HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-03/23/1983 1 '
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
MARCH 23 , 1983
A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board of Appeals was
held on Wednesday, March 23, 1983 at `7: 30 p.m. at the Southold
Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York.
Present were: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman; Charles
Grigonis, Jr. ; Robert J. Douglass and Joseph H.. Sawicki. Absent
was : Serge Doyen, Member (Fishers Island) . Also present were:
Mr. Victor Lessard, Administrator (Building Department) ; Mr.
Henry Lytle (Southold-Peconic Seniors Club) ; Mrs. Ruth Oliva
(North Fork Environmental Council) ; ,.and Mrs. Shirley Bachrach
(League of Women Voters) .
Chairman :Goehringer asked Member Grigonis to open the
meeting and .chair the first two public hearings. Chairman
Goehringer was absent during the opening of the meeting and
the first two public hearings. ' It is also. noted for the record
that the recording secretary for .the first two public hearings
was Eileen Carey, substituting for Linda Kowalski.
Chairman Pro Tem Grigonis opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. FL-13. Application of JAMES
AND DORIS IDLER, 27 Anoatok Drive, Huntington, NY 11743 for a
Variance to the Flood Plain Management Law, Chapter 46 , Section
46-7 for permission to utilize area below the eight-foot minimum
required elevation for placement of electrical utilities and
equipment in this A-7 Flood Zone. Location of Property: 1010
Maple Lane, East Marion, NY; Cleaves Point Filed Map 4650 , Subd.
Lot 60 ; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-035-05-027.
The Chairman (Pro Tem) opened the hearing at 7:30 p.m. and
read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal
application.
r�
Sauthold Town Board o appeals -2- March 23, 19F Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. FL-13, JAMES AND DORIS IDLER, continued : )
MR. JAMES IDLER:' Excuse me, there is another sketch there. The
elevation would be 11 ' it shows on there.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS : Here we go--it' s right on top, that' s why
I couldn' t find it.
MR. IDLER: Can I say something else also?
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: I ' ll go through it, and then you may speak.
(Mr._ Grigonis continued reading the appeal application and noted the
sketches in the file. ) Ok. Did you have something further you wanted
to say?
MR. IDLER: It' ll be higher than it' s shown there, because
existing now on this. . . I asked VanTuyl to give me the elevations of
the four corners , and he only gave me the two lower corners. Well,
the garage. . . it' ll be higher here, so actually the lowest point, it
says here , eight foot. It' ll be about, grade would be about 10 ' 5"
at that point there. That would be the grade. Because everything
will be brought up to meet that level. . .this is the garage level.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: This sketch here shows 91-,' , 'but I don' t
understand just what, A t stands for.
MR. IDLER: We have 9z' at this point here. He didn' t give me
these heights here , but this is higher than eight and this is high-
er. . .the garage, so this will be brought up to the garage elevation.
So actually, this level here would probably be another foot above
this as far as the elevation goes. . . I mean as far as the grade.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS : That would make the furnace 9z' maybe?
MR. IDLER: Well , yeah, I show it 314" to the bottom of the
furnace below, so actually it will be about another foot. About
2 ' 4" below the eight-foot mark. I've checked the furnace and so
forth, the furnace man says with a 2 ' he could get in there for
the furnace and tank, so we can raise it that high.
MR. LESSARD: You're asking for relief of 2 ' 4" , right?
MR. IDLER: Yes , yes.
MR. LESSARD : Give or take.
MR. IDLER: Give or take, it may an inch or so one way or the
other. It' s close there. That' s all I want to say.
:CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: Anyone else wishing to speak in favor of
this? Anyone to speak in opposition? (None) Any of the board
members or Vic , have any questions? (None) So I' ll offer a
resolution closing the hearing and reserving decision until later.
On motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr. Sawicki , it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the
matter of Appeal No. FL-13 , JAMES AND DORIS IDLER, until later.
r
�r ~ •. Southold Town Board o ppeals -3- March 23 , 19E Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. FL-13 - JAMES AND DORIS IDLER, continued: )
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs.. Gri.gonis, Sawicki and Doug-
lass . (Members Goehringer and Doyen were absent. ) This resolution
was unanimously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3091. Application of JOHN AND
LINDA KOWALSKI, 404 Atlantic Avenue, Greenport, NY for a Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for a Certi-
ficate of Occupancy of Lot No. 3 of Minor Subdivision of Christine
King, Map No. 117, with an adjustment of lot line between Lots 3
and 4 , leaving insufficient road frontage for Lot No. 3 and leaving
an insufficient sideyard setback from the existing dwelling on Lot
No. 4. Each parcel contains an area exceeding one acre. Location
of Property : West Side of Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-114-12-013. 3 and 013. 4 .
The Chairman (Pro Tem) opened the hearing at 7 : 37 p.m. and
read the legal. notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal
application.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: We have a copy of the tax map of the
surrounding area showing the lots in the immediate vicinity. Any-
one• here to speak for this , anything to add?
LINDA KOWALSKI: I 'm Linda Kowalski, and if there are any ques-
tions I would be happy to answer them.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: Ok. Anyone else to speak for it? (None)
Anyone to speak against it?
DON FEILER: Yes. A couple of questions beforehand. I'm Don
Feiler; I own and live on the property to the north of the property
seeking the variance. You mentioned that the area of Lot 3 would
not be changed?
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: I think that' s the way I read it. " . . . It
should be- noted that the area of Lot No. 3 would remain the same,
1. 793 acres. . . . "
MRS. KOWALSKI: It should say, Mr. Chairman , that it' s going
to be a minimum of 1. 793 acres which was what the Planning Board
required in 1978 . . .
MR. SHADELL: Excuse me, my name is Shadell._ My recollection
to correct that, that lot is about 2..something acres. I don't have the
overall map. Do you got it? The development of Lots 1, 2, 3 , 4?
MRS. KOWALSKI : There should be a copy in the back of the file.
There is a copy of the Planning Board requirement for 1. 793 and
it would remain 1. 793.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: It was 2. 035 . � It would be cut back to
1. 793 acres. It' s not far from two acres .
I` Southold Town Board o Lppeals -4- March 23 , 1� Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3091 - JOHN AND LINDA KOWALSKI, continued: )
z
MRS. KOWALSKI: There was a Planning Board meeting on March 7th
(1983) , and I submitted the same map that you have, and they
approved it subject to approval by the Z.B.A. , and that was the
1. 793 acres with the same lines as shown.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does that answer your question?
MR. FEILER: Well, yeah, that answers that question. But I
would like to express my objection. I think it was mentioned of
the unusual condition of the existing house and, the location of it.
I think that hardship is hard to explain and it' s clearly a self-
imposed hardship , and the relief that' s sought I'm concerned mostly
about the road frontage for one-third. difference in the relief.
And that' s pretty unreasonable. I'm. concerned about my own devalu-.
ation of property since I'm right to the north of that, and I
think this variance they're seeking is for a financial gain to
sell the lot, and our property is devalued because of that. Their
gain will be our loss. And I don' t think this is quite fair. The
depreciation of our property is not just my own. I've spoken to
several real estate brokers, and it' s a real depreciation. It' s
a character change. It' s not in harmony with the general plan that
was arranged for in that minor subdivision. When we bought the
house , the surrounding property was a major concern because it
was all vacant. The zoning there was important to us and what
the ultimate conditions were going to be, and I think it' s quite
a bit different from 150 ' road frontage to 100 ' road frontage.
That' s, off of my garage, that would leave their setback distance
18 ' off of my' garage. That' s. not as generous as it was when I
bought the house. I don' t think that' s a burden I should have to
bear.
There are some alternates that could be approached. The
first thing as I said before, it' s all a self-imposed hardship
and I realize that the previous owner built the house in the
middle of this on two lots, but the new owners , . I 'm sure, got
into this with their eyes open and couldn' t leave. nothing hidden
by that, but if the house was moved, this existing house and
conform to the original minor subdivision; or a flag lot possibility
of putting a new house in the back of that property, rather than on
top of my house. And another thing I'm concerned with is whether
this would set a precedent for the remainder. neighborhood. If
someone else were to decide this change to 100 ' it could open the
door to the whole piece of property across the road from us which
is approximately 1 ,000 feet of road frontage. Instead of 150 '
road frontage, why not 100 ' and that would be several extra houses
on there. And you can figure it out, maybe three, four, five extra
houses . That' s a considerable change in the character of the
neighborhood.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: I doubt if the Planning Board would take
a parcel would take a parcel and do anything like that with it.
MR. FEILER: Well , I talked with Henry Raynor- (Chairman of
the Planning Board) , and he mentioned that it was not with his
blessing— this is what was suggested to them. ...they did not approve
of anything -- I'm not sure it was their intent to approve it really.
r i
y Sfouthold Town Board c %ppeals -5- March 23 , 83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3091 - JOHN AND LINDA KOWALSKI, continued : )
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: There' s. a letter here, it is dated March 17 ,
1983 : " . . .Mr. and Mrs. John Kowalski
404 Atlantic Avenue
Greenport, NY 11944 . . . " this is from the Planning Board,
it reads ,
" . . .Re: Proposed lot line change, formerly Christine King Minor #117
Dear Mr, and Mrs. Kowalski :
The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board,
Monday, March 7 , 1983 :
RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board approve a set-off
(106-13) for a lot line change as designated on the map of John P.
and Linda F. Kowalski , formerly filed as Christine King Minor Sub-
division #117 , subject to the applicant receiving approval for a
variance regarding road frontage from the Zoning Board of Appeals. . . . "
So the Planning Board has approved it.
