Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout3701 · APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS · Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. Joseph H. Sawicki James Dinizio, Jr. Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. NO. 3701: Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRAunder Article XIV, Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. Location of Property: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, Lot 5. Zone District: Hamlet Business (HB), previously referred to as B-1 General Business. At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on September 6, 1990 the following action was taken: WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted into the record concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. By this application, applicant requests a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. The revocation was issued on November 5, 1987. The reasons stated on the building inspector's revocation notice read as follows: ...Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued October 27, 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason; not following plans, did not comply with a stop work order, in violation of 100-142-C & D... Page 2 -Appl. No. 3701 Application of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 Section 100-142-C & D, supra, (now Section 100-282C & D) of the zoning code regulations, provides as follows: ...Revocation of permit. The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances: ... C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance of the application, plans or specifi- cations... D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector... 2. The property in question: (a) contains a total lot area of 3,800 square feet with 40.0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold; (b) is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, 005; (c) is located in the Hamlet Business (HB) Zone District, as re-designated January 10, 1989 under the new Master Plan revisions; (d) is improved with an existing building which is nonconforming as to various setback requirements. 3. Numerous hearings were held by this Board, and on April 14, 1988, an interim decision was rendered. 4. In this record, it was found that factual and legal issues existed regarding the validity of the building permit under the nonconforming use section(s) of the zoning code (previously 100-118 and now Section 100-243), and the Board at its April 14, 1988 meeting set this matter down for a further hearing to be held on May 12, 1988. The applicants were asked to be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues concerning the nonconforming (residential) use of the building. 5. No hearing was held on May 12, 1988 since legal proceedings were commenced (May 11, 1988) by the applicant, and a hearing was to be continued on June 9, 1988, pending action by the Supreme Court. Page 3 - Appl. No. 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 6. On November 17, 1988 the Supreme Court rendered a decision remanding the issue of the nonconforming apartment use back to the Zoning Board of Appeals and reinstated that portion of the building permit which relates to the permitted restaurant use. 7. On January 10, 1989, re-designated Hamlet Business revisions. the subject premises was (HB) under the new Master Plan 8. During 1990, additional hearings were held by this Board, and testimony and documentation were recorded, "... concerning ~ne status of the second floor apartment as a nonconforming use..." (as per the Supreme Court's decision rendered November 17, 1988, Index No. 7725-88). NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, that based upon the record and personal knowledge of the board, reinstatement is hereby GRANTED for the apartment use on the second floor for single-family occupancy, with renovations and new construction as exists and as furnished for the record, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the apartment not exceed 825 sq. ft. in total floor area; 2. That the apartment comply with all other codes, rules and regulations applicable thereto, including local and state fire construction codes. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, and Dinizio. (Absent due to hospitalization was Member Sawicki.) This resolution was duly adopted. lk RECEIVED AND FILleD THE SOUTHOLD TOV~rN /i.~ERARD P. GOEHRI}fGER, ~IRM3~N Town Clerk Town Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11cj'71 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 370] Application Dated December ]0, ]987 TO: Eric J. Bressler, Esq. as Attorney for CHARLES ZAHRA Main Road, Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 [Appellant(s)] At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on April ]4, ]988, the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ ] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [X] Request for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV, Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal-~termination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. Location of Property: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY~ County Tax Map District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, Lot 5. Zone District: B-1 General Business. WHEREAS, public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl. No. 3701 on February 18, 1988 and March 3, 1988; and WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: I. This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. The revocation was issued on November 5, 1987. 2. The property in question is located in the "B-l" General Business Zoning District and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, Lot 005. 3. The subject premises contains a total area of 3,800 sq. ft. with 40.0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold. (CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO) DATED: April 14, 1988. Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Page 2 Appl. No. 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14, 1988 4. The subject premises is presently improved with a partially completed one-story concrete foundation with exterior walls. Previously, the premises was improved by a two-story structure which was nonconforming as to various setback require- ments and as to use. 5. The building permit was revoked under Article XVI, Section 100-142 of the Zoning Code which reads as follows: "...The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances: A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application, plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance with the applicable law. C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application, plans or specifications. D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. 6. Hearings were held on this application on February 18, 1988 and March 3, 1988. The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters of personal knowledge in the record. This was completed by March 14, 1988, and the hearing was closed at the Board's Regular Meeting on March 17, 1988. 7. Based on the facts in the record, it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the Building Department. It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure. Indeed, the second story has been totally removed and the first floor has been completely rebuilt. The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new struc- ture when compared to the prior structure. 8. Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted, the facts before the Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit. Specifically, the evidence would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building. This would violate Section lO0-118E of the Zoning Code. The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would also subject the project to compliance with present building code requirements under the New York State Building Code. Page 3 - Appl. No. 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14, 1988 9. Based on the personal knowledge of the Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner, it further appears that the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years. This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section lO0-118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid. 10. In his letter dated March 17, 1988, counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held. Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues. ll. The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code. These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this juncture. Since no vested rights can be obtained under an illegal permit, it would appear to be in the applicant's best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board. Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed, in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment's revocation of the building permit. 12. Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property, we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing, at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections lO0-118D and lO0-118E of the Zoning Code. Now, therefore, on motion by Mr. Grigonis, by Mr. Goehringer,it was seconded RESOLVED, that the Matter of ~he Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl. No. 3701, BE AND HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING, to be held on the 12TH DAY OF MAY, 1988, at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sec- tions lO0-118D and lO0-118E of the Zoning Code. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis, Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki. This resolution was duly adopted. lk GERARD P. GOEHRjrNGER, C~IRMAN RECEIVED AND FILED BY Town Clerk, Town of Southold APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS i L , fi f + • SCOTT L. HARRIS � E Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. �,' •�� ;¢`� d Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 NOTICE OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVE, pursuant to the Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at a Regular Meeting, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY, 11971, on WEDNESDAY, June 27, 1990, at the following times: 7 :30 p.m. Appl. No. 3949 - FRANCES FRISBIE. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A.4 (100-33) , as disapproved, for permission to construct an accessory building in the front yard area. Accessory buildings may only be located in the required rear yard. Property Location: 8050 Nassau Point Road, Cutchogue, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 118, Block 5, Lot 2.1. Page 2 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of June 27, 1990 7 :35 p.m. Appl. No. 3948 - MGH ENTERPRISES, INC. - ORIENT BY THE SEA. Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 C:9 (e) , as disapproved, for permission to construct an off-premises sign. Property Location: 66.040 North Road, Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 40, Block 04, Lot 01. 7 : 40 p.m. Appl. No. 3947 - JAMES MARK. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A.3, Article XXIV, Section 100-244 B, as disapproved, for permission to construct an addition to a one family dwelling. Proposed construct will have insufficient front yard setback. Property Location: 450 Parsons Boulevard, East Marion, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 37, Block 1, Lot 18. 1 7 :45 p.m. Appl. No. 3946 - MATTHEW KAR. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A. 3, Article XXIV, Section 100-244 B, as disapproved, for permission to construct an addition to a one family dwelling. Proposed construction will have insufficient rear yard setback. Property Location: 155 (Pvt. Road #6) Birch Drive S, Laurel, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 128, Block 4, Lot 4. Page 3 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of June 27 , 1990 7: 50 p.m. Appl. No. 3944 - ANTHONY MERCORELLA. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-33, as disapproved, for permission to construct a two car accessory garage in the front yard area. Proposed construction only permitted in the required rear yard. Property Location: 2260 Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 145, Block 04, Lot 04. 7: 55 p.m. Appl. No. 3951 - JAMES, PETER & CHRIS MESKOURIS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A.3, Article XXIII, Section 100-239d A. ( 2) . Proposed construction will not meet side yard setbacks and will exceed the permitted lot coverage and will be within 100 ft. of the ordinary high water mark. Property Location: 1350 Sound Beach Drive, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 106, Block 1, Lot 36. 8: 00 p.m. Appl. No. 3952 - BRUCE & TERESA BLASKO. Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 B (14) , for permission to have an accessory apartment. Proposed accessory apartment in an existing one family dwelling will contain less than 1600 sq. ft. of livable floor area. Property Location: 23 Middleton Road, Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 40, Block 5, Lot 9. Page 4 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of June 27, 1990 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 3950 - JACQUE KASABA. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A.4 (100-33) , Article III A, Section 100-30A. 3, Article XXIV, Section 100-244, as disapproved, for permission to construct a deck addition to dwelling and accessory pool. Proposed accessory structure not permitted in the front yard area and proposed construction will exceed permitted lot coverage. Property Location: 80 Lakeside Drive & 675 Cedar Point Drive, Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 90, Block 3, Lot 14. 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3953 - PETER & CHERYL INZERILLO. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30 A.3, Bulk, Area and Parking Regulations, as disapproved, for permission to construct a deck addition to existing one family dwelling. Proposed construction will have insufficient side yard setbacks and excessive lot coverage. Property Location: 505 7th Street, Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 48, Block 01, Lot 17. 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 3831 - RALPH & PATRICIA PUGLIESE. Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30B (14) , for a Winery for the Production, Storage and the Page 5 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of June 27, 1990 Appl. No. 3953 - RALPH AND PATRICIA PUGLIESE, continued Retail Sale of Wine. Property Location: 34876 Main Road, Cutchogue, County Tax 'Map No. 1000, Section 097, Block 01, Lot 12.1. 8:20 p.m. Appl. No. 3701 - CHARLES ZAHRA. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXV, Section 100-243, Article XXV, Section 244, for permission to continue to use the second floor apartment as a non-conforming use. Property Location: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 141, Block 4, Lot 5. 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 3915 - JORDAN' S PARTNERS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71, as disapproved, for permission to construct office and retail stores. Proposed construction is not a permitted use in this District. Property Location: 1000 Main Street and 160 Main Road, Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 34, Block 2, Lot 1. Page 6 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of June 27, 1990 The Board of Appeals will at said time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each of the above matters. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before time allotted. Additional time for your presentation will be available, if needed. For more information, please call 765-1809. Dated June 19, 1990: BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Doreen Ferwerda APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS 'c Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman 's ®� Charles Grigonis, Jr. Town Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 NOTICE OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at a Regular Meeting, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971, on WEDNESDAY, JULY 25, 1990, at the following times: .7:30 p.m. Appl. No. 3954 - PHILIP SALICE. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30A.4 (100-33) 01 Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4 B, for permission to construct an accessory shed and deck with gazebo. Accessory shed is less than 3 ft. from a lot line, gazebo is located in the front yard . and gazebo and deck are less than 75 ft. from the bulkhead. Property Location: 1945 Bayview Avenue, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 106, Block 06, Lot 37 . Page 2 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of July 25, 1990 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3960 - THOMAS & .ALLISON SARGENT. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30A.3, for permission to subdivide a non-conforming lot. Proposed construction of new lot will have insufficient width, depth and total lot area for this district. Property Location: Private Road of Fox Avenue, Fishers Island, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 06, Block 06, Lot 07 . 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3955 - DOMINICK SBLENDIDO & A. AURICCHIO. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30.3, Article XXIII, Section 100-230 (A) , Article III A, Section 100-30A.2 A(1) (100-31A) , for permission to construct an addition to existing one family dwelling. Proposed construction is not a permitted use (1) one-family detached dwelling not to exceed one (1) dwelling on each lot (a two family dwelling is not a permitted use) . Property Location: 185 Inlet Lane, Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 43, Block 004, Lot 37 . Page 3 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of July 25, 1990 7: 45 p.m. Appl. No. 3956 - LlOYD GATES. Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article X, Section 100-101B, for permission to Occupy and use as a Billiard parlor for commercial recreation. Property Location: 46250 County Road 48, Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 55, Block 5, Lot 7. 7 :50 p.m. Appl. No. 3701 - CHARLES ZAHRA. Variance to the j Zoning Ordinance, Article XXV, Section 100-243, Article XXV, r - Section 100-244, for permission to continue to use the second floor apartment as a non-conforming use. Property Location: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section i 141, Block 4, Lot 5. --- 7 : 55 p.m. Appl. No. 3915 - JORDAN' S PARTNERS. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71, as disapproved, for permission to construct office and retail stores. Proposed construction is not a permitted use in this District. Property Locations: 1000, Main Street and 160 Main Road, Greenport, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 34, Block 2, Lot 1. Page 4 - Notice of .Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of July 25, 1990 The Board of Appeals will at said time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each of the above matters. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before time allotted. Additional time for your presentation will be available, if needed. For more information, please call 765-1809. Dated July 17, 1990 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Doreen Ferwerda NOTICE OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN , pursuant to Section 267 of the . Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold , the following hearings will be held .by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at a Regular Meeting at the Southold Town Hall , Mai.n Road , , Southold , New York , -on ' THURSDAY., - FEBRUARY 18 , 1988 at the following times : 7 : 30 p .m . Appl . No . 3702 - OLGA CORDES . Variances to the Zoning Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-31 , Bulk Schedule , for approval of the proposed insufficient area and width of two parcels in this pending division of land located -at the south side of Sterling Road (Nassau Farms ) , Cutchogue , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 104 , Block 4 , Lots 17 and 18 . 7 : 35 p .m. Appl . No . 3709 EDWARD AND ORTRUD HANUS . Special Except-ion to the Zoning Ordinance , to establish one new Accessory Apartment in the existing dwelling structure in accordance with the requirements of Article III , Section 100-30 (B ) , subsection 15 . Location of Property : 635 Lupton ' s Point Road , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 115 , Block 11 , Lot 3 . 7 : 40 p .m. Appl . No . 3699 - EDWARD AND BARBARA BETSCH. Variances to the Zoning Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-31 , Bulk Schedule , for permission to construct addition ( s ) to dwelling with an insufficient westerly sideyard . setback and insufficient total sideyards . Location of Property : North Side of Rabbit Lane , East. Marion , NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-31 -17-15 . 7 : 45 p .m. Appl . No . 3607 - JAMES O ' NEILL and PETER McSHERRY . Variances to the Zoning Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-31 , Bulk Schedule , for approval of insufficient area , width and depth of two proposed parcels , each with an' existing dwelling , located at the corner of the N/s Wiggins Street and the W/s Eighth Street , Greenport , NY ; Map of S . Buel Corwin (1885 ) Lots 28 and 29; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 48 , Block 1 , Lot 22 . S Page 2 - Notice of Hearings Regular Meeting - February l8 , 1987 Southold Town Board of Appeals 7 : 55 p .m. TARTAN 0_IL CORP . : (a ) Appl . No . 3633 - Special Exception under Article VII , Section 100-70 (B ) of the Zoning 'Code for approval of the establishment of a partial self-service gasoline station ; and (b ) Appl . No . 3636 - Variance to the Zoning Ordinance., Articles VI , Section 100-62 ( B) , Article VII , Section 100-70 ( B) , for an Interpretation of "retail shopping center" and for permis- sion to establish convenience store as an accessory to the existing gasoline-service station . Location of Property : South Side of Main Road , West Side of Marratooka Lane , and East Side of Sunset Avenue , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 115 , Block 3 , Lot 9 . Zone . District : "B-1 " General Business 8 :05 p .m'. Appl . No . 3701 - CHARLESZAHRA. Application under Article XIV , Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #.15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 5 . Zone District : " B-l " General Business . The Board of Appeals will hear at said time and place all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each of the above matters . Each hearing will not start before the time allotted . Written comments may be submitted prior to the con- clusion of the subject hearing . For more information , please call 765-1809 . Dated : February 2 , 1988. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN Linda Kowalski , Board Secretary -----------------------------------------------------------------x Copies to the following 2/3/88 by mail : Mr. William B. Peters , 1600 Pine Tree Road , Cutchogue , NY 11935 ( Re : Cordes ) Mr. and Mrs . Edward A. Hanus , 635 Lupton ' s Point Road , Mattituck 11952 Lynn Theresa Cahalan , Esq . , 12 First St . , Box 1330 , Riverhead , NY 11901 As Attorney for Mr. and Mrs . Edward Betsch William D. Moore , Esq . , Main Road , Clause Commons , Mattituck , NY 11952 As Attorney for McSherry & O ' Neill As Attorney for Tartan Oil Corp . Eric J . Bressler , Esq . , Box 1424 , Main Road , Mattituck , NY 11952 As Attorney for Charles Zahra Other : Suffolk Times , Inc . L . I . Traveler-Watchman , Inc . ZBA Members Individual Files Town Bulletin Boards �.? \1J 1 FORM NO. 1 _ ..�.._ ..1 i TOWN O,F:SOU.THOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT , 4 1 91986 TOWN FIALL SO NY N.Y. 11971 E.LDr. DEI`r. TEL.; 765 1802 TOWN OF SOUTF101_D Tbvv ,Of YOUTHOL[),.` '__'_-- Exp..rnined 6k i4 �41, 19?(0 Received . . . . . . . . . . ... . 1pproved :1P.�. . .�: :?.?., 191�. Permit No.�. . . . . . . . . Oisapproved a/c ::. : . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �`etf . . . . .. . . . . . . . . ; . .r. . . .:. : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o1i61�� (BuildingInspector) APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT, Date / . . . . ., 19 ' INSTRUCTIONS a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector,with 3 is of plans,accurate plot plan to scale.. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets ,r areas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this appli- ation. ; c. The work covered by this application may'not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issued a Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit Ball be kept on the premises available for inspection.throughout the work. e. No building-shall tie occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy ;call have been granted.by the Building Inspector. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the ,uilding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or .egulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein described. lie applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, hot ' ig code, and.regulations, and to dinit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary ins] s. . . (,.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Signature of ap i nt, or name, if a corporation) r�r.�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Mailing address of applicant) .tate whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Jame of owner of premises .�!w's1. �. @.a: 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (as on the tax roll or latest deed) applicant is a corporation,signature of duly authorized officer. ' (Name and title of corporate officer) A Builder's-License No. Plumber's License No. . Electrician's License No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -Other Trade's License No. . . . . . . . . . . Location of land on which proposed work will be done' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . Hou se Number ..,, ; :.. ..::.,; Street Hamlet . County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . . . . J . . ..: , . . . . . Block . . . . . �. ?. . . . . . . . , Lot . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. (Name) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy,of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy .A. . .qr �. . . . . . . , r ''� . . .. � ... � . . b. Intended use and occupancy . . . . . . . . .��0%.:�. . , . , ="'y 2M 4 KAM4 . . . . . . .iii� . . . . . . . . . . . . Nature of work (check which appli, ;): New Building . . . . ... . .. . . Additii . . . . . . .�. Al'teration Repair . . . . Removal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demolition . . . . . . . . . . Other Work . . :. . . . '- Demolition..... . (Des EstimatedCost . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. . . . .. ' . . . .'.'Fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (to be paid on filing this application) If dwelling, number of dwelling units . . . . .,� . . . . . . . . Nuinbcz of dweilinn units on each floor. . , . . . . ... . . . . . . .. Ifgarage, number of cars . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.'_...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature land extent of each type of use e F<cv,.-AVA.�Mthr�. ./��J� Dimensions of existinb structures, if any: Front . . .��. . �' . Rear -. .` . �. . . . . Depth . .� . d. . . . . . . height . . �. . .fe �. . . . . . . . Nitmber of Stories . . . : . y�a'�? : .Q�r.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dimensions,of same structure with alterations or additions: Front . . : . . :3 Y. . . . . . Rear :. . : . . . Depth . . . . .°5r.. . . . . . . . . . . . Height . . . .4 V . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Stories . . 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Dimensions of entire new construction: Front . . . . . . . . . .... . . . . Rear . .. . ... . . . . . . . . . .. Depth Height . . . . . . . . . . Number of Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. Size of lot: Front . . . °�'.�'�.. . . . . . . Rear . . 'S' .�j'© . . . . . Depth -�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . !. Date of Purchase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Name'of Former Owner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Zone or use district in which premises are situated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Does proposed construction violate ny zoning law, ordinance or regulation: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Will lot be regraded . . . . , . : . . . Q. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Will excess fill be removed from premises: Yeses' mises . . . . . . . . . Address . . .Phone Nt.�. . . . . . . . . . ...Name of Owner of pre . . Name of Architect . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phone No. . .`. . . . . . . . . . . . . Name of Contractor . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phone No. . . . . . . i. Is this property located within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? *Yes . . . No . . . . *If yes, Southold Town Trustees Permit may be required. PLOT DIAGRAM Locate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether existing.or proposed, and,indicate all set-back dimensions from operty lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate whether tenor or corner lot. TATE OF NEW YORIC, S•S OUNTY OF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contrar-0 ')ove named. eistile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Contractor, agent, corporate officer, etc.) f said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this )plication; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief;and that the ork will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. worn to before me this 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . f. . . .day of. . . ra!'ce . . . . . 19?/. otary Public, . . . . /`:`:` :'r`-. . �. . .✓!`!.�'. � �- County . . . : y .0000 (Signature of applicant' Mattxr�Expir .7 FORM NO. 1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE _r,C j/c�� Z VE�?dj SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ���.r/ �!� �✓/i-� C� `� r Examined ...�i �6,/ ..... .... 19 Application No. .............. Approved ............I. .......... .......... I qZ . Permit No. . . 0. ...... '����� Uk�✓�1 � � R2) Disapproved a/c ............................................................................................ ........... ....................................... .............F:.l' � (Building Inspector) APPLICATION FOR BUILDING P RMIT � r� ci Date ........:�. ... ..................... .. 19...1..7... INSTRUCTIONS _ T a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter oe in ink and submitted in triplicate to the Building nspector, with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. t b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or reas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this application. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit hall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy hall have been granted by the Building Inspector. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the uilding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or egulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein described. he applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing c e, and regulations, and to dmit authorized inspectors on premises and in buildings for necessary i e ns. (Signature of ' licant, no e, if a corporation) y� ................................ ..................... ....... Address of applicant) =4 State whe+ker applicant is owner, lessee, agent,, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. �C�......... ........................................................................................... . Name of ow er of premises ........1. :. -... .............:.. ..: f3 % .. If applicant is a corporate, sign"ture of my authorized o er. . .................... .................................................................. \ (Name and title of corporate officer) S Builder's License No. .................................................... \�•. F� Plumber's License No. ................................................ � C Electrician's License No. ............................................ Other Trade's License No. . .......................................... Location of land on whi proposed work will be done. Map No.: ... .. .. .... .. ... .............. Lot No. ' ....................... Street and Number ... .�CP....� �L.r..l.................. �. �................. ......... .......... Municipality z• State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Exisiting use and occupancy ......... . �, � �1... .�..L�J. .�l`:... �:.. ....................... ', ... ...............�.. b. Intended use and occupancy ................................ '�c�:4�C 42///...1........ u�/��� c...... ................. I 1U k i t � f i ,rk (check which applicable): New Building• .................. Additjon ..............,::. Alteration .` h• Removal .................. Demolition.................... Other Work ........ ............................. ...... 1-15�-U (Description) ,d Cost ...............................................................Fee ... . ... ............... .................... ...... ....................... .... ... (to be paid on filing this application) '` selling, number of dwelling units ...................... .Number of dwelling units on each floor ............................ _ f garage number of cars ................... . ... . ............... ................................................................... ................... "' 69 business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use ............ ,1 • Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front ........:,.... .............. Rear• ................................ Depth .................... Height ........................ Number of Stories ........................... . .................................................................................. Dimensions of some structure with alterations or additions: Front ....................................` Rear ............................ Depth ................................ Height .............................Number of Stories ............................. g, Dimensions of entire new construction: Front .................................... Rear ................. Depth Height .................... Number of Stories ................................................................................................................�ti...• 9. Size of lot: Front ........................................................ Rear .......................................... Depth ......................... :,.. . 10. Date of Purchase ............................... ........................Name of Former Owner ................ ......................................L 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated ............................................................... ....................................... 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: ...............:.................................... 13. Will lot be regraded ............................ Will excess fill be removed from premises: ( ) Yes ', ( ) No 14. Name of Owner of premises .................................................... Address ................................ Phone No. ...................... Name of Architect .............................................................. Address ................................ Phone No. Name of Contractor ............................................................ Address ................................ Phone No. ...................... PLOT DIAGRAM Locate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether existing or proposed, and indicate all set-back dimensions from property lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate. whether interior or corner lot. s� STATE OF NEW atfolk I SS COUNTY Y OF . ........................f�Till'iam"Y,aager . ................................................................being .duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contracf) above named. contractor Heis the ............................................... ............................................................ ................................................................ (Contractor, agent, corporate officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and thar the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. Sworn to betfore me this 8 March 77........................ day of ...............Siiffd'Tk. ........ ., 19........ NotaryPublic, ............................. . ................ County . .1...............:....... ............. :....................... ............................ �, } i (Signature of applicant), -/ , ---i ELIZABETH ANN NEVIL LE NOTARY PUBLIC. State of P:er+ Y rj No. 52.8125850, Suffolk CoL Term Expires ,,•larch 30. 19 �` FORM NO. Y TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. T. IT 7 Examined ......... ../.. .�� ....j.. .. 19. C/- Application No. Approved ...............�.............�... ., 19�.� Permit No. ... L ...... ,/ (Building Inspector) - APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT J . ('.••1:...c .............. Date .......... ..... 19............ INSTRUCTIONS a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or, in ink and submitted in triplicate to the Building " Inspector, with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and giving a detailed description of layout ofproperty must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this application. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used-in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy shall have been granted by the Building Inspector. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in buildings for necessary inspections. (Si hotiire o !applicant/or na n if a corporation) (Address"of applicant) State whether appl!canf is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. ............ ......•..................................... / ...........................i` . .............,................................................. . Name of owner of premises ...........(.� �......�� : :fry:— .. ................................................... If applicant is a corporate, signature of duly authorized officer./ (Name and title of corporate officer) •.• Builder's License No. .......... .................................. C-I Plumber's License No. ................................................ Electrician's License No. ............................................ Other Trade's License No. .......................................... . . , 00 1. Location of land on which pr sed work will done. Map No.: .....� .�....•••,•,••,,,,,,,, , , Lot No. R. P..... Street and Number ..... �:,��� ..... ... U. 'Municip`ality 2. State existing use and occupancy of pprr raises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Exisiting use and occupancy ...�C.�.. l:r� ,.,.•...•." ........ ..... i ............. b. Intended use and occupancy �.. �G�i .�� ���i.U.�"`�' V able): New Building ..... Addition _ Demolition. Other Work - lr Of) (Descrtpt_��l C� Z0....... ....................... ,Fee .... ... ............:...........................................:........ (to be paid on filing this application) .'.,` per of dwelling unit'' .............................Number of dwelling units on each floor Derb � ................ f cars ........................................................:..................................................................... .ri j5 commercial or mixed occupancy, specify n ture and extent of each type of use .......... . = .. ions of existing structures, if any: Front .... ............. Rear ...... ........... Depth ...... !.D....... oZ �i Number of Stories �. . ...... . ../ .......... ........................... ....... oinensions of some structure with alterations .additions: Front ...... .... Rear ... �C?.............. Depth ................................. Height ........ :.............Number of Stories ............ ,............ ' .......� g, Dimensions of entire new construction: Front .:......... /.� Rear .....-Depth ........................ Height ...../.C.f....... Number of Stories .....................1-..................f...,.......�/.............................. ......._A.......... ..... 9. Size of lot: Front ............�(At)................................... Rear .........! ........................ Dee th . �...,.o................ 10. Date of Purchase ........................... . .........................No of Former Owner ....... .............. 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated ..............� .rnC' 1/�..�.—. ... .................. .......................... 12. Does proposed constructio iolate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: ..... .......................... .............. 13. Will lot be regraded .... .......0............. Will excess fill be removed fro premise : ( )I Yes: (Y) No 14. Name of Owner of premises V.D.:....... Address ./ il�. .( .�[ Phone No. 2 T:.511P..f 1 Name of Architect ..........:. Address .................. Phone No. .................................................. .:............. ...................... Name of Contractor ................................................::.:.,.,..... Address ................................. Phone No. ...................... PLOT DIAGRAM Locate clearly and .distinctly all buildings, whether existing or proposed, and indicate all set-back dimensions from property lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate whether interior or corner lot. STATE OF NEW YORK, 1 S.S COUNTY OF .................................f � \�(�' .. P.�� Cz being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the applicant .............1..... ..... �,...................... (Name of individual signing contract') . above named. //�� Heis the ...........'�l..�f./L�.01.. . ....................................................................................................................................... (Contractor, agent, corporate officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and thar the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. Sworn to before me this �...... day of ... . ..�..�A... 7................ 1911 NotaryPu ic. ................ ....................... County ......... . ... . ............................ „i ignat re o applic ) MARY E. DAWSON NO Y PUBLIC, State of New York No. 52-4643721. Suffolk County Term Expires March 3o, 19 0 L. 1�3 a, tit tl / 1, Cr•os.rcuyf' � U i !. y.. -.,r / ���•L7 �.� O � � .C'' .O U i+J[V7I7 C:G/C ..-_�_...__..._ ,E: ';::�` i�o!�.•�.�7'/`'N r�L lf�_,/•}l;• Y1/, Su• J..._.• 40 ...,....,. --- / { .a�I111.v r ' r U IN S(J.'TVZ YG 1� Fv r r e r7.r CA.u j'., c t `4 �y�-�d •) ()Jj � +3 19 il� �� UNAUTNOf.QED ALTERATION OR ADDITION C=] —/77 e— To TI-0(5 Y IS A VIOLATICN OF SECTION 72C9 OF THE NLW YCRI 7F EDUCATION LAW. t !" �= - COtIES OF THIS SU.^,V'Y MAP NOT ilVI`Cd Till LAND SU � ur�f-y �'j,�'l.e �J „VEYUR'S SI 1'r..;:L� . h/, /.�• t�iciNk>,;, � 7'i�• CO EAtcc:sz0 SEAL :ril.LL NCY CC ccn7:S"dr.,f,'1T��1'?�/ A5 J!✓/'"l%Cs%La. �'�: TO U A VALID TGUC COPY. cu.arnniEs :N:'ICnT.'. ......^y suALL RUNO fl��J� ✓ati. fl' ONLY 13 IN. 'L ...:..FOP.. w:-,m L:.SU'.%vil IS I ZPALLV• AND n., 6,S L:IIAL;IC THE �i 3 TITLE C(? VANY :3::1':.. ...:.:i I.:...:1'Y AND LEI•vr,.c rlsn• ••-•-----•. ..-.,-._...._......___.,.•._........... TUIW;L•CU LAN.CIA AC: I<CT TLAW;F2EAVl \' l /0-�4,a P7 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORr. APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL NO. ? 0 DATE TO TH E ZON I NG BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN 0 F SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 4...... .........................of 1.83Q. R;Lke..Si;xQP.La................. Name of Appellant Street and Number Town of Southold, . ...New York......,HEREBY APPEAL TO .. ...... ....... .... .............. Municipality State THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON BUILDING PERMIT NO. ...:154HZ...................... DATED ... .................... WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO CHARLES ZAHRA ................................................................................. Nome of Applicant for permit of ........... PW..Ypxk.............................. Street and Number Municipality State ( ) PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY ii, (KX) RE: Building Permit 1. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY .Pike„Street, Mattituck A ......................................................... Street /Ha mi. et / Use District on Zoning Map District 1000 Section 14113lock 041-ot 05 ........................................... .............. ............... Current Owner Charles & Jean zahra Map No. Lot No. R r i o r Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- - -. section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article XIV Section 100=142.(. `&.d)Revocation of Permit 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) ( ) A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map - - ( ) A VARIANCE due to lack of access (State of New York Town Low Chop. 62 Cons: Laws Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 r- (X1 Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector-Revo&ation of Building Permit r 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous appeal (I (has not) been made with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ) request for a special permit ( ) request for a variance andwas mode in Appeal No. ................................Dated ................................................................... .. REASON FOR APPEAL - ( ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 - ( ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (XX) A reversal of determination of building inspector-revcac:ation of building permit is requested for the reason that neither ground set forth in the revocation supports the action taken. All work pursuant to::the permit has been performed in accordance with plans and approvals of the Building Department. The stop work order was not violated and, in any event, was invalid. Accordingly, the decision of -the building inspector., should be reversed. Copy of revocation of Building Permit is annexed hereto. Form ZB1 (Continue on other side) r r� t' REASON FOR APPEAL Continued " s 1. Stop Work Order fails to comply with Section 100-143. This action requires that a stop work order state the conditions under which the work may be resumed. A copy of the stop work order is attached hereto. It is= apparent that the foregoing code requirement was not met and that, therefore, the stop work order is invalid. 2. The stop work order does not apply to the subject premises. The stop work order by its terms applies to premises at 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY. However, the premises for which a building permit were granted and for which the building permit was revoked are located; at 140 Pike Street. Copy of Building Permit is attached hereto. The premises at 1830 Pike Street is the applicants residence, about. which there is no dispute. 3. Even assuming that the stop work order was issued in compliance with the code and applied to the proper premises, the stop work was not violated. The .applicant did nothing after the issuance of the order except clean up the job site. Apparently, the building department recognized this fact when it withdrew its criminal prosecution for violation of stop work order because of its stated inability to prosecute the case. I�r�X�Xx3#ki�T�t��Y� X���iIZX�ft3� 4. All work on the premises has been conducted in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and instructions of the Building Department. There is no basis for the claim that work was done not in accordance with plans. XiX[$f X WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that the determination of .the building inspector revoking the building permit .be .denied. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ( ..� % ✓. v ss .... .... .. .............................. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Signature CHARLES . AHRA 1st 87 Swornto this .............................................. day of....December..................................... 19 7 ...... .. ....Notary Public............................. ERIC JONATHAN BRESSLER Notary Public,State of New York No.62-4622371 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires May 31, 1 i f \\ f OWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPER RECORD , CARD . OWNER STREET VILLAGE DISTRICT SUB. LOT FORMER OWNER N E / ACREAGE ] ..:. -- - S _ V — TYPE OF BUILDING �2lZ�sj i ;P r SEAS. �VL. FARM O V IND. I CB: I MISC. I - =AND IMP. TOTAL DATE. REMARKS 13 LD:,. - .J (J 3136 G3_ 9S00_ DouUH -40 IfoN� / 7i Yam© /,fit%® 3 2 0 � 1 /o 6 7 SBL tl f/ 000. O , o 7l,°��y� Sot `' !3 t9 t % IIZo 6 7,3 6 v '� S 7.3 SoZD &Z2,D o o. �. f-�R i: ,� t°✓r %o rC.f�.P,P®ems 6!2) l''� 90 .�� 24,0 e�,op ory &!r,rx'rP.lp c: RAGE, �- i BUILDING CONDITION 3/a9/�� .50LD �37;s,Do C. PRiac.Y C'o To Lr�S�� '" "� P zaoZ NEW! I NORMAL BELOW ABOVE � Farm Acre Value Per Acre Value Tillable 1 '1�C /? / ,,'14 Tillable 2 Tillable. 3 Wcodland Swampland Brushla.,d --•tip. House Plot Tcta I j i a - . —-- ► - MEMO aff, .M. Bldg, 2- 2- X �� �Ga I -�/� foundation Bath Extension 3 X iC LL�� D'"f0 S�� «�® asement Floors Extension /� p � ,s t. Wells- Interior Finish Extension 76, J Fire Place Heat Porch Attic Porch Rooms 1st Floor Breezeway Patio Rooms 2nd Floor Garage Driveway f L C o r � .r 1-` Crosstuf � s6�3->sJ` 0•00 r74vncrc IZL fN (• �1 I ;-'ij• G�,� S ��� "�+ 17 UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATIOI•I OR ADDITION , Cl TO THIS SURVEY 15 A VIOLATION OF "" "-•"--'•^ ==':a:; -•-: l SECTION 72C9 OF THE NLW YOR�.i.�T� 7�••• I� EDUCATION LAW. atr'��'/J��'�c!' / -- \�. COPIES OF THIS SURVEY MAP NOT RLTIr-C C U f 1/�• T'/ f./, �J y G cr a�-1 f r ' rO .THE IAKD 5U6VEYUi?'S IN„�U SEAL-CIA /y. /=" HNAG Z'!�ti• V EMC0-5:D SEAL SHALL NOT CE CSrwlr�,,d7'�paP/p`� �t.5' ��L/!'Zi'C �r� f�/JG7l^, TO CC A VALID TRUE CC-Pf. r GU.11'ANTT;S PC IV : :;7;t SIiAIL RUN r�O vaYJ - ONLY TO INi rc..5.;., FOR Va;:;M THE SURVEYIs rGEPALLP. AND a"1:.EhS II:'IIALF 10 THE ,�/-� TITLE CC117ANY. 4:1'_L;:;.!ZN'iA.!. A;,;;.C'f AND •/ f--r._c-c_L.' Rd._Yid.GL;I TO W, As...:.:..5 Of We Lc•;ur,:c 1N5TJ. /-/G ---•-. IUI:C;I• l.IJAXAI;U-S AU I-JUT TL/.N;F:RACII [GYM _ . .._..•_.--........_. ._....�..w___.....�_.n..�ti..... .... ITUII'JN-,OR-5UMEOvWT- L • Grosscu� - / Y✓ STPNAL/A AV. Nf 66�3950� 40•DO MAP-, of LAN. .3 � �` � svrrv6Ya�A Foie . (f. A. P RICE Co. INC. O Vo- Y a lYIA r7 TUCK TOWN 41C' -- SoLTHGLfD t� `• H Q Co,, /V.7! VAU7.•1 .Lil)ALTVATICN OR•ADOITION ,y- • ' ��� M 4 TO II•.;! '.'A6VEY IS A VICLATION OF - Q S O tJ QH/• W V SfCT;O:, 7709 OF iliE NEW►OiR S1ATE -'•'-•-^ f MUCA:JJN LAW. , CC;I'• OF THIS SU2V:f MAP NOT CEh'��' f} + _ �II`:L' •- `�` IF ...DO L If.G C.^I•:c�A MIL h 7R• COo '' ( A vAllc E.U. ct ra .i�.i:�O/e7 fC�u� i / �t/ � �u a ran9 t,•..I�973r7,w-r vyd Mar. 1 _. �►; ' /1/. / • GVAI ANTM :N..'.A 1.. .•,,i l 'UV / CIILf TG 11I: Ja J. I.+. 'YLT ,eoderick. van n/ • C ~Or/71Q/IS/ �il�.y)• Is rGIA!L%A... .�. u.! .aa I.• .A: .. i:ilE COf.t:Af♦1, •;)v_ ..:...I A. CI AND ♦ f r - LENDIrIG IASi.IUIIJI: L:SftOIt.L.u.., A.-.D i•� a� .. TO THE ASSIGNEES Of T1ff l(;.Cl:n; INSII• M / ` :•• • • TUTiON.GUARANI'(S A..( r:(.1 i.AJ.S1,.A[LE L���.rfV�+d����� �v���'•' ��• j AO 88(Rev.11191)Subpoena in a Civi 'Onttrb *tattg �iarfct Court EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK CHARLES ZAHRA, Plaintiff, SUBPOENA IN A CIVIL CASE V. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, VICTOR LESSARD, CASE NUMBER: CURTIS HORTON and VINCENT WIEZOREK 90-3364 (LDW) TO: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD and its agencies TOWN CLERK, TOWN BUILDING DEPARTMENT, TOWN: PLANNING. BOARD and TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ❑ YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear in the United States District Court at the place,date,and time"specified below to testify in the above case. PLACE OrifffT ySTATES DISTRICT COURTHOUSE COURTROOM 300 Rabro Drive Judge Leonard D. Wexler Hauppauge, New York 11788 DATE AND TIME March 11, 1993 at 9:30 a.m. ❑ YOU ARE COMMANDED to appear at the place,date,and time specified below to testify at the taking of a deposition in the above case. PLACE OF DEPOSITION DATE AND TIME YOU ARE COMMANDED to produce and permit inspection and copying of the following documents or objects at the place,date, and time specified below(list documents or objects): SEE SCHEDULE A ANNEXED HERETO PLACE DATE AND TIME ❑ YOU ARE COMMANDED to permit inspection of the following premises at the date and time specified below. PREMISES i DATE AND TIME Any organization not a party to this suit that is subpoenaed for the taking of a deposition shall designate one or more officers, directors, or managing agents, or other persons who consent to testify on its behalf, and may set forth, for each person designated, the matters on which the person will testify. Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 30(b)(6). ISSUIRE OFFICER SIGNATURE AND TITLE(INDICATE IF ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF OR DEFENDANT) DATE f � � March 10. 1993 SV NG O Uq W F�•ADARF�C,G /f�JilF{NUMBER J JWIIJCKHAMI, WIIAC i & BBR(ESSLER, P.C. P_(1 Rnx 1474, Main Road Mat tituck, New York Zge7g G 45.Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.Parts C&D on Reverse) (516) 298-5300 AO 88(11191)Subpoena in a Civil Case PROOF OF SERVICE DATE PLACE SERVED SERVED ON(PRINT NAME) MANNER OF SERVICE SERVED BY(PRINT NAME) TITLE DECLARATION OF SERVER I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information con- tained in the Proof of Service is true and correct. Executed on DATE SIGNATURE OF SERVER ADDRESS OF SERVER Rule 45,Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,Parts C&D: (c) PROTECTION OF PERSONS SUBJECT TO SUBPOENAS. son,except that,subject to the provisions of clause(c)(3)(13)(iii)of (1) A party or an attorney responsible for the issuance and service this rule,such a person may in order to attend trial be commanded to travel from any such place within the state in which the trial is of a subpoena shall take reasonable steps to avoid imposing undue bur- held,or den or expense on a person subject to that subpoena The court on behalf pil) requires disclosure of privileged or other protect-ad mat- of which the subpoena was issued shall enforce this duty and impose ter and no exception or waiver applies,or upon the party or attorney in breach of this duty an appropriate sanc- (N) subjects a person to undue burden. tion,which may include,but is not limited to,lost earnings and a rea- (B) If a subpoena sonable attorney's fee. ( (I) requires disclosure of a trade secret or other confidential 2)(A) A person commanded to produce and permit inspection and research,development,or commercial information,or cppyr�p 4f,5esian�lted¢ooks,,papers,documents or tangible things,or ()requires disclosure of an unretained expert's opinion or in- inspeotion of prerises heed not appear in person at the place of pro- formation not describing specific events or occurrences in dispute duction or inspection unless commanded to appear for deposition,hear and resulting from the expert's study made not at the request of ing or trial. any party,or (B) Subject to paragraph(d)(2)of this rule,a person commanded (Iii) requires a person who is not a party or an officer of a party to produce and permit inspection and copying may,within 14 days after to incur substantial expense to travel more than 100 miles to at- service of the subpoena or before the time specified for compliance if tend trial,the court may,to protect a person subject to or affected such time is less than 14 days after service,serve upon the party or at by the subpoena,quash or modify the subpoena or,if the party in tomey designated In the subpoena written objection to inspection or whose behalf the subpoena is issued shows asubstantial need for copying of any or all of the designated materials or of the premises.If the testimony ormaterial that cannot be otherwise met without un- objection is made,the party serving the subpoena shall not be entitled due hardship and assures that the person to whom the subpoena to inspect and copy the materials or inspect the premises except pur- is addressed will be reasonably compensated,the court may order suant to an order of the court by which the subpoena was issued.If ob- appearance or production only upon specified conditions. jection liars been made,the parry serving the subpoena may,upon notice to the person commanded to produce,move at any,time for an order (d) DUTIES IN RESPONDING TO SUBPOENA. to compel the production.Such an order to compel production shall pro- (1) A person responding to a subpoena to produce documents shall tect any person who is not a party or an officer of a party from signifi- produce them as they are kept in the usual course of business or shall cant expense resulting from the inspection and copying commanded. organize and label them to correspond with the categories in the demand. (3)(A) On timely motion,the court by which a subpoena was issued (2) When Information subject to a subpoena is withheld on a claim shall quash or modify the subpoena if it that it is privileged or subject to protection as trial preparation materials, (i) fails to allow reasonable time for compliance; the claim shall be made expressly and shall be supported by a descrip (ii) requires a person who is not a party or an officerof a party tion of the nature of the documents,communications,orthings not pro- to travel to a place more than 100 miles from the place where that duced that is sufficient to enable the demanding party to contest the person resides,is:e(nployed-or regularly transacts business in per- claim. SCHEDULE A TO SUBPOENA Building Permits Numbers 14359 and 16460 for Braun's Oyster Co. Certificates of Occupancy for Braun's Oyster Co. Health Department approvals for Braun's Oyster Co. Fire Inspections for Braun's Oyster Co. Any and all files pertaining to the building known as Village Commons Health and Racquet Club, Depot Lane, Cutchogue, New York, including, but not limited to, New York State Board of Review rulings, Health Department approvals, 7 Zoning Board approvals, Planning• Board approvals, Building Department applications, permits and certificates of occupancy. Application for building permit, building permit, certificate of occupancy and pool contract for pool, fence and deck for John Stewart, 16105 Main Road, Mattituck, New York. Applications for demolition and building permits, plans, specifications, certificate of occupancy, building permit, Health Department approvals, Department of Environmental Conservation, Trustee's Permits, and Town of Southold Zoning Board approvals for Eugene Berger's property at 2515 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue, New York. Any and all files, records and/or documents pertaining to an addition to the building located at The Lobster Pot, 13650 Main Road, Mattituck, New York, plus any and all fire inspection reports and fire violations on said property. Certificate of Occupancy, building permit, Board of Underwriter's Certificate for fence and pool located at the Arnoff residence on Sunny Side Drive, Southold, New York. - Alvah's Lane Survey Floor Plan re: Kapustka - "Approved as Noted" Building Permit 10/12/88 re: Kapustka/Beebe - New Foundation Under Existing Dwelling Application for Building Permit re: Kapustka/Beebe w/ Attached Worksheet Certificate of Occupancy 12/11/89 re: Kapustka/Beebe Application for Building Permit 10/08/85 l re: Beebe for James Homan, et al. Revised Application for Building Permit 10/08/85 re: Beebe for James Homan, et al. Line 2 (b) Addition of the Words 112 family" ,List of Changes of Home of James Homan and Others with "Approved as Noted" stamp 10/15/83 Building Permit 10/15/85 re: James Homan Certificate of Occupancy 05/27/87 re: James Homan Letter 01/25/86 James Homan (Geo. Braun Oyster Co. ) to Wm. Beebe re: Former Sabatelli Property on s/s of Main Rd. Stated that Property was Purchased. as Multiple Dwelling & Used as Multiple Dwelling Application for Building Permit 06/05/84 re: David Kapell for Gus & Helen Hartofelis, et al. North Side of Main road, East Marion, NY Application for C.O. 10/03/80 re: Conklin, et al. 180 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY C.O. 10/28/80 re: Conklin, 180 Pike Street, Mattituck . Town Record Card w/Photograph of Property re: Conklin Property Housing Code Inspection Report re: Conklin Property Envelope Thos. Costello to Town of Southold re: Notations regarding Conklin Property Application for Building Permit 06/27/85 re: Philip Horton (Chuck's Fiberglass Service) 37300 Main Road, Peconic, NY Notice of Disapproval dated 9/27/88 to RYCK Koke denying application for construction of pool Building Permit dated 8/9/83 - re: Neal Farrell pool & fence at 5200 Nassau Pt. Road, Cutchogue, NY Cassette tape of Zahra conversation with Lessard Application for public access to records Town of Southold dated 7/7/88 checked "approved" Packet of requests for records. and letters from Southold Town Request for Health Department information dated 2 11/1/90 and response from Building Inspector Letter from Kontokosta Associates to Victor Lessard re: Hellenic Snack Bar, .Demolition of Building Building Permit dated 6/5/84 for Hellenic Cabins Snack Bar Application for building permit dated 9/2/88 made by Eugene Berger for demolition and rebuilding existing dwelling Application for building permit dated 1/15/86 of Ann Burger for addition to existing residence Building Permit dated 12/30/86 issued to Baldassare to renovate. an existing store to pizza parlor in Mattituck, Main Road Floor Plans of Love Lane Flower Shop Order to Remedy Violation of Building Inspector to Gene Mazzaferro re: Island's End Gold Course and Country Club f Application for Building Permit dated. 7/29/91 of Island's End Golf & Country C1ub, .Inc. for alterations to existing clubhouse Building Permit dated 9/5/91 issued to Island's End Gold and Country Club Inc. Application for Building Permit dated 3/5/86 of Frank and Diane Ammirati Love Lane, Mattituck Building Permit dated 4/24/86 for Ammirati Action of the Zoning Board of Appeals to Ammirati's . request for Special Exception was granted Building Permit dated 6/7/85 issued to Reynold F. Blum to construction agricultural bar addition with winery Application for Building Permit dated 5//28/85 of Reynold F. Blum for agricultural barn and winery Application for building Permit dated 8/2/89 of Inland Homes, Inc. for constructing 1 family dwelling on Bayer Road, Mattituck Building Permit dated 8/8/89 issued to Inland Homes for building one-family dwelling on Bayer Road Certificate of Occupancy of 1 family dwelling on Bayer v 3 Road, Mattituck Certificate of Occupancy for vacant land on Bayer Road Application for Building Permit dated 2/20/85 of Paul Guiliano for travel agency, Love Lane, Mattituck Building Permit dated 6/17/85 issued to Paul Guiliano for renovations to existing building for travel agency on Love Lane, Mattituck Proposal of Expansion of the Mattituck Theatre to 8 Theatres Nolan, David D. File Wells, Gerald S. & Betty J. Wells File re: Residential Deck & Pool Addition Map of Property Rieger, John R. & Dorothy C. Directions for Filing Complaints as Dictated by Victor Lessard Letter 8/10/87 Victor Lessard to Judge Thompson & Kooper re: Thompson Property Accessory Building Letter 08/18/87 Judge Thompson to Victor Lessard re: Thompson Property Accessory Building Reply Letter 08/21/89 Dorothy Northridge to Victor Lessard re: Thompson Property Accessory Building Letter 06/17/91 Dorothy Northridge to Victor Lessard re: Thompson Property Accessory Building Certificate -of Occupancy 09/27/84 re: Porfiris, John Accessory Building Memo Victor Lessard 07/22/83 re: Stop Work Order Main Road & Rocky Point, - East Marion Memo Curtis Horton 07/22/83 re: Stop Work Order Main Road & Rocky Point, East Marion Memo Anonymous 09/10/85 re: Main Road, East Marion Photograph - 7735 Main Road (Accessory Playhouse) Memo �Curtis Horton 07/22/83 re: Stop Work Order Main Road & Rocky Point, East Marion 4 Application for Building Permit 06/27/83 re: Profiris, John Building Permit 04/15/86 re: Schondelbare Inground Pool Certificate of Occupancy 05/11/87 Re: Schondelbare Letter 07/20/88 Frederick C. Meyer to Planning Board re: Site Plan for RazMaTaz Town of Southold Property Record Card re: Saland, Monaco/Coudrey, Kenneth Carr, Stephen J. & Hansen, Elizabeth File re: Residence w/Inground Swimming Pool Pritchard, James File re: Inground Swimming Pool & Fence Cook, John Filere: Inground Swimming Pool & Fence Lizewski, Joseph J. File 1. Professional Offices 2 . Lap Pool 3 . Site Plan 4. Approval of Plans for Pool 5. Recreation Center 6. Site Plans 7. Building Inspection 8. Fire Inspection 9. Fire Inspection ? 10. Move Barn 11. Inspection "O.K. to Continue" 12 . Certificate of Occupancy Temporary Certificate of Occupancy 11/06/87 re: Lizewski, Joseph & Judie Building Permit Books 1. 1975 - 1983 2. 1984 - 1988 3 . 1989 - 1990 Note 09/20/88 -C.O. for Pools -Businesses Note 09/28/88 re: Serving of Appearance Ticket Meade pool 1-4 Photographs List Violations/Letters 5 Notes Fazio/Lorenzo Interoffice memorandum from G. Fisher to J. Terry re: records in possession of bldg inspector dated 4/3/78 Letter dated 8/25/88 from EJB to Supervisor Murphy re: securing Coffee Pot building Letter dated 7/16/84 from R. Fisher to J. Langer re Fire Inspection of Coffee Pot Framing inspection dated 6/1/89 "framing very good" Handwritten notes re: history of Zahra's work on Coffee Pot Handwritten notes 11/5/87 re: permit revoked Handwritten memo dated 9/21/88 and Certified Mail Return Receipt Requested to Zahra re: discussion with EJB Handwritten memo of Zahra's re: his discussion with Chas. Meyer 7 Transcript of ZBA hearing held 3/3/88 7 Letter dated 3/3/88 from EJB to ZBA covering chronology of events 7 Letter dated 2/17/88 from EJB to ZBA with requested documents Y Letter dated 12/10/87 from EJB to ZBA sending requested documents Letter dated. 4/14/86 to P. Brophy from Hindermann re his premises Bldg Permit dated 10/3/85 re P. Brophy Letter dated 11/5/84 from Kontakosta to Lessard re demolition of Hellenic Snack Bar Bldg Permit re Hellenic Snack Bar Application for Bldg Permit for Hellenic Snack Bar dated 3/8/77 Permit to excavate and remove fill from Langer job dated 12/8/77 Bldg permit dated 3/8/77 for alteration and build 6 addition to existing bldg NY Board of Fire Underwriters dated 2/1/78 to K. Langer re Coffee Pot water heater NY Board of Fire Underwriters dated 2/1/78 to K. Langer re Coffee Pot smoke detector CO dated 2/16/78 to J. Langer for accessory bldg Application for CO dated 2/16/78 by J. Langer for restaurant and apartment Bldg permit dated 8/12/77 issued to J. Langer to build a new accessory storage bldg Application for bldg permit dated 8/8/77 for restaurant and storage room Town of Southold Property Card filled out Tax Map of Coffee Pot Letter dated 1/12/88 from EJB to Bldg Dept requesting names of individuals who filed complaints against . Zahra .. Letter dated. 10/.8/87 from EJB to Yakaboski re People v. Zahra Letter dated 9/24/87 from EJB to the Bldg Dept complaining re cancelation of scheduled meeting Handwritten note by Zahra dated 3/10/88 re his conversation with George Penny Transcript of recorded conversation dated 11/5/87 Notice of Claim for infliction of emotional distress Handwritten notation by Zahra dated 2/25 re Fish and Wieczorek driving past Zahra's house Letter dated 9-1-88 to Town from E. Bressler re: requesting that order to Remedy be withdrawn Letter dated 9-14-88 from E. Bressler to V. Wieczorek confirming meeting of 9-20-88 (also annexed is a packet) Town of Southold/Action of the Zoning Board of Appeals dated Dec. 5, 1968, Appeal No. 1217 dated Oct. 24, 1968 decision on Nov. 7, 1968. (2 pages) 7 Southold Town Bld. Dept. Application for Building Permit dated Sept. 3, 1959. (2 pages) Town of Southold Bldg. Dept. Certificate of Occupancy dated April 1, 1960 No. Z 530 Town of Southold Bldg. Dept. Building Permit dated Sept. 3, 1959 No. 829 Z Town of Southold Bldg. Dept. Application for Building Permit, dated Sept. 3, 1959. (2 pages) Memo dated 10/5/88 from Schondabare to Supervisor and Town Bd. enclosing memos and opinion of State Controller re: misconduct and availability of documents for FOIA Letter dated 5/17/88 from EJB to Bldg Dept re: lost Kimonger file and 5 days to find it Letter dated 5/27/88 from EJB to J. Terry re: Kimonger file and local criminal court file Memo dated 6/2/88 from J. Terry to Lessard re: FOI request re: Kimonger and Gambino files Letter dated 7/18/88 from EJB to J. Terry demanding production of Kimonger and Gambino files Letter undated from Schondabare to EJB w/attachments re: FOIA, Town Bd. responses, etc. List of folders presented by Lessard 11/1/85 to 11/4/87 Letter dated 3/31/88 from EJB to R. Berntsson re: Zahra coming to inspect records Letter dated 10/19/87 to Lessard from Yakaboski requesting a chronology of events on Zahra Letter dated 4/11/88 from EJB to J. Terry re: FOIA Gambino, Goodale and Zahra files missing Letter dated 5/14/88 from EJB to Bldg Dept re: rundown condition of Coffee Pot Letter dated 8/18/88 from EJB to Berntsson re: steps in securing the bldg. Letter dated 12/17/87 from J. Terry to Committee on Open Gov't enclosing Town's discussion re: Zahra's appeal from denial of access 8 Letter dated 1/14/88 from Lessard to EJB re: complaints were oral and will not give names Letter dated 3/31/88 from EJB to R. Berntsson re: Zahra FOIA Letter dated 9/14/88 from EJB to Wieczorek re: confirming scheduled meeting Appeal Affidavit of Bayne Midget re: use of apartment at Coffee Pot Letter dated 5/15/89 from EJB to J. Homan re: thanking him for his cooperation Application kor CO 2/3/78 by Langer Restaurant and Apartment Letter dated 11/20/87 from EJB to J. Terry. advising that Zahra is willing to bring in his own copier and $5. 00/CO Letter dated March 17, 1988 from EJB to ZBA re: discussions held at the hearing and enclosing copies of documents requested Letter dated 1/27/88 from Committee on Open Govt to EJB . issuing opinion Letter dated. 8/18/88 from EJB to R. Berntsson asking for specific steps to secure Coffee Pot Memo dated 8/10/88 to Town Board from Schondabare re: files presented by Zahra Letter dated 5/14/88 from EJB to Bldg Dept asking for written instructions on securing Coffee Pot Businesses listed alphabetically from Laurel east to Fisher's Island as of 1990 Businesses listed alphabetically from Laurel east to Fisher's Island as of- 1988 listing latest inspection Handwritten notes of 2nd meeting w/Lessard and Horton Handwritten affidavit of Curt Horton re: inspections Handwritten affidavit of Lessard re: inspections Survey dated 7/27/89 of Alvah's Lane Cutchogue Copies of Zoning Maps 1957, 1960„ 1961, 1971, 1989, 1992 indicating Middle Road building 9 r Framing and insulation inspection dated 10/26/81 by C. Horton 1990-1991 Coffee Pot tax statement for arrears Letter dated- 6/25/90 from Chamber of Commerce to ZBA and Town Board requesting that Coffee Pot be finished and allowed to open Application for Public Access to records re: Broken Down Valise dated 12/10/90. Do not possess records Copy of envelope addressed to George Fisher at Town with handwritten notes about Zahra's properties Housing Code Inspection Report done 10/9/80 by C. Horton on 180 Pike Street owned by Conklin, lists violations Letter dated 10/2/80 from T. Costello, Esq. to George Fisher asking for a CO or pre-existing use for premises on Pike Street Application for building permit, Building permit, CO, mortgage for James F. Homan and others1985 Application, Building permit, CO, notation and photo for accessory playhouse/building Chester Orlowski } Love Lane Flower Shop addition, plans and photo Inland Homes, Inc. file, with pertinent docs and T transcript of hearing, zoning ordinances 1989 Church of the Open Door file - - fee question 1987 Bialeski file for accessory building, pool and fence 1989 Island End Golf file 1991, alterations as applied for James Murphy file, pool and fence Eugene Bradley file pool, fence, 1986 James Duffy file pool, ground level deck and fence 1989 Gary Meade file pool, deck and fence 1989 John Reiger file pool and fence 1990 Robert Conway file pool and fence 1987 Tom Storm filepool and fence 1985 10 Island End Golf file for clubhouse 1969 Island End Golf file for clubhouse 1966 Island End Golf file for addition to clubhouse 1967 E. Conklin file re: Broken Down Valise Robert Waddington file renovation remove front & replace Memo of Curt Horton re: Lawrence P. Suter w/copies of Stop work order and Order to Remedy for proceeding without calling for proper inspections Blue Water Seafood file w/advertisements, memo by Horton 9/16/88 re: tents and awnings/change of use Blue Water Seafood file fire inspection, parking plan, } Future Screw and Machine/Warren Hufe file addition 1976 Edward Koster file make an empty building into a machine shop 1968 Edward Meyer file business bldg shop and office 1962 Braun OysterCo. file re: addition to bldg 1987 (Temporary' CO 1988) Sanford Friemann file to construct accessory greenhouse with private office 1985 Sanford Freimann file to convert and alter existing store 1991 Eugene Giannone file addition construct 2nd floor storage area to restaurant 1984 Eugene Giannone (Gold Coin) file 1981 for lst floor restaurant, 2nd floor office, storage, dressing room, non-habitable w/Board hearing transcript -7 Reynold F. Blum file to construct agricultural barn w/addition for winery 1985 w/ZBA transcript of hearing Reynold F. Blum file (Peconic Bay Vineyards) to erect a new farm building 1980 Frank Ammirati file to renovate existing building 7 (three family dwelling) to a. two family dwelling w/retail store 1986 i _ 11 + e Lloyd Lindsey file to put a store in a vacant building. Also for fence. 1972 Esther Soullas files Our Lady of Ostrabrama file Sacred Heart Church file y Robert Douglass file Affidavit of Joseph Langer dated 3/26/90 in support of Zahra's application for reversal of bldg dept decision re: non-conformity of apartment Any and all transcripts of Southold Town Board meeting pertaining to Charles Zahra Calling card from Isidore Doroski of the Health Department for his inspection Board of Review transcripts for the Love Lane Laundromat 12 1 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK 2 ---------------------------------------x 3 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING, 4 ---------------------------------------x 5 Town Hall 53095 Main Road N , D P.O. Box 1179 a Southold, New York 11971 2 OdSJL. 4 4 � $ June 27, 1990 7: 3 5 P.M. 9 10 B E F 0 R E: 11 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman - i 12 13 B 0 A R D M E M B E R S: 14 CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. 15 SERGE DOYEN, JR. N 16 JOSEPH H. SAWICKI w 0 Z 17 JAMES DINIZIO, JR. 0 r= Z 18 19 A L S O P R E S E N- T: s 20 DOREEN FERWERDA, Secretary Z CL 21 0 e c } 0 22 . U 23 24 GAIL ROSCHEN Official Court Reporter 25 1 61 2 the size of the building for the winery. 3 MR. GRIGONIS: Second. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? 5 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.. 6 MR. DOYEN: Aye.' 7 MR. SAWICKI: Aye. a 8 MR. DINIZIO: Aye. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal is in 10 behalf of Charles Zahra, Application Number 11 3701, particular hearing is the basis of a 12 judge' s order, and that is the purpose of this 13 hearing. I will read the notice as it was in 14 the paper. It says: 15 _ "Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, 16 Article XXV, Section 100-243, Article XXV, e f 0 17 Section 244, for permission to continue to use V 18 the second floor apartment as a non-conforming O 19 use. Property Location: 140 Pike Street, W e 20 Mattituc}z, County Tax Map No. 1000 , Section 0 0 21 141, Block 4, Lot 5. " u z 22 I just want to mention two things for 23 the audience. This was the former Coffeepot 24 Building. The issue still at hand on this, 25 which really has a minor bearing on this par- 1 61 2 the size of the building for the winery. 3 MR. GRIGONIS: Second. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? 5 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye.. 6 MR. DOYEN: Aye. 7 MR. SAWICKI: A e. F s M . DINIZIO: ye. 9 THE CHAIRMAN The next appeal is in 10 behalf of Ch rles ahra, Application Number 11 3701, particul r hearing is the basis of a 12 judge ' s order, a d that is the purpose of this 13 hearing. I w 11 ad the notice as it was in 14 the paper. It says. 15 "Va fiance to t e Zoning Ordinance, 16 Article V, Section 10 -243, Article XXV, e w 17 Section 244, for permission to continue to use e 18 the s cond floor apartment as a non-conforming s 19 use. Property Location: 1 0 Pike Street, W _ m 20 Mat ituck, County Tax Map No. 1000 , Section 0 21 14 , Block 4, Lot 5. " W 22 I just want to mention two things for 23 he audience. This was the former Coffeepot 24 Building. The issue still at hand on this, 25 which really has a minor bearing on this par r r4 r • I 1 62 2 ti,cular hearing , is the pipe construction which 3 the Building Inspectors of this Town are 4 requesting the update on from its present 5 construction. That is not the natural nature 6 of this application, at this point. 7 What we are here tonight for is to m 8 continue a non-conforming use which the 9 Applicants concur, and did concur at the last 10 hearing which we had, that this use of the 11 apartment did continue during the period of 12 time that the North Fork Bank owned the 13 property and Charles Zahra took title, at that 14 particular time, and I can remember quite 15 vividly at that hearing that we did swear all 16 the parties in. I will not swear the parties 0 0 17 in tonight. However, I will ask you that I e 18 would like to reserve decision on that if, s 19 for some reason, I think it is needed. We ask W 2 20 Mr. Bressler if he would like to continue. 21 MR. BRESSLER: Erik Bressler speaking V i W 22 in favor of this application. Wickham, 23 Wickham & Bressler, Main Road, Mattituck, New 24 York 11952 . 25 As a procedural matter, Mr. Chairman s 63 2 I believe we should take up several issues 3 before we get into the meat of this matter. 4 First, let me express my pleasure at 5 being back here in front of the Board to 6 continue this hearing after a somewhat lengthy 7 hiatus which, in no way, do I attribute to the � 8 members of this Board individually. 9 Nonetheless, we are back here on this 10 application which came before the Board some 11 number of years ago, never mind exactly how 12 many, and is now back before this Board as 13 a result of the decision of Judge Tanenbaum 14 rendered November 17, 1988, which is now back 15 before the Board by order of Judge 'Tanenbaum 16 according to his decision for the hearing e g 17 concerning the status of the second floor 18 apartment as a non-conforming use. s W 19 The Board will recall, or it might not z 20 recall, but if it reads the decision it is o 21 familiar with the fact that at the time of u z W • 22 the last decision there were two issues raised 23 by the Board which gave the Board g pause with 24 respect to granting or not granting the 25 relief sought by Mr. Zahra. I might add, at 1 . 64 2 this point, the' relief sought by Mr. Zahra, 3 except with respect to the items which are 4 here tonight, the Board will recall was granted 5 by the Supreme Court and Mr. Zahra was put 6 back to work pending a resolution of this 7 issue and he did, in fact, go back to work � 8 pursuant to the Court decision for a period of 9 time. 10 Unfortunately, without getting into the 11 details, Mr. Zahra was again stopped by the 12 Building Department, again put back to work 13 by the Court, and was again stopped by the 14 Building Department and that is where the 15 matter stands now. He is now stopped and 16 stayed from going forward. 0 w 17 O THE CHAIRMAN: What is the reason for 18 that, Mr. Bressler? S Z 19 MR. BRESSLER: Well, Mr. Chairman, if W i Z 20 you will recall when Judge Tanenbaum issued 0 21 his decision in November, of 1988 , Mr. Zahra V 2 W L 22 went back to work. We had anticipated, at that 23 time, that the issues of the non-conformance of ( 24 the apartment, at least with respect to the 25 matters within the jurisdiction of this Board, 1 65 2 would be heard in a timely manner. Unfor- 3 tunately, that was not the case. 4 In any event, Mr. Zahra went forward 5 and he proceeded to work from -- well, this 6 decision was from November of 1988 to 7 approximately the beginning of 1989 he pro- ceeded to perform work on the premises, and 9 the Building Department duly went out, examine 10 his work, found it to be satisfactory, and 11 issued a satisfactory inspection report. Mr. 12 Zahra framed the -foundation had appropriate) 13 been approved. He sheathed. He rough wired. 14 He rough plumbed. He insulated. At that point 15 the Building Department took it upon them- 16 selves, unfortunately, to refuse any future 0 g 17 inspections. a 18 This instituted a trip back to Judge s 19 Tanenbaum who, we believe, quite correctly W _ 20 ruled that: No, the Building Department had 0 21 to go back and .they had to inspect. He ordered u z W 22 them to go back and inspect within 20 days 23 of his order. He was concerned about, :again, 24 the status of the second floor primarily with 25 respect to the State Board of Review, with 1 66 2 respect to the Class 5 construction. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: Class 5 is what, cement 4 block? 5 MR. BRESSLER: Cement -- wood. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: What is cement block? 7 What class is that? � 8 MR. BRESSLER: We will look it up for 9 you in our State Building Code here. In any 10 event, he was permitted to go ahead and go 11 ahead he did. As the Board is no doubt familiar 12 with the fact that the shell is now complete, 13 the building is insulated, this is ready to 14 be sheet rocked, and we are ready to go as a 15 result of that decision. 16 However, we felt that we would be per- 0 17 mitted to go ahead with the first floor 18 completed, get somebody in there, and get this a Z 19 building making money again. However, that Z Z 0 20 was not to be the case. 0 21 We basically agreed, which the Judge u z W 22 and his decision reflected the fact, that 23 pending the determination of the State Board 24 of Review, the upstairs was to be sealed and 25 not worked on. The Board is no doubt familiar s S (, 1 67 2 with this fact since, when it tried to obtain 3 permission from us to go in the building and 4 look, on my advice I said no, pending a con- 5 Terence with the Court, not because I didn' t 6 want you to but because the Court ordered it 7 sealed. � 8 THE CHAIRMAN: I found that unbelievable. 9 MR. BRESSLER: As a result, a telephone 10 conference was held with the Court and the 11 Judge indicated that, no, he did not intend 12 any regulatory agency to be kept out. But I 13 want to make it clear to the Board, based on 14 what believe to be a very unhappy experience 15 with certain agencies in the Town, I felt it 16 was the wiser thing to do to get the Judge to 0 0 17 okay that at least verbally, which he did, and 0 18 we have no problem with you going in there. s Z 19 I just want the Judge to say that' s okay. W m 20 THE CHAIRMAN: I just want you to know 0 21 that I have to further extend this hearing V L • W ` 22 because now I have to recess it, go look at it, 23 and come back. 24 MR. BRESSLER: Which brings up an 25 interesting point. What exactly would you like . P, ..:^ ,gip. . . ;• 1 68 2 to 'see? I mean, we don't have stairs or any- 3 thing. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: That' s fine. I just 5 want to see it. 6 MR. BRESSLER: There is some insulation. 7 There is rough electrical, but it is not � 8 finished. It is obviously not habitable space. 9 You are certainly welcome to come look at that, 10 now that the Judge said okay. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: We ' ll make an appointment. 12 MR. BRESSLER: No problem. Just please 13 be careful. So there we were. The building 14 with the tops sealed off, and my requesting to 15 come before this Board for the hearing. I 16 certainly don' t intend to go down to the State a 0 17 Board of Review if you tell me that I can' t V 0 18 have an apartment. That' s an absolute exercise s 19 in futility, notwithstanding whatever other W 20 people think. a O 21 Unfortunately, the Town felt it was V i W 22 appropriate to file a Notice of Appeal, from 23 Judge Tanenbaum' s decision, which they did. 24 The Board is probably aware this works an 25 automatic stay again. My clients and I can 1 69 2 no longer exercise any remedies except to 3 vacate the stay, to get them in there and 4 inspect. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: Is that what is pending 6 right now? 7 MR. BRESSLER: There' s an appeal pending F 8 in Brooklyn, and it is not going to be heard 9 for quite a period of time which is causing 10 a "severe hardship on Mr. Zahra. A fact well 11 known to everyone, I am sure, during the 12 summer months appeals are not going to be 13 heard again until the fall. That is a matter 14 of common knowledge. So the answer to your 15 question, is it would certainly be at least Type 16 4. It may be something else, but Type 5 is e 0 17 defined as that type of construction which the a 18 walls, partitions, floors and roof are all or e s 19 partially of wood or other combustible material. W 0 20 The block with some type of conforming roof, 0 21 it would be Type 4 or better., z W L 22 So here we are waiting for our court 23 date in Brooklvn on the appeal. The Building 24 Department has refused to inspect. The 25 building sits there. We can' t go to the State ` 1 70 2 Board of Review, until we get a decision from 3 this Board as to whether or not we are going to 4 even be using it as an apartment. I think that 5 fairly well sums up the procedural posture of 6 this case. 7 Here we are, and the two issues getting � 8 back to the original point, the two issues 9 which originally gave the Board pause were the 10 application of Section 100-116D and E. I note 11 in the Board' s notice of this particular hearin , 12 that the section cited appears to relate to 13 Code provisions under the new Code. I think 14 we are dealing with 100-118D and E. As the 15 Board correctly perceived at the time of the 16 application, and if Mr. Zahra satisfied those 0 o 17 requirements, that he has satisfied all of the 0 18 applicable provisions of the Code since the s 19 building permit was issued at that time and if m 20 complies with the 100-118D and E, I think he 0 21 is in there, and I think that that is the ;5 u z W 22 subject'- of the hearing tonight. If that is 23 not the Board' s feeling, please indicate to me 24 since that' s what we are prepared to address. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Is that the area that 1 71 2 concerns the non-conforming? 3 MR. BRESSLER: 100-118D is applied to 4 the two-year rule, which the Board noted in 5 its decision. In Paragraph 9 of the decision, 6 dated April 14, 1988 , 100-118E, which is in 7 Paragraph 8 of the decision of the same date, F 8 deals with the reconstruction and structural 9 alterations of the non-conforming building. 10 So I gather the answer to your question, 11 Mr. Chairman, is yes. Those are the non- 12 conforming sections. Those are the ones cited 13 by the Board, and if Mr. Zahra satisfied them, 14 then, he has satisfied the requirements of the 15 Code. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: Would you call our 0 0 17 present Town Attorney, during the period of e 18 this recess, so that we can readvertise this S 19 hearing? I reflect the Town Attorney, not the W z i 0 20 assistant. You may speak to the assistant, 0 21 but I would call Harvey and ask him if we are ;v u ` z W ` 22 addressing it under Section 100-118D. Under 23 Section 244 we are addressing it, at this point. 24 MR. BRESSLER: I think, pursuant to- the 25 Court' s decision, that' s what we are addressing. 1 72 2 I think that is only prudent. I will get his 3 phone number. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: Not to confuse the 5 public, we had a change in the master planning 6 between the period of time that this particular 7 application had come before us and subsequently F 6 to that it was held up and we .are presently 9 back here by Court Order reconvening this 10 hearing. So basically we are not dealing with 11 the new master plan, and Mr. Bressler is 12 reflecting the section of the old master plan 13 which is dated back to 1971. 14 MR. BRESSLER: Yes. I believe that is 15 definitely so since, for example, with respect 16 to Section 100-118D if the Board finds, and e 17 we are sure the Board will base on the evidence 0 18 that there was no discontinuance for the two- s 19 year period, then there is no discontinuing, W _ 20 and that is the end of that, and 100-118D is 0 21 satisfied and there is no need to look any V 2 W 22 further simply with E if that is satisfied. 23 We are in under the old Code, and there is 24 nothing to look at under the new Code because �` 25 we satisfied it. 1 73 2 With respect to Section 100-118D the 3 Board states, in the decision rendered April 14, 4 1988 , that based on personal knowledge of the 5 Board and conversations with family members 6 of the prior owner, and I take it that the 7 Board meant by that statement the Langers F 8 (ph , onetic) , and not the North Fork Bank, it 9 appears that the use of the premises may have 10 been discontinued for a period in excess of 11 two years and then the Board is going to 12 discuss the implication of that fact under 13 Section 1007118D. I think we can set this 14 to rest very certainly, at the present time, 15 which I am handing out an affidavit from Joseph 16 Langer and June Langer. As the Board is no e 0 17 doubt aware, . these were the owners of the o 18 property prior to the North Fork Bank and I s 19 presume that these were the family members to W Z Z m 20 whom the Board was referring. 0 21 THE CHAIRMAN: I spoke to the daughter, u a 22 Edith, who I attended school with and graduated 23 with. ( 24 MR. BRESSLER; Joseph and June state in 25 substance that they purchased the property 1 74 2 in March, of 1988 , from Caprice and Company, 3 Inc. (phonetic) , and they operated the Coffeepot 4 Luncheonette from that date to the day that 5 the property was sold to the bank on July 6 6, 1984. They also resided in the apartment 7 above the restaurant, during that period of � 8 time. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: Excuse me, Mr. Bressler. 10 You gave me the wrong date. You gave me 1988 11 as the first date. When did they actually 12 purchase it? 13 MR. BRESSLER: March of 1977 until 14 July 6, 1984 and they also resided in the 15 apartment during that time frame. Then they 16 entered into the agreement to sell the premises e 17 and they requested from the bank and were given 0 18 an approval from thereon to continue to reside s Z 19 in the upstairs apartment to mid-November. W _ 0 20 THE CHAIRMAN: Of 1984. 0 21 MR. BRESSLER: Right. This approval W 22 was then extended and their son resided in 23 the apartment until January, until January 24 of 1985. 25 (Discussion held off the record) 1 75 2 MR. BRESSLER: Based upon that affi- 3 davit and the timing of Mr. Zahra' s acquisition 4 of the property, and I believe those facts are 5 in the record before the Board -- you can 6 correct me, Mr. Chairman. 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, the only person F 8 .. that will .not speak tonight. is-.Stephen 9 Tsontaukis, who was the enginee-r,, ..because 10 he has since passed on. 11 MR. BRESSLER: So what we have, Mr. 12 Chairman, is a situation where we had occupancy 13 from the earlier 1985, and if you run that on 14 the two-year period you run into 1987. I 15 believe the Board has in its possession a copy 16 of the building permit. I will hand up another e 17 one. It is significant, of course, to note LL 0 18 the date is October 27, 1986, a period of 0 s 19 substantially less than two years. W z 0 20 THE CHAIRMAN: Subsequent to that it o 21 was uninhabited. u x W L 22 MR. BRESSLER: Subsequent to the 23 issuance of the building permit it then, of 24 course, was not as renovations were underway. 25 You cannot leave someone in possession while you 1 76 2 are performing renovations on the building. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: I did not mean necessarily 4 inhabited on a daily basis. I mean somebody 5 was in the building doing -- 6 MR. BRESSLER: Yes, from the issuance 7 of the building permit someone was actively F 8 in the building thus, of course, indicating the 9 intent to renovate the building and not to 10 discontinue the use. I believe that the time 11 period was established by the affidavit 12 resolving the issue under 100-118D. Although 13 I can appreciate the Board's comments in the 14 decision that clearly there was an issue since 15 particularly you, Mr. Chairman, live in the 16 area. We are aware there was a time period 0 0 17 during .which someone did not reside in the 0 18 building. s 19 THE CHAIRMAN: So we can assume that Z e 20 is the reason that the building was boarded up, 0 21 or during the period of time that the building u z W 22 was boarded up, was that period of time that 23 you have mentioned where the Langers had moved 24 out and the bank had taken the property over �- 25 by title. 