HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-02/04/1983 T
s
o
Southold Town Board of Appeals
STATE ROAD 25 MAIN ROAD - 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 M. I N U T E S
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI REGULAR MEETING
FEBRUARY 4 , 1983
A Regular Meeting of the Southold Town Board .of Appeals was held
on Friday, February 4 , 1983 at 7 : 30 .o'clock p.m. at the Southold Town
Hall,. Main Road, Southold, New York.
Present were : Gerard P. Goehr.inger, Chairman; Charles Grigonis ,
Jr. ; Serge Doyen, Jr. ; Robert J. Douglass and Joseph H. Sawicki. Also
present were: Mr. Victor Lessard, Administrator (Building Department) ;
Mr. Henry Lytle (Southold-Peconic Seniors Club) ; Mrs. Lydia Totura
(for the Traveler-Watchman) ; Mr. Jeff Miller (for the Suffolk Times) .
The Chairman called the meeting to order at 7 :30 p.m.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3066. Application of FRANK .TARULLI,
1540 :North Bayview Road, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30 for permission to construct
accessory horse stable and stable one horse for personal use in this
A-Residential District at 1540 North Bayview Road, Southold, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-79-06-002. 1.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7 : 32 . p.m. and read the legal
notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a copy of a survey from Young & Young,
L.S. dated December 27, 1982' indicating applicant' s proposed loca-
tion for the barn and the size of the property which is 1.485 acre
(64 ,686 . 6 square feet) . We also have a copy of the Suffolk County
Tax Map of this parcel and the surrounding area. Mr. Tarulli, would
you like to be heard in behalf of your application?
FRANK TARULLI: Mr. - Chairman and board members , I did want to
say a few words just to more or less satisfy myself and the board as
to the appeal that I had filed for, and that was that certainly I
have had, as I stated, the intent that over the years that I had the
property in the area that I would be able to maintain a horse on the
Southold Town Board oz Appeals - 2- February Y , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3066 - Frank Tarulli , continued : )
MR. TARULLI continued:
property, and certainly I have more or less inquired as to the proce-
dures and what the Town would require to maintain this property and
in stating so I have purchased a tractor, pick-up truck. . . I have done
about everything as far as even the land being cleared and hopefully
as I would to state that I certainly .intend to maintain a respectable
and add to the community as an asset for the area. I feel that you
might say, I'm not in a year-round residency now but I have been com-
ing out to Southold for over 30 years , so I'm aware of the area and
it has been. . . as I say, it is my intent that in the next couple of
years to retire here for that purpose, and I do hope that in the
board' s decision that certainly I would love to have it approved.
At the same time I would like to add that I prefer somewhere along
the line that maybe the board reconsider some more flexible means
whereby we could have, let' s say an area that we could . . or to say
that if you have an area and a half or two acres, whatever, the
requirements may be that we all know where we stand and we can or
we can' t have them. So I thank you for your attention and I appre-
ciate it. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would
like to be heard in behalf of the application? Anybody like to be
heard against the application? You are aware, Mr. Tarulli , of
your neighbor' s objecting to your keeping of the horse?
MR. TARULLI : No, sir, I'm not.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Szybowski . . . I. guess on the one side on the
west of your property.
MR. TARULLI: Mr. Szybowski?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. It says :
" . . . I , Water Szybowski , residing at 84 West Poplar Street, Floral
Park, New. York, and owner of the premises situated on the north side
of North Bayview Road adjacent to property owned by Frank Tarulli , of
1540 North Bayview Avenue, Southold, New York, and who applied for a
variance under Section III, Section 100-30 (2) C, ask that this variance
be denied on the grounds that the housing of a horse would cause
rodents , and create dirt, refuse , and an unplesant odor to adjacent
property. This would reduce the value of the property. . . . " And it
was signed by him.
MR. TARULLI: No, sir, I was aware of it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Also I would like to briefly read the denial which
you received from Mr. Hindermann, which says , " . . . it is returned here-
with and disapproved on the following grounds : insufficient lot area
to keep a horse -- total lot area is 64 ,686 square feet. Existing
dwelling requires 40 ,000 square feet. The keeping of a. horse requires
40 ,000 square feet. Lot area is short 15 , 313 . 4 square feet. . . . " Is
there .anybody else that would like to be heard in behalf of this
application? Sir, please state your name.
Southold Town Board oL Appeals -3- FebruaLY 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3066 - Frank Tarulli , continued: )
JERRY GRASECK: I would like to submit this, the building code law,
on the premises of all horse owners. (Mr. Graseck submitted a copy of
Page 10025 , Section 100-30) .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Graseck is referring is page 10025 , Article III,
which reads, " . . . (5) Horses and domestic animals other than household
pets, provided that such shall not be housed within forty [40] feet of
any lot line. Housing for flocks of more than twenty-five (25) fowl
shall not be constructed within fifty [50] feet of any line.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you like to be heard, and please use the mike.
MR. GRASECK: Well; I rest my case .on what you have there for a'
building (zoning) code.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Did you look at the other part of the code , sir?
MR. GRASECK: Yes , I did. As for residential use, accessory use.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tarulli?
MR. TARULLI : May I ask, Mr. Chairman, that my variance or appeal
has been denied?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No, no. It was denied by the Building Inspector.
MR. TARULLI: Oh, I'm sorry. I thought you had said it was denied.
MR. CHAIRMAN: No , that' s for the audience to be aware of the fact
that how you got here, what were the reasonings behind it and how we
interpret how the law was .interpreted by the Building Inspector. Ok?
Anyone else 'like to be heard either pro or con on this issue? Yes, would
you state your name and use the mike?
KATHLEEN GRASECK: My. name is Kathleen Graseck. I'm a neighbor. of
Mr. Tarulli. " I live on North Bayview Road, and there are quite a few
neighbors of mine who own horses and I don' t think there has been any
depreciation of property value in that area. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: All right, hearing. no further comm.ents. . .
MR. TARULLI: May I just add one thing. My wife just pointed out
what the area we were talking about. . .as far as the gentleman who owns
or made the statement as to being against this request, That piece of
land that I know of is still and has been vacant for many, many years ,
.and as far as the distance from that land, certainly, I think that
should. be taken .into consideration. It is quite a distance. I think
it' s over 70 feet or 75 feet from the property line. And there is no
one there. now. . . it' s just open land.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Any further comments? (None) Hearing
no further comments , I' ll make a motion closing the hearing and reserv-
--- ing decision until later.
f
Southold Town Board oL Appeals -4- Februu-1 4, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3066 —Frank Tarulli , continued: )
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later in
the matter of the application of FRANK TARULLI, Appeal No. 3066 . .
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
(The Chairman announced at the end of the hearing that any person
desiring to know the results of the hearing tonight may call either .
the office of the Board of Appeals , Building Department or Supervisor
.on Monday , February 7th. )
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3070 . Application of LAST ASSO-
CIATES, Box 796 , Cutchogue, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance ,
Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct one-family
dwelling with reduced front and rear yard setbacks upon parcel located
on the north side of' Birch Avenue, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Par-
cel ID No. 1000-077-001-021.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7 : 45 p.m. and read -the legal
notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have a sketch of the building permit of what
the applicant proposes and. there appears to be a 35 ' setback from
Birch Avenue and 33 ' rearyard setback. , I also 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, Mr. Murdock?
LAWRENCE MURDOCK: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First I would like
to address the property in general . This property in Goose Bay
Estates is a small subdivision. The subdivision is approximately 40
years old, maybe a little older.' Most of the lots in the subdivision
are 20-foot lots that have been put together_ in some combination of
20-foot. This particular lot covers two and one-half lots which has
a 501. front. The area is a nice , residential , recreational area. The
intent of myself and my son, and Last Associates is a very simple
derivative of the first two letters of Lawrence , who is me, and the .
first two letters of Stephen, who is my son; and we are Last Associates
for the purpose of building this house. We have formed a general
partnership. I don' t know what the future will be. My son Stephen
has lived in the area approximately 15-16 years ago along with his
mother, and is very well aware of the character of the area and I'd
like to put everybody' s fears to rest that this is. not a monster
development corporation coming in to take over all of Goose Bay
Estates and build a castle for the world to live in. The mere fact
` ' that this application deals only with a front and rear yard setback
T
Southold Town Board of Appeals -5- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 - Last Associates, continued : ) ,
MR. MURDOCK continued:
is credence to my intentions. The property being only 50 ' in width
in order to. comply with the town building codes , the house was
designed to have a minimum of width so that we complied at least
with the two sideyard code conditions . The house that we designed
is a one-bedroom house. It ' s designed with the hope of being either
a retirement home or at best a vacation home. I have four adult
children. I don' t know yet which way we're going to go with the
house . We would like to build this house. There is a loft that
could possibly be construed as being a sleeping area, and would be
available for somebody as a sleeping Iarea; .however, would not have
any partitions . It will just be insulated and there will be sheet-
rock covering the insulation just to keep from. looking at bare
insulation.
There are . . .I've received copies of two objections from the
residents of the area. One objection being from a Mr. George Dalton
who apparently lives next door to the property, and his concern is
for the placement of the sewage system .and . the well. That' s not a
province of mine nor a province of the Building Department or a
province of the Zoning Board of Appeals or province of the Planning
Board. The Suffolk County Health Department comes out, looks at a
piece of property, and they determine where these facilities should
go. Myself , I would prefer to have the cesspool system in front of
the house— it ' s less costly in 'construction. And I would like to
have it in the front and cover it with my driveway and have every-
thing taken care of. The Health Department says we will put the
well in the front and the septic system in the back, and we have no
choice. With all due respect to the neighbors' concern, I know of
no way we could answer his concern because it' s not in our province
nor any member of the town' s province.
The second letter was from again another one of the neighbors ,
who says that he would not be able to attend the original hearing
scheduled for January 13th and he only opposes the petition because
of a lack of information .on his part and he requests time to get
sufficient information. . .whatever that would be.
Again I would like everybody who certainly lives in the area
if there is anybody in the audience here, to be comforted in the
fact that this is merely a small house in a small community, and it
is designed to fit thoroughly in the community and not be obtrusive.
It like most houses there will be on -a so-called substandard lot.
In terms of this particular application, I would now say that
we are addressing Article III, Section 100-31 which pertains to the
front and rear yard sizes. I believe that is the only area that
should be eligible for discussion or consideration by this board.
Merely whether strict application of that code would prohibit me
from using this property—not only me but would just about prohibit
anybody else. As I said earlier , the house was designed to fit
-, within the plot limitations in relationship to sideyards. The town
code calls for a 50-foot frontyard. . .a 50-foot rearyard. That would
Southold Town Board or Appeals -6- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 - Last Associates, continued: )
MR. MURDOCK continued:
not leave but 20 feet of buildable space. Even if that were the
width, it would be impossible to construct a house with 20 feet.
The approvals that have already gone before on this property
give credence to the fact that strict adherence of this section
would be a hardship in that the Board of Health approval was granted
to the current owner, a Mrs . Norma Bunnell . The one other reason
that the application was turned down was on the access , and under the
Code of the Town of Southold, to what is considered 280-a access is
normally handled by the Zoning Board of Appeals. . .but since it' s a
filed subdivision it is now handled by the Planning Board. The
Planning Board, on a letter dated October 29 , 1982 in answering a
request from a prospective purchaser, a man by the name of John
Davis who is the inspector, made recommendations to the Planning Board
on achieving access to the property. The Planning Board granted
approval to the person who requested the approval on the 29th day of
November, 1982. Neither of these people who at separate times had
tried to deal with the layers of interpretation of codes have been
able to successfully take the time and the patience to do these
things. Respectfully if this application were to be denied , there
would be no house built there. The property would again go back to
Mrs. Bunnell and that is proof in itself of the fact that a denial
of this application would provide a hardship -- and a financial
hardship to the owner of the property. The front yard setback of
35 feet. . .there is only one house on Birch Avenue that is two blocks
away. It does. not front .on Birch Avenue. It appears that that has
35 feet sideyard, which in this instance would correspond to a front
yard setback. That ' s the only residence that touches Birch Avenue.
I think it ' s the .only application of sideyard, frontyard that would
apply to it.
Again I think that' s the only part to address in this hearing. . .
it ' s just the interpretation of Section 100-31. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there .anybody else that would. like
to be heard in behalf of the application? Anybody like to be heard
against the application? Would you use the mike, please, and state
your name.
GEORGE DALTON: My name is George Dalton and I'm an adjacent
property owner. I had asked originally for an adjournment .of the
hearing because I did. not receive notice through. no fault of Mr. Mur-
dock. It simply was not forwarded to a new address of mine. But in
any event, I decided to come tonight after speaking with the secretary
because I was told that you would hear information and that you would
reserve decision on it permitting me to submit additional information
to the board for consideration. . However, I would like to point out
just a couple of major areas that I find to be a problem. Mr. Murdock
has addressed the problem with the well, and while he is correct that
that is a Health Department concern. . .the Health Department according
to the survey that was in the file did not verify the location of my
well point. I was able to recently have a plumber find my well point.
Southold Town Board of peals -7- February 4 .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 .- Last Associates, continued: )
MR. DALTON continued .