MRS. KOWALSKI: May I say one thing? If the Planning Board had
recommended that we go along with a flag lot, a road frontage
variance would still be. needed. Also, if it were a flag lot, there
is a lot of marsh land there, and that would mean we would have to
build a house very. near the marsh, and the D.E. C. would not permit
that because it would be too close. Also he mentioned, the opponent
mentioned his garage being very close to the lot line. Excuse my
voice, it is going. And that lot is- not being moved. That line has
always been there. We're changing the lot line between two lots.
We're not creating a new lot—we' re changing a lot line. In 1978
a house could be built on that lot, and we're not really changing
anything. _ It' s just one house that would still be permitted on that
lot. Also, if we were to move the house , it is 3300 square feet
with a full foundation, and it would cost us probably -- at least $15,000 to
move the house , which is probably more than the lot is worth.
CHAIRMAN GRIGONIS: Anyone else?
MRS. BERTHA STARS : Yes. I'm to the south of the property.
That property was originally set up to be two lots with 150 ' front-
age . There is no hardship really, Linda, with the sideyard unless.
you want to make a buildable plot in there.
MRS. KOWALSKI : May I have your .name , please?
MRS. STARS : Bertha Stars. Now that' s a buildable plot. If
that wasn 't to be a buildable plot, there is no problem with the
sideyards , that area does not call for another home in that area
between the ones to the north and the original house. The original
owner placed it that way and had no problem with the sideyards.
The sideyards are being changed to conform so there is a saleable
building plot there, and I don' t think it' s right. I really don' t.
I can' t see another house ' .in .there, and it could set a precedent
I no
Southold Town Board o appeals -6- . March 23, 3 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3091 - JOHN AND LINDA. KOWALSKI, continued: )
MRS. STARS continued :
across the street if someone did 'the .same thing, bought two lots
at 150 '. and decided to do the same th.ing: aga.in. It would be a
hardship. . .well,..there' s a .lot across the street with 100 ' frontage.
I don't think that' s right. Be.cause. I don' t see where there' s a
hardship here. .unless the. person definitely wants to' make a plot
that they can sell. They bought it the way it was , and when the
.Kings owned it .and Ebba subdivided it, it .was..not• to be 'subdivided
further. Now they're getting a variance to make' a buildable lot.
I don' t think. it' s right.
MRS,. KOWALSKI : I would just like to say one more thing. There is_
a total of 4. 14. acres, and if the .board denied the application for ..
insufficient road frontage. . .the present zoning is 40 ,000 square
feet, .and it would be an economic hardship for us to leave one
house on four acres. We'-d. perhaps be forced to convert that to
a two-family dwelling which ,is permitted- by the code by Special
Exception and have to go for that.
MRS: STARS: When you bought that house you knew, your contract
wasn't conting.ent .upon you making' it a buildable plot. If my
intent was, to live there,, 'I would never want another house in
there. ' I would. never even go into getting a variance to make
that a buildable- plot, because ..I certainly wouldn't want .anybody
stuck in front of me or along side ,of me. . .and the whole area „as
y,ou .go down . Ole Jule Lane, there .i.sn' t one house on top of a
another house,' .so it seems to me you. really are doing it for
financial purpose because you would sell the house, and sell
the plot, and ' here we sit on Ole Jule Lane. I don' t think that' s
right.. Those houses there are very well spaced, and that, the
100 ' frontage is - nothing for a house .to go on. And' I think it
depreciates our property and I don' t think it should be.
..MRS. KOWALSKI: There are houses on Ole Jule Lane that are on top
of each other (interruption by Mrs. Stars)
MRS. STARS Not around our area when you .come down Ole Jule Lane , . '
not until .you..-get way down. . .right there it' s op.en;. ,.,aiid .if
one-
house went in there , it would spoil the whole continuity of that
area; and :Eh-e same thing -could be applicable across the street.
Somebody subdivides, .gets two lots , and all of a sudden decides
well we want to make another building plot. Now we've got a hard-
ship case because across the street there is a lot with 100 ' frontage.
We either stick with it or we don't; and you bought the house knowing
darn well it was .placed in the middle.
MRS. KOWALSKI : ,We did not buy the lot knowing it was in the middle
because we did not have a survey showing the house with a lot 'line
going through the house. We were not aware of it until we had the
survey made for the- property. I_ didn't bring the. original copy of
the survey with .us,, •but, 'that ' is why :we a-re making the. change.
(Mrs. Stars and Mr. Feiler interrupting. )
MR. FEILER: Did you buy, in' one--
7 S'uthold Town Board o ppeals -7- March 23 , 198 tegular Meeting
(Appeal No. .3091 - JOHN AND LINDA KOWALSKI, continued : )
MRS. STARS: The original owner had no intent of making. a lot out of
the other side.
(There were several persons speaking at this time and the statements
were not clearly audible. )
MRS. STARS: You bought it. You wanted to make it. . .you must have
bought it knowing it was on the middle of two lots. Now you want to
make a building lot out of the area? No way! How can you have
100 ' frontage. You're changing it again. It wasn' t to be subdivided
further, and I know that because I was interested in the parcel on
the other side. And I was to the attorney and asked him if I bought
the first lot next to me, if I could further take and subdivide it
part of it in the back making it two lots to the west of me, with
the heart of that lot, he told me "No way can you do that because
this parcel can. no further be subdivided. "
MRS. KOWALSKI: I would like to add there is no restriction in the
subdivision approval that it could never be resubdivided. .excuse me,
I mean, we are not creating a new lot.
MRS. STARS: You are creating a new lot.
MRS. KOWALSKI: We are not (Mrs . Stars interrupting again. )
MRS. STARS: Compared with the way it was subdivided. And we don' t
want a 100 ' lot..
MR. CHAIRMAN: We are going around and around now, so- Is there
anyone else that has something different to say?
MR. SHADELL: My name is Shadell .and I own Lot No. 1- to the north
of Feilers . I voice my objection to this .
MR. FEILER: Can I-- I would like t_7. did before-- Mrs. Kowalski
bought her property .under .one impression. I was .under the same
condition. I bought my property knowing what the zoning was , what
the setback was , and what the ultimate situation was. And this is
changing that situation. I was willing to pay the price of my house
because of that. I don' t think it should be on my shoulders. I
don' t think it should be put on my shoulders--the devaluation.
There' s a significant devaluation of my property because of that.
This was the zoning and the map was drawn up for a reason and it
should stay that way.
MRS. KOWALSKI: May I ask you, are you opposing that a house would
be built closer to your house—would you rather a house be built
further back with a covenant on there if it were approved that. it
would be farther away from your house?
MR. ,. FEILER: It' s not away from my house. It' s the general character
of that --the arrangement. I don' t think there is any acceptable
arrangement any more. There was an acceptable arrangement in my
opinion when I bought the house. That was acceptable to me.
} F
Southold Town Board c- _appeals -8- March 23, -_83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3091 - JOHN AND LINDA KOWALSKI, continued:)
MR. FEILER continued: If I knew this was a 100 ' lot there, I. might
have had a different opinion on it. It might have been a different
price for the house , and that' s not my own opinion. As I said before
that :.it .was verified. It' s as simple as that.
MRS. PATRICIA FEILER: I would like to speak.
MRS. FEILER: My name is Patricia Feiler, and I live with my husband
on the property to the. north of the Kowalski' s . I understand that
the Kowalski ' s are trying to -do the best they can in the situation
that they are in: But I do feel that the results of this variance
which would probably be a buildable lot with a house on it eventually
whether they own it or sell it or whatever. (The secretary changed
the tape to side two. ) ( Mrs. Feiler indicated that the changes
proposed would leave the burden .on them. )
WILLIAM STARS : My. name is William Stars, I live to the south of
the said property, and I also oppose the changing of the property.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Anyone else?
MRS. KOWALSKI: I just have one more thing to add. The building
width of the lot is 1301 , actually a variance in that. area of 20 '
rather than .one-third as was mentioned. On the road there' s 100 ' . . .
in the middle of the lot 1301 .
MR. FEILER: Well the middle of the lot is where your house is now.
MRS. KOWALSKI: No. We are way up front. The middle of the lot
is approximately 80 feet in the back of our house.
MR. FEILER: Are you saying Lot 3 or Lot 4?
MRS. KOWALSKI: We are talking about Lot 3 . (Mrs. Stars interrupted. )
MRS. STARS: What --
MRS. KOWALSKI : The house is set back 100 feet from Ole Jule Lane.