1 77 2 MR. BRESSLER: That ' is correct. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: Then Mr. Zahra started 4 to work on the building, at the date you just 5 mentioned. 6 MR. BRESSLER: Yes, when Mr. Zahra 7 obtained the building permit and, of course, 8 closed shortly after. He -obtained a building 9 permit and then, of course, actively commenced 10 the work that had to be done, whatever else 11 had to be done, in order to get the work done. 12 So with respect to 100-118D, I believe that 13 that issue has been resolved. 14 Are there any questions about that 15 particular issue, anything else I can address 16 or any other documents that the Board needs? w 17 THE CHAIRMAN: In reference with 18 resolving the 100-118D two-year issue, I would s 19 have to research the records again and I will Z 20 reserve decision on that until the next 0 u 21 hearing. Z W 22 MR. BRESSLER: I believe that the Board 23 already has in its possession a copy of the 24 CO, contract of sale, the deed, the building 25 Permit, and now the affidavit of the Langers. 1 78 2 I. think from the documentation point of view 3 that establishes the issue. 4 Now the second issue before the Board 5 tonight is 100-118E, which is the non- 6 conforming issue with respect to the structural alterations. 8 Now let me preface my remarks by 9 again reminding the Board that notwithstanding 10 the fact we are talking about non-conformity 11 here, at no time do we concede . that actual 12 non-conformity existed based on the fact that 13 the CO was issued with respect. to the building 14 at the time it was acquired by Mr. Zahra. 15 Not a certificate of pre-existing use, but a 16 Certificate of Occupancy. It may very well be 0 g 17 argued that' s wrong, but it is not the issue. 0 18 THE CHAIRMAN: A Certificate of Occupancy 0 s 19 for an apartment above a restaurant. z 20 MR. BRESSLER: That is absolutely correct, 0 21 and for the Board' s review we will hand up the z z W L 22 Certificate of Occupancy for this particular 23 structure. 24 THE CHAIRMAN: This is the Certificate 25 of Occupancy that this p I gentleman received prior 1 79 2 to taking title to the property. 3 MR. BRESSLER: That is absolutely 4 correct, Mr. 'Chairman. This is a Certificate 5 of Occupancy, dated February 16, 1978, and I 6 would like to contrast that Certificate of 7 Occupancy with certain other certificates that � 8 the Town issues in connection with occupancy. 9 Specifically, I am handing up a Certificate of 10 Occupancy, dated October 28, 1980, relating 11 to 180 Pike Street. This Certificate of 12 Occupancy conforms substantially to the 13 requirements of the business establishment 14 building prior to April 23, 1957, which the 15 Board is well aware of is the date of the 16 inception of zoning in this Town. e 0 17 THE CHAIRMAN: Where is 180 Pike Street? 18 MR. BRESSLER: Oh, my goodness. You ` 0 1s don' t know? W 20 This. is called a Certificate of Occupanc 0 21 for a non-conforming premises, which I think z W ` 22 relates to 180 Pike Street. 23 THE CHAIRMAN: Where is that, Mr. 24 Bressler? 25 MR. BRESSLER: This one says to William 1 80 2 and Grace Fiore. This one says it does not 3 conform to the present Building Code of the 4 Town of Southold for the following reason: 5 An apartment is not allowed over a business 6 in a B-1 zoned district. I hand up these 7 three documents to contrast what was done here, what might have been done. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bressler, could you 10 just tell us what the approximate size is in 11 square footage of the apartment, at the time of 12 either the issuance of this Certificate of 13 Occupancy or the time Mr. Zahra had taken title 14 to this piece of property? 15 - MR. BRESSLER: Yes, I can. We' ll get 16 the plan and we will give you a very good e 17 estimate. It just so happens we had occasion 0 18 to ask ourselves this question, before coming s Z 19 down here, and based upon the plan produced Z 20 by Mr. Tsontaukis, who' s unfortunately no longer 21 with us, it is approximately,: Mr. Chairman, : u z i 22 750 square feet give or take. 23 THE CHAIRMAN: Does that include the 24 knee wall or is that the finished product? 25 MR. BRESSLER: That basically represents 1 81 2 the space of the finished product. With 3 respect to 100-118E, certainly the issue of 4 the Certificate of Occupancy would be the first 5 point that I want to make, that we don' t believe 6 Section 100-118E applies since we are not 7 dealing with a non-conforming use. Assuming 8 that we are, 100-118E is a rather peculiar 9 section. I am sure this Board has not been 10 called upon very often in the past to interpret 11 100-118E. In fact, I have never heard of an 12 application involving a 50 percent value 13 actually coming before the Board. 14 Indeed I have seen many examples where 15 this particular section was avoided in one 16 way or another by variance and agencies of 0 17 government. So I am somewhat at a loss as to 4 18 why we are here in particular. I am not going a 19 to, at this time, burden the record with W z Z m 20 numerous examples. I am sure the Board is awar 0 21 of them around town, where it can be said this . u z W L 22 rule is honored in breach probably 100 percent. 23 I don' t believe 100-118E applies to this 24 situation for the simple reason a calculation 25 of .the fair value of the building and a cal- 1 82 2 culation of what Mr. Zahra has done to the 3 building, and a review of what the Board' s 4 statement was in Paragraph 8 reveals that we 5 don' t fall under that particular paragraph. 6 The Board needed that. The evidence would 7 tend to show that the Applicant is endeavoring 8 to renovate and structurally alter his non- 9 conforming building to an extent exceeding the 10 aggregate cost of 50 percent of the fair market 11 value of the building. 12 With all due respect, for the life of 13 me, I reviewed the records three times and 14 I cannot find anything in the records that 15 would lead to that conclusion, and there is 16 just nothing there. The issue was not s w 17 addressed in the prior proceeding. There is 18 no testimony taken. The building inspectors S 19 gave no evidence on it. So m W y question to the 2 20 Board is, at this point there is no deter- 0 u 21 mination it happened. The Building Department W ' L 22 has not asserted it happened. There is no 23 evidence in the record that it happened. How 24 would you like to proceed, Mr. Chairman? 25 - . THE CHAIRMAN; Well, let' s start out wit 1 83 ' 2 asking you, how large is the apartment now? 3 MR. BRESSLER: The apartment on the 4 plan is ap proximately pproximately 875 square feet as 5 approved by the Building Department. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: Does that include the 7 stairwell going up towards the hallway you have up above, or will; it go right into the 9 apartment? 10 MR. ZAHRA: The stairwell would be 11 considered part of the downstairs. The landing 12 would be considered part of the downstairs 13 square footage. That 870 does include the 14 upper portion of it. 15 MR. BRESSLER: These are Mr. Tsontaukis ' 16 calculations as shown on the plans. e 17 0 MR. ZAHRA: You want me to bring them up 18 THE CHAIRMAN: No. I have a :copy. So e 19 you are showing approximately 870, did you say? W z 0 20 MR. BRESSLER: To be exact, 876 square a 21 feet. z W 6 22 THE CHAIRMAN: So roughly about 125 23 square feet more. 24 MR. BRESSLER: More or less. Probably 25 a little bit less. The plans necessitate in 1 84 2 doing this calculation, that we get out our 3 ruler and measure it physically. It may be 4 115. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: It is basically a room 6 10 by 12 larger. 7 MR. BRESSLER: You mean the increased F 8 area. Well, you' re right, ' as -did the area. 9 However, the dimensions are slightly different 10 because it is 16 long and we estimate it to 11 be seven or eight wide, but then when you take 12 out the area of the stairwell which I included 13 it probably comes down to a difference of 14 80 square feet maybe. 15 THE CHAIRMAN: That is usable square 16 footage that has seven and a half foot head . 0 0 17 room. 4 18 MR. ZAHRA: Yes, as per :plan. s 19 THE CHAIRMAN: That' s what I would see W z m 20 when I come up there. 0 21 MR. BRESSLER: You would. You would not u " z W ` 22 see habitable space, at this point, but it 23 could be made habitable. What else would the 24 Board like to know about that issue, eXIcept for 25 me to state and Mr. Zahra to reiterate he had 1 85 2 no intention of reconstructing or structurally 3 altering it to exceed an aggregate cost of 50 4 percent of the fair market value of the 5 building. He did not, and he has not. I s don' t know what else you would like to know, 7 Mr. Chairman. 8 THE CHAIRMAN: I will review the file 9 again, Mr. Bressler, and if I have any questions 10 concerning it at the final hearing I will go 11 over it. I appreciate the square footage it 12 gives, and in the interim I will look at it 13 and we will go from there. 14 MR. BRESSLER: The hearing will be 15 recessed, . I take it. If you have any other 16 questions, we will be happy to answer those 17 issues. 18 THE CHAIRMAN: We would have addressed e W 19 it tonight but we haven' t looked at the buildin 20 where the problem is. We want to look at the 0 u g 21 building. V L W L 22 MR. BRESSLER: I think it is important 23 to note that what was done here has been a 24 large cosmetic improvement but the Board, I am 25 _ sure, is aware there was a substantial building 1 86 2 there in the first instance that had aignifi- 3 cant value particularly as a non-conforming 4 use. What basically has been done has been 5 a cosmetic job and repair to the upstairs 6 apartment as mandated by the Building Depart- 7 ment -- bring it up to Code, he was told, and m 8 he did which brings up another point which I 9 want to address. 10 I don' t believe that this by nature of 11 a variance hearing tonight -- it is my under- 12 standing that this hearing and the recessed 13 hearing are more by way of. a reviewing of the ' 14 outstanding issues with respect to the original 15 application which was a reversal of the 16 determination of the building inspector and if 0 o 17 it should go that route I think we would be 0 18 prepared to address the other issues; the s 19 issues of the variance of the hardship and W _ 0 20 everything else, but I don' t think, and on the 0 21 record, it warrants that. u z W L 22 Let me state one other thing for the 23 Board which might put your minds at ease on thi 24 issue. I state for the record, Mr. Zahra 25 reiterates he has not done that. There- is no 1 87 ` 2 evidence he has done that. No one accused him 3 of violating that rule. I am not quite sure 4 why we are here; but, Mr. Chairman, you may 5 be aware of the fact that in the State Building 6 Code Rules and Regulations there are regu- 7 lations which relate to renovating and recon- 8 structing buildings and that rule states that. 9 during this six-month period you may renovate 10 or reconstruct up to 50 percent of the value 11 measure. Should we, unfortunately, have to 12 go down to the Board of Review, we are going 13 to have to demonstrate to them that that rule 14 has not been violated, and we are prepared to 15 do that. That section is Subchapter E of 16 the Code of Rules and Regulations, Book 9-B 0 0 17 of the Executive Law Subtitle Z, Subchapter E, V 0 18 Part 231 deals with additions, alterations, s 19 and repairs and I think that this issue is W Z r 20 probably a subject to be brought up before that m 0 21 Board if at all. It has been my understanding, V Z W ` 22 quite frankly, that the way this matter has 23 been handled in this Town up to date, if there 24 is an issue they ship it down to the Board of 25 Review. I don' t think that issue is before you. 1 88 2 1 ' think the issue of the classified building 3 is going there anyway. So we will reserve 4 any comments with respect to those issues until 5 you determine, Mr. Chairman, what you want to 6 do at the next hearing. 7 Now Mr. Zahra wants to say a few things. 8 I don' t want to prolong this unduly. There has, 9 been an issue circulating around, swelling 10 around this case from the very inception. It 11 has remained largely unanswered, and I think 12 remained unanswered in the mind of the Board. 13 I am just going to give Mr. Zahra a .moment to 14 try to .resolve that, before we recess this 15 tonight. I think he can shed some light on the 16 continuing difficulties this Board had with the 0 0 17 application. 0 18 MR. ZAHRA: My name is Charles Zahra. s 19 I reside at 1830 Pike Street, Montauk. 20 Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, on 0 21 September 22nd, 1987 I was issued an Order to u z W ` 22 Remedy Violation. This stated: Stop all work, 23 non-conformity with the provisions of the ( 24 plans or specifications of the building permit `� 25 at once. I don' t understand what the apartment 1 89 2 issue has to do with this Stop Order, this 3 original Stop Order. I don' t know why we are 4 here. I feel as a matter of law it should have 5 been tossed out a long time ago. 6 This was the issue and we continually 7 strayed from it. There are some things I F 8 am going to mention here today, that might 9 strike a vein in some people that are not here 10 tonight. I was hoping it was not going to have 11 to resort to this, and I was also hoping I 12 would get my day in court but three and a half 13 years later I still have not gotten. my day in 14 court. 15 I would just like to commend the Court, 16 as long as they are not counterproductive. I 0 w 0 17 think it is important that the Board as well as e 18 the public be aware of what took place here. v. s Z 19 There are some things in the law that are left W _ 0 20 better to the observer and this may be one. 0 21 I went to the Building Department to ;. u z W 22 review records after receiving the Stop Order. 23 It was- also assumed I was trying to harass. 24 I am not. I was trying to defend myself. I 25 was told I did something wrong. I wanted to know 1 90 2 what it was, and I wanted to be prepared to do 3 what was necessary to defend myself. 4 Prior to the beginning, around November 5 4, I started trying to access files from the 6 Building Department. I was continually turned 7 down. Finally we submitted this letter, under � 8 45-6 of the Southold Town Code., requesting we 9 be allowed to inspect the records of the 10 Building Department. I took it down November 11 4. I gave it to the Building Department. This 12 is about after three, four, five tries. I 13 finally got access to the records. 14 We began copying several, using the Town 15 machine. At the end of the day, I told the 16 girl that was handling it that I would be in e 0 17 tomorrow, the following day, November 5th, 0 18 with my own machine to copy records. I was S 19 told I would not be allowed to. I felt I was W z 20 entitled to, from what I read in the laws. 0 21 On the morning of November 5th, I went ; u z W 22 into Riverhead to the North Shore Business 23 Products, and I purchased a copying machine, 24 approximately 8: 30 -- quarter to 9 : 00 in the 25 morning. I have a copy of the bill here. I am 1 91 2 handing it to the Board. It came to approxi-- 3 matel� 1 $913. That' s on November 5th. 4 When I went to the Building Department 5 with the machine, I was told to "Get the 6 hell out of here. " That the machine was -- I am going to scan through this. It is a 8 conversation between Victor Lessard and myself. 9 I am handing it up to the Board. I was told 10 I was impeding the traffic, and if I did not 11 remove it, I would be removed. So I respected 12 his wishes and I removed the machine. I asked 13 him. what law that this was under, that I had 14 to remove the machine. He said, these are his 15 words, "That is the Sunshine Law, my friend. " 16 Mr. Lessard speaking: Under the o . 17 Sunshine Law, you will come in and inspect 18 what you want, write down what you want on a s Z 19 piece of paper. W z z 0 20 Myself speaking: It does not say this 0 21 under this law, to write it down. : u z W ' 22 Mr. .Lessard: Don' t assume anything. 23 Myself: My interpretation, Mr. Lessard, 24 says inspect. Your interpretation is that. 25 I would like to know whose interpretation of ._ 1 92 2 the Code is that? 3 Mr. Lessard: That is mine. 4 Myself speaking: That is Mr. Lessard' s. 5 Mr. Lessard speaking: Absolutely. You 6 got it right from the horse. Okay. 7 Myself speaking: I said, "Okay. " F 8 Mr. Lessard concluding the conversation 9 said, "Having said that and having said your 10 machine is interfering with the flow of 11 traffic in here, kindly remove it. " 12 November 5th, again. With all' the 13 motions going on, I did not realize at the 14 time that my permit was revoked on that same 15 day. November 5th. Second Order to Remedy, 16 November 5th, 1987: Your building permit 0 0 17 under Number 15428Z issued October 27, 1987,; r 0 18 is hereby revoked. Reason: Not following s 19 plans. Did not comply with the Stop Work 20 Order -- of which was already thrown out of m 0 < 21 court. I think in viewing this and comparing u z W ` 22 the days one will see, and again I leave it to 23 the observer, why my permit was revoked. 24 In my mind it was because I was exercising my 25 rights, under the Freedom of Information, which 1 93 2 is a Constitutional right. That is basically 3 all I have to say on that. I hand this material 4 up. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. 6 Is there anybody in the audience that 7 would like to speak in favor of this appli- F 8 cation, that may not be here at the next hearing? 9 MR. AMMIRATI: Frank Ammirati. I am 10 here representing my wife, Dianne, and myself, 11 who are the owners of Ammirati' s Cupboard 12 across from Mr. Zahra' s building. We are in 13 favor of granting Mr. Zahra permission. It 14 has taken far too long. This Town has pro- 15 longed this action much too long for' Mr. Zahra' 16 building to open. It is our opinion that an e 17 unoccupied building leads to a demoralization r 18 of the Town' s pride and does nothing to promote e - 19 the tourism in the area. W _ 0 20 Being in close proximity to the Town 0 21 dock area, an indoor restaurant is in desperate z W 22 need, and asked for time and time again, some- 23 thing I cannot give. We hope that the past 24 problems are behind Mr. Zahra, and that the �-� 25 Building Department and the Appeals Board here ' - 1 94 2 that a compromise is reached here and no 3 further delays please. 4 Thank you. I also signed a Y g petition. 5 I went to the neighbors across the street 6 from Mr. Zahra' s building. It is a disgrace, 7 and it is a disgrace this has taken that long. � 8 I am a business owner. I know what people 9 need. People come into Town. They look for 10 something, and Mr. Zahra' s building I think 11 would be appropriate for these people who want 12 to sit down off the boat and have something 13 to eat. 14 That' s all. I cannot come back. 15 - THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 16 MR. BRESSLER: Mr. Chairman, there ' s e 17 only one last item that Mr. Ammirati alluded 0 18 to. There are a significant number of people s 19 that Mr. Zahra and his friend have contacted W m 20 in connection with this application. Mr. 0 21 Zahra will be handing up to the Board petitions u z W L 22 signed by individual citizens in the approximat 23 amount of 1, 400. As well, a letter from the t 24 Mattituck Chamber of. Commerce urging this Board 25 to grant his approval and get this J ro 'ect unde - project 1 95 2 way. This Board well knows the hamlet is in 3 need of a restaurant, and this Board knows that 4 the Town is in need of the housing that would 5 be provided by this apartment. So Mr. Zahra 6 will hand up these petitions, at this point 7 and that is all we have at this juncture. g $ THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 9 MR. ZAHRA: I would like to say ne 10 other thing, Mr. Chairman, with handing up 11 this petition. It has been a very uplifting 12 experience speaking to individuals in the 13 Town and finding out I am not alone. I must 14 have heard at least 1, 000 horror stories from 15 people who have been put through similar 16 situations, that you are well aware of, and O 17 the rest of the Town. I think it is high 0 18 time we asked our political leaders to take 0 Z 19 action and do something about this. This W _ 20 costs thousands of dollars, not to just me 0 0 21 but to all the taxpayers of Southold Town. _ W 22 THE CHAIRMAN: Who are you reflecting 23 this suggestion on? 24 MR. ZAHRA: To your political leader, 25 the Town Board. 1 96 2 THE CHAIRMAN: And slanted to whom, to 3 do something about what? 4 MR. ZAHRA: To take action, to 5 stop .the illicit goings on in the Building 6 Department from -- if you want me to be 7 specific -- 8 THE CHAIRMAN: That' s what I want you to 9 do. 10 MR. BRESSLER: Specifically, Mr. Chairma , 11 to grant the application with respect to the 12 apartment and to permit the project to proceed. 13 The delays are unconscionable and that is 14 reflected in the language of the petition. 15 MR. ZAHRA: I would like to thank the 16 people of the Town of Southold for supporting 0 0 17 me so well. I had no idea I would receive 0 18 very well responses. Of the 1, 400 names, we Z 19 had less than 10 turn-downs. That was only W 20 the people that just moved in the area several 21 months ago; one or two people that thought u z u 22 by signing it there would be retribution. It 23 is said to think there are people who think that 24 way, but they do. Thank you. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Hearing no 1 97 2 further comments at this point, and only 3 because we are going to get on with the next 4 hearing, I will recess this hearing to the next 5 regularly scheduled meeting. In the interim, 6 we will make an appointment with Mr. Zahra to 7 see the apartment, or the open construction 6 of the apartment if we know there is no 9 apartment there. At this point, we will see 10 floor beams and insulation. That' s what we 11 assume we will see, and we will reconvene the 12 hearing and -tell the Town Attorney. 13 I want you, Mr. Bressler, to contact 14 him now. 'Not tonight. I want you to contact 15 him, you know, within the next week or so and 16 make sure that that is exactly what we are 0 0 17 dealing with. If you have anything else -- 4 0 18 MR. ZAHRA: I have a question, Mr. 0 19 Chairman. I am just curious. Is this a .normal W _ m 20 procedure, or standard procedure, to enter 0 21 the building? V _ W 22 THE CHAIRMAN: Every time. 23 MR. ZAHRA: I have been before the Board 24 myself on occasions, when we were before you 25 on the bed and breakfast. I don' t recall you 1 98 2 going into that building. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: Which one was that? 4 MR. ZAHRA: Bed and breakfast on New 5 Suffolk Avenue. The Applicant was myself. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: I did not enter that 7 premises. That is the only one we did not . 8 enter. We did enter the one on Pike Street,' 9 however. 10 Offering that as a resolution -- 11 MR. GRIGONIS: Second. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? 13 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye. 14 MR. DOYEN: Aye. 15 MR. SAWICKI: Aye. 16 MR. DINIZIO: Aye. e 0 17 (After a brief recess, said proceedings 4 0 18 resumed) s 19 THE CHAIRMAN: I need a motion to 20 reconvene. m 0 21 MR. SAWICKI: So moved. u z W 22 THE CHAIP14AN: All in favor? 23 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye. 24 MR. DOYEN: Aye. ti- 25 MR. SAWICKI : Aye. 1 128 2 C E R T I F I C A T I O N 3 4 I, Gail Roschen, an Official Court Reporter, 5 do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and 6 accurate transcription of my stenographic notes taken on 7 June 27, 1990. 8 9 10 GAIL ROSCHEN 11 12 13 14 15 16 o 0 17 e 18 S Z _ 19 W m 20 o 21 u z W 22 23 24 25 1 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : STATE OF NEW YORK 2 --------------------------------------x 3 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 4 HEARING, 5 --------------------------------------x 6 Town Hall 53095 Main Road 7 P.O. Box 1179 a Southold, New York 8 9 9: 45 P.M. 10 B E F 0 R E: 11 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman 12 13 BOARD MEMBERS: 14 CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , Absent 15 SERGE DOYEN, JR. 16 JOSEPH H. SAWICKI, Absent 0 0 17 JAMES DINIZIO, JR. 0 18 0 19 A L S 0 P R E S .E N T: W m 20 DOREEN. FERWERDA, Secretary 0 21 V Z W a 22 23 24 GAIL ROSCHEN Official Court Reporter 25 1 11 2 THE CHAIRMAN: I just want to add one 3 question to the attorney. 4 What is the timeliness on this? When do 5 you want to get started on this project? 6 MR. McGAYHEY: As soon as possible. m 7 THE CHAIRMAN: All right_. We hope to m a - 8 have a decision for you very quickly. 9 MR. McGAYHEY: Thank you. 10 THE CHAIRMAN: Again we thank you. 11 Hopefully, we will try to do it tonight. I am 12 not guaranteeing it. Thank you. 13 Hearing no further comments, I make a 14 motion closing this hearing and reserving 15 decision until after the meeting. 16 MR. DOYEN: Second. e 0 17 THE- CHAIRMAN: All in favor? 0 18 MR. DOYEN: Aye. s 19 MR. DINIZIO: Aye. W Z r 20 THE CHAIRMAN: The last hearing on the m 21 agenda is in behalf of .Charles Zahra, and we u z 22 reconvene that hearing. We ask Mr. Zahra if 23 he has anything he would like to add, after our 24 measurement-s that were taken, and so on and 25 so forth, approximately three weeks ago on a 1 12 2 Saturday? 3 Pardon me. Mr. Bressler is going to 4 speak. 5 MR. BRESSLER: Wickham, Wickham & 6 Bressler, P.C. , Main Road, Mattituck, New York; m 7 by Eric J. Bressler. m a 8 I think since the last time we were 9 here the Board has had an opportunity to 10 examine the premises in question. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: That is correct. 12 MR. BRESSLER: I would ask, at this time, 13 whether the Board has any questions concerning 14 its examination of the premises? 15 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, I have no questions 16 as to what is upstairs, at this particular point, 0 0 17 and I hope you don' t think -- because it would, 18 be unkind of me to have you think that I am s 19 questioning anything else -- but in .light. of 20 all the things that were discussed, I have m 21 discussed our crackerjack maintenance group Z 22 to bring in a blackboard- because, as you know, 23 I was a teacher once and I do have to draw 24 something as we will continue throughout this 25 hearing - - just briefly. Hopefully, it won' t 1 13 2 go too lengthy, and do you want me to continue? 3 MR. BRESSLER: Please. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: We have a building that 5 has been reconstructed and rightfully so. Myself 6 and Mr. Dinizio went to the building and we m 7 noticed that major renovations -- major m a 8 alterations. I viewed the building. I saw 9 the whole thing and we realize that in granting 10 or not granting this apartment, assuming we 11 granted the apartment, we know that there are 12 specific elements to the granting of this 13 apartment and to the further consequences of 14 this particular building as it exists today. 15 Obviously I was very happy with the 16 dealings of the upstairs of the building, e 17 viewing of the upstairs of the building and 0 0 18 so forth. My only concern was that during the 0 s 19 period of time that the building permit was W m 20 secured, and regardless of what occurred after, 21 that you knew the construction delays and <u 22 show cause order and all the rest of the things 23 that occurred, it was always my opinion that 24 maybe your friends -- this Applicant -- should 25 have come in possibly for a variance before thi 1 14 2 Board and I am concerned that if in granting 3 this apartment from this particular Board that 4 we are not side-stepping further variances that 5 might have or should• have been secured at the 6 time this particular original project was m 7 started in ' 86. That is the only thing I am m a 8 concerned with, at this time. 9 MR. BRESSLER: With respect to the 10 issues you have referred to -- 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Side yard or rear yard, 12 or whatever the situation is, because we did 13 have a non-conforming building which was severed 14 from the property which was reconstructed and', 15 you know, I am not -- this is not a tantamount 16 issue to us. We are just concerned about it 0 0 17 at this particular time, and I have not asked 0 18 this Board to review it. s 19 I will be perfectly honest with you, W m 20 Eric. I am sitting here with an engineer' s 21 report from 1988 that I could have simply u z W 22 submitted to you and asked you to reflect upon 23 it. I don' t know if I should give it to you. 24 It clearly states that there are inconsistencies 25 in reference to the non-conformity of this 1 15 2 particular building and I am concerned about 3 that in light of the fact that we are either 4 going to grant or deny this apartment as it 5 exists. 6 I will be honest -with you. I have never, m 7 for the 10 years I have served on this Board, a 8 felt more strongly about granting some portion 9 of that upstairs apartment. I have not come 10 up with the figures in reference to -- because 11 as you know, I told you I thought it was 12 in excess of 750 square feet. We measured it. _ 13 It is about 850 or somewhere in that general 14 range. I have not come up with the figure as 15 to the minimum size of this apartment as of 16 this date; .this time, five of 10: 00 of. this e 0 17 evening. The engineer' s report says that the 18 building was 632 or 635 square feet upstairs. 0 19 I am concerned that there was a -vast difference W 20 between 632 and 850 . -- whatever the case may m e 21 be. I am concerned about if the Building u z 22 Department or any other agencies in the Town 23 is not denying this particular building for 24 either a side yard or a rear yard variance at 25 the time the construction was commenced, and 1 16 2 so on and so forth. How can you make me feel 3 better concerning that? 4 MR. BRESSLER: Well, I think we can 5 address those concerns one at' a time. I think 6 with respect to the side yard variance, I m 7 don' t believe that there was any expansion to m a 8 either side. 9 Is that true, Mr. Zahra? 10 MR. ZAHRA: Correct. 11 MR. BRESSLER: So I think with respect 12 to any non-conformity that existed with respect 13 to the side yard, I think the Board may rest 14 assured that by virtue of this project there 15 was no additional non-conformity. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: Can I draw that while 0 < 0 17 you are discussing? 0 18 MR. BRESSLER: By all means, of course. s 19 (Chairman .drawing diagram on blackboard) W _ r 20 THE CHAIRMAN.: I remember the existing - m . 0 21 building extending almost to the sidewalk u z ' W ` 22 area. Now I don' t know if the sidewalk is the 23 actual front property line or not. I remember 24 this little area to the east side of the 25 building as being -- at one time it was a place 1 17 2 where they had stored newspapers and later 3 when the prior owners owned it, it Jecame an 4 area of dining basically. Now when l looked 5 at the building which, by the way, was the 6 first time I was in the building, except when 7 it didn' t have any windows, I took some pictur s. s a 8 I noticed that the building is actually square 9 off like this (indicating) . I am dar(ecting 10 this question -- let the record show: What 11 is the actual area now in between -when I 12 say area, we are talking about open side 13 yard between the existing building and the 14 property line, or The Broken Down Val is'e which 15 is a bar? 16 MR. BRESSLER: First of all, I would 0 0 17 ask Charlie to answer your question, Mr. 0 18 Chairman, . and also do a little work (on that a.. 19 drawing there and reflect what, in fact, was W 20 there and what was done. m 21 So do it, Charlie. 22 (Mr. Zahra drawing diagram on black- 28 board) 24 MR. ZAHRA: The area between `The 25 Valise and my building are 140 Pike Street -- t 1 18 2 I only guesstimate it is in the area of 10 3 feet or less -- or less variance. 4 MR. BRESSLER: Is The Broken Down 5 Valise, to your knowledge, on the property 6 line? 7 MR. ZAHRA: Yes, to my knowledge, right a 8 on the property line. Now, the street side 9 as you show -it here, you are correct. " That 10 is the right-of-way -- it used to be, and this 11 had that overhang on there -- the entrance. 12 I set it back approximately three feet. 13 'MR. BRESSLER: Charlie, why don' t you 14 show them the solid line as the old and the 15 dotted line as the new, and make .it nice and 16 easy for everybody to look at. e Q 17 MR., ZAHRA: One of the reasons for that 0 0 18 one is to allow for clear access for the stoop, 19 make it large enough -- three feet plus. < 20 MR. BRESSLER: So the dotted is the old. m 21 MR. ZAHRA: Right. Right on the u z 22 straight line. 23 MR. BRESSLER: Now do the side yard. 24 MR. . ZAHRA: The west side yard is 25 exactly the same, and I would have; to put that 1 19 2 at approximately five inches which is exactly 3 where it was . 4 THE CHAIRMAN: Five inches from the 5 property line. 6 MR. ZAHRA: Approximately. I could be 7 off -- ten inches. The rear yard is the same. s a 8 You had a doorway. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: Well, there was some -- 10 MR. ZAHRA: A doorway on the left. That 11 would be the southwest corner, but otherwise, 12 the footprints stayed the same. 13 MR. BRESSLER: The east side. 14 MR. ZAHRA: The east side in the front 15 portion was extended and squared off. That 16 stayed the same as per plan. 0 17 MR.. BRESSLER: How big is the building a 0 18 now? 0 a 19 MR. ZAHRA: 30 by 50 feet. W Z m 20 THE CHAIRMAN: All corners, all the way 21 around. u z 22 MR. ZAHRA: Exactly perfectly rectangula . 23 THE CHAIRMAN: At the time that the old 24 code existed, what was the side yard require- 25 ments? That is the question I have. Was it 1 20 2 ten feet? I mean, we have a non-conforming 3 building here. There is no contest on this 4 side. My only question is based upon the east 5 side of the building. Was it 10 feet, and is 6 it still 10 feet? m 7 MR. BRESSLER: I believe that to be so. m a 8 In any event, my question to Charlie: Would 9 you go up any closer to that side? 10 MR. ZAHRA: No. No. 11 MR. BRESSLER: Except for the firewall 12 you are required to put up. 13 MR. ZAHRA: We stayed within the foot- 14 prints with that. We held that back to install 15 that eight-inch wall that was unnecessarily 16 required by the Building Department. We stayed 17 within the footprints. O 0 18 MR. BRESSLER: I think in answer to your 0 s 19 question, Mr. Chairman: What can we do to W 20 make you feel better, to reassure you about 0 21 that? I think with respect to the front, we u z 22 can say we move it back off the road, which 23. was a good thing. With respect to the rear on 24 the west side, we don' t change it. With 25 respect to the east side, we get no closer to 1 21 2 the property line. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: What about the rear 4 property line? What is that presently? 5 MR. ZAHRA: Why don' t I just refer to 6 the map. m 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. a 8 MR. BRESSLER: About 40 •feet, Mr. 9 Chairman, more or less based on the length of 10 the property line at roughly four or five feet 11 between -- three and five feet along the front, 12 a leg length of about 50 feet and subtract that 13 from 95 feet. You come out to roughly 40 - 14 one foot five inches on that one side. 15 MR. ZAHRA: The west wall, I said five 16 or six inches. It is 1. 6. 0 a 17 MR. BRESSLER: That is correct. 0 18 THE CHAIRMAN: That is presently where s 19 it is now. m 20 MR. ZAHRA: , Yes, definitely. 0 21 THE CHAIRMAN: Now the Planning Board -- u z W 22 MR. ZAHRA: If you recall, the building 23 was raised and excavated. Plumb lines were 24 dropped from the building to keep that foot- 25 print. 1 22 2 MR. BRESSLER: Now the Planning Board 3 raised the parking lot requirement because of 4 the parking lot in the rear. They waived the 5 site plan. 6 MR. ZAHRA: Did you notice that letter m 7 was sent? m a 8 THE CHAIRMAN: I am refreshing myself. 9 This was two years ago. So you are aware of 10 that. 11 MR. BRESSLER: Yes. The Planning 12 Board did waive. 13 MR. ZAHRA: That letter was sent to 14 Mr. Horton. I had spoken to Mr. Lessard on 15 several occasions -- more than several 16 occasions -- regarding the planning -- what 0 17 have you. . He handled it on his own. I did O 0 18 not see that letter for quite some time. It 0 19 was not until I accessed the file that I saw W < 20 that letter. I was never sent a copy of that m 21 letter. V i 22 MR. BRESSLER: All we knew was that it 23 was taken care of, I guess, from our point of 24 view; that .the letter, whatever the letter k- 25 reflects we presume.. is what happened. Not to 1 23 2 duck the question, but we didn' t do it. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: So I think with respect 4 to the first floor, I think it is plain .that 5 there was no additional -- if there was a non- 6 conforming there was no additional conforming m 7 by moving closer to the line. What we have m a 8 is a beneficial situation in the front. 9 The other question I have is -- I 10 apologize. I said 8/23. I have an engineer' s 11 report which reads original second floor to 12 be a total of 653 which presently is 876. 13 MR. BRESSLER: Well, okay. What I can 14 say to that is as per the plans, we calculated 15 and showed to members of the Board what was 16 there and what was not there. I am not sure 0 17 how the engineer calculated it. I know 0 18 physically measuring it with a tape, what we a 19 came up with and I know that to be so. I can Z Y 20 appreciate the Board' s concern. Quite frankly, m . < 21 I don' t know how he did it. I know what was u z W ` 22 added and I know what Charlie showed. I know 23 how many feet that was. That is what I know, ( 24 and that is what Charlie showed you with " ' 25 respect to that. I am a little bit at a loss t 1 25 2 we will give it to you and if you care . to 3 comment concerning it you are very welcome. . 4 MR. BRESSLER: Basically it is what 5 can you live with? We are talking about 225 6 square feet from the original to the present. m 7 I think, first of all, that is just not accurate m a 8 based upon your viewing of the premises; and, 9 secondly, I think that the increase in the 10 size of the apartment was reflected almost 11 in total by the -rerouting for safety reasons 12 of the staircase. I think the measurements 13 of the staircase area and of the adjoining 14 landing area represent the large bulk of the 15 apartment change as laid out, and but for that 16 I think we are basically in the same situation 0 0 17 as were before. I think it is probably a 0 18 situation that we don' t want to be in. s 19 THE CHAIRMAN: One second. C.an we m 20 just get a clean copy of this for you? 0 0 21 MR. BRESSLER: I am looking at the V i 22 renovation plans again. 23 THE CHAIRMAN: This is very rare that 24 we do that. So just hold on one second, 25 Counselor. 1 24 2 understand it, and I can't make the figures 3 work from the plans or with the tape measure. 4 MR. ZAHRA: The only thing I can reflect 5 on, first off, was the fact that there was 6 basically no second story at the time I assume m 7 he went there to look at it. He quite possibly m a 8 may have overmeasured or -- 9 MR. BRESSLER: -- or undermeasured. We 10 don' t know. 11 I.. .think that' the.. plane basically .of 12 Mr. Tsbhtakis. basically' speaks for themselves 13 on that issue and draws to show not only the 14 existing building but the changes to the' . 15 building. I think they support all calculation 16 and to the extent there is a difference, I 17 don' t understand it but I know we have approved 0 0 18 plans that show the numbers as we represented 19 them to the Board and I think that is about W Z m 20 all we can say oh that issue without knowing 21 about the methodology which I take it is not W 22 reflected in the report. 23 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, it is. I have to 24 afford you_ a copy of it. I think we will 25 afford you a copy of this and, after the hearing, 1 26 1; 2 Let the record show this was a report 3 that was requested by the prior Town Attorney, 4 from the firm of Sidney Bowne and Son, 45 5 Manor Road, 'Smithtown, dated October 20 , 1988 , 6 the Town of Southold. It was approved 'by m 7 the Town Attorney and it was performed by this a a 8 firm and at a cost to the Town. 9 Now, gentlemen, I would certainly love 10 to wrap this up tonight. But I don' t want to 11 cause you problems .trying to answer questions. 12 i without going through things. So you tell me 13 II what you want to do. We are. here. 14 MR. ZAHRA: Jerry, I would just like to 15 say one thing. I don' t want to sound arrogant i 16 when I say it. So I will say it with a smile. 0 0 17 I think I have given more documentation 18 on this particular case than anyone has ever 19 given in the entire history of the Southold W Z 20 Town. Not just back to ' 58 -- ' 57 . I am m u 21 talking about the entire history, 350 years. u u 22 I have been sliced, diced and looked under a 23 microscope. The only thing you have not done 24 is ask me for a urine sample to see if I do 25 drugs, and I am telling you right now I am 1 - 5 ;J 26 2 Let the record show this was a report 3 that was requested b q y the prior Town Attorney, I 4 from the firm of Sidney Bowne and Son, 45 5 Manor Road, Smithtown, dated October 20 , 1988 , 6 the Town of Southold. It was approved by 7 � the Town Attorney and it was performed by this 8 firm and at a cost to the Town. . 9 Now, gentlemen, I would certainly love 10 to wrap this up tonight. But I don' t want to I i 11 ;i cause you problems trying to answer questions i 12 jl without going through things. So you tell me 13 what' you want to do. We are here. 14 i MR. ZAHRA: Jerry, I would just like to. 15 say one thing. I don' t want to sound arrogant 16 when I say it. So I .will say it with a smile. 17 I think I have given more documentation 18 on , this particular case than anyone has ever 19 given in the entire history of the Southold 20 Town. Not just back to ' 58 -- 157 . I am ' 21 talking about the entire history, 350 years . 1 22 I have been sliced, diced and looked under a 23 microscope. The only thing you have not done 24 is ask me for a urine sample to see if I do 25 drugs, and I am telling you right now I am 1 27 2 prepared to do it. That is the only thing 3 left. I say it with a smile. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: I understand. 5 MR. BRESSLER: Let me just make several 6 comments. First of all, Mr. Chairman, what m 7 did you measure the second floor to be? m a 8 THE CHAIRMAN: Whatever we did, you and 9 I did it together. 10 MR. BRESSLER: Eight twenty something 11 or 810 and the reason it came out to be that 12 is instead of 876 as shown on the plans, was 13 because of the front which had been pointed 14 out to the Board. So we are dealing with at 15 least on its face a number closer to 800 than 16 to 870. 0 a 17 THE CHAIRMAN: What do you calculate 0 0 18 the original to be? s 19 MR. ZAHRA: Let me back .up a moment and 20 say that in looking at Sidney Bowne' s cal- m 0 21 culations, it appears that Sidney Bowne' s u z ` 22 calculations are based on the tax card. 23 MR. BRESSLER: What we are basing our 24 calculations on is. very simple.. If you look 25 at the plans, you will see that the plans call 1 28 2 for an addition on the side yard where the 3 stairway is and the landing. The plan also 4 shows a shortened rear of the building, and 5 a front that goes to the street. When the 6 Board looked at the building it saw that what m 7 was happening was the front yard got set a 8 back and the rear got set back. So we take 9 the existing line of the building as shown on 10 this approval plan and we say we will move it 11 back. That takes care of that. 12 Then we look at 16 times roughly 7 , or 13 8 , over here and say that is the increase in 14 the area, but it is a very simple calculation. 15 I think with all due respect to Mr. Bowne, 16 his reliance upon some billing that the Tax 0 0 17 Department did on some rough approximation is 18 just not accurate and, not the Tsontakis plans 's 19 so clearly where the lines are and actually W m 20 have dimensions on them and that they reflect 21 what happened. The fact the Board can see, 22 and we went out and measured, you can' see the 23 building was moved back and we calculate '. 24 the difference to be just in that area shown 25 on the sides -- which calculates -- or where 1 29 2 one dimension is not shown -- somewhere between 3 7 or 8 times 16. What does that come out to 4 be? Somewhere between 112 and 128 square 5 feet of which the stairway itself constitutes 6 approximately 30 some square feet, as the 7 Board can see. a 8 THE CHAIRMAN: This is the original or 9 now? 10 MR. BRESSLER: The increase in area now 11 is somewhere between 112 and 128 square feet 12 of which 30 to 40 some square feet consists 13 of the stairway itself. 14 THE CHAIRMAN: So just so I understand 15 it -- 16 MR. BRESSLER: Let me draw this. 0 a 17 (Mr. Bressler drew a diagram on the 18 blackboard and discussion was held off the a Z 19 record) t 20 THE CHAIRMAN: You say that was taken m < 21 out originally, the 653. 22 MR. BRESSLER: 653, whatever, they 23 were calculating, we represented by the 24 dotted line. We have the dimensions and you 25 can read them right off the plan. When we 1 30 2 are looking at the stairway and the landing, 3 that is what the addition consists of. So 4 this Board is concerned about the fact there 5 is additional square footage. I would only 6 say, based upon a visual inspection, it clearly 7 appears it consists . of the stairway generally a . 8 and the landing area with maybe a few feet to 9 spare. That is -what that consists of. 10 MR. ZAHRA: I would like to ditto what 11 he said, and add that fact, that this was done 12 simply for the betterment, to remove the 13 entrance to the upstairs from the street to 14 the alleway to prevent any congestion or 15 accidents happening to people opening their 16 doors onto the sidewalk. e 0 17 THE CHAIRMAN: If you say that, we .have 0 18 approximately 80 square feet. Is that correct? s 19 MR. BRESSLER: 80 -- I mean give or W Z Y 20 take, please. m . 0 0 21 THE CHAIRMAN: Excluding the stairway, u z W ` 22 is that correct? When we sat here at the 23 prior hearing they questioned the scope of 24 the Zoning Board. We took four and one-half � - 25 hours on a house in New Suffolk, four and one- 1 31 2 half. hours of testimon1V and the difference 3 between the house being measured with the 4 shingles on the house and without the shingles l 5 being on the house. We need not engage in 6 that. If we took the 653 and added 80 to -- P 7 MR. BRESSLER: -- plus the stairway area, �i I'. 8 -- G making the I; 9 THE CHAIRMAN: -- if we could arrive 10 at 730 square feet as the original, could we 11 saythe original a apartment with the stairwell �I P 12 was about 730 square feet? I' 13 MR. BRESSLER: I think that would be a 14 fair statement, somewhere in that area, because 15 the 120 -- is that right, somewhere in that 16 area because -- 17 THE CHAIRMAN: -- so we have here 18 approximately about 135 to 140 square feet, 19 more at this particular time, based upon whatever 20 this report showed or our visual calculations i i 21 show when we 'went to the site and developed the 22 figures that we developed that day. Is that 23 correct? 24 -MR. BRESSLER: I would shave it down to j • i 25 somewhere in that ball park. I would say you t 1 32 2 have gross between 112 to 128 more, and when 3 you net out the stairway you have somewhere 4 between 80 and 95 of floor space necessitated, 5 of course, by having to have a place to be when 6 you arrive at the top of the stairs. 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Assuming we took out the m a 8 stairwell out of the square footage that exists 9 today within the apartment. That stairwell 10 is how large now? 11 MR. BRESSLER: The stairwell looks to 12 be maybe 40 square feet. 13 THE CHAIRMAN: So we are talking there- 14 abouts of 820 square feet, somewhere in that 15 general area. 16 MR. BRESSLER: No. We think that would 0 a 17 be 780 because we think we only go 820 to 0 0 18 start with. 0 19 THE CHAIRMAN: We don' t know if this W m 20 is inside or outside. 0 21 It probably is the outside -- inside a u 22 dimensions as opposed to the outside of the 23 house. 24 You have to lop off the front. 25 MR. BRESSLER: Lop off 60. feet maybe. 1 33 2 You are down to around 820 less 40. 3 You are down to about 780 , and 4 that was somewhere in the vicinity of 710 5 to 720 when we started that house. 6 I think that ought to afford the m 7 Board some comfort about the scope of the m a 8 additional square footage. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: You have to understand 10 there was a two-year time lapse, and I am 11 sure you are aware of this because of the 12 corresponding documents going between the 13 Court and attorneys and so on and so forth. 14 My only other question to you is: Do you 15 want to digest this and reflect upon it, or 16 do you want to drop it at this particular point 0 e 17 knowing that it is part of the record? 0 18 I will use the phrase again, it would 0 sr ig be unkind of me to drop it because I am placing z 20 it in the file. I will give you a copy of m a 21 it. I don' t know what we are going to use. 13 z W 22 I don' t know what we are not going to use. I 23 will tell you this : We could have asked you 24 to petition the Langers (phonetic) to come in C '� 25 here and testify -- raise their right hands. 1 34 2 I could have engaged in the firm of Sidney 3 Bowne and asked Robert Bowne to come in -- 4 raise his right hand. We didn' t do that. I 5 told you in the outset of this hearing that 6 we are trying to clear this up in my own mind, m 7 and that was the purpose of the question. m a 8 I just want you to know we are trying to do 9 this as systematically as possible. 10 MR. BRESSLER: Let me ask the Board a 11 question or two. I think based on the approved 12 plan I submitted, we have proceeded with 13 calculations that can certainly be verified 14 by the use of a ruler. 15 I think we verified, if recollection 16 serves me right, somewhere in the area of 0 h 0 17 820 was arrived at. With the use of the ruler, 0 18 we arrived at that figure with respect to s z 19 Sidney Bowne. I don' t think we worked off the 20 tax card. It is probably an appropriate way 0 21 and should be afforded any weight as compared u z 22 to the Tsontakis plans. I think clearly the 23 Board will have to give that what weight it 24 deserves. 25 As to the other issues, I would have a 1 35 2 question or two for the Board. In the first 3 instance, this letter appears to state that 4 the questions to be addressed is clearly what 5 area has been reconstructed or structurally 6 altered. Although we did agree with their m 7 calculations,. I don' t think they are sig- a 8 nificantly off. 9 I think, based upon their erroneous 10 reliance on the tax map, and I have got to 11 note at this point I am somewhat surprised 12 by that, Mr. Chairman, considering the fact 13 Sidney Bowne must have had available to him 14 the plan. 15 THE CHAIRMAN: We don' t know. He is 16 not here. Let' s not reflect upon it, just as 17 I can' t recall Steve Tsontakis who, unfortu- 0 18 nately, has expired from this earth. Sidney s 19 Bowne is not here. W z m 20 MR. BRESSLER: Nevertheless, I note they o , 21 compute their computations of what we may u z W ` 22 differ. I note they have computed a net 23 increase in the area of 32 percent, thus 24 within the 50 percent requirement. I would 25 ask that the Board, in the first instance, if 1 I ' 1 . 1 36 2 that is the test that they are applying and 3 -- has that been applied by the Board? 4 THE CHAIRMAN: I am not sure, at this 5 point. 6 MR. BRESSLER: I don' t know that. I m 7 would also note that the conclusions of this a S letter seem to state that they ,-- based on 9 the foregoing facts and evidence, it can only 10 be concluded that more than 50 percent of the 11 fair market value of the building has been 12 exceeded by alteration activities. I am at 13 a loss from understanding that, from looking 14 at their report, other than to show that their 15 portion of the building has been worked on, 16 I 'm at a complete loss to understand that as 0 0 17 I think the Board is probably as well. 18 THE CHAIRMAN: The first floor area has 0 19 been taken care of by the discussions we had W m 20 before. So I am investigating the first floor 0 21 evaluation from this report. It was only u z W L 22 dealing with the second floor, which is what we 23 significantly went through back and forth. 24 MR. " BRESSLER: That raises an interestin 25 issue and I am a little at a loss to know 5 f 1 37 2 exactly how the Board wishes to proceed. I 3 see now that the Board is going to exclude 4 the first floor from consideration. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: Not the Board, just me. 6 We will certainly work from that, at least for m 7 the time being. m a 8 MR. BRESSLER: With respect to that 9 issue I would like some guidance from the 10 Board as to what standard is going to be 11 applied with respect to the 50 percent rule. 12 If the Board is concerned about the 50 percent 13 rule, let me state four things: 14 First, that with respect to the appli- 15 cation of the rule, the first instance at least 16 the Chairman has correctly discerned that the 0 a 17 actual square footage of the building changed a 18 very little. a 19 2) That 50 percent rule in this Town W Z 20 is somewhat problematic as amended, that at a 21 the last hearing date -- and we are prepared u z 22 either at this time or probably at the 23 beginning of what looks like another session -- 24 to go forward with evidence that we wish to �� 25 direct the Board' s attention to concerning what ,t 1 38 2 we believe to be rather than your application 3 of the 50 percent rule in this Town. We don' t 4 think it exists. I think we know it. I think 5 the Board is aware of it, and I think the Board 6 now knows this rule has been applied and I m 7 think we want it applied to us the same way, m a 8 and that' s basically not at all because it 9 doesn' t apply in this Town and everybody knows 10 that if you tear a buildihq_ down and you 11 build it in the footprints you are okay and 12 we are prepared to show that. 13 Third, Subdivision E. Paragraph E, this 14 50 percent rule, to apply exceeding aggregate 15 cost 50 percent of the fair value of the 16 building. You will note there is no definition 0 = 17 contained in this section that leaves open the 0 0 18 fair value of the building. What is the fair a 19 value of this building? We are prepared at Z o 20 the next session to tell you what the fair 0 21 value of that building is. < V 2 W ` 22 MR. ZAHRA: In dollars and cents. 23 MR. BRESSLER: Yes. I know what a good 24 way to figure out what the value of a building 25 like this is, to ask what the replacement cost 1 39 2 is, and he didn' t put in more than 50 percent 3 of the replacement. cost. Couldn' t we evaluate 4 the building on the basis of the income 5 approach? Couldn' t we do that? We will present 6 evidence, and the applicable multiplier to be m 7 applied. Mr. Zahra has not exceeded 50 percent m a 8 of that value, and with respect. to valuing 9 the building those are -the two ways I know 10 to value that building. I..don' t see anything 11 in this report except a conclusory assessment 12 to the effect that he has violated it, and 13 with that in mind I think we probably all had 14 about enough and I am going to digest this 15 report and ask the Board for some guidance on 16 that issue. 0 = 17 THE CHAIRMAN: I don' t think it is 0 18 necessary, Mr. Bressler. I will tell you the 's Z 19 reason why. That was the reason I asked the m 20 question regarding the first floor area. The 21 second floor area is the one of concern to u z 22 me because that is the area where the signifi- 23 cant increase appears to be. I mean it is 24 assumed that the east side of the building 25 was closed up. That is from that original foot f 1 40 2 print. There is no P question about it. 3 MR. BRESSLER: That is true. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: As long as it did not 5 encroach any closer to the side yard area, 6 which is something I wanted to know for myself. 7 As for the 50 percent rule, I cannot answer : a 8 for my two colleagues here or the two that 9 are not feeling well tonight, one of which 10 went through a serious operation. I don' t know 11 if it is a fair question, at this particular 12 point. I would personally think we should 13 close the hearing at this point. But that is 14 entirely up to you. 15 MR. BRESSLER: Well, at this juncture 16 let me ask one or two questions. I will then 0 17 consent to closing the hearing. % 18 Mr. Zahra, with respect to the building s 19 as it existed, what rent did you anticipate z m 20 receiving with respect to upstairs and down- 0 21 stairs as they existed? u z W L 22 MR. ZAHRA: First off, I would like to 23 say I had several avenues to follow, one of 24 which being renting upstairs and downstairs. -` 25 MR. BRESSLER: That is what. I want to 1 41 2 hear about. 3 MR. ZAHRA: The other possibility of 4 utilizing them -- from the rental upstairs 5 would bring in the neighborhood of $700 a 6 month; downstairs I would say in the neighbor- m 7 hood of $2,500 a month fully equipped. m a 8 MR. BRESSLER: In estimating the market 9 value of this building now that we arrive at 10 roughly 36 to $40, 000 in rent per year., what 11 multiplier would you use in evaluating that 12 building? 13 MR. ZAHRA: On the return basis -- 14 eight -- 15 MR. BRESSLER: Eight would yield a 16 12 percent return. That is on the income 0 17 approach. , The Board can do the simple 0 ,. ig arithmetic. Now, Mr. Zahra, with respect to 0 0 s 19 the replacement cost of that building as it W m 20 existed prior to the renovation, do you know 0 21 how much the replacement cost of that building u z 22 was? 23 MR. ZAHRA: I have here a letterhead 24 from Mr. John Scaranucci, who is a carpenter f '� 25 in Mattituck, Post Office Box 1150. He. has 1 42 2 prepared me an estimate of replacement cost 3 based on the original footprint, and briefly 4 it says here a bid on the formation -- I would 5 say that $130 per square foot is a fair cost. 6 That would make the actual replacement value m 7 of the Coffee Pot $250, 800 . m a S THE CHAIRMAN: Is that complete with 9 all fixtures and all? 10 MR. BRESSLER: As it existed. 11 MR. ZAHRA: It states in there -- I 12 would prefer to have you make a copy of that 13 and give me that back because my cop.ier is a 14 not working too well. 15 MR. BRESSLER: Mr. Zahra, have you 16 expended to date an amount which would exceed 0 f 0 17 one-half of either of those fair market values 0 18 on the building? s 19 MR. ZAHRA: Definitely not. W z 20 MR. BRESSLER: Have you expended m 21 $50 , 000 on the building to date? u z 22 MR. ZAHRA: No-. 23 MR. BRESSLER: I don' t have any further 24 questions for Mr. Zahra. Mr. Chairman, do 25 you have any questions or members of the Board? 1 43 2 THE CHAIRMAN: I don' t understand what 3 you just said about the $50 , 000 . 4 MR. BRESSLER: Have you expended less 5 than the sum of $50 , 000 without going into 6 detail -- and the answer was yes, less than m 7 that number. That number is fak less than . m a 8 50. percent of the fair market, either on 9 replacement or income approach. 10 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 11 MR. BRESSLER: The last item -- without 12 belaboring the Board, I am going to refer to r 13 certain files by number and ask that they 14 be deemed part of the record and leave it at 15 that without going into detail about what they 16 show or do not show. They are relevant to 0 17 the issue which I mentioned before. They are 18 files issued under Permit Numbers 14725, 13192, s 19 14553, 15104, 17524. I would ask they be zz 20 deemed part of the record. The nature of these m 21 items , as I said, they were basically four u z 22 issues on that 50 percent rule. These speak 23 to Issue Number Two, which there is no such 24 rule in this Town. And without going into 25 detail, without further belaboring the 1 44 2 point, I think the documents speak for them- 3 selves, and if they do not I will be pleased 4 to answer anything in writing with respedt 5 to those files. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: Hearing no further comments, 7 I make a motion closing the hearing. a 8 MR. DOYEN: Second. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? 10 MR. DOYEN: Aye. 11 MR. DINIZIO: Aye. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: On Jordan' s Partners, 13 Appeal Number 3915, we took it out of sync 14 and let Mr. Tsunis go. There were other people 15 tonight, and we took- it out of sync. What 16 we did, . we gave him a letter requesting that 0 0 17 he divulge the members of the corporation. We 18 further recessed the hearing to the next 19 regularly scheduled meeting, waiting for a 20 decision from the Planning Board on the evalu- e 0 21 ation of the site plan and we will close the V _ W 22 hearing if -- or if we do not receive the site 23 plan evaluation at the next regularly 24 scheduled meeting. f 25 (Time noted: 10: 55 p.m. ) 1 45 2 C E R T I F I C A T I ON 3 4 I, Gail Roschen, an Official Court Reporter, 5 do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and 6 accurate transcript of my stenographic notes taken on ` m. 7 July 25, 1990. a 8 9 10 / G TV ROSCH N 11 12 13 14 15 16 e 0 17 18 0 19 W x 20 m O 21 u z 22 23 24 f 25 1' V up b § 100-118 ZONING § 100-118 I r § 100-118. Nonconforming uses. Unless otherwise authorized as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided, the following provisions shall apply to nonconforming uses: A. The lawful use of a building or premises existing on the effective date of this chapter or authorized by a building permit issued prior thereto may be continued although such use does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, and such use may be extended throughout the building lawfully acquired to said date. B. A nonconforming use of a building or premises may be changed to a use of the same or higher classification ac- cording to the provisions of this chapter. C. Whenever a district shall hereafter be changed, any then existing nonconforming use of a building or premises in such changed district may be continued or changed to a use of a similar or higher classification, provided that all other ,. gel regulations governing the use are complied with. D. Whenever a nonconforming use-of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this section to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefor shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided. I E. A nonconforming building may not be reconstructed or structurally altered during its life to an extent exceeding in aggregate cost fifty percent(50%) of the fair value of the i building, unless the use of such building is changed to a _ conforming use. F. A nonconforming building which has been damaged by fire or other causes to the extent of more than fifty percent (50%) of its fair value shall not be repaired or rebuilt unless ,. C=!!!NLa the use of such building is changed to a conforming use. 10053 2-25-85 ;i Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI M I N U T E S REGULAR MEETING THURSDAY , APRIL 14 , 1988 A Regular Meeting and Public Hearings of the Southold Town Board of Appeals were .held on THURSDAY , APRIL 14 , 1988 commencing at 7 : 30 o ' clock p .m. at the Southold Town Hall , Main Road , Southold , New York 11971 . Present were : Gerard P. Goehringer , Chairman ; Serge Doyen.; Charles Grigonis ; Robert J . Douglass and Joseph H. Sawicki , constituting all five Members of the Board. Also present were Linda Kowalski , Board Secretary , and approximately 25 persons at the beginning of the meeting . (Mr . Lessard was absent. ) The Chairman opened the meeting at 7 : 30 p .m and proceeded with the first item on the agenda, as follows : DELIBERATIONS/DECISION: Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 . The Chairman indicated that the following interim decision is as a result of hearing and considering all testimony and reviewing all documentation in the record : WHEREAS , public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 ; and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony .recorded; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application ; and i Southold Town Board of Appeals -2- April 14 , 1988 Regular Meeting (Appl . No . 3701 - ZAHRA , Interim Decision , continued : ) WHEREAS , the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning , and the surrounding areas ; and WHEREAS , the Board made the following findings of fact: 1 . This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . The revoca- tion was issued on November 5 , 1987 . 2 . The property in question is located in the "B-i " General Business Zoning District and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 005 . 3. The subject premises contains a total area of 3 ,800 sq . ft. with 40 .0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck , Town of Southold. 4. The subject premises is presently improved with a partially - completed one-story concrete foundation with exterior walls . Previously , the premises was improved by a two-story structure which was nonconforming as to various setback requirements and as to use . 5 . The building permit was revoked under Article XVI , Section 100-142 of the Zoning Code which reads as follows : " . . . The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances : A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to' a- material fact in the application , plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance with the applicable law.. C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application , plans or specifications . D . Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector . Southold Town Board of Appeals -3- April 14 , 1988 Regular Meeting (Appl . No . 3701 - ZAHRA , continued : ) 6 . Hearings were held on this application on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 . The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters of personal knowledge in the record . This was completed by March 14 , 1988 , and the hearing was closed at the Board ' s Regular Meeting on March 17 , 1988 . 7 . Based on the facts in the record , it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the Building Department. It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure. Indeed , the second story has been totally removed and the first floor has been completely rebuilt. The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new structure when compared to the prior structure . 8. ' Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted , the facts before the Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit. Specifically , the evidence would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent C exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building . This would violate Sectio-n 100- 1.18E of the Zoning Code . The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would also subject the project to compliance with present building code requirements under the New York State Building Code . 9. Based on the personal knowledge of the Board and conservations with family members of the prior owner , it further appears that the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years . This would result -in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100-118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid . 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of di.scontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held. Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit r Southold Town Board of Appeals -4- April 14 , 1988 Regular Meeting (Appl . No . 3701 - ZAHRA, continued : ) under Section 100- 118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code . These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should . be resolved at this juncture . Since no vested rights can be obtained under an illegal permit , it would appear to be int he applicant ' s best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board. Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Department' s revocation of the building permit. 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100- 118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr. Goehringer , it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND .NEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING , to be held on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist -under Sections 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . The Chairman handed Mr . Charles Zahra a copy of the Board ' s decision in draft ; unofficial form , and indicated that the official final decision will be available tomorrow. Southold Town Board of Appeals -7- May 12 , 1988 Regular Meeting (Appl . No . 3575 = HODGSON decision, continued : ) f. significant economic injury has not been demonstrated by dollars_ an_d cents proof; g. in view of all the above factors and in view of the manner in whic.h the difficulties . arose , the interests of justice will be served by denying the relief requested . Accordingly , on motion by Mr. Douglass , seconded by Messrs . Goehringer and Grigonis , it was RESOLVED , that the relief requested under Appeal No . 35.75 in the Matter of the Application of ROSA J . HODGSON , BE AND HEREBY . IS DENIED AS APPLIED . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Douglass , Doyen and Douglass . (Member Sawicki was absent [out. of state] . ) This resolution was duly adopted . COPEN RECESS : WITHOUT DATE . Appl . No . 3701 - Matter of CHARLES Z R he Board was updated on the recent postponement at the May 7 , 1988 Supreme Court hearing on the Order to Show Cause in this matter. The Supreme Court Judge postponed this matter , as agreed by both parties , until June 22nd . The Board agreed that this matter should . not be advertised for a continued public hearing which was previously adopted with a date of June 14 , 1988. On motion by Mr. Goehringer , seconded by Mr. Douglass , it was RESOLVED , to hold the Matter of the Hearing of "CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 without a date , pending further notice by both the Town Defense Attorney and the .applicant.' s attorney. Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen and Douglass . (Member Sawicki was absent. (out-of- state ) ) This resolution was duly adopted. "TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING } THURSDAY , MARCH 17 , 1988 Appl . No. 3701 Applicant : ' CHARLES ZAHRA Location of Property : Pike Street , Mattituck County Tax Map ID No :.11000-141 -4-5 Board Members Present : Chairman Gerard P. Goehringer ; Robert J . Douglass , Charles. Grigonis , Jr . ; Serge Doyen. (Member Sawicki was absent. ) Also present : Victor Lessard , Building Department Executive --Administrator; Linda Kowalski , Board Secretary ; Daniel Ross , Esq . as Attorney with .the .Firm of Wickham , Wickham and Bressler , P. C . in behalf of the applicant; Applicant Charles Zahra , and approximately 30 persons in the audience at this time . The Chairman identified the application. Daniel C. Ross , Esq . of Wickham , Wickham & Bressler , P . C . appeared in behalf of the application and submitted a March 17 , 1988 letter with attachments for the record. Motion was made by Mr. Goehringer , seconded by Mr. Grigonis , to CLOSE THE HEARING IN TOTO , pending deliberations and determination . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs .. Goehringer , Grigonis , Douglass and Doyen . (Member Sawicki was absent. ) This resolution was duly adopted . Respectfully submitted , inda F. Kowalski Board Secretary 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD N " � BOARD OF APPEALS 3 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ RE: Charles Zahra - Application for 4 Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector - Revocation of Building 5 Permit . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 6 7 Town Hall Southold , New York 8 March 3rd , 1988 9 8 : 15 p .m. 10 11 12 BEFORE: 13 Gerard P . Goehringer , Chairman 14 Robert J. Douglass 15 Linda Kowalski , Secretary 16 Charles Grigonis 17 Serge Doyen, Jr . 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 2 2 A P P E A R A N C E S 3 4 WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, ESQS . Attorneys for Charles Zahra 5 P .O. Box 1424 Main Road 6 Mattituck , New York BY: ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ . 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 3 2 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: This is the last hearing 3 of the evening , and I do have to apologize to 4 you , Mr . Bressler that you were not the only 5 hearing on tonight so , therefore , you are still 6 the last hearing of the evening , and I know that 7 we had promised you that you would be the only 8 hearing tonight , but I 'm sorry there were other 9 more pressing issues before you or just as 10 pressing . 11 MR. BRESSLER: I need another date then . 12 No , just kidding . 13 MR. GOEHRINGER: For the record , this is 14 Appeal Number 3701 , is reconvened from the last 15 regularly scheduled monthly meeting . This is on 16 behalf of Charles Zahra. For the public in 17 question, during the last hearing we had three 18 witnesses sworn in and one witness that spoke 19 independently that was not sworn in and two of 20 those witnesses are before us tonight , and that 21 is Mr . Bressler and Mr . Zahra, and we will be 22 swearing in other witnesses tonight . 23 As for the tenure of the meeting , I would 24 ask if there are any spokespersons that would " 25 like to speak that represent either a group or, RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 4 2 if you ' d like to speak as an individual , kindly 3 just wait -- just kindly state your name and 4 please restrict your statements that are germane 5 to this particular subject area and preferably 6 to this particular hearing . 7 If you are not completely aware of the 8 hearing in question, of what is specifically 9 stated within or embodied within the transcripts 10 that I have before me , then I would ask you 11 please to limit your conversation to those areas 12 that particularly deal with that . 13 Thirdly -- or secondly, I have a specific 14 problem in the respect that I made a statement 15 at the last meeting that I was unaware of the 16 whereabouts of the two building inspectors and 17 that was not particularly true . I ' ll. be honest 18 with the public , I was not -- I was more 19 interested in the hearing than I was basically 20 on the -- of the whereabouts the other people 21 were or whereabouts other people wgxe and I 22 apologize to the building inspectors for that 23 particular part of it . I was aware, of course , 24 that Mr . Lessard was ill and Mr . Horton was on" 25 vacation, and so if I caused any problems , I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 5 2 apologize , gentlemen. 3 I guess we ' ll start with the hearing . Mr . 4 Bressler , could I -- would you step up to the 5 mike for a couple of moments? You were going to 6 supply us with some information. We had the 7 mike fixed this afternoon. You were going to 8 supply us with some information that we had 9 requested on specific dates . 10 MR.. BRESSLER: Yes , that ' s correct . At 11 the time of the last hearing , as I recall , Mr . 12 Chairman, you had requested in order to aid and 13 in organizing the testimony a brief chronology 14 of events . I have -- I have prepared that 15 chronology listing the various events with 16 copies of, relevant documents which were not yet 17 or at least to my knowledge not yet in the 18 record . 19 Secondly, I believe that you asked for a. 20 . chronology with respect to the photographs which 21 have been previously submitted . This has been 22 furnished in the form of Xeroxes of the 23 photographs , numbered sequentially, taken 24 between the period of May to August of 1987 . 25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 6 2 (Documents handed to Mr . Goehringer . ) 3 MR. GOEHRINGER: I appreciate it . 4 Is there anything else you wanted to add 5 to the record at this time? 6 MR. BRESSLER: Not at this time , Mr . 7 Chairman. 8 MR. GOEHRINGER: I believe there ' s a 9 lady in the back on my left-hand side that would 10 like to say something . 11 MS . FARR: Are you going to take 12 statements from people on this hearing after the 13 hearing information has been completed? 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes . 15 MS . FARR: Thank you. Then I 'll wait 16 till then. 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you for waiting . 18 All right , basically I guess we ' ve gotten 19 to the point where we want to discuss a couple 20 of issues with the building inspector , so I ' ll 21 ask Mr . Lessard if he would step up to the mike 22 and raise his right hand . 23 (Mr . Lessard approached the podium. ) 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Mr . Lessard , the 3 25 information that you ' re about to bring forth to RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 7 2 this board is the truth to the best of your 3 knowledge? 4 MR. LESSARD: Yes . 5 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you, sir . 6 Is there anything that you want to state 7 for the record concerning this case? 8 MR. LESSARD: Because of -- because of 9 pending legal activities or action that ' s 10 pending , if you would , I 'd make a statement that 11 would encompass that part of the project that 12 would be to where I would consider the Board of 13 Appeals would be involved and may have' to r . 14 address , if you would go that way. 15 And that would be probably sometime in 16 early September or late August when Mr . Zahra 17 came into my office and he said he had a 18 terrible problem; that he could not frame the 19 roof affair to meet the existing apartment roof . -20 And I said that at that time , "Mr . Zahra, 21 you have a stamped set of plans from an engineer 22 or an architect . That ' s the people you should 23 be talking to, because the Building Department .24 is not in the business of designing buildings ." 25 And he said "Oh, I can 't -- I can ' t talk RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 , 1 8 2 to that stubborn GD Greek because he won ' t do 3 what I want him to. " 4 And he said "My problem is the new roof 5 that I have to frame will not meet the old one . " 6 It was quite obvious because the ceilings were 7 too low in the existing building, along with the 8 windows and it would have to be picked up. 9 And he said "Do you suppose I could open 10 up parts of the accessory apartment and put in 11 two by sixes?" 12 And I said to him something to the effect 13 that it is a nonconforming apartment; you have 14 to be careful you don ' t exceed the value of the 15 50 percent . 16 And he said, "Well , I really don 't know 17 what to do . " 18 And I said "What you have to do as far as 19 I 'm concerned is to go back to your engineer and 20 do whatever you have to, " and he left . 21 This was in the early -- this was in the 22 morning , around 10 o ' clock . Early in the 23 afternoon Mr . Horton had returned from being on 24 the road , and he said to me , he said "Was Mr . 25 Zahra in?" And I said "Yeah" -- I 'm sorry, he RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 9 2 said "Was Charlie in?" I said "Yes , he was this 3 morning . " And he said "Did you make any 4 arrangements with him?" And I said "No. Why? 5 What is hell is the matter?" And he said he 6 took the whole top of -the building off. 7 So he went back and spoke to Charlie and I 8 guess he got the impression from Charlie , and 9 you 'd have to ask Mr . Horton this to verify it , 10 but from what I was told , Charlie told him that 11 I had said to him he can do anything he wants . 12 And I said to Kurt , Mr . Horton, "You know damn 13 well that nobody in the Building Department has 14 the authority to okay getting rid of 15 nonconformity and getting it back . Okay?" 16 I guess a Stop Work Order was issued . 17 Whether the first one was torn up or not, I 18 don ' t know. It ' s hearsay, and I 'm not gonna say 19 that . 20 The end result , and Mr . Horton could 21 probably tell you the sequence , Mr . Bressler 22 came in, early in the morning, 8 : 30ish maybe the 23 following day or shortly -- the following Monday 24 or whatever , wanted to talk to Mr . Horton 25 because he can 't talk to that "damn Lessard, " RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 10 2 which is perfectly fine with me . And when he 3 left I said to Mr . Horton, "Well , what ' s the end 4 result?" He said he explained to Mr . Bressler 5 that because the top was taken off, the plans 6 that the permit was issued for no longer 7 pertained, he would have to go out and get 8 another revised set of plans and bring them back 9 in again . And Mr . Bressler said fine, or 10 something to that effect , I guess , and he would 11 be back . 12 Further down the road we got reports that 13 Mr . Zahra was back working again , I had no 14 choice , but because he wouldn 't stop, revoke the 15 permit . Okay? 16 The only other thing that I would say was 17 from that day in early September until now, 18 nobody has come in with the revised plans , 19 nobody has ever told those people they couldn ' t 20 have their restaurant , nobody has filed with the 21 New York State Board of Review on whatever 22 problem he has there, no one has come into the 4 . 23 Building Department to ask if they can make the 24 building safe . Nobody has gone to your board 25 pertaining to the accessory apartment , if that ' s RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 11 2 what this is all about , and that ' s about all I 3 can say. 4 If I can answer anything , I ' d be glad to, 5 providing it doesn ' t go into that legal area . 6 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , you ' re going to 7 have to stop me if it does . 8 MR. LESSARD : All right . Yes , sir , I ' ll 9 try. 10 MR. GOEHRINGER: And I want the public to 11 be aware of the fact that the thoughts that I 12 have perceived are mainly thoughts that were 13 resurrected or elicited from the last hearing , 14 and they were not specifically anything that I 15 had derived out of reading the minutes , because 16 I ' ll be perfectly honest with you , I purposely 17 did not read the minutes; okay? 18 There was a discussion made by the 19 applicant , and I think it was somewhere in this 20 area of that day that Mr . Zahra came in and he 21 reflected the raising the roof; okay. 22 I just wanted to ask you first , what -- if 23 somebody mentioned to you , Mr . Lessard , I have 24 to raise the roof , what would that mean to you"? — 25 MR. LESSARD : That could be one .of two RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 12 2 things; either to take the roof apart and put a 3 new one onto it , or it could be as was 4 suggested , that the building itself could be 5 picked up and added onto on the bottom, 6 depending on what the condition is . 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: My only question is that 8 at no time were you ever with the thought that 9 this entire second story was going to be 10 demolished? 11 MR. LESSARD : Absolutely not. I thought I 12 had made myself perfectly clear . 13 MR. GOEHRINGER: So basically the reason 14 for the Stop Work Order was because of that 15 severing of that second story? 16 MR. LESSARD: One , that nonconformity was 17 removed, then the plans as submitted no longer 18 pertained , and by law you have to come in and 19 show us now what are you doing , can what you 20 want to do from this point on legally be done . 21 You have to meet the State Construction Code , 22 regardless . So there is no choice . He did 23 something that we had no authority to say fine , 24 just keep right on going . We had no choice in' 25 that department but stop it , and that ' s what we RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 1 13 2 did . And when he refused to stop it , then we 3 have no choice , but to revoke the permit . 4 MR. GOEHRINGER: To your knowledge , based 5 upon the New York State Construction Code , which 6 I believe is the code in effect -- and that ' s 7 what you more or less rely on? 8 MR. LESSARD: Yes , sir . 9 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. 10 What ' s required for new construction on 11 the second story of a wood frame building in a 12 business zone for utilization of that second 13 story, either for -- 14 MR. LESSARD : If you are talking a new 15 building -- 16 MR. GOEHRINGER: Right . 17 MR. LESSARD : Okay. 18 A new building in a type five or wood 19 construction flammable material , if you would , 20 is not permitted to go any higher than one 21 story; okay, as far as the public is concerned . 22 If it is an existing building , the state 23 cannot say anything, except the way it ' s 24 constructed to meet the safety regulations . 25 Once it is removed and it now becomes a RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 14 2 new building , then you must meet today' s 3 requirements , and the State Construction Code 4 says in a type five no way can you have an 5 apartment or living quarters over it . It must 6 be a type two noncombustible and a whole mess of 7 other stuff. 8 MR. GOEHRINGER: Just for my own personal 9 edification , what about the utilization of it 10 for a business purpose on the second floor? 11 Would it have to meet the handicapped law and 12 all the rest of it? 13 MR. LESSARD: Absolutely. Absolutely. 14 You would have to -- you would have to probably 15 design some type of elevator and put it in there 16 for that , as it stands today . There may be 17 modifications shortly, but as it is now -- 18 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. I thank you very 19 much, Mr . Lessard . That kind of answers my 20 questions . I guess we get to the approach -- 21 approach a conflict at this particular time , and 22 I do see the town attorney in the audience and 23 I 'll see -- do you feel that you want to answer 24 any questions from the applicant at this 25 particular time? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 15 2 MR. LESSARD: I 'd have to know what the 3 question is and whether it would involve 5 4 something other than this part of the hearing 5 that involves this board . 6 MR. GOEHRINGER: Then maybe what we ' ll do 7 is we 'll ask you to sit down and we 'll see -- 8 maybe we ' ll get you back up again . We thank 9 you , and we 'll ask Mr . Horton if he would step 10 up to the microphone for a few moments . 11 MR. LESSARD: Thank you . 12 MR. GOEHRINGER: I thank you . 13 (Mr . Horton approaches the podium. ) 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Mr . Horton, would you 15 raise your right hand and solemnly swear -- 16 MR. HORTON: I do . 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 18 There came a time during the hearing , the 19 last hearing , that they discussed the erection 20 of a cement block wall on the east side . Can 21 you kind of give us some background? 22 MR. HORTON: All right , I will try to 23 inform everybody to the best of my knowled.ge . 24 This so-called firewall cement block wall , I 25 don ' t care what we call it -- first off , when RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 16 2 the foundation was put into this building , 3 through , I don 't know what , rain storms or what , 4 the easterly wall collapsed. We were called -- 5 we were sent up there, we went up and we 6 observed, both Vic and I , he was there , and we 7 seen the wall was all collapsed in . 8 At this time Mr . Zahra said some few 9 things and he said something about either he ' d 10 like to expand the upstairs if he could and like 11 this . When -- this is a no-no because the way 12 the permit was issued , so I did make a 13 suggestion that we -- why don ' t you go for a 14 firewall , because you will be too close to 15 another wood frame building, the Broken Down 16 Velice , it would be less than 10 feet , and I 17 said if you boarded it up it wouldn ' t cost you 18 anymore money, you ' re down to the ground, your 19 footings now , start up and there would be in 20 your favor if you wanted to go to the Board of 21 Review and this you will see on a set of plans . 22 We talked about it , we wrote it down there , and 23 everything was done this way . He agreed 24 specifically because was told him, this is just 25 a suggestion, he didn ' t have to do it , but it RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 17 2 would be to his advantage , because we have been 3 to the Board of Review before. In fact , there ' s 4 a man in the audience right now that was there 5 with us and he knows what we ' re talking about , 6 and when you go to that and you lay the facts 7 on, they do give you breaks . I 'm not saying 8 they give it to you , but they do give you 9 breaks , so this was just a suggestion. 10 He agreed to go with it . I 'm not saying 11 it cost him anymore money or any less money, I 12 don 't know, that ' s not my job. But this is how 13 it came about . Nobody said he had to do it . 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Does this firewall have 15 to go all the way to the second story or is it 16 mainly for the first floor? 17 MR. HORTON: It was to go above the 18 other -- Broken Down is the one-story building 19 next store, it was to go above that , which it 20 did . 21 Now, it wasn ' t formerly filled in . He 22 might have wanted to do this , I don ' t know. He 23 just said I ' d like to enlarge what he ' s doing , 24 like a deck or anything , I don ' t know. 25 MR. GOEHRINGER: During the actual RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 18 2 granting of this permit , did you have any 3 reservations in reference to the preexisting use 4 of the building? 5 MR. HORTON: I was not involved in the 6 granting of this permit . 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: I 'm aware of that . But 8 did you have any feelings about the preexisting 9 use of the second story? 10 MR. HORTON: Yes , we all know what we ' re 11 doing , like that , there is reservations when you 12 have a nonconforming use and there are certain 13 restrictions you got to be careful of . 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: I thank you , very much . 15 I think that ' s all I have . Thank you, Mr . 16 Horton . 17 Is there anything you 'd like to say in 18 rebuttal , Mr . Bressler? 19 MR. BRESSLER: Yes , Mr . Chairman . I ' d 20 certainly like some questions put to Mr . Lessard 21 either from you or through you . I think his 22 statements certainly raise a number of issues 23 that bear investigation. 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Could I ask you a favor , 25 Mr . Bressler? Could you use that mike over RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 19 2 there and we 'll put Mr . Lessard back over here , 3 and if he wouldn ' t mind , and what we ' ll do here 4 is you 'll ask the questions to the Bias , if you 5 would , to the board , and then if he feels that 6 he can answer them, he 'll answer them. 6 7 MR. BRESSLER: Surely. 8 In the first instance , I believe Mr . 9 Lessard testified that in late August , early 10 September this problem arose. I would like him 11 to pinpoint for the board , if he could , the time 12 when it first came to his attention -- 13 MR. GOEHRINGER: In reference -- 14 MR. BRESSLER: -- that the second story 15 had been removed . When in late August , early 16 September was this work done? That ' s my 17 question. 18 MR. GOEHRINGER: You mean in reference to 19 a chronological date , time? 20 MR. BRESSLER: That ' s right . All I got 21 was August , September . When did it come down 22 and this problem arise? That ' s my first 23 question . 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Can you answer that? 25 MR. LESSARD: I tried to pinpoint it as RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 20 2 close as I could , Mr . Chairman, because at the 3 time I thought everybody understood and I 4 didn ' t -- I didn ' t put that much thought into 5 the matter after it was discussed . I didn ' t 6 figure it was a problem. I didn ' t see nothing 7 wrong with it and I ' ve got a million other 8 things to do . It is just another one of those 9 things during the day. 10 MR. GOEHRINGER: I understand. 11 MR. BRESSLER: I would like to know if a 12 note or record was made of this occurence which 13 would help the board in, ascertaining when it is 14 claimed that the taking down of the second story 15 and this conversation occurred? 16 MR. GOEHRINGER: You mean is there some 17 note in the file that would be able to -- that 18 would allow this gentleman to refresh his memory 19 at this particular time? 20 MR. BRESSLER: Precisely, Mr . Chairman . 21 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , the only thing we 22 can do in that particular case is to take a 23 three-minute recess and allow the building 24 inspector to refresh his memory for that 25 particular incident or action or occurrence or RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 21 2 whatever you want to call it at this particular 3 time and we ' ll see if -- you know, that ' s the 4 only thing I could do . 5 MR. BRESSLER: Please . 6 MR. GOEHRINGER: I just want you to 7 remember , that although we ' re on the structure 8 of somewhat of a tribunal , this is not a 9 tribunal in that respect . We are trying to 10 water it down to a certain degree . I 'm not an 11 attorney , although I ' ve spent a heck of a lot of 12 time in court . I was never trained in that 13 particular area, so I wish that you would bear 14 that in mind; okay? 15 MR. BRESSLER: Fine. Three minutes would 16 be perfectly all right . 