And I would like to submit to the board ' a sketch; and it is a rough
sketch admittedly because I did not have a whole lot of time, showing
that my well point actually goes toward Mr. Murdock' s property; and
rather than being on the front side of my house, it' s actually much
closer to his cesspool than the survey which was reviewed by the Health
Department, - shows. My well point is approximately 322' away from my
rear property line to Mr. Murdock. His cesspool is another 30 feet
approximately, and that would put the well and cesspool approximately
622 feet apart. Health Department regulations specify for a minimum
of 100 feet. If I can submit this to the board-
MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly.
(Mr. Dalton submitted a copy of a rough -sketch mentioned above
for the file. )
MR. DALTON: Once again, I plan on checking with the Health
Department and providing them with updated information. I also have
a survey that was done by a prior applicant in which the Health
Department stated on the survey that the information as to my own
well facilities were not available, nor did the Health Department
ever check with, me on it .in regards to Mr. Murdock' s application. I
also would like to submit this earlier survey which was done in 1980
and it has clearly specified on it that the facilities, my well
facilities were not verified by the Health Department; nor is there
any indication. on Mr. Murdock' s survey which you already have a copy
of, 'that the Health Department did verify where my well is located.
After I check with the Health Department and provide them with
this. new information on it;' I've been told that they will review it
again and verify where these facilities are located. Now what Mr.
Murdock has stated that that should not be consideration from this
board,. . . I have to disagree with him there because the Health Depart-
ment, if they should change the location of the sewage system, that
my very well change the design of his house or possibly the location
of his house,, which could conceivably change the front and rear yard
setbacks as .well as the side yard setbacks, so I think that it is
pertinent for this board to consider that.
My second area of concern is the slope of the area. At Mr. Mur-
dock' s property line , at Birch Avenue, there is .approximately a 36 '
elevation, sloping down to my property , which is a 20 ' elevation,
and that ' s at the rear of ,my property line. That' s roughly 16 ' feet
of slope over 120 , over an area of 1201. long which as you 'can well
imagine is a pretty steep slope. That area right now is covered
with trees and underbrush, and that dissipates any ground surface
water drainage, so I don',t have a drainage problem. I am very con-
cerned that if that area is cleared of the underbrush that I will
have a severe drainage problem. Mr. Murdock mentioned another house
on Birch Avenue, which is about a quarter block away. . .the .slope is
no where near the slope that we' re talking about right now.
On this point also , I would like the board to give me some.
additional time. I 'm not sure how I would go about it, but I would
- Southold Town Board of ppeals -8- February 1983 Regular Meeting -
(Appeal No. 3070 .- Last Associates , continued: )
MR. DALTON continued:
like to have some analysis done of what effect the clearing of the
underbrush and the trees are going to have on the type of drainage
and surface runoff. I don' t want my cellar flooding.
In this appeal, Mr. Murdock sites several points. He describes
a unique hardship that he has, and that existing dwellings in the
area are 35 ' or less. At least as far as my own dwelling is concerned
that' s incorrect. And I'm not sure that. . . there are no other dwellings
on Birch Avenue aside from the one that is a block away, and I have
absolutely no idea what the setbacks are there. But at the very least
I would think that it would be beneficial, since he is about to start
a precedent. . .there are other properties and other lots available that
unapproved at this point. Since Mr. Murdock' s house will be the first
one on Birch Avenue in that specific area,. he is about to set a
precedent, if you should give him this exception. I would think that
. . .there are a number of houses along Oak Avenue that' s .in a similar
position to mine. . would think that it would be beneficial to all
of the neighbors along that, if the rearyard setback is increased and
the frontyard setback decreased. . .in other words , Mr. Murdock rather
than having a 35 ' frontyard setback maybe he could have a 201. front
yard setback if you should grant the application for the house at all.
I think if you give him the precedent of setting a 35 ' frontyard
setback and a 33' rearyard setback, you are going to set a dangerous
setback for the 'rest of the residents. There has been no analysis as
to where.-:their wells are, what type of drainage that would cause, and
you're also just putting .the houses close together,. whereas if you
moved the house closer to Birch, you give all the neighbors a little
bit more space. There is . a statement in the_ file that views with the
tidal wetlands area. On the survey ,that' s attached to the front of
the . file also sites to an unnamed street. That .unnamed street was
underwater .when I was there about 15 minutes ago. ' I don' t when that
survey was done. I imagine it was quite some time ago. But the
tidal wetlands law requires that any property within 300 feet of
tidal wetlands, that any 'kind of building go before the Department of
Environmental Conservation. The statement I believe is inaccurate.
I 'm not a surveyor , but just according to the measurements , my
property line lengthwise .is 120 '.feet. I understand that Oak Avenue
. is 20 feet, and the property, across the street from me, which is
owned by LaDuns is 140 feet, which comes to a total of 280 , which
is .under that 300 ' minimum required by the N.Y.S. D.E.C. They may
have an interest in it; they may. not. But I think that that law is
in effect for specific reasons.
Mr. Murdock mentioned the access road, and Mr. Davis ' report to
the Planning Board. It was very .unclear as to Mr. Davis specific
recommendations as to how the access road should be improved. It is
quite overgrown. . . it' s_a dirt road is basically what it amounts to.
There has been no statement as to who will do that, whether Mr. Mur- '
dock will take it upon himself to improve that access road. I don't
believe it' s Southold Town property. I believe it' s a private road
owned by Goose Bay Community Association. In informal discussions at
least, I don' t believe the association was about to improve that road.
` Southold Town Board of ..,?peals -9 February 4 , ._ .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 - Last Associates, continued: )
MR. DALTON continued:
We do maintain our roads voluntarily. We each own halfway into the
road and we maintain them on a voluntary basis , and I would like it
clarified as to who will take care of those access roads.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Dalton, that is not the purview of this board.
That' s the Planning Board' s issue because it' s within the subdivision.
MR. DALTON: All right. Thank you. I think that' s about the only
statements I have. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to speak
against the application? 'Mr. Murdock would you like to say something
else? Mr. Strang?
GARRETT STRANG: Good evening. I would just like to, I concur
most enthusiastically with what Mr. Dalton has already presented to
the board, but one point I might add is Mr. Dalton has asked that I
give him some assistance in this matter since he was in the City and
was unavailable to some of the records this week. I had spoken with
the Health Department, and there' s an additional concern which was
brought up by Mr. Dalton with respect to the slope of this property.
The sloping property is a concern with respect to surface runoff, but
it is also concern as far as the location of septic system goes inas-
much as the groundwater runoff, groundwater run is. naturally towards
Goose Creek, and any upland that would be disbursed by the septic
system would run in the direction of Mr. Dalton' s well. So they are
going to review it quite critically as to the location of his septic
system, which again as Mr. Dalton had stipulated, might affect the
location of the house and again affect the variances that would be
required. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Can .I ask you one more question, Mr. Dalton. Are
you still asking for a recess to get some of these questions answered?,
MR. DALTON: Yes. Most definitely.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Murdock would you like to say something in
rebuttal?
MR. . MURDOCK: Well , in terms of whether I would be willing to
cooperate and have a smaller frontyard setback, I would. I base my
setback on the one existing house that does have any bearing. at all
on Birch Avenue. If the board would feel better varying the amount
of distance , the dimensions of the house are only 44 ' in length and
if varying the distances of front and rear yard would ease the board' s
decision-making process , I certainly would be glad to cooperate. It
only involves a few more feet of pipe in terms of connecting up to the
septic system because I certainly wouldn' t move where any of the
services are supposed to be. Other than that, that' s the only thing
germain to this particular hearing that I've heard them speak of. I
certainly would cooperate in any way -with the Zoning Board of Appeals
if the area feels that this is setting a precedent and the residents
would like a precedent set, I think this is a fine time to do it.
i
, Southold Town ;Board of ppeals -105" February 4 .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 Last Associates; continued:)
I
MR.*, MURDOCK continued:
Certainly, the first so-called house fronting on .Birch Avenue, that
would be the time to set a precedent; and if the board wanted to
change the setbacks,. bothifront and rear yard. . .that' s. no problem.
I would be'.very .glad to cooperate and do it. Thank you.
i
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Murdock, do you 'have any objection to a recess
at this particular time until the. next Regular. Meeting--
MR. MURDOCK,: No if one is necessary.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you have anything else to say, gentlemen?
MR.-. DALTON: If Mr. Murdock would like to address the slope issue.,
I think that is, another concern. You may not have any comment on it:
at this time.
MR. MURDOCK: Well , in : addressing the slope, the slope .is basically
probably much more than the.•problems associated with Mr. Dalton' s
property is ,a problem of construction. And what l had considered in
. . terms of runoff after we `finished -is to leave the. area natural. I.
want ' as .little displacement of woods as possible. That particular
section of Goose Bay Estaites' is heavily wooded. The only house that
doesn't have woo.ds ,is. direc,tly to..the west, and he does have a lot of.
trees and grass in his yard. And simply for' the>time. being until
other houses come in. Itwas our intention to` leave property as .much
. natural as possible. It is my intent that that should be a quiet
either a retirement home .pr quiet recreational-use home and wooded
lot. It' s certainly mor,ejadvantageous -than wide gpen. spaces and it
was our intent to leave it as wooded as possible._ ' The only displace-
ment 'bein.g for actual construction, .
MR. DALTON: I believe Mr.' Murdock' s concern for- that and I think
it' s a great .idea, . What happens when it is sold to .'someone else who. ..
doesn't think it' s such ai'.good idea and decides to take. .the trees down
and would prefer all grass -or put in a tennis court or something.
Doe's the board have the authority to specify in its variance that a
certain amount be. left 'na ural , - and that would carry over to any future
purchaser of the land,
MR. CHAIRMAN: . . That' s a . very interesting question, Mr, Dalton,
What we have done in at least the. near past, I. .would say„maybe two
meetings ago was proper screening then.. We did not specifically deal
with the issue of proper ground cover. We have however dealt with
.the issue of proper water' r..unoff, .which would of course lead back to
the question of propel' ground cover, „ so I'm, -sure -we .that we could
deal with that issue. Let me ask my board members if they have any
objections to a recess onithis hearing. Gentlemen? (No. objection, )
Any other questions from anybody? . (No further questions. ) Hearing
. no further questions, I' ll make a motion recessing this particular
hearing .until. the next Regular Meeting. ,
On motion. by Mr.. Goehringer, seconded by_ Mr. Grigonis, . it was
j -
Southold Town Board of Appeals -4 February 4, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3070 - Last Associates , continued : )
RESOLVED, to recess Appeal No. 3070 , matter of LAST ASSOCIATES
until the next Regular Meeting of this board, to wit, Friday ,
February 25 , 1983.
Vote .of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3067. Application for GRACE E. KENNEY,
2020 East Gillette Drive, East Marion, NY for a Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100=31 and 100-34 for permission to
construct additions to existing dwelling increasing the lot coverage
over the 20% allowable and reducing the front and rear yard setbacks ,
at 2020 East Gillette Drive, East Marion, NY; Marion Manor Subdivision
Map #2038 , .Lot 47; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-038-03-030 .
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 :15 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 by VanTuyl &
Son on August 19, 1982 indicating the proposed setback of 24 ' from
Cleaves Point Road. and 12 ' from the. northerly property line and 19 '
at the opposite corner from the northerly property line (Lot 32) . Is
there anybody that wishes to be heard in behalf of this application?
Kindly state your name.
ROBERT KENNEY: My name is Robert Kenney and I'm the son of Grace E.
Kenney, who has requested the variance. . And good evening gentlemen and
madam. I' ll try to be very brief. The variance my mother is requesting
basically is that the house that they have owned on East Gillette Drive
for about 10 or 12 years be converted into a full yearround house. My
father is. now retired and he is requesting that he be allowed to con-
struct a garage attached to the house and also a master bedroom on the
first floor. As the application .indicated, he is an amputee from
World War II and it' s somewhat difficult for him to get to the second
floor to the bedrooms, and he would like .to put a master bedroom on
his ground floor and also construct a garage for the wintertime for
his vehicles. I'm not sure why the request for the building permit was
denied. Evidently the setbacks from possibly the lot west of this lot
were too close. I believe that was 19 feet.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you like me to read it to you? I' ll read
you the disapproval. It says ,
" . . .The proposed additions increase lot coverage over the 20%
allowable by 835 . 20 square feet. Garage addition reduces frontyard
setback and rearyard setback when deeming sideyard rearyard on west-
erly side of dwelling, Article III, Sections 100-31 and 100-34 and
Bulk Schedule. . . . "
MR. KENNEY: According to the Planning Board of the Building
Department, there' s not enough footage.. What I was going to point out
Southold Town Board of )peals -11- February 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3067 - GRACE E. KENNEY, continued: )
MR. KENNEY continued:
was that most of the lots' from that development are either closer to
the road than the setbacks of this house or the same. I know there
are a number of houses that are only 101. back from the road; and also
the lot adjacent to my father' s house is also owned by him and assum-
ing none of his sons have a fight with him, we're going to be in that
lot. . . so I don' t there will be any problem with anyone putting a garage
or something closer to the line on that side. The other lot on the
other side that I believe the setback is only 16 feet, that I believe
is owned by the builder who' s going to construct the bedroom and the
garage , and he' s given notice to all the owners of the adjacent
properties . I don' t think anybody has any objection so that he'.s
requesting that the variance be granted and he be allowed to basically
convert the house into a yearroun'd house.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Can I ask you, Mr. Kenney, how he .intends to use
the garage. . .where will the doors be, maybe you can show us on the
sketch here?