The 130 ' width of Lot No. 3 is 275 feet or more (Mr. Feiler
interrupting) from the road.
MR. FEILER: Excuse me, that' s where the wetlands,. not exactly, but
the lowland, with a flag lot, that would be the same area.
MRS. KOWALSKI: Excuse me , but I haven't finished what I wanted to
say. The variation (of elevation) in that area is between ten feet
and twenty feet of elevation,' so, and it also is a wooded area. The
marshland does not start .until 350 feet back from the road. There
is no marshland there in this area.
MR. FEILER: Can I ask you--which lot were you purchasing when you
bought this?
MRS. KOWALSKI : We purchased it in two parcels on the deed.
x S°outhold Town Board o ippeals -9- March 23,' 3 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3091 - JOHN AND. LINDA KOWALSKI, continued-)
MR. FEILER: But ybu 'thought that the existing ;house was on .Lot No. 1
without-any problems. -
MRS. KOWALSKI: Not Lot 1,. no.
MR.,- FEILER: On• Lot 4 . But you didn' t think 'there was any problem,
you- just�'.:thought there were two building lots available.
MRS. KOWALSKI: We thought that the house was built on Lot . 4 completely.
We had. .no idea. ' Also,. the reason that. we are asking for a sideyard
setback, we were trying to get as much width for Lot..No. 3 as possible,
and' if the board would ask that .we have the 15 ' that is required and
make- .the l.ot larger, we would be willing .to do that.
MR. FEILER: For Lot 4?
MRS. . KOWALSKI: For Lot 4 ",=-"if-you object to the 10:' sideyard there.
MR. FEILER: Well then,- that .would .reduce the. new • lot.
MRS. KOWALSKI: ' If that is what the board would. ask ,for, if they .
` would require that., But there was: •nothing in. the Planning .Board
subdivision back in 1978 that 'restricted it to the size it was,
and we did go to the Planning Board in March and they approved it
as submitted on the plan.
MR. FEILER:. The zoning at that time was 150 ' road. frontage.
' There was a restriction. And that' s the way I understood it.
And that' s what should be upheld.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well ; this will all be taken into consideration
when the board acts on it, and if there is no further we have
several more to go and we are running way behind.. If .there are:.
no further questions, I' ll offer. a resolution closing the
hearing and reserving decision.
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Seconded.
On motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Douglass; it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter of
Appeal No. 3091, .JOHN AND LINDA KOWALSKI..
Vote of the Board: Ayes : - Messrs. Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki.
(Members Goehringer and Doyen were absent. ) This resolution was -. " .
unanimously adopted.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much for coming in.
Southold Town Board o Lppeals -10- March 23, 83 Regular Meeting
At 8 :02 p.m. , Chairman Grigonis called a five-minute recess.
Motion was made by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr. Sawicki , and
unanimously carried, to recess for approximately five minutes ,
at which time the Regular Meeting would reconvene.
At 8 :13 p.m. , Mr. Goehringer returned to the meeting room.
Motion was made by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by Mr. Douglass , and
unanimously carried, to reconvene the Regular Meeting at this time.
Recording secretary Eileen Carey left, and the regular secretary
Linda Kowalski commenced taking minutes of the meeting.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3088. Application of JOHN AND
FRANCES DiVELLO, Drawer 1402, Westphalia Road, Mattituck, NY for
a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Section 100-80A
for permission to construct one-family dwelling in this "C-Light
Industrial" Zone. Location of Property: 605 Marry' s Road (a/k/a
305 Hill Street) , Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No.
1000-140-02-032.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 14 o'clock p.m. and
read the leqal. notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal
application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a survey produced by Young
and Young dated November 4 , 1981 indicating this particular par-
cel as 1 .426 acres intended proposed placement of the house
approximately 60 feet from Mary ' s Road, 50 feet from Hill Street,
and 40 feet from L. I.R.R. I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax
Map indicating this property and the surrounding properties in
the area. Would you like to be heard in behalf of your application,
Mr. DiVello?
MR. JOHN DiVELLO: No , I don' t have anything to say that isn't
already said in the application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you have any idea what the proposed square
footage of the house is?
MR. DiVELLO: Twenty-six by 52 , whatever that comes to.
Thirteen something? Thirteen fifty.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would anybody else like to be heard in
behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak against the
application? (None) Any questions from any board members? (None)
Hearing no further comments , I' ll make a motion closing the hear-
ing and reserving decision until some time in the very near future.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until some
time in the very near future, in the matter of Appeal No. 3088 ,
JOHN AND FRANCES DiVELLO.
g,outhold Town .Board e appeals -11- March 23, 83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3088 - JOHN AND FRANCES DiVELLO, continued: )
Vote of the Board: -Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grig.onis , Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent.. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted,
PUBLIC HEARING: . Appeal No. 3089. Application of ANN WYDEN and
PEGGY HELLER, `One Harris Court, Great Neck, .NY 11021, for a Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to
construct screen-porch addition with a reduced rearyard setback at
2015 Bay Avenue, East Marion, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000- .
31-17-002 .
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 :17 o 'clock p.m. and
read the legal. notice of hearing in its "entirety and appeal
application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We, have a copy of a sketch of a survey dated
August 25 , 1981, indicating this particular property and the proposed
addition which appears to be 9 ' 4" by 8 ' and a copy of- the Suffolk
County Tax Map indicating this property and the surrounding properties
in -the ,.area. Is there somebody that would like to be heard in behalf
of this application? (None) Anyone wishing to -speak that is opposed .
to this application? . (None) 'Any questions from any board members?
(None) . - Hearing no questions or comments ,; I' ll make a motion closing
the hearing and reserving decision until later.
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Second.
On motion, by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.
RESOLVED, to close the bearing and reserve decision until. a later
time .in the matter of Appeal No. .3089 , application of ANN WYDEN and
PEGGY HELLER...
Vote of. the Board: Ayes : Messrs: Goehringer, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member ,Doyen -was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted'.
PUBLIC HEARING: `Appeal. No. 3090 .- Application of CHESTER M. MAYER,
by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. , 2265 King Street, Orient, NY for a Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-35A for permission to
erect fence ' exceed.ing the .maximum: height requirement of four feet within
the fr.ontyard area at* 2265 King Street,, Orient, NY; County Tax Map .
-Parcel ID No. 1000-0.26-02-043. 2.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 :19 o' clock p.m. and
read the legal. notice of hearing in its entirety, and appeal
application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have, a copy- of 'a. .survey,'.produced on January 20 ,
1981 indicating the nature. of this applicati.on, and the. 80 '.- of stockade
Southold Town Board o- ..ppeals -12- March 23 , _33 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3090 - CHESTER M. MAYER, continued: )
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER continued:
fence that is mentioned here in the application and a copy of the
Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this property and the surrounding
properties in the area, Mr. Bruer, would you like to be heard in
behalf of this application?
RUDOLPH H. BRUER, ESQ. : Yes. There should be another letter in
the file wherein the application was further amended, or asked to be
amended, to th& degree that the four-foot fence go back an additional
24 ' from the road from where it is. The purpose of that would be to
bring the four-foot area from the road frontage back some 32 ' and at
that point continue the 6 ' fence back an additional 561 . The purpose
of that has 'been that the applicant .and his neighbor, Mr. Schnoor,
have agreed amongst themselves, subject to, of course , the board and
the town, that as far as Mr. Schnoor is concerned , he wouldn' t object
to a four-foot fence if it was back so his open porch could have
visibility. So Mr. Mayer agreed that that would be fine and that
would still leave him the privacy that he required. With respect
to this fence, we' re here because of a determination of a building
inspector. I kind of disagree with the determination because if you
take his interpretation of the ordinance, you have anything in front
of Mr. Mayer ' s house it' s his frontyard, which I agree with, but they
also go further and say that along the sideyard there as far as the
fence is concerned, that that is - really his frontyard. The ordinance
is pretty clear, and it says that subject to the provisions of 100-34
that has to do with corner lots, walls, hedges , live plantings , et
cetera, within 5 ' of the property lines may be erected and maintained
subject to the following height limitations: when located in the
frontyard along the frontyard property line , the same shall not exceed
four feet; when located along the side and rear lot lines , the same
shall not exceed six .and one-half feet. Now I can understand why the
building inspector did what he did, if you go to the definition of
sideyard and frontyards , the definition of a sideyard, it says, "It
is an unoccupied ground area fully open to the sky between any
property line other than a street or rear lot line and a line drawn
parallel thereto between the front and rear yards. " So he said that
the frontyard, which I think he' s correct, the frontyard is that area
in front of the building. I believe though that if you read this and
continue it further, you can. never have a fence between that side part
of the building up to the frontyard.. But needless to say, the circum-
stances here do create a hardship and more particularly a practical
difficulty. It' s a hardship and practical difficulty because of the
setbacks of the two buildings or the buildings on this particular
street. The Schnoor building I believe was there first and if the
Mayer or the applicants ' building was placed in line with the Schnoor
building, there wouldn't be any problem here because he under this
application would have that part from the front of his house out to
the road , going to the 4 ' Line and 6 ' back to the rear.