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: So with everybody ' s 18 indulgence and seeing what I would hope Mr . 19 Lessard -- you know, I understand and I didn ' t 20 think this specific question of this nature was 21 going to be answered -- asked , rather , to the 22 board for your response , but we 'll take a short 23 recess and we ' ll ask Mr . Lessard if, you know, 24 if you can answer that . 25 MR. LESSARD : I don ' t see any bearing on RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 22 2 whether it happened on a Monday or Tuesday, but 3 I ' ll give it my best shot . 4 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . I make that 5 motion for about a three-minute recess , 6 Gentlemen . 7 MR. GRIGONIS : Second . 8 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor? 9 THE BOARD : Aye . 10 (At 8 : 30 p.m. a short recess was taken. ) 11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Are you still going with 12 the same question? 13 MR. BRESSLER: Yes . I 'd like to know if 14 Mr . Lessard found anything? 15 MR. GOEHRINGER: Could you -- thank you , 16 sir . 17 MR. LESSARD : As far as I could tell from 18 my records , okay, the first I became aware of 19 the second floor disappearing was somewhere in 20 probably the week of the 20th of September . 21 MR. GOEHRINGER: That ' s -- 22 MR. LESSARD: I can ' t pinpoint it any 23 closer than that . I 'm sorry . 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 25 MR. LESSARD : That ' s when Mr . Horton made RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 23 2 me aware of a problem in Mattituck . I didn 't go 3 to Mattituck . 4 MR. BRESSLER: Now, I would like the board 5 to ask Mr . Lessard if he is aware of whether or 6 not the approved plans called for a new roof 7 structure? 8 MR. LESSARD: Absolutely. How else can 9 you add on , sir , without putting the roof? And 10 you can ' t put a roof on unless it ' s new . 11 MR. GOEHRINGER: If I might just ask a 12 question, are we talking about the roofing 13 material or are we talking about -- 14 MR. LESSARD : I don ' t know. 15 MR. GOEHRINGER: -- or are we talking 16 about the roof rafters? 17 MR. LESSARD: I 'm assuming he ' s referring 18 to new roof rafters on the part that ' s gonna be 7 19 added on. I don ' t know what he ' s after . 20 MR. BRESSLER: His understanding is 21 exactly right , the new roof rafters and those 22 items which go upon it . And I take it the 23 answer is yes? 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: For the addition or for 25 the existing roof? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 24 2 MR. BRESSLER: A new roof over the entire 3 structure. I take it the answer is yes , as 4 shown on the plans? 5 MR. LESSARD : Not as indicated in the 6 plans as I determined . I got the impression 7 that that area that existed may in all 8 probability get a new asphalt roof to go with 9 the rest of what was added on. I don ' t know how 10 technical that is . 11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , that ' s basically 12 what my question was . 13 MR. BRESSLER: Well, I would ask , then , as 14 to whether or not Mr . Lessard is familiar with 15 what the existing construction of the roof was 16 as opposed to what is shown on the plans , and 17 I ' d submit to the board that it ' s evident from 18 comparing the two that there is a new roof shown 19 on the plans. If you look at two by eights and 20 two by sixes , which I 'm advised were not there , 21 I don ' t see how any other conclusion could be 22 drawn . 23 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you want to say 24 anything about that , Mr . Lessard? 25 MR. LESSARD : That may be as it is . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 l 25 2 That ' s up to the engineer or architect to take 3 care of . 4 What I studied on that roof plan indicated 5 that it was feasible , according to the state 6 code , and that ' s what my job is . The 7 responsibility of whether the roof is framed 8 properly is dependent upon the engineer or the 9 architect . According to the education law or 10 the executive law, it is up to the architect on 11 all commercial buildings , has to be there , 12 that ' s the object of it . 13 I don ' t know where this is going to , as 14 far as voiding the permit or whatever he asks or 15 whatever he ' s asked to reverse the decision on . 16 Did you want to say something? 17 MR. HORTON: Yes , I want to know if 18 somebody else can whisper in somebody else ' s 19 ear . Can I go whisper in Vic ' s ear? 20 MR. ZAHRA: If you want to pay him. I 21 happen to be paying him. 22 MR. LESSARD : If we are going to turn this 23 into a circus -- I think I 've given you enough 24 information to this board to make a 25 determination. If we ' re going to turn this into RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 26 2 a circus , I have nothing to say. 3 MR. BRESSLER: I object strenuously to 4 those remarks . I believe I 've asked questions 5 in good faith that go to the heart of those 6 issues , and I think as you , Mr . Chairman, put it 7 at the last meeting , we ' re trying to get down to 8 the bottom of things here , and I would state for 9 the record that my client and I both do not 10 appreciate those remarks and would reiterate the 11 fact that are they are asked strictly in good 12 faith strictly to get to the bottom of things 13 here and I don't believe that this has turned 14 into a circus by any means . It is a very 15 serious matter and I would like to proceed , Mr . 16 Chairman . 17 MR. ZAHRA: Excuse me , one second . I ' d 18 just like to apologize to the board and the 19 group for the outburst . I 'm sorry . 20 MR. GOEHRINGER: Would you sit down , Mr . 21 Zahra? I realize that there are times you might 22 have to confer with your attorney. 23 You kind of left me on a cliff hanging , 24 Victor , and you have to help me understand this . 25 In other words , although the plans say that they RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 27 2 call for a new roof, meaning new roof rafters 3 and so on and so forth, you did not specifically 4 think that they were going to replace anything 5 other than the shingles on the existing part of 6 the roof? 7 MR. LESSARD : That is the common practice , 8 sir , but that ' s between him and his architects , 9 not between him and the Building Department . 10 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. So you thought he 11 was only going to add on the addition, which 12 was -- the addition was going to be the new 13 roof , which is the part that -- which we refer 14 to a reverse gable coming off on the east side 15 facing the Broken Down Velice . 16 MR. LESSARD: That ' s right , sir . 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 18 Mr . Bressler? Excuse me , I just had to 19 clear that issue up in my own mind . 20 MR. BRESSLER: Fine . Thank you. That ' s 21 exactly the point . 22 I would now request the board to inquire 23 of Mr . Lessard whether or not he is aware of 24 whether the plans as submitted and approved ,r 25 called for a consideration and possible RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 28 8 2 replacement of structural members at the time 3 the renovation proceeded to the point where 4 these structural members became apparent to the 5 builder? Is Mr . Lessard aware of whether or not 6 the plans provided for that eventuality? 7 MR. LESSARD: If you ' re referring to that 8 statement in the plans , sir , that say that any 9 wood that is deteriorated would be replaced , I 10 would also point out to this board I have not -- 11 I , the building department , have seen no reports 12 from any engineers specifying what should be 13 replaced and that ' s where it belongs . 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. Mr . Bressler? 15 MR. BRESSLER: May I assume that the 16 answer , then, to my question is yes , that Mr . 17 Lessard is aware of something in the plans which 18 provides for that eventuality? 19 MR. LESSARD: Plus the procedure that has 20 to be gone through; yes , absolutely. 21 MR. BRESSLER: I would now ask whether 22 there came a time when Mr . Lessard had a 23 conversation with Mr . Zahra concerning the 24 deteriorated condition of the first floor 25 members in this building and what had to be done RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 29 2 to correct them? 3 MR. LESSARD : Not to my recollection. He 4 may have talked to Mr . Horton about it , but he 5 didn ' t talk to me . 6 MR. BRESSLER: If he didn ' t talk to Mr . 7 Lessard , was a conversation with Mr . Horton 8 relayed to Mr . Lessard , wherein a conversation 9 took place regarding the replacement of first 10 floor members? 11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you remember any, Mr . 12 Horton? 13 MR. HORTON: I do , yes . 14 MR. LESSARD: I did not have a 15 conversation with Mr . Horton on this , other than 16 the fact that when I went on that job , the 17 second or third time , all the -- all the first 18 floor members have been removed and done anew, 19 and I asked Mr . Horton what ' s going on here . 20 And that ' s the sum total of the rotten wood or 21 whatever you ' re referring to . 22 MR. GOEHRINGER: Did you therefore want to 23 ask that question of Mr . Horton? 24 MR. BRESSLER: Yes . I think I got -- I - 25 think I got an affirmative response . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 30 2 MR. LESSARD: Is he done with me? I 'm not 3 going to play yo-yo here. 4 MR. BRESSLER: I 'm not done -- 5 MR. GOEHRINGER: How many more questions 6 do you have? 7 MR. BRESSLER: Well , not too much , but I 8 think it depends in part on Mr . Lessard ' s 9 answers . 10 My next question is , didn ' t there come a 11 time before the second floor members were 12 removed that Mr . Lessard had a conversation with 13 Mr . Zahra concerning the rotten second floor 14 members? 15 MR. LESSARD : No , sir . We had no 16 conversation, and I want the board at this point 17 to understand something; Mr . Horton is a senior 18 building inspector . Mr . Horton is well trained 19 in his job. Mr . Horton doesn ' t have to come in 20 and report every nail and splinter to his boss . 21 If he did that , two things would happen; Mr . 22 Horton wouldn 't be able to do the rest of his 23 work and neither would Mr . Lessard . So let ' s 24 not get a little ridiculous on this . 25 What else would you like to know, sir? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 31 2 MR. BRESSLER: Well , Mr . Lessard, were you 3 present at the site when a discussion was had 4 with respect to the firewall and the foundation 5 on this building? 6 MR. LESSARD: I was , sir , yes . 7 MR. BRESSLER: And wasn ' t the question of 8 whether or not the first floor members were 9 rotten and had to be replaced discussed at that 10 time? 11 MR. LESSARD : Not that I was aware of . 12 Not that I was aware of . I know that Mr . Horton 13 and Mr . Zahra went over and conversed while I 14 was doing something else , and I know that Mr . 15 Horton advised him -- advised him that it would 16 be to his best interest to put that wall up, and 17 that ' s all I know about that . 18 MR. BRESSLER: Well , Mr . Lessard , did you 19 have occasion to look at the first floor members 20 while you were down at the building? 21 MR. LESSARD : I did not . I was standing 22 on the first floor , but I didn ' t look underneath 23 the first floor , no , sir . 24 MR. BRESSLER: Well , did you look around 25 the first floor? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 32 2 MR. LESSARD: Absolutely. 3 MR. BRESSLER: Was it apparent to you at 4 that time that there were structural members 5 that needed replacement? 6 MR. LESSARD: They were already replaced 7 when I was there. 8 MR. BRESSLER: At that time did you have 9 occasion to view the second story members at 10 all? 11 MR. LESSARD : Yes . 12 MR. BRESSLER: And what did you note about 13 them? 14 MR. LESSARD : That they were new . 15 MR. GOEHRINGER: I think he ' s referring -- 16 MR. LESSARD : When I looked at that , there 9 17 was new timbers added . You may call them 18 ceiling joist . You may call them second floor 19 joist, and technically that was they would be at 20 the time I observed the second floor , now 21 suspended with I beams . I don 't know what else 22 you want me to observe . 23 MR. BRESSLER: Were you told by Mr . Horton 24 that this had been discussed with Mr . Zahra and 25 it was approved? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 33 2 MR. LESSARD: What was , sir? 3 MR. BRESSLER: The fact that there was new 4 construction . 5 MR. LESSARD : I don' t understand the 6 question . Did I discuss -- 7 MR. BRESSLER: Did you discuss the matter 8 of the new construction with Mr . Horton and were 9 you told by Mr . Horton that he had discussed it 10 with Mr . Zahra? 11 MR. LESSARD : No , I didn ' t . I just 12 pointed out to Mr . Horton that I observed 13 everything brand new on the first floor and I 14 wanted to know what was going on . 15 MR. GOEHRINGER: Could you just , again, 16 for the board , not specifically to the -- 17 MR. BRESSLER: If that ' s the case , Mr . 18 Chairman , and that everything was new and Mr . 19 Lessard didn 't know what was going on and he 20 didn ' t get a satisfactory explanation, I don ' t 21 understand why the job proceeded at that point . 22 There is something -- let me just state , Mr . 23 Chairman, there is something inherently 24 inconsistent about this . 25 According to what we ' ve heard , the RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 34 2 Building Department goes down there , they see i 3 all these new things going on that are not part 4 of the plan , Mr . Lessard doesn 't bring it to Mr . 5 Zahra ' s attention, he presumably has a 6 discussion with Mr . Horton , if it ' s not clear by 7 Mr . Horton, and I haven ' t heard that it was , and 8 there ' s no violation issued and Mr . Zahra goes 9 on his way with no approval and there ' s no Stop 10 Work issued , yet the board is led to believe 11 that at some point the story which has been put 12 forth tonight comes out and that all of the 13 sudden he does something else without approval 14 and he ' s told to stop. 15 This doesn ' t make any sense to me , Mr . 16 Chairman, and what I 'm trying to find out is 17 what happened at the first meeting when 18 everybody found out things had been done anew? 19 No new plans were requested , no Stop Work were 20 issued, there ' s something internally 21 inconsistent , that ' s my point , and I would 22 invite the chair to ask any questions that it 23 has on this subject , because apparently I 'm not 24 going to find out exactly what happened , and I 25 don ' t have any more questions along this line . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 35 r 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 3 MR. LESSARD : All I could say to the chair 4 is I observed everything new. I observed that 5 what was new was in conformity, as far as the 6 layout is concerned with the floor plan. Okay? 7 Obviously the attorney doesn ' t know that 8 much about construction , and I can understand 9 that . I observed two things , what was put up 10 there is what was shown on the plan and that it 11 was all new, and I questioned the fact that it 12 was new with Mr . Horton, and that ' s nobody 13 business but me and Mr . Horton, unless we agreed 14 that something was severely wrong . Okay? 15 MR. BRESSLER In that case , Mr . Chairman , 16 I would just put forth the proposition -- 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you, Mr . Lessard . 18 MR. BRESSLER: -- that if that is so, and 19 that if everything that was put up that was new 20 . was .done in accordance with the plans and that 21 was okay with the Building Department , and 22 certainly you know from the last hearing our 23 position that had been discussed in advance and 24 approved and that that didn 't require new plans , 25 it is our position that with respect to the RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 36 2 second story, which was also discussed and which 3 was also new construction and which by the way 4 was also going to be in exactly the same place , 5 I think we ' ve just heard from the microphone 6 that that , too , would be perfectly okay. 7 MR. LESSARD : Nonconformity. 8 MR. BRESSLER: I am at a loss , Mr . 9 Chairman. I don ' t have any more questions for 10 Mr . Lessard. 11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 12 MR. BRESSLER: Now, with respect to Mr . 13 Horton, I just have one or two questions , 14 following up on the one that you indicated 15 properly was put to him. 16 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you want to answer 17 some questions, assuming that it ' s not without 18 the scope? 19 MR. HORTON: Yes , I. would like to answer. 20 First off , I ' d like to say something to Mr . 21 Bressler and like that . There ' s a little 22 misunderstanding here . He made a statement 23 about new joist and like that . He didn ' t say 24 where and what . I assume the second floor = 25 joist . To tell you the perfectly honest truth, RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 37 L(' 2 I have never been down inside that cellar 3 because I 'm -- I can 't fly down. I 'm not Batman 4 or anyone else. That cellar is pretty deep, 5 there ' s no ladder , nothing when I 've been there , 6 and I 've never been down in the cellar to see 7 all the timbers and everything that was put in 8 there. 9 The new part you could see . What the old 10 part is I haven 't got the slightest idea , unless 11 somebody buys me a sky hook , number 1. 12 Number 2 , what I thought he was referring 13 to is either the second floor joist from the 14 second story, and what happened there I pulled 15 in there one of my files and I pulled in for 16 inspection and Charlie says "I want to talk to 17 you . " I says "What about?" He says "I had 18 those old beams laying around my place , " and he 19 said "The upstairs I think was a little weak . 20 . .Do you mind if I put these up there?" 21 Well, if you take a look what ' s in there 22 and where he put in, he wants to double up. 23 That gives me a little more because the fish 24 plates is a little stronger. I agreed. He did 25 on it his own and everything else after it was RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 38 w 2 done. I did tell , afterwards , that everything 3 was fine . I mean what can you say after a man 4 has done something like this? 5 At that time the second story was sitting 6 on there and nothing was done above the .floor 7 joist, the second floor joist . He did beef them 8 up, which is great . You can go up there and see 9 them today . I don' t know how long he said they 10 had been laying around; that ' s why they were a 11 little discolored , he said he had them stored at 12 home or someplace , I don ' t know. That ' s what I 13 want to square away about the floor joist . 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Can I ask you the same 15 question I asked Mr . Lessard , and that was ; 16 based upon the plans , you know, when during the 17 period of time that there was some minor 18 modifications or anything , did you have any idea 19 that they were actually going to destroy that 20 second floor? 21 MR. HORTON: None at all until I drove up 22 there , I don ' t know, the 25th or 21st of 23 September and I looked and I . couldn ' t believe 24 what I saw. There was no top. I had to call 25 previous to this , "You ought to go to Mattituck RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 39 2 and see what ' s going go on. There ' s no top. " 3 MR. GOEHRINGER: But I mean based upon the 4 plans -- 5 MR. HORTON: No , because it showed they 6 were going to come out toward the street a 7 little bit and they wanted to change the 8 stairway and going toward the Broken Down Velice 9 with a stairway down there , and that ' s the only 10 thing that I know. 11 MR. GOEHRINGER: I 'm not trying to add to 12 the questions of tonight , I assure you; I am 13 just trying to get this straight in my mind . 14 Mr . Bressler? 15 MR. BRESSLER: My next question to Mr . 16 Horton is whether or not he ever had a 17 conversation with Mr . Zahra about -- other than 18 the beams supporting the second floor as to 19 whether he ever had a conversation with Mr . 20 Zahra about replacing structural members in the 21 walls . 22- MR. HORTON: What walls are we referring 23 to? 24 MR. BRESSLER: Why, the walls of this - 25 building , let ' s start with the first -- RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 40 2 MR. HORTON: The- second story, I was never 3 upstairs . There ' s no way of getting there after 4 he tore everything out . 5 MR. BRESSLER: How about -- 6 MR. HORTON: If you talk to Mr . Tsontakis , 7 the engineer , he said he couldn ' t see, had to 8 take a flashlight . He couldn 't see and he was 9 your engineer . 10 MR. BRESSLER: How about the first floor 11 walls; did you ever have a discussion with him 12 about the rotted and deteriorated -- 13 MR. HORTON: Not so rotted and 14 deteriorated . He mentioned a couple of fish 15 plates what he was changing. He beefed them up. 16 In fact , if anybody looks at those sets of 17 plans , they ' re not a good set of plans . Charlie 18 says he ' s a good builder , maybe he can build 19 them, but they' re not a good set of plans . 20 MR. BRESSLER: Were they approved? 21 MR.. HORTON: They were approved. If you 22 read , the alteration and like that, it doesn ' t 23 say a new building . 24 MR. BRESSLER: Well, Mr . Horton -- 25 MR. HORTON: And please check the permit RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 41 2 and you 'll see what it says . 3 MR. BRESSLER: The plans do reflect the 4 existence of a new roof . 5 MR. HORTON: May I ask a question? What 6 set of plans; you have , are they approved by the 7 Building Department or the one you dragged out 8 of your briefcase? 9 MR. GOEHRINGER: Let ' s not get 10 counterproductive . 11 11 MR. BRESSLER: Mr . Chairman -- 12 MR. GOEHRINGER: We did run into this 13 problem because of different sets of plans 14 because one of them was photocopied and one was 15 a straight set . I am in hopes that we are 16 dealing with the set that reflects 8/8/86 . 17 MR. HORTON: Our plans have a stamp of the 18 Building Department on there , what you can do 19 and everything else . Any other plans don ' t 20 pertain to this building . 21 MR. BRESSLER: The answer is yes? 22 MR. HORTON: The ones you 've been showing 23 in your hand before. 24 MR. BRESSLER: Yes . 25 MR. HORTON: This one you ' ve been waving RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 42 2 in front of us . 3 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you want a copy of 4 ours? 5 MR. HORTON: No , I 'm talking about that 6 one he ' s been referring to . 7 MR. BRESSLER: It ' s been shrunk , that ' s 8 all . 9 MR. ZAHRA: Eric , I have that one here . 10 MR. HORTON: I want to see the one Mr . 11 Bressler has been showing through the air , that 12 he ' s been referring to . 13 MR. ZAHRA: There ' s no difference . 14 MR. BRESSLER: It ' s the same one the board 15 has . 16 MR. HORTON: I ' d like an engineer to look 17 at it . I 18 MR. BRESSLER: The board has already 19 looked -- 20 MR. HORTON: I want an engineer . 21 MR. GOEHRINGER: He wants an engineer to 22 look at it . 23 MR. BRESSLER: , In this case , you can look 24 at the one the board has and answer the 25 question. Doesn ' t matter to me . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 43 2 MR. HORTON: I 'm not referring to that 3 one . You didn ' t wave it in the air . 4 MR. BRESSLER: Mr . Chairman , if the 5 witness would like to look at the boards ' plans 6 to answer that question , that ' s perfectly okay. 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: Could you just bring 8 those plans up so that I could compare them with 9 the same plans that we have here? It ' s 10 basically the newer set here, the ones that -- 11 yes , thank you . 12 They appear to be the same set of plans , 13 Mr . Horton, except this lacks the engineer ' s 14 seal on ours . 15 MR. LESSARD : What about our stamps, 16 Jerry? 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , yours are on the 18 copy of the -- of yours , okay. We had to reduce 19 it . 20 MR. LESSARD : I mean his . The object of 21 putting plans through the Building Department is 22 to -- the Building Department to mark up what is 23 required , not take them back to their client and 24 have them throw them somewhere and work off 25 plans that -- RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 44 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: Oh, you ' re referring to 3 the individual pencil marks that you placed on 4 the plans , I assume? 5 MR. LESSARD : The red ink marks and the 6 stamp and the rest of it , absolutely. 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: I have one -- the copy 8 that we have of yours , which again is shrunk , 9 has the fee -- the fee evaluation in longhand 10 and it has some writing which I think appears to 11 be yours . 12 MR. BRESSLER: Mr . Chairman , in order that 13 we may get on with this and not get bogged down 14 in things that aren ' t relevant , here ' s a stamped 15 set we 've got . The board can see -- 16 I MR. GOEHRINGER: Could I just see that? 17 MR. BRESSLER: The board can see that 18 they' re the same . It ' s the same , only they ' re 19 very difficult to read because they ' re faded . 20 So -- 21 MR. GOEHRINGER: This is the original set , 22 Kurt . 23 MR. HORTON: All right . Thank you . All 24 right . i 25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you want to take a RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 45 2 look at them? 3 MR. HORTON: No , I 'd have to compare ours 4 with that . 5 MR. GOEHRINGER: This is yours . We just 6 copied it and it ' s shrunk . 7 MR. HORTON: All right . 8 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you want to continue , 9 sir? 10 MR. BRESSLER: Well, the question was 11 concerning the new roof , and that ' s when the 12 dispute with the plans came up. 13 I want to know, and Mr . Horton is 14 certainly free to refer to the plans, as to 15 whether or not it demonstrates the existence of 16 a new roof? 17 MR. HORTON: As far as if you look on the 18 plans , from a point when Mr . Tsontakis put where 19 it will start from new to old , it doesn ' t say 20 all new. It nowhere -- it says it will replace 21 certain things . It doesn ' t say you ' ll put in 22 all new timber in there , no way. 23 MR. BRESSLER: Well , Mr . Horton, am I 24 correct -- 25 MR. HORTON: If it did -- let me add RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 46 2 something . If it did say, someone in this room 3 is awful stupid to go up there and put I beams 4 up there and keep a second story up there if 5 he ' s going to tear it down . 12 6 MR. BRESSLER: Well , Mr . Horton, how old 7 is this Coffee Pot building; do you know? 8 MR. HORTON: I couldn ' t tell you . I don ' t 9 know. It was there before I was born , I would 10 say . 11 MR. BRESSLER: Not too old . 12 MR. HORTON: No . I don ' t think that comes 13 into the thing . 14 MR. BRESSLER: Well , were roofs made with 15 plywood construction back then? 16 MR. HORTON: Pardon? 17 MR. BRESSLER: Were roofs made with 18 plywood construction back then? 19 MR. HORTON: I don ' t know if the roof was 20 plywood construction. I never saw it exposed . 21 Every time I saw it it has fascia boards on it 22 or shingles on it and I think blueish wood 23 shingles on the outside . I 'm not sure. I ' d 24 have to check . 25 MR. BRESSLER: My question to you , RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 47 2 buildings weren ' t constructed that way generally 3 back then, with plywood? 4 MR. HORTON: It depends . It might have • 5 been remodeled at one time . Who knows? I don ' t 6 know when the last roof -- I know when I was a 7 builder I used to put plywood on the roof . I 8 don ' t know what was on there . I never saw it 9 tore off. It was gone . There wasn ' t even 10 evidence on the ground . 11 MR. BRESSLER: I don't think I have any 12 more questions of Mr . Horton, Mr . Chairman . 13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 14 Thank you , Mr . Horton . 15 If anybody else would like to speak in 16 favor of this application, again, we ask again 17 if there are spokespersons concerning specific 18 groups or just an individual -- I know this lady 19 had a statement . Could you use the mike and 20 kindly state your name for the record? 21 MS . FARR: I represent a group. My name 22 is Cathleen Farr . I represent the Southold 23 Citizens for Fair Government . We are at 25 24 Sterlington Commons in Greenport and I would 25 like you to read the position of our group. RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 48 2 "The pressure for expansion development in 3 Southold Town is tremendous . The volume of 4 applications handled twenty-five years ago has 5 probably quadrupled . Thousands of items of 6 local ordinance and legislation have been added 7 piecemeal over the past twenty-five years . 8 Elected and appointed local officials are 9 inundated by conflicting demands from 10 constituents . There are a lot of problems , 11 problems of water supply, problems of land use , 12 sewage treatment , garbage disposal , management 13 of water ways , all are extremely difficult to 14 resolve . We ask our public officials , part-time 15 employees for the most part, to judge with the 16 wisdom of Solomon , yet we the voters confronted 17 them with a withering confusion of priorities . 18 We only offer objections to our own little 19 problems , rarely taking the time for 20 dispassionate study of the complete picture . 21 That job is left to, quote, government , close 22 quote , . such as yourselves . 23 In return we offer perilously low pay and 24 lots of criticism. We selected Mr . Zahra ' s case 25 as a case in point , because it ' s well RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 49 2 documented. It illustrates a number of problems 3 now typical between the town and its individual 4 citizens . Specifically these; one , conflicting 5 interpretation of rules . Probably the rules are 6 not as clear as they should be and training and 7 review is inadequate to insure consistent 8 interpretation. 9 Two , the system is too slow to respond , 10 due most likely to concern that cases be 11 thoroughly examined to avoid illegal decisions . 12 Apparently it must be streamlined to offer 13 quicker resolutions . For example , the legal 14 justice system sets up a separate court to 15 manage minor traffic violations and such . 16 Serious crimes receive a slower , more intensive 17 examination of cases in a different court with 18 different rules . 19 Three, the system punishes a citizen 20 without due process , before he receives a 21 hearing . Whether Mr . Zahra gains relief from 22 the defective Stop Work Order or not , he has 23 been punished . By order of the Building 24 Department , the building has stood open to the - 25 elements without a roof since mid October . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 50 2 Deterioration is evident . No doubt he has also 3 lost money due purely to the delay. Time , as 4 they say, is money. 5 Four , lack of priorities . A determination 6 of priorities should be established to move 7 disputes through the system with greater 8 dispatch . 13 9 Five , adoption by local governing bodies 10 of the legal concept innocent until proven 11 guilty. We propose that citizens to be judged 12 innocent , unless proven guilty in local civic 13 disputes , as well as criminal ones . Lack of 14 proof , failure to present proof and to do so 15 promptly should result in automatic dismissal of 16 cases , as it is done so from the criminal area . 17 Six , lack of accountability . The 18 supervisory body which should monitor the 19 conduct of the Building Department is the Town 20 Board . In the press of business , there appears 21 to be little regular advice or consultation 22 between the members of the Building Department 23 and the Town Board . One member of the Town 24 Board was -- is present at this hearing. We 25 look to the full board to take up the matter now RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 51 2 and study this event , not with an eye to 3 punishment, but with all eyes riveted . on 4 preventing this whole class of problems in the 5 future. 6 We look to the Zoning Board of Appeals for 7 a streamlined procedure that is much faster than 8 this cumbersome process we now have . We have a 9 long way to go to achieve fair government in 10 Southold . As it has been said , the journey of 11 1 ,000 miles begins with the first step. We ask 12 each of you members of the Zoning Board of 13 Appeals to begin this journey by finding in Mr . 14 Zahra ' s favor tonight . Thank you . 15 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 16 Is there anybody else that would like to 17 speak in favor ' of the application? 18 Anybody like to speak against the 19 application? 20 MS . GARCIA: Excuse me . 21 MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes? I 'm sorry, it ' s a 22 formality, we have to have you state your name . 23 MS . GARCIA: Mr . Chairman, my name is 24 Corinne Garcia, and I would just like to speak 25 as a taxpayer; that I am thoroughly disgusted RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 52 2 that I have to witness a Southold town attorney 3 just hired and paid by the taxpayers , that I 4 have to witness that he is outside during break 5 discussing the case with the client and advising 6 him on what he could do to win the case.. Thank 7 you . 8 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you. 9 Is there anybody else that would like to 10 speak? Do you have something in rebuttal , sir? 11 MR. BRESSLER: Yes , Mr . Chairman. I ' d 12 just like to make few remarks in closing . 13 First , I ' d like to respond just briefly to 14 the remarks that were just made . I think 15 they' re completely out of order and I would note 16 for the Chairman that to have the attorney for 17 the town talking to an attorney for an applicant 18 about matters presently under consideration is 19 what I would consider to be constructive rather 20 than destructive , and the content of what was 21 discussed of course is nobody' s business at this 22 point , but I would just note to the board that 23 if attorneys for parties stop talking to each 24 other , the legal system is gonna go a little bit - 25 crazy. RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 53 2 Finally, in summation, I would just like A 3 to point out to the board that what it has 4 before it is a very simple and narrow issue; it 5 has before it the issue of whether the 6 revocation of the building permit , based on two 7 grounds , was proper ; one, the violation of the 8 Stop Work Order , and two , failure to comply with 9 plans . 10 I think based upon the testimony at the 11 first session , we 've heard nothing to the 12 contrary tonight . That to the extent that the 13 revocation is based on an alleged violation of 14 Stop Work Order , it must fall , and indeed no 15 defense of that position was offered by either 16 member of the Building Department . I might add 17 that neither even claimed that the defects 18 raised were not in fact there. I think that 19 adequately disposes of the first ground . 20 As for the second ground , that is failure 21 to comply with plans , I would note first that I 22 believe the process was defective in the first 23 instance; there is no specification anywhere as 24 to the regard in which the plans were not 25 adhered to , and there ' s been no supplemental RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 54 2 writing ever issued setting forth in what 3 respect the plans weren ' t adhered to. 4 Assuming for a moment that we get over 5 that hurdle , we now come to the issue of whether 6 or not there ' s any kind of evidence before the 14 7 board as to whether or not the plans actually 8 weren 't followed , and I don 't believe that the 9 board has heard any tonight . 10 What the board has heard from Mr . Lessard , 11 rather , is the statement that when, during the 12 course of construction , additions and 13 substitutions were made to the first floor of 14 the building and they generally fell within the 15 parameters of the plan, that that was perfectly 16 okay. 17 I would put forth the proposition to the 18 board that what was intended with respect to the 19 second floor was exactly the same , and if the 20 position of the Building Department is to be 21 consistent, and I 'm sure that it ought to be , 22 then any renovation or replacement which falls 23 within the same general outline , just as the 24 first floor did, would be perfectly okay. 25 We have not heard from the building RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 55 2 inspectors any evidence concerning in what way 3 the plans could be altered to show anything 4 different . Indeed, they 've testified that the 5 additions that they authorized and ratified, 6 that is the additional supporting members of 7 additional members on the first floor , they 8 didn ' t stop work for that , they didn ' t require 9 him to submit additional plans, rather they said 10 that ' s fine , as Mr . Horton said , if you want to 11 over build , that ' s perfectly okay, no request 12 for new plans , no request to stop, no request to 13 do anything . 14 I would submit that the situation with 15 respect to the second floor is identical , and 16 that no plan they could ask for would be any 17 different . It is already being admitted by Mr . 18 Lessard that, in fact , a new roof was called 19 for , so it certainly couldn 't be that . 20 The walls , which by the way as you heard 21 were to be brought up to code , are going to go 22 on in exactly the same place , and we ' ve heard 23 from Mr . Lessard that that ' s okay. . 24 I don ' t believe that there ' s any evidence - 25 before the board that any plans have been RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 56 2 violated in any respect . 3 So I think to the extent that the 4 revocation is founded on that ground , it must 5 fail . And indeed , gentleman, those are the only 6 grounds that were urged before you. While there 7 have been, I note, several other issues 8 tangentially swirling around this case , they 9 haven ' t been addressed by the Building 10 Department , they haven ' t been addressed by us , 11 and formally they haven ' t been addressed by you , 12 and they are not before the board tonight . Had 13 they been brought before the board tonight , then 14 I dare say they would have been considered by 15 us , by other people and they would properly be 16 before you , but there are only two grounds 17 before you, and that ' s what your decision must 18 be based on , and based on the evidence that 19 we ' ve heard tonight , I don' t think there ' s any 20 basis for sustaining the determination of the 21 Building Department . 22 I would point out certain inconsistencies 23 in the Building Department ' s testimony this 24 evening . I would note that their testimony 25 concerning the dates that this problem arose are RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 57 2 completely erroneous . The evidence you 've heard 3 is the conversations and the demolition with 4 respect to the second floor of the removal took 5 place in August . You will find that in the 6 chronology the building stood that way for quite 7 a period while Mr . Zahra was involved in other 8 matters and was getting organized to proceed on 9 the job, and there was a break in there of a 10 good period and the board can see exactly how 11 long , from looking at the chronology. 12 During that period of -- and I don ' t 13 recall exactly how long it was , but it would be 14 apparent to you from looking , no action was 15 taken, and indeed there was a conversation, and 16 I believe it was in July; nothing was done in 17 July, nothing was done in August . They waited 18 until September. I don ' t know why. We haven 't 19 heard why. They are just in error about that . 20 What caused them to do that , we haven 't heard, 21 they didn ' t volunteer . A complaint , perhaps , I 22 don ' t know. 23 We ' ve inquired of the Building Department 24 if there was a complaint . Who complained? The 25 answer we got back is "We don ' t have to tell RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 58 2 you . And that ' s in writing , and you 'll 3 probably find that in your file , if the entire 4 file was turned over to you . 5 The Building Department ' s recollection of 6 certain conversations is certainly interesting , 7 to say the least . I believe if the board 8 studies the testimony they will find that it 15 9 doesn ' t make a whole lot of sense in terms of 10 the chronology which has been laid out before 11 you , and I believe to sum up, in total , there ' s 12 no credible evidence before the board that Mr . 13 Zahra violated his Stop Work Order or that he 14 deviated from the plans as approved by the 15 building inspectors in any significant way. I 16 would therefore urge the board to reverse the 17 determination of the Building Department and 18 reinstate the building permit and on those 19 grounds and no other grounds . 20 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 21 This board will go out and do a physical 22 inspection of the premises . We have looked at 23 it without measuring . At this particular point 24 we will go out and do some measuring and I will 25 also add to the record , because this particular RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 59 2 hearing will stay open from a formality point of 3 view until the next regularly scheduled meeting , 4 which is the 17th, and in between now and the 5 17th either the building inspectors or the town 6 attorney or the applicant ' s attorney or the 7 applicant may look at anything that we place in 8 the file based upon this physical inspection , 9 and I will go over your particular areas of 10 chronology on the pictures and refresh my memory 11 as to my personal instances as they pertain to 12 this building which may or may not be placed in 13 this area of personal knowledge and physical 14 inspection. 15 The only other thing I wanted to ask you , 16 Mr . Bressler , is that you did not furnish us 17 with two deeds . We ' d like to see the deed from 18 North Fork Bank and Trust Company, which was 19 from Edith and Joseph Langer to North Fork Bank 20 and Trust Company, and then the deed from North 21 Fork Bank and Trust Company to Charles Zahra and 22 wife or whomever is on that particular note . 23 MR. BRESSLER: I ' ll furnish them for you . 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . 25 _ On that particular note , I ' ll make a RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 60 2 motion , resetting the hearing for the formality 3 for no further information on an oral sense 4 until the 17th, at which time we will close the 5 hearing and which will give us two weeks to do 6 the physical inspection, and we thank you all 7 for your courtesy tonight , and we thank the 8 building inspectors for coming down , and I want 9 to just close on this note, and that is that the 10 issue of the subpoena that was mentioned not 11 only in the paper and not only what I mentioned 12 is basically an issue that was used to Mr . 13 Bressler that basically a guaranty that they 14 will be here , and as you know you objected to 15 the closing of the hearing -- I ' m sorry, you 16 objected to the recessing of the last hearing , 17 so I very simply used that as a secondary 18 guaranty that these gentlemen would be here if 19 need be , and in both cases I -- neither one of 20 them are subpoenaed tonight . They came 21 voluntarily and we thank you for that . 22 (Continued on next page . ) 23 24 25 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 61 2 So I 'll make the motion recessing the 3 hearing and in closing it with no further oral 4 testimony on the 17th of March and again thank 5 you, everybody. All in favor -- 6 THE BOARD: Aye . 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you again for 8 coming . 9 (TIME NOTED: 8 : 53 P .M . ) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 62 2 CERTIFICATION 3 4 5 I , DONNA SADLER BREITENBACH, a Notary 6 Public in and for the State of New York , do 7 hereby certify: 8 9 THAT the foregoing is a true and accurate 10 transcript of my stenographic notes . 11 12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my 13 hand this day of �'1��rs�- , 1988 . 14 15 16 17 18 ! 19 ---- ---`�--- 20 DONNA SADLER BREITENBACH 21 22 23 24 25 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING THURSDAY , MARCH 3 , 1988 SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS RECONVENED HEARING : Appl . No . 3701 - Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA requesting reversal of Determination of Building Inspector in his revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Premises known as 140 Pike Street , Mattituck . County Tax Map Parcel 1000-1,41 -04-005 : B-1 General Business Zoning District . The Chairman reconvened the hearing at 7 : 36 o ' clock p .m . Present were : Gerard P . Goehrin-ger , Chairman ; Serge Doyen ; Charles Grigonis , Jr". and Robert J . Douglass , constituting four of the five Board Members . Absent was : Member Joseph H . Sawicki . Also present were Linda Kowalski , Z . B. A. Secretary , and approxi - mately 80 persons in the audience ( including Victor Lessard , CBuilding-Department Administrator , Curtis Horton , Sr. Building Inspector , Thomas Fisher , Building Inspector , James A. Schonde- bare , Town Attorney , Mrs . Ruth Oliva , Councilwoman ) . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The last hearing of the evening , and I. do have to apologize to you , Mr. Bressler , that you were not the only hearing on tonight and you are still the last hearing of the evening and I know we promised you that you would be the only hearing tonight , but there were other hearings just a' pressing. (Jokingly.) MR. BRESSLER: We ' ll need another date then . (Jokingly ) . CHAIRMAN : For the record , this is Appeal No . 3701 . It is reconvened from the last regular-scheduled meeting in behalf of Charles Zahra . For the public in question , during the last hear- ing we had three witnesses sworn in and one that spoke independently and was not sworn in , and two of those witnesses are before us tonight , and that is Mr . Bressler and Mr . Zahra . And we will be swearing in other witnesses tonight. As for the tenure of the meeting., I would ask if there are any spokespersons that would like to speak that represent either group , or if you like to speak as an individual , kindly state your name and please restrict your statements that are germane to this particular d1 Page 2 - Transcript of Hearing Matter of Charles Zahra . App"1 No . 3701 Special Meeting - March 3 , 1988 IBA CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (continued ) : subject area, and preferably to this particular hearing. If you are not completely aware of the hearing in question of what is. specifically stated within. or embodied within the transcripts that I have before me , then I would ask you please to limit your conversation to those areas that particularly deal with that. Secondly , I have a specific problem in the respect-- I made a statement at the last- meeting that I was unaware of the whereabouts of the two building inspectors , and that was not particularly true . I ' ll be honest with the public-- I was not -- I was more interested in the hearing than. I was basically on the whereabouts or where other people were and I apologize to the Buildings Inspectors for that particular part of it. I was aware of. course that Mr. Lessard was ill and Mr. Horton was on vacation , and so if I caused any problems , I • apologize , gentlemen : All right , I guess we ' ll start with the hearing . Mr . Bressler , would you step us to the mike for a couple of moments . You were going to supply us with some information . (We had the Cmike fixed this afternoon . ) You were going to supply us with some information that we had requested on specific dates ? MR. BRE.SSLER: Yes , that ' s correct. At the time of the last hear- ing , as I recall , Mr. Chairman , you had requested in order to aid in the organizing of the testimony a brief chronology of events.. I have prepared that chronology listing variance events with copies of relevant documents which were 'not yet , at least to my knowledge , not in the record. Secondly , I believe that you asked for a chronology with respect to photographs which ha'd been previously submitted . This has been done in the form of xeroxes of the photographs numbered sequentially taken between the period of May to August of 1987 . (Mr . Bressler submitted a March 3 , 1988 chronology of events , copy of page one of the September 18 , 1986 Contract of Sale between the NFBTC and Charles J . and Jean Zahra , copy of the October 8 , 1986 letter from the Planning Board to the Building Inspector concerning the waiver of site plan review in the preexisting building , copy of Certificate of Occupancy #Z8935 dated February 16 , 1978 for a restaurant and apartment issued -to Joseph Langer , copy of photographs numbered 1 through 19 . ) CHAIRMAN : Thank you . We appreciate it . I I / Page 3 - Transcript of Z . B .A. Hearing- Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA -C App1 . No . 3701 1 Special Meeting of March 3 , 1988 CHAIRMAN : Is there anything else that you wanted to add to the record at this time? MR. BRESSLER: Not at this time , Mr. Chairman . CHAIRMAN : Ok . I believe there ' s a lady in the back :on my left- hand side that would like to say something . MRS . CATHERINE FARR: (Southold Citizens For Fair Government ) : Are you -going to take statements-,,on th.i_c _he:a.ri_ng_ a.fte_r_ the_ _- information .has been completed? CHAIRMAN : Yes . MRS . FARR: Thank you . Then I ' ll wait till then . CHAIRMAN : Thank you for waiting. CHAIRMAN : All right , basically , 'I guess we ' ve gotten to the point where we wanted to discuss a couple of issues with the Building Inspectors . So I ' ll ask Mr . Lessard if he would step up to the C mike and raise his right hand. Mr. Lessard , the information you are about to bring forth to this Board is the truth to the best of your knowl.edge? MR. LESSARD (raised right hand) : Yes . CHAIRMAN : Is there anything you wanted to state for the record concerning this case ? MR. LESSARD: Because of pending legal activities or action that ' s pending , if you would , I ' d make a statement that would encompass that part of the project that would be -- to where I would consider where the Board of Appeals would be involved and it may have to address it . It would go that way . And that would be probably some time in early September or late August when Mr . Zahra came . into my office and he had a terrible problem . That he could not frame the roof affair to meet the existing apartment roof. And I said that at the time , Mr. Zahra , you have- stamped set of plans from an engineer or an architect . That ' s the - people you should be talking to because the Building Department is not in. the business of designing buildings . And he said , "Oh I can ' t talk to that stubborn GD Greek because he won ' t do what I want him to . " And he said my problem is the new roof that I have to 11 Page 4 - Transcript of Z . B . A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl .. No . 3701. Special Meeting of March 3 ,. 1988 MR . LESSARD (continued ) : frame will not meet the old one . " That' s quite obviously because the ceilings are too low in the existing building along with the windows and it would have to- be picked up . And he said , "Do you suppose I could open up -parts of-. the accessory apartment and put i n .2 x 6 ' s ? " And I said to. .him . somethi ng .to .the effect that it is a nonconforming apartment. You' have to be careful you don ' t exceed the value of ,the. 50%. And he said , "Well ; I really don ' t. know what to do . " .. And I said , "What you have .to do as far as I 'm concerned is to go back to your engineer and do whatever you have to . " And he left. This was in the morning around 10 o ' clock . Early in the afternoon , Mr . Horton had returned from being on the road , and he said to me , ' he said , "Was Mr . Zahra in?" And I said , "Yeah . " I 'm sorry- he said is "Charlie" i-n? I said ,, "Yes , he was this morning . And he said "Did you make any arrangements with him?" And I said "No . 'What. What the hell is the matter?" And he said he took the whole top of the building off. So he went back and spoke to Charlie , and I guess he got the impression from Charlie and you ' re going to have to ask Mr . Horton this to verify it , but from what I was told , Charlie -told him that I said that he can do anything he wants . And I said to Curt , CMr. Horton , "You know damn well that nobody in -the Building . Department to okay getting rid of nonconformity and putting it back . Ok? I guess a Stop Order was issued ; whbther the first one was torn up or not , I ' don ' t know. It ' s hearsay, and I ' m not going to say that. The end result , and Mr. Horton could probably tell you the sequence , Mr. Bressler came in early in the morning 8: 30-i-sh maybe the following day , the following Monday or whatever. He wanted to-talk-to Mr . Horton because he can ' t talk to that damn Lessard , which is perfectly fine with me . And when he left , " I said to Mr . Horton , well what' s the end result?" He said he explained to Mr . Bressler that because the top was taken off the plans that the permit was issued for no longer pertain . He would have to go out and get another revised set of plans , and bring them back in again , and. Mr. Bressler said fine or something to that effect , I guess . And he would be back . Further down the road , .we got reports that Mr . Zahra was back working again and I had no choice but because he wouldn ' t stop ., I revoked the permit. Ok ? , . The only other thing that I would say was . from that day in early September until now , nobody has come in with the revised plans . Nobody has ever told those people they couldn ' t have their restaurant . Nobody has filed with the N . Y . S . Board of Review on whatever problem he has there . No one has come into the Building Department to ask if. they could make the building safe . C1. Page 5 - Transcript of Z . B . A. Hearing - Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl . No . 3701 Special Meeting of March 3 , 1988 f MR . LESS-ARD (continued ) : Nobody has gone to your Board pertaining to the Accessory Apart- ment if that is what this is all about . And that' s about I can say . If I can answer anything , 1" I'l be glad to , provided it doesn ' t go into that legal area . CHAIRMAN : Well , you' re going to have to stop me if it does . MR. LESSARD: ",1 1 r i y"t. Yes , -I '° 1 try-. - CHAIRMAN : And I want the public to be aware of the fact that thoughts that I have perceived are mainly thoughts that resurrected or illicited from the last hearing , 'and.. ..they were not specifically anything that I had derived from reading the minutes . ' And I.' 11 be honest with you ; I purposely did not read the minutes . Ok? There was a discussion made by the applicant , and I think it was some- where in that area of that day _that Mr. . Zahra came in , and he reflected 't.he phrase raising the roof. Ok? I. just wanted to ask you first , if somebody mentioned to you , Mr.. Lessard , " I have. to raise the roof. " What would that mean to you? CMR . LESSARD: That could mean one of two thin 9 s . Either to take the roof apart and put_ a new one. onto it , 'or it could be as was suggested that the building itself could be picked .up and added onto on the ' bottom , depending what the condition is . CHAIRMAN : Ok . My only question is , 'at no time were you ever with the thought that this entire second story was goi-ng to be demolished? MR. LESSARD: Absolutely not . I thought I had made myself perfectly clear . CHAIRMAN : Ok. So basically the reason for the Stop Work Order was because of .that severing of .that second story? MR-. LESSARD: Once that nonconformity was removed , 'then the plans as submitted no longer pertain and by law , you have to come in and show us know.,- what _are' you doing.. ._ Then what you want to do from this point on , legally be done . You have to meet the State Construction Code regardless . So there is no choice . He did . something we had no authority to say , "Fine . Just keep right on going. " We had no choice in that d.epartment but stop it . dl Page 6 - Transcript of Z . B .A. Hearing C\ Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl . No . 3701 Special Meeting of March 3 , 1988 MR. LESSARD (continued ) : And that ' s what we did. But when he refused to stop it , then we have no choice but to revoke the permit . CHAIRMAN : To your knowledge based upon the New York State Construction Code , which I believe is the Code that 's in effect and that you more or less relied on , ok . MR . LESSARD: Yes . CHA-IRMAN : What ` s. requi'red for new construction on the second story of a wood-frame building in a business zone for utiliza- tion of that second story either for MR. LESSARD : If you are talking a new building , ok , a new building in a Type 5- or wood construction, flammable material if you would, is not permitted to go any higher than one story . As far as the public is concerned . If it is an existing building , the State cannot say anything except the way it ' s constructed to meet the safety re--gulations . Once it is removed , it now becomes . a new_ bui._lding . Then you must meet today ' s. requirements , and the State Construction Code says in a Type V , no way can you have an apartment over the quarters over it--must be a. Type II combustible and a whole mess of other stuff, CHAIRMAN : Just for my own personal edification , what about the utilization of it. for a bus.i_ness .purpose on .the second- floor . Woul d it ._have -to meet' the han_di cap. 1 aw. and a.l 1 the rest of it? MR. LESSARD :. Absolutely . Absolutely . You would have to probably design some type of elevator and put it in there for that. As it stands. tod-ay ., There may be modi fi.cati ons shortly , but as it is now. CHAIRMAN : I thank you very much , Mr .. Lessard . ' That kind of answers my questions . I guess we get to the approach- approach conflict at this particular time , and I do see the Town Attorney ,in the audience , and do you feel you want to answer any questions from the applicant at this particular time? i r Y Page 7 - Transcript of Z . B.A. Hearing- Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl . No . 3701 Special Meeting of March 3 , 1988 MR. LESSARD: I ' d have .to know what the question is and what it would involve . Something other than this part of the hearing that involves this Board. CHAIRMAN : All right . Then maybe what we ' ll do is we ' ll ask you to sit down and we ' ll see , maybe we ' ll get you back up again and we thank you , and we ' ll ask Mr. Horton if he would step us to the mike for a couple of moments : CURTIS HORTON , 'SR. BUILDING INS.PE.CT.OR: toocf . up at the microphone . CHAIRMAN : Mr . 'Horton , would you raise your right hand and solemnly swear? MR. HORTON : I do. CHAIRMAN : Thank you . There came a time during the hearing - the last hearing , they discussed the erection of .a cement- block wall on the east side . . Can you kind of .give us some background on that? MR. HORTON : All right , I w.i.11 try to inform everybody to the best of my - knowledge .C This sb•-called fire wall , cement-block wall -- I don ' t. care what we call i.t. For ..the first off', when. the foundation was put into this building-- I don '-t. know what, rainstorms or what-- the .easterly wall collapsed . We were called . We were sent up there . We went up and we observed Russ he was there , and the wall was all collapsed then . At this time Mr. Zahra said some few things, a_nd he said something about me like to expand the upstairs if he could and everything l.ike that. Well this - is a no-no because the way the per was. issued . ' So I did make the suggestion that we--why don ' t. you go for a '.firewall because you will. be too close to another wood--frame bu.i.lding , the Broken Down Vel i ce . It woul d be less than. .10 ..feet . And I ._sai d if you boarded it up , it wouldn "t cost yo.0 any more money. You ' re down to the ground--footings now--start it up and this would be in your favor if you wanted to .go to the Board of Review. And this you will see. on the set of plans .. We talked about . it. We wrote it_ down there , 'and everything was done this way. He agreed specifically because we told. him this was just a suggestion. He didn ' t, have to do it. ' And it would be to' his advantage because we have been to the Board of Review before- ' in fact there ' s a man in this audience right now that was there with us and he knows what we ' re talking about. When .you go to that and you lay the facts on , they do_ g'ive you breaks . I 'm not saying they give it to you , but they do give you breaks . So this is just a suggestion- He- agreed to go with. I 'm not saying it cost him any more money or any less money , I don ' t know . That ' s not my job. But. this is .how it came about. Nobody said he had to do it. CHAIRMAN : Does this fire wall have to go .all the way to the second story o.r is it mainly .just for the first floor? Page 8 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA. - Appl . No. 3701 Special Meeti n of March 3, 1988 C. HORTON: It was to go above the other broken down -- there's a s=` one-story building next to it. It was_ to go above that, which it did. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I see, so- you mean like half way up the roof. . C. HORTON: It wasn't what we filled in, because it was a kitchen. He might have wanted to go this. I don't know what he wanted. He just said he would like to enlarge what he was doing, like a deck or anything, I don't know. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: During the actual granting of this permit, did you have any reservations in reference to the preexisting use of the building?. C. HORTON: I was not involved in the granting of this permit. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, I am aware of that, but did you have any • feelings about the preexisting use of the second story? C. HORTON: Yes, we all knew what we were doing, we are not like that. There is reservation when you have a nonconforming use. And there are certain restrictions, you've got to be careful• of. CHAIRMAN .GOEHRINGER: Okay, I thank you very much. I think that is all I have. Thank you Mr. Horton. Is there anything you would like to say in rebuttal Mr. Bressler? .MR. BRESSLER: No,, Mr. Chairman, I would certainly like some ' questions put to Mr. Lessard either from me or through you. I think .his statements certainly raised. a number of issues that lead to the investigations. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I ask you a favor Mr. Bressler, could you use that mike over there and we will put Mr. Lessard back up over here and, if he wouldn't mind, and a, what we will do here is, you will ask the questions to the dais, if you would, the Board and then if he feels that he can answer them, he'll attempt to answer them.. MR. BRESSLER: Surely. In the first instance, I believe Mr. Lessard testified in late August, early September this problem arose. I would like him to pinpoint for the Board, if he could, the time when it first came to his attention that. . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In reference to. what. . MR. BRESSLER: That the second story had been removed, when last August or early September, was .this worked on, that is my question. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You mean in reference to a.chronological date, time? Page 9 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. BRESSLER: That is right, all I got was August, September. When did it come down and this problem arise, that is my first question. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can you answer that. . . MR. LESSARD: I tried to pinpoint it as close as I could Mr. Chairman because, at the time ,I thought everybody understood and I didn't put that much thought into the matter after it was discussed. ' I didn't figure it was a problem, I didn't see nothing wrong with it and I have got a million other things to do, it was just another one of those things during the day. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:. I understand MR. BRESSLER: I would like to know if a note or record was made of this occurrence, which would help the Board in ascertaining when it is claimed that the taking down of the second story in this conversation occurred. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You mean, is there some note in the file that would be able to, that would allow this gentleman to refresh his memory at this particular time? MR. BRESSLER: Precisely Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well the only thing that we can do in that particular case is to take a three (3) minute recess and allow the Building Inspector to refresh his memory for that particular incident or action or occurrence, or whatever you want to call it at this particular time. And we will see if, and that is the only thing I can do at this point. You know, I just want you to remember, although we are on the structure of somewhat of a tribunal, this is not a tribunal in that respect. We are trying to water it down to a certain degree. I am not an attorney, although I spent a heck of a lot of time in court, I was never trained in that particular area. I wish that you would bear that in mind, okay. So, with everybody's indulgence and seeing, I would hope, .Mr. Lessard that you know, I understand and I didn't think the specific questions of this nature were going to be answered or asked rather, of the, to the Board for your response, but we will take a-short recess and we will ask Mr. Lessard if he can answer this. MR. LESSARD: I don't see any bearing on whether that happened on a Monday or Tuesday, but I will give it my best shot. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, thank you. We will make that motion for about a three (3) minute recess gentlemen. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. All in favor -AYE. Page 10 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter bf CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3101 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988. (Recess--tape off.) CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I make a motion reconvening. MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second. All in favor - AYE. ' CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Are you still going with the same question? MR. BRESSLER: Yes, I would like to know if Mr. Lessard found anything? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:Could you, thank you sir. MR. LESSARD: As far as I can tell, from my records, okay, the first I became aware of the second floor disappearing was somewhere,,probably in the week of the 20th of September. I can't pinpoint it any closer than that, I am sorry. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, thank you. MR. LESSARD: That is when._Mr. Horton made me aware of a problem in Mattituck, I don't go to Mattituck. MR. BRESSLER: I would like the. Board to ask Mr. Lessard if he 'is aware of whether or not the approved plans"'call for a new roof structure? MR. LESSARD: Absolutely. How else can you add on sir without putting the roof? And you can't put a roof on unless it is new. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: If I might just ask a question, are we talking about the roofing material or are we talking about the roof rafters, is .basically, you know. Are we talking about. MR. LESSARD: I am assuming that he is referring to new roof rafters. on the part that is going to be added on., I don't know what he is after. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You want to basically MR. BRESSLER: His understanding is exactly right, the new roof rafters and those items which go upon it. And I take it that answer is yes. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: For the addition or for the existing roof. MR. BRESSLER: A new roof over the entire structure, and I take it the answer is yes, as shown on the lans. Page 11 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. LESSARD: Not as indicated on the plans as I determined. I got the impression that that area that existed may in all probably get a new asphalt roof to go with the rest. of what was added on. I don't know how technical that is. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, that is basically what my question was. MR. BRESSLER: Well, I would ask then as to whether or not Mr. Lessard was familiar with what the existing construction of the roof was, as opposed as what is shown on the plans. And I submit to the Board that it is evident from comparing the two, that there is a new roof shown on the plans. If you look at two by eights (2 x 81s) and two by sixes (2 x 61s), which I am advised were not.there. I don't see how any other conclusion could be drawn. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You -want to say anything about that Mr. Lessard? MR. LESSARD: That may be as it is. That is up to the engineer or the architect to take care of. What I studied on that roof plan indicated that it was feasible according to the State Code and that is what my job is. The responsibility of whether the roof is framed properly is dependent upon the engineer or the architect. According to the education law, the executive law, it is up to the architect on all commercial buildings. Has to be there, that is the object of it. I don't know.where this is going to as far as voiding the permit or whatever he has asked to reverse the decision on. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Did you want to say something Mr. Horton? MR. HORTON: Yes,. I would like to know if somebody else can whisperin somebody else's ear, can I go whisper in Vic's ear? MR. ZAHRA: If you want to pay them. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Now, wait a minute. . . MR. LESSARD: If we are going to turn this into a circus sir, I think I have given you sufficient information for this Board to come to a determination. If we are going to turn this thing into a circus, I have nothing else to say. MR. BRESSLER: Mr. Chairman I object strenuously to those remarks. I belived I have asked questions in good faith which go to the heart of these issues. And I think that as you, Mr. Chairman, put it at the last meeting, we are trying to get down to the bottom of things here, and I will state for the record that my client and I both cannot appreciate those remarks. And we reiterate the fact that they are asked strictly in good faith and in an effort to get to the bottom of things here. I don't believe that this is turning into a circus by any means. It is a very serious matter and I would like to proceed Mr. Chairman. Page 12 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, would you do me a favor though. . MR. ZAHRA: Excuse me one second. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. MR. ZAHRA: I would just like to apologize to the Board and the group for the outburst. I'm sorry. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you sit down Mr. Zahra there. I -realize that there are times you might have to confer with your attorney, but, you kind of left me on a cliff hanging here, Victor, and you just have to help me understand this. In other words., although the plans say that they call for a new roof, meaning new roof rafters and so on and so forth, okay. You did not specifically think that they were going to replace anything other than the shingles on the existing part of the roof? MR. LESSARD: That is the common practice sir, but that's between him and his architect, not between him and the Building Department. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right, I see, okay. So, you thought he was only going to add on the addition, which was only, only the addition was going.to be the new roof, which was the part which we referred to as a reverse gable, coming off on the east side facing the "Broken Down Valice". MR. LESSARD: That's right sir. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, thank you. . Mr. Bressler? Excuse me, I just had to clear that issue up in my own mind. MR. BRESSLER: ,Thank you. That is exactly the point. I would now request the Board to inquire of Mr. Lessard whether whether or not he is aware of whether the plans as submitted and approved, called for a consideration and possible replacement of structural members at the time- the renovation proceeded to the point'where these structural members became apparent to the builder? Is Mr. Lessard aware of whether or not the plans provided for that eventuality. MR. LESSARD: If you are referring to that statement in the plans sir that say, that any wood that is deteriated would be replaced, I would also point out to this Board, I have not, I, the Building Dept. have seen no reports from any engineers specifying what should be replaced and that is where it belongs. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, Mr. Bressler? MR. BRESSLER: May I assume that the answer to my question is yes, that Mr. Lessard is aware of something in the plans which provides for that eventuality. Page 13 - Transcript of Z:B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. LESSARD: Plus the procedure that has to be gone through, yes, absolutely. MR. BRESSLER: I would now ask whether there came a time, whether Mr. Lessard had a conversation with Mr. Zahra concerning the deteriorated condition of the first floor members in this building and what had to be done to correct them. MR. LESSARD: Not to my recollection. He may have talked with Mr. Horton about it, but he didn't talk to me. MR. BRESSLER: If he didn't talk to Mr. Lessard,., was a conversation with Mr. Horton relayed to Mr. Lessard, wherein a conversation took place regarding the replacement of first floor members? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you remember any, Mr. Horton?. MR. HORTON: I do, yes. MR. LESSARD: I did not have a conversation with Mr. Horton on this, other than the fact that when I went on that job, the second or third time, all the first floor members had been removed and done anew. And I asked Mr. Horton what is going on here. And that is the sum total of the rotten wood or whatever you are referring to. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you therefore want to ask that question of Mr. Horton? MR. BRESSLER: Yes, I think I got an affirmative response. MR. LESSARD: Is he done with me sir? I'm not going to play yo-yo here. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How many more questions do you have? MR. BRESSLER: Not too many, but I think it depends in part on Mr. Lessard's answers. My next question is, didn't there come a time before the second floor members were removed that Mr. Lessard had a conversation with Mr. Zahra, concerning the rotten second floor members? MR. LESSARD: No sir, we had no conversation. And I want the Board at this point to understand something. Mr. Horton is a Senior Building Inspector. Mr. Horton is well trained in his job. Mr., Horton doesn't have to come in and report every nail and splinter to his boss. If he did that two things would happen; Mr. Horton wouldn't be able to do the rest of his work, and neither would Mr. Lessard. So, let us not get a little ridiculous on this. What else would you like to know sir. Page 14 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearin_ g Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No.° 37-01 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. BRESSLER: Well, Mr. Lessard were you present at the sight when a discussion was had in respect to the fire wall in the foundation on this building? MR. LESSARD: I was sir, yes. MR. BRESSLER: And wasn't the question of whether or not the first floor members were rotten and had to be replaced discussed at that time? MR. LESSARD: Not that I was aware of, not that I was aware of. I know that Mr. Horton,and Mr. Zahra went off, all over and conversed while I was doing something else. And I know that Mr. Horton advised him, advised him, that it would be to his best interest to put that wall up, and that is all I know about that. . MR. BRESSLER: .Well, Mr. Lessard did you have occasion to look at the first floor members while you were down at the building? MR. LESSARD: I did not. I was standing on the first floor, but I didn't look underneath the first floor, no sir. MR. BRESSLER: Well, did you; look around the first floor.? MR. LESSARD: Absolutely. MR. BRESSLER: Was it apparent to you at that time that there were structural members that needed replacement? MR. LESSARD: They were already replaced when I was there. MR. BRESSLER: At that time, did you have occasion to view the second story members at all? MR. LESSARD: Yes. MR. BRESSLER: And what did you note? MR. LESSARD: That they were new. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I think he is referring to. . . MR. LESSARD: - When I looked at that, there were new timbers added. You may call them ceiling joists, you may call them second floor - joists, and technically that is what they would be. At the time, I observed. the second floor now suspended with "I" beams. I don't know what else you want me to observe. MR. BRESSLER: Were you told by Mr. Horton that this had been discussed with Mr. Zahra and it was approved? • I' Page 15 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. LESSARD: What was sir? MR. BRESSLER: The fact that there was new construction. MR. LESSARD: I don't understand your. question. Did I discuss. . . MR. BRESSLER: Did you discuss the .matter of the new construction with Mr. Horton? And were you told by Mr. Horton that he had discussed it with Mr. Zahra? MR. LESSARD: No, I didn't. I just pointed out to Mr. Horton that I observed everything brand new on the first floor and I wanted to know what was going on. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you just again, to the Board and not specifically to the. . MR. BRESSLER: Yes, that is the case Mr. Chairman, and everything was new and Mr. Lessard didn't know what was going on and he didn't get a satisfactory explanation. I don't understand why the job proceeded at that point. There is something, let me just state Mr. Chairman, there is something inherently inconsistent about this. According to what we've heard, the Building Department goes down there, they see all these new things going on, )they are not part of the plan, Mr. Lessard doesn't bring it to Mr. Zahra's attention, he presumably has a discussion with Mr. Horton. If it is not cleared by Mr. Horton, and I haven't heard that it was, and there is no violation issued, and Mr. Zahra goes on his way with no approval.and there .is no, stop work issue. Yet, the Board is lead to believe that at some point, the story which has been put forth tonight comes out, and then all of a sudden he does something else without approval, and he is told to stop. This doesn't make any sense to me Mr. Chairman. And what I am trying to find out is, what happened at the first meeting when everybody had found out that things had been done anew. No new plans were requested, no stop. work were issued. There is something eternally inconsistent, that is my point. And I would invite the Chair to ask any questions it has on the subject because apparently I am not to find out exactly what happened here. And I don't have any more questions along this line. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR. LESSARD: All I can say to the Chair, is I observed everything new. I observed that what was new, was in conformity as far as the layout is concerned with the floor plan, okay. Obviously, the attorney doesn't know that much about construction and I can understand that. I observed two things--that what was put up there is what was shown on the plan, and that it was all new. And I questioned the fact that it was new with Mr. Horton, and it is nobody's business but me and Mr. Horton, unless we agree that Page 16- - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing - Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - ,Appl. Noy. 3701 Special Meeting of March. 3, 1988 MR.LESSARD (con't.): something was severly wrong, okay? MR. BRESSLER: In that case, Mr. Chairman I would just put forth a proposition. . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mr. Lessard. MR. BRESSLER: . .if that is so, and that if everything that was put up that was new was done in accordance with the plans, and that was okay with the Building Department, and certainly you know from the last hearing, our position, that that had been discussed in advanced and approved, and that that didn't require new plans. It is our position that with respect to the second story, which was also discussed and which was also a new construction and which by the way is also going to be in exactly the same place, I think we have just heard from the microphone that that too would be perfectly okay. MR. LESSARD: Nonconformity. MR. BRESSLER: I am at a loss Mr. Chairman, I don't have any more .. questions of Mr. Lessard. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. MR. BRESSLER: Now, with respeet,,Ao Mr ;`Horton, I just have one or two questions following up on the one that you indicated properly was put to him. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you answer those, assuming that they are within the scope? Thank you Mr. Horton. MR. HORTON: Yes, I would like to answer. First_off, -I would like to say something to Mr. Bressler and like that. There is a little misunderstanding here. He made a statement about floor joists andJ like that, he didn't say where and what. I assume the second floor joist. To tell you the perfectly honest truth, I have never been down inside that cellar, because I can't fly down. I'm not Batman or anybody else. That cellar is pretty deep, there is no ladder, nothing when I had been there, and I've never been down in the cellar to see all the timbers and everything that was put in there. The new part you can see, what the old part is, I haven't got the slightest idea, unless somebody buys me a shyhook. That is No. 1, No. 2 is, what I thought he.was referring to is either the second floor joist from the second story. And what had happened there, I had pulled in there, one of my times that I pulled in for inspection, and Charlie says I want to talk with you. I said what about. He said I had these old beams laying around my place, and he said the upstairs I think was a little weak, do you mind if I put, these in there? Well, if you take a look at what was there and what he put in there, he wants to double them up. He says that gives me more because of that fish plate, it is a little more stronger. Which I agree with. If Page 17 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No.. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. HORTON (con't.): anybody wants to overbeam something, fine. He did it on his own and everything else after was done. I did tell, afterwards that everything was fine. I mean, what can you.say after a man's done something like this. At that time, the second story was sitting on there and nothing was done above the floor joists, the second floor joists. He did beef them up, ,which is great, you can go up there and see them today. I don't know how long he he said they were laying around, that's why they were a little discolored, a grey color, but they were a new joists he said he had had at home, or storyed somewhere, but I don't know where. And that is what I would like to square away about the new floor joists. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just ask you the same question I asked ,Mr. Lessard and that was, based upon the plans, you know, when, during the period of time that there was some minor modifications or anything, did you have any idea that they were actually going to destroy that second floor. MR. HORTON: Not at all, until I drove up there, I don't know the 25th or the 21st of September and I looked and I couldn't believe what I saw, there was no top. I had a call previous to this, you ought to go to Mattituck and see what is going on, there was no top. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, but I mean, based upon the plans, did you think. . . MR. HORTON: No, it wasn't showed, they were to come out toward the street a little bit, and they wanted to change the stairway and go towards the "Broken Down Valice"., with the stairway down there, and that's the only thing that I know. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I am not trying to add to the questions of tonight I assure you, I just am trying to get this straight in my mind, Mr. Bressler? MR. BRESSLER: My next question of Mr. Horton is whether or not he ever had a conversation with Mr. Zahra about other than the beams supporting the second floor, as to whether he ever had a conversation with Mr. Zahra about replacing structural members in the walls. MR. HORTON: What walls are we referring to? MR. BRESSLER: Why the walls of this building, let us start with the first. . MR. HORTON: The second story, I was never upstairs. There is no way of getting there after he tore everything out. MR. BRESSLER: How about the first floor? V Page 18 - :Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No". 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 ;4 " MR. HORTON: And if he checked, Mr. Tsontakis, your engineer, .he said in a report he couldn't see, he had to take a flashlight. He didn't even know what was there. He was- your engineer. MR. BRESSLER: How about the first floor walls, did you ever have a discussion with him about the rotted and deteriorated . . . MR. HORTON: Not so much the rotted and deteriorated, he mentioned a couple of fishplates, which he was changing. He beefed them up for what they called for, in fact, if anybody looks at these set, of plans, they are not a good set of plans. - You can build by them, if you know how to build. Charlie says he is a good builder, but they are not a complete set of plans MR. BRESSLER: Were they approved?- MR. HORTON: They were approved, but if you read the thing, how it was issued, it was for alteration and like that. It doesn't say a new building. MR. BRESSLER: Well, Mr. Horton. . . MR. HORTON: And please check the permit and you will see what it says. MR. BRESSLER: The plans do reflect the existence of a new roof, do they not? MR. HORTON: ,And may I ask a question? What set of plans do you have there? Are they have been approved as Building Department, or one you dragged out of a brief case? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, wait a minute, let us not get counterproductive. We did run into this problem before in reference to different sets of plans because one was photocopied and one was a straight set, okay. I am in hopes that we are dealing with the set that reflects 8/8/86. MR. HORTON: Our plans will have a stamp of the Building Department on there, what you can do_ and everything else. Any other plans don't pretend to this building. BOARD SECRETARY: We don't have an original. We have the photocopies of the original of the building. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is one we have. That is the one we are going on, we believe it is the original, but it's just not stamped. It is a copy of the original. MR. HORTON: We have a stamped set. Page 19 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. BRESSLER: They do look to be the same, don't they? That's the one. The answer is yes. MR. HORTON: The one you have been showing your hand over there? MR. BRESSLER: Yes. MR. HORTON: That one over there? The one that you have been waving in front of us? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You want a copy of ours, Curt? MR. HORTON: No, I am talking about that one, that he been referring to. MR. BRESSLER: That has been shrunk, that is all. MR. ZAHRA: Eric, I have that one here that he has been referring to. If he wants to see that one, here it is. MR. HORTON: T want to see the one Mr. Bressler was showing through the air. He had been referring to. MR. ZAHRA: There's no difference in them. MR. BRESSLER: It is the same as the one the Board has, only' . . . . MR. HORTON: Then I'd like to have an engineer look at it. MR. BRESSLER: The Board has already looked. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, no, I mean, he wants to have an engineer look at it, so. MR. HORTON: To see if it is the same. I am not going to be qualified to do it. MR. BRESSLER: Well, in that case you can look at the one the Board has and answer the questions, it doesn't matter to me. MR. HORTON: I'm not referring to that, you didn't wave that one in the air. MR. BRESSLER: Mr. Chairman, if the witness would like to look at the Board's plans and answer the ,question that's perfectly okay. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you just bring those plans up so I can compare them with the same plans that we have here.. No, it is basically this newer set here that you have. The ones that aren't sun-bleached. (Reviewing plans) They appear to be the same set of, plans, Mr. Horton, except that they lack the engineer's seal on ours, okay. Page 20 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. LESSARD: What about our stamps Jerry? CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, yours are on the. copy of the of yours, okay, we had to reduce it. MR. LESSARD: Well, I mean his. MR. BRESSLER: What about what. MR. LESSARD: The object of putting plans to the Building Dept. is to--the Building Dept. to mark up what,is required, not to take them back to the client and have them throw them somewhere and do, and work off plans that. . . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are referring to the individual pencil marks that you've placed on the plans, I assume. MR. LESSARD: The red ink marks CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The red ink marks MR. LESSARD: The stamp -and the rest of it, and the rest of it, absolutely. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I had.one- the_;copy that we have of yours, which again is shrunk, has the'Ife's on it`,:'the fee evaluation in longhand and it has some writing, which I think appears to be yours. MR. BRESSLER: Mr. Chairman, in order that we may get on with this and not get bogged down on things that are not relevant, here is a stamped .set we've got. The Board can.see. . . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could I just see that? MR. BRESSLER: It is the same, only that they are very difficult to read because they are faded. So. . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:. This is the original set Curt, if you want to take a look, alright? MR. HORTON: All right, thank you. All right. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: "You want to take a look at them while you are standing there. MR. HORTON: No, I'd have to compare ours with that. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, this is yours, okay. We just copied it and it shrunk. MR. HORTON: All right. Page 21 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, you want to continue sir. MR. BRESSLER: The question was concerning the new roof and that is when the dispute about the plans came up. I.want to know, and Mr. Horton is certainly free to refer to the plans, as to whether or not it demonstrates the existence of a new roof? MR. HORTON: As far as if you look on the plans, there is a point where Mr. Tsontakis put on where it will start from new to old. It doesn't say all new, there is no where it says it will replace certain things. I don't see that. It doesn't say you will put all new timber in, no where. MR. BRESSLER: Well, Mr. Horton, am I correct. . . MR. HORTON: If it did say. . . Let me add something, if it did say, somebody in this room is awful stupid to go to all that trouble to put "I" beams up there and keep a second story up there, if he is going to tear it all down. MR. BRESSLER: Well, Mr. Horton, how old is this "Coffee Pot" building? MR. HORTON: I couldn't tell you. I don't know, it was there before I was born, I would say. MR. BRESSLER: Not too old. MR. HORTON: No, I don't think that comes into the thing. MR. BRESSLER: Well, were roofs made,with plywood construction back then? MR. HORTON: Pardon? MR. BRESSLER: Were roofs made with plywood construction back then? MR. HORTON: I don't know if roof was .of plywood construction, I never saw it exposed. Everytime I ever saw it, it had facial boards on it and it had shingles on it. And I think blueish wood shingles on the outside, I am not quite sure about that. I would have to check. MR. BRESSLER: Well, my question to you is, buildings weren't constructed generally that way were they, back then, with plywood? Page' 22 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. HORTON: Well, it depends, if things, it might have been remodeled at one time, who knows, I don't know when the last roof. . A lot of people, I know when I was a builder-I used to put plywood on the roof, I don't know what was underneath there, I never saw it tore up. It was gone. There wasn't even evidence on the ground. MR. BRESSLER: I don't that think I have any more questions from Mr. Horton, Mr. Chairman. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Thank you Mr. Horton. If anybody else would like to speak in favor of this application, again, we ask again if there are spokespersons concerning specific groups or just individuals. I know this lady had a question here, yes ma'am? Could you use the mike please and kindly state your name for the record? CATHERINE FARR: I represent a group, my name is\Catherine Farr. I represent the Southold Citizen's for Fair Government. We are at 25 Sterlington Commons in Greenport and I would like you to read the position of our group. The pressure for expansion and development in Southold Town is tremendous. The volume of applications handled twenty-five (25) years ago has probably quadrupled. - Thousands of items of local ordinance and legislation have been added piecemeal over the past twenty-five (25) years. Elected and appointed local officials are inundated by conflicting•'demands from constituants. There are a lot of problems, problems of water supply, problems of land use, sewage treatment, garbage disposal, management of waterways, all are extemely difficult to resolve. We ask our public officials, part-time employees for the most part, to judge with the wisdom of Solomon, yet we the voters confront them with withering confusion of priorities. We only offer objections to our own little problems, rarely taking the time for just passionate study of the complete picture. That job is left to "government", such as yourselves. In return, we offer perilously low pay, and lots of criticism. We selected Mr. Zahra's case, as a case in point. Because it is well documented. It illustrates a number of problems now typical between the Town and its individual citizens, specifically these: 1) Conflicting interpretation of rules. , Probably the rules are not as clear as they should be, and training and review is inadequate to ensure consistent interpretation. 2) The system is too slow to respond, due most likely to concern that cases be throughly examined to avoid illegal decisions. Perhaps it must be streamlined to offer quicker resolutions. For example, the legal justice system sets up a separate court to manage minor traffic violations and such. Serious crimes receive a slower, more intensive examination of cases, in a different court with different rules. 3) The system punishes a citizen without due process before he receives a hearing. Whether Mr. Zahra gains relief from the defective stop work order or not, he has been punished. By order of Page 23 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting, of March 3, 1988 MS. FARR (con't.): the Building Dept. , the building has stood open to the elements without a roof since mid-October. Deterioration is evident. No doubt he has also lost money due purely to the delay. Time as they say is money. 4) Lack of priorities. The determination of priority should be established to move disputes through the system with greater dispatch. 5) Adoption by local governing bodies of the legal concept innocent until proven guilty. We propose that citizens should be judged innocent, unless proven guilty in local civic disputes, as well as criminal ones. Lack of proof, failure to present proof and to do so properly should result in automatic dismissal of cases, as it is done so in criminal area. 6) Lack of accountability. The superivsory body, which should monitor the conduct of the Building Dept. , is the Town Board. In the press of business, there appears to be little regular advice or consultation between the members of the Building Dept. and the Town Board. One member of the Town Board is present at this hearing. We look to the full Board to take up the matter now and study this event, not with an eye to punishment, but with all eyes rivited on preventing this whole class of problems in the future. We look to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a streamlined procedure that is much faster than the cumbersome process we now have. We have a long way to go to achieve fair government in Southold. As it has been said, the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. We ask each of you members of the Zoning Board of Appeals to begin this journey by finding in Mr. Zahra's favor tonight. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. (Tape changed) CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of the application? Anybody like to speak against the application? Excuse me. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. Could you come up, I am sorry, it is formality, we have to have you state your name and your. . . CORRINE GARCIA: Yes, Mr. Chairman, my name is Corrine Garcia and I would just like to speak as a taxpayer that I am thoroughly disgusted that I have to witness a Southold Town Attorney, just hired and paid by taxpayers, that I have to witness that he is outside during break discussing the case with a client and advising him on what he could do to win the case. Thank you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, thank you. Is there anybody else who would like to speak? You have something in rebuttal sir? Page Transcript of Z.B.A. Hear2 ing Matter o CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3n1 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. BRESSLER: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I just like to make a few remarks in closing. First, I would like to respond, just briefly, to the remarks that were just made. I think that they are completely out of order and I would note for the Chairman that to have the attorney for the Town talking to an attorney for an applicant about matters presently under consideration is, what. I would consider to beconstructive rather than destructive. The content of what was discussed, of course, is nobody's business at- this point, but I would just note to the Board that attorneys for parties stop talking to each other, the legal system is going to go a little bit crazy. Finally, in summation, I would just like to point out to the Board that what it has before it, is a very simple and narrow issue. It has before it, the issue of whether the revocation of the'building permit, based on two (2) grounds was proper: 1) The violation of the stop work order and 2) Failure to comply with plans. I think based upon the testimony at the first session, we have heard nothing to the contrary tonight. That to the extent of the revocation is based on an alledged violation of a "stop work order", it must fall. And indeed no defense of that position was offered by either member of the Building Dept. I might add, that neither even claimed that the defects raised were not in fact there. I think that adequately disposes of the first ground. As for the second ground, that is failure to comply with plans, I would note. first that I believe the process was defective in' Ahe' first instance. There is no specification anywhere as to the regard in which- the plans were not adhered to. And.there has been no supplemental writing ever issued settting forth in what respect the plans weren't adhered to. Assuming for a moment, if we get over that hurdle, we now come to the issue of whether or not there is any competent evidence before the Board as to whether or not the plans actually were followed. And I don't believe that the Board has heard any tonight. What the Board has heard from Mr. Lessard rather, is the statement that, when, -during .the course of construction, additions and substitutions were made to the first floor of the building and they generally fell within the parameters of the plan. But that was perfectly okay. I would put forth the proposition to the Board, that what was intended, with respect to the second floor, was exactly the same. And, if the position of the Building Dept. is to be consistent, and I am sure that it ought.to be, that any renovation or replacement which falls within the same general outline, just as the first floor did, would be perfectly okay. We have not heard from the Building Inspectors any evidence concerning in what way the plans could be altered to show anything different. Indeed, they testified that the additions that they authorized and ratified, that is, the additional supporting members and the additional members on the first floor. They didn't stop work for that. They didn't _require him to submit additional plans, rather, they said that is fine. As Mr. Horton said, if you want to overbuild, that is perfectly okay. No request for new plans, no request to stop. No request to do anything. I would submit that the situation with respect to the second floor is identical, and that 1 Page 25 - Transcript of Z.B.A. Hearing Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. No. 3701 Special Meeting of March 3, 1988 MR. BRESSLER (con't.): no plan that they could ask for would be any different. It has already been admitted by Mr. Lessard that in fact the new roof was called for, so it certainly couldn't be that. The walls, which by the way as you heard were to be brought up to code, were going to go in exactly the same,place. And we have heard from Mr. Lessard that that is okay. I 'don't believe that there is any evidence before the Board that any plans have been violated, in any respect. So, I think to the extent to the revocation is founded on that ground, it must fail. And, indeed gentlemen, those are the only grounds that were urged before you. While there have been, I note, several other issues tangentially swirling around this case, they haven't been addressed by the Building Dept. , they haven't been addressed by us and formally, they haven't been addressed by you, and they are not before the Board tonight. Had .they been brought before the Board tonight, then I daresay they would have been considered by us, by other people, and they would properly be before you. But there are only two (2) grounds before you and that is what your decision must be based on. And based on the evidence that we have heard tonight, I don't think there's any basis for sustaining the determination of the Building Dept. I would point out certain inconsistencies in the Building Department's testimony this evening. I would note that their testimony concerning the ,dates that this problem arose, are completely erroneous. The evidence you've heard is that the conversations and the demolition, with respect .to the second floor of the removal took place in August. You will find that in the chronology. The building stood that way for quite a period, while Mr. Zahra was. involved -in other matters,and was getting organized to proceed on the job. And there was .a break in there of a good period and the Board can see exactly how long, for looking at the chronology. During that period of, and I don't recall exactly how long it was, but it would be apparent to you from looking, no action was taken. And indeed there was a conversation and I believe it was in July, nothing was done in July-, nothing was done in August.' They waited until September I don't know why. We haven't heard why. They're just in error about that. What caused them to do that, we haven't heard, they didn't volunteer. A .complaint perhaps? I don't know. We have inquired of the Building Dept. if there was a complaint? Who complained? The answer we got. back is, we don't have to tell you. And that's in writing and you will probably find that in your file, if the entire file was turned over to you. The Building Department's recollection of certain conversations is certainly interesting to say the least. I believe if the Board studies the testimony, they will find that it doesn't make a whole lot of sense in terms of the chronology which has been laid out before you. And I believe to -sum up in total, there is no credible evidence before the Board that Mr. Zahra violated his stop work order or that he deviated from the plans, as approved by the Buiding Inspectors in any significant way. I would therefore urge the Board to reverse the determination of the Building Dept. and reinstate the building permit. And on those grounds and no other grounds. Page 26' - Transcript of Z.B.A. 11t4ring Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA - Appl. W.I. 3701 Special 'Meeting of March 3, 1988 CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. This Board will go out and do a physical inspection of the premises. We have looked at it without measuring at this particular point. We will go out and do some measuring. And, we will also, I will also add to the record, because this particular hearing will stay open from a formality point of View, until the next regularly scheduled meeting, which is the 17th. And inbetween now and the 17th, either the building inspectors or the Town Attorney or the applicant's attorney or the applicant may look at anything that we place in the file, based upon this physical inspection. And, I will go over your-particular area's of chronology on the pictures and refresh my memory as to my personal instances, as they pertain to this building, which may or may not be placed in this area of personal knowledge and physical inspection. The only other thing I wanted to ask you Mr. Bressler, is -that you did not.furnish us two (�2) deeds. . We would like to see the deed from North Fork Bank & Trust, Co. in to the property, which was from Edith and Joseph Langer to North Fork Bank & Trust Co. And then from North Fork Bank & Trust Co. to Charles Zahra and wife, or whomever. And, on that particular note. . . MR. BRESSLER: I will furnish them for you. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. On that particular note, I will make a motion recessing the hearing for the formality for no further information on an oral sense, until the 17th, at which time, we will close the hearing. And, which 'w111,give''us,two (2) weeks to do the physical inspection. And, we thank you all for your curtesy tonight and we thank the Building inspectors for coming down. And, I want to just close on this note and that is that the issue of the subpoena that was mentioned not only in the paper, and not only what I mentioned, it is basically an issue that was used of Mr. Bressler as basically 'a guarantee that they would be here. And, as you know, that you objected to the closing of the hearing, I'm sorry, you objected to the recessing .of the last hearing, so I very simply used that as a secondary guarantee that these gentlemen would be here if need be. And in both cases, neither one of them are subpoenaed tonight, they came voluntarily and we thank you for that. So, I make the motion recessing the hearing and closing it with no further oral testimony on the 17th of March. And, again thank you everybody. ALL IN FAVOR.. - AYE. CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you again for coming in. by Lorraine A. Miller (Transcribed by tapes recorded March 8, 1988.) 4N -!Q MR 7k F,'Plo, rl �Ff:F _wv JOWN OF WOW TOWN NA1IXQ SOUTHOLD, 3 BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) z Date . .... .......................... M 15428 Permission is hereby granted to: ............yl.....�.4j......I.:..!............................................. ............. .......................................... ................ 4 47� ....Iq! ..................... ............ .........6... ...............................4.... ........... .....................10......... iF......!..! 0 A' .................... ....... Cttz.......................... L -at-, .......... . at promises located . .... ............... . .. ........ .................. 7, 7, ........................ ............... . ........ v .........................•...................... ....... ...... oi .......................................... 'a County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . ..................... Block ...................... Lot No. ................. cp� by thi pursuant to application dated .. . ...................... ...................... 191�, and Building Inspector. Fee ....... 'Building Inspector A5 FORM NO. S TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT r TOWN CLERKS OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date .,,,September 22 , . 19...87 TO CHARLES. T.. & JEAN ZAHRA . (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 PIKE STREET, MATTITUCK, NEW YORK 11952 .....................................................:........................... (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: CH 100 Zoning Ordinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that STOP ALL WORK NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE (state character of violation) PROVISIONS OF THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. .................................................................................................................................. ................. ..................................................................................................... ............................................ in violation of CH 100 XIV 100-143 (State section or par agr aph of applicable low, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ......AT O ...NCE..................................................... September 19 87 dayof .................................................... ... .... The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 1830 Pik.P:Sr_reet: Mattituck, ...................County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of, low may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 14 1-04-05 ... .... .......... ........ .. . .. ...... Building Inspector FORM N0. b 1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date November 5, 87 TO CHARLES T. & JEAN ZAHRA ....................................................... (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952 ................................................................................. (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there_ exists a violation of: CH 100 Zoning Ordinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that ,.,,Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued ................(state character of violation) October 27 , 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason.�.,,not„ followinp,,,,plans , did not comply with a stop work order. ................................................................................. ............................ .I. ........................................... 100- 142-C & D inviolation of .................................................................... ................................... ......... ................... (State section or paragraph of applicable low, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the 6th conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ...................................................................... dayof .....Novempe.r............................ 19....87 The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 140 Pike Street , Hatttituck...........County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and. to comply with the applicable provisions of low may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 1000- 14 1-04-05 ....tv Building Inspector u _ + t Y � R k (O 5}_ s ti 4•f `ti �• Y �, !•� fjU� IIr/l 22 / 29.1J O vr ft .., AVE. .IJlslr •• ~y -s29 -C9o90 t 34 6 30 BAPTIST CHURCH -28 ]Ij I - 20 - 2.OA(cI ••• t \9 37 6A >Z`s2+1Ea::� r•. �Ca`NVaC� 1 " Y `� . +•�~ri. '' sib - ` / / Ir 33 i31•c�._ s c r \b qi AO 34 Y t 0. sd VLp� '7 P�\\ � .••y ■'+, .20 ��I_ •c 'tA. .]3- .. .CeA ^?.c s 2 F; 4,h' :c ,NO •' AA -� .. �. sy .. '..• TELE-rchE CO °rc; 36 PAS - s' ]r r y O SEE SEC. NO 142 •'' ♦6 t.' !d = � WATCH J/ �.. 1 2 iTOWN OF SOUTHOLD , NEW YORK nt� 4G 3 i ZONING BOARD of APPEALS r - - - 4 In the Matter of the Appeal of 5 I Charles Zahra 6 , Re : Application for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector - 7 ! Revocation of Building Permit . 8 I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 9 I Southold Town Hall Southold , New York 10 February 18 , 1988 11 7 : 30 P .M. 12 BEFORE: Gerard P . Goehringer , Chairman 13 Joseph H. Sawicki i Robert J . Douglass f 14 i Linda Kowalski , Secretary Charles Grigonis 15 Serge Doyen , Jr . 16 17 18 19 I I 20 i I � 21 22 -: 23 ' I 24 I I i 25 I I I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 2 2 iA P P E A R A N C E S • - - - - - - - - - - - 3 WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, ESQS . Attorneys for the Applicant 4 P .O. Box 1424 Main Road 5 Mattituckr New York BY : ERIC BRESSLER, ESQ . 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i i 1 3 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: I guess we ' re ready to 3 begin. I ' ll read the legal notice . i 4 i The legal notice reads as follows , upon 5 application 3701 on behalf of Charles Zahra , 6 I application reads under Article XIV, Section I 7 100-142 of the Zoning Code for reversal of 8 determination of the building inspector in 9 j revocation of building permit 15428Z issued 10 i October 27, 1987 , location Mattituck . Zoning 11 district B1 , general business . 12 The reason for the appeal is a variance of I 13 zoning ordinance: "A reversal of determining of 14 building inspector-revoation of building permit 15 is requested for the reason that neither the 16 1 ground set forth in revocation supports the a 17 ; action taken . All work pursuant to the permit i I 18 has been performed in accordance with the plans 19 ; and approvals of the Building Department . Stop 20 work order was not violated and , in any event , 21 i was invalid . Accordingly, the decision of the I � 22 building inspecter should be reserved . Copy of ' 23 the revocation of Building Permit is annexed 24 hereto. " 25 The back of the application reads as i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I ' I 1 4 2 follows , !I 3 Number 1 : "Stop work order fails to comply f � 4 with Section 100-143 . This action requires that 5 I a stop work order state the conditions under 6 I which the work may be resumed. A copy of the i 7 j stop work order is attached hereto. It is f 8 apparent that the foregoing code requirement is I I 9 i not met and that, therefore, the stop work order I 10 is not valid . " I 11 Number 2 : "The stop work order does not 12 apply to the subject premises . The stop work 13 I order by its terms applies to premises at 1830 ` I 14 Pike Street ,. Mattituck , New York . However , the j i 15 I premises which a building permit was granted and 16 for the building permit was revoked are located i 17 at 140 Pike Street . Copy of the building permit 18 ! is attached hereto . The premises at 1830 Pike 19 Street is the applicants ' residence , about 20 I . .which there is no dispute . " 21 Number 3 : "Even assuming that the stop I 22 work order was issued in compliance with the 23 code and applied to the proper premises , the 24 1 stop work was not violated . The applicant did I 25 nothing after the issuance of the order accept i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I � i 1 5 i 2 clean up the job site . Apparently the building 3 department recognizes this fact when it withdrew 4 its criminal prosecution for violation of stop 5 work order because of its stated inability to i i 6 j prosecute the case . " 7 j Number 4: "All work on the premises has i 8 been conducted in accordance with the approved i 9 plans and specifications and instructions of the D e n t 10 Building Department . There is o b or basis a i f he 11 claim that the work was done in accordance with 12 the plans" -- excuse me , "that the work was not 13 done in accordance with the plans . Wherefore , 14 I it is respectfully requested that the 15 I determination of the building inspector revoking 16 the building permit be denied . " 17 And that is signed by the applicant on the i 18 j first day of December of 1987 . 19 I have a copy of several things in the 20 i file . I guess the first one we 'll deal with is 21 a survey, which appears to be the original 22 1 survey, which was dated -- it ' s a sketch of a i 23 survey, the date -- yes , okay, March 14th, 1973 I 24 i by Robert VanTyle (phonetic) , P .C. , which is j . 25 basically the survey which deals with the i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 'i i I 1 6 2 j building as it existed when the applicant had 3 purchased the property, and then we have 4 I buildingplans -- we have a co of the whole P PY 5 building permit file , but we have building plans I 6 which are dated 8/8/86 on behalf of Steve G. 3 7 Tsontakis Associates , and -- okay, the other 8 survey I was referring to was a sketched-in I 9 survey that was on the plan itself which 10 I indicated the areas of the building that were I 11 I being filled in around the periphery, and so, i 12 I therefore , I will not place that in other than 13 the fact that it is in our file in toto . 14 ; And I have a copy of the Suffolk County I 15 tax map indicated in the surrounding maps 16 properties in the area . 17 Mr . Bressler , you would like to be the 18 first person that wants to speak tonight? 19 i MR. BRESSLER: Thank you. I 20 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you want to raise your 21 right hand? 22 I MR. BRESSLER: Well , I don 't know that i I ' 23 I ' ll be giving any testimony, but I 'd be happy 1 24 to be sworn in, certainly. 25 MR. GOEHRINGER: All right . Would you i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 7 2 i raise your right hand? � I 3 Would you tell us that the information f 4 that you ' re about to give us is the truth to the I � 5 ' best of your knowledge? j 6 MR. BRESSLER: I do so affirm. I j 7 Gentlemen, as you all know, we are here 8 tonight to consider the application of Charles i 9 Zahra, wherein he is seking a reversal of the I 10 determination of the building inspector which I 11 I revoked his building permit . i 12 The subject of this particular building i 13 permit revocation, this whole matter , is the 14 premises known as -- commonly known as the i 15 Coffee i 16 Pot in Mattituck on Pike Street . It ' s located 17 at 140 Pike Street in the hamlet of Mattituck in ; 18 ! the Town of Southold . 19 MR. GOEHRINGER: Can I stop you? Is that 20 mike on? Can everybody hear him all right? 21 I VOICE: I don 't think it ' s working . 22 MR. BRESSLER: Can you hear me? 23 VOICE: Not too well . i 24 MS . KOWALSKI : Speak closer . 1 25 MR. BRESSLER: It ' s dead . i I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 8 t 2 In any event , it is commonly known as the 3 Coffee Pot in Mattituck . This structure for 4 many years has housed , in the downstairs , a 5 restaurant affectionately known to those in the 6 I area as the Coffee Pot , serving a fast , if i 7 i somewhat marginally bearable lunch , but it was 8 j beloved by all of us . Upstairs there was a 9 i residential apartment . 10 ! This situation obtained or persisted , 11 depending on how you like the food , for a number 12 i of years , and up until the end of 1986 , at which i 13 time Mr . Zahra acquired the building . At the I 14 I time that Mr . Zahra acquired the building and 15 property he intended to renovate it , make it 16 nice , fix up the restaurant , fix up the 17 apartment , and leave it to the same uses for 18 I which it had been put for so many years . II 19 As you will hear from Mr . Zahra in I 20 connection with this particular project he 21 conditioned his purchase of the building and 22 property upon the obtaining of a building permit 23 to do just that . It was a contingency in the 24 contract . The contingency was met , the contract 25 came to fruition, Mr . Zahra purchased the i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 I I 1 9 2 building and thereafter embarked on his plan to i 3 renovate and improve the building . 4 He obtained the building permit. He 5 started work on it . And I will leave a more 6 detailed statement of the facts to Mr . Zahra in 7 answer to my questions , but suffice it to say he 8 proceeded for quite a time until the instance 9 difficulty that we ' re all familiar with arose 10 with the issuance of a stop work order , a board 11 of criminal prosecution in the local justice 12 court and culminating in what we consider the 13 improper revocation of the building permit 14 which brings us here tonight . 15 Turning technically to what occurred in 16 this particular case , let us turn first to one 17 of the attachments to the application, which is i 18 dated November 5th, 1987 on Town of Southold -- 19 apparently a form known as Order to Remedy i 20 j Violation . And what it states is "Your building 21 permit issued October 27, 1986 is hereby 22 revoked . Reason, not following plans , did not 23 comply with stop work order in violation of I 24 100-142 (c&d) . " 25 We contend that neither reason stated is a f -- -- - - -J RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i i 1 10 I I 2 valid reason for revoking their building permit � I 3 j and the determinations ought to be reversed . 4 Let ' s turn first to the alleged 5 disobedience of the stop work order . In 6 connection therewith, we turn to the , again , the i 7 Southold Town form called Order to Remedy j i 8 Violation dated September 22nd , 1987 . This 4 9 document purports to be a stop work order , 10 although titled an Order to Remedy Violation . 11 It says in pertinent part, "stop all work not in 12 conformity with the provisions of the plans or 13 specifications of the building permit in I i 14 ! violation of 100-143 . " 15 Now, it seems apparent and the board has I 16 t already ruled on the fact that this purported f 17 stop work order is invalid on its face . The i 18 i reason it ' s invalid on its face I will spread 19 ; again on the record , and that is quite simply it i 20 I doesn ' t comply with the statute , Section i 21 j 143 , which states a stop work order must i 22 state the conditions under which work may be i 23 continued or proceeded or as previously 24 addressed this matter in the Gambino variance , 25 and it found on a virtually identical set of I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I i 2 facts that the purported stop work order did not j 3 comply with law,' and I point out this is the 4 second time that at least I am aware of a I 5 i purported stop work order coming in this form. 6 i It ' s invalid on its face . Any revocation based 7 i upon it is obviously invalid . 8 Let ' s turn now to the bottom of the 9 purported stop work order . The premises to i 10 i which this Order to Remedy Violation refers are 11 situated at 1830 Pike Street , Mattituck . 12 Everybody knows by now where 1830 Pike Street 13 Mattituck is . It ' s his house. It ' s Charlie 14 Zahra ' s house . It not the Coffee Pot . The 15 I Coffee Pot is at 140 Pike Street . 16 j You have only to turn to the building 17 i permit which follows the Order to Remedy 18 ! Violation to see that the building permit is 1 19 issued to renovate an addition on existing i 20 restaurant as applied for premises at 140 Pike i i 21 Street , Mattituck . 22 i Ground number 2 , the renovations based 23 upon on a stop work order issued with respect to 24 the wrong . premises cannot stand as a matter of 25 law . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I I 1 12 - I .t 2 Third , as a matter of fact , which you ' ll I 3 hear from Mr . Zahra shortly, he did not violate 4 , the stop work order . Even assuming , A, it was 5 validly issued, and B , it applied to the right 6 property, even forgetting those issues , he 7 didn ' t violate any . In fact , the stop work 8 order , purported stop work order issued on the 9 22nd was followed by an appearance ticket for a 10 criminal prosecution , which I ' ll go into more 11 i detail later, but that criminal prosecution was 12 dropped. The Town refused to go through with 13 I! it , couldn ' t go through with it . I ' ll explain I 14 in more detail why. I 15 i All right , now , let ' s turn to the second 16 i purported ground for pulling the building 17 permit , not following the plans . I ' ve got to I 18 j say to this board that I can ' t tell from looking 19 i at this piece of paper that -- I don't know what 20 was not in conformity with the plans or 21 specifications. And I will tell you now that I i Y i i 22 do not know to this day or this minute , and you 23 will hear .the same thing from Mr . Zahra, what is f 24 not in conformance with the plans or 25 specifications, and we ' ll go into more detail on RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i i 1 13 2 that later , but at no point have we been given a 3 I writing or indeed anything orally that sets 4 ! forth what in particular has. failed to comply f i 5 with the plans and specs, or more importantly, 6 what he can do to fix the problem. We don ' t 7 know today, standing before you , what we can do I f 8 to fix the problem. 9 Indeed , after the receipt of the first i 10 round of papers I called the building department i 11 to make an appointment with them and I got an 12 i appointment with them and I received a call back i i 13 t saying that nobody can meet with me at the 14 ; appointed time and place , and I said fine , let ' s i 15 I make another time and place , and they said no , 16 everyone ' s too busy, we can 't give you a time i 17 ' and place , and I wrote a letter and I said let ' s 18 have a time and place , and I still received no 19 response . I 20 This is the type of situation that we ' ve I 21 j been running into in trying to find out exactly i 22 what the nature of the difficulty is , and I 23 ; finally when we did have a conference , which i 24 came about only after the criminal case was in i I 25 progress , we had a conference and we left the I i — J RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 t 1 i 14 t 2 j room still not knowing what we could do to fix 5 3 i the problem. We stand here today before you i 4 telling you that we don ' t know, we don ' t know 5 what we did wrong and we don't know what we did 6 I to fix it , but whatever it is , we didn ' t do it , 7 i and you ' ll hear from from Mr . Zahra and you ' ll I 8 hear that from Tsontakis , the architect on the i 9 job. i 10 MR. GOEHRINGER: You are telling me as I i 11 sit here that you had a meeting with the I 12 I building department , at least one building 13 inspector , and he did not tell you -- 14 MR. BRESSLER: In the context -- in the I 15 context of the criminal proceeding , and the 1 16 question was put what about these plans and 17 specs , what do you want to see on them, and we I 18 i never got a satisfactory response . I don 't know 19 I today, and you 'll hear that from Mr . Zahra, I 20 . don t know today what they want us to do on the I 21 i plans and specs that would be any different than i 22 what we gave them. 23 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , you 've basically 24 answered my question, Mr . Bressler , and that 25 ! is -- I shouldn ' t say that , I told you as we RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 j 15 2 ; walked out in the room in the recess that I had 3 I anticipated , okay, holding this particular 4 I hearing over until March 3rd or 4th and you i 5 asked me why, and the reason being , okay, is 6 that we have all intentions of finding out what 7 remedy or remedies would possibly exist in this 8 i particular case and we want to know the i 9 sequences of events that have led to this I 10 1 particular time and we want to know it from the 11 ( building department . And if need be , we will 12 subpoena the building inspectors to be here on 13 March 3rd or 4th, whatever night we can get the 14 hall , and we will make every attempt to find i 15 out . 16 j MR. BRESSLER: May I ask why they ' re not 17 i in attendance tonight? 18 i MR. GOEHRINGER: I don ' t know , sir . We 19 have informed them that this hearing was going 20 on, both verbally and in writing . i 21 ; MR. BRESSLER: In that event , at the close 22 of the testimony I ' m going to make an 23 application to you on that very issue , and I ' d I 24 like you to reconsider that at the end of the 25 hearing . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i l 16 1 I y 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. j 3 MR. BRESSLER: Now, let me say a few words 4 briefly about the criminal case , just so the 5 { board has the full flavor of what went on in 6 1 this particular proceeding . 1 7 On September 23rd an appearance ticket was i 8 issued purportedly again for a violation of a ! 9 stop work order . This required Mr . Zahra ' s I 10 appearance in local criminal court . He was I I 11 ! charged with a violation. As the board is i 1 12 aware , not withstanding of the fact that it ' s a 1 1 i 13 violation, potential incarceration is available 14 as punishment for a guilty finding , a fine and I 15 ; imprisonment . 16 I Mr . Zahra was hauled into the local II 17 i justice court October 2nd. At that time an 1 I I 18 j application was made to the court for a piece of 19 I paper setting forth what the exact nature of the 20 violation was . Not a simple appearance ticket 21 1 that said please appear in court , but an I 22 explanation of what the charges were . He ' s 23 I entitled to it by law and in fact , Judge Tedechi I i 24 (phonetic) ordered it . He order it by October 1 25 15th so that a trial on October 30th could be I I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 j 17 i 2 j had. October 15th came and went . I 3 October .30th came . We appeared in court 4 i again , there were no papers . An application was I 5 ' made to dismiss the criminal case . It was 6 j granted . In fact , it was made by Mr . Jakaboski , 7 the special town attorney . What possible reason 8 I could there have been in a thirty-day delay and i 9 no papers produced what so ever relating to any 10 charge against Mr . Zahra? I 11 It was determined at that particular time I 12 ( not to go forward . I joined in the application . 13 It was dismissed. People are unavailable , and I 14 quote , "I 'll explain for the court , number 1 , " 15 1 Mr . Jakaboski says , "we assured you on this date 16 i that we would be ,prepared for trial today. We 1 17 ? knew Mr . Horton would be unable , but we thought 18 j Mr . Lessard would be . He ' s not . Representation I , 19 was made at the time , we can ' t try the case. " 1 20 { That would be the 16th , October 16th. "We can ' t 21 i try it on the 16th; one of the inspectors will 22 be away. We can do it on the 30th, Judge . " 6 I 23 "Fine . " Now we come to the 30th, no one 24 3 is available . I only note on that r'eg&rd we ' re 25 here tonight and the board tells us these people I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I � 1 I 1 18 4 2 have been notified and they' re not here , no 3 I explanation. No one was there at the criminal I 4 I case . Secondly, there ' s no criticism of the 5 I building department , but the investigation of I 6 the facts reveals the appearance of the criminal 7 j ticket , the charge was issued probably not much 8 I more of one hour at the issuance of the stop 9 I work order . One hour , not even time to pick up I 10 his tools and move his wood and get the job site 11 cleaned up. 12 Although the minutes don ' t reflect that 13 i part of the colloquy, one hour and they dragged 14 i him into criminal court . 15 j Needless to say, that was dismissed . It 1 16 I has not been repursued, so we ' re here before you 17 tonight seeking revocation of this decision that 1 18 j we find absolutely baseless . 19 Now, if I might at this time, I ' d like you i 20 ' to swear in Mr . Zahra, and I would like to put j I I 21 ; the questions to him that will elucidate for you 22 the events that took place leading up to this 23 particular transaction , as I really don 't have i 24 personal knowledge of those facts . i 25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Charlie, could I just i I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I i i 1 19 2 ask you , would you see if you could get that 3 ! mike to work before we begin? 4 VOICE: Use the other one . 5 MR. BRESSLER: Do you want us to move 6 over there? i 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: If you wouldn ' t mind . 8 Would raise your right hand , please? i 9 Will you tell us that the information j i 10 you ' re about to give us is the most correct ' i i 11 information to the best your knowledge? f 12 , MR. ZAHRA: Yes , I am. 13 ; MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . i 14 EXAMINATION BY 15 { MR. BRESSLER: 16 Y Q. State your name and addresses for the I 17 board , please . I i 18 ( A. Charles Zahra. I reside at 1830 Pike i 19 ` Street , Mattituck . i I 20 ! Q. Could you tell the board what' s located at 21 1140 Pike Street in Mattituck? i 22 A. Formerly known as the Coffee Pot, premises 23 ; formerly known as the Coffee Pot . j 24 Q . Is that the subject of this particular 25 hearing? 1 I _ J RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I I 's 1 20 ' I I 2 A. I hope so . 3 Q . Would you state for the board your current 4 ; occupation and your experience in the area of building 5 land construction, please? I 6 A. For the past ten years I 've been involved 7 ' in various phases of building and construction . 8 Q. Now, did there come a time when you first i 9 ; acquired the Coffee Pot? 10 , A. Yes . 11 Q . Was that in late 1986? � I 12 A . Yes . 1 13 Q . Now, you heard my statement earlier 14 iregarding the contingency in connection with the 15 ! purchase of the Coffee Pot , that is the issuance of the I 16 jbuilding permit; was that correct? 17 1 A. Yes , it was . 18 . Q. And did you , in fact , prior to the i - 19 acquisition, obtain that building permit? i 20 A. Yes , I did . 21 j Q . And were there plans and specifications 22 ! submitted to the building department upon which the 23 ! building permit was issued? ' 24 A . Yes , there was . 25 MR. BRESSLER: Does the board have those RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I i 1 21 2 plans and specifications in its file? I 3 i MR. GOEHRINGER: To the best of our 4 knowledge . i 5 Q . Now, did there come a time when you i 6 1commenced work on the Coffee Pot in accordance with the 7 iplans and specifications? 8 A . Yes , we began working in the spring . 9 Q . Of 19 87? 10 i A . Yes . 11 1 Q . Did there come a time shortlyafter you ; 12 commenced work that representatives of the building 13 ( department appeared at the job site? 14 A . Yes . j 15 j Q. Would you tell the board who it was and ; 16 ( what transpired? I 17 A. Upon commencing work on the project known 18 ; as Coffee Pot we were in the process -- I had Mr . I 19 ' Zaleski doing excavating to facilitate the installation i 20 of the foundation on said premises . Approximately 4 21 ; o ' clock that afternoon Mr . Horton and Mr . Lessard 22 ; appeared on the job site . 23 Q . You ' re referring to Curtis Horton and j 24 Victor Lessard employed by the Building Department , 25 Town of Southold? i f RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 22 2 A. Yes . Both appeared on the job site late I 3 ; that afternoon. Victor Lessard came over to me and i 4 questioned what am I doing . - i . i I 5 1 I said "Victor , I 'm doing exactly what the I � 6 1plans call for . " 7 He said "Well , you ' re taking out the I 8 Ifloor , you ' re taking the walls out , you ' re installing a 9 ; foundation. The plans do not call for a foundation. " I 1 10 I said "Victor , I beg to differ with you , i 11 ; but they do . " He said "Well , I have a set of plans 12 right out in the car . " i 13 I says " Fine, go get them, we ' ll both look i 14 jat them. " i 7 15 With this Mr . Lessard goes out , to the car , j i 16 icomes back with the plans , opens them up in the 17 ipresence of myself, Curt Horton and Roy Dean who is 1 18 there tonight . I 19 Turned to the page to the foundation, and 20 I so pointed out to him, "Victor , is this not a 21 ! foundation in the plan: Victor says to me , "Hum, well , J 22 iI can cover you on that . " Immediately thereafter -- I 23 MR. BRESSLER: Hold it . Could we stop at 24 ' this point? 25 Do the plans that the board have before i I ; RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 i 23 z 2 them show a foundation? 3 j MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , I think you should 4 bear in mind , Mr . Bressler , that we are not i 5 i engineers nor construction people; okay? 6 I MR. BRESSLER: If we could approach and 7 take a look . 8 MR. ZAHRA: We have an engineer here 9 ! tonight . 10 I MR. BRESSLER: I3e can approach and take a 1 11 ll look at what you have and maybe determine if you 12 have the right plans . 13 I 'm looking here at page 4 of the plan and I 14 on the left-hand portion it says "foundation 15 plan" and in parenthesis " replace existing . " 16 MR. GOEHRINGER: Just so we get all the 17 j plans straight , let ' s take the plan from the i 18 building department file , which may be the one 19 that should be stamped . 20 i MR. BRESSLER: I don 't think -- do you 21 want this one? 22 MR. GOEHRINGER: No , that one has no i 23 bearing on the case . 24 MR. BRESSLER: There it is . 25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. Fine . We 'll i f RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 J� I 1 24 2 i continue . 3 Q . All right , Mr . Zahra, you were explaining � 9 Y P g 4 1what happened at that particular meeting and you had 1 5 ! just finished reciting what had happened regarding the 6 foundation . 7 i Did further communications take place 8 between you and one of the building department i 9 representatives? 10 j A. Yes , at this point Mr . Horton intervened land11 his statement to me was , "What about your firewall? i 12 iWhere is your firewall?" Now, mind you the building ' s 13 hanging in mid air , there ' s no foundation, he ' s asking 14 ime about a firewall that ' s going to sit on a foundation 1 15 ; that ' s not there yet . Again I said to Mr . Horton , I 16 ijsaid " I refer you back to the plans . Does the plans or I 17 ido the plans call for a firewall?" He said, "Well I i 18 ; don ' t care about what the plans call for, you have to 19 ! have a firewall between these two buildings because the 20 code calls for it , the buildings are less than ten feet 9 21 ! apart . " Again , at this point it was the end of the � i 22 : day, I elected to schedule a meeting with them on f I 23 ' Monday. It was a Friday afternoon . I elected to 24 schedule a meeting for Monday. i 25 Q . Did you have such a meeting on Monday? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 f I 1 i 25 i r 2 4 A . Yes , I did . i 3 Q . Who was there? i 4 i . A. I walked in the office and Mr .\ Horton was i 5 ; there, so I asked to speak to Mr . Horton. I 6 i Q. And did you? i 7 A. In private -- yes . We went -- i i 8 I Q. What was the conversation? I 9 A. I asked Mr . Horton, I said , "What seems to 10 ` be the problem here?" He says "Well , he takes these i i 11 ; plans in , looks at -- half-assed looks at them, " excuse i 12 me , "stamps them, put his name on them and sends them 13 ! out . He doesn 't even look to see what he needed . " i } 14 Q . Referring to who? a 15 ; A. Mr . Lessard . 16 So I said "Well , that ' s an internal ' f 17 ; problem that I don ' t think I should have to be 18 aconcerned with. At the same time I would like to 19 icontinue on with the project . What would you like from 20 me?" I I 21 i Mr . Horton ' s response was "Give me the I 22 firewall . " } I i 23 ! I says "Fine, if that ' s all it ' s gonna j 24 : take , it ' s only money, I 'll put the firewall up. " 25 ; Q . And did you put -- s I . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 I 26 I 2 A . With that -- 3 j Q . Go ahead , please. I 4 f A. With that , Mr . Horton went over to the 5 Ifiles and grabbed one of the sets of plans and 6 jindicated on the office set firewall in two separate 7 ! locations . I did not -- I elected not to give him my 8 . plans . My plans do not show the firewall . 9 I MR. BRESSLER: Do the board ' s plans i 10 indicate the existence of a firewall? 11 I MR. GOEHRINGER: No . i 12 MR. KOWALSKI : We have two different sets . I 13 We have three different sets . We have the copy i 14 I that ' s starred . 15 MR. BRESSLER: We don 't know which set was I I 16 I marked and which one wasn 't , but suffice it to i 17 ` say, we put up a firewall . i 18 MR. GOEHRINGER: I 'm aware of that . 19 ' Before you go , Charlie , I just wanted to -- i 20 j at what stage of construction were you at that 21 point? Was Frank Zaleski there at the time 22 starting the excavation underneath the 23 building? 8 24 i THE WITNESS: Excavation had already been i I 5 25 well in progress . We were in the process of I 1 RAM COURT REPORTING .SERVICE (516) 727-3168 r' 1 27 2 i cutting out the deteriorated and inadequate 3 j floor and wall structures . 4 i MR. GOEHRINGER: Now, were the steel beams 5 then placed in the building at that time also? 6 I THE WITNESS: They had already been 7 installed . The building was suspended , I so 8 stated . I 9 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay . Go ahead . I 'm 10 sorry. 11 THE WITNESS: Where .was I? Back to the 12 firewall in the office . 13 A. After Mr . Horton -- after I told Mr . 14 IHorton -- after Mr . Horton said to me "Give me the j 15 Ifirewall and you can continue , " my words to him were , 16 1 "Are you going to leave me alone on the project now? 17 ! Can I continue and finish it?" His words , "Yes , I i 18 jwill . " He shook my hand and thanked me for my I 19 ; cooperation and I left and commenced work on the 20 ; project again . 21 j O . Now, did there come a time when you had 22 ' further communication with building department i 23 ` representatives concerning the condition of the first 24 ; floor of the building? 25 A. At the time we discussed the floor , the i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 28 2 ! foundation, we discussed the deterioration of the floor 3 ! beams and the walls . He was fully aware of it because 4 ! they had -- some of those materials had been removed ( 5 ! already at the time Mr . Horton and Mr . Lessard were on , 6 ! the site . i 7 i Q . And what did you discuss with them about 8 ! the replacement of the rotted and deteriorated members? i 9 A. I explained that they would have to be 10 ! replaced to meet code , which they were fully aware of . 11 i Q . And did they agree to that? j 12 A. Yes . - 13 I MR. GOEHRINGER: Excuse me . . 14 ( Reflecting now, the first floor of this ! i ! i 15 building? i 16 THE WITNESS : Yes . i 17 ! MR. GOEHRINGER: You were talking about , 18 ! the first floor of the building at this time? . ! 19 THE WITNESS: Yes , we are. ! 20 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. 21 j Q . Now, did there come a time when you had 22 ! further communication with a building department 23 ! representative concerning this project? 24 ! A. Yes . Unfortunately, Mr . Horton appeared 25 on the job site again, after the foundation and first ! • i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I� 1 29 2 + floor was rebuilt . His question to me was , "You ' re not 3 ; adding up any square footage to the upstairs?" I said i 4 "My God , Mr . Horton, we have to go back to the plans 5 Jagain. The plans show an addition of square footage to i I 6 ! the second floor . " 7 i With this , he did not say anything , he 8 Heft , went back .to the building department , brought Mr . 9 ; Lessard to the job site . Mr . Lessard put the question 1 10 � to me , "Are you adding square footage to the upstairs?" 11 jI said exactly as I spoke to Mr . Horton and told him, i 12 ` "Refer back to the plans , yes , we are ." I said "Mr . 13 ! Horton, you have a set of plans stamped by an engineer 14 las you required , you signed them and stamped them 15 , yourself . I don ' t know what you want me to do . " With 16 (, this , no more conversation took place , they left . I 17 Q . And did you proceed with the work? 18 A. Yes , we did . 19 {� Q . And did there come a time after that when I 20 ; you had again contact with members of the building I 21 ! department? 22 I A. Yes . We had finished renovating the lower i 23 ; structure , were in the process of moving to the upper I 24 ; structure, and in the process of exposing the walls we i 25 ; found more deterioration , no fire breaks in the walls , I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 30 i i 2 Ispacing of the studding was grossly outdated , in some I 3 cases five feet apart . We felt that -- I felt at this 4 ; time I should go to the building department and explain 5 imy dilemma to Mr . Lessard . i 6 I Q . And did you? 7 1 A. Yes , I did . I 8 Q . Did you have a conversation with Mr . i 9 ; Lessard about this particular problem? 10 A . Yes . I 11 I 0 . What ' s the content -- 12 ; A. I came to the building department , sat I 13 ! down with Mr . Lessard and discussed my dilemma with him 14 ! with regards to the inadequate structure , balance of 1 15 ; the structure. He went over to the file cabinet and 16 pulled my file , opened it up, we had a discussion. His 1 I i 17 ; one comment of his to me was , "You realize if you 18 ; remove this upper structure , you ' re going to have to 19 ; bring it into line with code , which would mean you 20 Iwould have to put in two by sixes . " I said "Victor , i 21 ; the job -- I wish to have the job done right . It ' s i 22 ; only money. I want the job right and to code . " 23 After some brief words back and forth , 24 Victor took the file , folded it up -- are the lights I 25 going out? I i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 31 2 I Q . Not yet . Keep talking . 9 3 A. Folded the file up, stuffed it in a file 14 Icabinet , and his words to me was , "Do what you have to 5 ! do . " 6 I MR. GOEHRINGER: Is he referring to the 7 second story of the structure? 8 THE WITNESS : Yes , that ' s all that was in 9 discussion here , the dilemma with the second 10 structure. I told him I had to disassemble the 11 j entire upper structure in order to facilitate 12 replacement of windows and to bring it up to 13 code . Energy code , as well . 14 Q. And did you proceed to do that? 15 A. I went back to the job site and removed 16 began to remove the upper structure . Completed it . 17 ! There was a time span between the completion of the 18 ( removing the structure and my going back to start 19 rebuilding the upper structure . 20 Q . And what happened when you commenced 21 ' building upstairs or you tried to? 22 A. I ' d like to back up a minute with regard 23 : to the conversation I had in Mr . Lessard ' s office . 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Approximately what date 25 was that; do you remember? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516). 727-3168 i I i 1 j 32 2 I THE WITNESS : I 'm not as good as Eric in - i 3 ! remembering numbers . 4 MR. GOEHRINGER: If you can supply us with i 5 that later , I ' d appreciate it . I 6 I MR. BRESSLER: Fine . I 7 A. After the conversation with Mr . Lessard I � 8 ! back in the office with regards to his making the i 9 ! statement "Do what you have to do , " I said to him, due i 10 Ito the fact that Mr . Horton was not available or i 11 ! present at the time , I said "Please inform Mr . Horton 12 i, as to what conversation took place here ,' so as he does 13 Inot come down and harass me on the job any longer . " He 14 ' says , "Don ' t worry about it , I will . " 15 j Now we ' re back to -- i i 16 Q. Then you went back and at a point you 17 ; started work on it . j I I 18 I Did something happen then with the 19 ( building department? 20 A. I commenced work with rebuilding the upper 21 ! structure as per Mr . Lessard ' s conversation and myself . I 22 { MR. GOEHRINGER: Wait a minute, the entire i 23 upper structure was now removed , it was i 24 severed -- i 25 THE WITNESS : Yes . f RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 33 2 ! MR. GOEHRINGER: It was never attached 3 from the lower structure? It was suspended? i 4 I THE WITNESS: No , it wasn 't suspended . 5 I MR. GOEHRINGER: Now it was set on the top 6 of the first structure , which was reconstructed? 7 THE WITNESS: Yes . i 8 MR. GOEHRINGER: -Go ahead . 9 I Q . That brings you , does it not , to September i 10 : 21st , or September 22nd? 11 i MR. GOEHRINGER: Of 1987? 12 MR. BRESSLER: Is it 187 . 13 A. It would be the date prior to, so 14 iSeptember 21st . We commenced work . At this time Mr . 15 Horton appears back on the job . He climbs the ladder , 16 ; says to me , "Charlie , have you submitted your fresh i 17 ! plans?" At this point I was perplexed , did not know i I 18 : what he was talking about , and asked him "What do you I 19 ; mean by fresh plans?" He said "Well , you know, you � I 20 ; took the top off , you got to submit fresh plans . " I 1 21 ; said "Well , if I give you fresh plans , you ' re gonna get 22 : the same plans you have in your office with Victor ' s I i 23 signature and stamp on it , because I do not intend to i 24 change or deviate from the plans that I issued the 25 department . " RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 ............ 34 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: Except for two by six 3 inch structure? 4 THE WITNESS: which would be in line with 5 I code . 6 MR. BRESSLER: Which had been approved by 7 Mr . Lessard . 8 MR. GOEHRINGER: That ' s the only 9 deviation? 10 MR. BRESSLER: Walls in the same place , 11 windows in the same place , everything was the 12 same . 13 j A. Okay, at this point Mr . Horton leaves and 14 ; again comes back with a stop order . 15 j I ' d like to back up with regards to the -LV Istatement when Mr . Horton climbed the ladder . 1 1 17 j After my explaining to him I was not going 18 ito deviate from the plans , I also said to him "Did 19 lVictor not tell you what transpired in his office with 20 ( regards to our conversation on the second structure?" 21 ' He says "Well , he ' s telling you one thing and he ' s 22 ; telling me another . " 23 By this time I was a little upset , to say 24 ; the least , and I proceeded to tell him that this was 2-5 : typical . Then he left and came back with the stop RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I j 1 35 2 ! order , affixed it to the building . I was a little bit 3 more upset at this point and I came down to the 4 ! building department to see if I couldn ' t rectify this i 5 ! situation with Mr . Lessard . , I 6 I At this point I sat down and said to Mr : i 7 ! Lessard , I said "What is going on here? I told you to 8 ! tell Horton our conversation as to what I 'm doing ." I 9 ; said "You told me" -- " I explained to you I had to _0 10 ! remove the structure. You told me do what you have to I ! 11 , do , bring it in line with code , use two by six i I 12 ' construction, and now he ' s issuing me a stop order . 13 ! What ' s taking place here? " Victor ' s response back to ! 14me was , "Yes , I told you do what you have to do , but I 15 ididn ' t tell you to remove the structure . " He says "You I � 16 1could have raised the roof . " 17 I I ' d like to say with regard to that , the 18 ! plans show a completely new roof , I believe . i 19 MR. BRESSLER: If the board would note on 20 j their plans , they do indicate a new roof , so i 21 that what Mr . Zahra is stating is that the 1 22 suggestion that was made to him is completely 23 nonsensical and wouldn ' t have served any purpose 24 at all . Raising the roof -- the roof was going 25 to be removed anyway, so what we ' re talking j i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 36 I i 2 about here is the replacement of rotted and 3 deteriorated members as indicated by Mr . 4 ; Lessard, which he was proceeding to do when he i 5 was stopped . 6 i Q . After the issuance of the -- let me back 7 up. 8 1 At that point did Mr . Lessard tell you 9 what you could do with respect to the plans to get back 10 pinto compliance? 11 A . No , he did not . 12 Q . At any time thereafter did he tell you 13 1what you could do to get back into compliance? I i 14 A. No , he did not . 15 ; Q . Upon informing Mr . Horton that the plans ' I 16 would be identical , did Mr . Horton indicate in any way I 17 ! that that ' s what you should do or that ' s all he wanted I 18 for what you had to do in any way to get back in , 19 icompliance? 20 A. No , he did not . i 21 i Q . To this time has anybody told you what you i I 22 have to do with respect to the alleged plans in order ` 23 to get back into compliance? 24 A. No , no one has . i 25 MR. GOEHRINGER: Can I ask a question? i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I I 1 37 I j 2 Was there or did there ever come a time when the I 3 I discussion basically lent itself to a I i 4 one-story structure as opposed to , quote , 1 5 unquote, what you had had in your plans? I i 6 j THE WITNESS : No . I 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay . Thank you . 1 i 8 Q. Upon the issuance of the stop work order , 9 : did you perform any work on the building thereafter? i I 10 A. No , I did not . 11 Q . Did you proceed thereafter to collect your I 12 ! tools and collect the building materials? 13 A. I attempted to. I 1 j 14 ; Q . What happened? I I 15 A. I was issued an appearance ticket , failure 16 ito obey stop order . i 17 ! MR. GOEHRINGER: How much later was that 1 18 after receiving the stop work order? 19 ! THE WITNESS: I ' d have to refer you back i 20 to the record . 21 Q . Was it very long? 22 A . No , it was not . I 23 MR. GOEHRINGER: It was the same day, 24 then, approximately? !I I 25 THE WITNESS : Yes . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I 1 38 i i 2 Q. Now, at this particular time are your 3 plans with respect to the building, if this relief is 4 granted, to proceed in accordance with the plans and 5 ( specifications as submitted to the building department? 6 A. Yes , those intentions stay. 7 Q . And did the plans and specifications as 8 submitted to the building department provide for the 9 replacement of rotted and deteriorated members as they 10 appearedwhen hen revealed? 11 A. Yes . 12 MR. BRESSLER: I ' d direct the board ' s 13 j attention respectfully to that portion of the 14 notes on the plans where there is a notation 15 made by Mr . Tsontakis that items which are 16 ( discovered during construction are to be 17 replaced as necessary. 18 I 'm looking at the second page , note 19 number 5, " existing structural members and 20 required bracing to be evaluated when exposed . " 21 I would submit to the board that what has 22 happened in this particular case is exactly 23 j that , a problem arose with respect to the first i 24 I story on -- the structural members were exposed , 25 they were evaluated and the necessary work was i i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 39 2 done . 3 When the structural members were exposed 4 and evaluated on the second story, again it was 5 taken up with the building department , advice 6 was given and Mr . Zahra acted on it . 7 The work , as we will hear from Mr .' 8 Tsontakis to date has been in accordance with 9 those plans and those notes . He ' s done an 10 inspection and he will so testify with respect 11 to bringing the construction up to code , that ' s 12 definitely so, and I don ' t think the board would 13 expect any less . If you were to replace 14 structural members you would certainly want them 15 replaced to code . i 16 i In that regard I would note for the board 17 i that the advice which was given to Mr . Zahra by 18 j the building department is entirely consistent 11 19 with its previous posture on these matters , and 20 I would direct the board ' s attention to a letter 21 dated April 14th, 1986 on the stationery of the f 22 j office of the building inspector to a Peter P . 23 Brophy from an Edward Hinderman , then 24 building inspector . And I have copies for the i 25 members of the board (handing) . RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 1 I 40 1 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: This is not particularly 3 germane in this case . I mean it ' s germane in i 4 reference to a standard , but it ' s not in i 5 . . reference -- 6 MR. BRESSLER: I would suggest that it is i 7 ! germane to the case in the following respect; 8 the proposition has been put forth tonight that 9 when Mr . Zahra brought to the attention of the 10 building department the inadequacies in the I ! 11 construction, that he was advised by building 12 department personnel that he was to take certain f 13 9 g steps . What I 'm introducing toni ht .in this I P 14 letter, and the highlighting was added by us , 15 I what I am introducing in this letter tonight is 16 evidence of a continuing practice by the 17 I building department to take this position , and I I 18 ! think it is probative of the fact that the 19 conversation that Mr . Zahra has testified to did f�f I 20 take place and that this was said to him, and I 21 I would state for the record that the letter 22 I reflects the fact that where a building is being 23 altered , any substandard construction that is 24 found in opening up of walls or exposing 25 I foundations shall be brought up to code RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 41 2 standards . This at times will necessitate the 3 removal of old structure; that is walls , ceiling 4 joyce , rafters , floor joyce , foundation and 5 replacing with an improved assembly to carry any 6 live or dead load . 7 The scope of this improvement is covered 8 under this permit , and when you turn to the 9 building permit it says "alteration and addition 10 to existing dwelling , " the same language that 11 was issued to Mr . Zahra, and I submit to you 12 that what he did was entirely in accordance with 13 the plans and the longstanding directive of the 14 building department , and that what he ' s 15 testified to happened , just as he said it , just 16 as it happened with Mr . Hinderman and Mr . 17 Brophy. 18 I would also suggest to the board that 19 there is precedent with respect to alterations 20 of existing structures to comply with safety and 21 other standards , and I 'm referring the board to 22 a letter from Tsontakis Associates to Victor 23 Lessard dated November 5th, 1984 relating to 24 i the Helenic Snack Bar . The board may recall in 25 this particular case there was a proposal to I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 F- 1 42 2 make alterations and an addition to an existing 3 restaurant . 4 What actually happened was , as set forth 5 in the second and third paragraphs and I quote , 6 "To attempt to alter the existing structure and 7 disturb its structural stability would be risky 8 and would result in a structure of questionable 9 integrity, " so in the interest of public safety 10 and at great expense for my client the decision 11 was made to demolish the building and rebuild at 12 the same location. " 13 This type of procedure , although I dare 14 say this was more substantial than ours , has 15 been sanctioned by the building department and 16 it has been recognized by Mr . Hinderman and 17 later by Mr . Lessard that these steps are 18 i legitimate and can be performed pursuant to a 19 I building permit to make alterations and i 9 20 I additions . 21 At this time I ' d like Mr . Steve 22 Tsontakis -- 23 MR. GOEHRINGER: Could I ask you a couple 24 of questions in reference to background? Not 25 specifically on the two things -- not on the two i i 1 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 43 , 2 things that you just presented to us , but just 3 to history of the building . The building 4 operated as the Coffee Pot till approximately f 5 I what date? Do you have any idea? i I 6 ( When it was -- the last operational date 7 of the Coffee Pot? i f 8 THE WITNESS : I don ' t have that at this 9 time . 10 MR. BRESSLER: We can supply you that , and 11 we are aware of the interest of the board in the 12 timing and we have been sensitive to the timing 13 of. the issue with respect to this item. 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Can you tell me when 15 North Fork Bank took title to the property? i 16 MR. BRESSLER: No , I can 't , but we can 17 I supply it . I 18 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay . 19 THE WITNESS : I ' d like to relate back to 20 the record with regards to the direction you ' re 21 I driving in; this is one of the contingencies I 22 I requested with regards to obtaining the Coffee 23 Pot . I required that the use be proven and in 2 24 I effect to be used as a Coffee Pot or restaurant i 25 and/or apartment upstairs . i i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 1 44 2 MR. BRESSLER: So that we wouldn ' t lose 3 the use . 4 MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. So then I might 5 I as well ask you the question while you ' re up 6 ( here. 7 At any time did you attempt or did you 8 think that you were altering this and thereby 9 extinguishing this use in some way through this 10 alteration? 11 THE WITNESS: No . 12 MR. GOEHRINGER: I apologize for the 13 wording . 14 Through the alteration process , did you 15 feel that you were altering , changing or i 16 aborting this particular use? 17 THE WITNESS: No , I did not . 18 MR. BRESSLER: In fact , quite the 19 opposite; that ' s why the contingency for the 20 building permit was renovate. Had we not gone 21 that route , he , Mr . Zahra, would have been faced 22 with two choices , either not to take the 23 building , or to take the building and keep it in i 24 its current state and keep the use going . I 25 However , the building permit was issued and we i I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 45 2 would have been done by now and we would have 3 been back in there operating as we always had 4 been within the time constraints of the 5 ordinance . 6 THE WITNESS: I ' d like to respond to that 7 statement . 8 I would not have elected to purchase the 9 building as a single occupancy from an 10 investment standpoint . It was not worth it to 11 me . 12 MR. BRESSLER: You mean without the 13 apartment? 14 I THE WITNESS: Without the apartment . 15 ; (A short recess was taken . ) 16 MR. GOEHRINGER: I make a motion to 17 i reconvene . I 18 MR. GRIGONIS : Second . 19 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor -- 2 0 THE BOARD : Aye . I 21 MR. GOEHRINGER: Are you ready for Mr . i 22 Tsontakis? 23 MR. BRESSLER: I am. 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Mr . Tsontakis , would you 25 raise your right hand? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I j 1 46 I i y 2 Do you swear that the information that 3 you ' re about to give before us is the truth to 4 the best of your knowledge? j I ,! 5 I MR. TSONTAKIS : I do . i 6 i MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you , sir . i 7 C EXAMINATION BY 8 MR. BRESSLER: 9 Q . Mr . Tsontakis , would you state your name �fI 10 Iand address for the board , please? i 11 A. My name is Steve G. Tsontakis . I 'm a I 12 Ilicensed professional engineer practicing in the State 13 Iof New York with offices at 632 Roanoke Avenue , I 14 Riverhead . i 15 Q . How long have you been in the business , I 16 IMr . Tsontakis , if you can remember? I 1 ! 17 ! A. Well , about twenty-five years ago , I I � 18 kguess . 19 Q . Did you cause to be prepared the set of � I I I 20 Iplans , "Renovations C. Zahra for the location at Pike 21 IStreet known as the Coffee Pot" ? 22 I A. I did . i 23 Q . Now, did you have occasion at my request 24 to go out and examine these premises while under I 25 ; construction? � I i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 47 2 A. Yes . I was asked by Mr . Zahra to inspect 3 the construction site with respect to compliance of the 4 drawings . On September loth I made that inspection and 5 found that the construction was in accordance with the 6 drawings , except that there was a two-foot concrete 7 block firewall installed , which was not indicated on 8 the drawing . I found that several of the structural 9 members had been replaced , and when I questioned Mr . 10 Zahra about it , he indicated that , as was stated in the 11 drawing , should any damaged members be found , they 12 should be evaluated and either replaced or assisted as 13 required , and he told me that he had approached these 14 problems with the building inspector , who had given him 15 ( permission to go ahead and replace all rotted and 16 structurally unsound members . I said that if 17 ! necessary, upon the building inspector ' s request , we 18 ! would add any changes to the drawings requested by the 19 '} building inspector to accurately reflect all those 20 changes that were made to make the building 21 Istructurally safe and sound . 22 MR. BRESSLER: That ' s the only question I i 23 ! have of Mr . Tsontakis . If the board has i 24 anything . I 25 i MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes . If you don ' t mind i J RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 48 2 standing there , I 'm going to put my personal 3 knowledge into the record and then I 'm going to 4 ask you a question . 5 I had frequented the Coffee Pot for 6 approximately ten-plus years every morning 7 before I went to work , and that was during my 8 teaching career , during my career in the county. 9 And probably up to the last day that it closed , 10 or the day before the last day that it closed . 11 There came a time in 1983 Supervisor Pell 12 approached me , at the time I worked for the 13 Suffolk County Sheriff' s office and I was an aid 14 to the sheriff , and he said we ' re going to give 15 you another task , we ' re going to let you hear , 3 16 cases before the New York State Construction 17 Code . i 18 I informed him that I had been a fireman i 19 in the Town of Mattituck since 1969 and I had 20 j told him that I didn 't think that I was really I 21 qualified to do that , and I didn 't feel my board i 22 was qualified to do that , and I wasn 't speaking t 23 for them. , i 24 There came a time after that when we made 25 an appointment with the town board , and I can i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 III j I 1 49 2 remember the zoning board sitting right where 3 Ruth Oliva is right now, I ' m sorry the town ` I 4 j board sitting where Ruth Oliva is now, and I � I 5 i basically told him I was not going to hear cases 6 I before the New York State Construction Code and I 7 that I had no idea what the grounds were for i 8 insubordination of an appointed official . I 9 Sometime thereafter a ruling came down 10 from Albany, the zoning board could not hear 11 questions before the New York State construction I 12 Code . The reason for appointing this board was 13 i that there was a case in the hamlet of 14 �i Mattituck , a bar and restaurant run by Mr . 15 Eugene Giannoni . This gentleman had wanted to i 16 ( place a bar/cocktail lounge on the second floor I I 17 of his building . It was a wood frame building . 4 18 ; It was mentioned to me at that particular time 19 that we would have to hear this case in the 20 sequence of events that I was mentioning , and 21 ( that that was his only way that he could I 22 1 possibly get a permit to do so . i 23 We then began to delve into the code and i 24 f we realized that sometime prior to that the New 25 York State Construction Code indicated that any i i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 50 2 activity on the second floor of a building , a 3 wood frame building , would necessitate , unless 4 it was preexisting , complete cement 5 construction, either by poured cement , walls or 6 cement block walls . 7 The question I ' m basically going to ask 8 you , Mr . Tsontakis , is , was there a time in the 9 construction of this particular building that , 10 to your knowledge , that this building should 11 have been brought up to those standards of full 12 cement block walls? 13 THE WITNESS : Well , the application was 14 made based on the renovation clause of the code 15 ! which requires that -- which says in essence , 16 and I don ' t know the exact wording right now, 17 but in essence it says if you make alterations 18 or changes to a building which amount to greater 19 I than 50 percent of the value of the building , i 20 then the entire building must be brought up to i . i 21 i code . In other words , it must comply with part i 22 B of the unified fire protection and building I 23 code of the State of New York . 24 MR. GOEHRINGER: Do you feel as -- and 25 I this is just an opinion, I mean I realize you ' re RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 51 2 a qualified engineer -- do you feel at any time 3 during the demolition of this building that the 4 I building probably should have been brought up to 5 I these standards, either cement block or poured 6 cement? 7 THE WITNESS: Well, if you -- that ' s hard 8 for me to say. I think that ' s a legal question , 9 because it depends on how you evaluate the 10 renovation and the zoning laws in place at the 11 time and the preexisting condition C of 0, and I 12 don 't think I 'm in a position to really render 13 an opinion on that . 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: I 'm sorry if I 've put you 15 I on -- in what we would refer to as a Catch-22 16 I situation . 17 THE WITNESS: I 'm here as an expert in 18 construction as an engineer and I think that 19 I this question falls a little bit out of my ' realm 20 i of expertise . I 21 j MR. GOEHRINGER: Let me ask you this 22 question -- 23 THE WITNESS: I can contribute to this , i 24 but I can ' t give you a complete answer . 1 � 25 i MR. GOEHRINGER: If the building was I i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 I 52 I I 2 completely demolished and it necessitated 3 ; construction of the second story of this I 4 I building -- I 'm sorry, if a building permit was 5 so granted so as to utilize the second story of j 6 ( this building for whatever reason , other than 7 j storage , would it be required that the building 8 be of cement block construction? 9 f THE WITNESS: Most probably would have to 10 be a type four building . 11 MR. GOEHRINGER: Is that cement block 12 construction? 13 THE WITNESS: That ' s block walls with wood 14 floors and roofs . 15 i MR. GOEHRINGER: So the outside periphery 16 i walls are basically cement block? I 17 I THE WITNESS: Yes . I 18 i MR. GOEHRINGER: I thank you , and again , 19 if I put you in a situation which -- i 20 THE WITNESS: No problem. We ' re here to 21 try and solve a problem, so anything I can tell 22 I you to help -- 23 I MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much . I i 24 That ' s very nice of you . i 25 MR. BRESSLER: Let me just say in response I i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 I 53 i 2 I to that question , Mr . Chairman , that I think you 14 3 have put your finger on one of the elements of 1 4 the problem and Mr . Tsontakis amplified it , that 5 i is the time of this project . 6 The way you phrased the question certainly 7 begged the answer , and that is if the whole 8 thing had been torn down at once , would he have i 9 had to take certain steps . I think A, that 10 wasn ' t the case here , and B, possibly the answer 11 i to that question is yes , but that didn 't happen 12 here . 13 It happened step by step, and at each step 14 of the proceeding what Mr . Zahra did was check 15 with the building department and it did happen 16 in stages , and I think under the circumstances 17 he followed the advice of the building 18 department . 19 I think when the building department gave 20 him his direction they were acting in good faith 21 and they did indicate that he should do certain 22 J things and he did at each stage of the pleading , 23 and had the issue been put to him at the outset , I 24 I you have to do this or you have to do that , that 25 i could have been presented to him before he got i i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 54 2 three quarters of the way down the road , and Mr . 3 Zahra has indicated to me just that fact , that 4 had it been put to him at the outset , that if 5 you want to do this and if you want to do that , 6 you may have to do X, Y and Z , his response very 7 possibly might have been yes , I ' d be willing to 8 do that , knowing that with his eyes open going 9 into the project that he had to do for instance 10 block , but we ' re not there because of the way 11 the events transpired . 12 MR. GOEHRINGER: I understand that . 13 MR. BRESSLER: I think Mr . Zahra would 14 like to address that issue as well . 15 MR. ZAHRA: I would like to mention in the 16 fact in your possession you have step by step 17 pictures proving the fact that I tried in vein 18 to save this particular structure; okay? 19 MR. GOEHRINGER: That ' s fine. 20 MR. BRESSLER: The board has a copy, I 21 j believe , of those photographs . 22 MR. GOEHRINGER: That ' s correct . I 23 MR. BRESSLER: If you have any questions 24 j about any of them at any stage of the 25 proceeding , I think -- i RAM COURT REPORTING. SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I 1 55 I 2 ! MR. GOEHRINGER: If you could give us -- T i 3 MR. ZAHRA: We also have a video of it , I 4 if you ' d like that . J 5 MR. GOEHRINGER: If you have possibly some i i 6 guesstimate dates of when those things might -- 7 j I 'm not talking days , I 'm talking months , it 8 ; would be a little helpful to put it into the t 9 sequence . You know, there ' s nothing that has to i 10 i be done tonight . You know what I 'm saying? 11 j In the next two weeks , maybe you could sit f! 12 i down and just put some guesstimate times so that 13 when we sequentially place this all back , we can 14 ` possibly fit it all in, and that ' s basically the 15 situation. 16 , MR. ZAHRA: No problem. 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: I don 't think you 18 substantiated exactly what date you took title 19 I to this premises . 20 j MR. BRESSLER: Oh, that was in November of 21 1986 . I don 't have the exact date . I 22 I MR. ZAHRA: I ' ll look in my file and see 23 if I have anything . 24 MR. BRESSLER: It was after the issuance 25 i of the building permit , obviously, since it was f RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 56 2 contingent on that , and the building permit was 3 issued on October 27 , 1986 , I believe , so it i 4 ' would be November something or other . I can 5 give you the exact date . 6 MR. GOEHRINGER: Would you substantiate 7 the condition of the building at the time you 8 took possession? Was the building fully lighted 9 or were the windows boarded up? 10 MR. BRESSLER: Charlie? 11 MR. ZAHRA: The windows were boarded up. 12 The electricity was on . There were lights in 13 the building , plumbing, septic system. 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Everything was operating 15 or could have been operable at that particular 16 point? 17 MR. ZAHRA: Yes . i I 18 MR. BRESSLER: Without a doubt I think Mr . 19 Tsontakis could also address that, since he 20 inspected that in connection with performance of 21 I the plans . I 22 I MR. GOEHRINGER: Would you do that for us , 23 j please? 24 i MR. TSONTAKIS : Well, sometime in the i 25 summer of 186 , I guess it must have been July, I i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 57 i 2 was asked to prepare a set of drawings for the 3 alteration and renovation of this said building 4 and as -- of course as part of that the first 5 thing we had to do was go and see what we had to 6 I start with and work with and I did measure the 7 building and inspect it . Basically it was -- it 8 was unlighted, but there was service there , 9 electric service which had been shut off and gas 10 service was off . 11 MR. BRESSLER: But it was available? 12 MR. TSONTAKIS: Yeah, it was connected , 13 but shut off. 14 I couldn ' t get under the building , so I 15 j couldn ' t determine what condition the floor 5 16 Joyce were in , because there was no crawl space , 17 you just couldn ' t get under there , there was 1 18 i very little space . Of course the interior walls 19 ' were finished , so we couldn ' t very well see 20 j what the wall construction was , and so starting I 21 from that and an indication from Mr . Zahra what i 22 he wanted to finally end up with, I prepared the ' 23 drawings , which are dated -- 24 MR. BRESSLER: 8/8? 25 MR. TSONTAKIS : Yeah , 8/8/86 . But I i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i j 1 58 { 2 suppose the question is whether you could occupy 3 the building safely at the time , and I believe i 4 I you could, having power on -- I 5 MR. GOEHRINGER: Did you go up -- i 6 MR. TSONTAKIS: -- maybe it was habitable . 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: Did you enter the second 8 story of the building? 9 i MR. TSONTAKIS : Yeah, I went upstairs . I a 10 couldn 't move around much in there . It was 11 pretty dark . And again we couldn ' t -- I i 12 couldn ' t -- the cavity wall , so I couldn 't see i 13 what the primary structure looked like , so, 14 because of that construction I added that note 15 on the drawing , indicating that when the 16 interior walls were pulled off , why then the 17 structure should be evaluated as to what members 18 ! had to be replaced or assisted . 19 !� MR. GOEHRINGER: Okay. Thank you , sir . i 20 ; Will you also supply us , Mr . Bressler , I 21 ( with the approximate day or date that North Fork- 22 I Bank took title to the building? i 23 + MR. BRESSLER: Yes . I I 24 j MR. GOEHRINGER: Thank you . i 25 I Is there anything else you ' d like to say i i I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 59 2 i in toto? 3 j MR. BRESSLER: I would like to say that I 4 with respect to Mr . Tsontakis ' offer with 5 respect to making what we believe are not even 6 necessary notations on .the plan, that was 7 offered to the department and the question was 8 put if we do this and say two by six instead of 9 two by four , which is what you directed anyway, 10 but if we do that , will that be sufficient and 11 i there was no answer , and we stand ready i 12 certainly to do that . I hardly think that ' s 13 material since the walls are in the same place 14 and the building department directed that , but 15 I just to clarify that for the record , that was i 16 offered and no answer was given as to whether 17 that was satisfactory or not , so I can ' t tell 18 you whether the whole case is over the absence 19 of a two and a six and an X , but I don ' t think 20 so , but I don ' t know. 21 Now, Mr . Chairman, you indicated earlier i 22 j a certain desire on the part of the board to 1 23 ! recess this to get at the facts . I have an i 24 j application at this time and the application is 25 ; that that motion not be made by the board , and I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 60 2 the reasons are as follows; we are here tonight 3 seeking reversal of the determination for the 4 building inspector took away Mr . Zahra ' s permit . 5 Mr . Zahra has been effectively stopped 6 from working on that building since the time of i 7 the issuance of the stop work order , invalid 8 stop work order , and I think that ' s clear to 9 , everybody here tonight . 10 Nevertheless , as a result of that invalid 11 stop work order he ' s been prosecuted criminally. 12 We were not going to put ourselves in a 13 situation where we ' re going to permit that to I 14 happen again and again and again and maybe at I 15 j some point they might even issue a stop work 16 I order that might be valid , I don ' t know, and i 17 then we ' ll be back in front of you again . I ' m i 18 not going to permit that to happen . 19 ! By the same token, September, October , ' I 20 November , December , January, February, it ' s five 21 I months and if the members of the board have been I 22 by that building , you will see that the time and i 23 effort Mr . Zahra invested in that building are 24 virtually shot . j 25 Mr . Zahra asked if he could get a letter I i I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 61 i 2 i from the department allowing him to secure the 3 premises in some way, hoping to save his 4 investment , that was not forthcoming . All his j 5 time and effort in there is going for naught and 6 is rotting away. , 7 j So first I would ask that the hearing be i 8 closed on the evidence and the board render a 9 i speedy decision. Second grounds for this 10 j application is , that we ' re here tonight , as I 11 said , seeking to overturn this . We presented 12 evidence . I have spoken , Mr . Zahra put in his 13 testimony . We had an engineer here . I 'm not i 14 j aware that there ' s a building inspector or a 15 building department representative here with any L6 I 16 i knowledge of the facts . We all know that they 17 I knew about this . I received no request for I 18 I adjournment . I have no knowledge , nor in 19 response to my question to the board apparently 20 I .does the board have any knowledge as to why i 21 nobody from the building department is here . I 22 This is a very important and significant matter . 23 ; MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , I know why. 24 MR. BRESSLER: Was there a request for an 25 ; adjourment , may I ask? RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I i 1 62 2 MR. GOEHRINGER: Not to my knowledge . 3 MR. BRESSLER: If the answer is no , then I 4 put forth the proposition to the board that they I 5 have waived their rights in this matter . 6 I Although this is an administrative 7 proceeding , we are seeking relief from the 8 building department determination , and I think 9 I that it is incumbent on them to either A, be I 10 here , or B, to make some sort of application to 11 i this board, and while I understand the board ' s 12 i desire to have someone here from the building -- 13 from the building department to fully explore 14 ; this matter , I think that it is prejudicial to 15 my client , it ' s going to cost him valuable time 16 i during the wintertime with this building , we ' re 17 going to have to come back to another hearing I I 18 for no discernable reason because they didn ' t 19 I show up. 20 i Not only that , they didn ' t show up at the i 21 criminal proceeding , they didn 't show up here , 22 and I don ' t think that my client should be i 23 prejudiced by their absence , and I would i i 24 j respectfully and urgently request that this i 25 board retire , consider the evidence before it RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 63 2 i and make a determination . 3 If they didn 't think enough to come down 4 I here and contest it , and I will note for the 5 I record the last time I was before the board on 6 Mr . Gambino ' s case , the board will recall there 7 was a representative here and there was a rather 8 sharp exchange and testimony from both sides . 9 There ' s nothing here, and their history of lack 10 of response and their cavalier attitude to our 11 attempt to resolve this , I think strongly 12 million faith in favor of closing the hearing 13 and taking a decision on the evidence, 14 particularly in light of their failure to even 15 request from you any consideration, and I would 16 implore you people to close this hearing and 17 render him some sort of relief . That ' s my i 18 application . 19 MR. GOEHRINGER: We have not even gotten 20 to the public discussion of this particular 21 hearing , so we ' re not even to that particular 22 point yet; okay? 23 i The other thing I wanted to mention to j 24 you , however , is that we did send the town 25 attorney a letter today indicating -- that is RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I 1 i 64 ! I 2 the full-time town attorney and the part-time I � I 3 ; town attorney, both letters indicating to 4 them that' -- I should say the town attorney and 5 the assistant town attorney -- letters j 6 indicating that a representative of the building 7 i department has to be here and at the next 8 regularly scheduled special meeting of this 9 j particular case , and if for some reason we don ' t 10 get any response by the 29th, then we will issue 1 11 i subpoenas for those two building department 12 members to be here; okay? And the town attorney 13 was unavailable to be here tonight , so we will 14 discuss that at that particular time . But we I 15 will deal with that . , I 16 So if you want , I -- you -know, the board I I , 17 will talk about this collectively after we talk 18 to the public and see what responses they have , 19 and then we ' ll make a decision at this point , 20 ' if we want to continue it or if we will accept 21 your suggestion. i 22 I MR. BRESSLER: Yes , I understand the f 23 ; position with respect to the desire to secure 24 the testimony. I would suggest to you that it I - 25 is incumbent upon that town agency to come i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 65 i i 2 forward and it is not , and I 'm not faulting your 3 motives , which are only the best , but it is not I 4 j incumbent upon you to insist or demand or issue 5 subpoenas for someone from the town from the I 6 building department to come forward and put in 7 what may or may not be opposition evidence . I 8 don ' t feel , respectfully, despite your desire to 9 find out their side of the story, I don ' t think i 10 i that that ' s warranted on these facts , but maybe 11 we should proceed with the public portion of the 12 hearing . 13 MR. GOEHRINGER: Only to answer that 14 quickly, and we ' ll discuss the rebuttal later , 15 and that is basically that there are or there 16 appears to be , not from your point of view, but e 7 17 from the point of view of looking , and I ' ll be 18 i honest with you , I spent the better part of last 19 1 Sunday looking over all of the information that 20 we have in our file and I see that there are i 21 I things missing that I would like to discuss with 22 the building department in reference to 1 23 ! questions that I ' d like to ask them and that is 24 the reason why I would like to recess the i 25 hearing . I mean that ' s the only reason. RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 66 2 MR. BRESSLER: I can appreciate, that . 3 MR. GOEHRINGER: Now we ' ll get to the 4 point . Is there anybody else that would like 5 I to speak in favor of this application? And that 6 is anybody -- I would suggest that you speak , if 7 you have an interest in it , bearing in mind .that 8 we haven 't made a decision if we ' re closing the 9 hearing tonight , we may come back again on March 10 3rd or 4th, which is not our regularly scheduled 11 meeting. It would be a .special meeting merely 12 to close this particular case to discuss what 13 questions we have with the building department 14 I at that time , and I 'm sure that possibly counsel 15 would like to ask a couple of questions of the 16 I building department , I have no idea at this 17 ' point , and if for some reason the situation 18 doesn ' t lend itself to meet on that particular 19 time , then we will meet the following week . Our 20 next regularly scheduled meeting is March 17th, 21 and we are trying , because we have a total f 22 calendar for that date and almost a total ! j 23 ! calendar for the April date, we are trying to I 24 clear the record before that regularly scheduled r 25 meeting . I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 67 2 i Is there anybody in the audience that I 3 would like to speak on behalf of this i 4 application? 