building Inspector and what he
is in fact interpreting as being almost trade between the two
dwellings into one dwelling, as opposed to the actual special
exception. Remember the minute the building on Second Street
Corporation severed from the land, it became personal property,
so that when it was moved, even though it was a two family
structure , and .when it was moved onto your wife ' s property,
it then went back to a one family structure, and because of
our specific requirements , whcih are extremely, extremely
stringent in this. Town on two family dwellings , they .require
160, 000 sq. ft. or four acres and there is no varying of that.
That is a special exception and you cannot vary that. Probably
the reason the Building Inspector had interpreted it in. that
manner , .jm t so you understand that situation. I hope you do.
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Fourteen
FRANK FIELD .REALTY, INC. HEARING - Continued
PAUL DINIZIO: Is it all one piece of property right now?
Such as my wife' s property, 'I looked into the probability
of building three houses , which because there were three
lots and I was told that since it was owned by the same
person for so long, that it became by the Town, which
department I don' t know, it became one parcel of land,
because it was owned by the same party.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I think to answer your first question,
that' s the reason we are going back to do the inspection.
If the building is destroyed more : than 50% of the. aggregate .
value of the structure itself and I am not referring to it
as a dwelling, I am referring to it as a structure, because
we assume. it is not a dwelling until the Building Inspector
so indicates that it is , and that it hasn' t been burned more
than 50% , then basically he only has 3 dwellings on this
particular piece of property or two dwellings and a trailer .
To answer your other questions , I assume that the entire four
parcels of 26 , 28.,5.0 and 59 are all in one name, is that
correct? So they are 'in effect, one lot.
PAUL DINIZIO: So, in other- words , according to Town zoning
if the lot was vacant, all four lots were vacant and owned
by the same person only one dwelling could go on that?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That' s correct. Is there anything
.that you would like to add, Mr. Field?
FRNAK FIELD: The only other thing there is another two family
dwelling 'in the area. Just one that I know of , which I own,
which is 621 Linden Street, which is right around the corner
and I purchased it as a two family house way back about 7 or
8 years ago.
CHAIRMAN GEOHRINGER: Before you 'sit down, this possibly could
require a special exception. I will have to see how the inter-
pretation goes after we do the inspection. I am rather con-
cerned -however , with the fact that we are getting to the holi-
days , I don' t want to turn this application down, we are running
out of time , so I am going to ask,with the Board' s indulgence
that we recess this hearing until the second meeting in January,
which is the January 17th meeting , so that if we have further
input you .fellows can come back and give us additional input,
so we are fully aware of everything that goes on here. If I
close the hearing, I can' t take any more input and that' s the
reason I would like the recess . So, I will make that motion
to the Board. Thank you gentlemen.
ZBA- 12/13/84
Page Fifteen
#3306 - At 8: 40 p.m. a Public Hearing was held in the matter of
ANTHONY and SALLY PIRRERA for a variance to erect accessory
storage building/carport in frontyard area, Suffolk County
Tax Map #10.00-44-2-3 .
IRA HASPEL: Mr. "Chairman and Members of the Board, my name
is Ira Haspel and I am here to represent Mr . and Mrs . Pirrera.
The 24 x 32 does include the. shed and I can answer any questions
you may have.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, let me say this . Over the years -in
granting these applications , we have run into tremendous problems
with carports . They start out as. carports and they end up as
cottages . So I am going to ask you the same question as I asked
Mr. Jacobs . I understand the nature of the application where the
the house is so positioned that to put something in the front
yard of this house in lieu of the rear yard would be absolutely
ludicrous and I can understand the purpose of the application.
How large will the ,shed be as part of the structure?
IRA HASPEL: The shed is an 8 x 24 section as indicated on the
plan, with the carport area being 24 x 24 and it will be on
the north section.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Will any of the sides other than the shed
side be enclosed?