It' s a unique situation in that if you notice the , I believe
members of the board have been out there because they usually inspect
these premises , the fence happens to be 2 ' in on the Mayer property.
Mr. Schnoor is using, right up to the fence, for gardening in terms of
flowers and whatever— I think that' s why they reached an agreement
1 r
S,outhol.d Town:,-Board c _ appeals -13- March 23 , 83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3090 - CHESTER M. MAYER, continued: )
MR. BRUER continued :
with respect to this fence. The only open item is who is going to
share what part of the cost at this particular point and as to
cutting down the fence or settling it down.
I would like to point out to the board that if Mr. Schnoor owned
this fence it would be perfectly legal. In fact, more so, because
the 4 ' area would be back behind the front of the building. We
intend to go approximately 10 ' beyond or north of Mr. , Schnoor' s
property line so he could have the air and see from his porch out
along both streets and everybody is insured their privacy.
Again I think the application should be granted. . .nothing is .
going to change in the area. I think it' s very important for the
board .to know that if the fence was moved 2 ' south and was owned by
Mr. Schnoor, it would be a perfectly legal fence.
MR. CHAIRMAN: . Before you sit down, just let me go over these
figures with you. The house is approximately 82' from King Street.
MR. BRUER: Yes. I have some guidelines if this might help the
board-of what is proposed. If I may pass it around.
(Mr. Bruer passed out copies of the sketch showing the proposed
fencing to each of the other board members and Mr. Lessard for view-
ing. )
MR. BRUER: What we basically plan to do would be that the 4 '
fence area would be contained to the area from the street line 32 '
back. And at that point, the 6 ' f.ence would then go up.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And that 321. is basically what Mr. Schnoor' s
setback is from the road?
MR. BRUER: No, his setback according to our measurements is
approximately 211 . We would then give him another 10 ' for his porch
which he would like the air and sunlight visibility, for his use and
enjoyment . on that porch. So in a sense we' re willing to cut down
almost three sections , not quite three sections of that fence, to
bring it down to the 4 ' limitation set by the building inspector.
MR. CHAIRMAN: ok.
MR. BRUER: And as I said, if_. it were Mr. Schnoor' s , it would
be perfectly legal. I roughly drew this tonight, showing the cross-
ing of, the fr.ontyard here saying that this is where the fence is
and what we intend to do is make from here to here back the 4 ' and
only here to here 56 ' of the 6 ' . Thank you very much.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Bruer. Would anybody else like
to be heard in behalf of this application? (None) Anybody like
to speak against the application? (None) Any questions from any
board members?
c
A Southold Town Board c kppeals =14- March 23, 83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No.. 3090 - CHESTER M. MAYER, continued : )
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Mr. Bruer, are you .aware that there are cove-
nants in the deed on that house, covering this?
MR. BRUER: No. I . should be because I represented Mr. Mayer
when he bought it.
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Well there is.
MR. BRUER: What does it say?
MEMBER DOUGLASS: It says that he cannot have anything above
four feet out there.
MR. BRUER: If that' s the case, I guess the person entitled to
enforce that covenant could enforce it. But I don' t think it has
to do with the , application here. I mean it' s worthwhile information
for the board but
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could you get us a copy of that?
MR. BRUER I' ll look , for it. I wasn' t aware of it.
MEMBER DOUGLASS : It' s .in the deed.
MR. BRUER:: Well , I' ll look for it:
MR. CHAIRMAN: Just so. we can have it for the record, ok?
.MR. BRUER: Sure.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Again, would anybody like to speak against .
the application? Any other questions from any board members? (None)
_Hearing no further questions , I ' ll make a motion closing the hearing
and reserving decision.
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass , it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision .until a later
time in the matter of Appeal No. 3090, application of CHESTER_M. MAYER.
Vote of the Board.: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously- adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3092. Application of ERNEST H. PRUSS-
NER, 910 Old Shipyard 'L.ane, ' Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31, Bulk Schedule for permission
to construct extension reducing the rearyard setback .and exceeding the
-20% maximum allowable lot coverage at 910 Old Shipyard Lane, Southold,
Southold Town Board c appeals -15- March 23 , 83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3092 - ERNEST H. PRUSSNER, continued: )
NY; Founders Estates Map 834 , Subd. Lot 91; County Tax Map Parcel ID
No. 1000-064-04-022.
The Chairman opened the hearing. at 8 :31 o'clock p.m. and
read the legal. notice of hearing in its entirety .and appeal
application:
MR: CHAIRMAN: We . have a copy of ' a survey dated October 15 ,. 1965
and a copy of the Suffolk Co:unty. Tax Map indicating this property .and
the parcels . in the surrounding area. Is there anyone wishing to speak
for this application? (None) Is there anyone wishing to speak against
the application?
MR. MEREDITH: My mother owns the property directly -to the north
of the Prussners , and I own the property next door to my mother. I'd
like to know, is this a two-story or a one-story. addition?
MR. CHAIRMAN: I'm sorry, I didn't catch your name, sir.
MR. MEREDITH: Meredith:
MR. CHAIRMAN Mr. Meredith, we can' t answer that question. We
had gotten a letter from .the attorney indicating .that they would not
be available tonight.
ELIZABETH GOLDSMITH: I 'm Elizabeth Goldsmith and they had
requested a postponement, but Lean answer Mr. Meredith that it is
a one-story.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very .much.. '-Ok?
' MR, MEREDITH: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN.: Is there anything else you would- like to ask, Mr.
Meredith?
MR: MEREDITH: Well, I gather there will be a further hearing,
. . MR. 'CHAIRMAN: We' ll continue this hearing until the next
regularly-scheduled meeting, Ok? Would anybbdy, else like to speak
in:behalf of, the application?� Anybody li,ke. to. speak against the
application? (None) Ok; at the request of Abigail A. Wickham, Esq. ,
I' ll make a motion recessing this particular hearing until the next.
regularly-scheduled meeting.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.
On motion by Mr. ,Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, to recess the matter of Appeal No. 3092 , application
of ERNEST H. PRUSSNER .until the. next Regular Meeting of this board.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, . Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was. absent. ) This,..:resolution was .unani-
mously adopted.
Southold Town Board oL Appeals 16= . ,March. 23 , _LA3 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC. HEARING: Appeal No. ' 3094 , . Application of NORTH FORK
BAPTIST CHURCH, C.R.. 48 , Mattituck, NY (by Gerry L. Horton) for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for
approval of lot having insufficient area -and .frontyage along West- '
phalia Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-121-
02-012. 1.
:.,The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 37 o'clock p..m. and
read the legal. notice .of hearing .in its entirety .and appeal
application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a .copy of the survey of the subdivision,
sort of speak, and the parcel in question is .on. No. 3 which- is
20 ,000 square . feet and 100 ' of road frontage on Westphalia Road,
and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this
property and the surrounding properties in the area. Would anybody
like to speak .in behalf of this application?. Mr. Horton?
(GERRY HORTON was present. )
MR. CHAIRMAN: I should. note for , the . file we have a petition,
" . . .We, the .undersi.gned object to the down zoning that the Bap-
tist Church is requesting .on their lot facing Westphalia Road: .. . .-. "
/sl by 33 persons.
Is there -.anybody else that would like to be heard in behalf of the.
application? (None) I also have two letters, one from Ruth Whit-
marsh and .one from Pamela McCaffery (objecting to the application) .
Would anybody like .to speak against the application? . Could you state
your, .name please?
MRS. ROSENFELD: I'm Mrs. Rosenfeld and my property adjoins. the
Lot 3 .in question, and I would like to state that I have a full acre
of land and I 'm. not, as you stated in' yourr statement, all the surround-
ing. areas are a .half acre. . .and` I q.u.estion that statement; There are,
It' s a very strange piece of' property; it' s a 1.00 ' on Westphalia and
. then it goes back to 83 at .the :back. My understanding was that it
was planned . for a .driveway .and :I d.on:' t ,think' it' s big enough for a
house.. It would make our life disorderly. . .we would have to put up
fences; we would have to put up trees for privacy. It just doesn' t
make any kind of sense: I think that Southold Town has an one-acre
zoning .and I don't think we should change that for anyone. : I really
don't. I think our water supply is questionable, and _if we're going
to make these variances continuously, we're going to all be drinking
salt water. I think it would change the character of our neighborhood
because we _would be very crowded. It wouldn't look like what' s left
there on the road: The other very minor thing that I would oppose- is
that there are many large trees and there are a lot of birds in that
field, and I think that .any one of those five things should be enough
to. not grant the variance.
MR. CHAIRMAN,:' , Thank• you, Mr',. Rosenfeld. . .Would anybody .else
� c
Southold Town Board o appeals -17- March 23, B3 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3094 - NORTH FORK BAPTIST CHURCH, continued: )
MR. CHAIRMAN continued:
like to speak against the application? Mr. Horton, the board was
down there and they are aware of the survey. I was just wondering
if the Baptist Church could furnish- us with a survey indicating
the other two parcels. of property that are involved here that aren' t
mentioned .on this survey, and that' s the one with the house on it
and there' s another tangent piece that goes off on one side, is
there- not?