5 i MR. KARLIN: Yes , sir . 6 MR. GOEHRINGER: Yes , sir . Would you use 7 , the mike and state your name , please? i 8 MR. KARLIN: Frank Karlin, Laurel . I ' ve 9 I been on many a jury duty and listened to the 10 case , and tonight it ' s obvious by listening to 11 j all of these facts that this man deserves to I 12 have that decision reversed and give him his 13 right to continue on in the time that he lost . 14 You , ladies and gentlemen , are educated 15 people and I know you have the ability to make i 16 I this decision. I know how Southold Town 17 I operates , and I believe maybe some people know 18 i how I operate in this town, I know Ruth does . I 19 call a spade a spade , and I 'm calling pinochle 20 f when I say that . I write articles in the paper . i 21 Many of them doesn ' t get printed , but I let the 22 chips fall where they may. 23 I ' ve been through one time like this man 24 i was many years ago with the zoning board - -- I 25 don ' t want to keep people here too long tonight , i j ' J RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 f I i 1 i 68 j 2 but I had to do the same thing. I come out of 3 + the service in 1951 and -- I live in Laurel , on 4 ( the Main Road , and I opened up a little T .V. 5 I shop, you know, to make a few dollars , and i 6 myself , so I hung a little radio T.V. sign out 7 in the front, maybe a twenty-four inch by twelve 8 inch , and then the building inspector comes down 9 and said "You ' re gonna have to take that down, 10 you can 't have that out there, it ' s against the i 11 ordinance . " I says "Why? Is that doing any 12 harm? Look at the little sign , it ' s not 13 bothering anybody. " I said " I ' m not gonna take 14 it down . " So at that time I got the lawyer 15 Laffanier (phonetic) , rest his soul in peace , 16 he ' s a good lawyer , and I was here like I am, 17 like we are here tonight , and I won the case and 18 I believe they added to the zoning rules at that 19 I time . 20 This was quite -- many years ago , and they 21 added that portion to the code , so I remained 22 j for ten years and since then I ' ve been out -- 23 i I 'm retired. I 'm now employed by Grumman I '.m 24 i going to retire in another year , but I '-11 still 25 be making the board meetings . 3 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 69 2 This is a little bit strange to me , I 3 don ' t make these meetings , but I ' ve been 4 i following this gentleman ' s case . I wanted to be 5 here to really listen to it and see what it 6 really was , and it ' s amazing how they gave this 7 man the runaround . 8 I 'm also going to recommend the next board 9 meeting on the 23rd -- I usually make them all , 10 I 'm pushing very strongly in this town for a 11 board of ethics; get a board , good board of 12 ethics is what I think we need in this town , but 13 I don ' t want to get off the subject . 1� 14 I think this attorney gentleman has done 15 j a wonderful job presenting the case and the 16 facts . I think the facts are here tonight to 17 make a decision. Not wait . They should have 18 been here. If they ' re not here -- I had .a 19 I lawsuit once , too , and I went to court against a 20 company. The people didn ' t show up, I lost time 21 ; from work . The lawyer -- the judge says let me 22 i hear your case anyway. He heard my case . I won 23 the case . Even if they wasn ' t there , I won the I 24 case. I feel this man should win his case 25 tonight , and I think you people have the ability RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i I I I 1 70 2 i and knowledge and in what you heard tonight to I 3 j make that decision tonight . Thank you very I 4 much. i l � 5 i MR. GOEHRINGER: Anybody else that would I I 6 like to speak either in favor or against this I 7 particular application? I I 8 VOICE : We ' re for . We 're for . j I 9 MR. GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further i 10 ! comment -- I 11 MR. BRESSLER: Well , Jerry, before you go 12 further , you mentioned that you needed some 13 information, from the building department . 14 j MR. GOEHRINGER: Right . 15 MR. BRESSLER: Is there anything that we i 16 have or may have in our file as a result either 17 i of this file or our other examinations that I 18 might -- 19 i MR. GOEHRINGER: Anything that you could 20 supplement the file that would help us in 21 i understanding some of the verbal -- some of the 22 verbal things that went on between the building 23 I inspector and Mr . Zahra, and we ' re not 24 I questioning either your integrity, Mr . Zahra ' s i 25 j integrity, Mr . Tsontakis ' integrity, I 'm not I I I j RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 I 71 2 questioning anybody. I am just wondering if you 3 might have jotted something down that you could 4 supply us . 5 i You know what it is , in reading the 6 , testimony, as you read it , it comes out just the 7 way we say it . It does not have the 8 transitional phrases that we can place back in 9 r it and it ' s much easier to understand it in that 10 I vein . But in other words , Charlie , after each 11 + meeting that you had , if you jotted it down on a I 12 note pad, that would be very helpful . 13 MR. ZAHRA: Your statement before , if I 14 i can recall the record , was he mentioned that 15 I there were items missing . Are these specific 16 items or are you generalizing? 17 MR. GOEHRINGER: I 'm generalizing . 18 MR. BRESSLER: If there ' s a specific 19 writing -- 20 MR. ZAHRA: We ' re looking for something 21 that might not be there , though . { 22 MR. GOEHRINGER: That ' s correct , and the i 23 only way we can reduce it is by having the I 24 people -- I ' m sorry, to elicit it , is to have 25 the people here to tell it . i i RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 72 2 i MR. BRESSLER: And that ' s the other side 3 that ' s missing . 4 MR. GOEHRINGER: Right . 5 MR. BRESSLER: That ' s my point . 6 I have only one other request in addition , 7 of course, to the fact that I join in this man ' s 8 statement that it be closed , and that is if the 9 board does decide to set a short recess date , I 10 think you indicated that I may have a few 11 I questions for any representative that shows up. 12 I take it you are talking about a right of 13 cross-examination? 14 MR. GOEHRINGER: Well , I cannot okay, in 15 any way, manner or form, ask somebody to answer i 16 j a question. If they don 't want to answer a 17 question, then they really don ' t have to answer 18 1i a question; okay? And I said this before , 19 i referring to building inspectors or any other I 20 members of this town , and I 'm not going to sit 21 here and ask or demand or whatever , but I have 3 22 certain questions that I ' d like to ask the i 23 building inspector and they are general 24 questions which I feel fit into this particular i 25 case, and if you feel that you want to ask some RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 i 1 j 73 2 questions and that they want to answer them, i 3 i that ' s fine with me . 4 MR. BRESSLER: And if they don 't , then 5 that will be that? 6 MR. GOEHRINGER: That will be that , we ' ll I � 7 i close the hearing and that ' s it . i 8 MR. BRESSLER: Okay. In that case , I I 9 ! would ask that you close the hearing . I 10 MR. GOEHRINGER: You mean tonight? - 11 i MR. BRESSLER: Absolutely. Right now . 12 (A short recess was taken . ) i 13 MR. GOEHRINGER: I guess we ' re ready -- we i 14 I really never -- didn ' t really convene , we just i I 15 have had a discussion about what to do , and the 16 ! board does feel that we would like to give the I 17 building inspectors a chance to discuss just a 18 couple issues with us . It ' s not going to be a 19 lengthy thing , so we would like to reconvene at 20 7 : 30 on March 3rd , which is two weeks from 21 i tonight , and invite everybody back and hopefully 22 i we can wrap it up in a half hour and we 'll -- 19 23 did I say something funny? And we thank 24 j everybody for their courtesy and , including the i 25 two main people that spoke and their frankness i I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 1 74 2 and their opinions and everything that ' s really 3 very helpful for us and thank the public also , 4 and we hope everybody has a safe trip home and 5 thank you again and I ' ll make that motion. 6 MR. GRIGONIS : Second . 7 MR. GOEHRINGER: All in favor -- 8 THE BOARD: Aye . 9 (TIME NOTED : 10: 30 P .M. ) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 I I 17 I 18 19 20 i 21 i 22 i 23 24 ' 25 I RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 I 1 75 2 I CERTIFICATION 3 4 5 I I , DONNA SADLER BREITENBACH , a Notary 6 Public 7 in and for the State of New York , do hereby 8 certify: 9 10 I THAT the foregoing is a true and accurate 11 transcript of my stenographic notes . 12 13 + IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my 14 hand this +l day of _ ` , 1988 . I 15 i 1 16 i i 17 18 i 1 19 I 21 DONNA SADLER BREITENBACH 22 23 1 i 24 i 25 RAM COURT REPORTING SERVICE (516) 727-3168 Vr1L.ERIE SCOPAZ -4 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN PI�VNER P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 J V Telephone (516) 765-1938 OFFICE OF THE TOWN PLANTER TOWN OF.SOtiTHOLD LC� C0Wfps JUN 1 419�0 June 14, 1996 Robert H. Whelan, P.E. P.O. Box 590 160 Bungalow Lane Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Request for site Plan waiver Mr. Charles Zahra 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 Dear Mr. Whelan, The Planning Board has received your letter of May 30, 1996, requesting a site plan waiver for the above referenced property. The Planning Board cannot respond to your request because of insufficient inf ormation. In the Board's resolution of October 6, 1986, the Board indicated that if any changes are made to the site after the date of this resolution the Board would have to reconsider the waiver. Accordingly, the Board requests a current survey showing all uses and parking requirements. In addition, floor plans and any changes made to the building after October 6, 1986 are requested. s i ! - I If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. inter y, 00bert✓ G/, Kassner Site Plan Reviewer I - cc: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Board of Appeals Laury Dowd, Town Attorney Thomas Fisher, Senior Building Inspector ! I I i I I I i i I I I .. j I i I I I i aV �oSOFFo�,�oo OHO Gyc ti Z Town Hall, 53095 Main Road p • Fax (516)765-1823 P. 0. Box 1179 �� Q� Telephone(516)765-1802 Southold, New York 11971 OFFICE OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD , CVA -pq TO: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. , Chairman FROM: Gary J. Fish, Building Inspector RE: Charles Zahra Property @1830 Pike St. , Mattituck,NY Suff. Co. Tax Map #1000-141-4-5 DATE: April 22, 1997 Due to recent inquiry by your board, and considering the past history of this project, I believe it would be most beneficial to have a conference with at least a representative from the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals, the Town Attorney, Frank Yakaboski, Legal Counsel, and a Building Inspector. Please respond as soon as possible so a meeting can be scheduled in the near future. cc to: Laury Dowd, Town Attorney Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, ZBA Frank Yakaboski, Atty i'7 1990 approval granted by ZBA with conditions regarding second use at premises for apartment. 10/6/86 Waiver granted by PB. 6/4/96 - Memo from PB as to status 6/5/96 - Reply to PB Memo 9/17/96 - PB sent letter to applicant for ? (await copy from Bob when he returns on 4/24/97) 4/18/97 - Memo from PB as to inquiry re: compliance. 4/18/97 - Advised Bob Kassner (in person) that Chairman's instructions are that PB inquire as to compliance with Building Department. ZBA does not have authority for enforcement of compliance issues, however, ZBA will send memo attaching variance for apartment which is still in effect from 1990. Bob Kassner took back PB memo with list of items of concern, and tore up memo. Also asked Bob Kassner for copies of info from PB file whenever correspondence is sent'since we do not have a pending application or jurisdiction at this time. 4/21/97 - Gary Fish indicated he would like to meet with PB and Attorneys involved in former litigation to understand where the Town is. I agreed that their Dept. should know updated status so they can consider a building permit or CO application. 4/23/97 - Await copies referred to in recent waiver request (from PB file: letters- dated 9/17/96 and other info (if any in this new status request) . 4/24/97 - Anticipated delivery of ZBA Reply to PB Re: PB Memo Also, technical questions about enforcement-compliance is not within jurisdiction of ZBA. Variance is still valid which allowed a second use on the second floor limited to 825 sq. ft. of living area. HB Zone allows arts & crafts use is a permitted use and would replace the former coffee pot use. ----------------- Parcels.zb/141-4-5 COPY TO: Jerry Goehringer, ZBA Chairman FROM: ZBA Staff/lk DATE: April 23, 1997 Southold Town Planning Board 13 June 9, 1997 Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr, Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. *************** Set Hearing: Mr. Orlowski: Broadwaters Cove - This site plan is for the expansion of a concrete block tool shed at an existing marina located on Bay Ave. in Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-104-8-2.5, Mr, Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I move that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, July 14, 1997, at 4:35 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated September 5, 1997. Mr. Cremers: Motion seconded. Mr, Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Waivers: Mr, Orlowski: Charles Zahra - This site plan waiver is for the conversion and renovation of a commercial building on Pike St. in Mattituck. SCTM# 1000- / 141-4-5. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution. WHEREAS, Charles Zahra is the owner of the property known and designated as SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 located at 140 Pike St. in Mattituck; and WHEREAS, a retail store is a permitted use in this Hamlet Business (HB) zone; and WHEREAS, apartments may be permitted over retail stores by Special Exception of the Board of Appeals; and Southold Town Planning Board 14 June 9, 1997 WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals reinstated the Special Exception for the apartment on the second floor for single family occupancy on September 6, 1990, Application No. 3701, subject to the following conditions: 1 . That the apartment not exceed 825 square feet in total floor area. 2. That the apartment comply with all other codes, rules and regulations applicable thereto, including local and state fire construction codes; and WHEREAS, Town Code Article XIX, Section 100-191, off street parking areas, gives the Planning Board authority to waive on site parking in the Hamlet Business District where it shall find that municipal parking facilities are located within three hundred (300) feet of the proposed use will adequately serve the proposed use, and WHEREAS_municipal parking is located within three hundred (300) feet of the subject parcel; and WHEREAS, the proposed change in uses from a restaurant and apartment to a retail store and apartment will not be a more intensive use of this property; and WHEREAS, this waiver is subject to review by the Building Department which has jurisdiction to deal with building codes, and to review by the Board of Appeals which has jurisdiction to deal with zoning regulations, and WHEREAS, any violation of the conditions of this resolution may be grounds for rescinding this waiver; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a waiver of site plan requirements. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr, Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. MATTITUCK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE P.O. BOX 1056 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND, N.Y. 11952 2e R- �rM�' t June 25 , 1990 Southold Town Board Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Gentlemen: It has come to our attention that the Building Department issued a stopwork order to Charlie Zahra with regard to "The Coffee Pot" restaurant he has been trying to complete renovations on so the establishment could be opened for business . It would appear to us that as long as Mr. Zahra did receive the necessary approvals from the town that he should be allowed to bring construction to a close and offer our town the benefit of an additional restaurant . Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, Mattituck Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors Robert Koch, President RSK/sk )Cried FORM NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERAAIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEEN ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) N° 15428 z Date ...!.... ............................................. 19....... Permission is hereby granted to: n X. / 3 :ca n ' , .....................................................I.................I............................................ ............r.�'�l�.. ............. .�..�........ .. ....... .............. '...................... of premises located at ................................................................... . u.......!J`:. .....°"`^: :: ....... :...!�1 ..�:�L................... .. ..�. .P' ........ ................. ................................................................................ ................ �h. .......L.n.�.. a..... ............................................. '............................. . . County Tax Map No. 1000 Section �. �......,;. Block ......0. ....... Lot No. ...0..-1.1:/........... . pursuant to application dated ....1. .....`:~`... .....�...................... 19.�.:'., and approved by the Building Inspector. nq Fees (r ' y ILA ................................ ..................................... Building Inspector Taken from tape recording of November 5, 1987 It is 45 minutes to ten, I 'm in the process of going into Building Department to exercise my rights under the Freedom of Information Act. CZ: Helen, I am here again Itoday to exercise my rights under section 45-6 page 4504 Code of Town of Southold, New York. ' VL: Rights CZ: Continuing with yesterday in copying records. VL: What you're gonna have to do is to come in inspect what you want, make a list of it, go down and file it with the Town Clerk. CZ: Why wasn't this mentioned yesterday? VL: Apparently you felt you was running it yesterday, you wasn't listening to nobody and by the way get that thing out of here. Its interfering with the hall CZ: Let's don't jump around, what are we talking about here? We talking about this or or what are we talking about. VL: Pay attention and I will tell you very simply, if you wish to inspect under 4506 like you say you want to then you will write down all the things you need and you will file them with the Town Clerk and within 5 days we will copy eerything you need. CZ: Where is that specified? VL: Are you paying attention to me or not? CZ: Go ahead. VL: OK, you will copy down everything you want copied, file it with the Town Clerk and within 5 days we will respond and you can pay for what it is and you can have it. CZ: Where is this written? VL: Where is this written? CZ: Yes. VL: That is the state, that is the Sunshine Law my friend. VL: Under the sunshine law you will come in and inspect what you want write down what you want on a piece of paper CZ: It does not 'say that under this law to write down VL: Don't assume anything what it says CZ: My interpretation VL: it says inspect CZ: Your interpretation is that? I would like to know whose interpretation of this Code that is? VL: That is mine CZ: That is Mr. Lessard's VL: Absolutely you got it right from the horse, ok? CZ: OK VL: Having said that and having said that you machine is interfering with the flow of traffic in here kindly remove it. Mr. Charles J. Zahra P.O. Box 1137 Mattituck, NY 11952 . November 4, 1987 Mr. Victor Lessard Town of Southold Building Department 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Lessard: This is to request, pursuant to Section 45-6 of the Southold Town Code, that I be allowed to inspect the records the Building Department is required to keep in accordance with Section 45-6 of the Southold Town Code. Very truly yours, Charles J. Zahra cpa/C-9 I-e a o v FORM NO. 8 U cre (1 - of ry%. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date ....September 22 , ... 19...8.E TO ...CHARLES T: .&. JEAN.. ... .... ZAHRA . .. ... (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 PIKE STREET, MATTITUCK, NEW YORK 11952 ................................................................... (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: Zoning Ordinance CH 100 ...... ............................... Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that ,,,,,,,STOP ALL WORK NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE .............................................................................. (state character of violation) PROVISIONS OF THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. .................................................................................................................................................................. .............................................................................................................. .... ............................................. in violation of .,,,,,,.CH 100 XIV 100-143 ....................................................................................................................... (State section or paragraph of applicable low, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ......AT. ONCE .......................................................... day of ....... .e P t emb e. ............................ 19......8 7 The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 18 . u ..30......Pike.....................Street............. ..Mattit.....ckt. .........................County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of law may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 14 1-04-05 Building Inspector APPLICATION FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO RECORDS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SECTION I . TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT: Please complete Section I of this form. Give the form to the agency Freedom of Information Officer. The Freedom of Information Officer will return one copy to you as a response to your request, or as an interim response. TO: FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER AGENCY NAME: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGENCY ADDRESS : 53095 Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 I HEREBY APPLY TO. INSPECT THE FOLLOWING RECORD (Please describe the record sought. If possible, supply a date, a file title and number, and any other informa- tion that will help locate the record desired): Files maintained by Building Department and all applications, permits, notes, documents, papers, surveys, reports, memorandum, correspondence contained in files regarding applications for Building Permit for the time period November 1, 1985 to November 4, "1987. Signature R f Applicant and Printed Name: �� Applicant epresents• �' � Charles J. Zahra Applicant's Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1137, Pike Street, Mattituck, NY 11952 Date of Application: November 4, 1987 SECTION II . FOR USE BY AGENCY FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ONLY [ ] Approved [ ] Denied: (for the reason(s) checked below) RECEIVED [ ] Confidential Disclosure [ ] Part of investigatory Files �v�)V � i0 7 [ ] Unwarranted Invasion of Privacy [ ] Record of Which This Agency is Legal Custodian Cannot be1T 1ihTnwn Clerk [ ] Record is Not Maintained by This Agency [ ] Exempted by Statute Other Than the Freedom of Information Act [ ] Other (specify): [ ] Receipt of this request is acknowledged, There will be a delay in supplying the requested record until for the following reason: Signature: Title: Date: Freedom of Information Officer SECTION III . NOTICE TO APPLICANT YOU HAVE A RIGHT TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF THIS APPLICATION IN 1VRITING .IVITII- IN 30 DAYS OF THE DENIAL. INFORMATION AS TO THE PERSON TO CONTACT IS SIIOWN BELOW. THE CONTACTED PERSON MUST RESPOND TO YOU IN WRITING WITHIN SEVEN BUSINESS DAYS OF RECEIPT OF YOUR APPEAL. Name: Southold Town Board Business Address: 53095 Blain Road Telephone: Southold, New York 516-765-1S00 FORM NO. 5 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE ' SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date November 5, 87 ............................................ .. 19... TO CHARLES T. & JEAN ZAHRA ............................................................. (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952 ................................:................I................... (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: Zoning Ordinance CH 100 Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ of remises hereinafter described in that Your bung p . P ildi ermit no 15428 Z issued(state character of violation) October 27 , 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason .............................,... ; not following plans , .................................................... did not comply with a stop work order. .........I....... . ............................................................ ................................., ............................................. in violation of 100— 142—C & D (State section or paragraph of applicable law, ordinance or regulation) -YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the 6 th ........................................................... day of .....November............................ 19.....87 The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 140 Pike Street , Hatttituck .................................................................................County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of law may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 1000- 141-04-05 COPY FOR YOURBuildinguilding Inspector 1 ONO ,3a NORTH SHORE BUSINESS PRODUCTS 138 E. MAIN STREET RIVERHEAD, NY 11901 (516) 727-7747 (516) 727-7749 SI ilp lf): -T'F it i)ii{i j III?VIA! I FRIlip, FIE Ff*r T-MCE IT ....... • 04 17."(%'Gll t�'t;7 r,lry .I, IT I I P FM NUKjG[.'fl l DFISCIfill"'I ION PRICE ri A 1. ell Q! Ar 14 95 2"4. FZ A f2 ixf 0 0101 58. t'UF3l NE.Ell r-3 A.74]" W31N E;T. 5 0 I 0A 7 7,1-7 1.1 v t 1) '�.l '71. yj 1, (recc( (Q - a`7 - 9 v d�lred �¢ n-19. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ----------------------------------------X In the Matter of an Appeal by I CHARLES ZAHRA, AFFIDAVIT ----------------- ----X i' STATE OF NEW YORK) li ss. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) i JOSEPH O. LANGER, and JUNE B. LANGER, being duly sworn, 1; ; depose and say: i� 1. We reside at Main Road, Aquebogue, New York, and make this affidavit in support of Charles Zahra's application for a ;; reversal of building department decision regarding the non- iI ! conformity of the apartment over the building known as the Coffee t' Pot, located at 140 Pike Street, Mattituck., New York. H 2. We purchased the above mentioned property on March 29th, 1977 from C.A. Price & Co. ,' Inc. . We operated the "Coffee Pot" luncheonette from the date of purchase to the date the ;- property was sold to the North Fork Bank on July 6th, 1984 . We also resided in the apartment above the restaurant during that , time period. During that time frame, the premises was insured as a "frame" building occupied as a luncheonette and dwelling. 3. When we entered into the agreement to sell the premises, we requested and were given approval by the North Fork Bank for our son to continue to reside in the upstairs apartment l until mid-November of 1984 . This approval was then extended and our son resided in the apartment until JanuaryZofl . JOSEPH O. LANGER I ' JUNE B. LANGER I Sworn to bef re me this 02 ay of , 1990. o/I KATHLEEN D. KOTZK} ram' NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York Notary Public NO. 4842181 Qualified Commlwion exglrefd Iy`@j,County a_ o TOWN OF SOUTHOLD �e I �cl ere �r1-� F BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office J y Southold, N. Y. t i Certificate Of Occupancy NO. .Z8935: . . • . Date . Xebruax Y. . . . . . . .16. . . . . .� 19. .7$ THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at .14Q. Pe St. Map No. . . . . . . . . . . • • , . . . . . . . . . Street . Block No. . . . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office . . 1r dated l. ar�kt . . . 8 ' ' • • • • • 197.7. . pursuant to which Building Permit No.•9074Z dated . . . .tf ar.Gh. . . .$ . . . • 19. .7.7, was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . . .Restaurant .a. Apartmqx1t Z' O certificate is issued to . . . . . • . • . . . . . . . . . Jose,Ph.�axlgeF. . . . . . . . of the aforesaid building. (owner, . . . . . . . . . Suffolk County Department of Health Approval N/R UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. , ,N373999 N373997 HOUSE NUMBER . . 14o. . . . , , , . Street . , • • , pike. Street • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mattituck, NY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . � �. Building Inspector TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NONCONFORMING PREMISES No. Z11636 4/25/83 THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the Land Building(s) /x/ Use(s) located at 600 Pike Street Mattituck street Hamlet shown on County tax map as District 1000, Section 140 Block 03 Lot 004 does not conform to the present Building Zone Code of the Town of Southold for the following reasons: an apartment is not allowed over a business in a B-1 Zoned District . On the basis of information presented to the Building Inspector's Office, it has been determined that the above nonconforming /_/ Land /_/ Building(s) /X /Uses) existed on the effective date the present Building Zone Code of the Town of Southold, and may be continued pursuant to and subject to the appli- cable provisions of said Code. IT IS FURTHER CERTIFIIED that, based upon information presented to the Building Inspector's Office, the occupancy and use for which this Certifi- cate is issued is as follows: for a five ( 5 ) room apartment over a B-1 Zoned business . The Certificate is issued to William & Grace' 'Fiore (owner, -1e&9-ee- of the- aforesaid'biiilding._:"--...-:-- - -- -. - Suffolk County Department of Health Approval N/A UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE NO. N/A Building Insp ctor -ems ty-o FORM NO.4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N.Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. . i G21 October 28 �'0 . . . . . Date. . . . . . . . . . 9 THIS CERTIFIES that the building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Location of Property �� i=''e Streets .fwttytue;Z .Y. House No. 141 Street . . . . . . . . . . . . Ham/et County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . . . . . . . . . . . .Block . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .Filed Map No. . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . reauirer:.ents for a Business staLlisk"cnt built ' prior conforms substantially to t -,4�pli�at €oa. 1� g�Prut_l �#efe.-i1ed_�x_ths_efl;�ce.clated_ ` J7 Certi ihd � iay . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . , 19 pursuant toh RWIinge;zRt .Gi 0-1.7. . . . . . . . . . . . dated . . . . JctQb�r .28.. . , . ., , , , . , , 19$0 ,was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . . . . . . . . . laycrn,brat . t?rq , tom e; u .� �,lac; ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The certificate is issued to . K• .Ognklin & Ors. (ownr,le:bYiM e b27 ti of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . . I1o1+128, ," The Broken mown Valise UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE NO. .I.VA . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Inspector Rev 4/79 PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS 6L-C � v 1 PETITIOT FOR THE APROVAL OF THE 'COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" -in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of. Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted' on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should b'e withdrawn and the -"Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDREOg J .T PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL Op THE ,COFFE$ POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS t v MMiS V saaLo(j- cr yTRA ,gam 6:a zC-1 P o T kO V CCU�Z/f�Gu� m r , ✓k t ` r � ' `// �'/j i:1.i L 1.:��r:y� !��7 / `( i '-L�• 6(. C-�-�-, { �(_,r.l e t_ ._ J �'L� r f� PETITION FAR THE AgRQAi, Olr T8E "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS n rL 6 6�k :da fu hVIO." z c �/,T�� 1 Sri (� , 1 7 ffCi� i'Alrr it-lo7 JT` ST i�29T A1111f/xek GG GJy ......... .te j z: /. RX Gkk L k�60 0--,MOD( 06 A.o� (14�(J—)I I_&I(201L RtY C2 ( Cc t 1 ,G la sz AA w (433- e PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE $'COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS d �LLfi�G e cv. AA' 7-1-;Tvc�< r2/ Z7 ZU I.L- L 4d"U', Pj -4. <�<D V-10, 051 W( V, Z AQ c. i GPI?G,�cv.Jb&JI,5n(.C��/ 12 ( � PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE 11COFFEB POT" WE the undersigned residents of `the; Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge 'it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of' Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS � r // � i ���«il: U•%,j�i �C %� / `�GsY�'i G < �V �1��i 3�f l/ Ou/ A S L lei PO go i ) : iC�L -PO 0-71 •6 4L/J AM V 1w/ UN . r PETITION FOR THE APPgQUL OF THE viCOFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS / l A VY (�Mj; e),10, ��f-ajv-f A,, 'T 14LI-11 Lill ,Y- 4- e 1VV w i 1faL -oc FPS a& TY-C) G�Atc- r �z mil/� '(C ,, --- �U J / t PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS k"Le 9 k 2l :AFT<l"Ce 9 61,05,v -A) s � ��'�'-.�-�i �'.�e�,.��-• � -,i: 11 � �� � ��,G�"�Lam. �-,' ', J;> I^ ,s s P r�h ?10, ` n Imo.A P-1 '4 1,'-, A A 222 al W,/zt- f,( ly -Z-6�",-( -- I k;,-4/)/7,/-f J^ z FD lk u. 4J PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COPPER POT , WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. Nam$ ADDRESS i _ �. j '-� < _.1C_,Cr_ )C.• 1 �;.i L!f L. - - ! ! ,• i'.• .•. //- ✓ �-1�. .,,7i�,�/,. S .i_'l'' / . ['r_; )• "' I�+r.(C./ � �:,,,� ��;i,�-. /ice /� / �. '�-f �� ✓` Cam'• / �. c'-/ Jr- Ci-.!i.7:.1-.!9 ��{ft, �/r�l'./,' �//i/„' �7,:•/ /� l';�, rYl%.� +•__ '��-� '+r�' �...1 � 1, �ti �� 1, ,/ ri l/ �lt_k.� �,� �.�{,�,��!-t,�(.. /Y t'�.% � � 1 )� / �il�, `( �J�'-' 1.-C.: .A�' �':�.1. tJ�. 'i '�-'�� �f' -� :7 •) •� )1'L (.�.i. LCJ(�'`� �'..(/ I � S 1"'.._ �G�J,.°� .���� "•��)r�_�-Y��,�,(>>`1r1 `=�:.IC�'t-��11'1 1� `'I ,i �l� l�!_e�� f�!.%.if:�l ���.� /�• � ( tit-%�/L.;��� � �l � � � �j /:�.la.�G � •� ) J 7:: l' CC-A--1. �./'`1:L' /' (l�%:v'� /o/�-�' • 'I �-`� � r i� ,�� ./;I l'c-` .,�_ J a 1�!�1 � r•i r:r�-��`f�/� // %_�."j. 7- i PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. -NAME ADDRESS �1 � /� i ! a-. .. I (•, Cis ✓Y1 C [ / f. — 4 61 rn CZ 4-2 /CX-BLS/1AZL��. 1271 per/ l - ,i(� YIC a �� � .l'fj : � ��;;j t v !�-t J f'�:�.�f` i t_�i 1 )•(� F `'' 'i'�. } 11� Uc". AZ jq, l�.'�� '>-. �4�''_-u.� . �l a ,!'�../",u t-�-. �/�_.•, , � �_ �; �' C°,G I{) '.1 i/ V l i PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFER POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS J Xv� erll V ujd"L,�- ! .t r �71V1 i1 ,1 / .10 <_Iz 0 III Y leol 'All IV V s FLq - �i •�fi� ,/l,�l�/ f J(mil C'�� ,��� 77 AV Y-C/, N Zt(7 I e�_r- �. �-1. C ,• C� r� r PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME J / J ADDRESS ��zzr., ��.✓� C�Ci2-L'i77 C�C.i/ � � / � � ' �/ /� t�C L.�,c.�� �� C. /3 3 d w ([V) L �J -/ 22, 2. 1 I AA,,�5 16 , P/4 [�4 L) 1 r r 9 /-- ' PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL_ OF THE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition . the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly,: unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is .in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted .on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation {proceed. NAME,, ADD S kT LOA- j6 �J --�/ 1177 �._... ._ ���•/:7`' l/ u _' ��) gI.�i(L.+rl,/(.��.�/ Y�a i. t4119.;✓ice t 5- h ILI 4-1 /`_ .. �[-t•(:' _....M�`,c.,%, ' �_ �{:"„gyp`''., r�z ii�..� ✓ c) 1✓I���.;�..�.r..r".:..��-- •/� `%.f__: r f` PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the .hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS I J / � � � /' � , +err '(�, �^ •'� � 'r ` /ZL:[Ci<. •\yr J � /,4�k "fit In l - _ Gar -LL Z if"I\ �e- 1,;rIA-IL-- O" 6 —�.2/ cm -16 •� n PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. ADDRESS ZC1,11 4/� c7- ,l 1/n, h c A / ,4 r` ,-,7il-11 �. f Aa,J li F7, Ov V ——5s/ /4) 2LE2 71' .. C C PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the -Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS .s T- G 6raw n2 r161 PIS. 4 C Rr q& C0/V f . / ININ42 I WaAL4-AO Met A Ale -UA t -j 2t Pv,--e, 11971 JW.,4 /,� -7 -7 62 �f PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being .wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Poj�" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS yL n act k .2 r / C5S ek- AASe— Ci G -, AdLy ac jo�� YMrns. Lai— Z_14416� Aett . 0-� 1—__. ,_U /1-P qat, : /h IOP,4 6 4, e/7- /,_cl VP PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS � . i 1 C-1 Er) •�� e NO—A- 'wq �.G o_ 7s3 ' 2� ` lI AIS-7 ' V' O671 r• , _ — — A MA UYI �106 V_ r , aep, ,'� En P$TITION FOR THE APPRO L OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME y ADDRESS e .1_ I.i/c%--'-✓_- L�� /c1.��Fc:t. <,� f' !•/,-f cal.1`'Cf,, 1,,/ + : -f'(' C %h( / r: r 21 (i-7n Oe f / V ���..Jn � �. %- , ,� ' �,�--.•.tip-� >=�,.r_ ,r: '•(- .1` .� c.` l d f r,, �' _ �d PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL_ OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. N , 1 ADDRE S All�, IF 1,4-461-zej-61r, 144 -,c7el�;L- Wr ' , r go IA f 7C PETITION FOIL THE APPROVAL OF THE 11OFFEa POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME �J ADDRESS �� li' ,��'l f.ice'," � � 1'� '11 rr_( I 1 tL`+•' 11 ei. •�J .J r, (v; - �� �r`t( <<:JItI(a'- /�h�-til"GcF 1 /Gv< U��lcci.r�c:( iA 1, �. ,` 1! D)b �'1����� </�����lli(��aG�Jl_,Y�' S I c� /���� iLtt'�'Icf''t�.?•�l ,v�/�'1c ��i'�'�'' %/r7 C rX ,'ti LI GI C old 6Cj(( j C 0� AL. 1 �� .✓ �@ d i -�i I l r A J,. VC tj ce ✓ L PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS _ �ELi� � �7,�,.� . •• Zip �,��._. 1 � �2 II //�iID , vv 1i 01 ©`s f,tVI A A/ ` - � s- U Yr-^ti-O f-�j [�4�.y���'� /iJ�C� ti.l�ti,7 .1 f'.C.'�/ �i.�-�._�. •�l-L!.�=''=�r�'.t_•.Ct.'_ , l 1� PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. : We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. N ADDRESS Gc. ..ate e �tC /YQ- JtLtG �,E�V�• .v�- '77r•(i GJ1� �� 12 R011- �►�i ���f GAL 4 .11 CO, k"LCM,\)"-� i �'1 tit- �> ,C �/:1 .ice_ i� • ? "� E.z LI 11 �• '1 y PETITION FOR To APPROV!►L OF TH8 "COFFE POTn WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS kiLl,L'1' I-' L _ \ . U(c_ K (.-1 +ram 4� � ' /� j' / ' I��<� ���(//. ,J`j. /' � •� •%•"`• S✓6,--j>",AO 01,1 �L-`Tr �l_ •1 O IVA- ./ !-21 / // �'l .+ . t� ��/ /'� 4-7'�/�� t I PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of 1 Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS JC„c �vc�.� !��-" �' ILaL.Ulilr[c✓ C:'f J�6 ti• c. VI /L L\Iu -,, (1) C)O tL CA Lf UII�I( �_C, i KI,7z,7kym J M j �- } -Uz_r _ 12-5o , (9,(j: FBTITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE- POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck. is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS � . C 7 7 4/ � . T ler r�� a , ,} All t6-uckce" Alt ;77- 00 LY �-�l� Ste► �(�� .... .�Ctiu��,,--L'__ ....__ It `. 3'?''���i•-vl �, PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS ,�'L�l..(�y,c�/ �f'�'/•.,�/lam _ l f qA :` �CJL':-...��� � •• �_\�' Ll�(,c:{�I�;�c_ ? i (l �C.--, yam/ -( _,� '���_�c.�%��..X-:.�-���,...... � G / J /7Xft.i+ �'�/;/! i �� �F / C/i_(s r 74 LL r /J [ 0 . . 610`/o/) �=l � )r: r ( ; <` 1. -71 Lk PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of*'the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that. the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS 4tc o LOAC) L ad ` Z ` �1f•`-{..- ( � L .a.�r,c.� /l.%'C. +�� ,s.:"t ( .�:'t.-L. (`:_mil ) C%'.�c.,c n.Yd-b )�Lm:a r /f _. PETITION BOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COF'FRa POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" ' in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided.by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS 14 / 13t> D O jJ L/ ,6 !l r, 58 U Y- os sv N. A&IIJ / ff "' `+r 7 ✓i 42 JO.Zle-r-, � J I 1 o a �d MY A� • L 3 30.. P��n J Y i f ?5a i Lei Z-4 l 9�� 60 Oq S' 6) Al V "-) a �5 l� -� PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS r i o li c deg te- al PS0337 UY A I Z A -e r PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. r NAME ADDRESS 37 jO0 A �lj-4k, /-r A/ "s A !ZZ6) L11 j L?G L �S d 5-1-2. -A X" ?01111104-y- a N® / -� •C�• -7 I Ok :rn-dia- 0 i Line, 00 1 C 04",/t, A?YIt6/ PFI i�i' •11• U r dC.L� � � lei SO ,ter.-.t �. 4 3 '" ' ' PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS4J I �4� 4 Ook r �'�:/sue !� i -r✓� 7 ' L L' c �-- L62 23 7 S/ x ti fl el _ • X—ol c��. PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAM ADDRESS 12 GO -100Z �v G IL --e-, Ize se'r ,—, zr c K L VVUL -'Nal�k :�2 3 TG,r� r I'1,j -o 6L j II9 71- ' /7� 14, /V C51 V('uCL,.kx b SOL-ti U 01W )dy, 1�65_ 1e arc.. V,e � OA �C�t �� e aOL, kv-«4� i PETITION FOR THE !APPROVAL OF THE 'NCOFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck. is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation . proceed. NAME ADDRESS 1 v 7 v- Jo /(Mzdaw Gone. /g!K �,c��. �cfh .2 yz /77 5 S� f Q✓ n T ' POW ✓ I ; . 1 S 3d� �� a Gtie � PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE nCOFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS ` ,vt J ,� U23n Y W7 ) ! i l `S k y y t j t1ff zfj YJAAA A4 A Ad PttA I L-2 C, .r6 :26 PT014' AkCk— v PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. E ADDRESS "Etrr -7 3© ,S I GS EE- PP. lA2/67 -�Pa� P N)x �Ll 0 kice FaM10i r 62c? z J k4 v � t � �3C3 woc�cl� �, 1 T f v e IV kc;k, llwl 61 1100, e J le (A /A�A'-Jftjk elho' & -L -ffIK Cj 0, i N -wSMA Ctitelcn L _. - - - - -� Ali; 0 rxz go FF " pgTI 10- FOR TH$ petition nde -signed residents of the Town of Southold herof eby WE the u e it to 'approve the application k �� in Matti and its use the Town of Southold and urge 1 unending legal Charles Zahra for renovation and to"endithe seeminne d of the housing as a restaurant and apartment ed b the apartment and that d e We1°also be tha battles. we believed hat Town is in desperate which would be prove as previously existed. 'n wasted on needless litigation and that the current is in need of a luncheonette, .our money is being appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee pot" renovation proceed. . ADD= NAME �a / Al c� jr of to 0� 1 � U M PETITION FOR THE APPRO t OF THE "COgPgg POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS ' u n o� o 7�, (�- r. t n(j �00# lieVY 10 - > 1 S / a? P coUj ps � r ,� 4 AA PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" P, WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application' of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and,that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS 61 1`16� 'I&L 6 1 sic \ V 01 lit� 406 PIA'" HAL K\ AA (-,r\-A d jkl 41'f AOW-4116-71,41-1111A LI IAJ " I3a r u s_. V , ("(U icy W `I( n &A�V-P - d � �� PETITION POR THE AP *-THE #,Corp POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of. Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" •in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the -"Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME D . `1 17 Lf V r I PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS zt // � r Co 'e in i)r r— t� L [ '2� S f. Cam. 1'1 �� NY, tj 60 cis uv\QoN o P11- (AJ �I:V ( 6 0 61 �j i l � - Z4 /IV f , (* PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAM 7�/C�t 4 r ! /lac. L'-- eAL.. �.,;✓' � , �,;. r PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS 0) (4nr,4,X-i Or\AA, . n Al 11 PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to .approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. ADDRESS ALL! -S• P K3 ILA' 30$ Ur^ ler a r i -G' M emu= CAN i-77(Jc 61 , �.. vy`•� : .. • .. PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe. that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS C l AJ ILA, JZ Loor a ,�, f Id � j,.f ' ,y •ii .s. w PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS t dy 1 4 r � i PETITION FOR THE APPRO t. nu TEE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and 'apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS 41 C4L &kJA_ h el t -P I PETITION FO OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the -"Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS n �c-c�cU PETITION FON THE Appurtiv�r OF THE ''COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge . it to approve the application of.. Charles Zahra for renovation of. the. "Coffee Pot" In Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided. by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is ,being wasted� on .needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the -"Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS PETITION RPROVAL OF POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to. approve the application of . Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" ,in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of 'the housing which would be provided, by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette;. as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted-. on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the -"Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRE88 V PETITION BO IROVAL OP TU nCogggg POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of . Charles Zahra for renovation of the•."Coffee Pot" rin Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly -unending legal battles. We believe that the Town 'is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted. on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the -"Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRE JO w '... Y; Y- 62 r C// 1..lE� ref�, ' �!`� ;+,i �., •( �•—r // \ Gl a; L �'`^' �_) r (( •et Z/1 V PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE nCOFFEE PDT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS L7I r � d & J ' J/ PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ,ADDRESS to -- L -hit� a,La ac) e� Q M�, , PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAME ADDRESS .1119 Y5 l-- '✓L-�� r cX�v / f� zo 17 9O K -7T i TC-,c l f PETITION FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE "COFFEE POT" WE the undersigned residents of the Town of Southold hereby petition the Town of Southold and urge it to approve the application of Charles Zahra for renovation of the "Coffee Pot" in Mattituck and its use as a restaurant and apartment and to end the seemingly unending legal battles. We believe that the Town is in desperate need of the housing which would be provided by the apartment and that the hamlet of Mattituck is in need of a luncheonette, as previously existed. We also believe that our money is being wasted on needless litigation and that the current appeal by the Town should be withdrawn "and the "Coffee Pot" renovation proceed. NAM�F ADD g JAI iloZ / i� .o�F�voc� �� / /c 7Z11 7 VA I) . G •/� �"'�%� ':.��� . � ����'� Asa (../��� ,((� �c�3 .��( � � / CqA q-fi U-kT t44/ lam. �.en"� �� -ul� �� i 23s r APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS "�O CMG Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman 4',- `��, :h ;j, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen C o P.O. Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Southold, New York 1971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Lydia A.Tortora � Ol ��O�' Telephone (516) 765-1809 Maureen C. Ostermann r� BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD REPLY MEMO ',TO: Bennett Orlowski, Jr. , PB Chairman FROM: Gerard P. Goehringer, ZBA Chairman DATE: April 23, 1997 SUBJECT: PB Memo/Inquiry dated April 18, 1997 (141-4-5) There has been no change to our previous memo dated June 5, 1996 to the Planning Board, which was in response to your memo at that time regarding this property and existing building. After a waiver was granted by the Planning Board in 1988 (copy attached) , the applicant was to have a building permit filed with the Building Department which would meet all fire, building and other codes. As you may recall, litigation was commenced while inspections were pending by the Building Department. The ZBA does not have an application or knowledge of any other possible quasi-judicial jurisdiction at this time. Since the ZBA's jurisdiction is quasi-judicial, it must be based upon an action or disapproval of the Building Inspector dated within the last 60 days. We are not aware of any such action by the Buildng Inspector at this time. The variance granted in 1990, and still valid, is for a second use for occupancy as an apartment on the second-floor of the existing building with a limited floor area of 825 sq. ft. (as expanded by approximately 100 sq. ft. - see floor plan and ZBA file if additional information is needed) . We hope that the attached copies of the ZBA approval will be of assistance to you in making a waiver determination. 11 CC:. J3U/'"i49 Tour►,t-------------------------- Parcels.zb/141-4-5/p2 IPLANNING OARD MEMBERS OSUFF01 49, Town Hall, 53095 Main Road RICHARD G.WARD h`1` ifi c P.O. Box 1179 GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,JR. co2 Southold, New York 11971 BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. Fax(516) 765-3136 WILLIAM J. CREMERS y Q�� Telephone(516) 765-1938 KENNETH L.EDWARDS PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Appeals Board FROM: Bennett Orlowski, Jr, Chairman RE: Charles Zahra 1830 Pike Street Mattituck Zoning District: Hamlet Business (HB) SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 DATE: April 18, 1997 The above applicant has requested a waiver of site plan requirements. (copy attached) Before this Board can consider the waiver request, we would appreciate it if you could review your files to insure that all code conditions have been met. We would appreciate a written response to the above request. cc: Laury Dowd, Town Attorney Frank Yakaboski, Attorney R OBER T H. WHELAN, P.E. P.U. Bar 590 •.160 Bungalow Lane Mattituck, NY 11952 •516-298-5770 April 1, 1997 Southold Town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Att: Robert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer Re: Request for Site Plan Waiver Mr. Charles Zahra 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 Dear Mr. Kassner: Pursuant to your letter of September 17, 1996, copy attached, please find enclosed a copy of the proposed floor plans for the building at the above referenced location. A tenant has been selected for the first floor. The proposed occupancy is an Arts & Crafts Shop in accordance with section 100-91A(6)Retail Stores. The second floor occupancy will remain as before, namely a single bedroom apartment. In addition to my request for a site plan waiver, I request a waiver of off-street parking spaces in accordance with Section 100-t91A, being that the facility is within the Hamlet Business District and there are municipal parking facilities within three hundred(300) feet of the proposed permitted use. I trust the enclosed information will satisfy your requirements for this project. Thank you for i your time and cooperation on this matter. If there are any questions relative to the above please do not hesitate to call. Very Tr ly You ; ob rt H. Whelan, P.E. enc. cc: Mr. Charles Zahra APR 2 = ' FFOt'� .-kPPEALS BOARD ME-MBERS Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer. Chairman o 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen. Jr. O r P.O. Box 1179 y Southold. New York 11971 James Dinizio,Jr. �O Robert A. Villa Fax(516)765-1823 Lydia A.Tortora Telephone(5 16) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD REPLY MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Board Attn: Site Plan Reviewer _ FROM: Jerry Goehringer DATE: June 5, 1996 SUBJECT: PB Inquiry - Property #1000-141-4-5 (C. Zahra, Owner) In response to your memo/inquiry received today regarding the above, there is of record a conditional ZBA approval which is still in effect (copies furnished to you by Mr. Whelan with his letter to PB . ) Apparently the Planning Board granted a waiver in 1986 based on that project indicating that the building was already existing and determined no site improvements were possible or required. It is our understanding that Mr. Whelan is trying to obtain a current building permit and other agency approvals necessary to complete and occupy the building as provided by the codes, and wants to be sure the waiver given by the PB in 1986 is still in effect. One of the changes that involved the zoning since the previous litigation was that the zoning category name was changed in 1989 from B Business to Hamlet Business (without any significant effect on the permitted uses under the previous zoning) . A copy of this letter is being furnished to the building department for their information since the Building Department may be, or will be involved in the process at some point. cc: Building Department (with copies) Attn: Thomas Fisher, Sr. Building Inspector o ;t own Hall, 53095 Main Road VALERIE SCOPAZ en !; P.O. Box 1179 TOWN PLANNER t .s- ,r,t�{ Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516)765-3136 Telephone(516)765-1933 OFFICE OF THE TOWN PLANNER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD D FJUN - 519 Q-�Z v i I , i I TO: Thomas Fisher, Senior Building Inspector Laury Dowd, Town Attorney Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Board of appeals FROM: Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer SUBJECT: Request for site plan waiver Charles Zahra Pike Street, Mattituck ' SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 DATE: June 4, 1996 The attached correspondence has been received from Robert H. Whelan, agent for Charles Zahra, requesting a waiver of site plan requirements. In light of the previous litigation on this project I would appreciate your comments on this request. C pf) kpq Southold. N.7. 119 1 ( , w• c� :z October 8 , L986 Mr. Curtis Gorton �d Building. Inspector �II Town. 13all i! Southold, NY 11971 it Re : Charles Zahra Dear Mr . Horton : . ill The followin:, action was . taken. by the Southold Town ?Lanni nc 3oard, Mcndav, October 6 , 1980' . RESOLVE that the Sobthold 'Town Planning 3 c a r d •jai %e the requirement for fcr-nal site plan review for the site of Charles Zahra located at Mattituck , since this is a pre- existing buildina and no sits improvements could be made at this time . If any physical changes are made subsequent to this , however, it may need forinaL site 'plan consideration j and should be reviewed by the Plannina Board. If you have any questions , please don ' t hesitate to contact Our office. Very truly yours , BENNETT ORLOWSK; , J?. . ._t 7RMAN SOU'T HOLD TOWN P i.,ANN r NG BOARD 3v Diane LM. Schultze , Secretary a APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS =-' SCOTT L. HARRIS •= Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Gri onis, Jr. �I Town Hall, 53095 Main Road C g -_ Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 September 21, 1990 Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Dear Mr. Bressler. Transmitted for your records is a copy of the determination rendered by the -Board of Appeals concerning the above application. Please be sure to. return to all involved agencies for approvals and permits as deemed necessary. Copies of this decision have simultaneously been transmitted to the Building Inspectors' Office for their files and update. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GO CHAIRMAN By "Linda Kowalski Enclosure Copy mf Decisian tv: Building Inspectors' Office Suffolk County Department of Planning Parcel Info if needed for future reference: Resolution of PB G/9/97 granted waiver of site plan at 141-4-5, 140 Pike Street, Mattituck. HB Zone District. Actions.97/141-4-5 a y' JFrD(,�- C� _ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS OF, Town Hall, 53095 Main Road BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR. o StuY Chairman _� } ` : P.O. Box 1179 rr , ,;Y44 Southold, New York 11971 WILLIAM J. CREMERS ✓ _f Fax(516) 765-3136 KENNETH L.EDWARDS O' GEORGE RITCHIE LATH-AM,JR. �� �� Telephone (.516) 765-1938 -A RICHARD G.WARD W PLANNING BOARD OFFICE ` SOTJTHOLD IS �� , June 10, 1997 j,M� JUN 1 1 11T1 II Robert H. Whelan, P.E. P.O. Box 590 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Request for site plan waiver for Charles Zahra -(1830 ike St., Mattituck SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 Dear Mr. Whelan: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, June 9, 1997: WHEREAS, Charles Zahra is the owner of the property known and designated as SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 located at 140 Pike St. in Mattituck; and WHEREAS, a retail store is a permitted use in this Hamlet Business (HB)zone; and WHEREAS, apartments may be permitted over retail stores by Special Exception of the Board of Appeals; and WHEREAS, the Board of Appeals reinstated the Special Exception for the apartment on the second floor for single family occupancy on September 6, 1990, Application No. 3701, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the apartment not exceed 825 square feet in total floor area. 2. That the apartment comply with all other codes, rules and regulations applicable thereto, including local and state fire construction codes; and Page 2 Site plan waiver for Charles Zahra June 10, 1997 WHEREAS, Town Code Article XIX, Section 100-191, off street parking areas, gives the Planning Board authority to waive on site parking in the Hamlet Business District where it shall find that municipal parking facilities are located within three hundred (300) feet of the proposed use will adequately serve the proposed use; and WHEREAS, municipal parking is located within three hundred (300) feet of the subject parcel; and WHEREAS, the proposed change in uses from a restaurant and apartment to a retail store and apartment will not be a more intensive use of this property; and WHEREAS, this waiver is subject to review by the Building Department which has jurisdiction to deal with building codes, and to review by the Board of Appeals which has jurisdiction to deal with zoning regulations; and WHEREAS, any violation of the conditions of this resolution may be grounds for rescinding this waiver; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a waiver of site plan requirements. Please contact this office if there are any questions regarding the above. Sincerely, Bennett 0 lowski, Jr. Chairman cc: Building Department Zoning Board of Appeals Ed Forester, Town Investigator Laury Dowd, Town Attorney Frank Yakaboski, Attorney Charles Zahra _ ' SCOTT L. HARRIS BOARD 1dEMBERS 'ti '� u~ '� Supervisor p. Goehringer, Chairman �•.:;! `J Town Hall. 53095 Main Road Charles Grigonis, Jr. p.0. Box 1179 Serge Doyen, Jr. Southold, New York 11971 Joseph H. Sawicki Fax (516) 765-1823 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 -elephone (516) 765-1809 1 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS .F is S: �- App1. No. 3701: Matter of the Application of CgARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV, Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit 115428Z issued October 27 , 1986. Location of Property: 140 Pike Street, County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141, Block j Mattituck, NY; previously 4, Lot 5. Zone District: 8usinessusiness (HB) , zeferred to as B-1 C-eneral At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on .September 6, 1990 the following action was taken: WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted into the record concerning this application; and WHEREAS, .the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1,. applicant requests a reversal of By this application, the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of ion Building Permit §15428Z issued October 27, 1986. The revocation. was issued on November 5, 1987. The reasons stated on the building inspector's revocation notice read as follows: . ...Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued October 27 , 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason; not following plans, did not comply with a stop work order, in violation of 100-142-C & D. . . . _ Z , The property in question is located in the I • -} -2'A ; � i AQkni-i fi -d on the 1 I page 2 _App1, AFmA Application of Decision Rendered St-r -ember 6 , 1990 ; i {now Section 100-282C & D) of the Section 100-142-C & D, supra, ; zoning code regulations, provides as follows: . .Revocation of permit. The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and I approved .in the following instances: , �, Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance of the application, plans or specifi- cations. . . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails- or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. . . 2. The property in question: (a) contains a not�hlot southea of side ofBPike gtreet feet in with 40.0 ft. frontage along e the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold; (b) is identified Bl the 4 ,Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000 , Section 141, (c) is located in the Hamlet Businessmess (the ZonenewMaster District, as re-designated January 10 ,plan revisions; (d) is improved with an existing building which is nonconforming as to various setback requirements. 3. Numerous hearings were held by this Board, and on April lh, 1988 , an interim decision was rendered. legal 4. In this record, it was found thathfactual lding- andpermit " issues existed regarding usee validity of section(s) of the zoning code under the nonconforming and the Board at (previously 100-118 and now Section 100-243) , its April 14, 1988 meeting set this matter dwn licantsrwereuasked to hearing to be held on May a re The gPthe factual issues be prepared to present evidede nce regarding concerning the nonconforming (residential) use of the building. 5. No hearing was held on May 12, 1988 since legal d (May 11, 1988) by the applicant, and proceedings were commence a hearing was to be continued on June 9, 1988, pending action by the Supreme Court. ;he property in^question is located in the -�- � � .; ,4 anci is identified on the r Page 3 - Appl. No. 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 6. On November 17, 1988 the Supreme Court rendered a decision remanding the issue of the nonconforming apartment use back to the Zoning Board of Appeals and reinstated that portion of the building permit which relates to the permitted restaurant use. 7: On January, 10, 1B8B, the subject premises was re-designated Hamlet Business (HB) under the new Master Plan revisions. 8. During 1990 , additional hearings were held by this Board, and testim n .. and documentation were recorded, ��. . . concerning tie status of the second floor apartment as a nonconforming use. . . " (as per the Supreme Court' s decision rendered November 17, 1988, Index No. 7725-88) . NOW, THEREFORE, an motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, that based upon the record and personal knowledge of the board, reinstatement is hereby GRANTED for the apartment use on the second floor for single-family occupancy, with renovations and new construction as exists and as furnished for the record, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the apartment not exceed 825 sq. ft. in total floor area; 2. That the apartment comply with all other codes, rules and regulations applicable thereto, including local and state fire construction codes. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Origonis, Doyen, and Dinizio. (Absent due to hospitalization was Member Sawicki. ) This resolution was duly adopted. j ,GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN lk APPEALSBOARD MEMBERS :a ' +*`b ►'s+ SCOTT L. HARRIS '�� '` Supervisor Gerard P. Gcehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 September 21, 1990 Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Dear Mr. Bressler: Transmitted for your records is a copy of the 'determination rendered by the Board of Appeals concerning the above application. Please be sure to. return to all involved agencies for approvals and permits as deemed necessary. Copies of this decision have simultaneously been transmitted. to the Building Inspectors' Office for their files and update. YOUrm very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Rowalski Enclosure copy Df Decision to. Building Inspectors' Office Suffolk County Department of Planning x _ / t ,�- APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ;,=� :t SCOTT L. HARRIS b 1 `. k Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman , Z) Charles Grigonis, Jr. 1 s Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS - Appl. No. . 3701: Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV, Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. Location of Property: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, Lot 5. Zone District: Hamlet Business (HB) , previously referred to as B-1 'General Business. At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on September 6, 1990 the following action was taken: WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted into the record concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: . 1. By this application, applicant requests a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October -27, 1986. The revocation was issued on November 5, 1987. The reasons stated on the building inspector's revocation notice read as follows: . ...Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued October 27, 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason; not following plans, did not comply with a stop work order, in violation of 100-142-C & D. . . . f Page 2 -Appl. No. 3701 Application of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 Section 100-142-C & D, supra, (now Section 100-282C & D) of the zoning code regulations, provides as follows: . . .Revocation of permit. The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances: . . . 1C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance of the application, plans or specifi- cations. . . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails. or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. . . . 2. The property in question: (a) contains a total lot area of 3 ,800 square feet with 40.0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in -the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold; (b) is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, 005; (c) is located in -the Hamlet Business (HB) Zone District, as re-designated January 10, 1989 under the new Master Plan revisions; (d) is improved with an existing building which is nonconforming as to various setback requirements. 3. Numerous hearings were held by this Board, and on April 14, 1988, an interim decision was rendered. 4. In this record, it was found that factual - and legal issues existed regarding the validity of the building permit under the nonconforming use section(s) of the zoning code (previously 100-118 and now Section 100-243) , and the Board at its April 14, 1988 meeting set this matter down for a further hearing to be held on May 12, 1988. The applicants were asked to be prepared to .present evidence regarding the factual issues concerning the nonconforming (residential) use of the building. 5. No hearing was held on May 12, 1988 since legal proceedings were commenced (May 11, 1988) by the applicant, and a hearing was to be continued on June 9, 1988, pending action by the Supreme Court. J Page 3 - Appl. No. 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 6. On November 17, 1988 the Supreme Court rendered a decision remanding the issue �of the nonconforming apartment use back to the Zoning Board of Appeals and reinstated that portion of the building permit which relates to the permitted restaurant use. -7. an January 10, 71798S, the subject premises was re-designated Hamlet Business (HB) under the new Master Plan revisions. 8. During 1990, additional hearings were held by this Board, and testim n " and documentation were recorded , . . . concerning tie status of the second floor apartment as a nonconforming use. . ." (as per the Supreme Court's decision rendered November 17, 1988, Index No. 7725-88) . NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, that based upon the record and personal knowledge of the board, reinstatement is hereby GRANTED for the apartment use on the second floor for single-.family occupancy, .with renovations and new construction as exists and as furnished for the record, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the apartment not exceed 825 sq. ft. in total floor area; 2. That the ,apartment comply with all other codes, rules and regulations applicable thereto, including local and state fire construction codes. Vote of the Board: Ayes Messrs. Goehringer, -Grigonis, Doyen, and Dinizio. (Absent due to hospitalization was Member Sawicki. ) This resolution was duly adopted. 1,,-`GERARD P. . GOEHRINGER, Chi IRMAN lk / t Southol Town Board ®f Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3701 Application Dated December 10 , 1987 TO: Eric J . ' Bressler , Esq . as Attorney [Appellant (s) ] for CHARLES ZAHRA Main Road , Box 14.24 Mattituck , NY 11952 At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on April 14 , 1988 , the above appeal was considered , and the action indicated below was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section j ] Request for Valiance to the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ X] Request for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV , Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Determination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 5 . Zone District : B-1 .Gener.al. .Busi ness . WHEREAS , public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 ; and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application ; and WHEREAS , the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning , and the surrounding areas ; and WHEREAS , the Board made the following findings of fact : 1 . This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . The revocation was issued on November 5 , 1987 . 2 . The property in question is located in the "B-l " General Business Zoning District and is identified on the Suffolk " County Tax Map as District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 005 . 3 . The subject premises contains a total area. of 3 ,800 sq . ft. with 40 . 0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck , Town of Southold . (CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO ) 1 DATED: April 14 , 1988 . CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) Page 2 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 4 . The subject premises is presently improved with a partially completed one-story concrete foundation with exterior walls . Previously , the premises was improved by a two-story structure which was nonconforming as to various setback require- ments and as to use . 5 . The building permit was revoked under Article XVI , Section 100-142 of the Zoning Code which reads as follows : " . . . The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances : A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application , plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B . Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance with the applicable law . C . Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application , plans or specifications . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. 6 . Hearings were held on this application on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 . The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters of personal knowledge in the record . This was completed by March 14 , 1988 , and the hearing was closed at the Board ' s Regular Meeting on March 17 , 1988. 7 . Based on the facts in the record , it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the Building Department . It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure . Indeed , the second story has been totally removed and the first floor has been completely rebuilt . The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new struc- ture when compared to the prior structure . 8. Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted , the facts before the Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit . Specifically , the evidence .would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building . This would violate Section 100- 118E of the Zoning Code . The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would also subject the project to compliance with present building code requirements under the New York State Building Code . Page 3 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 9 . Based on the personal knowledge of the Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner , it further appears that the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years . This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100-118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid. 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held . Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code . These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this juncture . Since no vested rights can be obtained under an illegal permit , it would appear to be in the applicant' s best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board . Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment ' s revocation of the building permit. 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr . Grigonis , seconded by Mr . Goehringer,it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of the 'Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING, to be held on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepay-ed to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sec- tions 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . GE AID P . GOEHRINGER , CVfRMAN O�oS11FF0(,��o APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS oy` G�.c Southold Town Hall Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman W 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. �, • �� P.O. Box 1179 James Dinizio,Jr. Or � Southold, New York 11971 Robert A. Villa Fax(516)765-1823 Lydia A.Tortora Telephone(516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD REPLY MEMORANDUM TO: Chairman and Members of the Planning Board Attn: Site Plan Reviewer FROM: Jerry Goehringer i DATE: June 5, 1996 SUBJECT: PB Inquiry - Property #1000-141-4-5 (C. Zahra, Owner) In response to your memo/inquiry received today regarding the above, there is of record a conditional ZBA approval which is still in effect (copies furnished to you by Mr. Whelan with his letter to PB . ) Apparently the Planning Board granted a waiver in 1986 based on that project indicating that the building was already existing and determined no site improvements were possible or required. It is our understanding that Mr. Whelan is trying to obtain a current building permit and other agency approvals necessary to complete and occupy the building as provided by the codes, and wants to be sure the waiver given by the PB in 1986 is still in effect. One of the changes that involved the zoning since the previous litigation was that the zoning category name was changed in 1989 from B Business to Hamlet Business (without any significant effect on the permitted uses under the previous zoning) . A copy of this letter is being furnished to the building department for their information since the Building Department may be, or will be involved in the process at some point. cc: Building Department (with copies) Attn: Thomas Fisher, Sr. Building Inspector eJ o c (j�04 pG' VALERIE SCOPAZ o Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN PLANNER y P.O. Box 1179 - -rry. Southold,New York 11971 s�t 0 Fax(516) 765-3136 -' '• �y7� Telephone(516) 765-1938 OFFICE OF THE TOWN PLANNER- D TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FP� rJUN {� - 51.9% Ll L ` f TO: Thomas Fisher, Senior Building Inspector Laury Dowd, Town Attorney / Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Board of appeals ✓ FROM: Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer/, SUBJECT: Request for site plan waiver Charles Zahra Pike Street, Mattituck SCTM# 1000-141-4-5 DATE: June 4, 1996 The attached correspondence has been received from Robert H. Whelan, agent for Charles Zahra, requesting a waiver of site plan requirements. In light of the previous litigation on this project I would appreciate your comments on this request. 't r su-GS'F PK R•d3E.R T H. WHELAN, P.E. p.O. Bnz 59/1 • 160 Runuttloty Lane ,lftwituck.. NY 11952 • 516-298-5770 Nlay 30, 1996 Southold Town Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York l 1971 Att: Richard G. Ward, Chairman Dear iv1r. Ward: As agent for Mr. Charles Zalira l would like to request a waiver of site plan requirements. ided for the Planning Board's review: The Following data is prov Name: 1Vlr. Charles Zahra Address: P.O. Box 1137, 1 g30 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY l 1952 Phone: >16-293-4091 Tax Map 9: 1000-l 4'1-04-05 Project Location: 140 Pike Street, N(attituck, NY l 1952 The project consists of the completion of alterations to the above referenced structure originally started in accordance with Building Permit#me on the se and level(ted occupancy is type C l or C2 for the first level and a residential ap A waiver of the site plan is requested based on a previous waiver dated October 6, 1986, copy attached and the prior issuance of a building permit. ZBA approval for the apartmentattached. Is current, with stipulations posted in a determination rendered September 6, 1990, copy Thank you for your time and cooperation on this matter. If there are any questions relative to the above please do not hesitate to call. e—ry U11 Yours; , A', Robert H. Whelan, P.E. enc. cc: Mr. Charles 7_ahra ►-,� } T( I,ll S . 'y Southold. N.Y. 1 1971 (516) 765-1938 '1 October 8 , 1.986 .Mr. Curtis Horton Building. Inspector Town Ball Southold, NY 11971 Re : Charles Zahra Dear Mr . Horton : The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, Monday, October 6 , 1986 . RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board waive the requirement for formal site plan relriew for the site of Charles Zahra located at Mattituck , since this is a pre- existing building and no site improvements could be made at this time . If any physical changes are made subsequent to this , however , It may need formal site plan consideration and should be reviewed by the Planning Board. If you have any questions , please don ' t hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours , BENNETT ORLOWSnI , JR . CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN pL,jANNiNG !3Ur1RD By Diane M. Schultze , Secretary 7:4 APPEALS BOARD ASS �� S{=I_RABBIS a •.�`?# Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman :<•.._ �� . Charles Grigonis, Jr. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen,Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold,New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SO UTHOLD Telephone(516) 765-1800 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS = Appl. No 3701: Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV, Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. Location of Property: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 141, . Block 4, Lot 5. Zone District: Hamlet Business (HB) , previously referred to as B-1 General Business. At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on September 6, 1990 the following action was taken: WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted into the record concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the .Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding a=aas; -and 't WHEREAS, the Board made the _following findings of fact: 1- By this appl;r-ai-;nn.-ap?7 ;rant re-quests a revexSsll -of _the determination of the Building -Inspector of his -Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. The revocation was issued on November 5, . 1987. The reasons stated on the building inspector's revocation notice read as follows: . ...Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued October 27, 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason; not following plans, did not comply with a stop work order, in violation of 100-142-C & -D. . . . ' 1 Page 2 -Appl. No. 3701 APPIInatinn of CELARLEa ZAEIRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 Section 100-142-C & D, supra, (now Section 100-282C & D) of the zoning code regulations, provides as follows: . . .Revocation of permit. The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances: . . . C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in . accordance of the application, plans or specifi- cations. . . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. . . . 2. The property in question: (a) contains a total lot area of 3 ,800 square feet with 40.0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold; (b) is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, 005; (c) is located in the Hamlet Business (HB) Zone District, as re-designated January 10, 1989 under the new Master Plan revisions; (d) is improved with an existing building which is nonconforming as to various setback requirements. 3- Numerous .hearings were .held .by this Board, and .on _April 14, 1988, an interim decision was rendered. 4. In this record, it was found that factual and legal issues existed regarding the validity of the building-permit under the nonconforming use section(s) of the zoning code (previously 100-118 and now Section 100-243) , and the Board at its April 14, 1988 meeting set this matter down for a further hearing to be held on May 12, 1988. The applicants were asked to be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues concerning the nonconforming (residential) use of the building. 5. No hearing was held on May 12, 1988 since legal proceedings were commenced 4Xay 11; -UBB) �by the applicant, and a hearing was to be continued on June 9, 1988, pending action by the Supreme Court. Page 3 — ARpl_ No_ 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 6. On November 17, 1988 the Supreme Court rendered a decision remanding the issue of the nonconforming apartment use back to the Zoning Board of Appeals and reinstated that portion of the building permit which relates to the permitted restaurant use. 7. "On Uanuary ID, 1989, the subject 'premises was re-designated Hamlet Business (HB) under the new Master Plan revisions.. 8. During 1990, additional hearings were held by this Board, and testim ny" and documentation were recorded , ". . . concerning tie status of the second floor apartment as a nonconforming use. . ." (as per the Supreme Court's decision rendered November 17, 1988, Index No. 7725-88) . NOW, THEREEFORE, an motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, that based upon the record and personal knowledge of the board, reinstatement is hereby GRANTED for the apartment use on the second floor for single-family occupancy, with renovations and new construction as exists and as furnished for the record, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the apartment not exceed 825 sq. ft. in total floor area; 2. That the apartment comply with all other codes, rules and regulations applicable thereto, including local and state fire construction codes. Vote of the Board: Ayes: 'Messrs. Goehringer, -Grigonis, Doyen, and Dinizio. (Absent due to hospitalization was Member Sawicki. ) This resolution was duly adopted. /-'GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, C IRMAN lk / 9/22/87 - Stop Work Issued (Plans 100-243 old code) 10/27/86 Permit issued by V. Lessard 11/5/87 Revocation issued by Building Dept. 12/10/87 - Coffee Pot variance filed with ZBA Numerous ZBA hearings held 4/14/88 - Interim Decision by ZBA and Resolution Remanding for final hearing to be held 5/12/88. 4/15/88 - Transmitted decision with cover letter to E. Bressler. 5/11/88 Order to Show Cause Petition served upon the Town Clerk. 5/12/88 - Final Hearing Date was to be held this evening, and was postponed due to status of Order to Show Cause. Hearing was then postponed by ZBA Resolution (with reserved date as agreed . . .of June 9, 1988) -await further notice by both the Town Defense Attorney and the applicant's attorney. 6/9/88 - Court case still pending. Final hearing not advertised. -------------------------- B&B 9/28/88 - Bed and Breakfast application by C. Zahra filed. 10-19-88 - Copy of owner's deed received as requested by ZBA. 10-20-88 - Advertised hearing in newspapers 10-26-88 - B&B Hearing held by ZBA. 12-8-88 Denied without prejudice by ZBA. 1-9-89 - Letter from Eric Bressler requesting rehearing. 1-11-89- Art. 78 filed for B&B 1-12-89 - ZBA meeting-Board not able to obtain unanimous vote to rehear as required by Town Law. 2-27-89 -' Application submitted for B&B by Raymond Nine and Charles Zahra (instead of C. Zahra solely) . 3-9-89 - B&B Hearing held for new application. 4-13-89 - B&B Denied Without Prejudice. B&B .operator was not an owner. ' 5-30-89 - Art. 78 was found to be on file with Town Clerk. s ----------------------------- 11/17/88 - Judge Tanenbaum rendered decision remanding issue of nonconforming apartment back to ZBA. 12/7/88 - Charlie Zahra was in office and spoke with Theresa Reilly about status of a ZBA file. 12/7/88 - Linda Kowalski called Charlie Zahra at his home in Mattituck and left message on his machine--as a follow-up to his visit earlier this day in the office. 12/12/88 - Ray Nine stopped in ZBA office twice. 12/16/88 - Charlie Zahra reviewed ZBA file in office. 1/10/89 - Town changed zoning to. Hamlet Business (HB would permit an apartment over existing businesses by Special Exception subject to approval of fire inspector if over a restaurant) . 1-9-89 - Letter from Eric Bressler requesting B&B rehearing. 1-11-89- Art. 78 filed for B&B 1/31/89 thru 5/15/89 - Charlie Zahra visited ZBA office 20+ different dates during this time period. 4-13-89 - B&B Denied Without Prejudice. B&B operator was not an owner. 5-30-89 - Art. 78 B&B was found to be on file with Town Clerk. 4/16/90 - 6/12/90 - Charlie Zahra visited ZBA office at least six (6) different dates during this time period. B&B 6/12/90 - Charlie Zahra delivered updated, corrected neighbor notices to ZBA office, with proof of current mailing (certified mail receipts) . -= NOTICE OF HEARINGS" 'NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, poniuiint to Section 267 of the Town Law and the�Co&of the_Town of Southold.;the following;hearings. will be held by the.SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD,OF APPEALS at a d� Regular Mee+jng,:at:the Southold Town hall,h?&%n.Roid NY,_11971; "Southold, STATE OF NEW YORK) ;og WhDNBSD'AY, . JULY 254199 , a1 the following )SS: ttmd �i¢� i h Sr I 7:3Q p�m.App:'No.39S4i'- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) PHILTP SALIGB Vatisnce'.3q tfi'e Zoning orainanrektieie iti°A; , Yvonne Lieblein of Mattituck, in Section 100-3OA 4(1Q0=33),�rtide xxm section 100 2.39 a B for said County, being duly sworn,says that he/she is Principal permission.toi'construci'an' Cces sory.shed and deck with.gazebo. Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, Accessory.shed;is 1e"ss`.t>tan3ft. published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of from'a lot line;gazebo:isfioeated`in thefraat.yard antrgazebo and deck Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which siegeii;thsn:75 r from°alic:bRt�li= the annexed Is a printed copy,has been regularly published in head_.No pm VLocation=1945 Bayview Av=46,Mattituck;°Court- said Newspaper once each week for 1 weeks ty Tax Mip.No:;,11000 Sec(iot'I.06 1�— day+o f Bl«ko6,Lfli:37:���:-,�; �:��;�;�.:�;�`� successively, commencing on the 7:35 p m;Appl .No 3960; July 19 90 ` THOMAS`d�ALLI50N:;'SAR GENT.Variance"totfie'Zonin9 Ordi-: nance,`ArticlIV .IIt.�►I Sectioin 100:.. ;. .30A3,for pemnission,tosubdivide.a' non-conforming:=loi..Pioposed 'constrnetian.of"aew:lot".vyill h$ve: insu�iciei .width;4 and; orai;;; Principal Clerk lot area for this district;:Prope Location: Private Rol.&of Fox, Avenue;Fishers Island,County Tax (MK[p}_N•.(�..//1000.:Section 06;'Block Sworn o efore me this 7:40 p.m. Appf"No k3955 '' DOMINICK SBLENDIDO.& A;'; day of 1 U (WARY K.DEGNAN AURICCHIO:yariance'to the Zon NOTARY PIBLiC,State of New York ing Ordinance;Article III A;motion;; Suffolk County No.4ti498o0 �j� Term Expires Februa1�j _) 100-30.3, Article XXIII;:Section 100-230(A),Article IIIA'Sear 100-30A.2:A(1)(100-31A),for-per= mission to construct an:addWon to existing one fafitily:dwelling Pro' e,.,......,_.>.. posed 00i0ruicam is not a permitted -use." -0 one-family detached' dwelling rio;tato exceed on 7•$S p.m. Appl.No. 39I5•=. ;;:dwelling on each loi(a two:family JORDAN'S PARTNERS:Variance.: dwelling is not a permitted use) t1.o-.the Zoning Ordinance,Article Property Location:.185 Iri�et;Lane VII,Section 100-71 as disapproved;. Greenport.Court Tax Map No for permission to'construct office D V t5 1000.Section 43.Block 004;�1.ot 37: and retail stores Proposed consttnc ?:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3956 'don is note permitted Rise-I iU� O 19� :rYnvn t' S.Soecial Exr�ti District.Property Locations tolhe.Zoning Ordinance,•Article.X;, Main Street and 160.Main Seixion�100-101B,fotpermisgion to Greenport, County Tax M?'occupy enduse as a Billiard parlor 1000.Section 34,Block 2,Lofor commeroial recreation.Property. 'r';The Board of Appeals will Location:.46250 County Road 48, and place hear ajy and all per Southold; County Tax Map No. sons or representatives,desiring to 1000,Section 55,Block 5,Lot 7; heard,.in each of the. e,matters atte °:1:50 p.m.Appl.No..3701` '�Wnitten*comincnti may-also be sub CHARLES-ZAHRA. Variance to mitred prior to the oonclusion'of tb the Zoning Ordinance;Article XXV, subject hearing:Each hearing w• Section 1080-243,Article XXV;Sec- not start.before time allotted.Addi 'ion 100-244,for permission to.con-_ tional time for your presentation will tine to usC.the second floor aFurt- be available;if needed.`For more ment as anon-confonming_use. inf6rmati6n,pleasecall765-1809. .: Property Location: 140 Pike Street, Dated:July 17,1990 Mattituck,Cotinty'Tax Map.No. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD 1000,Section 141,Blocz 4,Lot;5..J� •- :TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P.GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN (b~ 'By Doreen Ferwerda NOTICE OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY. GIVEN, pursuant to Section,`,. COUNTY OF S U F FO L K 267 of the Town Law and the STATE OF NEW YO R K ss: Code of the Town of Southold, the following hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the �r'at a Regular Meeting, at tb ?'-Southold Town.,Hall, `Main,..'I. Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, ;.:Road, Southold, NY•11971, on a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; WEDNESDAY,lowin times: ,1990,: ` and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed co at the following times:- '•'••:` . ' ;.`•�_ p copy, p.m. Appl.,No. 3954.N has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman '�PHILIP SALICE:'Variance to.. once each week for . . ,�. , weeks Zoning Ordinance, Article., ' ' 'III A. ;Section 100 30A 4 22` ,(100-33),Article XXII1,Seehon.,` successively, commencing on the ::;100-239.4 B,.for.permission to% construct'an accessory shed and deck with gazebo: Accessory ` day o l. . . . . . . . . ....shed is less than 3 ft'.from a lot' fine,-gazebo is located:,in the 'front yard and gazebo and deck aie less-than,75'ft. from the ,.!,,bulkhead. Property.•Locationv 1945 Bayvfew Avenue, Matti-. tuck, County Tax Map .No.,.,, 1000'Section 106,Block 06,Lot 37. Sworn to before me this . . . ,�. . . . . day of 3707:35 p.m. Appl.,No. 396(J— '`' c THOMAS.& ALi ISON SAR , • • , , • • . • • . . . . . 19 ••GENT. Variance to'the;Zoning' Ordinance,-Article III.,A,-Sec- cle:XXV,Section.100-243,:Art!