MR. KENNEY: Basically I think that is facing south.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So he' s going to come in off Cleaves Point Road?
MR. KENNEY: Right.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I just want to caution you that 835 square feet is
a substantial amount to exceed the lot coverage by, and it may well be
that this board might take into consideration only allowing a one-car
garage.
MR. KENNEY: Fortunately for him, unfortunately for me, he is
in Florida vacationing so he couldn' t be here; but he has requested
that if it' s denied or there is, some problem with it, he could either
make the garage smaller or forget the garage. The main thing is the
bedroom and deck area. He could change that.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like
to be heard in behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak
against the application? (None) 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 in the matter
of Appeal No. 3067 , matter of GRACE E. KENNEY until later.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was .unanimously adopted.
`Southold Town Board of —ppeals -12- February 1983 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3071. Application of GEORGE AND NATALIE
WIESER, Harbor Lane, Cutchogue, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordi-
nance, Article III, Section 100-'32 for permission to construct accessory
garage in the frontyard area at 1415 Harbor Lane , Cutchogue, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-97-06-010 ..
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 21 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 September 20 , 1980
indicating the existing dwelling and the approximate location of the
proposed" garage. We also have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map
indicating this parcel and the surrounding area.. Is there anyone
wishing to speak in behalf of the application?
GEORGE WIESER (JR. ) : Mr.. Chairman, basically it' s pretty clear
what we would like to do. We cannot put a garage behind the house
simply because it would put the garage effectively right .on top of
the marshland, which borders Eugene' s Creek, I have approximately a
total of three acres for my property which is two separate lots. The
whole front area with this garage where it' s going to be located is
nothing but woods, so I felt that there wouldn' t be any real problem
with the area as far as other neighbors go and whatever where this
garage is placed. One bigger question I do have, I received from
your board in the mail a request for an approved right-of-way for
sufficient accessibility by emergency vehicles. Now I already have
a deeded right-of-way across my neighbor' s property which is a
driveway , and I 'd like to know from the board if this would be
acceptable; and if it ' s not what are you recommendations to proceed
from here?
MR. CHAIRMAN: ' If you have a right-of-way-it has significance
to your effect that you have a right-of-way and it makes the property
saleable , ok. But it does not give you the right .under New York Town
Law of 280a, which is approved access. We have certain criteria that
we use. We did not look at your property for that particular use when
we were over there , and we very simply looked at it for the position
of the proposed garage. We will 'be dealing with that in another
application, .and there are certain standards that we sometimes impose
and others , depending upon how many people use the right-of-way. I
can ask you the question now -- how many people use the right-of-way?
MR. KENNEY: Just my neighbor and myself.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok, so that' s two houses.
MR. KENNEY: Right.
MR, CHAIRMAN: We may ask you that same question at the next
hearing.
MR. KENNEY: What you're telling me is that I should submit an
application for a right-of-way to this, utilizing the existing right-
of-way?
, Southold Town Board of peals -13- February 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3071 - GEORGE & NATALIE WIESER, continued: )
MR. 'CHAIRMAN: That ' s correct. Can I just see you for one second
concerning this?
(Mr. Kenney came up to the dais. )
MR. CHAIRMAN: These are the pictures that we had taken when we
over to the property. This is the right-of-way, is that correct?
MR. KENNEY: Yes , that' s the right-of-way it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Now is this the correct picture, standing here
we would be looking at the proposed structure over here?
MR. KENNEY: No, that' s my. neighbor ' s house. That is also the
turnaround to my neighbor' s house.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. So what we are going to come back to do is ,
another inspection because. no one was there at either house when we
were there, and I didn' t see any stakes on .any of the grounds. . . so
what we will do is come back and do another inspection, prior to
making any decision on this. So we' ll recess this particular hearing
until the next date just as we did, not the .one before this , but the
one before that.
MR. KENNEY: You would be looking for another application also.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That' s correct.
MR. KENNEY: Another thing, too , I don't .know we have time but
I 'm here to represent Thomas Samuels on his application which is not
on your roster for tonight. Should I wait until the .end?
MR. CHAIRMAN: That' s two more hearings away. Do you have any
objection to our recessing?
MR. KENNEY: Bearing 'in mind that I get the applications in for
the other--
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to be heard
in behalf of this application? Anybody like to speak against the
application? (None) I' ll make . a motion recessing this particular
application until the next regularly scheduled meeting.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED , to recess Appeal -No. 3071 , application in the matter
of Appeal No. 3071 , matter of GEORGE & NATALIE WIESER until the next
Regular Meeting of this board.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was unanimously adopted.
(After the hearing, Mr. Wieser informed the board that he did
receive approval from the N.Y. S. Department of Environmental Conservation. )
Southold Town Board .,_ Appeals -14- February 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3014 - EAST END SUPPLY CO. )
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3014 . Application for EAST END
SUPPLY CO. , INC. by Irving L. Price, Jr. , Esq. , 828 Front Street,
Greenport, NY for a Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance ,
Article VIII, Section 100-80B for permission to construct warehouse-
office building in this "C-Light Industrial" Zone. Location of
Property : South Side of Corwin Street, Greenport, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel ID No. 1000-48-02-002 & 003.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 28 p.m. and read the legal
notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application,.
MR. CHAIRMAN: , We have a rather large plan here indicating the
nature of this application. Mr. Burden, would you like to be heard
in behalf of your application?
WALTER BURDEN: Mr. Chairman and board members, Mr. Price is
not available, therefore, I' ll do his part of this . The entire
parcel of abandoned Seventh Street to land of 125-127 Main Street
Corporation is Zoned C-Light Industrial District in which office
buildings, wholesale storage and warehousing are permitted uses
under Special Exception,. The existing warehouse building to the
east. was granted a Special Exception by the Board of Appeals in
Appeal No. 1537 , May 25 , 1972 , prior to East End' s purchase and
use of same as a warehouse. These part of premises have been
commercial for many years and at one time encompassed grain-
milling, oil and coal storage and distribution. The westerly
part of the premises for which the Special Exception is requested
is presently improved with four rundown dwelling units which will
be raised to accomplish the building of a new warehouse. The
Planning Board has' already considered this site plan, and it goes
back to some time last year. And in this. regard, I would like to
ask the board if you grant this Special Exception, because we have
applied for a rehearing as I think you are aware of the last hear-
ing (Appeal No. 3013) , that the Special Exception be granted and
applied to that rehearing so that we avoid going through this again
and save some time. Thank you.
MR.' CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr." Burden. Would anybody else like
to be heard in behalf of this application? Anybody like to be
heard against the application? Questions from board members? (None)
Hearing no further questions , I' ll make a motion closing the hearing
and reserving decision.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter
of Appeal No. 3014 , application for EAST END SUPPLY CO. , INC._
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board Appeals -15- Februar_, 1983 Regular Meeting
RECESSED PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3061. Application of
ANITA M. SAMUELS , Box 89B, Haywaters Road, Cutchogue, NY for
Variances : (1) to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section
100-30 (A) [1] for permission to construct ingro.und pool on a vacant
lot; and (2) to New York Town Law, . Section .280-a for approval
of access. Location of Property : South Side of Haywaters Road
(a/k/a 155 Fishermen' s Beach Road) , Cutchogue, NY; Lot No. 2 , Map
of Peconic Bay Properties, Inc. , Filed Map No. 786 ; County Tax Map
Parcel ID No. 1000-111-1-41.
The Chairman reconvened the public hearing at 8 : 40 .p.m.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could you state your name, please, for this hearing.
GEORGE WIESER: George Wieser. If you have any questions , I'm
hear to answer.
MR. CHAIRMAN: There were questions in the audience at that
particular time (prior hearing) and it does not appear-- we' ll find
out -- see if anybody has any questions. Ok? Is there anybody
that would like to speak against the application? (None) . The
question that .one person had had was, was the water that was going
to be used for filling this swimmingpool going to be trucked in or
was it going to be used from the existing well?
MR. WIESER: I would assume that it is going to be used from
the existing well.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It' s my understanding that there will be no
enclosure around this pool, or a roof?
MR. WIESER: There will be. no roof and there won't be any side
walls . The .only thing that will be around the pool would be a
wooden deck.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would there be any overhead lighting?
MR. WIESER: I do not think he had plans on putting in .light-
.ing at this point in time. He does have some spot lights affixed
to the house ,. and there will probably be pool lights.
MR. CHAIRMAN: All right. I think that sufficiently answers
my 'questions. Do we have any questions from any board members? (None)
Thank you 'for coming in. Hearing no further questions, I ' ll make a
motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr.
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter
of Appeal No. 3061, application of ANITA M. SAMUELS.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board c kppeals - 16- Febru 4, 1983 Regular Meeting
Motion was made to recess for approximately 3 minutes, duly
seconded and carried. After approximately 5 minutes , motion was
made by Mr. Sawicki , seconded by Mr. Grigonis , and duly carried to
reconvene the Regular Meeting. These resolutions was adopted unanimously.
RECESSED PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 2930.. Application for
SAL CAIOLA, by David E. Kapell as agent, 143 Sixth Street, Greenport,
NY for a Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article V, Sec-
tion 100-50 (B) [3] and Article VI, Section 100-51, Bulk Schedule, for
permission to construct condominium units (multiple dwelling units)
to be located at the south side of C.R. 48 , Southold , NY; County Tax
Map Parcel ID No. 1000-51-05-002 .
The original public ,hearing on this application was held
January 13 , 1983, and the hearing was recessed until tonight.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8 : 45 p.m.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Kapell, do you 'have anything to be added?
DAVID E. KAPELL: Just to ask that the project be approved. My
understanding is, the reason for the recess from the last hearing is
to give this board the opportunity to forward this application with
the N.Y. S. Department of Transportation. It is also my understanding
that they returned it with. no comment; and therefore I'm not aware of
any other impediments prior to approval of the project. I'm here to
answer any questions.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I would ask if .there are any spokesmen from any
groups , that the spokesman speak instead of individual people so
that we might move along with the hearing. Is there anybody else
that would like to speak '.in behalf of the application? (None) Ok,
Mr. Verity.
JARVIS VERITY: I 'm not speaking for; I 'm speaking against.
MR. CHAIRMAN: That 's correct. That' s why I'm calling on you.
Anybody like to speak against it?
MR. VERITY: My name is Jarvis Verity, President of the Southold
Town Baymen' s Association. Now we don' t want to see that creek be
polluted. We've been planting clams there for 10 years and we 're
finally getting situated so everybody can get clams out of the creek.
Now in Southold Town there ' s 2 ,000 permits, 700 permits for the
commercial man and there' s 1, 300 people of Southold Town. Now I
think that ' s a lot of people that goes in there and gets clams out
of that creek, and it produces a lot of money from everybody in
Southold Town. We don' t want to see that creek be polluted and
anything at all. We would like to save that creek. It' s the best
creek we've got in Southold Town for the clams , for small clams .
It has been for years and years--scallops too. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does anybody else wish to speak?
Southold Town Board or Appeals - 17- Februa.Ly 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 293Q - Sal Caiola, continued: )
ALEX BONDARCHUK: Yes , Alex Bondarchuk from Southold, Richmond
Road. The questions I have are to the town and Mr. Kapell. What
do you plan to do with the cesspools?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bonderchuk, would you -direct the question
this way. You can read all the questions and maybe Mr. Kapell can--
MR. BONDARCHUK: The pollution. . . I understand it' s supposed to
be a de-nitrification system. Can you explain it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you want him to do it inbetween questions?
MR. BONDARCHUK: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you mind standing at the mike?
MR. KAPELL: May I hear all the questions at one time?
MR. BONDARCHUK: Oh, ok. Is there a D.E.C. regulation that a
building has to be built 10 feet above mean high water, the elevation
has to be 10 .feet? Do you know anything about that? Also, this
system, once I find out what it is , who is going to monitor it and
at whose expense and what happens in the future if this system fails
and they find that the creek is being polluted? Does it condemn the
condominiums and whatever? I have some more questi.ons , but those I
would like to be .answered first.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Kapell.
MR. KAPELL: Those are the questions for me?
MR. BONDARCHUK: Yes.
MR. KAPELL: With regards to the septic system,. it is, as I
understand it., it' s called a. nitrification/de-nitrification system
which I 'm. not a professional engineer--I 'm not personally aware of
all the technical details; but the net -result is .that the effluent
from the end of this system if one were to add chlorination, which
is what' s done on municipal water supplies. . . it would be potable
water. In other words there are no pollutants that would eminate
from this system. I also understand it' s a proven system that has
been used elsewhere. It has never been used in Southold Town. I
think you' ll see it required by the Health Department in many other
situations in the future. It' s a new requirement by the County.
Let me answer all the questions ,. and if they don' t satisfy you, if
you' ll like to ask again, ok. That' s what the septic--it comes at
substantial cost to the applicant and we are prepared to install it.