MR. HORTON: It' s on it. This is the parsonage here.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Right. It' s not shown as a lot on this subdivi-
sion though. It' s shown as'. just this lot with the parsonage cut out
and then .ybu '.have another tangent piece which comes out over here
which is. not shown on the survey.
MR. HORTON: I was not aware this was a contiguous piece. This
is all together?
MR. CHAIRMAN: It' s cut out.
MR. HORTON: Oh, you mean this should have been on it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. It should have been on it and this other
piece over here should have been on it.
MR. HORTON: Oh, this little piece here. Ok.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you think maybe you could get that for us, if
we recess the hearing here and you could re-present it to us at the
next regular meeting?
MR.. HORTON: Yeah, sure. You want this included, as on the
Lot No. 1?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yeah, and then include the acreage, what' s
involved .in that, and then whatever is on this tangent.
MR. HORTON: Ok. Sure. No problem. This used to be a legal lot.
The church bought. this property, this was a lot here; this was a lot
down to here. This was a lot down to here.
MRS. ROSENFELD: But it isn' t- now.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And it has been merged?
MR. HORTON: Yes, unless the surveyor is wrong, it ' s a half acre
lot there. Rosenfeld.
MR. LESSARD: When was it purchased, Gerry?
MR. HORTON: I think around 1976 . The church bought I believe '
two lots.
} Southold Town Board c kppeal's -A- Marc]i 23, . __83 Regular. Meeting
(.Appeal'No. 30 94 :- NORTH FORKBAPTIST CHURCH, c.on,t.inued: )
MR. LESSARD And. nothing has been done to it since?
MR. HORTON:' Nothing was done 'to :.it,. no. Now they're trying to
'get the three lots .and go back to two lots.
MR. LESSARD: Well they don' t have ,to .worry because it did.
MR. HORTON: I think it was three lots they bought. I was not
there then, so .I don' t know.
MR. CHAIRMAN:' But you' ll get that for 'u.s : and we ' ll recess
MR, HORTON: Well you all want this included in Lot No. 1?
MR. ,CHAIRMAN: Show us what else you `own ' in that particular area.
I_ don' t mean you .individually, I mean ,the church.
MR: HORTON: Ok.
MR.' CHAIRMAN: Thank you
MR. HORTON: And you .won' t need a new application or anything?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, we're. just going to recess this till the.-
next regularly-scheduled meeting. . Ok. Any-comm.ents from anyone?
. (None) Hearing. no further comments, I ' ll" make a motion recessing
this appli`cation -.until the next regularly-scheduled meeting.
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Second,
On motion by. Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.' Douglass , it was
RESOLVED, to recess the application of NORTH FORK BAPTIST CHURCH,
Appeal .No, 3094 , until the next- Regular -Meeting of this Board '
(tentatively April 20 , 1983) .
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehr.inger, Grig.onis, Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was - absent..)- - This resolution was .unani-
mous'ly adopted
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. . 3095 : Application for., GEORGE AND
SYBIL PENNY, by Skinny Dip Pools, Inc. , Box •108 , Mattituck, NY for a
Variance to the Zoning. Ordinance*, Article III, Section 1.00=32 for
permission to construct swimmingpool and fence in the front and side.
-yard areas at 9305 Soundview Avenue, Southold,, NY; County Tax Map '
Parcel ID. No. 1000-59-6-21.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 :45 o'clock. p,m'®- and
read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal
application.,
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have ,a copy of a sketch indicating the 20 ' by
4 -
S•o%ithold Town Board o- Appeals -19- March .23 , 1J83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3095 - GEORGE AND SYBIL PENNY, continued: )
MR. CHAIRMAN continued:
40 ' proposed pool to be placed approximately 45' from, it looks like
the north property line , and approximately 50 ' from their house.
Would you like to be heard in behalf of this application, Mr. Siemer-
ling? (No-comments . )
(Mr. Siemerling was present. )
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would anybody else like an opportunity to be heard
in behalf of the application?. (No one) . Would anybody like to speak
against the application? (None)
MR. HENRY LYTLE: I would just like to ask one question.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly.
MR. LYTLE: Is that the property that was put for the horse pen?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, this is on the other side of the house. • It
doesn' t show the distance from the pond but -it' s farther .from the
pond than the .house is. It' s the same piece of property but that' s
in the fr.ontyard area, this is toward the opposite side , to the
north, northeast. It shows north.
.MEMBER DOUGLASS : It' s northeast actually.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Siemerling. I would assume that this struc-
ture would not be enclosed in any way?
MR. SIEMERLING: (Nodded. no. )
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would anybody else like to speak regarding this
application? Any questions from any board members? (None) I' ll
make a motion closing the hearing .and reserving decision until later.
MEMBERS:' SAWICKI AND GRIGONIS : Second.
On motion by Mr. 'Goehringer, seconded by Messrs. Sawicki and
Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until a later
time .in the matter of Appeal No. 3095 , application of GEORGE AND.=SYBIL
PENNY.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted .
Southold Town Board o= Appeals -20- March 23 , iyiU Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No . 3096 . Application of FRANK AND
BRENDA CICHANOWICZ, Lupin Drive and Skunk Lane, Cutchogue, NY for
a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-32
and 100-35 for permission to construct accessory swimmingpool and
detached garage, and fence exceeding the maximum-permitted four-
feet in height within the fr.ontyard area at 255 Lupin Drive and
4135 Skunk Lane, Cutchogue, NY; Hickory Acres Map 3325 , Subd. Lots
1 and 2; County Tax Map Parcel ID Nos. 1000-97-9-15 and 16.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 :48 o 'clock p.m. and
read the legal. notice of hearing .in its entirety and appeal
application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a rather extensive landscaping
plan produced .on 2/21/83 .indicating the nature of the swimmingpool, .
garage and deck/patio areas and the chainlink fence , and I have a
copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this property and the
surrounding properties in the area. Would somebody like to be heard
in behalf of this application? (No one) . Would somebody like to
speak against the application? (No one) . Any questions from any
board members? (None) Hearing no questions, I' ll make a motion
closing the hearing and reserving decision until later.
On motion by Mr. Goehr.inger, seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
in the matter of Appeal No. 3096 , application of FRANK AND BRENDA
CICHANOWICZ .
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
PUBLIC RE-HEARING: Appeal No. 3085. (Rehearing of Appeal No. 3028) .
Application of ANN O' SULLIVAN, by Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq. , Main Road,
Southold, NY for a Variance for approval of access pursuant to New York
Town Law, Section 280A. Location of Parcel in Question: 5692 Main Bay-
view Road, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-78-4-41. 2.
The Chairman opened the. hearing at. 8 : 51 o' clock p.m. and
read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal
application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a sketch of a survey indicating
the right-of-way and we have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map
indicating this parcel and the parcel in the surrounding area. Mr.
Bruer, would you like to be heard?
RUDOLPH H. BRUER, ESQ. : Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and
members of the board. The original application here was made by the
O' Sullivans who are present tonight for the erection of a shed, a 12 '
by 20 ' shed. That appeal was granted with the idea or the condition
x
Southold Town Board o- Appeals -21- March 23 , 1�83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3085 - ANN O' SULLIVAN, continued: )
MR. BRUER continued:
that a 280-A access be granted. It was granted, subject to as you
read, an improvement of the road. As indicated before, the house,
or this particular right-of-way services two residences and that' s.
all that can ever be used on this particular piece of property and
it has been in service for over 50 years. The O' Sullivans own the
back piece of property and I believe her sister owns the front
piece, and it has been in the family for over all these years. I
have here pictures showing the right-of-way looking at it from the
subject property down to the main road (Bayview Road) and back again.
I would like to have this as part of the board ' s file, and I think
a viewing of those photographs would show that the road is more than
adequate considering the use of it to be for only two properties.
(Mr. Bruer submitted a total of 12 color photographs of the areas
in question for the record. )
MR. BRUER continued: I would like to point out further that in the
past, the roadway has been used for fire access to get to an adjoin-
ing landowners piece of property, and it was certainly adequate at
that time.
The economic hardship here. . .the O' Sullivans have received an
estimate where they were quoted a figure from $3,000 to $3 ,500 to
improve the roadway up to the conditions the board specified on the
last appeal.
Under the circumstances of the building being requested here
and for the purposes for which the application was originally requested ,
I think it' s excessive to ask the O' Sullivans to put this road into
the condition the board set forth in the last appeal.
As a practical matter, if there was ever any problem getting to
the subject property which, if you look at the survey, it' s very
close to Corey .Creek Lane. . . although it is a private road, the road
is in good condition and I 'm sure on their own, emergency vehicles
would use that access if needed. Again, I can only reiterate the
fact that the existing building has been there some 50 years. That
there is in existence Certificates of Occupancies for this building
dated I believe February 6th, 1981 for a private one-family dwelling
with an attached outside storage shed; that' s CO #Z10378 . That there
is a second CO for a private one-family dwelling and attached garage,
Z10382 it looks like. Both dated February 6th, one signed by Mr.