=;rtrt tion 100-30A.3, for permission cle XXV,,Section 100-244,.for.to subdivide a non-conforming. permission''to continue,to'.use lot. Proposed construction of the second floor apartment'as a.... . . . . .e. . .. .new lot Will have .insufficient non-conforming'use."]Property` width,.depth and.total lot area, Location: 140 Pike Street;_Mat- Notary Public for this district.Pioperty Loca tituck, County Tax Map No., don: Private Road:of Fox Ave-,, - BARE-ARA A. SCHNEIDER 1000 Section 14l Block 4 Lof - nue,Fishers Island,County Tax S. s ; a+sty NOTAII'M P M2,1_iC, State of New York Map No. ,1000, Section 06, 7 55., No. 4:i'•Ii846 p.m Appl. No• 3915 Block'06; Lot 07 ( :;a;�d 1 `-oll� I cun'y ,_. JORDAN S PARTNERS.Van f 7:40 p.m. APPI No 3955 -ion ance to the Zoning Ordinance, '150MINICK .SBLENDIDO & Article VII, Section 100-71, as -rAURICCHIO::Variance,-to:` -,K w��.:, . • disapproved, for permission to 'the,Zoning-Ordinance;'.Article. ; construct office and retail stores. .R41(A 'Section 100-30.3,Article'.;, �: Iroposed construction is nova- : ,,XXIII,Section 100-230(A),'Ar- . ' 3° . .``•`permitted"use in;.this District: s: ele.'III`"A; Section°100-30A,2 Property Locations:.1000,Main, =31A), for permission Street and .160 .Main Road; _-rto construct addition to exist •-,r--..._ .,., .. ,:� �`.'•Greenport;:•County Tax Map..`; gli ing one family dwelling. Pro r..posed construction is not a per,.,; No. 1000, Section 34, Block 2;, ,Lot 1; mitted use (1) one-family de-.. The Board of Appeals will at - tached dwelling not.to exceed said time and place hear any and ol, one (1) dwelling on each lot (a;"' an persons or representatives de- two family dwelling is not a per-. siring to be heard in each of the ' mitted use).Property Location: ':"'; above matters..Written coin- 185 Inlet Lane, Greenport, .., ments may•also be submitted 'County TaxMapNo. 1000,Sec t `'''prior to the conclusion of the tion 43, Block 004, Lot 37. subject hearing. Each hearing 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3956-"': i''? -..will not start before time allot- • . -"LLOYD GATES.Special Excep- > ted. Additional time.for our tion to the Zoning,Ordinanc y � "''•``presentation will be available;if '• Article X,Section 100-1011),for needed. For more information, permission to Occupy and use as ;please call 765-1809 a Billiard parlor for commercial ! Dated July.17, 1990, recreation: Property.Location: BY ORDER OF 46250 County Road 48, ' THE SOUTHOLD TOWN Southold,County Tax Map.No. `,r.. BOARD OF APPEALS 1000,Section 55,Block 5,Lot 7. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER .-Z:50=p:rh-._AppL- No.-3701—. CHAIRMAN CHARL-ES-ZAHRA•Variance i to the Zoning Ordinance,Arti- BY Doreen Ferwerda�l 1X;7/19/90.(3) I f APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Supervisor Charles y is, Jr.Doyen, Town Serge Doyen, Jr. To Hall, 53095 Main Road Joseph H. Sawicki P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD qb Telephone (516) 765-1800 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time, date and place of the public hearing concerning your application is a -copy of the Legal Notice, as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman, Inc. and Suffolk Times, Inc. . Please have someone appear in your behalf at the time specified in the event there are questions brought up during the same and in order to prevent a delay in the processing of your application. Your public hearing will not start before the times allotted in the attached Legal Notice. Please feel free to call our office prior to the hearing date if you have questions or wish to update your file. Yours very truly, P GERARD P. GOEHR10CER, CHAIRMAN dff NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, BRUCE & TERESA BLASKO. pursuant to the Section 267 of the. Special Ex. ;�n o the Zoning TowfF Law and the Code of the Ordmance- FM Section 100- Town of 4etnitaid,the following 31 B(14),fl-�:_ ,mission to have an -hearings will be held by the accessory apartment.Proposed SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF "'accessory apartment is an existing STATE OF NEW PORK) APPEALS at a Regular Meeting,at one family dwelling will contain less the Southold Town Hall,Main Road, then 1600 sq.ft.'of livable floor }SS' -Southold,. N.Y., .11971, . on area.Property Lotion:23:Middle WEDNESDAY,June 27, 1990'at . ton Road,Greenport,County Tax COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) the following times: Map No. 1000,Section 40,Block 3,. Lot 9. '7:30`p.m. Appl. No 3949 ,8:05 P.m. Appl No 39.50 t Yvonne Lieblein of Mattituck, in PRANCES FBISIm.6.Xariance to JACQUE.KASABA.Vananceto.the. Said County, balm duly sworn says that he/she is Principal the Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, g y y p Section 100-30 AA(100-33),as dis- . ' '..-.Section 100-30 A.4(100-33),Arti- Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, approved for permission to con- cle III A,Section 100-30A.3,Ar if struct an cessory building in the XXIV, Section 100-244, as ais- published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of .'.• front yard rea Accessory buildings approved, for permission to con-. Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which may only located in the required; struct a deck a dition to dwelling yL ` rear yard. Property Location:Soso :d}hand a��essory 1 001. Proposed ac- the annexed is a printed copy,has been regularly published in Nassau Point Road,Cutchogue County Tax Map No. 1000,Seaton - - said Newspaper once each week for 1 wee-ks 118,Block 5,Lot 2.1. Le gals no successively, commencing on the 21 _ day o f 7.35 p.m. Appl.No. 3948 :.'Coritinuedfrompreviouspage June 19 90 MGH ENTERPRISES, INC. cessory structure not permitted in ORIENT BY THE SEA. Special the front yard area and proposed Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, construction will exceed permitted Article III,Section 100-31 C.9 (e), lot coverage.Property Location: 80 / as disapproved,for permission to Lakeside Drive&675 Cedar Point v (WaA construct an off-premises sign.Prop- 'Drive,Southold,County Tax Map erty Location:66040 North Road, No. 1000.Section 90,Block 3,Lot Principal Clerk Greenport,County Tax Map No. 14. 1000,Section 40,Block 04,Lot 01. 8;10 p.m. Appl. No. 3953 - 7:40 p.m. Appl.No. 3947 - PETER&CHERYL INZERILLO. JAMES MARK. Variance to the Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, = Article III A Section 1 ; 30 A:3, Section 100-30 A.3,Article XXIV Swoon t before me this Section 100-244 B,as disapproved] Bulk.PP and Parking gulations, -�+- o?1 u•� G„p NeNc1}pt4 as disapproved,for permission to y /�i� , �t� for permission to construct an add.- day Of �9 tion to a one family dwelling. Pro- construct a deck addition to existing. ,n�4''1 P•�3 ++v °fj.0 posed construction will have insuf one family dwelling.Proposed con- ficient front yard setback.Property struction will have insufficient side Location: 450 Parsons Boulevard, yard setbacks and excessive lot cov- erage. East Marion,County Tax Map No:.. Property Location:505 7th' 1000,Section 37,Block 1,Lot 18.- Street; Pon+County Tax Map 7:45 p.m. Appl.No. 3946- No.1000,Section 48,Block 01,Lot MATTHEW KAR. Variance to the 17. t L� - Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 3831 - 8.2 p.m Appl. No. 3915 - Section 100-30 A.3,Article XXIV, RALPH&PATRICIA PUGLIESE. JORDAN'S PARTir S. Variance Section 100-244 B,as disapproved,`•" Special Exception to the Zoning _-- •- for permission to construct an addi- Ordinance,Article III,Section.100- -to the Zoning Ordinai ce,Article tion to a one family dwelling.Pro- 30B (14).for a Winery for the Pro- ir�0 VII,Secti�-. 100-71,as isapproved, posed construction will have insuf- :duction.Storage.and the Retail Sale for permission to construct office. ficient rear yard setback. Property of Wine.Property Location:34876 and retail stores.Proposed construe- Location: 155 (Pvt.Road ti6)Birch '.'.Main Road,CutcJnogue,County Tax tion is not a permitted use in this Drive S,Laurel,County Tax Map Map No. 1000,Seetion.097.Block• District. Property Location: 1000 No. 1000,Section 128,Block 4,Lot Ol Lot 12.1. Main Street and 160 Main Road, q - 8:20 p.m. Appl.No-3701 - Greenport, County Tax Map No. 7:50 p.n. Appl. No. 3944,- CHARLFS ZAHRA.Variance w the 1000,Section 34,Block 2,Lot 1. _ - Zoning Ordinance,Article XXV, ..The Board of Appeals will at said HON' MERCORELLA.Vari- Section 100-243.Article XXV,Sec- time and place hear any and all per- ante td Zoning Ordinance,Arti- tion 244,for permission to continue ``.sons or representatives desiring to be, cle II1,Section 100-33,as disap- to use the second floes'apartment as heard in each of the above matters. proved,for permission to construct a a non-conforming use.Property Written comments may also b_e.sub- two car accessory garage in the front Location: 1;; street,Matti- mined prior to the conclusion of the yard area.Proposed construction tuck,County Tax.Map No. 1000. subject hearing.Each hearing will only permitted in the required rear Section 141,Block 49 Lot 5.. . not start before time allotted Addi- yard. Property Location: 2260 ' tional time for your presentation will Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, .be available, if needed. For more County Tax Map No. 1000.Section information,please call 765-1809. 145,Block 04,Lot 04. -,Dated June.19,1990: 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 39511D f BY ORDER OF JAMES.PETER&CHRIS MESK-. THE SOUTHOLD OURIS.Variance to the Zoning Or- z :TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS dinance,Article III A.Section 100- @Eit.GOEHRINGER 30 A.3,Article XXIIL Section 100- _ CHAIRMAN -_239d A.(2).construction ` By Doreen Ferwerda will not meet side yard setbacks and. 6623-1TJ21 will exceed the permitted lot cover- -. age and will be within 100 ft.of the ordinary high water mark.Property. Location: 1350 Sound Beach Drive, Mattituck,County Tax map No.. ti 1000.Section 106,Block 1,Lot 36, Town Board p�of A eals Southold b� t�r.,• a �, „r MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516)765-1809 FAX No. (516)765-1823 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. / JOSEPH H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time, date and place of the public hearing concerning your application is a copy of the Legal Notice, as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman, Inc. and Suffolk Times, Inc. Please have someone appear in your behalf at the time specified in the event there are questions brought up during the same and in order to prevent a delay in the processing of your application. Your public hearing will not start before the times allotted in the attached Legal Notice. Please feel free to, call our office prior to the hearing date if you have questions or wish to update your file. Yours very truly, r GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN dff F rr '�- APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ;+ ' ' SCOTT L. HARRIS c,+"� `" t . ' y Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, '�;t;..,�:::; ! �; Chairman � �• Charles Grigonis, Jr. `=' '., Ser a Do en, Jr. � '-Y� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road g y P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800. September 21, 1990 Eric J. Bressler, Esq. Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl.' No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Dear Mr. Bressler: Transmitted for your records is a copy of the determination rendered by the Board of Appeals concerning the above application. Please be sure to. return to all involved agencies for approvals and permits as deemed necessary. Copies of this decision have simultaneously been transmitted-'to the Building Inspectors' Office for, their files and update., Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By 'Linda Kowalski Enclosure Copy of Decision to: _ Building Inspectors' Office Suffolk County Department of Planning APPEALSBOARD MEMBERS y SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ',= Charles Grigonis, Jr. -� 1 �`� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph H. Sawicki Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 7654800 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS - Appl. No. . 3701: Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV, Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. Location of Property: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck,' NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, Lot 5. Zone District: Hamlet Business (HB) , previously referred to as B-1 General Business. At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on September 6, 1990 the following action was taken: WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted into the record concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the .Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: . 1. By this application, applicant requests a reversal of the determination of the Building -inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27, 1986. The- revocation was issued on November 5, 1987. The reasons stated on the building inspector's revocation notice read as follows: . ...Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued, October 27, 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason; not following plans,, did not comply with a stop work order, in violation of 100-142-C & D. . . . t x�. Page 2 -Appl. No. 3701 Application of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 Section 100-142-C & D, supra, (now Section- 100-282C & D) of the zoning code regulations, provides as follows: . . .Revocation of permit. The "Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances:. . . . C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance of the application, plans or specifi- cations. . . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. . . . 2. The property in question: (a) contains a total lot area of 3,800 square feet with 40.0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck, Town of Southold; (b) is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, 005; (c) is located in the Hamlet Business (HB) Zone District, as re-designated January 10, 1989 under the new Master Plan revisions; (d) is improved with an existing building which is nonconforming as to various setback requirements. 3. Numerous hearings were held by this Board, and on April 14, 1988, an interim decision was rendered. 4. In this record, it was found that factual and legal issues existed regarding the validity of the building permit - under the nonconforming use section(s) of the zoning code (previously 100-118 and now Section 100-243 ) , and the Board at its April 14, 1988 meeting set this matter down for a further hearing' to be held on May 12, 1988. The applicants were asked to be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues concerning the nonconforming (residential) use of the building. 5. No hearing was held on May .12, 1988 since legal proceedings were commenced (May 11, 1988) by the applicant, and a hearing was to be continued on June 9, 1988, pending action by the Supreme Court. J. Page 3 - Appl. No. 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered September 6, 1990 6. On November 17, 1988 the Supreme Court rendered a decision remanding the issue of the nonconforming apartment use back to the Zoning Board of Appeals and reinstated that portion of the building permit which relates to, the permitted restaurant use. 7. On January 1D, T989, the subject premises was re-designated Hamlet Business (HB) under the new Master Plan revisions. 8. During 1990, additional hearings were held by this Board, and testim ny', and documentation were recorded , 11 , , concerning tie status of.,the second floor apartment as a nonconforming use. . ." (as per the Supreme 'Court's decision rendered November 17, 1988, Index No. 7725-88) . NOW, THEREFORE, on motion by Mr. Goehringer, seconded by Mr. Dinizio, it was RESOLVED, that based upon the record and personal knowledge of the board, reinstatement is hereby GRANTED for the apartment use on the second floor for single-family occupancy, with renovations and new construction as exists and as furnished for the record, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. That the apartment not exceed 825 sq. ft. in total floor area; 2. That the apartment comply with all other codes, rules and regulations applicable thereto, including local and state fire construction codes. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer,, Mrigonis, Doyen, and Dinizio. (Absent due to hospitalization-was Member Sawicki. ) This resolution was duly adopted. Z-1� "GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, C IRMAN lk / a n ��Fi1� � ,. �- ld Board Southo Town ®f} : f MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTH❑LD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 1 � TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3701 Application Dated December 10 , 1987 TO: Eric J . Bressler , Esq . as Attorney [Appellant (s) ] for CHARLES ZAHRA ` Main Road , Box 1424 Mattituck , NY 11952 At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on April 14 , 1988 , the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning. Ordinance Article , Section [ ] Request for Valance to the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ X] Request for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV , Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Determination of Building Inspector in hi,s Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 5 . Zone District : B-1 .Gener.al. .Busi ness . WHEREAS , public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988; and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application ; and WHEREAS , the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning , and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS , the Board made the following findings of fact : 1 . This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . The revocation was issued on November 5 , 1987 . 2 . The property in question is located in the "B-l " General Business Zoning District and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 005 . 3 . The subject premises contains a total area of 3 ,800 sq . ft. with 40 .0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck , Town of Southold . (CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO ) DATED: April 14 , 1988 . CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) i Page 2 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 4 . The subject premises is presently improved with a partially completed one- story concrete foundation with exterior walls . Previously , the premises was improved by a two-story structure which was nonconforming as to various setback require- ments and as to use . 5 . The building permit was revoked under Article XVI , Section 100- 142 of the Zoning Code which reads as follows : " . . . The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances : A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application , plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B . Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance with the applicable law . F C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application , plans or specifications . D. Where the person to whom a building permit ha-s been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. 6 . Hearings were held on this application on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 . The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters of personal knowledge in the _ record . This was completed by March 14 , 1988 , and the hearing was closed at the Board ' s Regular Meeting on March 17 , 1988 . 7 . Based on the facts in the record , it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the Building Department . It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure . Indeed , the second story has been totally removed and the first floor has been completely rebuilt . The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new struc- ture when compared to the prior structure . 8. Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted , the facts before the Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit . Specifically , the evidence would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building . This would violate Section 100- 118E, of the Zoning Code . The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would also subject the project to compliance with present building code requirements under the New York State Building Code . Page 3 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 9 . Based on the personal knowledge of the Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner , it further appears that -the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years . This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100- 118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid. 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held . Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code . These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this . juncture . Since no vested rights can be obtained under an illegal permit , it would appear to be in the applicapt' s best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board . Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment ' s revocation of the building permit. 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr . Grigonis , seconded by Mr . Goehringer,it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING , to be held on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sec- tions 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . 1 k -CERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CaXfRMAN d UVYN ( LfcRWS U1 1 8(.IL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date ....... embe.r...5.......................... 19. 87. - TO CHARLES T. & JEAN Z.AHRA ....................................................... (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952 ...............................................................I................. (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: Zoning Ordinance ..........CII.........�0................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that ......Your building permit no 15428. Z issued (state character of violation) October 27, 1986 is hereby revoked Reason; not following...pl.ans , did not comply with a stop work order. ................................................................................. .•............................,.- ............................................ inviolation of ......................................................100- 142—C & D.............. .............................................. ..................... (State section or paragraph of applicable law, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the 6th conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ...................................................................... day of .....Novemper 19....II� The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 140 Pike Street , Matttituck , County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of law may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 1000- 141-04-05 ... . .. .... ..j� ....2z Building Inspector RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) sent to Charles & Jean Zahra Street and No. 1830 Pike St T }1E P.O.,Stat nd ZIP Cod °.� O •� igttitucelt N.Y. tM � •' m i Postage $ j'/ c V m v a dt a c 1s Certified Fee i a o.�•�c '" � w i '" � � � ' Or Special Delivery Fee 0,n m° 9 d �.; CD t: Restricted Delivery Fee N j 3`, m o pa O JJ }(' mW� cam N J.J Return Receipt Showing = °t y m ® h '�'O o . to whom and Date Delivered I m v F m_ v m ii O Return receipt showing to whom, ' '° m ti t o n o ib y j O Date,and Address of Delivery ° - ° ; v a p _ o,� Q Q Q IM _ t2 gg i TOTAL Postage and Fees $ V ri « v O •u m v `O °> Lu my �,�a, m ..o m ,� 00 N o °' OW o S Postmark or Date -�,'� Z m :'m �LU O .W M m C i `—° H ❑ W' 15 Q ` I.�,'i FT- '�U `ccIW-' o 11/5/87 T �Q rn in _ a.m a v ° )C r0.. X a R<< PS Form 3811,duly 1983 447-845 ! DOMESTIC RETURN RECEIPT Pi, OF.$0W1"M A (TOVWMN H G.,DEPA T ti r�`T i� Y�94.. dt �< r *A­ -;, SOUTHOLD I BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) ......................... 19.... z Date N9 15428 Permission is hereby granted to: —4........... ......1.: .................................... ........... .........................................i................. '4v t �.. ..;z........to .. ......... ................. ........................... ....... .. ................. ........ .... .. .......... It.......... �Tty ........................ . ..... *;-*K*77 01M 94-----------9" remises located at . .... ............. . ... ...................... ................. ... 4"IT .............:..... 0........................ .............. .......... .. I - -5.*: '._ ' 7' ' .............................................. 7 County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .......-, Block ..................... Lot No. .......... ...... i6 pursuant to application dated ....... .... .............. ...... 19. and oplN W by thi.;_ Building Inspector. a Fee $........ Zz­ 0 J J.. 'i'SVxi ­049/80 Patricia Wood,- being dul, worn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAwty- TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been •published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman once each week for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .l. . . . weeks Successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S�� I Sworn to before me this . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . clay of . . . . . , 19 . l. .v . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .� . . . . . . . . . . :.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notary Public BAR13ARA A. SCHNE10911 NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New 11ot No.4S O6846 Qualified it Suffo;k County commission 'xpires �3111rjv NOTICE OF HEARINGS T. 7:47:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3946- in an existing one family dwell- 8:20 p.m. Appl. No. 376- NOTICE IS HEREBY MATTHEW KAR.Variance to ing will contain less than 1600 CHARLES ZAHRA. Variance GIVEN pursuant to the Section the Zoning Ordinance, Article sq.ft.of livable floor area.Pro- to the Zoning Ordinance,Arti- GIVEN of the Town Law and the III A,Section 100-30 A.3,Arti- perty Location: 23 Middleton cle XXV, Section 100-243, Ar- Code of the Town of Southold, cle XXIV,Section 100-244 B,as Road, Greenport, County Tax title XXV,Section 244,for per- the following hearings will be disapproved, for permission to Map No. 1000, Section 40, mission to continue to use the held by the SOUTHOLD construct an addition to a one Block 5, Lot 9. second.floor apartment as a TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS family dwelling.Proposed con- 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 3950- non-conforming use. Property Mat- at a Regular Meeting, at the struction will have insufficient JACQUE KASABA. Variance Location: 140 Pike Street,Mat- Southold Town Hall, Main rear yard setback: Property to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- tituck, County Tax Map No. Road, Southold, NY 11971, on Location: 155 (Pvt. Road N6) cle III A, Section 100-30 A.4 1000,Section 141,Block 4, Lot WEDNESDAY, June 27, 1990, Birch Drive S, Laurel,County'' (100-33),Article III A, Section 5, at the following times: Tax Map No. 1000,Section 128, 100-30A.3, Article XXIV, Sec- 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 3915- 7:30 p.m. Appl. No. 3949- Block 4, Lot 4. tion 100-244,as disapproved,for JORDAN'S PARTNERS. FRANCES FRISBIE.Variance 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 3944- permission to construct a deck Variance to the Zoning Ordi- to the Zoning Ordinance,Arti- ANTHONY MERCORELLA. addition to dwelling-and acces- nance, .Article VII, Section cle III A, Section 100-30 A.4 Variance to the Zoning Ordi- sory pool. Proposed accessory 100-71,as disapproved,for per- (100-33), as disapproved, for nance, Article III, Section structure not permitted in the mission to construct office and permission to construct an ac- 100-33,as disapproved,for per- front yard area and proposed retail stores.Proposed construc- cessory building in the front. mission to construct a two car construction will exceed permit- lion is not a permitted use in this 1_ yard area. Accessory buildings accessory garage in. the front led lot coverage.Property Loca- District. Property" LocatioRql may only be located in the re- yard area. Proposed construe- tion: 80 Lakeside Drive & 675 l 1000 Main Street and 160 Maih quired rear yard.Property Loca- tion only permitted in the rel Cedar Point Drive, Southold417 Road, Greenport, County.Tax tion: 8050 Nassau Point Road, quired rear yard.Property Loca- County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- Map No. '1000, Section. 34, Cutchogue, County Tax Ma� tion: 2260 Peconic Bay Boule- tion 90, Block-3, Lot 14. Block 2, Lot 1. No. 1000,Section 118,Block 5; -vard, Laurel, County Tax Map 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3953- The Board of Appeals will at t o, 1 No. 1000,Section 145;Block 04, PETER & CHERYL IN- said time and place hear any and 7:35 p.m. Appl. No.•3948- Lot 04. ZERILLO.variance to the Zon- ali persons or representatives de- NIGH ENTERPRISES, INC. 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 3951- ing Ordinance, Article III A, siring to be heard in each of the ORIENT BY THE SEA.Special JAMES, PETER & CHRIS Section 100-30•A.3,Bulk,Area above matters. Written com- Exception to the Zoning Or- MESKOURIS. Variance to the and Parking Regulations,as dis- ments may also be submitted dinance, Article III, Section Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, approved, for permission to prior to the conclusion of the 100-31 C.9(e), as disapproved, Section . 100130 A.3, Article construct a deck addition to subject hearing. Each hearing for permission to construct an XXIII,Section 100-239d A.(2). existing one family dwelling. will not start before time allot- off-premises sign. Property Proposed construction will not Proposed construction will have ted. Additional time for your Location: 66040 North Road, meet side yard setbacks and will insufficient side yard setbacks presentation will be available,if Greenport, County Tax Map exceed the permitted lot cover- and excessive lot coverage.Pro- needed. For more information, No. 1000,Section 40,Block 04, age and will be within 100 ft.of perty Location: 505 7th Street, please call 765-1809. Lot Ol. the ordinary high water mark.. Greenport, County Tax Map Dated:,June 19, 1990 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3947- Property Location: 1350•Sound No. 1000,Section 48,Block 01, BY ORDER OF he Beach Drive,Mattituck,Coun- Lot 17. THE SOUTHOLD TOWN JAMES MARK..Variance to t Zoning Ordinance,Article III he ty Tax Map N6. 1000, Section 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 3831- • BOARD OF APPEALS Section 100-30 A.3, Article 106, Block 1, Lot 36. �RALPH & PATRICIA GERARD P. GOEHRINGER XXIV,Section 100-24413,as dis- -8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 3952- PUGLIESE.Special Exception CHAIRMAN BRUCE&TERESA BLASKO. to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- By Doreen Ferwerda approved, for permission t Special Exception to the Zoning III,Section 100-30B(14),for sd 1X 6/21/90 18 construct an addition to a oneo pec g c �._ -. '_..�.. � ( ) family dwelling.Proposed con- Ordinance, Article III, Section a Winery for the Production, • struct will have insufficient front 100-31 B(14);for permission tdou Storage and the Retail Sale o$Sc yard setback. Property Loca- have an accessory apartment. Wine.Property Location:34876 tion: 450 Parsons Boulevard? Proposed accessory apartment Main Road,Cutchogue, Coun- East Marion, County Tax Map ty Tax Map No. 1000, Section No. 1000, Section 37, Block 1, 097, Block 01, Lot 12.1. Lot 18. , r ._.......'...'u._..:�••..'.R.?r..: -. Yw.�.F?1K'..i..jcxmu: cu'N. " ..1^. ..Y,.... ':._-:.:ii,�: .,_ �... ....... ..i+in w.i:anr. .�,...<.•*.,>..:-xr...:.x-..,._.. „_-s,.. .. .. ... ....a•... TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. .Z89§ . . . . . Date . .FeEbruary . .16. . . . . . . . . . . .. 19.78. THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at . .140. .P.ike. .S t.. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . Street -; Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . Block No. . . . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . j conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office 19, ursuant to which Building Permit No. ,.940.1-Z ' dated . . . 84.8/??. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . p dated . . . 8./.12/7.7 . . • • • • • . . . •, 19. . . ., was issued, and conforms to all .of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate Is issued is . . . . . .Acce.ssory. .Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The certificate is issued to . . . • . Joseph .Langer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (owner, of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . . . 11/R. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N/R UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11+0 Street Pike Street HOUSE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r.attituck 7 NY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .� . . . . .w . . . . . . ./. . . . . . . Building Inspector 765-1802 BUILDING DEPT. ON lim5FECTI ' FOUNDATION IST [ ] ROUGH PLGG. C ] FOUNDATION 2ND [ ] INSULATION C ] FRAMING [ ] FINAL DATE �� 1 � g INSPECTOR V r ' ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ----------------------------------------x IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF CHARLES J. ZAHRA APPEAL NO. 3701 AFFIDAVIT TO REVERSE THE DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ---------------------------------------x BAYNE MIDGET, being duly sworn deposes and says: 1. I am maintenance supervisor for The North Fork Bank & Trust Company and make this Affidavit to clarify to the Zoning Board the nature of the upstairs apartment at premises known as "The Coffee Pot, " 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, New York. 2 . In my official capacity, I had occassion to examine the Coffee Pot Building on numerous occassions and, therefore, I am familiar with its construction and layout during the period that it was owned by the Bank. 3 . The upstairs apartment was a completely separate living unit with its own utility feeds. It consisted of a living room, bedroom, bathroom and kitchen. The kitchen contained a sink, stove, refrigerator, and eating table, and was partially tiled (in its work area) . 4. The apartment was occupied at the time the Bank came into title and for a period thereafter. Bqjne Midget Sworn to before me this 17th day of March, 1988 Notary Public KATHIEEN k MARTH Notary Public.we of New YQ* Na 4891M OXARW in 5titM Cauntf► trornRWOr,toms Jm.4,199� ©127e JULIUS BLUMBERG, INC. r STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss.: I, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, ❑ Certification certify that the within x By Attorney has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy. ❑ Attorney's state that I am Affirmation the attorney(s) of record for a in the within action; I have read the foregoing Y and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The reason this verification is made by.me and not by The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: I affirm that the foregoing statements are true, under the penalties of perjury. Dated: The name signed must he printed beneath STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF Ss.: 1, being sworn, say: I am x ❑ Individual in the within action; I have read the foregoing m' Verification and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. n a Corporate the of ❑ Verification a corporation and a party in the within action; I have read the foregoing and know the contents thereof; and the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. This verification is made by me because the above party is a corporation and I am an officer thereof. The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: Sworn to before me on 19 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The name signed must he printed beneath STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SS.: (If both boxes are checked—indicate after names,type of service used.) I, being sworn, say; I am not a party to the action, am over 18 years of age and reside at On 19 I served the within x ❑ Service by depositing a true copy thereof enclosed in a post-paid wrapper, in an official depository under the exclusive care m By Mail and custody of the U.S. Postal Service within New York State, addressed to each of the following persons at the last known address set forth after each name: a ❑ Personal by delivering a true copy thereof personally to each person named below at the address indicated.I knew each person Service on served to be the person mentioned and described in said papers as a party therein: Individual ca Sworn to before me on 19 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The name signed must be printed beneath Appeal NOTICE OF ENTRY XIW)4M No. 3701. Year 19 Sir:-Please take notice that the within is a(certified) ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS true copy of a TOWN OF SOUTHOLD duly entered in the office of the clerk of the within named court on 19 IN THE MATTER OF .THE APPLICATION OF -Dated, Yours,etc., CHARLES 'J. ZAHRA q., WICKHAM, WICKHAM&BRESSLER,P.C. Attorneysfor T0. REVERSE -THE -DETERMINATION OF ' Office and Post Office Address THE BUILDING INSPECTOR MAIN ROAD,P.O.Box 1424 MATTITUCK.NEW YORK 11952 To Attorney(s)for NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT Sir:-Please take notice that an order AFFIDAVIT of which the within is a true copy will be presented for settlement to the Hon. WICKHAM, WICKHAM&BRESSLER,P.C. Attorneysfor CHARLES J. ZAHRA one of the judges of the within named Court, at Office and Post Office Address, Telephone MAIN ROAD, P.O.Box 1424 on 19 et M. MATTITUCK,NEW YORK 11952 Dated, (516)298-8353 Yours,etc.,. 1. WICKHAM, WICKHAM&BRESSLER,P.C. To Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address Attorney(s)for MAIN ROAD, P.O.Box 1424 MATTITUCK,NEW YORK 11952 Service of a copy of the within is hereby admitted. Dated, aTo Attomey(s)for Attorney(s)for 3900-JULIUS BLUMBERG.INC.LAW BLANK PUBLISHERS,NYC 10013 ` - 1 t1BER 9597 PAGE 155 . 3448 7 i THIS INDENTURE,made the 6 t h day of July , nineteen hundred and eighty-four c^a BETWEEN C IV D JOSEPH 0. LANGER and JUNE B. LANGER, presently residing at; $. . �.�. .. I (no #) Breakwater Road, Mattituck, NY 11952 JUL 10 1984 TAX party of the first part, and .� c-���� K CO. BANKING C0�_�1`!T'! ' HE NORTH FORK BANK-1 TRUST/a New York/Corporation, with office and principal place of business at: 245 Love Lane, Mattituck, NY 11952 party of the second part, WITNESSETH,that the party of the first part, in consideration of Ten Dollars and other valuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being lWtl*X at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a concrete monument set on the southerly side of Pike Street at the northwest corner of the premises herein described adjoining land of late of George P. Bergmann on the West, said monument being 140 feet as measured along the southerly side of Pike Street East from its intersection with the easterly side-of Westphalia Avenue, from said monument of beginning; RUNNING THENCE along the southerly side of Pike Street, North 560 391 50" East 40.0 feet to a cross cut in the concrete and land of Conklin; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Conklin and land of Estate of George H. Riley South 290 361 10" East 95.0 feet to a concrete monument and land of Estate of" George H. Riley; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Riley, South 561 391 50" West 40.0 feet to. a monument and land of late of George P. Bergmann; RUNNING THENCE along said land late of Bergmann, North 290 361 10" West 95.0 f t to the concrete monument and place of BEGINNING. � ' RANTOR, herein, is the same as the Grantee, in Liber 8212, cp. 200, dated 3/29/77, and recorded 3/30/77. TAX MAP )ESIGNATION )1s1'1000 TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, if any, of the party of the first part in and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof; TOGETHER with the appurtenances -ec. and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises; TO HAVE AND TO 141 .00 HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of slk. 04.00 the party of the second part forever. °I(s) 005.000 AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- eration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first above written. IN PRESENC OF: �i /OSEPH0. LANGER JUNE B. LANGER i16NIN�TM MSTIWMINT— _. _ afrOYR LAII�� TMi�INtTt11 . p-SHOULD an USIO•r LAVnM*f 0"L 01'76 t�1<< is12o mrHIS INDFMVRE,made the 020 day of November , nineteen hundred andEighty-Six BETWEEN THE NORTH FORK BANK & TRUST COMPANY, a New York Banking Corporation with principal place of business at 245 Love Lane, Mattituck, New York 11952, party of the first part, and CHARLES J. ZAHRA & JEAN ZAHRA, his wife, both residing at 31 L (No #) Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952, party of the second part, Vyl1T METH,that the party of the first part,in consideration of Ten Dollars and other valuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, does hereby grant and release unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of the party of the second part forever, ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being in the at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, r bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a concrete monument set on the southerly side of Pike Street at the northwest corner of the premises herein described adjoining land of late of George P. Bergmann on the West, said monument being 140 feet as measured along the southerly side of Pike Street East from its intersection with the easterly side of Westphalia Avenue, from said monument of beginning: RUNNING THENCE along the southerly side of Pike Street, North 56° 39 50" East 40.0 feet to a cross cut in the concrete and land of Conklin; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Conklin and land of Estate of George H. Riley South 29° 36' 10" East 95.0 feet to a concrete monument and land of Estate of George H. Reilly; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Riley, South 56° 39' 50" West 40.0 feet to a monument and land of late of George P. Bergmann; RUNNING THENCE along said land late of Bergmann, North 29° 36' 10" West 95.0 feet to the concrete monument and place of BEGINNING. k, BEING and intended to be the same premises conveyed to the party of _ the first part by deed dated 7/6/84, recorded 7/10/84 in Liber 9597, Page 155. w�Is TAX MAP DESIGNATION Dist. 1000 TOGETHER with all right, title and interest, if any, of the party of the first part in and to any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof; TOGETHER with the appurtenances Sec. 141.00 and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises; TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, the heirs or successors and assigns of Bik. 04.00 the party of the second part forever. L't(')005.000 AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything . whereby the said premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. AND the party of the first part, in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law, covenants that the party of the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- eration as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and will apply the same first to the payment of the cost of the improvement before using any part of the total of the same for any other purpose. The word "party" shall be construed as if it read "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. I IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first ve written. f• IN PRESENCE OF:. [7N �JZ&E NORTPFORK BANK & UST CO. cT,tT�1986By: JOIUX A. KANAS, President ;', FFO Southold Town Board of � v s MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Appl . No . 3701 - Charles Zahra Location of Premises : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck County Tax Map No . 1000-141. 04-05 Findings of Board based on familiarity with activities at the subject site on at least a weekly basi'.s , 4 to 5 days per week , before establishment closed in 1984 . Spoke to family member of prior owner who managed "The Coffee Pot" and who indicated business closed in November 1984 . Any occupAncy- on the second floor was occasional . Any occupancy was limited to sleeping since there was no kitchen or cooking facilities on the second floor , and prior occupants came downstairs to eat at "The Coffee Pot . " TTe subject building was boarded up at the time North Fork Bank acquired the premises , and there was no occupancy on the second floor as a residence since that time . Findings of Board based on familiarity of operations of recent re-construction , renovations , etc . to include new basement foundation , first floor including additions to east side and rear , lifting of the second-story , and removal of second story , etc . Building remained boarded up until re-construction commenced and removal of portions of the building , and of course until the. present time . ( Photographs and notations from 3/7/88 attached hereto . ) 3/14/88 w. mow, r. ti •.�.i:ti. ii.�.t1�i�.►w j. `'/._�, ✓�.� / - ,, i...� • t T �y{,�t• '�. • 96 ot V .�. a .fir,•:.- •,�, :. i i rM III-04 lwi iM. '^'•''rw' �� ,., �.� t •`+ t ,• IX It-it 'i{�� M.. �Vr►i\•t•�OF�I�ir`1�,�'�rt1'�(::�i�w►,% •�•� '•, `,•',i � i�:,YVa�H�T���Y:+•;�i:"�F,J:Jt`':�'r�'jA•�, �{ ,3_.il�a�{J•..{'S�?ti.a'TX�,a• •/ �r .l ,.. l�. w •j7.•�AZ r';1� ...;-ri'; !�'• ,•S!, t' 'i.4'yy;•r;!'r• 1i.'''��a1,��r ,,wt'c•71:;�'�i':. 3 +-. ,r,i:l,� .�i.`�t Lr�►°•� •.::;a, t _ili:��#.1�fG:�g4'•INNi%.: it fi4 a�r �:a{.,.::.�/. , +�. i,rt..Ij a� i iJ4 rya e � •f,i \Yt!r- � l�� i't�� �taf•+a J ',t i t .l ,.'a. �'A Ri rI •' � Mnr avY.'G� ti �� 1 S i •y ) ,u y' �Y�..�` 1,��'Imo{�11 �`,(.. I� { ♦ I •- •',!• r '.,,rMi i!a ,�".��..., yrYa:�+'��t�'fw �#'.,J..✓ t. � �ti=e+'+,� �� r . 1.�y: 1 �• �ii r1•R�r.a`/7�1a,.L♦{ ? ,,i * : �' [{�J.aI F�,�L+s > tw�1 r •C�'SI `.J��a.� - _w n4 r f• \ :f i• rlJ,! � , ,Y, aft .,al• ••�`� �i'Y-•' � - •'• f it 1 Laf a ' � .1i. "�� _> its L•�. it u.., f :. . ,j. � , !'X?}•�" f{ t: ice' i .. � �:' Le •✓ - { "'•'ti, , iJ�`t�v�'tt••;i.���,R::y..fi H. L;1!+�� ... •'�'�a i r .P?J3K•r1+..:r•�"'a''k +; ''"�',a•°:*//�..•:b:};�•.�t %��:�t,.;;�::;. ,.2h,il.i w ,I, Y Y, ..1..:.•rj••��C'Jti.."•' _..�ti.. •.'�.F�`�.y7�rJJy:• ,t,Jiiisar,��. '�-•N^M���,�,,��,.Y,�� -i r.1•rt���l Mil:��r7• �f� � E'w•t' rM.•a•+�:.'.�:.�Kr` �'•�' .,•i�•�les%a°,m..±�.C�'..,=. �*:a�•n��.'+J`':� ,Ri .?,ro.•«•;s�3.7'N ,;.Zxr4t 1 •r"''�rw.✓•-1sa 7' fin. .L+�•!'► fe I', : ,r.��.,��w+.'!i�i...y.w.4. '2'f'1y"••l.�r:•a ;:.i+..caw 4 . {�„» p�`r,Y 'i'+�t�� �i �.:A.: �� - •'fr: �„ _Nu.aJn•o aLlq`'.�s 'y7`•11lli +.. ... •2 ..•-.i•i.'T•••._µ__r-:1.+`r..:t •..a(4�♦ t•.s, :a `{I`-r �JSO,-`. �t3i`. Y 5«Zi �a;,,� y'7J6 �L'v��,5��''+ 7�y,'� •' a�` .�., rya �ti;. txgl•y i�tytl ry• �,� 7 't`��•��: aV. KV..'�,•i::..J t, 3: T t' f `L�,{:� `-tta �t ,1�' , ,r' �5 , a l�,• .1� .'J. , x* ; 'Y r �i,•�:;a u !�, ya 1,.-,' ; .�n2r• SG �a•• i'{�-Gt•= Fr �yyZla ntfi.�j� j�+r'K k�.t' i/'i..�.`i���( ��.3.,\ [ j{�i�,yl •� F:J J.,'i �S :Y�7ft�! r� `-\ S .Jtrt�..,\ itEiti •• S 1! L`C ••j :~ (. �t�?: !?cKa1 iL "• ' J�...j:.I } .�f, L 'th f.:• 1 tLtt:•i.a 'S r } 1 Pa:"•!>a Yl- `:..�• _ � .' I 7iC s '�kn r �} S,/T�j.•71nt y'�4�� t:`,�u � �•., �ti a ��Ta,w,x•,y N�J „_ .L',•�r/+1 �4',i,Jt ''�-'•Ye_• '�•='t'4: •,y,y t T?I f•. i al<..• �, ��� :(�'' •' f"'!.•i F:Y �7�•'.1 � a }„�:, ::SSy�!�'•♦- .- v,. ir:L ^ � t;� ,..�.{�R�•y�tii t �r1:i n ')J +'�+ �.a rati.`� a .'s --��t?-:..::; iJ: +:y.r•S4T�Ct(�. LY• C:, \ r •�a': f `, r;•: „I r�,:.•,r .iri•^�•:,.,:�- 1.,...,�,,.,,i�w. �y r• 3R:-Ye"je -•":a 1,r.•ti r.i� �.rr___rl�rr ... Mr• /� �� :;��%4=��s'•��� t� ,�•'.""r",ii. �r .� w�j{1f���+�{. ��� ar '�y'a 4u,�ice`.'�«ra rr'.�.r�:r,..w.;r'�.�r.fa,��,� �-•iu�'tti+1;,:�u2.� 'vr�• �r�'t..I�•7wi t YiWw� ,- ('-�Z• � ] r�. i4}=a�3'++y tt..• ;+-:�2.i1.�-` .. _ � � rJ•sti.'Y • w.• h�ii,'G3`iiJ,Jy�1 a�}.F. It w •" '}� a. M�Z�,i i•��:.•.�...a+.••:w.o •ri/ L?.•. t ••a.a{•Y, � »,,�I ' I •. 06.., 4 ��\, ,a,Ji r•n•�.`t{'iiw s ��t{l1'J ice.,"; T at- +\ Z'r< I •r f. ► !►''i,,••• ~.'.'rj R\j`_aN�-+y'+1.�.:T.t1 �"v�: .: �i'rj�i'}•.• A -{i �i!' i r �'(�.� G•ai rl =�'L,,.G J44 1`�,,�j�a• * `L��:+��� ��ra� :4�l� ►r��:•. t•'►��.a�'L'% r {{''T• `u'�•�y.H i`'t� ?:yJ �z_lri��"^:, y �• - 3•;,,�s"�'�iv.•����.. '„ ,�� •. fj.:;,�t.>i`:��.•.:.-i:r'a. p a„�y�,.�i�•.+�y.>V,�S�,..r.. '�-. ••�SCi•��'.i,�`:`L•':a:r yam,•.,'~.'^y1".k. .. ••"~•"�JC. -"� +,w .r`� `� ..!• •,;�_ t:s",���� "fI-VftY7i irk`�.: ti:•t C'•f.�3'r„:��t tti� � ,at �.. �.. ,,3••.r � '' ••., ,,:�� rL "ems i 1. r•�tJI•T3 vL S•i•�:.r5vr titl.F 1�. t, N1, �. u. J. r k r.. `+`::+..tr�•.n:. t�,.' 'Sit»�f:}4�'yr. =a'n; 'ME,UUN Yam:•.�. ,r 49. �. ��� /ram' � '•. :�����' ..1 Ry yam',. t 1• •i. . iE�(�' ... _ . t7e�i't(1.�- "•- i•+i +•.�.�`. .�� 3"i y,�,a•, •'•�;�%i�'?6 � G • YiR �a��•it"Ri"►ti�ii• J � iiRA• it a oil i t i .�� '� • ,' M �s.{T .mac le �s y}r •'r• �t�`'•,`'• 'Sri °5;�•`h!13;7h;���^!� I �Ij Ita 1 i 1{W�1�Ilui �. ,VA •�, �• � L;yid a•�y� } � � ,�R � � � l•f Z.)•�E�' :�< :T•b• '^ r�''. r •r.Y;• rr.a •• Y'T I.• 'i.1: •� .t'.Rs'.t.;i..:Icsr,•,ta-L:�. '.xi;%„w,.rr i[:S'ie�:.n'. I' r iv •, y ` 1 ` • _�W:/RV:.V�•t{u► `n,Tir•}Y wa•:.lan':Y.A �}' .} j�.Y�{IS.7�!�[!' y .:T..1{+il•�1: t yi}�,�r:.T,y a�,T..r�N': //!;y o. '�L'�` y AT ki,IT.f' �f 6 i .7Ti r rd v i ::`� �.�y�k'''1• d. .� .t.. • •.f is; •• . 'i �• i?e}z� t' rRp� b } ,S 1:~ �t•y�)••;:�i'"•'. �1 ,� � .ter 'lJi� ••�y IMS�,• ,��M �•n'..�, {rah 1 4 .Zf. �'••�rti• r, f +�4.4.•.b:f�?{!•% � V' •�� moo' r.����r�E � �e�syyt. �'� ,�'�'f.•�,r�Y f�.' , ��, .f N{'L�'r'T"• 4!:• .1 YSf F4:.r �•� y_~••�� >�• �AYo�s•YY � f'�.a.'�n. ,Y}�--tti,'�':4• re�j.,3•��'�1�.N.r•�'� t�K..r..r�• ��w ff ;Y+. �T. ly .y '"• l�i"'t,�,yr,Y�sG,.: r,..� �' {��� •a*,...w,.ur:,,f;.=?;:,r..i'.'sre' � •..;�i,•�.;:j;;S':,V'lrv*+�`� �,r*'�r�a 3 jam,• "r�� r '��;�- '�• '�,� :� .y ., h•��i'�t7` a .i 1r•~'tic. �� ,•'� y]K`•. ..!.�.it i'l r ' '3Y� ••\isror.drlir r !• • � 'sir • ._ � •,1 r.t-,•. Lam_-�c•rk�� / . T. 44 M- ,J ! ' J 4U-�~ ` • 1 . � � jl.•.t�ir;1� ' /mow - 4 Is y►� ng j` I:, ; •y,�-�.1L. per, "�f •� ii«`_�•'�:•, r'G.w''"SZ�rA"ll� k'�••- . �. ^•l` ,�'%`r_•rr.S+'pw►r:. �...;• � o�:.fl.� r1►• �r 11Q �.e+S` �f�' o1��irT;T�.+"`�i����t'ii:r�:/1�.-�:.r ,�r•:. .�.f.•�r :.x.�' .n !.M• �f�lr�:,:( _ ma •1 .. t' r� .-4-',•:' '.:...+rj.•.i.�'1'r.{-S�J•. 11 .E .r=.�� .,'r. t t :' \ `•Vir.Y t= Y.• 't Z �.j.il:'M1�.•,. ,'• .I,►''• •t.• e 1'�. •'.1� �•. ,M,t ,+IPA; �. + .r• r •ro;1- ir+►•, � �{'�r�lI `.t �,,... --�-yr -J:1 ty 'r,':i.•��:: a�i.�. jr r �f . ..'. ` r1i0i`!'�J'fs'�`(`�•} •`.,1, ',�I'�f..��'I�k4" �'.[''r i-l..f�ty is�y-f.�'..�T f �7'd'�F tr•W�-; �'�'• -�y7� -iaj�i.f.ai-+ii •il�iE-r.�l� �;•..,^ y'��r;E':>'•�;"-•.-,.- .,..._nth:•. ,._�_::-:S:{.+,: 05.•.'s+"S..a-�,:+c:='^-- I- All =�%%ti-t:.. v _,s R: .�'�., r� ..+•fit}1•ace :11L�.-�,•-Y•\ tam ...4!'� `M4 S l.1Fi�',•.•i.: •��:'7`. — R•-+'rY - :Vim~l i- nor "'g ' a WM 14, j- � �.� �d•-r 3, ?"�•Ci "'` r• :A' ''-'.e'!'[: .\� 1 GJ.i L�?«���r�:-:lt•_ .. •\r�'.+�..r��i��'� c ` ,A�t•r :�,.�sv« 1.'•Q. �-i�i:7.4•(. F'..•+ �-" ..._ .. .. •.r.r 1.i �l� :'Lv:�.S1. -- 1-.c�C' �•. �5♦ _.,,•..is o... .•-r.. yy{{��•i.=�i .�i•+� ��f��iqq J .11 •�*�TT�`tJJ � �:?R-+��;:.7s�ib�`;��E�azT.'.�.y,. 't, y, r. ;yam �`vf� .v, Z1��r�:..� �y��_•�h'd'% ' . _ i�_.-N�.�y���•• ILA ziz '•. a.nr`.t�•�•\��,�'1.'w.7�4'�. �}1:C-I�CQ'�I?m• �. `M`r...�4, a;i M• ..,`•. ` ' 1 �`'N;�•'T .12(�'�`KCt\~?L�_^Vw',S" -'l t.�Xi��`t`� ;�Zci. :iiL,•.Y•/�f � �')•7�i'� . P'r.ar'.Ww+,1+i•:`5 t3i..'� �..�.T..--''�•i".:._ �-, tit tar 'it.s'�7�'xs . ��x��.*�'�;^ .ate h-•����' ��. �:{`�c"8.�2k9,� _ . jcy. A ONO 0®®®!S� M®R ::r „.... ....... - l ` •'ice•''' _:��„�J��.•. ;- .�-�3•r��•r��� . r I '•`. _41 �'°ter'_.:.?..�, _; {'�'4 T n{. ' rrr :a. ,6{• 'ate � �+ / , tr 1 \ � A�1�-� •'• r I�r r r r r y..iytT•Y .� •�• . ��,y�2�` •}ram '� /�• {d +� {�t�K,1 �:ftj lye*�•i•ISM� ,a •r F4 �'`'.' ~.. J ��•,f;' � { � .7i7! ;rr,G.:`:.if;,•►��Ipj ti '"�� ro r€ 7 ��•f ll���gl��1��.��lt.�'"ta.nr:;��• °J�S,.•1;`:1�: ':rn �.moo. `i .r. .r• 1 K ��t' "7. 1v -r?�j�e,��q?t`�7: ��;n•t�")`i(y� J �. p�WON ICASaMimi SbSA� -Mfg®l5im<�!➢! ��, 10�.� i np _ _.�•••1�;�`'bar•'r�r�=:=Fr-Y1'i��� ::.x�'r.•.L'a�•��+�.�a��r. -�S '.C.r�• •'L`�C r'L�:-:.'r:;'+-`_- _�-._ .�.wi` �'.i-..iTi'- _ � :;.. i��•...�..�"�' _=w.�.�1.�ri �- °:�s.•;'+'r'`"�:_'..;c`;�.►...�ic:...i� :y.....•S'.�r.•+`Lr r.'''' •cs..'.�..:':aRX:r ••• -.:;�' - reiA':'�,Y,Y,rS:til_,-•r,.• .•��'t.:;�^1�-�%}=F•°'�•rAi•r:...r: _., t.wy;,;="„':.__.:. �;'t'��t=;;:it''�?.�,•h�'��. . +•T�rt•:� t;I.l1`I fSi��.��I.w"r_._�1�•��.r,,Y_v!!�v'�\�•1��F1 iN•w "• S�`: � ,.'�•�tiYJl,w7'f�f R,S� � �:'YE�IrM.�• 11rA '�.�.r•'4�{�! I(" h� ry'j��T:�'L•:':. -. � .Y.: ':-\.... --I:r,..i.'IY 1�:',:.•h��'• <,l 1 i.^.�•f•'•�:r �c •�.�ri}�yc.'_� to t!'��..��_ ! r rye t.y kf�);.•Y+r r ��l'w:c�7 � T�.: m • � '��� i+C Ysc:i-+`��.,a�:!t�i'r s?__,'I(,�•}.ri•;,�t' 1 �.. S :s4 � lb `� ftt'ySS r I''1'.�F���:\zS•9��il,-,^.•4•.ohlf^Yv1�xrl�.•Gj� �i i,r �•j } ��S"�.. •ttt 'kid• � r�. �;• �6 a L t •i• �•r.� • �.- �, �Ye�j�,�n.•.T {•`..yi,,,sisa�i?;�..•. ''t"•�r`ij;.'L�Q'Y [Y'r'k 6 {{,, { - - •i - ) `.C'lr:e.`'.fl.Y'SrY'.S+T+r.11:�.��a�i%�.•tn , "i�7yr:.':;�rl�,!!lF•F'��'k+ �� r T lv ' -,H.I I�Yy(� a.}..:r t.:r1• :r "`:;T�:��:'�.i}.�- pi�'.:•t•,;.,;' _ ... .�-'•,...' l 1 `ar --- � � A::)• v,St'�•. �e•%i'{.:`Lla�i. �.��, •i_..�:M+.:.iy�.:T.+.�,1:�ii1M��:i.•'.�1i1.►iiJ�f�:. "f.• � Iti�-jy��y'�- `.: tS"r .���,'�` ' �::,-`{�.•:�j4",..y_I•:tH•rY•:1:4Ci-..'iM; '«t' - ITt.'iY �s��tivJ;.('.,=.^:N:l%Y1r�s::l:i.�,�lZi.y�,�;�:i'�iR,� , h s�l' ::•:i � .• r'.+ �?h.,/:}r.��:.•1•i r��ri'/. .4:'.i ,�1."• '' �"rn y' ..��::.�{�X.t i5i r.� 77.--ee�` _- r ��}-+,r.}.1'';L 1 r.:�:C.1°N. 1 :: _t lyt• w t c]^y'J�!��.,f- -_:..,�•s--:fir_ems - � F _ .. �'rT��"t�;:'vim• �•'. - nv!ammm al Mmmmu Lill Mon No jt� ray :Li. *+•+ �s:' '+ • ) , JI • T _. ry?�- , _ .fir. •/ { +•off.ci��+,•--'1 p� : dW tt FM low ��'' "�'s..,.r...�"'T•.r.7• 1V, � �ems' fis- �a. • - a ' � t.,�` i aty� � ' r ,Y • . , ,.acre ,��o•�• 1 ,.. ` .y a♦ � °.-.m.m,n_.. -� -�"",.,..-ram..,,•,. � ��.3! . .. .'•-! �. -�+-TAM r^Y y t��,�,�?�...` - •.-N ,�_ -.. .- v µ.t•.. ) irh �� � ��'1` � '"'r'.." 1- /at•,+.mo101 i i a���N�_��f� „y..._ q9 f.� �.., �r err. asV• c uaz+. \t '•tH i'rd r fi \�� •2 �R C�� t et ��xt, ,..: - •.,,, ,i���,v d ��n�•,yet, k \ �£',ti.,� ,� �i•rtitti;�"�i,�4 . -`''-�`•a"'JS,^� rr�'! 'V l�;rlj'(,yyt(�,�,, '4�{��� e),��,t,t'�• ^i'CX•'T. •rtt�aPil���'t��1•�f�Y.X\rat { J,,r • •b �,. ta.• 51L ti, - ��I,tl �..e�xY s� �+3�Y�•.F�fll 1 ,y �t�'��'�'f'�y\�5�,sp�,t"'•.�w-.�� +R4It S•- mac.�yt��.���,���s} • �r ,sue «c � a��• ', i j�\,4\I�S;V� r k II 3 �� „ !� � ��•��ltl11�.'�:SIl,n�lal'.}l4i�i,:�,!1:4�Y.M'•" _ a .{��• -.yf. !� 1�. i fry �• ♦l.. f i!y3 � ✓ y,,..: ,thy -".!s u t � i.a e , 1-®It�tty9®.�' 1;�1Eu }imp t' 4 �•'. -�.'��-�'c 5 ke IID', 4 G Mi;,u,L,g;n ^r. ��I-. ti^r-�- fir. .p;•,t r,... ���_ `,.��§Yr �I.m n yA p�,Vr-- kJ.:�=. �. �L• L '�f t S�"fir•� nii.•narullYAt� rash ®• .e 74K ` tt1 MI�NY�r,wo i ivllaY '�1 �' ILI i r r•b.irw.rao uallYmaAAN17NYNN1011s�s01 1 st•.�•ti:�j},.e.��+r f � ti 1 A L..Y:=T� �.tYsrlAl�tlYE}�iiil7N�raYl�rl �"f'; •,-•,+,^ ,s r- a4s14C1���n�i .+�ra`as.•�..�..L,. _/ r' qf'` , I Yr, tke7bw¢,i"'.IA'111rTlKlti�r'_ r g1 l�ird•Ifjj„�j l �a V�'�"�' •� _� <. � r�R.M..`'+S•or -�••� .,� •:30�jp,�,5�e�. '"^#—,ice wSti�,•ti M'�,�•�t�r • I � •�,,•.�rtt '� j, q•�r�i Y °tea����-��1�'`b,y1y4q`ti 3 al% r" �x � � �.i ���� '' Sryt 1y�,•1�,�"ci`�' '��Tti i .f�, -.�- ! -1. r �yf5■u, ���7Y1F t•f���v3���� —+'�42'. y.n �tw •`, ryf ixti'+1 r"z".t"tip- ` '. a. ,� ¢¢rd _.t`. { s � i.� a 5+�,•,�t,,�ei1�Ff�'q�'pr'�, tY-a.F.•��•*,L.r�h Z1,at1�+�,.+o'•:. ?J �j}J - 7 t - LaA .GfSp• t� Y' ` 1 re■7I it i� ��tt t (�• •�,;rs rc.- `� i.f�y •'�� I�yyy !� i•� ����iv�$:.�Yfl ' t}y.*i�.. � t � ti L`��[��.•.r.• '�'`,y'7ti,� IW ""IIYz � '$. 77 f •i�'ti. gn f QI m I -,may w ;,��P.,iit'w, ', a,�'f�+'` t 1.;�•�cy c • rd" )!' O M i OL '_ r`�"ar,�J I��u 111 I I �...+'•e,.n","";.,w', i 41 S�It t r , 1 044,, ••aG ,yLt...r- Y �,°v:,y�?8t�a, C��1 � ��yy l ir� � .�q�j«+• �S, ipa,;« �t .mat •M - T _A.'r c t i i �t,• t1 � .y tlr 1r.,�v' < UP.�r c.� 4 Ni p.POL k-,,, rr'r•�rr n- OEM �.; �� 1.: SfX� . r� r 'Sf h,�i,t•r� .. � �'t t 1S1ipr� ,,f'. t 7 =mac ��itl°tl�r, ' � o- `` �tS.ZJ!7✓'�"Mpi,�. - '+• 1 A hs `hV ie'QI��`!r as+ k li.' I �•]f]t; rr��'��. t �� 'i, Yt.� ,1c�k -.{ �e1i4r4�r�'�nO'y. aw z�ti.i�+� Bvm`. {P 11, ,t 1_f} p.i;l r•P�'" „i/ s• 2 4�..,��i 1��.�pyyc, � V .;...` ._^*, ✓�t�"9 .i t �� 'r�'.t��� •""�.wrvde.,SE'kt t ad' r t `� r,1, r. a wv �� y 4�„t+lV�t� �,f��{e `t`�� t �"f•�/��.,,�; "`d¢7 yW'!S'' «�t� sX.H�/'4��y`yp-'�"fi...�r, �..�.,�:�i0� �d �•.r'a -..R,r•"�'�,�l��S'' .k '�'atlt ri���„'"4' 4 + ,rj -�.�64 �'Yy,..� 7 w Y't ;t,"�•s'�y�^i.`.M���" �, Y�.�.�. '. i,,�s,�ny '+. tajc• M? y, 'I� {p a .+'vh ♦S""`�.�y �. !`'� •r �, "M• f., �+ r";f .i t. �y'.iw?y,� `�Sda,,1•-i{' , i 13 i'yti Yyzj� CCC �r urr� 1�•�.���,�y�'�,�'� f� ."Z LQ La � ���.��"�a�Cq} a e$r�is} d 5 �� ��^�''' ��ti w`°'"��'.SLR'v��+.�4 'F`"^L,?+.o'�r�t�" �`+:�.•. <•:• rl r��y�'t, Y+ (���a7��' �a'`��w o T+ } .�r"C',��y�'p£SS't�.�y5�`c„Np.,s',,,�r..+ ,.,,s: �+e*���.,r O..r. � s-`. d'�r�s�4�i�: ( 't'„� 'f•'L�t".y�i-,.'c '�`i-:�" `x�43'°�.b�ik+7i'F�f- � '� 2.nw r. "L.f'.+...{..�Li'. a\ � u+?-A''-eta?"�'�'•�ic�R`...::'tJl�,�'..a...t..���`�_.:�._.o...'�'�' "-•`'�=- s- } 771 ��� .t I -•rr--++'- �Iii3ipSir+5a1 � �(Sjt. .Yr_.-„��^^°'.y.r'�• "" � V �t,.� +;xt4 �rFP attG �. .1 A., ��`R,' �{•1tiT"�"yrr E@ a ill•, F Y .,-r'G M t�. �� a -F - JZMk� EEMM Pijr�"�-�� w.a`,..Pa 3_ ...•.a�"�iS:v1n`�i�-.. )4d2�:�Cac�<i�.�`S`�''�w�l;�s'�'c�+t' �. .1 c t q ' JL � r • L.�4> o'r+... - ... /_ r'=15''°'Y.���r Tf �r4 h,� . a 1_ 1 tV'I I •tl' � x T �F''a��J c ri` k�'� I _ t' �.K y�!�ail!/ �� �i�� y�:1d'. ���;•� � "� � I.i:C;7v (' �1�� M1 r� -•*� #fit' a hk dh s may}`, C+a'�Q•t FF mnauAa '� � Jyf rw:•�naiur>mrsurtRa nwnlrmran�oa �� j sp mmomerm S ��R�� tsas nr:a�.�wnusw.°tr�'�3:.yztra�®�t�y�W� � f• q + , �7kN 00 II 4 kF 1 � •. 3 I,lL .t C L t �- ,y�• rt�a,�ctl���.�[1G61�1�'r:,..lr,� ,ti y a"` •r. f Ar r TOWN^OF SOUTHOLD Y __ BUILDING DEPARTMENT. Town Clerk'@ office Southold, N. Y. i Certificate Of Occupancy No. Z89-35. . . . . Date . .FebruarY. . . . . . . .16. . . THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at .14 p • • 19. .?8 . Q. . .��Ce• ,S t , •. Map No. . . . . . . . . . . Block No. . . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . : . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Street conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this 'dated . .,.Ivla-re3� : . . . 8 . . . office • • • 1977 . pursuant to which Building Permit No.•9o�4Z dated . . . .I�arch. . . .$ , . . . , . . .1 lg• .7.7, was issued, and conforms to all . ' require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for of the P y r which this certificate is issued is . . .Res.taurant .&. Apar.t;gevt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The certificate is issued to . . . . . . . . .Joseph• l,afiger . . . • • . . . . . . . . . of the aforesaid building. (owner, ' X. . . . . . . . . Suffolk County Department of Health Approval IV/R . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. . N373999 N373997 HOUSE NUMBER . . 11+�. . , Street . , pike Street • • * • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mattituck, NY . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . Building Inspector Memorandum from . . Southold Town Board of Appeals TOWN HALL, SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 1.1971 765-1.809 'Date: 3/15/88 To: James A. Schondebare , Town Attorney Robert H. Berntsson , Assistant Town Att. From: Jerry Goehri nger Copies for your information concerning, the application pending before the Board of Appeals - Charles Zahra , Appl . No . 3701 . Copies have also been furnished for Mr . Bressler this morning. LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.c. MAIN ROAD, P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 MORTGAGE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER 516-298-5300 ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM 516-296-8353n' DANIEL C.ROSS /J 6 GOY March 3, 1988 Southold Town Board of Appeals Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Main Road State Road 25 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Application 3701 - Charles Zahra Dear Mr. Goehringer: At the hearing on February 18, 1988, you requested a chronology of events to aid you in organizing the testimony. Set forth below are the events surrounding the appeal, including those specifically requested by you: 1. 07/06/84 - North Fork Bank acquired property; r 2 . 06/19/86 - Application for Building Permit; 3 . 09/18/86 - Charles Zahra contracts to acquire property contingent upon approval of Building Permit; Copy of front page of contract of sale attached; 4. 10/08/86 - Planning Board waives Site Plan Approval; Copy of Letter attached; 5. 10/27/86 - Building Permit issued; 6. 11/20/86 - Charles Zahra acquired property; Copy of Certificate of Occupancy attached; 7 . 05/87 - Excavation commenced; 8 . 05/87 - Foundation work commenced; Shortly thereafter invalid complaint by Building Department re: existence of Foundation and request for fire wall. Conversation with Building Department re: rotten members in first story; 9. 06/87 - Foundation Inspection completed; 10. 06/87 - Conversation with Victor Lessard re: replacing second story; Letter to Gerard P. Goehringer Dated: March 3, 1988 Re: Appl. 3701 - Charles Zahra. Page 2 of 2 11. 09/22/87 - Stop Work Order; 12 . 09/23/87 - Criminal Violation Issued; 13 . 10/02/87 - Court Appearance; 14. 10/30/87 - Dismissal of Charges; 15. 11/05/87 - Revocation of Building Permit. Should you require anything further, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very trul you s, Eric Bressler EJB/jtz June 19 , 1986 Building Permit Application Received July 7 , 1986 Two Notices of Disapprovals issued by Ed Hindermann 10/16/86 Notation on Application by Building Inspector to "start. " 10/27/86 Permit issued by V . Lessard 6/11 /87 Foundation approved ( 1st foundation ) by V. Lessard 9/22/87 Stop Work Order dated 9/22/87 (wrong house #) (CTM # ok ) 9/23/87 Appearance Ticket returnable 10/2/87 9/24/87 Letter from Eric Bressler to Building Department 10/19/87 Letter from F . J . Yakaboski to Building Department (VL ) 10/30/87 Town Justice. Court granted Motion to Dismiss 11 /5/87 Revocation issued (corrected house number ) (CTM #-.ok) Town records show apartment floor area on second floor 30 ' x 22 ' plus 3x19 ' total : 717 sq . ft . floor area . New plan shows 896 sq . ft. FORM NO. b TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date .......November. ..5'........................... CHARLES T TO T. & JEAN ZAHRA (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952 (address of owner or out horized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there_ exists a violation of: CH 100 ZoningOrdinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that ....Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued .................................................................................. (state character of violation) October 27 , 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason.;, not.„follovin8 plans , did not comply with a stop work order . ................................. ................................................................................. ............................ .... ............ in violation of .100— 14 2—C D (State section or paragraph of applicable low, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the 6th conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ...................................................................... day of .....Novemper............................ .. 19....87 The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 140 Pike •Street , Matttituck ..,County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of low may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 1000— 14 1-04-05 . .�(/..... . .. .......... Building Inspector FORM NO. 5 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Se tember87 Dote ........P....................22.......................... 19........ TO ...CHARLES. T. & JEAN ZAHRA ..................................................... (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 PIKE STREET, MATTITUCK, NEW YORK 11952 ......................................................a..................... (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: CH 100 Zoning Ordinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that STOP ALL WORK NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE .....................................state..................character....of...........violation)....................... ( . PROVISIONS OF THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. ........................................................................................... ........... ................. ................................................................................................................................................ CH 100 XIV 100-143 inviolation of .................................................. ..... .......... ......... ........................ ......... ................... (State section or paragraph of applicable law, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the low and to remedy the conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ......AT. ONCE September 19 87 dayof ............................................. . ... .. ..... The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at. 1830 pik.p Sr_reet: .Mattituck,,. .... .. ............County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of low may constitute on offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 141-04-05 ..J .... .. ..`. .........��.� .`•t ...... Building Inspector "'- ).,xA+`rbc d.;a �,t ry e k X "e E' 9 a i3�.''4 t. �-�`'�'�? .A r.•f" a - �r ��" t � � j _ .:.,� � i . . > �My:t•°. �,.ity�§�. a•Yt5•..�;9a �a'3r x.q� 'r ak,.$`e 3�r Yr.eu i'::'��T" �`�„=�'��F. f.s"�i•. s�'1• 'iiw 'w 3': �r ��� ��i � `,,. #� �' '2's* •xr�S..��' S .�. �_�,'. � ,s-',�`'•t � 'x�. '�` .�S'? ^�2�`� 4 ra„� i•�,a�,,°,L,'ba`^" :+�'�%�• .��`�' �+ '�f"�x`�nr �`�'y �n�`. J Y:g •����'�+ `���5'@' ^"azAF�"� �� ,^t .,P,":.$;,0.y a e" r .•�: % ��'3¢',a g 4 y-u"1`•' � fFa a•. �y�a'���''�f.t �S' `'" � ;�•�`�r°va` `� �a '�.&t'• � F % v } �° a<L"u.yf`.y� * T � n�t '�1� '� .°=`#�,�`�"�` .� ak k #5 �" �a�'"" + -y��,�d';^ a�. •( ��j+.E���sw'Sl�'s.��(�z°�i ' 3 ���C■Vis �. .. a � G �• �.^, .. e -'t• ;?q tt4 '`(,', � �5.s- "� -.. -tn.-::"' ,iti`srsk"6' >��#da.`, r �'` '`34^ ¢tn` 3 f a:. •'... +r ,y� � q ' .'i,'pns. 'e ,•f ' ° ',x., a f i, 'a:TOWN OF $OU, p f UILDING. DEPA 11 v3x 4 =2 ,. C $ ^t �=r} :'�•� i e i`roWN 'HALL.- *� fk,+i t ti ?i#a 1'kx. 'p?.•x,{ ` by SOUTHOLD, N. BUILDING PERMIT ;{ (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL ' COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) : N° 15428 Z Date ... .............................................. �9 .....^ .. r . Permission is hereby granted to: ...........}............... ..... ..... xf- •••••••.••• •1.u•q •••. ••• • ••h ...... •..• ••.•1••• a ""r'a '`.`r' `bJ.,,'� .r>',a°�'�•+e• . •.••••u••••••.•.•..••..•• .............••• u•••.u••••••.•••. .•••••• •••••uu••• ••• n•aw••••uuu.•.uu••w •1v ••pM�� c, . :.••'..•i•�• . i• i•• ••••i• ••• •. •.•u•• •••••.1.'••••••u••••••••.w••N•••• .•• ••• •.: •••�• • �t 'fir CLtt= of7777. promises located dt's..,................ ... . •....•N•y •Nu•iN•�• it NN .......Its ..... q•H•(N• S)p •}••.hrr,�,/�� f �h 1) ....YK.......... ... ..... .... .............. ................................................ • JC J ................................................ ......•..•....•.........................................►•....••.•.•.•......... Nuw•••••• ••• si.� x w�j County Tax Map No. 1004 Section • .... Block ......`�........... Lot No. ...... :`.: :.`. .. ;. the pursuant to application doted ...... ................. .. 19.�.... and oppraved by Building Inspector. Fee ;.......{.......:.. N -� r.1�N '� a �" J � L 3 _ ty x. �• •,^r .` r, •dtx - a y,� rr{{ y-e s'e a f- _- P•t3. rs C 1 r `fzi" 'c di 1 .•fl'q"'a�i'q ? w owl, ing `3 ' §a= ..+. ci??fi.,�,• „gs-Sy •s..� a'z - ; .. ). _.-F•'i h:z;�z v '���'F•�� '7'ti.,.�,i+k�•F # r•."" `,11` 1 1., f/ �''•7' ... �'? ��,}Ti �-e k•S�'�#Y��Rr vh,t �.p�f� •� �r': 5G4 x�..e� x a�`'•R��-��r ti�.K '�' -Y''r 6�`., 'k 1.. t l '' '� >Cti#f d 'w .3" est '! '6 k ✓k 4 � a'�..,, "WO/ . ?..�� �.. ? 'ux v �i,,. '� �s.?�-+r.•s'`.Y}�+�i' 'S' �'4''�' �"� (� Y�- � '7'�``e�'..� �� K ��/�■ wow■._� -•�� �7. � L�Fnd ��-+ h'���tp�i��`7 -1:111 VI 4�,^• � .Y/YY/Y�I. 6.'A S: ,Y,Y�f �.. ,y f L fi t` L y Y `M V. S ?" y j( r ' r FORM NO. 5 TOWN OF' SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date September 22 , 19 87 CHARLE S T:.. & JEAN .ZAHRA TO „ .. .. . .... .... .. . (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 PIKE STREET, MATTITUCK, NEW YORK 11952 (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: CH 100 • Zoning Ordinance ............................................. Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that ,.,,,,,STOP ALL WORK NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE (state character of violation) �••• •• PROVISIONS OF THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. ................................................................................. ..........................................................N................... ........... ..........................♦................... ............. .............. .r............................................... in violation of ...........CH........100....XIV..................100-........143........................................................................................ (State section or paragraph of applicable law, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the. ......AT ONCE ........................................................... September 19. 87 dayof .................................................... .. .... The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 1830 Pike Street. Mattituck,.. ••�•• ••• • ,..••,•••,County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of low may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 14 1-04-05 .. J... .. .. ... Building Inspector FORM NO. a TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date .......November .5............................. 19... TO . .. CHARLES T. & JEAN ZAHRA .. .......... ..... ................. ..... .. (owner or authorize.. . d agent of owner. . ).......... 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952 ................................................................................. (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: CH 100 ZoningOrdinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that ,,,,Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued (state character of violation) �������� October 27 , 1986 is hereby revoked. Rbason.;...not.,;following,,,pl,ans, did not comply with a stop work order. ................................................ ............................................................ ................... .................. ...... ., .. 100- 14 2-C 6 D inviolation of .................................................................... ............................................ ..................... (State section or paragraph of applicable low, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the the 6th conditions ....... above,mentioned forthwith on or before .....•.....................•• ..............................••• day of .....Novemper............................ 19....87 The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 140 Pike Street , Matttituck ..,,County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of law may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 1000- 14 1-04-05 . .. %•...,��7�. .......... Building Inspector Off 1019M T LD S Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 % ,w a_ (516) 765-1938 October 8, 1986 Mr. Curtis Horton Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Charles Zahra Dear Mr. Horton: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning '10aYd, Monday, October 6, 1986. RESOLVED that the Sohthold Town Planning Board waive the requirement for formal site plan review for •the site of Charles Zahra located at Mattituck, since this is a pre- existing building and no site improvements could be made at this time. If any physical changes are made subsequent to this, however, it may need formal site plan consideration and should be reviewed by the Planning Board. If you have any questions, please don' t hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, r� BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary KONTOKOSTA, ASSOCIATES ENGINEERS/ARCHITECTS 43 west 54fh street / new york city, new york 10019 / 212-582-6100 e.m. kontokosta p.e. gary rogers r.a. N ov . 5, 1984 \ Mr . Victor Lessard, Bldg Inspector Town of Southold Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: ellenic Snack Bar Demolition of Buil ding Dear Mr . Lessard: In preparing for the proposed alteration to the "Hellenic Snack Bar " building , it was found that many of , the structur- al members had deteriorated throughout the years due to water damage and termite infestation . The foundation consis- ted of concrete block without the benefit of footings To attempt to alter the existing structure and disturb its s,tructural stability would a risky an would resu in a s ructure of questionable integrity. So , in the interest of u�blic safet ex�e and at a great �nse to my Q 1�i a_n. t, the decision was ma e o demolish the b iil ding and rebuil at the same location . if you have any questions onthe above, please do not hesi- tate to call . Yos ru ` . ont a ,p .e . EMK/ck FORK NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK.AUTHORIZED) N° 13192 Z Date ... NC.......�....................... 19..9 Permission is hereby granted to: -7V 4LZA,-Ie. Qq��,vS ��'j,-k Zo/c � .��.`.. ., J.F.�... . .� ........... � �.. ... .. .Q,� .......................... /.l 2 r...7.................. .... to ... . ... :....I-4V,(--T.�W2r.W. Q-A1%;�...l.:QAAQ....�.—�.�l/AvvU....lf?..... .A.) ...... ... . ...« ... ............................................................................... at premises located at :.��..............7.. !N....../�>�..., ............................................ .........................................................................................................L�,c�,l.SE .. .M... i.G�s !V ../.. Y ..................................................................... ........................................'............................................:........ County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .0a..2l,6........ Block ... f .......... Lot No. Q"..e.V......... pursuant to application dated ...a.O..Ar=.......... .................... 19 .. .., and approved by the Building Inspector. rda COPY FOR YOUR Fee ... ..........:.`... INFORMATION ....... ... .... . .. . ..... ...... . . .... ...... ... ................. Building Inspector fDar JAMES A.SCHONDEBARE ry Town Hall 53095 Main Road TOWN ATTORNEY �® ® P.O. BOX 1 179 ®1 '�°�® Southold, New York 11971 ROBERT H.BERNTSSON ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY TELEPHONE (516)765-1939 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-OFFICE MEMO FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO: Zoning Board of Appeals and Building Department FROM: Robert H. Berntsson, Assistant Town Attorney p DATE: July 24, 1989 RE: Zahra (Coffee Pot) will need copies of all of your files pertaining to the above as soon as possible. If you have any questions, feel free to call. a � . Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 1 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR.. SERGE DOYEN, JR. JOSEPH H.SAWICKI February 7, 1989 JAMES DINIZIO,JR. Francis J. Yakaboski, Esq. Frank A. Isler, Esq. 456 Griffing Avenue, Box 389 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Appl. No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Premises Located at Pike .Street, Mattituck Gentlemen: Continuing on our telephone conversation today, we are enclosing copies of the new Zoning Map and excerpt from the Master Plan Zoning Update provisions for the Hamlet Business (HB) Zone District concerning the above premises. A complete re-print of the Master Plan Update (Local Law #1 - 1989) will be sent directly to you by the Town Clerk's office. - Please keep us advised on developments. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski lk Enclosures 15, Article IX is repealed and a new as follows: Article IX is added in its place, to Provide ` ARTICLE Hamlet Business (HB) District Section 100-90, Pur ose. The purpose of-the Hamlet Business (He) District is to provide evelooment in the'hamIet central business areas, �nctoJUI pr retail, p de for business service uses, public and semi-public uses, as well as hotel and motel and m ami y residential development that .vil! su o five and • and provide a focus for h Dort and enhance the retail dev ulti the hamlet area, elopment Section 100-91. Use regulations, In a He District, no o a buildin building or premises shall be used, and no buildina or q shall be erected or altered .v to be used, in whole or in nick is arran �ip�rt part, for an ed, intended or pest uses except the following: geed T A. Permitted uses, - 1. Any permitted use set forth in and re a^d 13) of the qulated by Section 100- Agricultural Conservation District. 31A (11 uses as set forth in and as re�ated b of the Hamlet Residential District, Y•-Sectio�_ ' (3) Boardin houses du em (4) Business, professional an d governmental offices, (5) Banks and financial institutions, (6) Retail stores. (7) Restaurants, excludin drive-in restaurants. (8) Bakeshoos (for on-premises retail sale, , (9) Personal service stores and shoos, including barber shoo, arlor, ororessional stuaios, and t ravel agenc beauty • y. (10) Art, anti ue and auction galleries. (11) Artists' and craftsmen's workshops. (12) Auditorium or meeting hall. (131 Repair shoos for household, cabinet shops business or personal aoDli carpenter shoos, eleetricai anees• inclu urniture r«_ -� --- ding Pair shoos an '1igps. Dlumb;n d Dicvcle and motorcycle shops n snobs, ( 141 Custom workshops. ( 151 Bus or _ train stations. (161 7heaters or cinemas (other than outdoor) (17) Libraries museums (18) Laundromat _39_ I 26. Chapter 100 is amended by adding a new Article thereto, to be Article XXIV, to provide as follows: i ARTICLE XXIV Nonconforminq Uses and Buildinqs i Section 100-240. Purpose. i The purpose of this article is to reduce or minimize impacts of• uses and buildings which do not conform to the use or bulk requirements set forth in this chapter, all. uses and buildings that become nonconformrnq by reason of any subsequent amendment to this chapter: and all buildings containing I i nonconforming uses. II Section 100-241. Nonconforming uses. I ' Except as provided hereinafter, nonconforminq use of buildings or open land existing on the effective date of this c a ter or authorize b a building permit issued prior thereto, regard ess of chanqe—ot title, possession, or occupancy.or.right thereof, may be continued in a initely except that such buil inq or use: A. Shall not be enlarqed, altered, extended, reconstructed, or restored or placed on a di Brent portion o t e lot or parcel of land occupied by such use on the effective date of this chapter, nor shall any external evidence of such use be increased by any means whatsoever. B. Shall not be moved to another location where such use would be nonconforming. C. Shall not be changed to another nonconformrnq use without a roval i by the paid o ppea s an then only to a use which in t e opinion of the said Board, is of the same or of a more restrictive nature. D. Shall not be changed back to a less restrictive use, if chanced to a more { restrictive nonconforminq use. s E. Shall not be re-established if such use has been changed to or replaced by, a conforming use. F. Shall not be repaired or rebuilt unless the use is changed to a conforming use if the nonconforming use. is damaged by fire or other causes to the extent of 509. of its fair value. 1� G. Whenever a nonconforming use of a buildinq or premises has been discontinued fo_rr a period of more than two 2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in tNi—s article to the contrary nonvicnstanaing, the nonconforming use of f such puudinq or premises shall no lonqer be permitted unless a variance therefor sY�all have been granted by the Boar of ppeals. i Section 100-242. Nonconforming buildings with conforminq rises. A. Nothing in this article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling, reconstruction or enlargement of a noncontorming budding containinq a conforming use provide that: such action does not create any new nonconformance or increase the degree of nonc_onfor•mance with regard to the regulations•I)ertaining to such buildunl5, B. Reconstruction of a damaged building. 1_ T% nonconforming building containing a confor•rnincf use whir_h has -90- C i ' I been damaged by fire or other causes to the extent of more than 5/; of its fair value shall not, be repaired or i-ebuiit unless such building is made substantially to conform r.:. h_ eight and yard requirements oft a k3ulk Schedule to the 2. Application for a permit to build or restore the damn cd portion 0 any building damaged or estroyed as set forth in subsection .c ii above, shall be tiled one the date of a such mage, and shal be accompanre by p ans or reconstru tc ion which as to such orUon, shall com I with the recuiremen- set fort above. I sue ermit is issue , rt sha lause one year therea ter unless reconstruction in a---. ance with tl;e a Dui oved i p ans has been initiated I Section 100-243. Nonconforming buildings with nonconforming uses,t( A. A nonconformin 1: Wilding containing a nonconforming use shall not be ` enivilill"ClInCl reconstructed or structurally altered or ntoveu, un es�li% use o such buildin Is change: to a conforminc use. B. A nonconforming building containing a nonconformi 71 use which has been 1 ama value oy fire or other causes to t air valhe extent of mole than SU of its rue shall not be re aired or reburit unless the use of Such buildin Is changed to a con orming use .. I Section 100-244. Nonconformin`ts. A• This subsection is intended to provide minimum standards r for ranting of a buildin hermit for lots made non-conformin or continued in a state of non-conformance i b the adoption of this Local Law and that were singly and separatel owned as of the effective date or this Loca—�La�• B• A nonconforming lot se arately owned and not adjoining an lot or land in the same ownership at the effective date of this Local Law in the same owners hi and not ad Dining any lot or land y date may be used at an time subsequent to such or a building or structure may be erected on such lot for use other a plicable rovisions Ofn this rLocaleLaw, all the Law,-- that roof of such se arate owners hi is submitted inthe form said an abstract of title showing the changes of title to said lot which abstract shall be in the usual form shall be certified b an ttorney or a company re ularly doin such work i a n Suffolk County or by a cor ration dul licensed to examine and insure title to real ro erty in Suffolk Count and shall contain a certification that no contiguous rooert%, %,ras owned bw an owner of the ro erty involved since the date of any ranted re a plicable Zonin Law. Such lot shall t)e ranted relief for front side and rear yard dimensions as follows: L " L L -90(a)- t ■l►=' M sm tea• OAF f �'������w�'�'�=:rid�N������j�►�• — Soft Ml � ` �ilia � � �y�A�•�/� � �• I� ��� ����♦�,� SIDNEY B. BOWNE & SON Sidney B.Bowne,P.E.,L.S. Roland Anders (1922-1959) � Roger L.Cocchi Chester C Kelsey, P.E.,L.S. 45 Manor Road Francis J.Lynch Alexandre W.Mercil,P.E. Philip Schlotzhauer Robert A.Stanton,P.E. Smithtown, N.Y. 11787 Joseph F.Stegman Robert W.Brown,L.S. 516 724-0611 Paul F.Stevens Zabdiel A.Blackman,P.E.,L.S. ) William T.Styne Richard B.Weber George A.Style,P.E. c Jerry D.Almont,P.E. George L Fagan,Jr.,Ph.D.,P.E. Frank Capobianco,C.E. October 20, 1988 Thomas R.Pynchon,L.S. C0NFLDENTIAL Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: SBB NO. 87288 - Building Permit #154282, October 27, 1986 140 Pike St. , Mattituck, New York Tax Map District 1000, Section 141, Block 4, Lot 5 Zone District B-1 - General Business Dear Sir: As requested, we have investigated the records and field condi- tions of the above site and building as they are affected by Section 100-118, Non-conforming Uses of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold, Paragraph "E". (See Exhibit A Tax Map) E. A non-conforming building may not be reconstructed or structurally altered during its life to an extent exceeding in aggregate cost fifty percent (50%) of the fair value of the building, unless the use of such building is changed to a conforming use. The question to be addressed is clearly what area has been reconstructed or structurally altered? The original building occupying the site prior to the request to improve contained (see Exhibit B): 1138 s.f. first floor 653 s.f. - second floor 1791 s.f. = Total area of building originally. Proposed building, after additions (See building plans on file with building department) : 1485 s.f. - first floor _._.. ------- 876 s.f. - second floor 2361 s.f. = Total area of building after alteration. MINEOLA • SMITHTOWN • NEW YORK CITY • CLEARWATER An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/H ` Gerard P. Goehringer a Chai rman Zoning Board of Appeals TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 20, 1988 Page Two The net increase in area is approximately 32%, thus within the 50% requirement of paragraph E above, if none of the existing building is altered other than to make cosmetic changes. A site inspection and detailed review of Exhibit C photographs taken between May, 1987 and August 1987, #1-19 was conducted by our staff engineers and the appraisal firm of Rogers and Taylor noting that photographs 1-7 indicate the building's preparation for alterations with the removal of the rear one-story addition of 16x22 = 352 s.f. . Photographs 13-14 show the rear , addition as proposed under - construction. Photographs 15-19 show alterations and reconstruction of the entire first floor of the existing buildings' frame construction of 22x30 + 1Ox17 = 830 s.f. Moving on to Exhibit D which contains 4 photographs of 2/29/88 that clearly indicate two things: 1) the entire second floor of the building has been removed - 653 s.f. , and 2) the first floor structure is completely reframed with new components. Given the foregoing facts and ,evidence it can only be concluded that more than 50%.sift, .4e,Mfair a ei: y lue of e bu �di.ng figs exceeded by alteration activities. Construction Activities Original Building Altered Areas 1791 s.f. 570 s.f. - new addition 653 s.f. - second floor removal 12 33 s.f. Altered area of building = 1223 s.f. 68% 1.791 s.f. Very truly yours, SIa � !! & <7 CONSULT NS ROBERT W. BROWN, L.S. RWB:clg Encl . II p "t � �•��tt V 1� A dto ,• 4, i! F Ar 49 / i9r1 ! r. MLIA �r �! / BAPTIST CIti/RCH •` tt ` t• i 1.i•I. .. 9L• ,y<9p � . 20 z.oao t 1 '•�+ \ s F iT e 1 st c a K .• �� .1 ,ICSS M 1 37 =r LSA1t1 �E c~,a. •1 9�l a t2� iS DE•rIL ' UVI-Etr tT .JB `T►+ L6A 460 w 34 •� Q•• - J 1 � ya••It��F.yy !, t •atst..t 6 1•/ pol ••• \v t2 :M•F'• NOPtN , S i� r•� ''s �, JO a •1_t-tO+t CC •' ri • a wl 76 •s '\t St[ SEC. NO 142 JB = ,oloov _ • �` • Ciosr cs,� f Asti �. .9 N. �6�39SDE00 .oc,o.lcrtc V p U Rl Z Z t�G• ���`��\ g` � O '� � Sc�rN6YsSA FO/Z {� U C. A. -PRICE Co., INC � M lYIA-r- TU CK v a _ TOWN OJC' SO L THOU P rr''� mil, H _ • -. S�fR Co,�N.Y. /lp\ �\Y J N�.•v:.•, ..c 4• ALT!'ATiZN O.*ADGIfION' ' �� fO Ik:3 .IrV1►Is A YIOtAl1:1N Of :N7prlN�7�6•/'j�' rr:r:o'• 770i O/TIII I'd ✓�� .�% (2UCA:I.1N TAW, CO:1" Of THIS!u7V:f MAP NOT . o tv:vii,,: : I.t:.0•... ,�s'e c uri t r'�tJe Guaranty I :.o $:At :I:At: N.of fl C_...:,,.�• i': A VATIC I-V. C for„ on as sur�cy�a' Mar: I�,. 1973 B /Q , TR' G'JAfA1.Tf:: .AI . ...... . .•I�•l 'uV ' CIA,f TO TII.;A ,.•. . 1.•. :..•WIT Roderick. Vaal 72a ylj P. C.. yRmcl) is rtilA!W.A.; J. it.! 1:: .•.1'J.• .:li • t-ftt COf.1:AI%T, ...)v:_:....I..A: A:..r C1^A►O --/� _ ` '•. LTT ir V�r F • '• '• - "Foy�`��.srs'�'"�'4``r�,•k',��-��� _ ��' '" { _- `i r 1-* all P.- oil =*•" � .a-���+.� •...dx-..r+--auw. r� :fir-!'`ta"Y..:. ,:'.r,G�°:+ru=�r. :' � y '-• -�•---- '::+�,7G-.�:J- 'r:i•%•��—" •'ems --_— - •�^ .�..�-_,�-��--_ � I _ r—_.'�': .J.,�h�:�i A.r�.. �t•'� ::Jt b':AdC �Gy J_ �.L: r -tq_- Y[[ _mac,+-. '"c.t.. - �:ri ��.::.. :�:-i K'. ��..• A�;':z '�ti.. it fi...• .r.' ..K-i Bath oundction _ M. Oldg. ? 2 Y �? ce GG _ -- — — ------ Floors i ^;�'rr, i, j•i �/ osement i Extension Interior Finish Wells Extension I — Heat Fire Place Extension Attic —— —'_-_- -- '--- - - --.—,-••-- —+--=� i Porch , _ ___ -- I Rooms 1 st Floor iPorch _ -- -- --- — -' — Rcoms 2nd Floor -• — - --'— -- i Patio — _ — B r eezeway _ ._..._.-._.____---- - --'----- —� ----- - ; Driveway Garcge + --..._— .._. — _ — t — -- -_._ ►, y 9 , i % ®� Southod Town Board of ApeaIs p MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 . TELEPHONE.(516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI i April' .l 5-, • l 988 Eric J. Bressler , Esq . Wickham , Wickham' &' Bressler , P . C. Main Road , *Box 1424 Mattituck , NY 11952 Re : Appl . No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Dear Eric : Transmitted herewith for your perusal and record is a copy of the. official findings and determination rendered by this Board , the on-ginal of which has this. date been filed with the Office of the Town Clerk. Please note that this matter has been set down for a further hearing to be held on May 12 , 1988. In the interim , please furnish us with a complete copy of the Contract of Sale between the North Fork Bank and the Langers , a,nd between the North Fork Ban...k and Charles Zahra. . A copy of the Notice of Hearing as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman , Inc . and Suffolk Times , Inc . by, our office will be forwarded to you_.in the near future . Yours very truly , GERARD P . GOEHRINGER lk CHAIRMAN _Enclosure Copies of Decision to : 'James A. Schondebare , Esq . (Town Attorney) Robert H. Berntsson , Esq . (Asst . Town Attorney) ILAr Mr. Victor Lessard , Executive Administrator `` Southold Town Building Department �;•,� Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3701 Application Dated December 10 , 1987 To: Eric J . _ Bressler , Esq . as Attorney [Appellant (s) ] for CHARLES ZAHRA Main. Road , .Box 1-424 Mattituck , NY . .1.1952 At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on April 14 , 1988 , the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below. was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning..Ordinance .Article Section [ ] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article Section [ X] Request for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV , Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal of Determination of Building Inspector . in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 5 . Zone District : B-1 .Gener.al. .Business . WHEREAS , public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988; and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted. concerning this application ; and WHEREAS , the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning , and the surrounding areas ; and WHEREAS , the Board made the following findings of fact : 1 . This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . The revocation was issued on November 5 , 1987 . 2 . The property in question is located in the "B-l " General Business Zoning District and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District . 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 005 . 3 . The subject premises contains a total area of 3 ,800 sq . ft. with 40 . 0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck , Town of Southold . (CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO ) DATED: April 14 , . 1988 . CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) Page 2 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 4 . The subject premises is presently improved with a partially completed one-story concrete foundation with exterior walls . Previously , the premises was improved, by a two-story structure which .was noncon:forming. as to- various-- setback require- ments and as to use . 5 . The building permit was revoked under Article XVI , Section 100-142 of the Zoning Code w.hich reads as follows : " . . . The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in - the follow ng instances : A. Where he -finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation .as to a material • fact in the application , plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B . Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance .with the applicable law . C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with . the provisions of the application , plans or specifications . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. 6 . Hearings were held on this application on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 . The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters .of personal knowledge in the record . This was completed. by March 14 , 1988 , and the hearing was closed at the Board ' s Regular Meeting on March 17 , 1988 . 7 . Based on the facts in the record , it appears ,that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the .Building Department . It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure . Indeed , the second story has been totally removed and the first floor has been completely rebuilt . The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new struc- ture when compared t.o the prior structure . 