With regards to the Department of Environmental Conservation regula-
tions , there is a section of the Environmental Conservation Law
the Tidal Wetlands Act, which states that property located above
10 feet_ in elevation above mean high water is outside their juris-
diction. They don' t have a requirement that you build at 10 feet
r in elevation; but any land that is above 10 feet in elevation falls
Southold Town Board oz Appeals - 18- FebruaLy 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 2930 - Sal Caiola, continued: )
MR. KAPELL continued:
outside their jurisdiction.
Now with regards to the monitoring of the sewage system. . .this
will be done by the County Health Department, and the maintenance of
the sewage system will be done at the condominiums ' expense.
MR. BONDARCHUK: All right, now, as far as. the monitoring part--
let' s go back. Number One, it isn' t a proven system in Southold?
MR. KAPELL: As I understand it, it' s a proven system. It has
never been used in Southold.
MR. . BONDARCHUK: Where has it been proven though?
MR. KAPELL: You would have to ask the Health Department those
questions . I believe it has been used on the South Side, and it is
definitely a proven system.
MR. BONDARCHUK: We don' t know that.
MR. KAPELL: It is a proven technology and our plan has been
approved by the County Health Department. They're the experts.
MR. BONDARCHUK: We don' t know that. Now the Board of Health
is supposed to monitor it? For how .long?
MR. KAPELL: Can I ask that I hear all the questions at once
so that I can--
MR. BONDARCHUK: Well I did ask you the question, and I 'm just
going over it. All right, how long is it going to be monitored--
a year, .two years. . .you know it, takes a while for the pollutants to
reach the creek. This is. not a proven system, which we don' t know. . .
it ' s experimental and it might take a while. . . it -might not take a
year., it might- not be two years. . . it might be like five years before
the pollutants reach the wetlands. And what happens then after the
condominiums are built and they find out this is the cause of the
creek being polluted. Are they going to say, "Well we' ll close it,
condemn it and close them. " What' s going to happen now. I 'm con-
cerned about the creek. We lost Long Creek, you know that for a
fact and it was always a good source of income for a lot of baymen
or whoever wanted to go out and. get a few clams . And now little by
little, every year you' ll notice they close it further and further
down. What we don' t need is more of this. And this is on the main
part. What happens when you close the creek. All right, fine, you
have the condominiums but what happens to the rest of the creek?
If- it' s one big polluted area?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Kapell, maybe you could supply Mr. Bondar-
chuk with the name of the gentleman that you used at the Health
_ Department and he might contact him and ask some of these more
technical questions.
Southold Town Board o� Appeals - 19- Febru... 4, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 2930 - Sal Caiola, continued : )
MR. KAPELL: Mr. Robert Jewells is the gentleman that reviewed
our application. I do want to say a couple of things— it is a
polluted system. This is not an experimental system. This is a
proven system. It has also been specifically required by the Health
Department in response to the pollution on this. If all the houses
on these creeks had these systems at present, I don' t believe you
would have the pollution situation that you have at the creeks. So
that I want to state emphatically that this is a proven system and
it is my understanding that it does not produce pollutants. . The
question of monitoring is one that you must take up with the Health
Department because that is not• something. . .obviously the applicant
is not going to monitor it itself , so you will be relying on the
Suffolk County Health Department. It is my .understanding that the
monitoring would take place the same way that it does in a municipal
sewage treatment plan., where it will be done a regular basis forever.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Kapell , while you' re up there. This is an
excavated system--it' s below ground?
MR. KAPELL: Absolutely.
MR. CHAIRMAN; And therefore there ' s. no chance of freezing or
anything of that nature in the winter-time.
MR. KAPELL: No, sir. I also want to state that we dug two
test holes in front of the Health Department so that the location
of the facilities and the soil in which they' re going to be installed
has been witnessed and reviewed and approved by the Health Department.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bear?
FRANKLIN BEAR: I 'm here tonight as a substitute for Ruth Oliva,
and she called me this afternoon and told me that she had talked to
someone in the Health Department and so far as the type of denitrifi-
cation is concerned, she was assured by the Health Department that
this is a 99% pure method of taking care of the sewage. She did say
also in regard to the matter of monitoring, that she was told that the
Health Department does not monitor it. . . it would require an annual
report from the owners and if that annual report is not received , then
the Health Department would check up on it. She said also that she
was told that under. normal circumstances that the builder. . .the
sulfur lined stone filter would have to be replaced every five years
or so depending of course on the usage , some times maybe a little
less but sometimes even more. So that' s the information in which
she received and which she referred to me.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much, Mr. Bear. Does anybody else
wish to speak against the application? Yes, ma' am?
MRS. KIRNER: I would just like to say, I'm Mrs. -Kirner and the
.last time I was here I had said I had a letter from the D.E .C. say-
ing they had no jurisdiction and Mr. Kapell was waiving a little
paper saying it was going by every rule, and I was most unprepared;
Southold Town Board o_ _appeals - 20- Februi , 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 2930 .- Sal Caiola, continued: )
MRS. KIRNER continued:
I do have the letter with me, which is a copy of a letter sent to
Mr. Kapell saying that they have- no jurisdiction because they are
10 feet above the mean high water. I do have photographs that prove
that map, that show the water from the land on the property. I
don 't know--is this allowed to be shown?
MR. .CHAIRMAN: Well , it will be part of the hearing if you would
like to give them to us.
(Mrs. Kirner gave the board .a copy of the D.E.C.- letter dated
June 9, 1982 , and four color photographs of portions of the property
in question for the record. )
MRS. KIRNER: This does show. . . it ' s sort of hard, I know, it
was taken from an airplane, but it does show the water. Our house
is where all the trees are. It does show the water; it comes right
around. . .the property. Here the neighbor had taken, and shows how
far the water does come up. I don' t these are of any--you cannot
see what we are trying to show. This is from the neighbor' s house. . .
his car is in the driveway., to show how far the water does come up.
This is at regular tide, and I have a bigger photograph that we
keep on our wall. You can' t have it but if you would like to see
it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: When were these taken, Mrs. Kirner?
MRS. KIRNER: Mr. Smulcheski wrote on the back. (March 1982 and
January 1983) .
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would you like to see these, Mr. Kapell or anybody?
Is there anybody in the audience that does not know what this complex
looks like? We had copies of it circulated. You can place this down
on the table.
MR. KAPELL: I would like to respond to these.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Certainly.
MR. KAPELL: I will do this here because I want .to point out a
couple of things : Number One, unless I'm mistaken, this is taken from
the berm that we've discussed a couple of times, before this. We have
no argument that this is water. We 've never stated that it ' s other-
wise, and this is most definitely protected wetland area on the
property, but I also want to state that that is not this area of
the property, which at the last hearing is what was claimed to have
been underwater. This is a picture taken from this point in a
southerly direction over the wetland area. There has never been
any statement or representation on our part that it was other than
wetland. This area that came up at the last hearing was removed
from the tidal wetland map by the Department of Environmental Con-
servation after their own on-site inspection and determination that
it is not an active tidal wetland. These pictures do not argue any
Southold Town Board c appeals - 21 Febru� 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 2930 - Sal Caiola, continued : )
MR. KAPELL continued:
statement that we made. I'd also like to point out that as long as
we're getting into it that there is a-- I don' t know whose house
this is right here, but adjacent to that somebody .undertook to build
a garage, adjacent to the south of this building right here. I
don't think it' s shown on this.
MR. CHAIRMAN : You probably can't see it from the air.
MR. KAPELL: I guess that' s what it is, obscured by the wing of
the airplane, I think here. In any case, there is a building. . .
there ' s a house down there where somebody built a garage, I don' t
know who it is , that is within three feet of this area that we've
been discussing .in these ,past two hearings. So the neighbors in
there in fact have been intruding and encroaching on that area for
some time. Also all the houses there are much closer than anything
we propose to build.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Kapell. Is there anybody else
that would like to be heard. Mr. Verity?
MR. VERITY: I got a little paper here from the Town Trustees.
This gentleman says that he can build 11 ' from the mean high water.
It says that alterations of construction to N.Y. S. Department of
Environmental Conservation and the Southold Town Board. So I talked
to Mr. Stoutenburgh today. He says they have to get permission
from the Conservation Department or permission from the Southold
Town Board, or until the Building Department gets permission from
them in order to see if that is wetlands. And whatever that sec-
tion is, there is a lot of wetlands there. Do you want to see this ,
I' ll show it to you.
(Mr. Verity submitted an informational folder on docks , filling,
dredging, mooring, bulkheads , alteration of wetlands prepared by
the Southold Town Trustees. )
MR. VERITY: It was put out by the Southold Town Trustees. It
is the law on the lands. '
MR. LESSARD, ADMINISTRATOR: It certainly would all be checked
before a building permit were granted , absolutely.
MR. KAPELL: We have it. We have a Department of Environmental
Conservation permit for the project.
MR. BONDARCHUK: You didn't clear one thing about the elevation
part of it. Mr. Kapell has spoken to all of us , as long as it' s
over 10 ' above mean high water mark than the D.E. C. has no control
over it. Now is this going to be over 10 ' above elevation or not?
MR. KAPELL: Yes, sir.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Does anybody else wish to be heard? (None)
Hearing no further comment from anyone, I' ll make a motion closing
Southold Town Board Appeals - 22 Februa�Y 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 2930 - Sal Caiola, continued': )
the hearing and reserving decision until a later date.
On motion by 'Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. ' Douglass, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision until later in
the matter of the application of SAL CAIOLA, Appeal No. 2930 .:
Vote of the Board,: Ayes.: Messrs Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
The hearing was officially declared closed.
After the close of the hearing, Mr. Bondarchuk asked for .addi-
tional information concerning the, 10.' elevation and D.E.C. juris-
diction, and' the Chairman suggested , that he speak directly with Mr.
Kapell The Chairman also made the ..audience aware that the board
had 60 "days to make a decision on this application from tonight.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3073.' Application of RONALD J.
ROTHMAN, Box 878, Southold, NY (Owner: V. L'Epplatenier) for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Articl& III, Section 100-31 for
permission to construct new dwelling with insufficient front and
rear yard setbacks at Lakeview Avenue, Peconic, 'NY; Peconic Shores
Subdivision Lots 52-56 inc1. ; : Co.un.ty Tax. Map -Parcel ID Nos. 1000-
67-03-002 , 003, 012 and 01;3'.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9:06 p.m. and read the legal
notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I have a copy of a survey amended on 9/.1/81
. prepared by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. indicating the proposed house to
be approximately° 15 ' from Lakeview Avenue .and 15 ' from •Lakeview
Avenue , both streets are Lakeview Avenue. And I have a copy of the `
Suffolk County Tax Map indicat.ing . this property and the surrounding
properties in the area. Would somebody like to be heard. in behalf of
this application? Sir?.
RONALD J. ROTHMAN: Yes. I'm Ronald J. Rothman, and I've just
entered .into contract as far as. buying this, piece of property depend-
ing on receiving a building permit, ,and right- now I am following the
procedure 'which is .necessary in order to build primarily what will be
a one-family dwelling for my own yearro.und use. I will be enhancing
the property as I've stated because what is there now is a previously.
filed subdivision which calls for I believe 4-5 of the subdivision lots
two approved Southold Town building lots. Both lots do have D.E.C.
approval. . The close approximately to Autumn Lake. . . it is a real hazard.
There is some favorable high gro_und. . .more favorable high ground would
be where this paper road exists . , Of course, there is .a problem with ,
trying to build on that road, so I'm asking the board to consider the
possibility of building as .close to .that road as possible., asking for '
15 ' seeing that that came out to_ be a reasonable amount where I could
still build a house on the favorable higher ground. To the best of my
Southold Town Board of Appeals - 23- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3073 - RONALD J. ROTHMAN. - VICTOR L'EPPLATENIER, continued: )
MR. ROTHMAN continued:
knowledge, the neighbors in the area who I have spoken with, there is no
opposing-opposition to it, and I would just like to have the board con-
sider this , that it' s the only way I feel I could build a house sufficient
enough for yearrouhd use. And I'm here to answer any questions that the
board may have.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you have any idea what the setback is from Autumn
Lake?
. MR. ROTHMAN: I believe there' s about 70 .feet, and again that' s
a plus and minus figure, depending on the mean. highwater. The higher
ground is about, where I'm asking to build, is about five or six feet
above sea .level to the best of my knowledge. As you go off to which
would be the. northerly direction of the property, you Igo to a lower area
in order to get sufficient setbacks off again these paper roads , I would
be asking to really build in an area which is kind of spongy and marshy.
The other area is favorable. . . it' s dry, solid land and that ' s my concern
in building the house, it* wbuld be I would say near impossibly unless you
built on stilts to build any closer to Autumn Lake than what I 'm asking
for.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Concerning the D.E.C. permit, do you have an updated
D.E.C. permit?
MR. ROTHMAN: I have copies of letter done for the L'Epplateniers
concerning each specific lot. Right. now as it stands ; there are the
two lots owned by the two L'Epplateniers. One is a copy which I
acquired concerning Lots 12 and 13. The other is a copy which was
supplied to me by the L'Epplateniers concerning Lots 2 and 3.
And it states that it is out of their jurisdiction.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Any 'd'ecision by this board will be based upon D.E.C.
permits , so you 'may have to update these if they have run out. Ok?
Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that would like to be heard
in behal.f.,of this application? Anybody like to .speak against the
application? (None) Any questions from board members? Hearing no
further comments , _ I ' ll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving
decision until a later time.
MEMBER DOUGLASS: Seconded.
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. 3073 , application of RONALD J. ROTHMAN.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and' Sawicki. This resolution was .unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board o appeals -24- February 1983 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3069. Application of WILLIAM B.
BERLINER, JR. , Box 647 , Mattituck, NY (Owner: B. Norris) , for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71 for
permission to construct greenhouse addition with reduced sideyard
setback at 105 Love Lane, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID
No. 1000-141-04-031.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9 : 14 pm. and read the legal
notice of hearing in its entirety and appeal application.
MR. CHAIRMAN:_ We have a copy of the original subdivision plan
indicating Lot No. 4 which has 2, 662 square feet with a building
which is approximately 1321 .by 36 ' . The proposed addition i.s .7. 5 '
by 34 ' with a 2 ' setback toward Lot No. 5 . 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 speak in behalf of
this application?
WILLIAM BERLINER, JR. : Mr. Chairman, I don't have anything to
add to my application. If there are any questions , I would be happy
to asnwer them.
MR. CHAIRMAN: The board was only interested in why you selected
the sideyard, Mr. Berliner, and not the rear of the building?
MR. BERLINER: I 'd like the greenhouse to be viewed from the
street.
MR. CHAIRMAN: For retail purposes?
MR. BERLINER: Yes. I'm going to build it out . of glass and
aluminum and it' s going to be a. nice appearance, so I want it to
be seen from the street.
MR. CHAIRMAN Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that
would like to be heard in behalf of this application? Anybody like
to speak .against the application? Any questions from board members?
Hearing no further questions, ,I' ll make a motion closing the hearing
and reserving decision until later.
MEMBER GRIGONIS : Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, to close the hearing and reserve decision in the matter
of Appeal No. 3069, application of WILLIAM B. BERLINER, JR.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of Appeals -25- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3074 . Application of JOHN AND SABINA
BASILE, 510 Custer Avenue, Southold, NY for a Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance , Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct
addition to existing dwelling with reduction in frontyard setback at
510 Custer Avenue, Southold, NY; Fairview Park Subdivision Map 3388 ,
Lot 11; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-70-08-033.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9 :17 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 prepared
by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. July 17 , 1967 indicating this property.
There is a proposed reduction from 53 ' to 42 ' in the frontyard. We
also have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this parcel
and the surrounding parcels. Is there anyone wishing to be heard in
behalf of this application?
MRS. - SABINA BASILE: I'm Sabina Basile. This is a wholely new
experience for me , and I' ll answer any questions that I can.
MR. CHAIRMAN: How big is the proposed addition?
MRS. BAIZE: Eleven feet. We plan to extend the existing garage
11 feet.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Eleven feet by what?
MRS. BASILE: By 12 or 13 feet.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. Is there anybody else that would like to be
heard in behalf of the application? Anybody like to speak against the
application? Questions from board members? Hearing no further ques-
tions, I' ll make a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision
until a later time.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, to close the. hearing and reserve decision in the matter
of Appeal No. 3074 , .application of JOHN & SABINA BASILE.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigon is,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 3075. Application of JOSEPH & MARY
GNOZZO, by Gary Flanner Olsen, Esq. , Main Road, Mattituck, NY for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VI, Section 100-60 and
Article XI, Section 100-118D for permission to reinstate. nonconforming
dwelling use for existing building in this B-Zone at 73265 Main Road,
Greenport, NY; County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-45-03-002.
Sbuthold Town Board c kppeals -26- February 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3075 - JOSEPH & MARY GNOZZO, continued: )
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9 : 21 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 January 25 , 1983
indicating this property which is some 5. 126 acres , and a copy of the
Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this property and the surrounding
properties in the area. Mr. Olsen, would you like to be heard in
behalf of this application?
GARY OLSEN, ESQ. : Yes. My name is Gary Olsen. I'm an attorney.
having my offices at Main Road, Mattituck. I'm representing Joseph
and Mary Gnozzo who are purchasing the piece of property in question
from Wayne A. Moritz and under the contract of sale which was dated
December 16 , 1982 , there ' s a contingency clause in the contract that
it' s subject , to Zoning Board approval to reinstate a residential use
of the easterly most building on this property; and I ' ll just submit
the contract 'for your records.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you.
(Photocopy of the, Contract of Sale between Wayne. M. Moritz
and Joseph and Mary Gnozzo dated December 16 , 1982 was submitted
for the file. )
MR. OLSEN: As, you've indicated the subject property is over
five acres. Part of it is zoned Business; that' s the part where
the structures are presently located, and the rest of the property
is zoned Residential-Agricultural. What' s appealing to my clients
as far as this property is concerned is the fact that it can be
used as a business and the easterly most structure has historically
been utilized as a residence , in fact it has a bath and a half, a
living room, two bedrooms , and has over the years been used for
residential purposes . The building has not been used that way for
at least two years. . . therefore we need to go through the Zoning
Board. As you're aware, the Zoning Code used to enable residential
use for this type of situation. It has been changed, requiring a
variance procedure. We 've been advised by Collin VanTuyl , that
the living area is 1 ,OOO square feet and the dimensions of the
easterly most building is shown on the survey, which you have in
your file. Also I would point out that the character of the. neigh-
borhood would. not be changed due to the fact that both on the
westerly side. of this property and on the easterly side are houses
that are being used for residences: I think that' s about all I
have to say.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Olsen, would the applicant have any objection
to a-- not .an imaginery line on a survey, but a line on a survey
indicating that this particular building be placed in. a 40.,000 sq.
ft. parcel. not be used as business? In other words , a line between
drawn somewhere equally distant between the large concrete building
and the building in question and going back to encompass 40 ,000
square feet?
MR. OLSEN: I'm not sure I understand the reason. At this point
there ' s- no intention of splitting this house piece off from the rest
of the property. It would be used in conjunction with the other
buildings that are on the property in the B Zone.
Southold Town Board o appeals -27- February 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3075 - JOSEPH & MARY GNOZZO, continued: )
MR.'.. CHAIRMAN: We just didn' t want any cluttering if this applica-
tion were granted, or any additions to be located closer to the resi-
dentiality of this particular building. Again if it were granted.
That' s--
MR. OLSEN: Again I don' t understand what you' re saying.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We don' t want business to encompass to run around
this building if we 're reinstituting the residentiality of this
building. Do you understand what I'm saying?
MR. OLSEN: No I don' t.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you want to step up here one second? Just a
line., indicating that this would be used for residential purposes.
Not a subdivision.
MR. OLSEN: Well,, suppose we wanted to incorporate a business
use with the residential use? They can do that--
MR. CHAIRMAN: Well , you would probably have to come back to
this board.
MR. OLSEN: I mean, it is zoned for business.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I know that.
MR. OLSEN: But supposing for example I wanted to operate an
antique business or something, which is permitted out of that build-
ing, and plus live there also? I didn' t say I want to , but I don' t
want to restrict what they can do. Sort of like Jim' s Diner, or
the Wishbone Inn. They' re living upstairs and operating downstairs.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do they intend to live in this building?
MR. OLSEN: Yes, they do. Yes.
MR.CHAIRMAN: It was only a question, ok?
MR. OLSEN: Ok.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else that would like to be heard
in behalf of this application?
BERT LEWIS : I'm Bert Lewis. I 'd like to add to one thing that
Gary overlooked. ' There is a kitchen in-there-the house was used as
a home for 50 years . This man is going to spend a lot of money and
fix it up and pick up the whole neighborhood.
MR. CHAIRMAN: He has no intentions at this time of incorporating
any business into that house though. . .the only business use will be
the use of the building next door to it.
MR. OLSEN: That' s my understanding but I don' t want to restrict
it is a B-Zoned piece of property and I don 't want to restrict what he
Southold Town Board of Appeals -28- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3075 - JOSEPH & MARY GNOZZO, continued: )
MR. OLSEN continued:
can do in that building. As .far as what he tells me, he basically wants
that for living and he wants the other buildings .on the property for
business use. That' s all the information I have on it.
MR. CHAIRMAN: So at this time, we' re only dealing with two uses ,
is that correct? The residentiality of the house reinstating this
house, and then the business or whatever he intends to do with the
building next door , which is really not the nature of this application.
MR. OLSEN: That ' s correct.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I 'm just trying to reduce it to how many uses
we're dealing with here. Is there anybody else that would like to
be heard in behalf of the application?. (None) Anyone wishing to .
speak against the application? (None) Any questions from any board
members? (None) Hearing no further questions , I' ll make a motion
closing the hearing and reserving decision until a later time.
MEMBER SAWICKI: Second.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, gentlemen, for coming in.
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. 3075 , matter of JOSEPH & MARY GNOZZO, .until a later
time.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass .and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of mppeals -29- February 1983 Regular Meeting
PUBLIC ,HEARING: Appeal No. 3072. Application :of IRENE AND POPPI
PAPADAKIS, Main Road, Box 28 , Orient, NY for a Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance,, ,Article III, Section 100-3'O .for permission to use part of
residence for a skin care clinic at 26165 Main Road, Orient, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1090-18-03-023.
The Chairman opened the hearing -at 9: 31 p.m. and read. the legal
notice of hearing in its entirety and' appeal .application.
MR. CHAIRMAN,: We have a copy of the survey made by Roderick
VanTuyl, .P.'C. dated October 4 , 1976 showing ' the home which is the•
nature of.. this application, or a, portion thereof ,, 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?
IRENE PAPADAKIS: I 'm Irene Papadakis. , I have some letters here
to add from some .clients of mine. (Mrs. Papadakis read 'each letter. )
" . ., .To. Whom It May Concern:
It has come to my attention that -there. is some controversy about
Irene' s Skin Care Clinic in Orient. I am, a client of Irene' s and
feel there is a definite need for. this ,type 'of service in our town.
The type .of .person.-using IreneIs -.tal'ents and facilities is hardly one
who would be a disruptive force . in- the community.
Plea.se• consider any objections raised as inconsequential. Thank
you for your .assistance in this matter. :
Yours very trulyy
/s/ Beatrice Farber. . . . "
MS. . PAPADAKIS continued:: Again, addressed to.. the Town of Southold:
" . . .Dear Sirs :
I am writing to you concerning Iren.e' s European Skin Clinic, 28
Main Road, Orient, NY owned and operated by Ms. Irene Papadakis.
I am one of Ms: Papadakis ' clients at her skin care clinic. and
I thoroughly enjoy. my sessions with her. They are both relaxing and.
important to people who care about "their appearance.
Irene' s Skin Care Clinic is also one of the very few places that
offer., skin treatments, etc. on this end of the Island, which would
mean. if it weren't for them one would have to travel into the City .
In a time where ,our town is so successfully growing, I think
it' s .important to meet all ..people' s needs. I hope you will consider
just how important Irene' s Skin Care Clinic can- be to a lot of people' s
needs. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ Deborah Barszczewski. . . . "
' Southold Town Board of ppeals - 30- February 4 .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 - Ir.ene & Poppi Papadakis, continued: )
MS. PAPADAKIS continued :
Here is one more :
Southold Town Hall :
We feel there is a need for. a skin & body care clinic at the East
End of Long Island. Irene' s will be a great value to the community. . .
Very truly yours,
/s/ Gertrude L. Poulson. . . . "
Those are the three letters I have.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We will need copies of those for our file., or if
it is all right, take the originals and give you copies back.
MS. PAPADAKIS: I don't believe I' ll be needing the originals.
I, have signatures here of persons. I've gone to Board of Commerce
meetings , approximately two or three Mondays ago , and I have signa-
tures here of persons I spoke to about this matter., and which you can
also use. And I- spoke to my lawyer, Mr. Price, and he gave me a
little piece of the Southold Code stating:
. " . . .Home Occupations , provided that:
(a) No display of goods is visible from the street, and it is
not visible at all;
(b) Such occupation is incidental to the residential use of
the premises and is carried on in the main building by the resident
therein with. no more than one resident assistance.
I don't have have in my residence. ,, just me.
(c) Such occupation is carried on in an area. not exceeding
300 of the area of one floor of the main building.
And it does not exceed that.
(d) There shall be no exterior effect at the property line,
, such as noise, traffic, odor, dust, smoke, gas , fumes or radiation.
Now .- there will be no noise because, the equipment, the only noise
you will hear is us talking actually. No traffic because I will be
the only one working there. And the lady outside stated, what happens
when the business .grows . Ilm* not planning on hiring anybody. From
past experience I've learned that, no way I can manage with one the
same way that I can, It will be me and my sister after school, she' ll
take over the phone. And that'. s it. And that' s official for me. I
never wanted a big business and bringing in a lot of people working
for me and cause a lot of traffic. The most would be four or about
five cars a day. It' s just going to be one person.
And the last one :
Southold Town Board of Appeals -31- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 - Irene & Poppi Papadakis, continued: )
MS. PAPADAKIS continued:
(e) Studios where . . . no, excuse me.
Odor. No odor whatsoever. No dust; no smoke;. no gas , fumes or radiation.
(e) Studios where dancing or music instruction is offered to groups
in excess of five pupils at one time, or where concerts or recitals are
held, are prohibited.
This one has nothing to do with me at all.