Horton and .one signed by Mr. Fisher. I believe the appeal should be
granted as requested.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Bruer. Would anybody else like
to be heard .in behalf of this application? (No one) Would anybody
like to speak against the application? (No one. )
MR. BRUER: Just one word-- on the prior appeal, the reasons the
O' Sullivans were. not here at that time , they had to be on the West
Coast and were not in the area. . .otherwise I'm sure they would have
been here.
Southold Town Board o appeals -22- March 23 , ] 3 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3085 - ANN OTSULLIVAN, continued: )
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Bruer. Unfortunately , our pictures
didn't come out as nice. Hearing no further comments , I' ll make a
motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
in the matter of Appeal No. 3085 , ANN O' SULLIVAN.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3086 . Application for PORT OF
EGYPT ENTERPRISES, INC. , 62500 Main Road , Southold, NY (by George A.
Cottral) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII, Sec-
tion 100-80A for permission to construct addition with an insuffi-
cient frontyard setback and to use proposed addition for retail sales
in this "C-Light Industrial" Zone. Location of Property: 62500
Main Road , Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-056-06-006 .
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 :57 o 'clock p.m. and
read the legal notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal
application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of sketch dated 12/20/79 indicating
the existing retail sales area of approximately 26 ' by 32 ' which is
No. 1, and a proposed retail sales area with addition, of a variable
40 ' by 301 . Store No. 1 having a sales area of 276 square feet and
a storage of 556 square feet. Store No. 2 having retail sales area
of 400 square feet with a storage area of 800 square feet. And I
have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this property
and the surrounding properties in the area. Would you like to be
heard in behalf of the application? (Nodded negatively. )
MR. GEORGE COTTRAL was present.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would anybody else like to speak in behalf of
the application? Anybody like to speak against the application?
(No one) . It. is my understanding that retail sales No. 1 is going
to remain as it is now?
MR. COTTRAL nodded affirmatively. '
MR. CHAIRMAN: Sales No. 2 would be what kind of business?
MR. COTTRAL: It' s proposed to be a retail fish market.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would there be extensive tanks and such .in the
storage area?
_ MR. COTTRAL: No.
Southold Town Board c kppeals -23- March 23, __ 83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3086 - PORT OF EGYPT ENTERPRISES, INC. , continued : )
MR. COTTRAL: We 're not proposing to go large scale.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. Any questions from any board members? (None)
Hearing no further questions , I ' ll make a motion closing the hearing
and reserving decision until later.
MEMBER SAWICKI: Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.
RESOLVED , to close the hearing and reserve decision until later
in the matter of Appeal No. 3086 , application of PORT OF EGYPT ENTER-
PRISES, INC.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by
Mr. Douglass, it was
RESOLVED, to approve the minutes of the meetings of this board
held :
February 4, 1983 Regular Meeting,
February 19 , 1983 Special Meeting
February 25 , 1983 Regular Meeting
March 12 , 1983 Special Meeting.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Douglass
and Sawicki . (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
RESPONSE TO INQUIRY: Appeal No. 2098 , Decision Rendered
February .5 , 1976 for William Jacobs application, with conditions.
Edward Hindermann, Building and Housing Inspector, and Mr.
Costello have requested a clarification of the subject appeal.
Member Grigonis , being a voting member in that decision, informed
the secretary that the relief granted was for two dwelling units
in the barn, in addition to the existing one-family dwelling use
in the principal residence , making a total of three dwelling units
on the subject parcel (2:3 acres) .
CLOSED SESSION FOR DELIBERATIONS : On motion by Mr. Goehringer,
seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, to recess this Regular Meeting temporarily for the
purpose of "deliberating in closed session" ; and at the end of
deliberations , the board will reconvene this Regular Meeting.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Douglass
and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent. )
Y �
Y . ~ ,Southold Town Board c kppeals -24- March 23, 83 Regular Meeting
The board deliberated in closed . session for approximately one
hour.
RECONVENE REGULAR MEETING: On motion by Mr. Douglass , seconded
by Mr. Goehringer, it was
RESOLVED, to reconvene the Regular Meeting.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki . (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
The Regular Meeting reconvened at 10 :05 p.m.
DATE FOR NEXT REGULAR MEETING: On motion by Mr. Grigonis ,
seconded by Mr. Sawicki , it was
RESOLVED, that the date and time of the. next Regular Meeting of
this board, be and hereby is scheduled for WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20 , 1983
commencing at 7 : 30 p.m.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Grigonis, Douglass
and Sawicki . (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATIONS - S.E.Q.R.A.
On motion by Mr. Douglass , seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, to declare the following Negative Environmental Declar-
ations pursuant to the regulations of the N.Y. S. Environmental Quality
Review Act:
APPEAL NO. 3097 - ROBERT AND JOANNE DeVOE.
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take-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
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Approval of access pursuant to New York
Town Law, Section 280-a. Right-of-Way located at the north side of
Main Road , Orient, NY.
} a
Sbuthold Town Board Appeals -25- March 23; 983 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declaration, Appeal No. ' 3097, DeVoe, continued: )
REASONS 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
implemented as planned.
(2) This relief requested by this application is.- not directly
related to construction.
f
APPEAL NO. : 3087.
PROJECT NAME: LULA MAE LATHAM.
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law u44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take 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 access pursuant to New York
Town Law, Section 280-a.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: Right-of-Way located off the south .side of
Main Road, :-Qrdent.
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been. sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
(2) The relief requested is. not directly for new construction.
3 ` Southold Town Board c appeals -26- March 23 , 191 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations , continued: )
APPEAL NO. : 3098.
PROJECT NAME: HENRY JOHN PAVLAK
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take 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: Accessory garage in sideyard area.
LOCATION OF PROJECT : Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as : Grand Avenue, Mattituck, NY.
REASON.(.S_) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
APPEAL NO. : 3099.
PROJECT NAME: DOROTHY REISE
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take 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: Tennis court and garage on vacant parcel.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: Hyatt Road (private) , Southold, NY.
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
' Southold Town Board o Lppeals -27_- March 23, 83 Regular Meeting
lEnvironmental Declarations , continued: )
APPEAL NO. : 3100
PROJECT NAME: ROGER L. MUNZ and VICTOR CATALANO.
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take 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: Use variance to permit boat sales in B-1
Zone.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as : 13175 Main Road, Mattituck, NY.
REASON (_S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
APPEAL NO. : 3101
PROJECT NAME: ROGER L. MUNZ AND VICTOR CATALANO.
This notice is' issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take 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: Special Exception for boat sales in B-1
Zone.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 13175 Main Road, Mattituck, NY.
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
" ' Southold Town Board o appeals -28- March 23 , 191 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations , continued: )
APPEAL NO. : 3102
PROJECT NAME: JOHN F. AND MARY F. McFELLY
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take 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: One-family- dwelling as proposed places
accessory building (existing) in frontyard area; and dwelling will
have insufficient sideyard setbacks.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel.
REA80N.(.S) °,SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
APPEAL NO. : 3104 .
PROJECT. NAME: ANNE POLASHOCK.
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law #44-4)
of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the State
Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law.
This board determines the within project not to have a significant
adverse effect on the environment. Also, please take 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• Replace and enlarge existing porch which
will exceed the 20o maximum-permitted lot coverage.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as : East Side of Third Street, New Suffolk, NY.
REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the Short Form has been sub-
mitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the
environment are likely to occur should this project be implemented as
planned.
ISouthold Town Board o: ppeals -29- March 23 , 33 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations , continued: )
(Appeal No. 3104 , Polashock, continued : )
(2) The premises in question does not adjoin a wetlands or
other environmentally critical area.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehr.inger, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki'. (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
APPLICATIONS FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS FOR NEXT REGULAR MEETING OF
APRIL 20 , 1983 :
On motion by Mr. Douglass , seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, that the following applications be and hereby are
SCHEDULED FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS to be held at the. next Regular Meeting
of this board, to wit, April 20 ; 1983 commencing at 7 :30 p.m. , and
that notice of same shall be advertised in the local and official
newspapers of the town pursuant to law:
Appeal No. 3097. ROBERT AND JO:ANNE DeVOE. Approval of Access
off the Main Road , Orient.
Appeal No. 3087. LULA MAE LATHAM. Approval of access off the
south side of Main Road, Orient.
Appeal No. 3098. HENRY JOHN PAVLAK. Grand Avenue, Mattituck,
Accessory garage in sideyard area.
Appeal No. 3099. DOROTHY REISE by Rial Realty Corp. Tennis
court and garage on vacant parcel. Hyatt
Road, Southold.
Appeal No. 3100. ROGER L. MUNZ and VICTOR CATALANO. Boat sales
in B-1 Zone. Main Road , Mattituck. (Variance)
Appeal No. 3101. ROGER L. MUNZ .and VICTOR CATALANO. (same)
(Special Exception)
Appeal No. 3102. JOHN F. AND MARY F. McFEELY. Insufficient side-
yard setback for new dwelling. Accessory build-
ing in frontyard area.