IRA HASPEL: We propose to enclose the south side, which will
be facing the road, and leave the east and west open.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you very much. Is there anybody
else who would like to speak against the application? I apologize,
it has not been a good night. Anybody like to speak in favor of
this application.? Anybody against the application? . Hearing no
further comments and with winter coming, I make a motion granting
this subject :to the following two restrictions : 1. That the
east/west side of the carport always remain open; 2 . That the
shed area only be used for storage purposes. Thank you very
much for coming in. (Findings and determination in official
minutes filed. with Town Clerk: ) ,
----------------------------------------------------------------
FL #15 and
#3286 - At 8 : 45 p.m. - Public Hearings - held in the matters
JOSEPH GRASSO for a variance to construct new dwelling .with
insufficient frontyard and variance for lowest floor elevation
below .minimum. required elevation above MSL , Suffolk County Tax
Map #1000- 59-06-003 (Owner : Milne ) .
ZBA - 12/13/84
Page Sixteen
GRASSO HEARING CONTINUED
D. DENIS : In order to reduce the effects for frontyard requests
we moved the house as suggested, as far to the left as possible
to the largest building envelope that was available. Our request
now is to modify the frontyard from 35 ' to 18 ' . What we did
was put the garage over here and filled up the whole envelope.
Having the garage on this end.,. the garage was wider than the
16 x 16 bedroom. The other thing I would say, and I don' t
know if I mentioned it the last time, in a normal situation ,
we could have asked for a compromise on the backyard, but we
are restricted by the DEC , so we really couldn't have compro-
mised on that one.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What is your setback by DEC?
D. DENIS : 351 . It coincides with the rear yard requirements
but if there hadn' t been that restriction, I think we would have
asked for a compromise on both of them. I would also say that
the topography of that area was a little bit lower than the
property. and there is a natural berm from the road up and . the
right of way is 56 ' so, the property line is probably back
another 10 to 12 feet til you get to actual paved area.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What is the proposed setback from .the
rear property line?
D. DENIS : The proposed setback is 35 ' .
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you for this drawing and we will
certainly tale it into consideration. Let me talk briefly about
the flood plain variance for a moment. Not looking at this file
since the last available meeting, we were at that particular
time indicating a crawl space basement, is that correct?
D. DENIS: No, we wanted to put a full basement, but we want
to put a mechanical system in that basement. Again, we are
restricted by the size of the house because of the size of
the lot, so we really can' t put the mechanical space on the
first floor and that' s why we are asking for a variance on
that. The other thing I would say on behalf of that is, if the
site were larger , we could raise the house and perhaps grade
around it, so we. are restricted again by the size of the lot.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How deep a basement are you entertaining?
D. DENIS: We would go eight feet, a foot for the floor , we
may be able to go up to three feet, 32, ' , I think I mentioned
in the application 2 ' .
CHAIRMAN :GOEHRINGER: Yes , I am looking at elevation 3 . 5 '
D. DENIS: I think it' s also possible to elevate the mechanical
system to again above that floor , maiybe raise it on a platform
ZBA-12/13/84
Page Seventeen
GRASSO HEARING - Continued
D. DENIS - Continued: or something.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So the house will have an entire basement
underneath it?
D. DENIS: Yes , except for the garage.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There is one question I wanted to ask you.
WE have in the past, and I can think of one application by the
name of Seeman on Peconic Bay that had utilities hung from the
ceiling. In your particular case, you are talking about it
as elevated from the floor , it' s basically the same situation.
I have not discussed this with the Board in any way so I have
no idea of .what they thinking about in reference to obtaining
this variance.. The hardships were somewhat similar, except
that was an existing house, so I will have to deal with that
when we go into deliberation. Are you entertaing the con-
struction of this house as soon as possible? Or. will it be
done next Spring?
D. DENIS: As soon as possible.
CHAIRMAN GEOHRINGER: I cannot guarantee that we will get you
a decision with a week, but we will do the best we can.
D. DENIS: Will it be necessary to attend another meeting?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, no. Once I close this hearing , I can' t
take any more.
D. DENIS : Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Anybody else like to be heard
on behalf of this application? Anybody against the application?
Questions from Board Members? Hearing no further questions ,
I make a motion closing the hearing reserving decision until
later . Thank you very much .for your change of plan and we
will do the best we possibly can. Good night.
Meeting concluded at 8 : 50 p.m.
RECEIVED AND FILED BY
THE SOUTHOLD TOWN
Respectfully submitted,
DATE HOUR
Barbara A'. Strang
Town Clerk, Town pl I P p. 1-18
*These minutes were transcribed from tapes as recorded.