And if you have any questions , we ' ll be glad to answer.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes , what percentage of the business is basically
devoted to the actual total square footage of the ground floor of the
house?
MS. PAPADAKIS : We don' t know.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Could you supply, us with that information? Do you
know what I mean by that question?
MS. PAPADAKIS : How wide the house itself is?
MR. CHAIRMAN: No.
POPPI PAPADAKIS : 90 .by 65 , the building.
MR. CHAIRMAN: We have to know how much area you have devoted to
the skin care clinic.
MS. PAPADAKIS : Would you like some •of the measurements of the rooms ,
is that it?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes. You don't have to give it to us right this
second.
MS. PAPADAKIS : The whole main floor consists of nine rooms approxi-
mately. We' re using three.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And you' ll let us know the size of those rooms some
time?
MS. PAPADAKIS : My father has it. He has it because he did the
work on the wall , and we put the carpeting in so he knows how much it
is.
MS. PAPADAKIS :_ :, 14 by 14 , both rooms , approximately and a small
bathroom. These three rooms were there. Just the paneling and the
tile on the wall and the carpeting and the desk and equipment.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Is there a waiting room?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Yes.
• Southold Town Board of __peals - 32- February 4 .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 _ Irene & Poppi Papadakis, continued: )
MR. CHAIRMAN: Included in this two 14 by 14 rooms?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Yes. One is the clinic , actually the equipment
is, and one is the waiting room.
MR. . CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. All -right. The second ques-
tion I have, what type of license to you have, Ms. . Papadakis?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Yes. State Board license. New York State.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you have any additional Health Department
approvals for this clinic? Is there anything that would require
additional Health Department approval where you would need an addi-
tional cesspool or additional well, or whatever the case might be?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Perhaps I should have my father-- Would you ask
the question again, please?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Would this skin care clinic require any additional
cesspools other than what you have within the house now?
MR. PAPADAKIS : No. We don' t use any water.
MS. PAPADAKIS : My father is a construction worker so he would
be able to explain--
MR. PAPADAKIS: For this business.
MR. CHAIRMAN: No additional cesspool?
MR. PAPADAKIS : We don' t need it.
MS. PAPADAKIS : The only, as I said, it' s not going to be a heavy
load. It' s only going to be a few persons per day. Very little water
use. So I don't understand what the problem is there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Have you devoted any parking spaces to the clinic
at all?
MS. PAPADAKIS: There' s plenty of room on the property.
I have a garage now that' s been there. So they can park out there.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You don' t have any idea how many parking spaces--
let' s assume you had five people at one time, do you have room for
five cars?
MS. PAPADAKIS: That' s impossible first of all.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Everything would be done by appointment?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Yes. Definitely. That' s what I 'm trying to say.
It will not cause too much traffic because I have it by appointments
and I leave room from one client to the other.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is there anybody else that would like
to speak in behalf of the application? (None) Anybody against the
application? If there are any spokesman .for any specific group, I' ll
Southold Town Board of __ppeals - 33- February 4 .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 - Irene & Poppi . Papadakis , continued : )
MR. CHAIRMAN continued:
take those first. Sir?
ROBERT HUGHES : Mr. Chairman and members of the board. I'm Robert
Hughes from Orient. I have a petition here which I will come to in a
few moments . Irene Papadakis has obtained an operator' s license to
practice skin care and cosmetology. This is not a license to operate
a beauty parlor .or skin clinic. The Department of State which gives
us this information has no record .of Irene' s European Skin Care
Clinic . I 've dealt with State Departments before. . .there may be
an application in the way. . . I don' t know. So we ask,. does Irene
Papadakis have a license from the State to operate. a skin care
clinic? Does she have a partnership or a trade name certificate
as it is on file with the County Clerk. If she does have a State
certificate, has she met the plumbing, electrical and other require-
ments of the Town? Here is the petition which is signed 205 people
from Orient only, unlike the petition that Ms. Papadakis had circulated
at the Chamber of Commerce.
" . . .We the undersigned residents of Orient, urge the board to
reject the application of Irene Papadakis for a variance to
incorporate a "European Skin Care Clinic" into her residence on
Route 25 in Orient.
We in Orient are proud of our hamlet, its traditions , its unique
blending of residential and agricultural. This commercial effort
to encroach on a residential area must be denied. A variance would
be destructive immediately and further set a dangerous precedent for
the future. . . . "
(Mr. Hughes submitted the 205-name petition for the record. )
MR, "CHAIRMAN: Would .anybody else like to speak against the
application? Mr. Bear?
FRANKLIN BEAR: I'm speaking on behalf of the North Fork Envir-
onmental Council as a substitute for Ruth Oliva as the President.
This type of business is not in accordance with the type of life
that goes on in the Hamlet' of Orient and it should not be allowed
because it could set a precedent which would lead to more types of
business . This is the type of thing that could be very well carried
on in Greenport. There' s. no reason why this type of business
couldn 't be carried on in the East End of Long Island without hav-
ing it in Orient itself.
One of the things that concerns us is the fact that this is
being done at a very time that the town planners are in the process
of it being updated. Lots of things are going on in this town
right now which could and very well likely will affect the type
of town plan that will come out of this effort to update it because
things will already be done and will 'set a precedent which will
keep the town plan from, let' s say, zoning something one way or
another. We feel that something of this kind should not be allowed
e
'Southold Town Board of Appeals - 34- February 4 , 983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 13072 - Irene & Poppi Papadakis , continued : )
MR. BEAR continued:
and for one thing, because of the nature of the area and for another
thing, because now is not the time to start something. new while the
town plan is being in the process of being updated. We would like
to ask this board to deny this application. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Bear. Would anybody else like to
speak against the application? Yes , ma' am?
PAT LUKEMAN: I believe everybody can hear me from here. I'm
Pat Lukeman from Orient, and I 'd like to state on my behalf and
on behalf of many people that I 've spoken with. . . I thank Mr. Hughes
really for getting up that petition. I believe petitions are some-
thing, but if people don' t really come to meetings and state their
opinions , then they mean nothing. I'm asking the board to deny this
petition for the simple reason that Orient is a Hamlet where there
are noncommercial businesses outside of the Candyman and I believe
he is the only one in Orient that operates as a commercial establish-
ment. All the others are nonconforming. I believe also that once
we let one person operate without any permission and give them the
opportunity to circumvent, the law, sort of speak, we' re in trouble.
And I'd ask the board to please contact lawyers and back up their
statement when they deny this petition, because we might be in a
position. now where we're faced with lawyers from New York City or
any other place and we'd be in big trouble. And we also, with
respect to the last 20 .years , we. need a Master. Plan. And .until this
Master Plan is formed, I think it behooves us to stop any develop-
ment whatsoever. . .not only in Orient, and East Marion, but all of
Southold Town. Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mrs. Lukeman. Anybody else like
to speak against the application. Ye.s , ma'am.
MS. WAXBURGER: I'm a homeowner- in Orient and while I feel badly
if the Papadadis are operating .under a misunderstanding about the
procedures they had to go through, I feel that just to express a
personal feeling about it apart from my very strong commitment to
the historic nature of Orient that I think the precedent would be
very dangerous. It would make me feel insecure in that I wouldn' t
know whether a commercial property might open next door to me or
I think it would create a very strang feeling for people who were
looking to buy in Orient not knowing whether something might open
. next to them or the possibility that people might buy in Orient under
the guise of buying a residential property with the intention of
getting a variance and opening an establishment if the set of a
precedence could be that easily gotten to convert residential to
commercial property.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Would anybody else like to speak
against? Mr. Hughes again.
MR. HUGHES : Yes , I would like to submit to you an application
- form from the State of New York that must be 'filled out by someone
operating a beauty. shop and there' s several various important items
Southold Town .Board of .,ppeals - 35- February 4 983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 - Irene & Poppi Papadakis , continued: )
MR. HUGHES continued:
in it conforming to local laws , regulations and whatnot, and it' s very
stringent and it' s filed .under threat of perjury. If you haven' t
seen it, you might want it for the file.
(Mr. Hughes submitted a copy of the State of New York, Department of
State; Division of Licensing Services , Form R114-790 (5/78) for the file. )
MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that
would like to speak against the application? (None) Irene, could we
ask you some additional questions? Could you maybe bring those peti=
tions up with you for the file?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Would you like these now?
MR. CHAIRMAN: And the letters , yes. Thank you. Is this Skin
Care Clinic operating at this present time?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: It is. You are aware of the fact that you don' t
have a license to operate or you don' t have permission to operate it
on the site at this particular time?
MS. PAPADAKIS : Yes, sir, but the day that we came to the
Building Inspector, we told him about everything that we--the flyers
and the ads and everything, and people that have called me so far--
and the gentleman sitting over there (Mr. Lessard) , I don' t remember
his name, he says, "Just go ahead with your plans as normally you
would until you open and until you come in to the Board of Appeals,
and then we ' ll see what happens when they decide for you. "
MR. CHAIRMAN: In answer to Mr. Hughes' question, did you fill
out one of these applications to operate your skin care clinic?
MS. PAPADAKIS : No.
MR. CHAIRMAN: If this falls within the jurisdiction of that?
MS. PAPADAKIS : No, I haven' t.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You have not.
MS. PAPADAKIS: I would like to say something about the lady
that mentioned she called the State Board of Licenses and the busi-
ness is not written down as Irene' s Skin Care Clinic. That' s
because it wasn' t. We' re just starting it now. And I came up
with a name, and when I called four months ago , a gentleman said,
we need a State Board License and we would have the permit for you
in a matter of two-five days , then you can work. Give us the name.
He says as long as the name is not the same as anybody else' s business.
Of course there ' s no other skin care clinic around. So any name I
used would have been fine. As far as the lady' s concern, but the
plumbing is as was , it is safe, it' s been inspected by my father and
Southold Town Board of )peals -36 February. 4 983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 - Irene & Poppi Papadakis, continued: )
MS. PAPADAKIS continued:
his co-worker who is a plumber,. and the electricity as well. Now I
don't understand why .they're worried that if I open up-, it will become
commercialized. I spoke to Mr. Price, and he says if I decided to
sold the house, it will be as it ,was before, residential. Am I right?
I mean I 'm curious as well.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Anything.that this board grants goes along with
the land. So if this board were to' so . grant an application, it would
change the nature of your property. You would have dual use. You
would have two uses. , You saw me ask this gentleman how many uses he
had on his property,` prior to your application., and he said to me, "Two. "
Residence. A business. You would have, a similar situation. You would
have a business. And you would .have a residence. You would have two ,
uses where you legally really only have one use right. now, and that
is only residential. Ok. '- You' re in an .A-Zone.
MS. PAPADAKIS: I understand. But let' s say if everything, if
I do open, with your understanding, . if I open, will that area ever
become commercialized and bring .in more businesses? Because that' s
most of these people here are .worried.
MR. CHAIRMAN: I can'.t answer that question, all right. It' s
beyond my scope at this particular point. All I can say is that we
appreciate everybody' s information, '.including yours , and we will take
everything into consideration. We do have 60 days .to make a decision "
oft this application. This board does. not agree with the Building
Department' s interpretation where they feel that you can continue
your business. We don' t think that you should continue your business.
Based upon some determination, we think you should cease operating
your business until such time. that there is a determination, and
whatever. that determination may be, we' ll see, within the 60-day
period.
MS.. PAPADAKIS: . Is there any information that you .would like me
to come back with., or will I get a letter stating--
MR. CHAIRMAN: You will get 'a letter within a specific period of
time .indicating a decision if it' was granted or denied, and if it
was granted what the conditions are, and if it were denied what the
conditions are. Member Grigonis would also ask that you look into
the licensing situation.
MS. PAPADAKIS: I definitely will.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok, thank you. Does anybody else wish to comment?
Mr. .Hughes, did you have anything else you would like to say? Anybody
else?
MRS. LUKEMAN: In other words, is she allowed to operate now for
the '60 .days until you ':give .a decision?
MR. CHAIRMAN: The unique part, Mrs. Lukeman, about the Board of
Appeals is that we have the right to vary, if we see fit, any zoning
code laws 'the exist in the code book in Southold Town. We are, however,
, Southold Town Board of ppeals - 37- February 4 .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 - Irene & Poppi Papadakis, continued : )
MR. CHAIRMAN continued:
not an enforcing agency. The enforcing agency is the Building Depart-
ment, and it is my opinion, as I just mentioned to Ms. Papadakis , that
we feel that she should cease and desist in operating this business
until such time that there is a determination from this particular
board. . .ok, be whatever that determination is.
MRS. LUKEMAN: . Thank you.
MR. CHAIRMAN: You're very welcome.
MS. PAPADAKIS : May I ask .one thing, please?
MR. CHAIRMAN: Surely.
MS . PAPADAKIS : When one lady just said, that I didn' t contact,
felt that I didn't contact everyone--anyone. I did. We called from
New York before,.we decided to move here permanently. We had this
house for two years. The gentleman over the phone, I don 't care who
he was , it doesn 't make a difference about his name, because he was
from Town Hall, the licensing services. He told me just bring your
State Board License, bring your permit ,and then tell us what name you
would want in the business , that you cannot open up. I did contact
somebody. We didn' t just move here and spend .$20 ,.000 without contact
someone and ask about the law.