Appeal No. 3104 . ANNE POLASHOCK. Lot coverage variance. Replace
and enlarge existing porch. Third St, New Suff.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis , Douglass
and Sawicki . (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was unani-
mously adopted.
Southold Town Board o ppeals -30- March 23 , 1 3 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3084 . PATNICK REALTY.
Upon application of PATNICK REALTY CORP. , by Gary Flanner Olsen, Esq. ,
Main Road, Box 38 , Mattituck, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article VI, Section 100-60 permitting two residential dwellings in this
B-Zoned District. Location of Property: 69430 'Ma.in Road, Greenport, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-45-04-001.
The public hearing on this application was held on February 25 , 1983 ,
at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations and
further research.
The board made the following findings and determination:
By this appeal , appellant seeks to obtain a Certificate of Occupancy
for a single-family residence (converted from a garage) which has appar-
ently been used as such since 1968 . The principal building is a noncon-
forming .one-family residence preexisting the adoption of the zoning ordi-
nance in 1957 and has continuously been used as a one-family residence.
The premises in question is located at the south side of Main Road,
Greenport with a road frontage of 300 feet and contains an acreage of
2. 036 . The premises is zoned "B-Light Business . "
In researching town records concerning this property , it appears
Building Permit #11444Z and Certificate of Occupancy #Z10894 were
issued .on November 2 , 1981 and February 26 , 1982 , respectfully, for
" . . .a laundry room addition to existing dwelling. "
In considering this appeal, the board determines that under the
circumstances, the use applied for will not alter the essential char-
acter of the. neighborhood; that . the use will not prevent the orderly
and reasonable use of adjacent properties or of properties in adjacent
use districts; that the use will. not prevent the orderly and reasonable
use of permitted or legally established uses in the district wherein
the proposed use is to be located, or of permitted or legally estab-
lished uses .in adjacent-use districts; that the safety, health, wel-
fare, comfort and conveience and order of the town will not be '
adversely affected by the proposed use and its location; and that
the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance ,
as noted below.
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3084 , application of PATNICK REALTY
requesting approval of the conversion of a garage into the one-
family residential structure. now existing on the premises , BE
AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE ,FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
(1) Any change of use of either or both of the existing
buildings shall be subject to conformance with all zoning regula-
tions , and laws subsequently adopted to this decision; and no
more than one use shall be permitted upon the premises except as
permitted by this variance (i .e. no business and residential mixed) ;
(2) Review by the Suffolk County Planning Commission pursuant
$au,thold Town Board o_ _,ppeals -31- March 23 , 1 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3084 - PATNICK REALTY, continued: )
to Sections 1323, . et seq. of the Suffolk County Charter.
Location of Property 69430 Main Road, Greenport, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-45-05-001.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Grigonis , Doug-
lass and Sawicki. (Member Doyen of Fishers Island was absent. ) This
resolution was unanimously adopted.
Member Goehringer left the room. at this time.
RRSERVED DECISION! Appeal -Na.. -3091. _ Application of JOHN AND
LINDA KOWALSKI, 404 Atlantic 'Averiue; Greenport, NY for a Variance to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for a Certificate
of Occupancy of Lot No. 3 of Minor Subdivision of Christine King,
Map No. 117 , with an adjustment of lot line between Lots 3 and 4 ,
leaving insufficient road frontage for Lot No. 3 and leaving an
insufficient sideyard setback from the existing dwelling on Lot
No. 4 . Each parcel contains an area exceeding one acre. Location
of Property : West Side of Ole Jule Lane, Mattituck, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000=114-12-013 . 3 and 013. 4.
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:
By this appeal, appellants seek to obtain a . Certificate of Occu-
.pancy for: Lot No. 3 of Minor Subdivision Map #117 of Christine King
with a change in the position of the lot line separating the parcel
in question and the parcel abutting on the south (Lot No. 4) . Parcel
No. 4 has constructed .thereupon a one-story framed dwelling set back
approximately 100 feet from from Ole Jule Lane, set back approximately
89 feet from the southerly property line. Applicants propose a 10-foot
sideyard setback from the northerly property line of Lot 4 to attain
as much road frontage as practical. Lot No. 3 is vacant, having an
acreage of 1. 793 and frontage along Ole Jule Lane of 100 feet, and
thence widens out to 130 feet, 275 feet back from Ole Jule Lane. Lot
No. 4 has an acreage of 2. 348 and frontage along Ole Jule Lane of
150 feet. Appellants have received approval from the Southold Town
Planning Board of the within proposal at a Regular Meeting held on
March 7 , 1983.
It is noted for the record that the board members are familiar
with the statements raised at the public hearing held March 23 , 1983 ,
objecting to this application.
It is the opinion of the board that the changes proposed will
not alter the character of the neighborhood; that the subject parcel
will conform in all other respects with zoning; and that the plan
as submitted is the most practical under the circumstances.
s �
.., lei _..... .
Soifthold Town Board of Appeals -32- March 23 , .1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3091 - John and Linda Kowalski, continued : )
In considering this appeal , the board determines that the
variance request is not substantial; that the circumstances herein
are unique and practical difficulties have been shown; that by
allowing the variance no substantial detriment to adjoining proper-
ties would be created; that the difficulty cannot be obviated by
a method feasible to appellants other than a variance; that. no
adverse effects will be produced on available governmental faci=
lities of any increased population; that the relief requested will
be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and
that the interests of justice will be served by allowing the variance.
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Sawicki , it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3091, application of JOHN AND LINDA
KOWALSKI, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED AS APPLIED FOR.
Location of Property: West Side of Ole Jule Lane , Mattituck,
NY; County Tax Map Parcels ID No. 1000-114-12-13. 3 and 13. 4 .
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Grigonis , Douglass and
Sawicki . (Members Doyen and Goehringer were absent. )
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. FL-13 . JAMES AND DORIS IDLER.
Upon application of JAMES AND DORIS IDLER, 27 Anoatok Drive, Hunting-
ton, NY 11743 for a Variance to the Flood Plain Management Law, Chapter 46 ,
Section 46-7 for permission to utilize area below the eight-foot minimum
required elevation for placement of electrical utilities and equipment in
this A-7 Flood Zone. Location of Property: 1010 Maple Lane, East Marion,
NY; Cleaves Point Filed Map 4650 , Subd. Lot 60; County Tax Map Parcel ID
No. 1000-035-05-027.
The public hearing on this application was held earlier this evening,
at which time the hearing was declared closed, pending deliberations.
The board made the following findings and determination:
By this application, applicants seek permission to place electrical
utilities within basement area below the eight-foot elevation above mean
sea level. The premises in question is located at the westerly side of
Maple Lane , East Marion, and is located partially in an A-7 Flood Zone
and partially in a B Flood Zone. Applicants propose to locate the
utilities a minimum of 20" from the foundation floor, which appears to
be approximately four feet above mean sea level. The board finds upon
viewing the area there are several homes in the neighborhood of the
subject parcel. The dwellings constructed on these lots are on lots
of a similar size , and the dwellings constructed thereon are constructed
below the base flood level.. The board therefore finds that the lot in
question meets the standards set forth in Section 46-16A of the Code
Southold Town Board of mppeals -33- March 23, 19di Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. FL-13 - JAMES AND DORIS IDLER, continued : )
since it contains an area of less than one-half acre and is contiguous
to and surro.uhded by lots with existing structures constructed below
the base flood level.
In passing upon this application, the board has considered all
technical evaluations; all relevant factors; all standards specified
in the Code; and all of the applicable factors contained in Section
46-15B, subdivisions (1) to (11) , inclusive, of the Code.
The board further finds and determines that: (1) there is a good
and sufficient cause for the grant of this variance; (2) a failure to
grant the variance would result in exceptional hardship to the appli-
cant; (3) the grant of a variance will not result in increased flood
heights , or additional threats to public safety, or extraordinary
public expense, or create nuisances , or cause fraud, or victimize the
public, or conflict with existing local laws or rules or regulations.
On motion by Mr. Douglass, seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, that JAMES AND DORIS IDLER, the applicants herein, be
and hereby ARE GRANTED a variance from the provisions of the Flood
Damage Prevention Law of the Town of Southold to construct a one-family
private dwelling with utilities .in the basement area AS APPLIED FOR,
on premises located .on the westerly side of Maple Lane, East Marion,
NY, and more particularly identified as County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000-35-05-27;
AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that pursuant to the provisions of
Section 46-16F of the Code, the applicant is hereby given notice that
the structure for which this variance is granted will be permitted to
be built with the utilities in the basement area below the base flood
elevation, and that the cost of flood insurance will be commensurate
with the increased risk resulting from the reduced lowest floor eleva-
tion;
AND IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Secretary to this Board
transmit copies of this determination to the applicants and to the
Town Building Department/.Inspector.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Grigonis, Douglass and Sawicki.
(Members Doyen and Goehringer were absent. ) This resolution was
unanimously adopted.
At this point in time, Member Goehringer returned .to the meeting.
Southold Town Board of Appeals -3 4-
March 23 , 1983 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3088 .
Upon application of JOHN AND FRANCES DiVELLO, Drawer 1402 , Westphalia
Road, Mattituck, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VIII,
Section 100-80A for permission to construct one-family dwelling in this
"C-Light Industrial" Zone. Location of Property: 605 Mary' s Road (a/k/a
305 Hill Street) , Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-140-02-
032.
The public hearing on this application was held earlier this evening,
at which time the hearing was declared closed, pending deliberations .
The board made the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, applicants seek permission to utilize the east
end of the subject premises for one-family residential use and to con-
struct a one-family modular home. The premises in question is vacant
land, containing 1.426 acres, and is zoned "C-Light Industrial. " Abut-
ting the premises on the north are the Long Island Railroad and several
homes in the A-Residential District. Abutting the premises on the east
are Mary' s Avenue (Road) and an A-Residential Zone.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the use
applied for will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood;
that the use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adja-
cent properties or of properties in adjacent use districts; that the
use will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of permitted or
legally established uses in the district wherein the proposed use is
to be located , or of permitted or legally established uses in adjacent-
use districts; that the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience
and order of the town will not be adversely affected by the proposed
use and its location; and that the interests of justice will be served
by allowing the variance , as noted below.
On motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED , that Appeal No. 3088 , application of JOHN AND FRANCES
DiVELLO for permission to construct modular home and use same as a
one-family residence , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOW-
ING CONDITION•
That only 40 ,000 square feet shall be applied for residential
use (around house) .
Location of Property: 605 Mary' s Road (a/k/a 305 Hill Street) ,
Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-140-02-032.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis , Doug-
lass and Sawicki . (Member Doyen was absent. ) This resolution was
unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of Deals -35 March 23 , 19 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3096 .
Upon application of FRANK AND BRENDA CICHANOWICZ, Lupin Drive and
Skunk Lane, Cutchogue , NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article
III, Sections 100-32 and 100-35 , for permission to construct accessory
swimmingpool , detached garage, and fence exceeding the maximum permitted
four feet within the frontyard area at 255 Lupin Drive and 4135 Skunk
Lane, Cutchogue , NY; Hickory Acres Map 3325 , Subd. Lots 1 and 2; County
Tax Map Parcel ID Nos . 1000-97-9-15 and 16 .
. The public hearing on this application was held earlier this even-
ing, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending deliberations.
The board made the following findings and determination :
By this appeal, applicants seek permission to construct an inground
swimmingpool in .an area in front (westerly) of applicants ' one-family
dwelling and a 20 ' by 20 ' garage structure abutting the brick patio of
the subject pool at the. northeast corner. The proposed pool is 20 ' by
40 ' , brick patio area 2800 square feet and garage structure 400 square
feet. Upon .inspecting the property, the board finds that only that
area westerly of 'the existing residence is practical due to the loca-
tion of the cesspools and the position of the residence. The premises
in question is a corner lot as defined by Section 100-119A, fronting
along Bay Avenue (a/k/a Skunk Lane) 125 feet and along Lupin Drive a
total of 327. 38 feet. The lots in question are part of a major sub-
division entitled, "Hickory Acres , " Map No. 3325 , subdivision lots
No. 1 and 2.
For the record it is. noted that applicants originally proposed
a. 5 ' high fence along the frontyarrd area at the northerly property
line; however , it is the understanding of the board members that this
proposal is. no longer anticipated .and applicants will be conforming
with the zoning code with a maximum-height requirement for fences of
four feet.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is..not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zon-
ing code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the
variance no substantial detriment to adjoining properties will .be
created; that the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible
for appellants other than a variance; that the relief requested will
be in harmony with and promote the general purposes .of zoning; and
in view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and in considera-
tion of all the above factors, the interest of justice will be served
by allowing the variance , as indicated. below.
On motion by Mr.. Grigonis , seconded by Mr. Sawicki , it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3096 , application of FRANK AND BRENDA
CICHANOWICZ , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CON-
DITIONS :
1. That the fence shall not exceed the height of four feet;
2 . That the pool must meet all setback requirements for a
y. 11
.Eloutjiold Town Board of _ peals -3'_6 March 23 , 19 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3096 - FRANK AND BRENDA CICHANOWICZ, continued : )
principal use;
3. That the accessory structure be used for "pool use" .(not
to be used for housing of automobiles or for. living quarters , etc. )
Location of Property: 255 Lupin Drive, Cutchogue , NY; Hickory
Acres . Subdivision Map No. 3325 , Lots 1 and 2; County Tax Map Parcel
ID Nos. 1000-97-09-015 and 016 .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doug-
lass and Sawicki . (Member Doyen of Fishers Island was absent. ) This
resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION : Appeal No. 3095 .
Upon application for GEORGE AND SYBIL PENNY, by Skinny Dip Pools
Inc . , Box 108 , Mattituck, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article III, Section 100-32 for permission to construct swimmingpool
.and fence in the front and side yard areas at 5305 Souridview Avenue,
Southold, NY; County Tax. Map Parcel ID No. 1000-59-6-21.
The public hearing concerning 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:
By this appeal, applicants seek permission to construct a 20 ' by
40 ' ingro.uhd swimmingpool in an area easterly of applicants ' existing
dwelling structure deemed to be front and side yards. The pool struc-
ture will be set back from the easterly property line a minimum of 45
feet and approximately 50 feet from the residence. Upon viewing the
property in question, the board finds there is minimal rearyard area
available for new construction and therefore the rearyard would not
be practical. The premises contains an area of 1. 78 acres with 200 '
frontage along Souridview Avenue and approximately 399 ' frontage along
Great Pond. Under the circumstances , the board agrees with the
reasoning .of applicants .
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is. not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zon-
ing code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the
variance no substantial detriment to adjoining properties will be
created; that the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible
for appellants other than a variance; that the relief requested will
be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and
in view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and in considera-
tion of all the above factors , the interest of justice will be served
by allowing the variance , as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Sawicki , seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
Southold Town Board of .)eals -37-f March 23 , 19� Regular Meeting
'(Appeal No. 3095 - GEORGE AND SYBIL PENNY, continued: )
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3095 , application for GEORGE AND
SYBIL PENNY for permission to locate inground swimmingpool and fence
in the front and side yard areas , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED AS
APPLIED FOR.
Location. of. Property: 9305 So.undview Avenue, .Southold, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-59-06-021.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehriinger, Grigonis ,
Douglass and' Sawicki. (Member Doyen of Fishers Island was absent. )
This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3089.
Upon application of ANN WYDEN .and PEGGY HELLER, One Harris Court,
Great Neck, NY 11021, for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article
III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct screen-porch addition
with a reduced rearyard setback at 2015. Bay Avenue, East Marion, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-31-17-002 .
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 :
By this appeal, applicants seek permission to construct an 8 ' by
9 '4 " screened-in porch addition at the rear northeasterly corner of
the existing_ one-story, one-family bungalow. The premises in question
contains an area of approximately 4 ,000 square feet, with a frontage
along Bay Avenue of 69 feet and an average depth of 64 . 75 feet. The
premises fronts Marion Lake on two sides and is improved with the
one-story bungalow with small front porch and accessory shed which is
located in the rearyard approximately 10 ' from the shoreline of Marion
Lake. The proposed screened=.,porch addition will be no closer than
13 feet from its nearest point with the shoreline. The board finds
that applicants ' reasoning is not unreasonable under the circumstances.
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zon-
ing code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the
variance. no substantial detriment 'to adjoining properties will be
created; that the difficulty cannot be obviated by a method feasible
for appellants other than a variance; that the relief requested will
be .in harmony with and promote the general purposes of zoning; and
in view of the manner in which the difficulty arose and in considera-
tion of all the above factors , the interest of justice will be served
by allowing the variance, as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Douglass , seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was
RESOLVED , that Appeal No. 3089, application for ANNE WYDEN
and PEGGY HELLER for permission to construct an 8 ' by 914 " screen
- porch addition, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOW-
.Sou*old Town Board of _ _peals -38- March 23 , 19 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3089 - ANNE WYDEN and PEGGY HELLER, continued: )
ING CONDITION:
That the subject addition shall always remain screened and
shall never be closed with windows or .walls.
Location of Property : 2015 Bay Avenue, East Marion, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000- 031-17-002.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki. (Member Doyen of Fishers Island was absent. )
This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Being there was no other business properly coming before the
board at this time, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned.
Respectfully submitted,
On�da F. Kdwal i , Secretary
Southold Town Board of Appeals
(As to pp. 10 - 38)
Eileen M. Carey, Temp. Secretary
(As to pp. 1 - 10)
APPROVED
Gerard P. hring , Chairman
�(P 10-3 )
Charles G .igoni , JrV RECEIVED AND FILED BY
Chairman Pro Tem (PP. 1-1`0 ' inc . , T11E S®UT-HOLD TOWN CLERK
and pp. 31-33 .incl. )
DATE 41.qA.f 33 FOUR g 1.5 fP A