MR. CHAIRMAN: What licensing, specifically licensing departmente
when you refer to "bringing in my licens . "
MS. PAPADAKIS : When I called up the Southold Town Hall.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Yes , but what licensing department are you speci-
fically talking about when you said , "I have to bring in my license. "
MS. PAPADAKIS : State Board License - Operating License. For
skin care and hairdressing, in spite what the gentleman says— that
includes hair , make-up, skin care in that one license.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Hughes?
MR. HUGHES: Yes. As it was explained to me by the Department
of State, an operating license gives the recipient the right to go to
work, and that may be a beauty parlor, or another beauty parlor, but
it does not have anything at all to do with operating a shop you
don 't even have to have an operator' s license to operate a shop--you
would be a business.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Do you understand what he said?
MS. PAPADAKIS: Yes.
MR. CHAIRMAN: And you certainly have. not gone to the County
Clerk's Office as Mr. Hughes had mentioned and filed your name of
your business with anybody in Suffolk County, is that .correct?
• Southold Town Board of __ppeals - 38- February 4 . .983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3072 - Irene & Poppi Papadakis , continued: )
MS. PAPADAKIS : That' s correct.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Mr. Lessard, do you have any questions?
MR. LESSARD: I would ask somebody from Orient whether or not
there are any doctors , lawyers , dentists living in Orient and running
a business? Real estate?
MRS. LUKEMAN: Floyd King has a real estate in Orient. He has
been there for centuries.
MR. LESSARD : All right. Thank you.
MRS. LUKEMAN: Professional people? I don't think we have a
doctor in Orient. Wish we did but we don' t.
(There was some discussion by Ms. Papadakis to Mrs . Lukeman
about professionals vs. skin care clinic, but the statements were
not audible. )
MR. CHAIRMAN: Irene, you're going to have to say it a little
bit louder. This is all electronically taped. Ok?
MS. PAPADAKIS : From what I .understand they won't object to a
doctor, but they would object to an itician, what every woman
needs. . .whether she wants to believe it or. not.
MR. CHAIRMAN: Ok. Thank you. Any further comments? Hearing
no further comments, I ' ll make a motion closing the hearing and
reserving decision.
MEMBER DOUGLASS : Seconded.
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. 3072 , application of IRENE & POPPI PAPADAKIS.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
DATE FOR NEXT REGULAR MEETING: On motion by Mr. Sawicki,
seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, that the date of .the next Regular Meeting of this Board
be and hereby is SCHEDULED FOR FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 25 , 1983 commencing at
7 : 30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall , Main Road, Southold, New York.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehr-inger, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
flouthold Town Board .of. tippeals -39 February 4 , �98.3 Regular Meeting
"CLOSED SESSION FOR DELIBERATIONS" - Motion was made by. Mr. Doug-
lass , seconded by Mr. Sawicki, to recess temporarily for closed session
for deliberations. This resolution was unanimously carried.
"RECONVENE REGULAR_MEETING" - Motion was made by Mr. Sawicki,
seconded by Mr. Douglass, to reconvene the Regular Meeting. This
resolution was unanimously carried. The meeting reconvened at 11 : 30.
ENVIRONMENTAL. DECLARATIONS : Motion was made by Mr. Douglass ,
seconded by Mr. Grigonis , to declare the following Environmental
Declarations pursuant to the N.Y. S. Environmental Quality Review Act:
APPEAL NO. : 3084 .
PROJECT NAME: PATNICK REALTY
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 (and Local Law 1#44-4)
of the implementing. regulatio.ns 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: Second dwelling use on two-acre business-
zoned parcel.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: Main Road, Greenport, NY; 1000-45-05-001.
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 premises in question is not located. near a critical
environmental area.
Southold Town Board o appeals -40- February 1983 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations,- c.ont.inued: )
APPEAL NO. : . 3083
PROJECT NAME: J. ROYAL AND VIRGINIA GIFFORD
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 : Minnehaha Boulevard, Southold, NY; 1000-087-03-
050 :.
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. : 3080 .
PROJECT NAME: EAST END SUPPLY CO. , INC.
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: Rehearing on Appeal No. 3013. New
construction of building with .insufficient front, side,.a_nd rear yard
setbacks.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as : Corwin Street, Greenport, NY; 1000-048-02-002 &
003.
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: ppeals -41-- Februa 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations , continued: )
APPEAL NO. : 3076
PROJECT NAME: HAROLD P. SCHWERDT
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 building in front yard area.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 2720 Cedar Avenue, Southold, NY; Goose Bay
Estates Lots 192 to 195 inclusive.
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) Receipt of D.E.C. approval.
APPEAL NO. : 3077
PROJECT NAME: JANET A. DAVIS
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 of B-1 Zoned premises for apartment
and antique shop.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as : Main Road, Peconic, NY; 1000-075-02-011.
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) Premises is not located near a critical environmental area.
Southold Town Board o: ppeals -42- February 1983 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations , continued: )
APPEAL NO. : 3079
PROJECT NAME: WALTER GAIPA
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: (a) Approval of access and (b) to
construct accessory building [replacing existing] in frontyard area.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 360 .Lake View Terrace, East Marion; 1000-
31-09-012.
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. : 30'_82
PROJECT NAME: BURKE E. LIBURT
This notice is/ 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: To construct corral and alter use of
existing barn to stable a pony on premises having an area of 39 ,048
square feet.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more
particularly known as: 1420 King Street, Orient; 1000-026-02-040 .
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) Premises is not located near a critical environmental area.
a
Southold Town Board of Appeals -43 February 4, 1983 Regular Meeting
(Environmental Declarations , continued: )
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was _un.animously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3069.
Upon application of WILLIAM B. BERLINER, JR. ,, Box 647 , Mattituck,
NY (owner: B. Norris) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article
VII, Section 100-71 for permission to construct greenhouse addition
with reduced sideyard setback at 105 Love Lane, Mattituck, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-141-04-031.
The public hearing concerning this matter was held earlier this.
evening, at which time the hearing was declared closed pending delibera-
tions.
The board made the following findings and determination:
By this appeal, appellant seeks permission to construct an addition
to the existing flower shop structure 7182" wide by 34 ' in length, leav-
ing an insufficient sideyard setback from the southerly line of two feet.
The premises in question contains an area of 2 ,662 square feet with a
frontage along Love Lane of 25 feet. The premises is improved with a
stucco building 486 square feet in area. It is noted for the record
that the lots in the immediate business area are improved with struc-
tures substantial in size and at or very close to their side property
lines .
In considering this appeal , the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zoning
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 appellant
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- consideration - of all the
above factors , the interest of justice will be served by allowing the
variance as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis , it was
RESOLVED, that 'Appeal No. 3069, application of WILLIAM B. BERLINER,
JR. (for B. Norris , owner) for permission to construct greenhouse addi-
tion with a setback from the southerly side property line at two feet,
BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED AS APPLIED FOR.
Location of Property: 105 Love Lane, Mattituck, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel ID No. 1000-141-04-031.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Griognis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of Appeals -44- February 4, _L983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3067 - GRACE E. KENNEY: )
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. , 3067.
Upon application for GRACE E. KENNEY, 2020 East Gillette Drive, East
Marion, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III., Sections
100-31 and 100-34 for permission to construct additions to existing dwell-
ing increasing the lot coverage over the 20o allowable and reducing the
front and rear yard setbacks, at 2020 East Gillette Drive, East Marion,
NY; Marion Manor Subdivision Map #2038 , Lot #47; County Tax Map Parcel ID
No. 1000-038-03-020 .
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 , appellant seeks permission to construct an addition
16 ' by 19 ' at the northerly corner of the existing dwelling, together with
an open deck area 28 ' by 12 ' and 25 ' by 25 ' two-car garage. The existing
dwelling contains an area of 1588 square feet, and together with the
proposed 1445 1,588 square feet .would contain a total area of 3 ,033 square
feet. The lot in question is a corner lot and contains an area of
10 , 989 square feet. The zoning code limits the amount of lot coverage
by 200, or 2 ,918 square feet. Appellant'_s proposed application would
exceed this requirement by 835 square feet, or 18% over the allowable.
It is the opinion of the board that the relief requested is sub-
stantial in relation to the code requirements and that a. reduction in
the proposed construction should be made, ,as indicated below. Also, in
considering this appeal , the board determines that the circumstances
are unique; that by allowing the variance as indicated below no substan-
tial detriment to adjoining properties will be created; that the relief
requested will be in harmony with and promote the general purposes of
zoning; and that the interest of justice will be served by allowing the
variance , as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Douglass , it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal. No. 3067 , application of GRACE E. KENNEY
be and hereby is GRANTED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
That the proposed. garage addition be reduced by 13' by 25 ' with
a minimum setback of 24 ' from the neighbor at the northwesterly corner
of the garage addition (to the lot line of Lot #32) .
Location of Property: 2020 East Gillette Drive, East Marion,
NY; Marion Manor Subdivision Map #2038, Lot 47; County Tax Map
Parcel ID No. 1000-038-03-020 .
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was .unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of Appeals -45- February 4, 1983 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3074 .
Upon application of JOHN & SABINA BASILE, 510 Custer Avenue, South-
old, NY for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article' III , Section
100-31 for permission to construct addition to. exist.ing dwelling with
reduction in frontyard setback at 510 Custer Avenue , Southold, NY; Fair-
view Park Subdivision Map 3388 , Lot 11; County Tax Map Parcel ID No.
1000-70-08-033 .
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 , appellants seek permission to construct a 13 ' wide
addition extending 11 feet from the northerly wall of the present garage
area leaving a setback from Custer Avenue at 42 feet. The premises in
question contains an area of 20 ;125 square feet with 115 . 94 feet along
Custer Avenue. Existing on the premises is a one-story one-family
dwelling with attached garage which is set back 53 feet from Custer
Avenue. After inspection of the immediate area, the board finds that
the average frontyard setback of the existing homes is approximately
40 feet.
In considering this appeal , the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zoning
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 appellant
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 consideration 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
RESOLVED , that Appeal No. 3074 , application of JOHN AND SABINA
BASILE, for permission to construct an extension to the existing
garage leaving an insufficient frontyard setback at 42 feet, be and
hereby IS APPROVED AS APPLIED FOR. .
Location of Property: 510 Custer Avenue, Southold, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-70-08-033; Fairview Park Subdivision Map
#3388 , Lot 11.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
Southold Town Board of Appeals -46 February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3061.
Upon application. of ANITA M. SAMUELS, Box 89B, Haywaters Road,
Cutchogue, NY for Variances : (1) to the Zoning Ordinance, Article
III, Section 100-30 (A) [1] for permission to construct .ingro.urid pool
on a vacant lot; (2) to New York Town Law, Section 280=a for
approval of access . Location of Property: South Side of Haywaters
Road (a/k/a 155 Fisherman' s Beach Road) , Cutchogue, NY; Lot No. 3;
Map of Peconic Bay Properties ,' Inc. , Filed Map No. 786 ; County Tax
Map Parcel ID No. 1000-111-1-41.
The public hearings on this matter were held on January 18 ,
1983 and February 4 , 1983 , at which time the hearing was declared
closed pending deliberations.
The board made the following findings and ,determination:
By this appeal, appellant seeks: (1) permission to construct
a 25 ' by 40 ' inground swimmingpool and fence on a vacant parcel of
land known as Lot 2 of Peconic Bay Properties , Inc. Subdivision; and
(2) approval of access over the private road known as Fisherman' s
Beach Road [also known as Haywaters Road] . It is the understanding
of this board that the swimmingpool is the be used accessory to the
main dwelling on the adjacent parcel. Both parcels have frontage
along Cutchogue Harbor and therefore are subject to the rules and
regulations of the Tidal Wetlands Act of the State of New York. The
adjoining "residence parcel" has minimal reasonable building area,
and the board agrees with the reasoning of the appellant under the
circumstances herein.
Upon .inspecting the private road in question, it is the opinion
of the board that same is in good satisfactory condition up to the
point of access (driveway) . into these premises.
In considering this appeal , the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements of the zoning
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 appellant
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 consideration 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. Goehringer, it was
RESOLVED , that Appeal No. 3061 , application of ANITA M. SAMUELS
for approval of access. and for permission to construct inground
swimmingpool, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING
Southold Town Board of Appeals =47- February .4, i_j83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3061 - Anita M. Samuels, continued: )
CONDITIONS :
1. That the initial fill of' pool be trucked in to prevent salt- .
water intrusion possibility if taken from ground water in this
immediate .area;
2 . That this application is subject to review by ,the Suffolk
County Planning Commission pursuant to Sections, 1323, et seq. of the
Suffolk County Charter.
Location of Property: South Side of Haywaters Road (a/k/a 155
Fisherman's Beach- Road) , Cutchogue, NY; Lot , #2 of Peconic Bay Proper-
ties ,. Inc. ; County Tax Map Parcel ID' No. 1000-111-1-41.
Vote of the -Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass :and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3062. OTTO ZAPF.
Upon application of .OTTO ZAPF', by J. Hayes Kavanagh as attorney,
666 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10103 for a Variance for approval -of alter-
native- access over rights-of-way located off the North Side of Main Road,
Orient, NY, over lands. now or formerly of' Kyrkostas and Demarest. Location
of Parcel . in Question: R-O-W off the North Side of Main Road, Orient, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel .ID No. 1000-13-24.
The public hearing concerning this. application was held .,on
January 13 , 1983, at which time the, hearing was declared, closed pending
deliberations .
The board made the following findings and determination:
This is an application for .permission to use part of an alterna-
tive right-of-way adjoining -the legal right-of-way to the premises in
question along the ?asterly-',boundary for a. distance of approximately
1200 feet. The original approval of access was given a conditional .
approval by this board on October 30 , 1982 under Appeal No. 304.3 to
Mr. and Mrs. Gus Kyrkostas , predecessors in title, and was filed with
the Town Clerk' s Office on November .4 , 1982. . As -shown on plan dated
November. 19..82 and ,filed with this application, access to the premises
commences at a point on the northerly side of Main Road (running along
the easterly boundary of a 2. 232 acre parcel now or formerly of Kyrkos-
tas) running northerly 424 . 08 feet, a width of 15 feet, thence running
northeasterly and northerly 1597 . 22 feet, thence ' running northwesterly
and northerly 50 .09 feet to the driveway area 'of the parcel .in question.
It is noted for the record that this is an alternative choice
of access for the owner of the parcel in question, and in the event
-the owner does. not choose this alternative access , then the prior.
Southold Town Board of Appeals -48- February .4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3062 - Otto Zapf, continued: )
decision of this board filed November 4 , 1983 shall be adhered. It
is also noted for the . record that similar improvements are required.
for this alternative route as that required for the original access..
In considering this appeal, -the board. determines that. the variance
request is. not substantial in relation to the requirements of ' the zoning
code; that the circumstances are unique; that by allowing the variance
no substantial detriment to. adjoin.ing properties will be created; that
the 'difficulty cannot be obviated by a' method feasible for appellant
other than a variance; that the relief, 'requested will be in harmony
with and promote the.,g.eneral purposes of. zon.ing; and in view 'of the
manner in which the difficulty arose. and .in consideration of all the
above factors , the interest of justice will be served by allowing the
variance as indicated below.
On motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3062 , application for OTTO ZAPF for
approval .of an alternative access route, BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. That this access road running. along the easterly side of
premises. now or formerly of Kyrkostas a length of 4214. 08 feet (from
the northerly side of Main Road) , shall; '
(a) be improved .and cleared a minimum width of 15 feet
. [except that the stone wall existing. near this right-of-way shall
.not be disturbed] ; and
(b) be improved with a minimum of 4" of stone blend to
a .width of 15 feet.
2 . That the remainder of this alternative right=of-way, which
IS a length . of approximately 1.597. 22 feet and 50 .'08 . feet, shall have
a clear and ..unobstructed with of : l5 .feet and .shall
(a) be improved with . 21I .of. three-quarter-inch stone blend
and properly leveled:
3 . Where the terrain- of the land over which such access road
is to be traversed is such that drainage problems may occur in the
future, the applicant (or subsequent owners) shall be required to
construct such drainage facilities as may be recommended by the town
(road engineer) .
4 . All work required as her,einbefore set forth shall be performed
under the supervision of the town (road) engineer, and. no certificate
of occupancy for vacant land or structures shall be issued .until these
requirements have been complied mith.
5. That this approval of alternative access is subject to
Southold Town Board of Appeals - 49- ,February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3062 - Otto Zapf, continued: )
approval by the owner of the alternative access (now of H. Demarest)
giving his written consent therefor.
6 . That the Board of Appeals may make any reasonable exception
as in its judgment it deems appropriate under the circumstances con-
cerning the improvements of this right-of-way.
7. That in the event this right-of-way is to service more than
one residence , then this entire right-of-way must be brought up to
the specifications adopted by this board on March .22 , 1979.
Location of Parcel in Question: County Tax Map District. 1000 ,.
Section 013 , Block 02 , Lot 004 , containing 3. 1.36 acres , at Orient, NY.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously .adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3073 - RONALD J. ROTHMAN.
Upon application of RONALD J. ROTHMAN, Box 878 , Southold, NY
(Owner : V. L'Epplatenier) for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article III, Section 100-31 for permission to construct new dwelling
with insufficient front (and/or rear) yard setbacks at Lakeview Avenue,
Peconic , NY; Peconic Shores Section II, Subdivision Lots 52-56 incl. ;
County Tax Map Parcel ID Nos. 1000-67-03-002 , 003 and 013.
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, appellant seeks permission to locate a proposed
,one-family: dwelling on a parcel of land containing an area of approxi-
mately 34 ,750 square feet and comprising Subdivision Lots 52, 53 , 54,
55 and 56 of "Map No. 2 of Peconic Shores, Map No. 654 as filed in the
Suffolk County Clerk' s Office. " The proposed dwelling is to be
located at the southeasterly end of the subject premises with a
setback from both Lake View Avenues of 15 feet. The appellant has
indicated that the rear yard setback from Autumn Lake will be a
minimum of 50 feet as required by the zoning code. Survey amended
September 1, 1981 for Victor L'Eplattenier, Jr, by Roderick VanTuyl,
P.C. indicates that the parcel in question has a higher elevation
at this proposed location in comparison with the remainder of the
lot, between 10 ' and 51 . It is noted for the record that this
property is located in the Flood Zone A-8 which requires a minimum
elevation above mean sea level of the lowest floor at or above 111 .
The board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant and find that
this area is the most feasible and practical building area.
A
:Southold Town Board of ._peals - 50- February 4, )83 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3073 - RONALD J. ROTHMAN, continued: )
In considering this appeal, the board determines that the variance
request is not substantial in relation to the requirements- of the zoning
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 appellant
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 consideration 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. Gri.gonis, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3073, application of RONALD J. ROTH
MAN for permission to . construct one-family dwelling with insufficient
frontyard setbacks at .15 feet, BE� AND, HEREBY IS APPROVED; SUBJECT TO
THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS':
1. That the grant of this variance is subject to the conditions
of Appeal No. 2897 , application of Victor L'Eplattenier, filed with
the Office of the Town Clerk on November 10 , 1981, granting approval
of access .
:2. An updated N.Y.S. Department of Environmental Conservation
review concerning this project.
3. Compliance with the Floodplain Management Law of the Town
of Southold.
Location. of Property: Peconic Shores Subdivision Lots 52 , 53 ,
54 , 55 and 56 , Map No. 654 ; County Tax Map Parcel ID Nos. 1000-067-03-
2 , 3 and 13.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis , Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was unanimously adopted.
RESERVED DECISION: Appeal No. 3075 - JOSEPH AND MARY GNOZZO.
Upon application for JOSEPH & MARY GNOZZO, by Gary Flanner Olsen,
Esq. , Main Road, Mattituck, NY [Owner : W. Moritz] for a Variance to the
Zoning. Ordinance , Article VI, Section 100-60 and Article XI, Section 100-
118D for permission to reinstate nonconforming dwelling use for existing
building in this B-Zone at 73265 Main Road, Greenport, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel ID No. 1000-45-03-002 .
The public hearing concerning 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, appellants seek permission to reinstate the use
`Southold Town Board of Appeals - 51- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
(Appeal No. 3075 - JOSEPH .& MARY GNOZZO, continued: )
of the easterly most building on the subject premises as a one-family
residence , which use has. been discontinued for over two years. The
building in question contains approximately 1,000 square feet of living
area, upon information supplied to the board, and is set back approxi-
mately 35 feet (exclusive of canopy area) from the front property line
abutting the Main Road. Also existing on the premises are a concrete
block, one-story building containing an area of approximately 2400
square feet, small shed to the rear of the "residence" structure and
blacktopped parking areas. The premises contains 5 . 126 acres. and
fronts along the Main Road 147 . 43 feet. The parcels immediately
abutting the subject parcel on the west and east are also zoned
B-Light and appear to have been used as one-family residences prior
to the adoption of zoning.
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 property 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 use 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. Douglass , seconded by Mr. Grigonis, it was
RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 3075 , application for JOSEPH AND MARY
GNOZZO for permission to reinstate one-family dwelling use in existing
structure , BE AND HEREBY IS APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING:
(1) Any change of use of this structure to be used as a one-family
residence must comply with the zoning laws; i.e. no more than one use of
this structure shall be permitted at one time) .
(2) Review by the Suffolk County Planning Commission pursuant
to Sections 1323 , et seq. of the Suffolk County Charter.
Location of Property : 73265 Main Road, Greenport, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel ID No. 1000-45-03-002 .
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
h
' Southold Town Board of Appeals -52- February 4 , 1983 Regular Meeting
NEW APPEAL APPLICATIONS:
APPEAL NO. 3081 - R.T. KROEPEL, D.D.S. , P.C. - The board, upon
reviewing the application of Dr. Kroepel filed on February 1 , 1983 ,
noted that the Planning Board has not had an opportunity to review
this proposed subdivision and comments from the Health Department
have not been received. It was the consensus of the board to await
comments from the Planning Board and the County Health Department
before scheduling this matter for a public hearing.
The secretary was instructed to forward a letter to the
applicant' s attorney advising him of the above.
APPEAL NO. 3078 - MARION SADICK and MURRAY SCHLUSSEL by Shepard M.
Scheinberg, Esq. - The board, upon reviewing the application of
Sadick and Schlussel filed on January 27 , 1983 , noted that the
Planning Board and N.Y. S. Department of Environmental Conservation
have not commented or approved the proposed project. The following
resolution was adopted:
On motion by Mr. Douglass, . seconded by Mr. Goehringer, it was
RESOLVED, that the matter of Marion Sadick and Murray Schlussel,
Appeal No. 3078 , be and hereby is held in abeyance pending written
receipts of approval from the N.Y. S. Department of Environmental
Conservation and the Southold Town Planning Board.
Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was .unanimously adopted.
SET-UPS FOR NEXT REGULAR MEETING: On motion by Mr. Douglass ,
seconded by Mr. Goehringer , it was
RESOLVED, that the following application be scheduled for public
hearings to be held at the next Regular Meeting of this board, to wit;
Friday, February 25 , 1983 commencing at 7 : 30 .p.m. and that the same be
advertised in the local and official newspapers of the town pursuant
to law:
7 : 35 p.m. Appeal. No. 3076 . HAROLD P. SCHWERDT. Accessory
building in frontyard. Oak Avenue, Southold.
7 : 40 p.m. Appeal No. 3077. JANET A. DAVIS. To reinstate non-
conforming use as an antique shop and residential use
in this A-Zone. 45395 Main Road, Southold.
7 : 45 p.m. Appeal No. 3079 . WALTER GAIPA. (1) remove and replace
accessory building in frontyard area; (2) Approval of
access . 360 Lakeview Terrace, East Marion.
r
Southold Town Board o ppeals -53- February 4 .983 Regular Meeting
(Set-Ups for February 25 , 1983 , _c.ont.inued: )
7 : 50 p.m. Appeal No. 3082. BURKE E. LIBURT. Utilize existing
storage building for corral to stable pony, with less
than required 40 ' setback from property lines . 1420 King
Street, Orient.
7 :55 p.m. Appeal No. 3083. J. ROYAL & VIRGINIA GIFFORD. Accessory
building in sideyard area. 1515 Minnehaha Blvd, Southold.
8 :OO p.m. Appeal No. 3084 . PATNICK REALTY CORP. Two residential
dwellings in this B-Zoned District. 69430 Main Road,
Greenport.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was unanimously adopted.
TENTATIVE SPECIAL MEETING DATE: On motion by Mr. Goehringer,
seconded by Mr. Doyen, it was
RESOLVED, that a Special Meeting be scheduled for Saturday,
February 19 , 1983 at approximately 9 :15 a.m. for the purpose of
transacting such business matters that may properly come before
the board at that time.
Vote of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis ,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
REQUEST FOR RE-HEARING IN THE MATTER OF EAST END SUPPLY CO. , INC.
APPEAL NO. 3080 (to re-hear Appeal No. _3013)
WHEREAS, on January 13 , 1983, this board rendered a conditional
approval of Appeal No. 3013 , for East End Supply Co. , Inc. , and
WHEREAS, on February 1 , 1983 , East End Supply Co. , Inc. filed
an application for a rehearing of Appeal No. 3013 (see Appeal No. 3080)
stating its reasons for this request for a rehearing, and
NOW.,, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Appeal No. 30.80 , application
of East End Supply Co. , Inc. be granted a rehearing, and . that the public
hearing concerning this matter shall be scheduled and advertised pursu-
ant to law; to be held at the board' s next Regular Meeting, Friday,
February 25 , 1983, to be held at the Southold Town Hall, Southold, NY.
Vote. of the Board: Ayes : Messrs. Goehringer, Doyen, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was unanimously adopted.
01 A
a Southold Town Board of Appeals -54- February 4 , 983 Regular Meeting
Being there was no other business properly coming before the board
at this time, the Chairman declared the meeting adjourned. The meet-
ing was adjourned at approximately 11 : 20 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda F. Kowalski , Secretary
Southold Town Board of Appeals
'ROVED
� TMOn Board of Aovv!,
RECEIVED AND FILED BY
TIIE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK
DATE_�I g3 HOUR 9,'a�)P to
Town Clerk, down o uthola