8.. . Irrespective of- Whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted , the facts before the .Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit . Specifically , .the evidence would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building . This would violate Section 100- 118E of the Zoning Code . The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would -also subject.. the project to compliance with present building, code requirements under `the New York State Building Code . ,ge 3 - Appl No . 3701 .-iatter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 9. Based on the personal knowledge of the Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner , it further appears that the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years . This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100-118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held . Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the ,building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code. These issues go to -the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this juncture .. Since no vested rights can be obtained under an illegal permit , it would appear to be in the applicant' s best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the. Board . Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment ' s revocation of the building permit. 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr . Goehringer,it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of thb7Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING , to be : held : on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sec- tions 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . _ Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Go.ehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . 1 k � ► 'GERARD P . GOEHRINGER, CVIRMAN i IZECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTiiGLD .TOVVN CLERK DATE ql/541 HOUR Town Clerk, Town of Southold Page 3 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 9 . Based on the personal knowledge of the Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner , it further appears that -the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years . This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100- 118D of the 'Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid. 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were. not squarely before the Board at the hearings held . Cou.nsel ' requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code . These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this juncture . Since no vested rights can be obtained under an illegal permit , it would appear to be in the applicant' s best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board . Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment ' s revocation of the building permit . 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr . Goehringer,it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of thb -Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND , HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING , to be held on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present . evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sec- tions 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . lk R DP . GUEHRINULK , UVIKMAN �I,• ' Jam, LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.c. MAIN ROAD,P.O.BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND NEW YORK 11952 MORTGAGE OFFICE WILLIAM WICKHAM ERIC J.BRESSLER 516-298-8353 % 516-298-5300 ABIGAILA.WICKHAM DANIEL C.ROSS March 17, 1988 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall - Main Road Southold, NY 11971 ,Re: Appl. No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Location of Premises: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck County Tax Map No. 1000-141-04-05 Gentlemen: We are writing to you pursuant to the discussion at the last hearing date concerning: 1) items requested by the Board; and 2) a response to the Board "findings" after inspection. Accordingly, enclosed are copies of the deeds into the North Fork Bank & Trust Company and Charles Zahra, as requested by the Board. We have reviewed the "findings" of the Board dated March 14, 1988 with respect to the premises and offer the following comments: 1. The extent or expiration of a non-conforming use is not an issue in this proceeding. It was not advanced as a ground for revocation of the building permit by the Building Department either in its notices or at the hearing. No questions concerning same were put to either the applicant or the building inspectors prior to the Board cutting off further oral testimony. In the event that expiration of a non-conforming use is the subject of a subsequent hearing or determination or proceeding, we will be prepared to address it at That time. 2 . The "observations" were not introduced at the hearing and are not based upon testimony at the hearing or detailed statements of information within the personal knowledge of individual board members. As such they are not properly part of the record and may not be relied upon. 3. Mr. Zahra is in Florida this week on vacation, so I have been unable to discuss the matter fully with him. However, I have been advised by Gail Wickham, who represented the North Fork Bank & Trust Company in the purchase from Langer and the sale to Zahra, that she spoke to the Langer's daughter and was told that her family was actually living in the "upstairs apartment" and had been for some time. The Bank allowed the Langers and their family to remain in possession for several months after the Bank purchased the property. It is her recollection that the restaurant was closed before the apartment was vacated. As Gail and I are leaving today for a brief vacation, we have not had adequate time to ascertain the dates of these events, but in any event, this issue should not form the basis for your decision, in whole or in part. 4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and without waiving any such objection, we annex an affidavit from Bayne Midget, maintenance supervisor for North Fork Bank & Trust Co. demonstrating the existence of the upstairs apartment as a full dwelling unit. 5. Finally, we note that the gratuitous statements of the Building Inspectors concerning the type of construction are also not properly before the board, as such issues did not form the basis for the revocation. In any event their conclusions are not supported by fact and are erroneous under 9 NYCRR. In summary, because of the narrow scope of this appeal and the corresponding lack of notice and opportunity to be heard, as outlined above, we urge the Board to resolve the appeal in favor of applicant on the bases presented to it by way of the notice of revocation. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric qJ. Bkressler EJB:pmf enc.. Standard N.Y.B.T.U.Form 8041• —W.Itract of sale. CONSULT YOUR LAWYER BEFORE SIGNING THIS INSTRUMENT—THIS INSTRUMENT SHOULD BE USED BY LAWYERS ONLY. NOTE: FIRE LOSSES. This form of contract contains no express provision as to risk of loss by fire or other casualty before delivery of the deed.Unless express provision is made,the provisions of Section 5-131 1 of the General Obligations Law will apply. This section also places risk of loss upon purchaser if title or possession is transferred prior to closing. L THIS AGREEMENT, made the IK day of �7 nineteen hundred and ''Eighty-Six BETWEEN THE NORTH FORK BANK b TRUST CO., a New York Banking corporation with principal place of business at 245 Love Lane, Mattituck, New York 11952, :a �w hereinafter described as the seller, and i CHARLES J. ZAHRA & JEAN ZAHRA, his wife, both residing at (no #) Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952, hereinafter described as the purchaser, WITNESSETH, that the seller agrees to sell and convey, and the purchaser agrees to purchase, all that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being in the at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a concrete monument set on the southerly side of Pike Street at the northwest corner of the premises herein described adjoining land of late of George P. Bergmann on the West, said monument being 140 feet as measured along the southerly side of\Pike Street East from its intersection with the easterly side of Westphalia Avenue, from said monument of beginning: i RUNNING THENCE along the southerly .side of. Pike Street, North 56° 39' 50" East 40.0 feet to a cross cut in the 'concrete' and land of Conklin; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Conklin and land of Estate of George H. Riley South 29° 361 10" East 95.0 feet to a concrete monument and land of Estate of George H. Reilly; RUNNING -THENCE along said land of Riley, South 560 391 50" West 40.0 strict feet to a monument and land of late of George P. Bergmann; 30 RUNNING THENCE along said land late of Bergmann, North 29° 36r 10rr West 95.0 feet to the concrete monument and place of BEGINNING. j ction i 1.00 i Eck .00 5.000 This contract may not be assigned without consent of Seller. D At or. before closing Seller shall deliver Certificate of Occue Premises.Site PlThis contract is contingent upon the Purchaser obtaining a/But fromthe Town of Southold,for renovation of the existing building frantand upstairs apartment usage. - 31urchaser agrees to make diligeandmay cancel the contract if the Building Permit is denied due tfor subdivision approval. I I. This sale includes all Tight, title and interest, if any, of the seller in and to any land lying in the bed of any street, road or avenue opened or proposed, in front of or adjoining said premises, to the center line thereof. and all right, title and interest of the seller in and to any award made or to be made in lieu thereof and in and to any unpaid award for damage to said premises by reason of change of grade of auy strt•t•t; and the seller will execute and deliver to the purchaser, on closing of title, or thereafter, on demand, all protx•r insiw:na•n1:. lot :hc cnrvt•y:,:u•t• tJ such title and the assignment and collection of ttnV rUr•It awarrt FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate 'Of -Occupancy No. .7,$936. . . . . Date. . February 16 . ., 19.7g.. THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at . ..j)+0':pj. ke .St.W . . . . . . . . .. . . Street Map No. . . . . . . . . . . Block No. : . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated . . . .$9$/77 :. 19. . . . pursuant to which Building Permit No. . .9)+01 z dated . . . .8/12./.77. . . . . . . . . . ... 19. . . ., was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the,-law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . . . . . .Acce s sorry•Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . The certificate is issued to . . . . . .Joseph Leger • • . • • . . . . . . • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . • • • • • (owner, of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval .. . . . .VR. . . : . UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. •N/R • HOUSE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street . . . .Pike Street • • • • . . • . . • • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Inspector FORM NO. 6 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Building Department Town Clerks Office Southold, 'N. Y. 11971" APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF'OCCUPANCY. OCCUPANCY. "Instructions',."' . A. This application must be filled, in typewriter:.OR ink, and submitted in DUPLICATE"to the Building Inspector with the following;. for new buildings or new use: 1. Final-survey of property with accurate location of, all buildings, property lines,- streets, and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. Final approval of Health Dept. of water supply and sewerage disposal-6-9 form or equal). 3. Approval of electrical installation from Board of Fire Underwriters. 4. Commercial buildings, Industrial buildings, Multiple Residences and -similar buildings and installations; a certificate of .Code :compliance from the Architect or Engineer, responsible for the-building: 5. Submit Planning Board approval. of completed site plan requirements where applicable. B. For existing buildings (prior to April 1957), Non-conforming uses, or buildings and "pre-existing" ' land uses: = - 1. Accurate survey-of property showing all property lines, streets, buildings and unusual natural or topographic features. .2. Sworn statement of owner or previous owner as to use, occupancy and condition of buildings. 3. Date of any housing code or safety inspection of buildings or premises, or other pertinent in- .formation required "to prepare a certificate. C. Fees: " 1. Certificate of occupancy $5.00 2. Certificate of occupancy on pre-existing. dwelling or land use $5.00 - 3. Copy of certificate of occupancy $1.00 ll Date .:.... ". .l..�. „ - New Building ................ Addition .... ...... Old or Pre-existing Building ..........Vacant Land ............:. Location Of Property ...... .5..�1. .. :.f (..!...1. (.........:. .1. .. . .::�:C:Li...(Y:..l.,...: ...Pot: 02 Owner Or Owners Of Property .:'..1..!�... J..,.1.� ......... SFI...I.L ......L:..... ............... subdivision ...:.....:......,,.r:. .....f. r-77 .....Lot No. ..... . Block No. ........ . House No.............. Z 3b ermit o...1 sici.. ... LJote Of Permit &L KAZI...Applicant �::'. ..::...'.............. Health Dept. Approval F:'.�' `.. � Labor Dept. Approval .. It. ........... . .... . .. 5-1 FL c Underwriters Approval ...1..N� '..f'� 11 U 3.�3. z1anning Board .Approval ........... ............................ Request For Temporary Certificate ....... Finn! Certificate Fee Submitted $".. ...�6�....................................... . ... .. ................. „ . .... / Construction on above described building and permit eets%�all applicable odes and regulations. Applicant ....... ................. .........:. Sworn to before me this Tlc 0--07 093 5 rZ 9 35 � ...1.4�....... day of ... .................. a....� (stamp or seal) WSAN I. Det�1N15 G`� p;. L' c.tG,i,1g0'LaJ1.}1`9�j Notary.Public .. ....... ..................... County V,.;:nflC, Stare of NewYr�3E ;0�'�y. �tC g0. 0. suffelk CwffiV �QtPR� '•.\ .:es March 30, IN? C3`Ss`an - r i - :, aj t , . FORM NO 2 -, t TOWN"OF"SOUTHOLD BUILDING `DEPARTMENT" ;, :r ;TOWN CLERK'S .OFFICE tSOUTH'OLD, N.:Y ti5t }• 5 t `` l �.•.i S i _1 t „ �,1k, ,+ ,� �; 5: ! 7 t4 ! ' ,4 t 't a r, t t { s a"s 1 r• 1 r< 1_5: S z r4k ! , Zr.r,� 4f ,r I.r; b { BUILDI G PERMIT x ; 7 , �: �, +, r t ' -4 x .t, y° , tv r ., { �.S ,�. 7 - t "„t'r< ,;._: 4 1 , { '�, d i'7 ' 7 t. r 1 .. `. ,f t (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL t t ,. ' COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) ,ti t Y frf�l, Tv , r .^r _ ;. ka... -r g ! t.. a , t.t';ti a 4 c { t P 1 2 y,, r t sf i , c t k ° ` 1 r t 4 :a v p ry,Ac�h T s '17 p. Y�r I t�J4'1 t v) r < i . v', .. 1 _ .. 1- ,yt 1 F r `J is i. i s ,ra /;t,, 1 ; r - t'',; ,, J L -' y F' 'i u ; ti r �. .( 1 i p! t 4 +1! 1i i t47 y ( t ri 53 1 ^•'F + �,.: _ f a O: .' - r _� t (r' ` f ,:,s j 1` y ; ( jl�(. Au St s ) .} :. �� F - i� • 9 4 0 Z Dote 19 . r A t f b t. / S �:9 R 1 a_r k ,y t . 1 j f 1 r -�". f r;' ., 4 .cr 7 r 7 9. r f '4 .Y r' a Permission is hereby granted to r <a r ;Joseph Lamer 1 v. - h 4{v r ` - _ - . , Pike St Mattituakx s ,5r, tA i Build••new accessory (storage) building to ... t?y,1 r f .n. f,1 ,,-.- 1 - e Pt premises•located at. Pike St :,: _ Mattituck N.Y 7 Aug 12' 77 ;pursuant tq application: dated :•....:....... 19.. and approved,b 'the. a r,, Building Inspector. - ' a K0 4:6 t 10.00 x r t ; Fee $. t r t ,;-, "s r 5 r r f. 1 St�7yr A t , _ t i Y e r. } i r T f t r , a, 1"�1 7rt •,ka d " t n.. i 3 ¢.. rj ak I' air t} ' �1 'x ^ :i r r i s a .;7..2r r4 �rr lYtd Ill ,K. r r•x , + t4 : , t t t �, r ^ctogrV"i - • ' 7 y , ,i'.t , r 7 4 r t1 r �r Sa a,, ravf�i.� r a wP ! - s r' a r 1 r'` # •• Y Rt �,t 'r 3`^r x r f xiLtf k L +1 x ' r x E , Buildmg Inspector �t3„-r `Ak4i `: s}?:, f a :­ , 1 t - R t t 43 t `}l^, 111 r rt. , 1g t�'�.,•r . : Jfx h ;,"..' i , -'1 1 y` t •`'.- 1, ! r of `' - i 7 1 _ s i x t i- L -f ro ' ' �,t 1x r ,c { 1 s �r tt�.. r a pM }`i-. ` s. r'-, 7 k 4 ~� .. 1 ✓ •e,i yIj! cy7 "t f o `mil^.�+a t- r + f -I` ,�� Y _ t`t x "v ' 1. lM1 P7' ) 11} i, !.X F ate` t^,day l' P '¢$I ' _ _,. Y tt,. i 1 ! t 1 'j }�i'fif 1 x'N t'trr K.-:} i • 1} ,- ' k G ,'� r _. .r a ra i c r a r, r trl..-. '!4°r k4 5 S.. x'f�a`'-f' ''i u{syA911 Jr_�Y s-! a r x Y' i t t t 1. Iy 6 ,t,t a s 5b y ,u,l 3� y 1,,Ar ,>•vk`tt r' .71^.-Ifi 'n r,,4, ,.r y �`? x.s 1 ty+ s s TY{�.� L?.. 1 a t v 1. t .,,{ Sy t'Fy�c ,( aF+$xy*rJT �;;^`t*, v: 5 �e fY 1r a i 1at -. > r:P r sY `r i Srr' *'S ; as+�,ax '��k�5 r ,x 4#1 r fxvJ 7� ! ' a „. 9' 4 f f ?-:+5.` r :mil Tr yF` ­zf `RP 'M < n r t`j --r ., '�v d "..k �,y >,,; ';r�l a.:, r 4 / ,arr:- `'r :e t ( >,± d a n. kTF*. "r''ifey � a dp,t'ra , ,rA1': �,s 'a w-a >'�s., f Is^.M+f+ss"'r.> r 'C. x Ef' a P`m. S t +. r r-r'4, +•"i,.s`r '. ^f,2..,�j t9 .fx?-nryt P b _`1,g_,:; y._� Ct,; Rr" s , , axp �.T }(«r ri"-,g-',." lrT r,Rg,.;, t� ro- 7 kt �: �.ta.+ .�,,p ;�''£.yr r' k.', �`.,it w.,' f *tip: ✓5fx'ti'. .d` :.b':6 `i.M d':'1, tr 9 sr <: 4 9 r }w,• -, > ' R F 'y rr�k �� 4 t t, 1'S� .� w� z y.>r .k. tw 9 {l.z r k r ,. . h � ty ;Er x yz;Sji tfdr'�. y' s. i 7 3•,:,r�';u �''''fi rY y.-"Y "9s,4Ny F' : � rh. 'Si�+"�y` { r$+ .,_,� S x�"^'..3. .7.+a�;%':` . ..a<': ''; zP'a••/R 'lj t.'a•, .' .a. S4�x.^�y'J,rkrdi}�.; >`1RC+.° t'♦;'.?u'ir �;z: �.'1"i`''" ',;:.'�S•.:�'�:�.? �_ .Ei t .rt.. Y,'•;:;,s�''.�'t� r ns - '�,��,F.,e�a;M1 a'� 1 ��y{.e Y_;,£; 5y�'t`ti s.Y ", ��. $'.•¢ �'�S 'uF';r,. 3•nr a. ,'A.r+x. µ "'e��'Sy°' ',':5 ';+' `}r'. ' :ts' a ,a •F. , i< s„�..�., •, + `'f •.�. f, '��rr>�x:k.s.. v x�;A? r_lTr .r �.., tr M2 :rvf1' `'x r,..,_;vim �yt.�. sck--�Y :b'Fm7" y ary E<As �'4.r' b. ?7 3 r a '+. �. •' '„y.' �.Y+ " p'#'.'E r �' £ -•*} t ,t 3 i `,•:3r?E �#,$t r� .si'='. �;'S .4°"'£�a may. ' - �+ " :r h x, ;ryY !c"5x r rrCf+ N.y" .'' ;?rw,. '' to x t.F f rs�•tic� +r S- , E . +' K n S * '�`` c +ti y4. .:l _ a ,a`,'ai?'r�rSr ,;.'d.,�h4' :f. 't''.', ;ar�'r:. G.'°ti !N "'e?..fwY•r^•yyG4ty„.,-.,.+A•i�,iw, ".<H' e3'[' ^xf4`a7:'�.i6rrls"� � .R.+v.:dB_,+:sar..a9'R•RY3..+. ".�. c .. ,. FORM NO. 1 VVV TOWN OF SOUTHOLD � � BUILDING DEPARTMENT , I TOWN HALL . .,OUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 TO .N LDG. DEPT.OF SOUTHOLD TEL.: 765-1802 Examined . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 . . . Received . . . . . . . . . . . 119 . . . rn�Approved . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 . . . Permit No. . . . . . . . . . . . a7.� C� ✓ Disapproved a/c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Building Inspector) APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date . . . INSTRUCTIONS a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector, with 3 sets of plans,accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this appli- cation. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issued a Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy shall have been granted by the Building Inspector. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, hou ' g code, and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary ins] S. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Signature of ap i fit, or name, if a corporation) �. 30. ./. 17 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Mailing address of applicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general. contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Name of owner of premises. ./ 9!..T!�. F4- A . A k!t. c. . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. . . . . . . . (as on the tax roll or latest deed) If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . �. (Name and title of corporate officer) Builder's-Builder's-hicense No. Plumber's License No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Electrician's License No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Otlher Trade's License No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . 1. Location of land on which proposed work will be done' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r 1J.i./.U�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. House Number Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . . . I ./. . . . . . . . Block . . . . . �. !. . . . . . . . . Lot . . . d S! Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . . . .- . . . . . . . Lot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Name) 2. State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy . . . . . . . . !' ./ .✓. . . . . ?�.!"/a°.!'. . !T!�! .S.�qV.-q a. � . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � b. Intended use and occupancy . . . . . . . . .S!ti#A.-4.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3�r,. 1;�h_��rNO • • a � I � 3. Nature of work (check which apy ,.ble): New Building . . . . . . . . . . Addi_____ . . . . . . . . . . Alteration . . �. . Repair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Removal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Demolition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Work . . . . . . . . . . . ,a. . (Description) 4. Estimated Cost . . . . . . . . .�,s� O—t.`—a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ito be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling,number of dwelling units . . . . ./ . . . . . . . . Number of dwelling units on each floor . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . If garage,number of cars . . . . . . . �� h 6. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature N d extent of each gyp�Hof use �y FLori��t,LZ��:Qh� 7. Dimensions of existing structures,if any: Front . : .3.Z . S! . . . . . Rear ,3 2„Y Depth . .y Height . . .�'?!. . . . . . . . . Number of Stories . . . . . lopw ..2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . Dimensions,of same structure with alterations or additions: Front . . . . . ?;!Ir . . . . . Rear . . 3 2 y. . . . . . . . . Depth . .3.-.'y . . . . . . . . . . . . Height . . . .4 Y/. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Number of Stories . . . 14 . . . . . . . . . . . 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Depth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Height Number of Stories . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. Size of lot: Front . . ...��. �. .`7 a.4 . . . . . . Rear . . . . S . .`y o .. . . . . Depth .`!-S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. Date of Purchase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Name of Former Owner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 11. Zone.or use district in which premises are situated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: . . . . 13. Will lot be regraded . . . . . . . . .I.UQ. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Will excess fill be removed from premises: Yes ,. 14. Name of Owner of premises . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . .. . . . Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phone No. . . . . . . . Name of Architect . . . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . . . Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Phone No. . . . . . . . . . . . . Name of Contractor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Address . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . ... .Phone No. . . . . . . 15. Is this property located within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? *Yes . . . . . No . .X. .. *If yes, Southold Town Trustees Permit may be required. PLOT DIAGRAM Locate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether existing or proposed, and,indicate all set-back dimensions from property lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate whether interior or corner lot. t ;TATE OF NEW YORK, S.S ;OUNTY OF . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . • • • • • • • • • being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the applicant (Name of individual signing contract) bove named. leis the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . (Contractor, agent, corporate officer, etc.) )f said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file this pplication; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief;and that the cork will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. ,worn to before me this ^ . . . . . . . . . �. . . . .day of. . . .k - . . . . . . ., 19 � iotary Public, . . . . `-. . . . . ; "�. County . . . :�fZ.C�. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1lE1E11 K K MOE NOnIly PUBM sm d NM� (Signature of applicant) Terms 30.199 OUNDATION ( 1st ) �. f. 'OUNDATIOid ( 2nd ) z s o -C. .OUGH FRAME & G PLUMBING cJ N y [c =i1SULATIOPI PER' N . Y. �3 STATE ENERGY CODE x �" FINAL z ¢; ADDITIONAL COMMENTS : x rA_ x ' H t a • r y ,] H �- O • 2 • x rn r Ct a . ro ' H . , square foot of sign area, with a minimum fee of twenty-five dollars ($25.). h) Demolition and/or removal and/or re:.,.,.Lion of any building ten dollars ($10.) minimum and five cents ($0.05) for each square foot in excess of three hundred (300) square feet of floor area. (2): For the purposes of this Subsection J, cellars, decks, attached garages and any habitable area shall be included in the calculation of floor area. §. 100-142. Revocation of permits The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore',issued and approved in the following instances: 10070 a 25-R7 100-142 ZONING § 100-144 A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application, plan or specifications on which the building permit was based B. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not.have been issued in accordance with the applicable law. C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application, plans or specification. D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. § 100-143. Stop orders. [Amended 8-26-76 by L.L. No. 3-19761 Whenever the Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to believe that work on any building or.structure is being prosecuted in violation of the provisions of.the applicable law, ordinances or regulations, or not in conformity with the provisions.of an ap- plication, plans or specifications on the basis of which a building permit was issued,or in an unsafe and dangerous manner, he shall notify the owner of the property, or the owner's agent or the person performing the work, to suspend all work, and any such persons shall forthwith stop such work and suspend all building activities until the stop order has been rescinded. Such order and notice shall be in writing and shall state the conditions under which the work may be resumed,and may be served upon a person to whom it is directed either by delivering it personally to him or by posting the same upon a conspicuous portion of the building under construction and sending a copy of the same by certified mail. § 100-144. Certificates of occupancy. A. A certificate of occupancy shall be applied for from the Building Inspector and it shall be unlawful to do any of the following until a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor: .. 10071 .1 -25-87 TEL. 765-1802 �c��FFQ(kC� TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR P.O. BOX 728 d w TOWN HALL O O� SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 , � April 14 , 1986 Peter P . Brophy P .O . Box, 3 Main Road Mattituck , N . Y . 11952 Subject : B. P . # 14319Z for Frank and Mary L. Brophy Dear Mr . Brophy : Per your request I am forwarding the following copies from the above file with . certification by the Town Clerk of the Town of Southold . Application for building permit dated August 30 , 1986 to make addition and alterations to dwelling . Survey of property dated 7/24/78 which you sub- mitted with your application . Section from Flood Insurance rate map showing approximate location of your property shaded in red , Zone 'B ' does not require development permit . Building Permit # 14319Z dated October 3 , 1985 . Permit was issued under requirements of Chapter 100 , Zoning Ordinance Town of Southold , Art . XIV , .Sec . 100-141 Building Permits . Application for demolition permit dated March 11 , 1986'. Tne building permit covers the extent of .altera- tions and repair necessary to bring the structure up to the minimum standards of construction required under the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code and also the proposed additon . The Town of South- old adopted this construction code on June 8 , 1976 . Peter P . Brophy April 14 , 1986 Page 2 Where a building is being altered any sub s ,an-d;;r,d construction that is found in opening up of walls or exposing foundations shall be bro phis at times will necessitate tpeto 9,Qdal stand- structure , ie : wallold ceiling joists ; rafters ; floor Joists ; foundation ; and replacing with an improved`assem- bly to carry any live or dead load . The scope of this 'rTrpi'ove Fen is covered under this permit ir-7—Y19L . Before issuing this Building Permit I determined that a development permit was not necessary under the National Flood Insurance Rate Map Program by scaling the location of property from Flood Insurance Rate Map , panel #94 as revised 6/15/83--my findings were that the Brophy property was located in Flood Zone B which does not require a development permit , Zone B in the 5U0 year flood zone . In the latter part of February 1986 , at the request of Mark Boeckman the contractor making these alterations I visited Brophy property. Mr. Boeckman showed me sec- tions of the old building that were sub standard in con- struction and I gave him the approval to remove and correct any sub standard construction he finds in the course of making the renovation . Trusting this will clear up any questions ing this matter , concern- Y s trul G�CI.�-� Edward Hindermann ED : hdv Building Inspector I FORK NO 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 'BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) N° 14 319 Z Date .... :rP :........j......... 1 . Permission is hereby granted to: ........: . ..�... Q/4 ...... ......�`�.�.� 7 -.,r. :.. ..... . .......... of premises located at ....7.5............. ............ Cl.� .SSG............ ..,..�de% CR .r/til..:� ................................................................................................................................................................ ................................................................................................................................................................. County Tax Map No. 1000 Section f�7........ Block ....lQ.......... Lot No. pursuant to application dated ....../.�..I.......... 19. and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee g..l. �.. .. .. .... Buildin® Inspector ................. r Rev. 6/30/80 AlflY'kf SUBTITLES HOUSING AND COMMUNITY RENEWAL 1231.1 SUBCHAPTER E Conversions, Alterations, Addltions and Repairs to Existing Buildings PART 1230 Purpose 1231 Applicability 1232 Special Conditions 1233 Historic Buildings 1234 Retrofit for Areas of Public Assembly PART 1230 PURPOSE (Statutory authority:Executive Law,§§375,377) Sec. 1230.1 Purpose Historical Note Part%1230.1) filed Dec.'13, 1983 eff. Jan. 1, 1984. Section 1230.1 Purpose. The purpose of this Subchapter is to provide the condi- tions under which conversions, alterations, additions and repairs to existing buildings shall be subject to the applicability of the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code. Historical Note Sec.filed Dec.13,1983 eff.Jan.1,19M. PART 1231 APPLICABILITY - (Statutory authority:Executive Law,if 375,377) Sec. Sec. 1231.1 Conversions 1231.4 Roof covering 1231.2 Relocations 1231.E Equipment 1231.3 Alterations,additions and repairs 1231.8 Existing uses continued Historical Note Part (% 1231.1-1231.8) filed Dec. 13, 1083 eft. Jan.1,19M. Section 1231.1 Cuaversions. The provisions of Subchapter B of this code shall apply to existing buildings as if hereafter erected, where the general classification by occupancy or use as set forth in Part 701 of this code is changed from one classification to another. 4 Historical Note Sec.filed Dec.13,1983 eff.Jan.1.1984. 638.333 Ex 11-30-85 I ' ,.� Affm inn f 1231.2 TITLE 9 EXECUTIVE 1231.2 Relocations. The provisions of Subchapter B of this code shall apply to existing buildings as if hereafter erected; where a building.is physically relocated. Existing mobile homes shall be exempted from this requirement. Historical Note �. Sec.filed Dec.13,1983 eff.Jan,1,19M. . 1231.3 Alterations,additions and repairs, (a) The provisions of Subchapter B of this code shall apply to alterations,additions and repairs made to buildings. (b) The provisions of Subchapter B of this code shall apply to an entire existing building, as if hereafter erected, when the cost of any alterations, additions or repairs made within any six-month period exceed 50 percent of the cost of replacement of the building at the beginning of that six-month period:. (c) Repairs other than those set forth in subdivision(b)of this section shall be permit- ted to be made in buildings and systems with like or similar material, so as to replace existing conditions in need of repair, provided such repairs are made in a safe and sanitary manner. (d) Where additions or alterations subject parts of existing systems to loads exceed-" ing those permitted herein,such part shall be made to comply with the code. Historical Note Sec,filed Dec.13,19M eff.J.an.1,19M. 1231.4 Roof covering. Whenever more than 25 percent of the roof covering of a building is replaced in any six-month period,all roof covering on such building shall be made to comply with applicable provisions of this code. Historical Note Sec.filed Dec.13,1%3 eff.Jan.1,19M. 1231.5 Equipment. New equipment installed in existing buildings shall conform to the requirements of this code. Historical Note Sec.filed Dec.13,1983 eff.Jan.1,IBM. 1231.• Existing uses continued. Provisions of this code shall not be retroactively applicable except as herein required. Historical Note Sec.filed Dec.13,1983 eff.Jan.1,1984. PART 1232 SPECIAL CONDITIONS (Statutory authority:Executive Law,§§375,377) Sec. Sea 1232.1 Multiple dwellings 1232.3 Assembly space 1232.2 General building construction 1232.4 Physically handicapped requirements Historical Note Part (if 1232.1-1232.3) filed Dec. 13, 1983 eff. Jan.1,1984. Section 1232.1 Multiple dwellings. (a) Except within fire limits A.a building of type 6 construction,not exceeding three stories or 40 feet in height,existing prior to the effective date of this code,may be altered or converted to group Bl occupancy provided that such building;when so altered or converted,compiles in all other respects with the requirements of this code. 838=4 EX 11-30-85 h 3�i �r South®Id " wn 'card ®f eels MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI NOTICE OF RECESSED HEARINGS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE , that the following hearings will be reconvened at a Special Meeting of the Southold Tow.n Board of Appeals at the Southold Town Hall , Main Road , Southold ; NY on Thursday , MARCH 3 , 1988: 7 : 30 p .m. Appl . No . 3607 - PETER .McSHERRY AND JAMES `O ' NEILL; 7 : 35 p .m. Appl . No . 3701 - CHARLES ZAHRA. For additional information, please call the Board of Appeals Office at 765-1809. GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Copies mailed 2/25/88 to : L . I . Traveler Suffolk Times Eric J . Bressler , Esq . �1 William D. Moore , Esq . t� Board Members 1• �16�z Southold Townoared off' Appeals. '' .1 MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD - MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR... SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H.SAWICKI TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN : Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time and date of the public hearing concerning your recent application is a copy of the Legal Notice as published in the L . I . Traveler- Watchman , Inc . and Suffolk Weekly Times , Inc . Someone should appear in your behalf during the public hearing in the event there are questions from board members or persons in the audience . Please be assured that your publi-c. hearing will not start before the time allotted in the Legal Notice . - If you have any questions., please feel free to call our office , 765-1809. Yours very trulym,� G RARD P . GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Linda Kowalski Secretary and Board Clerk Enclosure -h -)I,, • �ny sro,.{� p0'Ov ,"nG�.S� 0 9.5 `i11 �,:`b/ h'l7 b'HJ1 �.':?/1,q ' d Building Inspector's Office Town Clerk Building Southold, N. Y. 765-2660 Dec. 89 1977 Geo. Taylor Niattituck N.Y. This will aet as a permit to excavate and remove fill from Langer job 9. 74Z, r90 1 Z Pike St..-.Matti't ck, i ( .i ,•-..,1 tip; i :: ,-•�� ...: . . .- � ::.'_ t—, Building Inspector i FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF" SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. Date . .February. . . : .16. . . . . . .119.. .78 THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at .140 -Pike. .StAP. . . . . . . . . . :. . Street Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . Block No. . . . . : . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated . . .March . . _ . .8 : . . . . . :, 19 7.7. .. pursuant to which Building Permit No. 907�Z Z. dated . . . .Vlar-ch .8 . . ... ... . :, 19: .77, .was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments .of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for.which this certificate is issued is . . .Ile s taurant 4. Apartment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The certificate is issued to . . . . . : . . .Joseph.La4er. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (owner, lsve 'e of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . . . . . . . . . . . .:: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. . N373999 .N37399? . HOUSE NUMBER . . .40. . . . . . . . Street . , , , Pike Street Mattituckg NY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Inspector FORM NO. 6 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Building Deportment' Town Clerks Office Southold, N. Y. 11071 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Instructions.. A. This application must be filled in typewriter OR .ink, and submitted in DUPLICATE to the Building . Inspector with the following; for new buildings or new .use: 1. Final survey of property with accurate location of all buildings,. property lines, streets, and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. Final approval. of Health Dept. of water supply and ,sewerage disposal—(S-9 form or equal). 3. Approval of electrical installation from Board of Fire Underwriters. . 4. Commercial buildings, . Industrial buildings, Multiple -Residences .and .similar buildings and instollotions, a certificate of'.Code ,compliance from. the Architect or Engineer responsible for the building. 5. Submit Planning Board approval of completed site plan requirements where applicable. B. For existing buildings (prior to April 1957), Non-conforming uses, or. buildings and "pre-existing" land uses: 1. Accurate survey•of property showing all property lines, .streets, buildings and unusual natural or topographic features. . .2. Sworn _statement of owner or previous owner as to use, occupancy and condition of buildings. 3. Date of any housing code or safety inspection of buildings or premises, or, other pertinent in- formation required to prepare a certificate. C. Fees: 1. Certificate of occupancy $5.00 2. Certificate of occupancy on pre-existing dwelling or land use $5.00 3. Copy of certificate of occupancy:$1.00 Date .. .3./..�. New Building ..:............. Addition .... ...... Old or Pre-existing Building ...X...... Vacant Land Location Of Property ...... °. .1�. ....... :.1.. .. . .. .d..(..!...1..6.:!..C��i...`v:..l... ........... 1...�1:+:. o� Owner Or Owners Of Property ........ �..... .............111 GE�............. ,Subdivision. .. ..7.. .r. ... ....Lot No. ...... Block No. ....... House No. Z$`�316 ermit o. . `:� �.. ... L)ote Of Permit &1? �f 7.7....Applicant '':�' .!:4:. '...::.u: ....:.. Health Dept. Approval .1V0..... ..4�..n-1.f...l... Labor De ti. Approval ..••� �Sri FLccP i11 ���� Underwriters Approval ..�1..!�� °.{'�...Lv. Planning Board Approval ............ ........ ......... .. . .... ......... Request For Temporary Certificate ........................................ Final Certificate ... .... ............................... Fee Submitted $ b . Construction on above described building and permit eets- II appli a (e codes and regulations. Applicant ............... �............. .:...1... �................ .. . ........... s: Sworn to before me this �c13 99 36 . ..�1.4:'.. �OZV935 ZB�S. as Y .�c.. (stamp or seal) �:= of ,.... day of ... .................. ......�.r�.... ... SUSAN I, bEyN{S v�P�.�,s` 7790�o°�t��9� Notory Public ............ County . Y PUBLIC,'State of New YodE - �P�s�0`•5� C Qyrr7pr stFM /J .Q '6229 'f a Suffolk :as march 30, 1141 Qv°�\oo�p\�g `SS\ o�\m G FORM NO. 2 , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT ; TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTH-OLD, N.. Y. BUILDING PERMIT ..`,' ,. (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) .. 9074 Z Date .............:..::........March........ ......., `o Permission is hereby granted to: .....Joseph„Lanier.............. .. .................... : Pike St Mattituck to ... ake...alteration. C„build add ,tJ.q ..Qn...exlating..blxalne .a..bui.lfll"... at premises located at .....(E/....Barak..EnterancB).......................................... ..........................................:..kia.t ituck.:....N..Y... ............: .............: :...... .......................................... ................................................. ...... ......\• ... .... - '; -'S pursuant to application dated ...........................Ma.r...... ...$........... 19 7?, and approved by the Building Inspector. ; Fee $..., 5.t.00........ Building Inspector _ ���— - .—.a.-w�'-�.-.ram—. •ate.•s.—�. - �.-...�..��- ��. _ —__^Y�..v.: ..+. THE NEW YORK. BOARD -'OE 'FIRE UNDERWRITERS . - � BUREAU OF ELECTRICITY, 85 JOHN STREET, NEW YORK. NEW YORK 10038 C Date February , 1978 Application No.on.file go- 6(5)4 N 313597 THIS CERTIFIES THAT ; only the electrical equipment as described below and introduced,by the applicant named on the above application number in the premises of The.. C-ften .Pot,' - Box '�47, Fike St re:�. , flat titu'ck, . t c in the following location; ❑ Basement ist Fl. ❑ 2nd Fl. Section Block was examined on J--n U a r y 3 n, . 19 7 8 and found to be in compliance tcith the requirements of this Board. '` `:.•, FIXTURE RECEPTACLES SWITCHES FIXTURES RANGES COOKING DECKS OVENS DISH WASHERS EXHAUST FAITS• OUTLETS INCANDESCENT1 FLUORESCENT UPOR AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. H.P. .9 15 F; 9 � c t' l f•- DRYERS FURNACE MOTORS FUTURE APPLIANCE FEEDERS SPECIAL REC'PT TIME CLOCKS BELL UNIT HEATERS MULTI-OUTLET DIMMERS SYSTEMS AMT. K.W. OIL M.P. GAS H.P. AMT. NO. A.W.G. AMT. AMP. AMT. AMPS. TRANS. AMT. H.-P. NO.OF FEET AMT. WATTS ? r 2 3 0 {: c -..-SERVICE DISCONNECT,—_NO.OF S. E R V 1 C E ....:._.- AMi. AMP. TYPE METER 1�6'2W 1,B•3W 3,0'3W 3�'�W NO.OF CC.COND. A.W.G. NO. HI-LEG. A•W G• NO. NEUTRALS A.�yG• C EQUIP. PER% OF CC.COND. OF HIAEG OF NEUTRAL C ' C C OTHER APPARATUS: • - f Motors : ' I - !/2hp - 1-;4. 0 kw Water ha �: �� { �I AMOUNT PLEASE REMIT BY CHECK OR MONEY - 24.00 ORDER TO THE ORDER OF THE NEW � YORK BOARD OF FIRE UNDERWRITERS AS CASH SENT BY MAIL WILL BE Af Kenneth J . Langer RISK OF SENDER. C Box 247 PI Sit reet MattItuckt'. I:� .I ! ! 952 :' c .. Per' De THIS IS YOUR BILL FOR SERVICE RENDERED AND IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.THIS BILL PAYABLE AT THE NEW YORK OFFICE,85 JOHN STREET,NEW YORK,N.Y.,10038 _L77 1�_ THE NEW YORK BOAR® OF FIRE UNDERWRITERS IS f BUREAU OF ELECTRICITY I 85 JOHN STREET, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10038 Date February I , E 978 Application No.on file 902219 3 j THIS CERTIFIES THAT d 3 9 Q only the electrical•equipment as described below and introduced by the applicant named on the above application ,number in the premises of !<er,nei-n JOSeph La'li.9er, 1'E ke Stt-eet, `iatti;tuct<,. L. in thefollotcine location; ❑ Basement ❑ 1st Fl. ❑ 2nd Fl. y Section Block Lot.- r.uary �0 t 978 was examined on and found to be in compliance with the requirements of this Board. .. � , FIXTURE ECEPTACLES SWITCHES FIXTURES RAN GES COOKING DE CKS OVENS DISH WASHERS EXHAUST FANS OUTLETS INCANDESCENT FLUORESCENT MER uRY rr pp VAPpR AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. H.P. i f 4 Q DRYERS FURNACE MOTORS FUTURE APPLIANCE FEEDERS SPECIAL REC'PT TIME CLOCKS UNIT HEATERS MULTI-OUTLET AMT. K.W. OIL H.P. GAS H.P. BELL DIMMERS AMT. NO. A.W.G. AMT. AMP. AMi. AMPS. TRANS. AMT. H P. SYSTEMS NO.OF FEET AMT. WATTS rSERVICE-DISCONNE NO_OF-.. S ,E.. R V AMT. AMP. TYPE METER ... �- - -.-. -..- L:.. C .. E � EQUIP. 12W 1 3W 3 0 3W 3 0 4W NO.OF CC.COND. A.W,G, PER.6, OF CC.COND. NO.OF HI-LEG OF HI LEG NO.OF NEUTRALS A•H`•G. OF NEUTRAL OTHER APPARATUS: i G F l Smoke detector Rolm FEE PA JL) AMOUNT PLESE RIT BY CHECK.OR 13 a QQ ORDER O THE ORDER OFT EONEW ASS CASH SENTT BY FIRE MAIL WILLIRBEE RS Kenneth J o s eA, p h n C�E r .4RISK OF SENDER. UOX 24 P i k9 S 1~net "attltuck ? L. 1 . . I1952 Per THIS IS YOUR BILL FOR SERVICE RENDERED AND IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.THIS BILL PAYABLE AT THE NEW YORK OFFICE,85 JOHN STREET,NEW YORK,N.Y.10038 t: Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD.- STATE. ROAD 25. SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11671 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERTJ. DOUGLASS INTER=DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM JOSEPH H. SAWICKI TO : James A. Schondebare , Town Attorney Robert H. -Berntsson , Assistant Town Attorney FROM : Jerry Goehringer , Z . B . A. Chairman DATE : February 18 , 1988 SUBJECT: Building Department Record - Matter of C. Zahra: As you may know , we have an application pending concerning a request to ,reverse a Revocation of. Building Permit #15428Z in the Matter of the premises of Charles Zahra at Pike Street , Mattituck; 1000- 141 -04-05 (copies attached) . Tonight we are conducting the first hearing and it is possible no one will be available- in behalf of the Building Department to ascertain the chronology of events and other facts relevant to this Building Permit, although. notice has been given on several occasions . Under the circumstances , it is suggested and urged that under the guidance of. your office the Building Department prepare for this hearing and be available for questioning before the matter is officially concluded and in no event later than February 29 , 1988. Thank you for your assistance . 14 A . Southold Town Board of Appe als MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, LJ., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD % MEMBERS 19 a `J . D GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN FEB. � CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. f SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS BLT JOSEPH H.SAWICKI TOWN ODDG . . DEP DEP OLD TO: Southold Town Building Department FROM : Southold Town Board of Appeals DATE : February 10 , 1988 SUBJECT : Premises Now of Charles Zahra , Pike Street , Mattituck County Tax Map Parcel No . 1000-141 -04-05 As you are aware , the Board of Appeals will be conducting a public hearing on Thursday , February 18 , 1988 at 8 :05` p .m. in the above matter concerning the issuance of the Stop Work Order and- Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z . As of today , we' have received copies of the following data from your files relevant to the subject Building Permit : 1 . Notice of Disapproval dated July 7 , 1986 concerning appli - cation for permit to add and al'ter existing restaurant_ and apartment; 2 . Notice of Disapproval dated July 7 , 1986 concerning appli - - cation for permit to add and alter restaurant and apartment concerning information on plans as submitted ; 3. Building Permit Application received June 19 , 1986 for alteratio.n ; 4 . Building Permit issued August 19 , 1986 under #15428Z "renovation and addition".; 5 . Inspection Report indicating first foundation inspection approval June ll , . 1987 ; 6 . Copies of Plans : (a) showing foundation prepared 6/86 by TAG; (b) showing second floor plan , and Drawing 86-048 of founda- tion and section ; .(_c ) first-floor and second-floor plans ; (d ) Drawings 86-048 dated 8/8/86 prepared by Steve G. Tson- takis Associates ; 1 Southold Town Building Department Page 2 ;.o',n: Southold Town Board of Appeals 'Y Date : February 10 , 1988 Subject : Premises of Charles Zahra 1000- 141 -04-05 7 . Copy of a portion of Survey (without date ) prepared for C . A. Price Co . , Inc . by Roderick VanTuyl , P . C . 8 . October 8 , 1986 letter from the Southold Town Planning Board waiving the requirement for formal site plan review; 9 . Copy of Building Permit (Form Rev . 6/30/80 ) #15428Z dated. October 27 , 1986 , for renovation and addition to existing restaurant as applied for ; 10 . Copy of Order to Remedy Violation dated September 22 , 1987 together with copies of Certified Mail #P263060756 postmarked September 22 , 1987 , and Return Receipt Card postmarked September 23 , 1987 ; 11 . Copy of letter dated September 24 , 1987 from Eric J . Bressler and date-receipted by the. Town Building Department September 25 , 1987 ; 12 . Copy of Appearance Ticket #118 dated September 23 , 1987 con- cerning disobeyance of a Stop Work Order ; 13 . Copies of letters dated October 19 , 1987 to the Building Department and dated October 23 , 1987 from Francis J . Yakaboski as Special Attorney ; 14 . Copy of Notice of Motion and Motion to .Dismiss dated October 22 , 1987 before the Town Justice Court , which we understand was dismissed on October 30 , 1987 by Justice Tedeschi ; 15 . Copies of Order to Remedy Violation dated November 5 , 1987 revoking Building Permit #15428Z together with copies of Certified Mail Receipt #P565-487-154 postmarked November 5 , 1987 and Return Receipt Card receipted November 9 , 1987 . 16 . Copy of letter dated January 12 , 1988 from Eric J . Bressler to the Building Department with reference to complaints . . ( It is understood that no official complaint has been received by the Town to date through the Building Department. Please advise if this is incorrect . ) It is urged that any other facts and information or chronology of events , including the dates the Stop Work Order and Order of Revocation were posted (100-143 ) be furnished , either in writing before or during the public hearing on February 18 , 1988. �� 4 7T ,,. -� 4k J 7 MR v of LAnro : � � � o Surr+rcYiEo f+a�c .�. • f - C A. PRICE N : p a o row" J. . .";� �• .�, � � Soar/G. .Z� �-== / ~ :.� �NAUTII�"JEED ALTERATION OR ADDITION a,'�•' ' O Eye ` SURVEY TO THIS IS A VIOLATION OF _ 7�/•f '��t' s' •• # I: SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORK STATE �,�a' •' EDUCATION LAW. !,:{•j1• • � 1� COFI[S OF THIS SURVEY MAP NOT BE �....-•�--..— : ' ;,�- y/ t.•y THi I.c1t,D SU0.VEYOR'S IIdK:D SEAL OR DIR N�+Q^�r,i rJ./� * �I I b` Sc0 SEAL SHALL NOT CE CONSI 7 (l. N Gor "TO 6E A VALID TRUE COPY. CQ�•R�h �.S .Tlfl/r�ICs/I�Q Mar. Ilk .46 • �• A� • GUARANTEES INDICAT.0 KLf.:ON SHALL SUN _ • t • � iL.•• *, v ONLY TO THE OE.:SOI!FOR 1H. :U!.VETAMC: - � "Crist�?►"�x /�i ) 15 PREPALED,A;:D Orr H,S UAAU IU rl1'. ," •'•?;; TITLE COMPANY. GOWR;,MLNrAL AGENCY AND ,•„i;t' r LENDING INSTITUTION LISTED H.I:.u.a, AND ''_" ,�7• TO THE ASSIGNEES OF THE LINDING INSTI• • TUTION.GUARANTEES ACE NOT IKANSFUASUI it .h7r•► V - ,: r TO ADDITIONAL LNSrIrUu..r.S UN SU"LQU&W ; a Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI TO: Southold Town Building Department FROM : Southold Town Board of Appeals DATE : . February 10 , 1988 SUBJECT : Premises Now of Charles Zahra , Pike Street , Mattituck County Tax Map Parcel No . 1000-141 -04-05 As you are aware ,, the . Board of Appeals will be conducting a public hearing on Thursday , February 18 , 1988 ,at 8 :05 p .m . in the above matter concerning the issuance of the Stop Work Order and Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z. As of today , we have received copies of the following data from your files relevant to the subject Building Permit : 1 . Notice of Disapproval dated July 7 , 1986 concerning appli - cation for permit to add and alter existing restaurant and apartment; 2 . Notice of Disapproval dated July 7 , 1986 concerning appli - cation for permit to add and alter restaurant and apartment concerning information on plans as submitted ; 3. Building Permit Application received June 19 , 1986 for alteration ; 4. Building Permit issued August 19 , 1986 under #15428Z "renovation and addition "_; 5 . Inspection Report indicating first foundation inspection approval June 11 , 1987 ; 6 . Copies of Plans : (a ) showing foundation prepared 6/86 by TAG; (b) showing second floor plan , and Drawing 86-048 of founda- tion and section ; (_c ) first-floor and second-floor plans ; (d ) Drawings 86-048 dated 8/8J86 prepared by Steve G.. Tson- takis Associates ; To : Southold Town Building Department Page 2 From : Southold Town Board of Appeals Date : February 10 , 1988 Subject : Premises of Charles Zahra 1000- 141 -04-05 7 . Copy of a portion of Survey (without date ) prepared for C . A. Price Co . ,, Inc . by Roderick VanTuyl , P . C . 8 . October 8 , 1986 letter from the Southold Town Planning Board waiving the requirement for formal site plan review; 9 . Copy of Building Permit (Form Rev . 6/30/80 ) #15428Z dated October 27 , 1986 , for renovation and addition to existing restaurant as applied for ; 10 . Copy of Order to Remedy Violation dated September 22 , 1987 together with copies of Certified Mail #P263060756 postmarked September 22 , 1987 , and Return Receipt Card postmarked September 23 , 1987 ; 11 . Copy of letter dated September 24 , 1987 from Eric J . Bressler and date-receipted by the Town Building Department September 25 , 1987 ; 12 . Copy of Appearance Ticket #118 dated September 23 , 1987 con- cerning disobeyance of a . Stop Work Order ; 13 . Copies of letters dated October 19 , 1987 to the Building Department and dated October 23 , 1987 from Francis J . Yakaboski - as Special Attorney ; 14 . Copy of Notice of Motion and Motion to .Dismiss dated October 22 , 1987 before the Town Justice Court , which we understand was dismissed on October 30 , 1987 by Justice Tedeschi ; 15 . Copies of Order to Remedy Violation dated November 5 , 1987 revoking Building Permit #15428Z together with copies of Certified Mail Receipt #P565-487-154 postmarked November 5 , 1987 and Return Receipt Card receipted •November - 9 , 1987 . 16 . Copy of letter dated January 12 , 1988 from Eric J . Bressler to the Building Department with reference to complaints . ( It is understood that no official complaint has been received by the Town to date through the Building Department. Please advise if this is incorrect . ) It is urged that any other facts and information or chronology of events , including the dates the Stop Work Order and Order of Revocation were posted ( 100-143 ) be furnished , either in writing before or during the public hearing on February 18 , 1988 . N yya ri ,f r'1 F Southold Board of Anneals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM JOSEPH H. SAWICKI TO : Mr . Victor Lessard , Executive Administrator Southold Town Building Department FROM : Board of Appeals DATE : December 17 , 1987 SUBJECT: Premises known as 140 Pike Street , Mattituck Current Owner : Charles and Jean Zahra County Tax Map Parcel No . 1000- 141 -04-05 We presently have an application pending concerning the above premises for a reversal of of determination (s ) made by the Building Inspector . Inasmuch as we do not have direct access to these files , we must request that you -furnish us with one complete set (photocopies ) of all material in the following files : Building Permit File #15428Z Inspection File for Permit #15428Z Violation Files , and any other materials concerning these premises since 1985. Thank you for your assistance . I jrw Southold Town Board of Anneals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I„ N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS INTER-DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM JOSEPH H. SAWICKI TO : Mr . Victor Lessard , Executive Administrator, Southold Town Building Department FROM : Board of Appeals DATE : December 17 , 1987 SUBJECT: Premises known as 140 Pike Street , Mattituck Current Owner : Charles and Jean Zahra County Tax Map Parcel No . 1000- 141 -04-05 We presently have an application pending concerning the above premises for a reversal of of determination (s ) made by the Building Inspector . Inasmuch as we do not have direct access to these files , we must request that you--furnish us with one complete set (photocopies ) of all material in the following files : Building Permit File #15428Z Inspection File for Permit #15428Z Violation Files , and any other materials concerning these premises since 1985. Thank you for your assistance . Southold Town Board of AIDIDeals pis, ±y Z. � MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERTJ. DOUGLASS December 16 , 1987 JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Eric J . Bressler , Esq . Wickham , Wickham & Bressler , P. C . Main Road - Box 1424 Mattituck , NY ' 11952 Re : Appl . 'No . 3701 - Charles and Jean Zahra Dear Mr. Bressler : This letter will acknowledge receipt of the above recent application before the Board of Appeals . The Board Members will be conducting field inspections. and reviews prior to scheduling this application for a public hearing. Also , it is our understanding that in the interim you will be fu.rnishing the following for the record : (A) Prior to the issuance of the subject building permit : 1 . Survey or certified diagram showing the exterior walls (footprint) of the principal building , and 2 . Diagram showing the building and floor construc- tion ; (B ) For each phase of construction : 1 . Survey or certified diagram showing the exterior walls (footprint) and building-floor plan [more particularly the changes as construction progressed] ; (C ) " Before" and "After" diagrams depicting the total square footage and use (s ) of each room or floor. Upon receipt of all of the above , the Board will be in a position to place this matter on the hearings calendar. Page 2 - December 16 , 1987 To : Eric J . Bressler , Esq . ' Re : Appl . No . 3701 - Charles and Jean Zahra Please feel free to call at any time if you have questions . Yours very truly , GERARD P . GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN I Southold Town Board of Ap*p.eab._.',_,.;_ MAIN ROAD STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHO.LD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD February 18, 1988 .MEMBERS- GERARD P. GOEHR.INGER, CHAIRMAN CHAR LES'GRIGONIS, J.R. S.E.Q.R.A. SERGE DOYEN; - ROBERT J. DOUGLASS NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION GL JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Notice of Determination .of Non-Significance APPEAL NO. : 3701 PROJECT NAME: CHARLES ZAHRA -- This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental .Conservation Law and Local Law #4474 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a signifi-. cant adverse:__effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be . considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar. project. TYPE- OF ACTION: [ :] Type II fX)d- Unlisted [ ] ___-DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Request for Reversal- of Determination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more particularly known as: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck,_ NY 141-4-5 REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) Information has been .submitted by -applicant or his *agent indicating that the project will not involve the disturbance of wet- land grasses or areas subject to flooding which may be considered wetlap6g-FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary, Southold Town. Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. 516- 765-1809 or 1802 . Copies of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board. me C��CFou _ L O w F x 4Ah,i Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765 1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS . Y Februar 18 1988 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. S.E.Q.R.A. _ SERGE DOYEN, JR.ROBERT J. DOUGLASS NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Notice Of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO. : 3701 PROJECT NAME: CHARLES ZAHRA --- . This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law 1#44-4 of the Town of Southold.- This board determines the within project not to have a signifi- cant. adverse-effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be .. considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar. project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ :] Type II rx) Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Request for Reversal- of Determination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more particularly known as: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY 141-4-5 REASONS) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short. form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects . to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) Information has been submitted by applicant or his agent indicating that the project will not involve the disturbance of wet- land grasses or areas subject to flooding which may be considered wetlap4f�-FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary, Southold Town Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. 516- 765-1809 or 1802. Copies of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board. me ocr 10 IA P � D T LD S Y v.� Southold. N.Y. 11971 (516) 765.1938 October 8, 1986 Mr. Curtis Horton Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, NY 11971 Re: Charles Zahra Dear Mr. Horton: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning cfard, Monday, October 6, 1986: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board waive the requirement for formal site plan review for the site of Charles Zahra located at Mattituck, since this is a pre- existing building and no site improvements could be made at this time. If any physical changes are made subsequent to this, however, it may need formal site plan consideration and should be reviewed by the Planning Board. If you have any questions, please don' t hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, �C �v BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary I T� TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's office Southold, N. X. Certificate Of Occupancy No. .Z89.35. . . . . Date . .FebsijaxY. . . . . . . .16 THIS CERTIFIES that,the building located at .14 p . . . ' • • 19. .?$ 0. . .ap- ,S t. . . . . . . Street Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . Block No. . . . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office ,dated . .,.blared . . . . 8 , . � ce • . . ., I97.7. . pursuant to which Building Permit No.•9074Z . . . dated . . . .1�ar.Gh . . . . . . . . 19. 17, was issued, and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate issued is . . .Rest Apartment aurant .&. is . , TAe certificate is issued to . . . . . . . . .Josep ange>'. . . . . . . . of the aforesaid building. (owner, . . . . . . . . Suffolk County Department of Health A N/R PProval UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. . 14373999 N373997 . . 140 . . " " ' • • • • • HOUSE NU MBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street . . . .Pike Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Mattituck, NY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Inspector Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 JUDITH T. TERRY TELEPHONE TOWN CLERK ($16)76$-1801 eecIsrsaR of viral srnrisrIcs OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 10, 1987 TO: Southold Town Zoning Board. of Appeals FROM: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town- Clerk Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 3701 , application of Charles. Zahra for a variance. Also included in notification to adjacent property owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form; Letter relative to N.Y.S. Tidal Wetlands Land=Use; Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department; survey of property; and any other attachments relative to this application. a Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Recom 3.`o a LAW OFFICES DEC 1 01987 WICKHAM, WICKHAM Sc BRESSLER, P.c. MAIN ROAD,P.O. BOX 1424 q{ .• �1 MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND 9 WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 MORTGAGE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER ABIGAILA.WICKHAM 516-298-8353 I O 516-298-5300 DANIEL C.ROSS December 10, 1987 Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Charles Zahra - Application for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector - Revocation of Building Permit Gentlemen: Enclosed are the following in connection with the above application: 1. Application in triplicate; 2. Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector; 3. Short Environmental Assessment Form; 4. Wetlands Questionnaire; 5. Original Notice to Adjoining .Owners with Affidavit of Service thereon; 6. Four Prints of Survey; 7. Zoning Board of Appeals Questionnaire; 8. Certificates of Occupancy; 9. Check in the amount of $ 150.00, representing the .application fee; If any additional information is required, please contact us as soon as possible. Very truly yours, EricJJ. ressler EJB/jtz Encls. FOur ® ` Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD February 18, 1988 MEMBERS- GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. S.E.Q.R.A. _ SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO. : 3701 PROJECT NAME: CHARLES ZAHRA This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental - Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a signifi- cant adverse-effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be .. considered a determination made for any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar project. TYPE OF ACTION: [ :] Type II IX) Unlisted [ ] DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: Request for Reversal- of Determination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more particularly known as: 140 Pike Street, Kattituck,_ NY 141-4-5 REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental Assessment in the short. form has been submitted which indicates -that no significant adverse effects . to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) Information has been submitted by applicant or his agent indicating that the project will not involve the disturbance of wet- land grasses or areas subject to flooding which may be considered wetla,6,�-FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary, Southold Town Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. 516- 765-1809 or 1802. Copies of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board. me • • LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.c. MAIN ROAD,P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 MORTGAGE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM 516-298-8353 516-298-5300 DANIEL C.ROSS February 17, 1988 Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road State Road 25 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Appl. No. 3701 - Charles & Jean Zahra Gentlemen: Enclosed please find the following: 1. Six copies of survey of property at Pike Street. 2. Six copies of pictures showing structure under renovation in several stages. 3. Six prints of blueprints by Steve G. Tsontakis Assoc. Should anything further be required, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, Eric JIssler EJB/jtz Enc. i g December 4, 1987 (Today' s Date) To: Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Appeal Application of Charles Zahra Location of Property: 140 pike Strept,"Matt;t„ck_ NV'..11952 Nnrt'h hV P;kP StrPat; Fast by Broken Down Valise; SoUth by Parking lot owned by North Fork Bank; -and West by Parking lot owned by North Fork Bank'. Dear Sirs: In reference to the New York State Tidal Wetlands Land-Use Regulations, 6 NYCRR, Part 661, and Article 25 of the New York State-Environmental Conservation Law, please be advised that the subject property in the within appeal application: (please check one box) f 1 May be located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands; however, constructed along the water-lying edge of this property is a bulkhead in very good condition and at' least 100 feet in length. * [ ] May be located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands; however, constructed along the water-lying edge of this property is a bulkhead in need of (minor) (major) repairs, and approximately feet in length. [ ] _May be located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands; however, constructed along the water-lying edge of this property is a bulkhead less than 100 feet in length. [ ] . May be located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands; and there is no bulkhead or concrete wall existing on the premises. [xxx] Is not located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands to the best of my knowledge. * [Starred items (*) indicate your property does not appear to fall within the jurisdiction of the N.Y.S. D.E.C. ] Sincerely yours, -. moo_ ':1:'_ 'l:a..-.. � _. JL` � x,lr SsY���::#• .Y' +'f 4K K:��n. �T. I ,ie ii. r . J . t nvironlnental (jual i ty i(uv lew ict r•equirc�, cub- mission of this , ' rtn• and an environmental view will be made by this bo,. before any action is taY. SNORT ENVIRO`VIVITAL ASS?Y;uEtl, YOP'4 (a) In cyder to answer the questions in this short EAF is is osst=ed that the preparer will use currently available inforrztien concerning the Project and the 1 :kely i--.pacts of the action• It is not expected that additional .7tud1a-, roeearch or ether investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any question has been answered Yes the project may be significant and a completed 'cnviren.:.ental Assessment Form is necessary. (c) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that this proj®ct is n�- significant. (d) Environmental Assessment 1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter more / than 10 acres of land? Yes d No 2. Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual land form found on the site? Yes J No 3• Will project alter or have a large effect on an existing body of water? • • • • • •. Yes 110 4. Will project have a potentially large impact, on groundwater quality? Yes No 5* Will project significantly affect drainage flow / on adjacent sites? • Yes N0 6• Will project affect any threatened- or endangered plant or aniral species? • 0 0 � • • • . • • • Yes No 7. Will project result in a major adverse effect on air quality? Yes lie 8• WL'1 project have a major effect on visual char— acter of the community or scenic views or vistas known to be important to'the cormunity? . . e Yes . 110 9• Will project adversely ir.pact any site or strvct, ure of historic, pro-historic, or palbontologicul importance or any site designated as a critical environmental area by a local agency? Yes No 10. Will project have a major effect on existing or future recreational opportunities? . Yes No 11. Will project result in major traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing transportation / systems? • Yes 12• Will project regularly cause objectionable odors, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturb- ance an a result of the project':; operation? . Yes !lo 13. Will project have any impact on public health or �- l safety" . • • • . • • . • • • • Yes J NO 1L. Will project affect the existing community by directly causi'n.; a growth in permnnent popula- tion of more than 5 percent over a one-yoar / period cr have a major ner ^,gative..effect on the J charact of the cor--munity :r neighborhood? . Yes No 15. Is there public controversy concerning the projcc. ,.) Yes 71110 I'?EP,UER'.3 SIC�:A RE. TITLE: ` • Attorney `?c f?ESE'�TI'1;;: Charles �Zah as erEsq.. pATr; December 8, 1987 UESTIONNAIRE TO BE COMPLETED AND SUBMITTED WITH YOUR APPLICATION FORMS TO THE BOARD OF APPEALS ` Please complete , sign and return to the Office of the Board of Appeals with your completed application forms . If "Yes" is answered to any questions below , please be sure to depict these areas on your survey (or certified sketch ) , to scale , and submit other supporting documenta- tion. 1 . Are there -any proposals to change or alter land contours ? Yes N� 2 . a) Are there any areas which contain wetland grasses ? (Attached is a list of the wetland grasses defined by Town Code , Ch . 97 for your reference . ) Yes *b) Are there any areas open to a waterway without bulkhead? Yes Nt' 3: Are there existing structures at or below- ground level such as patios , foundations , etc? 6�eTD Nb 4. Are there any existing or proposed fences , concrete barriers , decks , etc? Yes Ng 5 . If project is proposed for an accessory building or • structure , is total height at more than 18 feet above average ground level ? State total : ft . Yes Nc 6. If project is proposed for principal building or structure , is total height at more than 35 feet above average ground level ? State total : ft '. Yes Nt ' 7 . Are there other premises under your ownership abutting Yes this parcel ? If .yes , please submit copy of deed. 8. Are there any building permits pending on this parcel for abutting land under your ownership , - if any) ? Yes Nc State Permit # and Nature : Permit No. 15428 Renovates and ad;t;on on existing restaurant as applied for 9. Do state whether or not applications are pending concerning these premises before any other department or agency (State , Town., County , Village , etc . ) : Planning . Board Yes No' Town Board Yes Town Trustees Yes p County Health Department Yes Village of Greenport Yes N. Y . S . D . E. C. Yes Other Yes 10 . Is premises pending a sale or conveyance? If yes , please submit copy of names or purchasers and conditions of sale . (from contract ) . Yes 11 . Is new construction proposed in the area of contours at 5 feet or less as exists? `- Yes No_ 12 : If new construction is proposed in an area within 75 feet of wetland- grasses , or land area at a6 eleva- tion of Jive feet or less above mean sea level , have you made application to the ,Town Trustees for an inspection for possible waiver - or permit under Yes N� the requirements of Ch . 97 of the Town Code? 13. Please list present use or operations conducted upon the subject property at t h i s time 2nd Story Apartment and lst Floor Restaurant a n d proposed 2nd Story Apartment and 1st k7oor Restaurant *Please submit photographs for t-he record . .. I certify that. the above statements are true and are being submitted fo.r reliance by the Board of Appeals in considering my. application . 2U&L Attorney for Appellant Signal e Pr r Authorized Agent 3/87 1k Tudor Insukance Company 48 South Franklin Turnpike • Ramsey, New Jersey 0744"504 • Telephone(201)825-3300 • Telex 13M24 RECEIVED ► U N 2 3 1988 June 20, 1988 5oldhn1#4 Tn%,.n rlArk Town of Southold Main Road Southold, New York 11971 RE: Charles Zahra vs. Town of Southold. Policy No. : PE-51899 Gentlemen: Please be advised that Tudor Insurance Company is currently in receipt of a Notice of Claim in the above captioned matter. A review of this Notice of Claim indicates that this matter emanates and flows from an alleged malicious prosecution of the plaintiff on September 23, 1987. Please be advised that Tudor Insurance Company was the Public Officials Liability insurance carrier for Town of Southold under policy PE-51899 for the policy period 11-17-86 to 1-1-88 subject to the provisions and exclusions of said policy. I refer you to III . DEFINITIONS. .. . . (d) "Loss" shall mean any amount which the Insureds are legally obligated to pay or which the Public Entity shall be required by law to pay as indemnity to the Insureds., for any claim or claims made against them, for Wrongful Acts and shall include but not be limited to damages, judgments, settlements and costs, cost of investigation and defense of legal actions (excluding from such costs the salaries of officials or employees of the Public Entity or any other governmental" body), claims or proceedings and appeals there- from, cost of attachment or similar bonds; provided always, however, such subject of loss shall not include fines or penalties imposed by law, or matters. which may be deemed uninsurable under the law pursuant to which -this Policy shall be construed. I refer you to IV. EXCLUSIONS. ... . The Company shall not be .liable to make payment for Loss in connection with , any claim made against the Insureds allegedly, based upon or arising out of one or more of the following: (6) . (a) false arrest, assault and batted ; detention or imprisonment, or malicious prosecution; cc: Town Board Town Attorney Chief of Police Supt. of Highways Griffing & Southwick Ins. McMann Price Willian Mullen Building Dept. Appeals Board A Member Company of Westco Insurance Group June 20, 1988 Page Two (b) defamation, including, but not limited to li-bel or slander; (7) the willful violation of statute or ordinance committed by or with the knowledge or consent of an Insured; I refer you to Endorsement TU-88 PUNITIVE DAMAGE EXCLUSION. . . . . "In consideration of the premium charged, it is understood and agreed that this policy excludes any claim for punitive or exemplary damages whether arising out of acts of insureds, insureds' employees or any other person." I refer you to VII. GENERAL CONDITIONS. .. .. (i) Other Insurance: If the Public Entity or any Insured has other insurance insuring against a loss covered by this policy, the insurance provided by this policy shall apply in excess of such other insurance. Please be advised that Tudor Insurance Company must hereby deny coverage to you in the above captioned matter. This denial of coverage is predicated upon the exclusionary language as stated above. Tudor Insurance Company will not be responsible for any cost of defense, defense, judgment or ver- dict that may be rendered against you. It is strongly suggested that you notify your Law Enforcement Officers Liability carrier. Mr. Francis Murphy, Town Supervisor has been advised of Tudor's position. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Very ruly yo r�i �s, _ 9 Suit Examiner HAS/jp cc: #264 Risk Emporia Inc. a. hundred (300) square feet of floor area. \ J (2) For the purposes of this Subsection,J, cellars, decks, .. . .attached garages,,and any ,habitable area shall be- included in the calculation of floor area. §_.100-142:Revocation of permit. h. : The Building, Inspector may revoke a -'building permit theretofore issued and approved,in the following instances: § 100-142. ZONING § 100-144 A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation"as to a material fact in the application, plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance with the applicable law. C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application, .plans or specification. D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or.refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the. Building Inspector. § 100-143. Stop orders. [Amended 8-26-76. by L.L. No. 3-19761 Whenever the.Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to believe that work on any building or structure is being prosecuted in violation of the provisions of the applicable law, ordinances or regulations, or not in conformity with the provisions of an ap- plication, plans or specifications onr-the-basis of.which a building permit_was issued,or in an unsafe and dangerous manner, he shall notify the owner of the property, or the owner's agent or the person performing the work, to suspend all work, and any such persons shall forthwith stop such work and suspend all building activities until the stop order has been rescinded. Such order and notice shall be in writing and shall state the conditions under which the work may be resumed,and may be served upon a person to whom it is directed either by delivering it personally to'him or by posting the same upon a conspicuous portion of-the building M under construction and sending a copy of the same by certified mail. § 100.144. Certificates of occupancy. A. A certificate of occupancy shall be applied for from the Building Inspector and it shall be unlawful to do any of the following until a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor: 10071 � wI v" 11 110 f2. LF '� •9,'aaq_ tip 4 (',(1' n Espy nr�l 22 29.1••! 1P 20 4Y s sr ESTPHALIq aQl` u 2'!• F faf..IdlhJr �• _ '29 - % • as e\� .- -30 NORTH FCRf( - 33- g n' - t • BAPTIST C)fJRCH P 26 • ` 31 - - _ 20 2.OA(c) ' - ••\9 _ 37 8A ,?SS�e E to - 1�R`HJgGN i . .- • f`t. O - - Ztd cN2.?3 .. 'e vZP n= 810 f o �2 34 zz r �]EyT£gtSR N11 - _.__ _ i j0O BOA •d. •' �v l4 _ \E'K `SON f ' `, _ Z �• sy :• .f T�?*7:e Cp y\ P 36 . 37 %A - 4 ,y Ab :FOR PARCEL NO 20 { 30 plc SEE. SEC NO 142 '+; •° \6 S. Jg 2 uATCM _T ,.. _IYE +i.•i^~7 .._i 1 -� \1 d 1 i BETSCH. V aimimes to the Zoning ;": The Board of Appeals.will, Ordinance, Article III,Section 100 lsatd_ttme•and„place all parsons or' - 31;Bulk Schedule,for permission to, representatives desiring to be heard in , construct additions)to dwelling with k each of the above matters.Each hear- ping will not start before the time allot- an insufficient westerly sideyard set. back and insufficient total sideyards. !td&,.Written comments may be sub- Location of Pro perry:North Side of mitted`jrior to the conclusion of the Rabbit Lane -East East Marion, NY; IIsubject;'hearing. For more: m infora- County:Tax Map Parcel NO. 1000- ;tion,please call 765-1809.'-...: 31-17-15. (Dated February 2,.1988.., 7:45 p m: Appl. No. 3607 = �:. a�", %'' 'BY ORDER JAMES O'NEILL'and PETER OF THE SOUTHOLD McSHERRY.Variances to the Zon- f` F , ,,;,, TOWN BOARD ing Ordinance, Article.III, Section OF APPEALS 100-31,Bulk Schedule;for,approval GfiRA$D P'GOEIIRINGER, .of insufficient area,width and depthN CHAIRMAN - -- - — of two proposed parcels,each with'an €::, Ltnda Kowalski,Board Secretary -.existing dwelling,located atthe cor 1825 1TF11 / ' net of theN/s Wiggins Street and the _ S W/s.Eighth Street, Greenport, NY — ":NOTICE'OF 11EAxtr Mapof&Buel Corwin(1885)Lots 28 \ i :NOTICE IS HEREBY:GIVEN, and,.29;;'.County Taz''Map,District `, � pursuant Section 267•of the Town 1000,_ Section 48,Block 1,Lot 22 STATE OF NEW YORK ) !' Law and the Code of the•Town of 7:55 p.m.TARTAN OIL CORP I Southold;the•following hearings wrIl (a)Appl.No.3633—Special ) SS: be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN- Exception under Article.VII;Section. BOARD OF APPEALS at aRegular 100-70(B) of.the Zoning Code:for. ,s COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ). Meeting at the Southold Town Hall, approval of the establishmentof agar- Main Road,Southold,New York,on tial self-service gasoline station,and C' i i n nn t Pn t n of G reenport, in THURSDAY,• FEBRUARY 18, (b)Appl.No.3636—Variance 1988 at the following times: to the Zoning Ordinance,Articles VI;:' said County, being duly sworn, says that he/she is 7:30 p.m..Appl.. No. 3702 — Section 100-62(B),Article..VII,Sec OLGA CORDES. Variances to the tion 100-70(B),for an.Interpretatiori Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sec- of "retail shopping center" and for Newspaper, published at Greenport, in the Town tion 100-31,Bulk Schedule;for ap- 'permission to establish convenience proval of the proposed insufficient 'store.as an accessory to the existing of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New area and width of two parcels in this gasoline-service station. York, and that the Notice'of which the annexed is pending division of land located at the Location of Property: South south side of Sterling Road(Nassau Side of Main Road, West'£id+. .of a printed copy, has been regularly published in Farms),Cutchogue,NY;County Tax Marratooka Lane,and East Side of said Newspaper once each week for 1 Map District 1000. Section 104, Sunset Avenue, Mattituck, NY; 11 commencing on the Block 4,Lots 17 and.18. County Tax Map District 1000,Sec Weeks successively, 7:35 p.m. 'Appl. No. 3709 — tion 115,Block 3,Lot 9.Zone District:, EDWARD AND ORTRUD HA- "B-1"General Business. day Of NUS.Special Exception to the Zoning 8:05 p.m. Appl: No. 3701 — Ordinance.,to establish one new Ac- _,CHARLES ZAHRA. Application ?tessory''Aparnfl�hT m.,tTie exusting under Article XIV,Section 142 of the dwelling structure in accordance with Zoning Code for a Reversal of Deter- the requirements of Article III,Sec-. mination of Building Inspector in his principal Clerk tion 100-30(B),subsection 15.Loca- Revocation of Building Permit tion of Property:635 Lupton's Point #15428Z issued October 27, 1586. Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Location of Property:140 Pike Street, Map District 1000,. Section 115, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Sworn to a e�ja this Block 11,Lot 3. 'District 1000,Section 141,Block 4, d Of 19 7:40 pm. Appl. No. 3699 e Lot 5.Zone District: "B-1"General y ^lIARY K.I)EGNA�J EDWARD AND BARBARAyL Business. NOTARY PUBLIC,^tate of New York /l Irt t.yl~,8-�� gu(falk ices t�:ru �989dy a(:71 Fx�IfCS F°h(;18,'�+ [1 d' [ a.a ,�uaauuua w...wuvu .v. �a _ _ ,J"•• SS. the Town Law and the Code of STATE OF NEW YO R K r3the `i`owri of= Southold, the following hearings will be held:_ Vi "the SOU'I'HOLI)'TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at a. Patricia Wood; beirig duly sworn, says that she is the ".Town Regular Meeting at Mai Southold Road, Editor of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, Town Hall,.'.Main" Road, , Southold,NY on'THURSDAY,. a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; FEBRUARY 18. 1988 at the_ •':following times: and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, '. '- ' 7:3.0 p:m. Appl. No. 3702, has been published in said .Long Island Traveler-Watchman . OLGA:-CORDES...Variances to once each week for . weeks the Zoning Ordinance,-Article: III, Section 100-31, Bulk , � Schedule,.for.:approval of the successively, commencingon the proposed,insufficient_area and J ' width of,two parcels in this-pens 1� ding division of land located at' d o ?`` j;:• g the south side of Sterling Road (Nassau .Farms), Cutchogi e, NY; County Tax Map District • • . . . 1000,Section 104,Block 4,Lots '17 and 18:._ 7:35.,p.m..Appl.'.,No. 3709= EDWARD AND ORTRUD HANUS. Special Exception to Sworn to before me this . . . . . . l/ day of the Zoning Ordinance, to • • • • . . . • . . . y establish one new`Accessor-y Apartment in the existing dwell-- g ing structure in accordance with the-requirements of Article III, title VII,Section 100-70(B),foil. Section .100-30(B),- subsection .i an Interpretation•-of "retail B. Location of Property: 635 shopping canter" and for per-. Lupton's Point Road, Mat mission'to establish cottvenience.;: �G tituck, NY; County Tax Map . store as an accessory,to the ex -, • •.• • . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . District 1000,Section 115,Block -o istmg gasoline-service station.,'. Notary Public 11,.Lot 3 ;/ ':Location of Property..South 7:40:p.m. Appl. No. 3699- Side of Main Road,,West Side .EDWARD AND BARBARA .,,-of Maratooka Lane, and East BARBARA FORBES BETSCI+Variances to the Zon- _ Side;of Sunset:Avenue, Mat- Notary Public, State of New York ing Ordinance,Article Ill,Sec- tituck,.N.Y;. County.flax Map No. 4306846 tion 100-31, Bulk Schedule, for District 1000,Section.115;Block (qualified in Suffolk County permission to construct`addi- 3,�Lot 9. Zone District: "B-1" Commission Expires a!" 3/ 19'F-{= don(s)to dwelling with an insuf- General Business. ficient westerly sideyard setback g:OS p.m..,Appl. .No. 3701= and insufficient total sideyards. ; CHARLES'ZAHRA. Applica; Location of. Property:`-Noith._; lion un er Article XIV,Section Side of Rabbit Lane;.,'East .142 of the Zoning Code.-for a Marion, NY; County Tax Map Raversal of-Determination,of Parcel'No. 1000-31-17-15. i 1' BuilI ing:::Inspector• in his 7:45 p.m. Appl., No: 3607- Revocation`of Building Permit J'AMES O.NEILL " AND No.15428Z issued 0i tober'27, PETER Me-SHERRY. 1986..Location`of Property: 140 Variances to the Zoning 'Or- Pike" Street, Mattituck, NY; ; dinance, Article III, Section ; County Tax Map District 1000, • 100-31, Bulk Schedule, for,ap Section 141,'Block 4; Lot 5. proval of insufficient area,/hU Zone District: "B-1"" General.: Width and depth of two propos- Business.', ed parcels,eachmith an existing The Board -of Appeals will dwelling, located at the corner. hear at:said time,and place of the N/s•Wiggins Street and persons or representatives desir- the W/s:Eighth Street, Green- ing to be heard in each of the port, NY; Map of S. Buel Cor= above matters.Each hearing will win (1885) Lots 28 and 29; not start before the time allot- County Tax Map District 1000, ted. Written comments may be Section 48, Block 1, Lot 22. submitted prior to the conclu- 7:55 p.in:,.TARTAN OIL sion of the subject hearing.For CORP.: more information, please call (a) Appl. No; 3633-.Special 765-1809. Exception .under Article.VII, Dated: February 2, 1988 Section,100-70(B)of the Zoning BY.ORDER OF.THE Code for. approval .of the u:SOUTHOLD TOWN establishment of a,partial self- BOARD OF APPEALS service gasoline station;,and i GERARD P. GOEHRINGER; (b)Appl.No.3636 Varianpe CHAIRMAN ;i:`.:; to. the Zoning Oirdinance, Ar- ..�:.:-;''.�r Linda Kowalski; titles VI,Section 100.62(B),Ar-`s° Board Secretary •Nip-..:�::::e.. - - 1T 2/I1/88(5) � y STATE OF NEW YORK ) SS: NOTICE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) OF RECESSED HEARINGS PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that the following hearings will be recon- Christina Conten to of Greenport, in vened at a Special Meeting of the- Southold Town Board of Appeals at said County, being duly sworn, says that he/she is the Southold Town Hall,Main Road, Southold,NY onThursday,l�g Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly 3. 1988 j Newspaper, published at Greenport, in the Town 7:McSH Appl.RRY 'oNJAmW per of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New TER McSI1ERRY '' D JAMES I O N- 7:35. ork, and that the Notice of which the annexed is .P.M.pm App1.:,No. 3701 — C AR ES�Arme a printed copy, has been regularly published in For additional in' 'lion,please said Newspaper once each week for 1 call the Board of'Appeals Office at) " 765-1809. weeks successively, commencing on the 3 GERARD P.GOEHRINGER, i day of March 19_8 8 SOUTHOLD ZMA HAII12 " N BOARD �1 OF 5841-1TM3 " APPEALS Principal Clerk �. Sworn to be a me this day of 19 MARY K.DFGNAN NOTARY PUBLIC,State of New York Suffolk County No. y.XA o Term Expires Februarl9 4rA BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter or the Petition of CHARLES ZAHRA NOTICE TO to the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold ADJACENT TO: PROPERTY OWNER Mr. Gregory Simonelli The North Fork Bank & Trust Co. YOU,ARE H REBY GIVEN NOTICE: g 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold to request a (Variance) (Special Exception) (Special Permit) (Other) [circle choice] Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector - Revocation of Building Permit ). 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY 11952- North by Pike Street; East by Broken Down Valise; South by Parking Lot owned by North Fork Bank; West by Parking Lot owned by North Fork Bank; Suffolk County Tax Map No. Dist.1000 Sec. 141 Blk. 04 Lot. 05 3. That the property which is the subject of such Petition is located in the following zoning district: District A 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector - Revocation of Building Permit 5. That the provisio s of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the recief sought by the under- signed are Article g; Section 100-142(c&d) [ ] Section 280-A, New York Town Law for approval of access over right(s)-of-way. 6. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road Southold, New York and you may then and there examine the same during regular office hours. (516) 7d5-1809. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Board of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices_; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Dated: December 4, 1987 Petitioner Owners ' Names : Charles & Jean Zahra Post Office Address P.O. Box 1137 Mattituck, NY 11952 PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS NAME ADDRESS THE NORTH FORK BANK & TRUST CO. Main Road Mattituck, NY 11952 MR. GREGORY SIMONELLI c/o Pike Street Tavern Corp. P.O. Box 1190 Mattituck, NY 11952 P 709 9219 309 P 709 29 310 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL `"�'�AECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAILNO INSURANCI COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR IN ERNATIONAL MAIL • NO INSURANCE OVERAGE PROVIDED (Se Reverse) NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL (See Reverse) Sent to Mr. Gregory Simonelli Sent t The North Fork Bank & Trust Street and No. Street and No. P.O. Box 1190 �- Main Road ' P.O.,State and ZIP Code •P.O.,State and ZIP Code Mattituck, NY 11952 Postage S I Postage S I Certified Fee Certified Fee Special Delivery Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt showing to whom and Date Delivered Return Receipt showing LO to whom and Date Delivered Return Receipt showing Ia wboLn1 co Return Receipt showing to whom. Date,and Address (Delivery), — Date,and Address of Delivery TOTAL Postage nd es c TOTAL Post and F e S Postmark or D t80 �(rl C o Postmar tLLVate LL cn cn IL STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) ss.: PATRICIA M. FICNER residing at 685 Village Lane _ Mattituck. New York being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 7th day of December 119 87 , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the re- verse side hereof, directed to each of the above-named persons at the addresses set opposite their respective names;that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the current assessment roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Of- fice at Mattituck, NY ; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certified) (VeVX9 Imo, mail. * Return Receipt Requested. PATRICIA M. FICNER Sworn to before me this 7th day of Decednb , 19 87 Notary Public ERIIC JONMAN BRESSLER Noary l i stm o Nsw lot am N>h c (This side does not have to be completed on form transmitted to adjoining property owners .. ) r r jw- i DATE / Ii;ITIALED t j S �-, Zz c/w/n r - DATE -------4- INITIALED 62 c[ . , � � t ------------- ,,,,lam• - �~r + E .Y�j t�E+�r r, K'- 31 �� ' � I Fil � W' k tLm l I _ I I4 I I o I 'nTIY1 5'LP.J , iL I 4 t �k7T E�.EYAT'IO N --- -- �` SOLD=R USLD I;J"ATc'R :.70VED AE NOTED 5U??iY 5�10 of 1;,�4D. OT i FFF By. :On= nou.0!N+; UEPaFTF+'IiiP!T AT 'Fg cv- !i .+S C a S: f-0R THE `J i :;D L'GIJ[� rL:�dsJL"! "r o�•%:>r..�spFCT!ces: G';-_ L:di;;=J":! �fJUST '� lIl— �� I .. ...�. ,7a7 I•_-�[',o�- .�e- r,�.a.a_�.l _�'S-I_ F'O:t I I LI �i I i.-• I, -- -- � unawnoraed aneranon er II I I j it Ij addition to th's document is_a violation of se<Non 7209 of the Now York 5:ate Education ;I —_._—__ �=✓•,¢-r.-.�..-i l-j`L, _ c,.t:Dbinft.i t!wJ law. •j '-v•`0,..� . 11 iilj II �i oil III ;I h I r.. )t r d7W;b.'tinq c, (this do„mcnt not _sit 1 pies o ie bearing the eng'nxrs inked )�—_.____..__._ - .' •i�__._.__.I� i o coon ere valid 1 1 C,s f1 or I C^i7 seal ar embossed seol shall not I ...�. _ _._ ._. ---_.j ...__.—.. .. ._ _—_._ --�J ' oP"ecsstoNa/� R-E FJGVAT?tit ' G•.�f�N�H / G.ISO c =1= — — ••fir :�.J ,,`r ,n s.�a t �',�''1 s•:T1Y��;pp��7 rn,T f'In L ^UL 9��i0F IN 42e110,��� , J {i t'10 l C:- Ir+4��L e Sjp1 STEVE O.TSONTANIS ASSOCIATES OF C�CUPANC I g 832 AOANOKQ AVE.,RIVHAHEADr N.Y. (S1f9)727.7A11 1,�, e�.o�,rn �--- ,�•,�- _ ?\!��\ �o�u,sfoou.oua oy��uuvoy _ - 7�� 4f-?I.7� YQnV! ,i7�ML ` u iuown o �11$lf.y - � � v t �-'�. 5- .r: ...'u-c.-" - GOlI- -2r+d�d 3!1 7aV-1946+d7 f4~..�y��i�'t+f °�"•�wr@I��i+��7 h•�`b�;,s��1 4-aF�+V' 1�,,J� .,t?q .• �. xr�i bean t r.:. s., Y'y � j �'. � fi• }� !' w�'�^'.Gl� rt•� c•*• ,.- �- �za .a-rs`��� A ., —n� ,Ca 1H dt"1 tVW..h�� �� Z-� 7 T �- - X� Y-S2SI ez t1"1fk ' I ' � I 41 � I s CD '• �` � w 21 'J.�bd �1�t•� q 1 h•...,-a �ow � 5Q'•�Yt - _ -,y, .`svT�j 1 •D � "sty �x� �: :�oNtv...+sta' :, (SOWLID{.E t+y_Ad - _.-0 4w.+ro-ear- - o. `l .-j -�a9v�,1 - '°Slst�v�v�-� Nth �— 1 •. _.._�.� h � o-•Pr. �- 'I 'sse'+5.4s >. rI]H]]-� - I �b1 .. I r»d h?m a=N�e i and as, r -r Al. A ; I �i "iII i II 1 k�a hl I ' r �:_t- - l"Clp$ - ll 71( 44 N• W'ii•ri�a�vinctlt r S ,:I it - A 's I i � •1I I j1 ___ ��IpRD Ty V(Ea- I 1�P4n-avec ¢F�ti Qt 2�a(O � ' ir.`� r T� � �', - ----_--__ -- _- 27tp-,\'aiL(B2•c..�C1 '/�'q.-c boi-8•�� n Y' -•n I � _- �Ei t_p.� _�_i�---C T H 2.� 4 Y�c�r 2mn;) --- 4 I Z v > o--c I STEVE O.TSONTAKIS ASSOCIATES 632 ROANOKE AVE.,RIVERHEAD,N.Y. (616)727-7411 - DWG /� DATE SCALE - 1' • II I t i ill I it ' 5 ' II' LE V NT1 ON �3 . o4:}:R. .... ..• - .: � _ ., r._ _:.IL I�us.=•� � .. wSSS -� •1..� - O�Sf `A'MEL.i F+- FR= IYBSSF ..�C_n ��'•., �"' .. ._, -. -.n•_� . 1��C-- 1t-L Sc ii..�- _�.o�)Cr..nl+ � t)Ci�l�C•�sXbt) �v-� ¢cam °.cl _�._ .- ,'r•'-._a',=1s.•.I 2.E •,._.cam:-:�., _ a..�r�fY��t.c`� - OVnG:,v:c114•a �t...� o.n9$ C o.t8••aok_ s ?i� tin 'A= 376 e�-•k,m •, ._ PzrL_ Il»h tc. •.�� 1as6 0,10 tfr:" , - C�p.S: -7g S- S1.;ca._ O•to L O.18 y �L VtsTl�A-r h-I = r3 - .�.4 ova >13 70t ctF - (Zm,q ' ' - PL(2 = NONE ' aulhoriz.:d alrelat:on or :ion fo this document is a' `v�sfO�y6'VRROO S ID 9 - _t f-tf10vATtaa C P A_ soon o{s o 7209 i. F - low York Stale Education + 5 oyr9 - - •" - QfC-E,ST •MRYTi?vC- ,I+a... law. � � p �� �- .. - •las of this document not - e" S f ` ' ring tho on /! y3 A 9`neeJs in!sed ���l7�Kr�ONSr,, i.�--rct - C�`►E'FCi�%•R[`A} SK' - c ar ombossed seal shall not PN� °4yg19 a{ considcrod valid copses. �P- S3EVE 6TR0.TSOITAKIS ASSOCIA.T.ESANOKEAVE,RIVRMEAD. (5�617a74411 DING 'tt�=� V`�. I.O DATE,. .... SCALE REV y i TM n + f� ,ter•. r. . , _ t ' `��tG•..rG. 1 r� � � - It � ___. .-..�. _::•: �`_- ---_.._. .. �_: ..� 4-,., �_ � _.. . :.- . Y • : : ''�=�a.--,....�...—„� _ .-.�_.w__�_ .. - - .�.. .. .- r +L.EyA i�o t-4 , i iu Q02 . � I 7 (c'�A i!f../C, �_ .. r✓' r'.� O�p L� t.n I't't, (--('KL Ox_t'c V 1 1 —��a'S, , dc� d, 91008(%o -------------- 1 4 tf i STEVE 0. TSONTAKIS ASSOCIATES - 632 ROANOKE AVE., RIVERHEAD, N.Y. (816)727-7411 DWG GATE !! SCALE REV s i { � i R � •� ' � y !i f j i i IL G N Ev-3 ,� Re. . W�i� S µ�� VZ� a r•� iw+4-r�•J, _. L=- N E..R-G�( C�J 5�..�' V IT`S�'�*..> F�.t—,f�\,.Y��s 1 S 1J..� - � S 1' �f-r..�,7 c�S��•.r� '•� �?-C-1a�� Cr--G ='```� aL CiE Z�2 k►QZ �J F4T 'FL — 'FR= (�1 85 SF' T Z C>. lJRS 5- — g y) CAI— �. �Qr�.('���h.�ar...�� �- N {�'.C._. 4.5� '�'\��i��1..i '...a S"'' ,+1, „�.1^}'� �.•�: 1.-%'r,�,��t'�.�T"_7'-�-R^s yc 1 T1r.,C, SZ t? a O. 4 i S� V*--t-g ¢- Cz FLrz STEVE 0. .TSONTAKIS ASSOCIATES 632 ROANOKE AVE., RIVERHEAD, N.Y. (516)727.7411 DWG DATE SCALE REV LIN i V•...- ••�-- 1'ru'n.Vr.^<1•.31+f11Tt�.a"'�iYCbi`$iY�M.� '•!i! F. , _ ° Via• � � � , tl 6 1 i , i d 9 " co r a > t � x tl , 1 A P , a r P f l , a ' C d �2)z%<8 v% 3fvN d S �L A 7 `' :® '� ao-»"(-, C-.2 3 10 I r , _ —_. _ PQ q d bra- • r �aSµ�A5F1tYl., LrTc 171 S° n r d ° }y =4 °K . g a , VtT Flu , G 1 _ _ jj. t. i ^•yam r e ;p i ° N y , g. g p ' G wLy s �j o - P �--s-Y _ �7 SSOZ _DWG ALE " N t �a rh 2 Y 8 r-1d ' ,'ul w c, u 10 i _,._....,.,...._...s.. sir G - I =� F - I t v L h-- ` t'Ci,ktf r,�fi +4S6tCJ -4- �.. a._ E� � .. i 4 . a.a e t " E I fS}1 � - .✓. ...rw.rs�,.ws_v,.,,vv-+va._..-t,n.r.T�.r.�.ce+;sr•..am,-.,ma+mawr,.-.vi �.esvw . Sit 4 � a 1 , z c=Loor `A t-o x ' .h to P g •yy��TSOMI T %I AG Y� A V KE A �,�� Ef ��. '��. .:< Ol n ,r _ EM8 JULIUS BLUMMK*G. INC.. PUNLISHER 62WHn`KSTRKffT.NCWY0FtK.ALY.10013 For Clerk Only SUPREME Court, SUFFOLK County Index No. ( Y--?72-� Full title of action Date Purchased �- P A!"' In the Matter of the Application of R.J.1. FEE ...................................................................... CHARLES ZAHRA, AS entry date I MAY 10 198 JULCE-1712 ..................................................................... Name of assigned judge REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL ---------- against Petitioners) INTERVENTION I...........**....Date of .................. THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, 0 Issue joined (date............................................................ ) (check if applicable) 0 Bill of particulars served (check if applicable) In the City of New York only: • The City of New York is a party to this action. • The Transit Authority(or MABSTOA)is a party to this action. Respondent(s) NATURE OF JUDICIAL INTERVENTION (check) • Request for preliminary conference 0 Other'e x- parte application • Note of issue and/or certificate of readiness 0 Notice of petition(return date................................................................ • Notice of motion (return date ................................................................) Relief sought ...................................................................................................... Reliefsought...................................................................................................... . .................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................................................ .................................................................................................................................. ...........................................................v...................................................................... 0 Notice of medical malpractice action KI Order to show cause 0 Notice of dental malpractice action (Clerk will enter return date ....................................................................) 0 Statement of net worth Relief sought.........Prohibition............................................................ 0 Writ of habeas corpus ........................... .................................................................................................................................. 0 Other(specify):................................. --------------------------------------- .................................................................................................................................. ...................................................................................................................... .NATURE OF ACTION OR PROCEEDING (check) Tort Special Proceedings 0 Motor vehicle 0 Tax certiorari • Medical malpractice 0 Condemnation • Dental malpractice 0 Foreclosure • Seaman 0 Incompetency or conservatorship 0 Airline Other special proceeding, including but not limited to: • Other tort, including but not limited to personal injury, 0 Article 75 (arbitration) property damage, slander or libel(specify): ...................................... 0 Article 77 (express trusts) IPI Article 78 ............I..................................................................................................................... 0 Other(specify):............................................................................................ OTHER ACTION • Matrimonial(contested) 0 Contract • Matrimonial(uncontested) 0 Other(specify):.................................................................................................. Instructions: Attach rider sheets if necessary to provide required information. If any party is appearing pro se (without an attorney), the required information concerning such party is to be entered in the space provided for attorneys. Attorney(s)for plaintiff(s)/petitioner(s) Name Address Phone ._,._.ERIC J. BRESSLER, ESQ. MAIN ROAD, P.O. Box 1424 516-298-8353 WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. MATTITUCK, NY 11952 Attorney(s)for defendant(s)/respondent(s) Address Phone Name Name of insurance carriers(if applicable and available) RELATED CASES(if none,write"NONE"below) Title Index# Court Nature of relationship I affirm under penalty of perjury that,to my knowledge,other than as noted above,there are and have been no related actions or proceedings,nor has a request for judical intervention previously been filed in this action or proceeding. Dated:.......MAY 10,.__1988----------- Signature—type name low. WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. ERIC J. BRES ER,P.C. Attorneys)for Petitioner Office dt P.O.Address Main Road, P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 At a Special Term, Part of the Supreme Court o the State of New York, County of Suffolk, held at the Courthouse, Griffing Avenue, Riverhead, New York, on !U May , 1988. P R E S E N T HON• DANIEI` F:LUCIANO Justice. ----------------------------------------X In the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA, VV Petitioner, INDEX NO.I 0 71 Z� For a Judgment Pursuant to ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Article 78 of the CPLR -against- SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondent. ----------------------------------------X Upon the annexed petition of the petitioner, Charles Zahra, verified on the loth day of May, 1988,and the exhibits annexed thereto; and upon all the proceedings had before the respondent Southold Town Board of Appeals, in the matter of appeal number 3701, it is ORDERED that the respondent, Southold Town Board of Appeals, show cause before this Court atnn z�-s (aY n rma�o b e held at the Courthouse on Griffing Avenue, Riverhead, New York on the,_ �C of May, 1988, at 9:30 o'clock in the forenoon, or as soon I� thereafter as counsel may be hear, why judgment should not be made and entered pursuant to CPLR Article 78 as follows: (1) annulling and setting aside. Respondent's determination of April 14, 1988 setting Petitioner's application (Appeal No. 3701) down for further hearing as being arbitrary and capricious and constituting an abuse of discretion and in excess of its jurisdiction, (2) granting the relief sought by Petitioner before the Respondent: reversing the determination of the Building Inspector in his revocation of Building Permit # 15428Z issued October 27, 1986, (3) prohibiting Respondent from conducting further hearings on Appeal No. 3701 as in excess of Respondents' jurisdiction, (4) pending the hearing and determination of this proceeding, enjoining Respondent from conducting a further hearing on Appeal No. 3701, and (5) granting the Petitioner such other and further relief as to this Court may seem just and proper, and it is further ORDERED, t pending the heari nd eterminatio is proc edi Respondent be ereby is enjoi d restrained 0yx� om hold' furthe hear' son Appeal and it ' urth ORDERED, that sufficient reason appearing therefor, service of a copy of this order together with papers on which it was granted, upon Respondent in accordance with CPIR 312 on or before the 12th day of May, 1988, be deemed good and sufficient service. DANIEL'F:LUCIANO G R APIT E D J.S.C. , S MAY 10 1988 Juliette A. Kinsella Clerk of Suffolk County SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ----------------------------------------X In the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA, Petitioner, INDEX NO. For a Judgment Pursuant to VERIFIED PETITION Article 78 of the CPLR -against- SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondent. ----------------------------------------X TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, SUFFOLK COUNTY: The Petition of Charles J. Zahra, respectfully shows: 1. Respondent at all times mentioned was and is the Southold Town Board of Appeals, duly established pursuant to Town Law Section 267 of which board Gerard P. Geohringer is and was at all times chairman. 2. Petitioner is an owner of real property with the building thereon situated at 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, Suffolk County, New York, more fully described in Schedule A attached hereto. 3. In March, 1986, Petitioner entered into an agreement to purchase the premises described in Schedule A. The agreement was contingent upon Petitioner obtaining a building permit for renovation of the premises. 4. At the time Petitioner entered into the agreement there was located on said premises a two story building used as a restaurant on the first floor and an apartment on the second floor. A copy of the certificate of occupancy is annexed as Exhibit A. 5. On October 27, 1986, a building permit was issued to Petitioner to "renovate and addition [sic] an existing restaurant as applied for" pursuant to an application for same dated June 19, 1986, copy annexed as Exhibit B. 6. On November 20, 1986 Petitioner came into title of the premises in reliance upon the aforesaid certificate of occupancy and building permit. 7. Thereafter Petitioner entered upon the premises and commenced the renovation and addition to the building on the premises in accordance with the plans and the building permit. 8. On or about September 22, 1987, the Building Department of the Town of Southold issued an "order to remedy violation" with respect to the premises. Copy annexed as Exhibit C. 9. On or about September 23, 1987, the Building Department of the Town of Southold served Petitioner with an appearance ticket returnable in the Southold Town Justice Court alleging a violation of Chapter 100, Article XV, Section 100-143 of the Southold Town Code, copy annexed as Exhibit D. 10. On October 30, 1987, the aforementioned criminal proceeding against Petitioner was dismissed. 11. On or about November 5, 1987, the Building Department of the Town of Southold issued to Petitioner an "order to remedy violation" revoking the building permit previously issued with respect to the premises, copy annexed as Exhibit E. The stated basis for the revocation was "not following plans, did not comply with stop work order". 12. On or about December 1, 1987, Petitioner did appeal and make application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals to reverse the determination of Building Department as aforesaid, copy of application annexed as Exhibit F. 13. The application and appeal was designated by Respondent upon its calendar as No. 3701 and was heard by said Respondent at hearings on February 18, 1987, March 3, 1987, and March 17, 1987. Prior to the March 17th date the Respondent introduced its own "observations" as part of the record. Copy annexed as Exhibit G. Petitioner responded in writing to these "observations" (See Exhibit J below) . Upon such final date the hearing was closed. 14. After such hearing and on April 14, 1988, the Respondent rendered its decision in which it failed to address the issues before it under Southold Town Code Sections 100-142 C,D, as set forth in the determination of the Building Inspector. Copy of decision is annexed as Exhibit H. Rather, Respondent set the matter down for a further hearing on May 12, 1988 on issues raised sua sponte by Respondent allegedly pursuant to Southold Town Code Sections 100-118 D, E, dealing with non-conforming uses. Such decision was filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office on April 15, 1988. 15. The aforesaid determination of the Respondent was arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion in that it: (a) failed to address the issues before it. The only issues before Respondent were alleged violations by Petitioner of Southold Town Code Sections 100-142 C, D. (b) improperly set the matter down for a further hearing on issues not before it. Alleged violations of Southold Town Code Sections 100-118 D, E are not and were not properly before Respondent. These sections deal with the duration and extent of a non-conforming use, not the revocation of a building permit pursuant to 100-142 C & D. The Respondent has appellate jurisdiction only, not original jurisdiction and cannot render decisions except upon review of issues raised by the Building Inspector. (c) improperly attributed the need for a further hearing to an alleged request by Petitioner when, in fact, no such request was made. Annexed hereto as Exhibit J is a letter from Petitioner's Counsel to Respondent specifically advising Respondent to "stick to the issues". No request for further hearing was made. 16. Respondent is proceeding and is about to proceed further without and in excess of its jurisdiction in that the issues sought to be addressed by Respondent under Southold Town Code Sections 100-118 D & E were not the subject of the Building Inspector's determination and, therefore, are not properly before the Respondent. Respondent's jurisdiction extends only to appellate review of the Building Inspector's determinations, not to issues raised de novo at the Board of Appeals level. 17. The evidence addressed at the hearing demonstrates that Petitioner is entitled to the relief as requested. Neither ground for revocation of the building permit asserted by the Building Inspector is supported by the evidence on the record: (a) Southold Town Code Section 100-142 D permits revocation where a stop work order is not obeyed. Even a cursory review of the alleged stop work order in this case reveals that it was issued with respect to the wrong property i.e. 1830 Pike Street, not 140 Pike Street, and that it fails to comply with the Southold Town Code as to substance, to wit: it fails to contain a statement of conditions under which work may be remedied. Moreover, there is no evidence on the record that the stop work was in part, violated. Copy of relevant Code Sections annexed as Exhibit K. (b) Southold Town Code Section 100-142 C permits revocation where the work being performed is not in accordance with plans. There is no evidence on the record that the work was not being performed in accordance with plans. 18. Petitioner will be irreparably injured unless Respondent is enjoined from its totally illegal and arbitrary attempt to assert original jurisdiction over on as yet unalleged violation. Petitioner has completed the hearing process and is entitled to a decision thereon within 60 days of the closure of the hearing. There is no provision in law for reopening the hearing in the manner assured by Respondent. Petitioner's premises stand in a semi-constructed status open to the elements and deteriorating daily to Petitioner's detriment. To subject Petitioner to such a perversion of the administrative process without jurisdiction would cause undue hardship and expenses and would legitimate the illegal usurpation of power by Respondent. 19. No prior application for the relief sough herein has been made. Petitioner has no other adequate remedy at law to redress the wrongs complained of herein. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that judgment be granted herein: 1) reversing, annulling and setting aside the Order made by Respondent on April 14, 1988; 2) granting Petitioner the relief sought in his appeal to Respondent; 3) prohibiting Respondent from conducting any further hearings in this matter; 4) pending the hearing and determination of this proceeding enjoining Respondent from conducting any further hearing on Appeal No. 3701, and; 5) granting Petitioner such other and further relief as is just and proper. Dated: Mattituck, New York May 10, 1988 WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner 10315 Main Road, P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, New York 11952 (516) 298-8353 SCHEDULE A ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a concrete monument set on the southerly side of Pike Street at the northwest corner of the premises herein described adjoining land of late of George P. Bergmann on the West, said monument being 140 feet as measured along the southerly side of Pike Street East from its intersection with the easterly side of Westphalia Avenue, from said monument of beginning: RUNNING THENCE along the southerly side of Pike Street, North 56 degrees 39 feet 50 minutes East 40.0 feet to a cross cut in the concrete and land of Conklin; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Conklin and land of Estate of George H. Riley South 29 degrees 36 feet 10 minutes East 95.0 feet to a concrete monument and land of Estate of George H. Reilly; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Riley, South 56 degrees 39 feet 50 minutes West 40.0 feet to a monument and land of late of George P. Bergmann; RUNNING THENCE along said land late of Bergmann, North 29 degrees 36 feet and 10 minutes West 95. 0 feet to the concrete monument and place of BEGINNING. BEING and intended to be the same premises conveyed to the party of the first part by deed dated 7/6/84, recorded 7/10/84 in Liber 9597, Page 155. raw ra e TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Ogics Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. .Z8.9.35. . . . . Date . .February. . . . . . . . 1�. . . . THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at .140 P jtp. .gt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . Block No. . . . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in office this oQice dated . . .March . . , 8 . . . . . . .. 1977. . pursuant to which Bu ilding Permit No.•?0�4Z dated . . . .Har.Gh. . . .8 . . . . . . . .9 19. 27, was issued, and conforms to all of the . . ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupant for which require. Y ch this certificate Is Issued Is . . .Restaurant .,C. Apartment, . . . .. .. . .. . TAO certificate is issued to . . . . . . . . .JoseAh. Linger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . of the aforesaid building. (owner, �Srxt' , .. . . .. . . . Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . . . . .N/R • • . . , • . . ' . UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. . H373999. . , N373997 HOUSE NUMBER . . 140. . Pike Street . . . . . . . . Street . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . .. . . . Matt ituck, NY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .... . . Building Inspector . . .«i YY1I M viY 'r -Y••. - r• ♦ TOYM OF.$6. s" ��• N '> > 'mt' ' - 'cam" e > a f s `grtS Y y► . SOUTNOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) p eT N15428 Z Date. .... ..... ..........:-.... ............... 19. .(..�. Permission is hereby granted to: .......t.. :. ..... *�&0...•........... .... . 1-$y d t� .................... •.............Nw•' .NNN....... .Nw••..•.••.w.•. . •.. .....'..'...�......./r .�i...�.,N..•.....:........... ........... ..............: a to ......• . .....wN.NNN�N.�NNN.wwwwN.N.Nw.w`-t;=• � ��...•Nwr•AA�J�J,1��1./ ... ....... NNN ............................. ....•• •Nwd •w.••NN.........NM.wN.N• Nu................•.+ �� ��� �'�r.-Mom^' � .J'�V•Y �:at'.pro miss: located at ....... ..�N.NN .NN..........NN.N,INNNNN..�..wNN NNNMNN.NN.Nw.w..Nwww.�M=.y YVJ.•i .....................................................................w: ......Syr..... .......1..... N� .••••w••• ,.•............. ................. :• ;.:' NN..NwN..N.NN....w..NN•..�•w.N...•.N..•....•.. ....... •N...•wN.N....••NNNw.N...N...NNN..N...... • �INN�N..�• County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . .. .. ............:. Block ...................w. Lot N0. .. ........•........ !t!.`.°':`. •: �. .. 191`, and appt+o�ved by the pursuant to application dated �•• •••••••••••••••••••� .ram Building Inspector. Fee + ••........•........... R ' :building Fx Y �F' ':h a FOND! NO. s TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date ....September 22 , 19...8.E CHARLES T. & JEAN ZAHRA .................................................. (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 PIKE STREET, MATTITUCK, NEW YORK 11952 ........................................................M................... (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: CH 100 ZoningOrdinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ of premises hereinafter described in that .......STOP ALL WORK NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE (state character of violation).....��������� ��� PROVISIONS OF THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. ................................................................................. ................................................................................. ............a.................... .................................... ..... in violation of CH 10. ... 0 XIV. . ....... ...100-. . .143. . .. ... . . . .. . . ... . . ................................................................ ................... (State section or poragroph of applicable law, ordinance or regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ......AT. ONCE............................................... September 19 87 dayof .................................................... .. ... The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 1830 v;kP Street. Mattituck,., ,...................County of Suffolk, New York. .................................................... Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of law may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 14 1-04-05 Building Inspector BUILDING DEPARTMENT, APPEARANCE TICKET-NO: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD tioutheAd, Ni•w Yurk 11071 Issued to: commission of the offense of: first Name M I Last Name L jr-2 0 Number and Street ! _ - �, �� �-- contrary to the provisions of Sta Zip Section �� y-3 City o/Town YOU ARE HEREBY directed to appear at the Justice of the code o the Town of Southold C;ourt,'l'own of Southold('Town Hall)53095 Main Road Dated: �' � -30 f6f (State Route 25), Southold, New York 11971.�J 19 Issued and ubscribed b On the day of G at D o'clock in the 'a M Building Inspector, Town•o uthold in connection with your alleged IF YOU FAIL TO-APPEAR ON THE DATE ISSUED. ANTIME INDICATED, A CRIMINAL SUMMONS OR WARRANT FOR YOUR ARREST MAY BE FORM NO. i TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date November 5, CHARLES T. S JEAN ZAHRA TO ........................................ (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, New..York 11952 ... . .. .. ... .... .... ... ... . ...... (add. .ress. .. . of owner. .. .. or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: C8 100 Zoning Ordinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ Your building permit no. 15428 Z issued ............................................................................................. of premises, hereinafter described in that (state character of violation) October 27, 1986 is hereby revoked. Reason.i•.•not...follov ng,,,Rlans, .................................................................. did...not...comply with ..a.. stop ..work• order.. .............. ..;. . ........................................... 100- 14 2-C ,6 D in violation of ............................................................................................. ......................................... (State section or paragraph of applicable low, ordinance or regulation YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the low and to remedy the 6th conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the .........t ......................................................... day of .....Noveober............................ .. 19....87 The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 140 Pike Street , .Matt.tituck...........County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of low may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 1000- 14 1-04-05 �.�! .. .......... Building inspector.. �x h ,' b,•f 4 , Y (� NEW ■ V � TOWN OF iOUTNOLo, ORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL NO. DATE A�s;amh�x..l,►..�.9&7 TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ...CHMES-ZAHU... ... ...........................of 1830-Rake. Stray a ......................................... Name of Appellant Street and Number Town of Southold, New York HEREBY APPEAL TO .....................................Municipality................................... ..... State ......... THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON BUILDING wwM PERMIT NO. ...1S.420Z..................... DATED .................... WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO CHARLES ZAHRA ............................................................................ Name of Applicant for permit of .A.f..SjoutbDlAq ..........11k7�1..YAxk.. . . ....................... Street and Number Municipality State ( ) PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY JKX) RE: Building Permit 1. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY Pjce„ Mattituck ,,A,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Hamlet... ............ Street / /....Use District on Zoning Mop District 1000 Section 141Block 041-ot OS.'Current Owner Charles & Jean Zahra Mop No....................................... .Lot No............. Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article XIv Section 100-442Ed&Q Revocation of Permit 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) ( ) A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A VARIANCE due to lock of access (State of New York Town Low Chop. 62 Cons. Laws Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 (XI Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector-Revocation of Building Permit 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous oppeal (koW (has not) been mode with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ) request for a special permit ( ) request for a variance andwas mode in Appeal No. ................................Dated ....................................................................... REASON FOR APPEAL - ( ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 ( ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (XX) A reversal of determination of building inspector-revae--ation of building permit is requested for the reason that neither ground set forth in the revocation supports the action taken. All work pursuant to the permit has been performed in accordance with plans and approvals of the Building Department. The stop work order was not violated and, in any event, was invalid. Accordingly, the decision of the building inspector should be reversed. Copy of revocation of Building Permit is annexed hereto. halal ZBl (Continue on other side) 5x h, 614 F REASON FOR APPEAL Confined F'C MN 1. Stop Work Order fails to comply with Section 100-143. This action requires that a stop work order state the conditions under which the work may be resumed. A copy of the stop work order is attached hereto. It is apparent that the foregoing code requirement was not met and that, therefore, the stop work order is invalid. 2. The stop work order does not apply to the subject premises. The stop work order by its terms applies to premises at 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY. However, the premises for which a building permit were granted and for which the building permit was revoked are located at 140 Pike Street. Copy of Building Permit is attached hereto. The premises at 1830 Pike Street is the applicants residence, about which there is no dispute. 3. Even assuming that the stop work order was issued in compliance with the code and applied to the proper premises, the stop work was not violated. The applicant did nothing after the issuance of the order except clean up the job site. Apparently, the building department recognized this fact when it withdrew its criminal prosecution for violation of stop work order because of its stated inability to prosecute the case. 4. All work on the premises has been conducted in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and instructions of the Building Department. There is no basis for the claim that work was done not in accordance with plans. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that the determination of the building inspector revoking the building permit be denied. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss .. ... ................................. COUNTY OF Suffolk ) CHARLES ZAHRA�ture Sworn to this .........lat lat............................... day of..........Decembex.............................. 1987 ...... Notary Publip............................. �xh � b►f � . 1. t, Board of A eals � Southold Town 1y • 0 ti: MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD. 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H.SAWICKI Appl . No . 3701 - Charles Zahra Location of Premises :. 140 Pike Street , Mattituck County Tax Map No . 1000-141-'04-05 Findings of Board based on familiarity with activities at the subject site on at least a weekly basfs , 4 to 5 days per week , before establishment closed in 1984 . Spoke to family member of prior owner who managed "The Coffee Pot" and who indicated business closed in November 1984. Any occupancy- on the second floor was occasional . Any. occupancy was limited to sleeping since there was no kitchen or cooking facilities on the second floor , and prior occupants came downstairs to .eat at "The Coffee Pot . " Tfie subject building was boarded up at the time North Fork Bank acquired the premises , and there was no occupancy on the second floor as a residence since that time . Findings of Board based on familiarity of operations of recent re-construction , renovations , etc . to include new basement foundation , first floor including additions to east side and -rear , lifting of the second-story , and removal of second story , etc . Building remained boarded up until re-construction commenced and removal of portions of the building , and of course until the present time . (Photographs and notations from 3/7/88 attached hereto . ) 3/14/88 o Southold Town Board of A eals ' ►1 .�1��� MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI April 15 , 1988 Eric J . Bressler , Esq . Wickham , Wickham & Bressler , P. C . Main Road , Box 1424 Mattituck , NY 11952 Re : Appl . No . 3701 - Charles Zahra Dear Eric : Transmitted herewith for your perusal and record is a copy of the official findings and determination. rendered by this Board , the original of which has this date been filed with the Office of the Town Clerk. Please note that this matter has been set down for a further hearing to be held on May 12 , 1988. In the interim , please furnish us with a complete copy of the Contract of Sale between the North Fork Bank and the Langers ; and between the North Fork Bank and Charles Zahra . A copy of the Notice of Hearing as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman , Inc. and Suffolk Times , Inc . , by our office will be forwarded to you in the near future . Yours very truly , O . GERARD P . GOEHRIMGER� lk % CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copies of Decision to : James A. Schondebare , Esq . (Town Attorney) Robert H. Berntsson , Esq . (Asst. Town Attorney) Mr. Victor Lessard, Executive Administrator Southold Town Building Department FOur 0 Board f A eats Southold Town oPP MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD. L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3701 Application Dated December 10 , 1987 TO: Eric J . Bressler , Esq . as Attorney [Appellant (s) ] for CHARLES ZAHRA Main Road , .Box 1424 Mattituck , NY 11952 At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on April 14 , 1988 , the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ ] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article Section [ X] Request for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV , Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversal o etermination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 5 . Zone District : B-1 General Business . WHEREAS , public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988; and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS , the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning, and the surrounding areas ; and WHEREAS , the Board made the following findings of fact : 1 . This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . The revocation was issued on November 5 , 1987 . 2 . The property in question is located in the "B-l " General Business Zoning District and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000 , Section, 141 , Block 4 , Lot 005. 3 . The subject premises contains a total area of 3 ,800 sq . ft. with 40 .0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck , Town of Southold. (CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO) DATED: April 14 , 1988 . CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) w Page 2 - Appl . No. 3701 - Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA '. Decision Rendered• April 14 , 1988 4 . The subject premises is presently improved with a partially completed one-story concrete foundation with exterior walls . Previously , the premises was improved by a two-story structure which was nonconforming as to various setback require- ments and as to use . 5 . The building permit was revoked under Article XVI , Section 100- 142 of the Zoning Code which reads as follows : " . . . The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances : A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application , plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance with the applicable law. C. . Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance . with the provisions of the application , plans or specifications . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. 6 . Hearings were held on this application on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988. The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters of personal knowledge in the record . This was completed by March 14 , 1988 , and the hearing was closed at the Board ' s Regular Meeting on March 17 , 1988. 7 . Based on the facts in the record , it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the Building Department. It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure . Indeed , the second story has been totally removed and the first floor has been completely rebuilt . The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new struc- ture when compared to the prior structure . 8 . Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted , the facts before the Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit . Specifically , the evidence would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building . This would violate Section 100-118E of the Zoning Code . The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would also subject the project to compliance with present building code requirements under the New York State Building Code . Page 3 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 9. Based on the personal knowledge of the Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner , it further - appears that the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years . This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100- 118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid . 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use , were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held . Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code'.:and under the State Building Code . These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this juncture . Since no vested rights can be obtained under an, illegal permit , it would appear to be in the applicant' s best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board . Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment ' s revocation of the building permit. 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr . Goehringer,it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING , to be held on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sec- tions 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . lk R ER , CWXIRMAN . I / LAW OFFIC98 WICKHAM,WICKHAM 81 BRESSLER, P.c. MAIN ROAD.P.O.BOX 1424 MATTITUCK.LONG ISLAND NEW YORK 11952 MORTGAGE OFFICE WILLIAM WICKHAM 516-298.5300 ERIC J.BRESSLER 516.296-8353 ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM DANIEL C.ROSS March 17, 1988 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall - Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Appl. No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Location of Premises: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck County Tax Map No. 1000-141-04-05 Gentlemen: We are writing to you pursuant to the discussion at the last hearing date concerning: 1) items requested by the Board; and 2) a response to the Board "findings" after inspection. Accordingly, enclosed are copies' of the deeds into the North Fork Bank & Trust Company and Charles Zahra, as requested by the Board. We have reviewed the "findings" of the Board dated March 14 , 1988 with respect to the premises and offer the following comments: 1. The extent or expiration of a non-conforming use is not an issue in this proceeding. It was not advanced as a ground for revocation of the building permit by the Building Department either in its notices or at the hearing. No questions concerning same were put to either the applicant or the building inspectors prior to the Board cutting off further oral testimony. In the event that expiration of a non-conforming use is the subject of a subsequent hearing or determination or proceeding, we will be prepared to address it at That time. 2 . The "observations" were not introduced at the hearing and are not based upon testimony at the hearing or detailed statements of information within the personal knowledge of individual board members. As such they are not properly part of the record and may not be relied upon. 3. Mr. Zahra is in Florida this week on vacation, so I have been unable to discuss the matter fully with him. However, I have been advised by Gail Wickham, who represented the North Fork Bank & Trust Company in the r purchase from Langer and the sale to Zahra, that she spoke to the Langer's daughter and was told that her family was actually living in the "upstairs apartment" and had been for some time. The Bank allowed the Langers and their family to remain in possession for several months after the Bank purchased the property. It is her recollection that the restaurant was closed before the apartment was vacated. As Gail and I are leaving today for a brief vacation, we have not had adequate time to ascertain the dates of these events, but in any event, this issue should not form the basis for your decision, in whole or in part. 4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and without waiving any such objection, we annex an affidavit from Bayne Midget, maintenance supervisor for North Fork Bank & Trust Co. demonstrating the existence of the upstairs apartment as a full dwelling unit. 5. Finally, we note that the gratuitous statements of the Building Inspectors concerning the type of construction are also not properly before the board, as such issues did not form the basis for the revocation. In any event their conclusions are not supported by fact and are erroneous under 9 NYCRR. In summary, because of the narrow scope of this appeal and the corresponding lack of notice and opportunity to be heard, as outlined. above, we urge the Board to resolve the appeal in favor of applicant on the bases presented to it by way of the notice of revocation. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric J. Bressler EJB:pmf enc. ,y. s § 100-141 SOUTHOLD CODE a � ? § ZONING § 100-144 ,q [1] New buildings and additions and al Where he finds that there has been any false statement or �) = existing buildings: one hundred dollars • `misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application, plus twenty cents($0.20)for each square ., plan or specifications on which the building permit was r p 1 floor area in excess of one thousand bued square feet. t; Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error [2] Accessory buildings and additions and end should not have been issued in accordance with the tions to existing accessory buildings; 'prplicable law. five dollars ($25.), plus fifteen cents each square foot of floor area in excess :Where he finds that the work performed under the permit ; hundred (500) square feet. 'h not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions ( of the application, plans or specification. d) Foundations constructed unde r existing ! seventy-five dollars ($75.). Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by (e) Swimming pools, together with required the Building Inspector. fencing: one hundred fifty dollars ($150.). (f) All other structures (i.e.. fences, etc.) and and alterations to such structures: tw 143. Stop orders. [Amended 8-26-76 by L.L. No. 3-19761 ; dollars ($25.). ver the Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to i '0 ! (g) Signs.the fee for all signs, i gns,except signs pe - that work on any building or structure is being prosecuted i § 100-30C(6)(a), shall be one dollar ($l.) tat` ' n of the provisions of the applicable law, ordinances or square foot of sign area, with a minimum ns, or not in conformity with the provisions of an ap- ' twenty-five dollars ($25.). plans or specifications on the basis of which a building 1 was issued,or in an unsafe and dangerous manner, he shall (h) Demolition and/or removal and/or relocation building ten dollars ($10.) minimum and the owner of the property, or the owner's agent or the ($0.05) for each square foot in excess I fd _ performing the.work, to suspend all work, and any such ! ;I hundred (300) square feet of floor area. � shall forthwith stop such work and suspend all building until the atop order has been rescinded. Such order and '! (2) For the purposes of this Subsection J. cellarm shall be in writing and shall state the conditions under attached garages and any habitable area b the work may be resumed, and may be served upon a person �! included in the calculation of floor area. it is directed either by delivering it personally to him or the same upon a conspicuous portion of the building construction and sending a copy of the same by certified ! ! § 100-142. Revocation of permit. The Building Inspector may revoke a building theretofore issued and approved in the following instanumm y 44. Certificates of occupancy. A certificate of occupancy shall be applied for from the Building Inspector and it shall be unlawful to do any of the 'following until a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor: ii ,D CODE ZONING § 100-144 'ram gs and additions and7� .`"� he finds that there has been any false statement or a dings: one hundred Presentation as to a material fact in the application, ! j rents($0.20)for each: or specifications on which the building permit was z excess of one f Y re he finds that the building permit was issued in error i — Adings and addi ' ` should not have been issued in accordance with the ting accessory b�l�'a ale law. i {� 25.). Plus fifteen ` : I f foot of floor area iA "` he finds that the work performed under the permit E t being Prosecuted in accordance with the provisions �) square feet. application, plans or specification. t 7_ �r, :the , ;tructed under ex' the person to whom a building permit has been I' rs ($75.). < } ed fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by together with requT 'Building Inspector. fired fifty dollars($1b0; _ res (i.e., fences, etc.) orders. (Amended 8.26-76 by L.L. No. 3.19761 to such structurem., Stop r the Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to i : ' work on any building or structure is being Prosecuted 11 signs,except signs hall be one dollar (_� . •n of the provisions of the applicable law, ordinances or gn area, with a mini , or not in conformity with the provisions of an ap- -s ($25.). i plans or specifications on the basis.of which a building >_ f issued,or in an unsafe and dangerous manner, he shall .r removal and/or rel property, I ti owner of the or the owner's agent or the ars ($10.) minimum a orming the work, to suspend all work, and any such ! square foot in ex forthwith stop such work and suspend all building uare feet of floor area i Y:imtil the atop order has been rescinded. Such order and this Subsection J, ce be in writing and shall state the conditions under �d any habitable ar, 4 work may be resumed,and may be served upon a person , Ltion of floor area it is directed either by delivering it personally to him or i the same upon a conspicuous portion of the building traction and sending a copy of the same by certified ay revoke a b d in the following — �, , Certificates of occupancy. certificate of occupancy shall be applied for from the ;I ■ ding Inspector and it shall be unlawful to do any of the bowing until a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor: )70 10071 a -:; "; ii ! 15AIA,d- k� A 1 • i ! i c h a. �r 100-118 I 1 ZONING § j I{ r onconforming uses. "? ise authorized as a special exception by the Board hereinafter provided, the following provisions shall pconforming uses* 1 �., I i � 1 es existing on the use of a building or premis I , 've date of this chapter or authorized by a building •t issued prior thereto may be continued although use does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, r such use may be extended throughout the building is y acquired to said date. 1 nconforming use of a building or premises maybe , d to a use of the same or higher classification ac. i to the provisions of this chapter. - ever a district shall hereafter be changed, any then ing nonconforming use of a building or premises in changed district may be continued or changed to a use similar or higher classification, provided that all other f� lations governing the use are complied with. never a nonconforming use of a building or premises been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) 5. s or has been changed to a higher classification or to a nforming use, anything in this section to the contrary 1 twithstanding, the nonconforming tedunle u of nless variance premises shall no longer p refor shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals, f hereinafter provided. _ ti nonconforming building may not be reconstructed or cturally altered during its life to an extent exceeding aggregate cost fifty percent(50%) of the fair value of the wilding, unless the use of such building is changed to a conforming use. i nonconforming building which has been damaged b=cfire 1 or other causes to the extent of more than fifty pe �60%)of its fair value shall not be repaired or rebuilt unless h building is changed to a conforming use. e use of such I i l I i 10053 z zs es ' I 3i a � 197e JULIUS 13LUMBERG, INC. • .0 ♦. STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss.: I, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State, ❑ Certification certify that the within By Attorney has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy. x m Attorney's state that I am R ❑ Affirmation the attorney(s) of record for in the within action; I have read the foregoing and know the contents thereof; the same is Cj true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The reason this verification is made by me and not by The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated-upon my own knowledge are as follows: I affirm that the foregoing statements are true, under the penalties of perjury. Dated: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The name signed must be printed beneath STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF t3T3"014M ss.: I, i di S 4 being sworn, say: I am E3 F@t$ 1JYlt T' In m t�e witt action; I have read the foregoing m Verification itt�Ect1 and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the ma ters t erein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. n a Corporate the of ❑ Verification a corporation and a party in the within action; I have read the foregoing and know the contents thereof; and the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein.stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters-I believe it to be true. This verification is made by me because the above party is a corporation and I am an officer thereof. The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: Sworn to before me on 19 ------- ------- F The names ed must be printed beneath Kx. t' 10 ELL • Pubft State Suffolk co ntv I aA1 2I t zlota'Y P 1t �p{pptiif ExDlrea July T STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss.: (If both boxes are checked—indicate after names,type of service used.) I, being sworn, say; I am not a party to the action, am over 18;years of age and reside at On 19 I served the within o ❑ service by depositing a true copy thereof enclosed in a post-paid wrapper, in an official depository under the exclusive care m By Mail and custody of the U.S. Postal Service within New York State, addressed to each of the following persons,at the.last known address set forth after each name: Personal by delivering a true copy thereof personally to each person named below at the address indicated. I knew each person y ❑ service on served to be the person mentioned and described in said papers as a party therein: Individual ca Sworn to before me on 19 -----------------------------------------------------........................... The name signed must be printed beneath _i � } NOTICE OF ENTRY Index No. Year 19 Sir:-Please take notice that the within is a(certified) IIRR.!.aE C 11.I UF RE ',MPAT 07 NEW YORK- true copy of a t..a,..•Y rtit SUp,37 O t duly entered in the office of the clerk of the within named court on 19 xt The XdWar of tham '91iCV-t30a O Dated, Yours,etc., WICKHAM, WICKHAM&BRESSLER,P.C. tNOFa �e Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address For a Jua,'gmaat i�'13Zfgttaat to t MAIN ROAD,P.O.Box 1424 MMUR 7a� of t 46 `L MATTITUCK,NEW YORK 1 1952 To Attorney(s)for Onl? aitF4w C'&USA+ - NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT Sir:-Please take notice that an order Mid of which the within is a true copy will be presented for settlement to the Hon. WICKHAM, WICKHAM&BRESSLEA,P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner one of the judges of the within named Court, at " Office and Post Office Address, Telephone on 19 MAIN ROAD, P.O.Box 1424 � at M. MATTITUCK,NEW YORK 11952 Dated, (516)298-8353 Yours,etc.,. WICKHAM, WICKHAM&BRESSLER,P.C. To Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address Attorney(s)for MAIN ROAD, P.O. Box 1424 '�. MATTITUCK,NEW YORK 11952 Service of a copy of the within is hereby admitted. Dated, c To Attorney(s)for Attorney(s)for 39OG—JULIUS BLUMBERG.INC..LAW BLANK PUBLISHERS.NYC 10013 !I JAMES A.SCHONDEBARE Lnc ;` '"'� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road t �� TOWN ATTORNEY O P.O. Box 1179 �'A S Southold, New York 11971 ROBERT H.BERNTSSON a TELEPHONE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY ($16)76$-1939 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY IX0 �/� TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Ui a1 g y t�ssis � �tc:..;� .�lu To: All Departments From: James A. Schondebare, Town Attorney Date: February 2, 1989 Re: Pending Applications vis-a-vie updated Zoning Code As you are aware, all departments are operating under the updated zoning code. The question has risen concerning pending applications and processing of some under the new code. It would be the recommendation of this office that where the applicant meets the requirements of the new code but the relief request refers to the old code section then, and in that case, the application should continue to be processed by the department with an amendment to. reflect the correct section under the new code. It would not be necessary to return any. such application. Where however, the application while meeting the requirement of the old code does not now meet the requirement of the new code then, 'such applications should be returned. Each application should be viewed on its own merits, and common sense should apply. If a single adjustment or change to the application can be made in order to have it comply with the new code, then it would not be necessary, and only fair, to make the change rather than force the applicant to begin anew. No change or amendment to any application should be made without first obtaining the consent of the applicant. JAS:kjp JAMES A.SCHONDEBARE a ' fi E Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN ATTORNEY P.O. Box 1179 � �` Southold, New York 11971 ROBERT H.BERNTSSON TELEPHONE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY (516)765-1939 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 12, 1989AIJ— h Frank A. Isler Smith, Finkelstein, Lundberg, Isler and Yakaboski P.O. Box 389 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Article 78 Charles Zahra, v. Southold Town Board of Appeals (Coffee Pot) Index No. 88-7725 Dear Mr. Isler: We have received an inquire from the Building Department as to the status of this matter. Evidently, the building permit has expired, but on the other hand, they still have Justice Tanenbaum's order allowing them to proceed. In addition, it is my recollection that the Zoning Board of Appeals was to hold a hearing on certain aspects of the project. I would request you contact the Building Department and if necessary -- — the Zoning Board Appeals to establish if. everyone is doing what they are supposed to. If you have any question, please call. Very truly yours, James A. Schondebare Town Attorney JAS:mis cc: Building Department / Zoning Board of Appeals ell 1 15. r Article IX is repealed and a new Article IX is added in its place,as follows: to provide ARTICLE Hamlet Business (HB) District Section 100-90, Pur ose. The purpose of.the Hamlet Business HB evelooment in theTrtclet central business erreas,t �ncludrn retail, Is to provide for business service uses, Public and semi- public uses, as well as ote! and motel and multi- - d amr y residential development [hat will su and Provide a focus for the Hamlet area, port and anhance the retail development Section 100-91. Use re ulations In a HB District, no buildin o a buildin or remises shall be used, and no building or shall be erected or altered which is arran to be used, in whole or in Part art, for an ed. intended or desi ned uses except the following: � A. Permitted uses, - � (5) An permitted use set forth in and re and (3) of the q ricultural qulated by Section 100-31q Conservation District. (1) (21 Ate_ Deuced uses as set forth in and as requlated b 42A (2) ��_ by Section Of the Hamlet Residentialial Dr rs rcrs rct— (5) Boardin houses and tourist homes. (4) Business, professional and governmental offices. (5) Banks and financial institutions. a (5) Retail stores. (7) Restaurants, excludin drive-in restaurants. (8) Bakeshogs (for on retail sale). (9) Personal service stores and shoos arlor, rofes , including barber shoo, psional stugr genc os and trove a beauty y. (101 Art, anti ue and auction galleries. (11) Artists' and craftsmen's workshops. (12) Auditorium or meeting hall. (131 Repair shoos for household, business or cabinet shoos, carpenter shoos Per,—oval ao urniture r . electrical plrances, including epair shops and bicycle and silo°s• plurTrv�n motorcvcie shoo., g moos, ( 14) Custom works.hoos. (151 Bus or train F stations. (16) Theaters or cinemas (other than outdoor) (17) Libraries or rnuseums (18) Laundromat _39_ - =s 26. Chapter 100 is amended by adding a new.Article thereto, to be Article XXIV, to provide as follows: ARTICLE XXIV {.:. Nonconforming Uses and Buildings Section 100-240. Purpose, The purpose of this article is to reduce or minimize impacts of: uses and i uil in s which do not conform to the use or bulk requirements set forth in this chapter; all.uses an buildings that become nonconforminq by reason ! of any subsequent amendment to this chapter; and all buildings containing nonconforming uses. .. Section 100-241. Nonconforming uses. Except as provided hereinafter, nonconforming use of buildings or open land existing on the effective date of this.chapter or authorized by a buildinq permit issued prior thereto, regard]ess of change of title, ion or occupancy-or-right thereof, may be continued indefinitely, except that such building or use: A. Shall not be enlarged, altered, extended, reconstructed, or restored or placed on a different portion of the lot or arcel of land occupied b such use on the effective date of this chapter, nor shall any external evidence of such use be increased by any means whatsoever. B. Shall not be moved to another location where such use would be i nonconforminq. . C. Shall not be changed to another nonconforminq use without approval by the Board of A peals and then only a use which, in the opinion Z' ot. the said Board, is of the same or of a more restrictive nature. D. Shall not be changed back to a less restrictive use, if changed to a more 1 restrictive nonconforminq use. E. Shall not be re-established if such use has been changed to, or replaced by, a conforming use. F. Shall not be repaired or rebuilt unless the use is changed to a conforming use if the nonconforming use is amazed by fire or other causes to the extents 50% of its fair value. G. Whenever a nonconforming use o'f a building or premises has been discontinued fora period of more than two 2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a con orminq use, anythinq in j t is article to the contra y otwithstan ing, the nonconforming use of such building or premises s al no longer be permitted unless a v�a,,, i therefor shall have been granted by the Boar of ppeals. i Section 100-242. Nonconforming buildings with conforming uses. A. Nothing in this article shall be deemed to prevent the remodeling, reconstruction or enlargement o a no-neon orminq building containing a conforming use provide that. such action does not create any new nonconrormance or increase the degree Of nonconformance with regard to the regulations•pertaining to=Lich buildinis. B. Reconstruction of a damaged buildinq. nonconforminq building containing a coilfnrmi ,(I use which his -90- 1 been dama ed b fire or other causes to the extent of more Than SOo of its fair value shall not,be repaired or rebu It unless such burl ing is made substantially to conform to the r.:. e_ fight and yard requirements oft a 13u1k Schedule 2• Application for a permit to build or restore the clam oa ed I;ortion an building, damaged or estro ed as set forth in subsection 1J above, shall be file within one ear o the date of such t an.ac , and Shall be acci)1111-1a I I IeE by pans or reconstruction which, as to such ortion, shall com I with the rec urrement> Set ort above. I sue permit Is Issue it sha lapse one year I therea ter unless reconstruction in actor ance with the a� roved p ans has been Initiated Section 100-243. Nonconforming buildings with nonconforminc uses A. A nonconformin I building containing a nonconforming use shall not be entar ed reconstructed or structural) altered or moved, un e[s the - - use o such building is chana"Ll to a con orming use B. A nonconforming-building containing a conforming use which has been a+ama ea o fire or other causes to thtent of athan Sll' of Its airvalue shall not be re afire or reunless the use of Such buildin Is changed to a con orminq use i Section 100-244. Nonconformin lots. A. This subsection is intended to 'provide minimum standards for rantin of a buildin Hermit for lots made nont —Coo 2--ormin or continued in a state of non-conformance b the ado tion of this Local Law and that were sin ly i and separatel owned as of -the effective date of this Loca— d B. A nonconforming lot separately owned and not adjoinincr an lot or land in the same ownership at the effective date of this Local Law and not ad oinin anv lot or land in the same owners hi at any time subse uent to such date may be used, or a buildin or structure may be erected on such lot for use in accordance with all the other a licable rovisions of this =thatLoca1 Law roof of such se crate ownershi is submittedyined . the form of an abstract of title showing the chances of title to said lot which abstract shall be in the usual form shall be certified b re ularl doin an attorne or a tom anv such work in Suffolk Count or by a cor ration dui licensed to examine and insure title to real ro ert in Suffolk Count certification that no contiguous and shall contain a an owner of the ro erty involved sincettheadatenof abw nv reviousl a licable Zonin Law. Such lot shall he ranted relief for front side and rear and dimensions asas follow,. . L L L -90(a)- I SMITH, FINKELSTEIN, LUNDBERG, ISLER AND YAKABOSKI ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELOBS AT LAW 456 GRIFFING AVENUE,CORNER OF LINCOLN STREET P.O. BOX 389 HOWARD M.FINKELSTEIN RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901 PIERRE G.LUNDBERG FRANCIS J.YAKABOSKI FRANK A.ISLES (51G). 727-4100 REGINALD C.SMITH SUSAN POST ROGERS FAX (516) 727-4130 1926-1983 GAIR G. BETTS November 21 , 1988 /P Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Zahra v. Southold Town Board of Appeals Dear Gerry: Enclosed please find a copy of the Court' s decision which reinstates the building permit and remands the proceeding for a hearing on the issue of the nonconforming status of the second floor apartment. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to -` call. Ver ruly yours, r FRANK A. ISLER FAI :knm Enc. INDEX # 7725-88 MEMORANDUM r SUPREME COURT SUFFOLK COUNTY TRIAL TERM, PART XIII 7. In the Matter of the 1.pplicationBY Tanenbaum J. S. C. of CHARLES ZAHRA, Petitioner, DATED November 17,19 88 For a Judgment Pursuant to Article 78 of the C.P.L.R. -against- SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondent. WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. SMITH,FINKELSTEIN,LUNDBERG, Attorneys for Petitioner ISLER & YAKABOSKI, ESQS. Main Road, POB 1424 Attorneys for Respondent Mattituck, New York 11952 456 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 This proceeding brought pursuant to C.P.L.R. Article 78 seeking a judgment annulling the decision of respondent, SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, which affirmed the revocation of petitioner' s building permit, and enjoining respondent from conducting a further hearing on the matter is determined as follows: Petitioner purchased "The Coffee Pot", a two story building in Mattituck consisting of a restaurant and a second floor apartment located in the General Business Zoning District. The sale was contingent on petitioner obtaining a building permit to renovate the. entire building and to add to the restaurant. The restaurant was a . conforming use in the district, whereas the apartment was a valid non-conforming use. Petitioner was issued a building permit in October,. 1986 and 1 began renovations in the spring of 1987 . Petitioner substantially re-built the first floor restaurant. Sometime in June, 1987, petitioner began work on the second floor. Upon the Town Building Department' s discovery that petitioner had removed the entire second floor of the building, a stop work order was issued. On November 5, 1987 the Town Building Department summarily revoked petitioner' s building permit citing as reasons, petitioner was "not following plans" and "did not comply with (a) stop work order" . Petitioner appealed this order to respondent Board of Appeals. Hearings were convened on February 18, 1988, March 3, 1988 and March 17, 1988. Testifying during the hearing were town building r 1. .. r Page #2 _. - ZAHRA v. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS INDEX #7725-88 inspectors, Lessard and Horton, and petitioner. Respondent Board also made a personal inspection of the building and personally interviewed family members of the prior owners. By decision dated April 14, 1988 respondent, BOARD, set the matter down for a further hearing to consider issues dealing with the non-conforming use (i.e. the apartment) and possible violations of the Zoning Code Sec.100.-118 & 100-118 (1) . Petitioner now seeks to enjoin respondent from conducting a further hearing and to annul respondent' s decision to continue revocation of the building permit. A determination by a Town Board of Appeals, to revoke a building permit is reviewable in an Article 78 proceeding (LEMP v. TOWN BOARD OF TOWN OF ISLIP, 90 Misc 2d 360, 394 N.Y.S. 2d 517 (Sup.Ct. ,Suff.Co. , 1977 ) ; BUSH v. TOWN BOARD OF TOWN OF MORILLA, 71 Misc . 2d 72, 335 N.Y.S. 2d 677 (Sup.Ct. , Erie Co. , 1972) ) . Decisions of the zoning board will be sustained if it has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence (NEWMAN v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF TOWN OF YORKTOWN, 121 A.D. 2d 543 503 N.Y.S. 2d 601, appeal denied 68 N.Y. 2d 610 (1986) ) . This proceeding involves two distinct, narrowly drawn issues, namely: (1) whether the respondent Board' s affirmance of the building permit revocation was rationally based and supported by substantial evidence in the record, and (2) whether petitioner can continue to use the second floor apartment as a non-conforming use. With respect to revoking the permit, the hearing evidence failed to sustain respondent' s finding that petitioner exceeded the plans submitted. The undisputed evidence showed that petitioner made . efforts to renovate and add- to the building in a sound, workmanlike manner in accordance with the plans submitted to the Town. Inspector Horton verified the extent to which petitioner cooperated with the building department by adding a fire wall when requested, by installing a foundation and by reinforcing the deteriorated wooden structure to conform to the Building Code. Moreover, the testimony of the building department inspectors clearly failed to provide substantial evidence that petitioner exceeded the plans submitted. Whereas both inspectors admitted to -inspecting the job site during petitioner' s renovation of the first floor, neither sought to prevent him, by stopwork order or otherwise, from restructuring the -restaurant. Nor could either man testify whether the plans submitted called for a new or replacement roof on the second floor, a factor clearly relevant to reconstructing the A . W ;I Page #3 ZAHRA v. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS INDEX #7725-88 the second floor apartment Perhaps best exemplifying the lack of substantial evidence in this- record was the language of the respondent, BOARD' s decision wherein it stated in pertinent part: "7. Based on the facts in the record it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in -excess of the plans sub- mitted to the Building Department . . . . t- 8 Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans sub- mitted, the facts- before the Board raise serious other issues. . . " . , (emphasis supplied) The Court finds therefore that respondent BOARD has abused its discretion by affirming the revocation of the building permit. The record below is not supported by substantial evidence sufficient to establish a rational basis for the BOARD' s decision. This is especially so, where the actions by respondent BOARD have not only prevented petitioner from completing construction of the building but in so doing have effectively prevented him from conducting his restaurant business - a use conforming to the zoned district. Under these circumstances the BOARD' s determination was clearly an abuse of discretion (MATTER OF FUREY v. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, 105 A.D. 2d 41, 482 N.Y.S. . 2d 788 (2nd Dept. , 1984) ) . With respect to the determination of whether petitioner can continue to use the second floor apartment as a non-conforming use, the matter must be remanded to the respondent BOARD for a hearing since the record below affords this Court no basis to evaluate the factual circumstances necessary to make a proper determination. Accordingly, the petition is granted. solely to the extent that the Court directs that building permit #154282 is hereby reinstated and petitioner shall be permitted to complete the renovations to the subject building in accordance with plans previously submitted and the New York State Building Code. The petition is denied and the matter is remanded to the respondent BOARD OF APPEALS for a hearing concerning the status of the second floor apartment as a non-conforming use. SO ORDERED. J.S.C. INTER-OFFICE MEMO FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE v - FROM: Robert H. Berntsson, Assistant Town Attorney DATE: REF: 70. rc` I . S . T 4 IIMEX # 7725-98 •" MEMORANDUM SUPREME COURT, SUFFOLK COUNTY TRIAL TERN, PART RIII In the Matter of the I.pplication13Y Tanenbaum J. S. C. of CHARLES ZAHRA, Petitioner, DATEDNovember 17,19 88 For a Judgment Pursuant to Article 78 of the C.P.L.R. -against- SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondent. WICKHAM, WICKHAM 8 BRESSLER, P.C. SMITH,FINKELSTEIN,LUNDBERG, Attorneys for Petitioner ISLER 8 YAKABOSKI, ESQS. Main Road, POB 1424 Attorneys for Respondent - - Mattituck, New York 11952 456 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, New York 11901 This proceeding brought pursuant to C.P,,L.R. Article 70 seeking a judgment annulling the decision of respondent, SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, which affirmed the revocation of petitioner's building permit, and enjoining respondent from conducting a further hearing on the matter is determined as follows: Petitioner purchased "The Coffee Pot", a two story building in Mattituck consisting of-a restaurant and a second floor apartment located in the General Business Zoning District. The sale was contingent on petitioner obtaining a building permit to renovate the entire building and to add to the restaurant. The restaurant was a conforming use in the district, whereas the apartment was a valid non-conforming use. Petitioner was issued a building permit in October, 1986 and began renovations in the spring of 1987. Petitioner substantially re-built the first floor restaur.nt. Somctime in June, 1987, petitioner began work on the -second floor. Upon the Town Building Department's discovery that petitioner had removed the entire second floor of the building, a stop work order was issued. On November 5, 1987 the Town Building Department summarily revoked petitioner's building permit citing as reasons, petitioner was "not following plans" and "did not comply with (a) stop work order". Petitioner appealed this order to respondent Board of Appeals. Hearings were convened on February 18, 1988, March 3, 1988 and March 17, 1988. Testifying during the hearing were town building Page #2 ZAHRA v. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS INDEX 17725-88 inspectors, Lessard and-Horton, and petitioner. Respondent Board also made a personal inspection of the building and personally interviewed family members of the prior owners. By decision dated April 14, 1988 respondent, BOARD, set the matter down for a further hearing to consider issues dealing with the non-conforming use (i.e. the apartment) and possible violations of 'the Zoning Code Sec.100-118 a 100-118 (1) . Petitioner now seeks to enjoin respondent from conducting a further hearing and to annul respondent's decision to continue revocation of the.,building permit. A determination by a Town Board of Appeals, to revoke a building permit is reviewable in an Article 78 proceeding (LEMP v. TOWN BOARD OF TOWN OF ISLIP, 90 Misc 2d 360, 394 N.Y.S. 2d 53'1- up,Ct. , u .Co. , , BUSH v. TOWN BOARD OF TOWN OF MORILLA, 71- Misc 2d 72, 335 N.Y.S. 2d 317-(Sup.Ct. , Er le Co. , . Decisions- of the zoning board will be sustained if it has a rational basis and is supported by substantial evidence (NEWMAN v. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF. TOWN OF YORKTOWN, 121 A.D. 2d 54T—,, -3U N. (.S. 2d 601, appeal. denied u N.Y. This proceeding involves two distinct, narrowly drawn issues, namely: (1 ). whether the respondent Board's affirmance of the building permit revocation was rationally based and supported by substantial evidence in the record, and (2) whether petitioner can continue to use the second floor apartment as a non-conforming use. With respect to revoking the permit, the hearing evidence failed to sustain respondent's finding that petitioner exceeded the plans submitted. The undisputed evidence showed that petitioner made efforts to renovate and add to the building in a sound, workmanlike manner in accordance with the plans submitted to the Town. Inspector Horton verified the extent to which petitioner cooperated with the building department by adding a fire wall when requested, by installing a foundation and by reinforcing the deteriorated wooden r structure to conform to the Building Code. Moreover, the testimony of the building department inspectors clearly failed to provide substantial evidence that petitioner exceeded the plans submitted. Whereas both inspectors admitted to inspecting the job site during petitioner's renovation of the first floor, neither sought to prevent him, by stopwork order or otherwise, from restructuring the -restaurant. Nor could either man testify whether the plans submitted called for a new or replacement roof on the second floor, a factor clearly relevant to reconstructing the Page #3 ZAHRA v. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS INDEX #7725-88 the second floor apartment Perhaps best exemplifying the lack of substantial evidence in this record was the language of the respondent, BOARD's decision wherein it stated in pertinent part: "7. Based on the facts in the record it a ears that the applicant proceeded wit wort in excess of the plans sub- mitted to the Building Department 8 Irrespective of whether the actual construction tom a wit ans - m e (emphasis t e acts a ore t o Boar . serious other issues. . . "� raise — asis supplied) The Court finds therefore that respondent BOARD has abused its discretion by affirming the revocation of the building record hal`w ig ilot Su y establish a rational basis�forbtheuBOARD'sadecisience sufficientFtoT�p especially so�. on. This is where the actions by respondent BOARD have not onl prevented petitioner from completing construction of the build in so doing have effective) y restaurant business y Prevented him from conducting his but these circumstances the BOARD,sfdetermination ormin to the zoned district. Under discretion (MATTER OF FUREY v clearly an abuse of N•Y•S• 2d 78 COUNTY OF SUFFOLKv 105 A.D. 2d 41, 482 �' n Dept., 984) . With respect to the determination of whether petitioner can continue to use the second floor apartment as a the matter must be remanded to the respondent BOARD for a hearing • since the record below affords this Court no basis to evaluate the on-conforming use, factual circumstances necessary to make a proper determination. that the CourtAccorddirectsinglYt the petition is granted solely to the extent reinstated and petitioner shall be permittedermit #to4 compis lete ethby renovations to the subject building in accordance with s previously submitted and the New York State Buildingplans petition is denied and the matter is remanded to the reese' The OF APPEALS for a hearing concerning the status of the second floor apartment as a non-conforming use. Pondent BOARD SO ORDERED. B 399—Ralwo for Odkisl ho-nation,22 NYCRR M4.16-K. JULIUS BLUMBERG. INC.. PUSLISN[R ' 62 MMIr[STRCCr.Ncw YoRK.N.Y.10013 p For Clerk Only SUPREME Court, SUFFOLK County Index No. —?7 2. Full title of action Date Purchased In the Matter of the Application of R.J.I . FEE PA" CHARLES ZAHRA, IAS entry date MAY 10 198' far' . :'::'J Name of assigned judge s,O►.1��i ..i. REQUEST FOR tX JUDICIAL Petitioner(s) ...............•------..............------.....--------...------------ against INTERVENTION Date of assignment THE- SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, ❑ Issue joined (date............................................................ ) (check if applicable) ❑ Bill of particulars served (check if applicable) In the City of New York only: ❑ The City of New York is a party to this action. ❑ The Transit Authority'(or MABSTOA) is a party to this action. Respondent(s) NATURE OF JUDICIAL INTERVENTION (check) ❑ Request for preliminary conference ❑ Other ex pane application ❑ Note of issue and,or certificate of readiness ❑ Notice of petition (return date................................................................) ❑ Notice of motion (return date ..................................:.............................) Relief sought ---------......------.................--------..................-------------------------------------- Relief sought ...................................................................................................... --------------------:----------------------.......----........------------------------------. .................................................................................................................................. --------------------------------...............................................------------..................-----------•--------- .................................................................................................................................. ❑ Notice of medical malpractice action KI Order to show cause ❑ Notice of dental malpractice action (Clerk will enter return date ...................................................:................) ❑ Statement of net worth Relief sought ......... rohibition...............:............................................ ❑ Writ of habeas corpus ....... .. ................•-----................................. ❑ Other(specify):------------------------------....------..........---..........----•----.....--------------------- .................................................................................................................................. ............................................--------...............------------...................................---...........-- NATURE OF ACTION OR PROCEEDING (check) Tort Special Proceedings ❑ Motor vehicle ❑ Tax certiorari ❑ Medical malpractice 0 Condemnation ❑ Dental malpractice ❑ Foreclosure ❑ Seaman ❑ Incompetency or conservatorship ❑ Airline Other special proceeding, including but not limited to: ❑ Other tort, including but not limited to personal injury, ❑ Article 75 (arbitration) property damage,slander or libel (specify): ..................................... ❑ Article 77 (express trusts) 19c Article 78 .................................................................................................................................. ❑ Other(specify):............................................................................................ OTHER ACTION ❑ Matrimonial(contested) ❑ Contract ❑ Matrimonial (uncontested) ❑ Other(specify):.................................................................................................. Instructions: Attach rider sheets if necessary to provide required information. If any party is appearing pro se (without an attorney), the required information concerning such party is to be entered in the space provided for attorneys. Attorney(s) for plaintiff(s)/petitioner(s) Name Address Phone ERIC J. BRESSLER, ESQ. MAIN ROAD, P.O. Box 1424 516-298-8353 WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. MATTITUCK, NY 11952 Attorney(s)for defendant(s)/respondent(s) Name Address Phone Name of insurance carriers(if applicable and available) RELATED CASES(if none,write"NONE"below) Title Index## Court Nature of relationship I affirm under penalty of perjury that,to my knowledge,other than as noted above,there are and have been no related actions or proceedings,nor has a request for judical intervention previously been filed in this action or proceeding. Dated:.......May 10, .1988 ---•--•--- ----•- .......... Signature—type name low. WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. ERIC J. BRES ER,P.C. Attorneys)for Petitioner Office dt P.O.Address Main Road, P.O. Bob 1424, Mat)tituck, NY' 11952 At a Special Term, Part of the Supreme Court o the State of New York, County of Suffolk, held at the Courthouse, Griffing Avenue, Riverhead, New York, on /Olk May 1988. P R E S E N T HON• DANIEC F:LUCIANO Justice. ----------------------------------------X In the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA, Petitioner, INDEX NO.(�—7� L For a Judgment Pursuant to ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Article 78 of the CPLR -against- SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondent. ----------------------------------------X Upon the annexed petition of the petitioner, Charles Zahra, verified on the loth day of May, 1988,and the exhibits annexed thereto, and upon all the proceedings had before the respondent Southold Town Board of Appeals, in the matter of appeal number 3701, it is ORDERED that the respondent, Southold Town Board of Appeals, show cause before this Court atn SFAS a? n Pato�be held at the Courthouse on Griffing Avenue, Riverhead, New York on the,,q("day of May, 1988, at 9: 30 o'clock in the forenoon, or as soon I� thereafter as counsel may be hear, why judgment should not be made and entered pursuant to CPLR Article 78 as follows: (1) annulling and setting aside Respondent's determination of April 14, 1988 setting Petitioner's application (Appeal No. 3701) down for further hearing as being arbitrary and capricious and constituting an abuse of discretion and in excess of its jurisdiction, (2) granting the relief sought by Petitioner before the Respondent: reversing the determination of the Building Inspector in his revocation of Building Permit # 15428Z issued October 27, 1986, (3) prohibiting Respondent from conducting further hearings on Appeal No. 3701 as in excess of Respondents' jurisdiction, (4) pending the hearing and determination of this proceeding, enjoining Respondent from conducting a further hearing on Appeal No. 3701, and (5) granting the Petitioner such other and further relief as to this Court may seem just and proper, and .it is further 1 ORDERED, t pending the heari n eterminatio is V r ' proc edi Respondent be ereby is enjoi d restrained om hold' furthe hear' son Appeal and it urth;� ORDERED, that sufficient reason appearing therefor, service of a copy of this order together with papers on which it was granted, upon Respondent in accordance with CPLR 312 on or before the 12th day of May, 1988, be deemed good and sufficient service. DANIE. F:LUCIANO GRANTED J.S.C. , s MAY 10 M8 Juliette A. hm.sella Clerk of Suffolk County SUPREME COURT OF THE -STATE OF, NEW„ YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ----------------------------------------X In the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA, Petitioner, INDEX NO. For a Judgment Pursuant to VERIFIED PETITION Article 78 of the CPLR -against- SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, Respondent. ----------------------------------------X TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, SUFFOLK COUNTY: The Petition of Charles J. Zahra, respectfully shows: 1. Respondent at all times mentioned was and is the Southold Town Board of Appeals, duly established pursuant to Town Law Section 267 of which board Gerard P. Geohringer is and was at all times chairman. 2. - Petitioner is an owner of real property with the building thereon situated at 140 Pike Street, Mattituck, Suffolk County, New York, more fully described in Schedule A attached hereto. 3. In March, 1986, Petitioner entered into an agreement to purchase the premises described in Schedule A. The agreement was contingent upon Petitioner obtaining a building permit for renovation of the premises. 4. At the time Petitioner entered into the agreement there was located on said premises a two story building used as a restaurant on the first floor and an apartment on the second floor. A copy of the certificate of occupancy is annexed as Exhibit A. 5. On October 27, 1986, a building permit was issued to Petitioner to "renovate and addition [sic] an existing restaurant as applied for" pursuant to an application for same dated June 19, 1986, copy annexed as Exhibit B. 6. On November 20, 1986 Petitioner came into title of the premises in reliance upon the aforesaid certificate of occupancy and building permit. 7. Thereafter Petitioner entered upon the premises and commenced the renovation and addition to the building on the premises in accordance with the plans and the building permit. 8. On or about September 22, 1987, the Building Department of the Town of Southold issued an "order to remedy violation" with respect to the premises. Copy annexed as Exhibit C. 9. On or about September 23, 1987, the Building Department of the Town of Southold served Petitioner with an appearance ticket returnable in the Southold Town Justice Court alleging a violation of Chapter 100, Article XV, Section 100-143 of the Southold Town Code, copy annexed as Exhibit D. 10. On October 30, 1987, the aforementioned criminal proceeding against Petitioner was dismissed. 11. On or about November 5, 1987, the Building Department of the Town of Southold issued to Petitioner an "order to remedy violation" revoking the building permit previously issued with respect to the premises, copy annexed as Exhibit E. { The stated basis for..the revocation was "not following plans, did not comply with stop work order". 12. On or about December 1, 1987,. Petitioner did appeal and make application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals to reverse the determination of Building Department as aforesaid, copy of application annexed as Exhibit F. 13. The application and appeal was designated by Respondent upon its calendar as No. 3701 and was heard by said Respondent at hearings on February 18, 1987, March 3, 1987, and March 17, 1987. Prior to the March 17th date the Respondent introduced its own "observations" as part of the record. Copy annexed as Exhibit G. Petitioner responded in writing to these "observations" (See Exhibit J below) . Upon such final date the hearing was closed.; 14. After such hearing and on April 14, 1988, the Respondent rendered its decision in which it failed-to address the issues before it under Southold Town Code Sections 100-142 C,D, as set forth in the determination of the Building Inspector. `a Copy of decision is annexed as Exhibit H. Rather, Respondent set the matter down for a further hearing on May 12, 1988 on issues raised sua snonte by Respondent allegedly pursuant to Southold Town Code Sections 100-118 D, E, dealing with non-conforming uses. Such decision was filed in the Southold Town Clerk's Office on April 15, 1988. 15. The aforesaid determination of the Respondent was arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion in that it: (a) failed to address the issues before it. The only issues before Respondent were alleged violations by Petitioner of Southold Town Code Sections 100-142 C, D. (b) improperly set the matter down for a further hearing on issues not before it. Alleged violations of Southold Town Code Sections 100-118 D, E are not and were not properly before Respondent. These sections deal with the duration and extent of a non-conforming use, not the revocation of a building permit pursuant to 100-142 C & D. The Respondent has appellate jurisdiction only, not original jurisdiction and cannot render decisions except upon review of issues raised by the Building Inspector. (c) improperly attributed the need for a further hearing to an alleged request by Petitioner when, in fact, no such request was made. Annexed hereto as Exhibit J is -a letter from Petitioner's Counsel to Respondent specifically advising Respondent to "stick to the issues". No request for further hearing was made. 16. Respondent is proceeding and is about to proceed further without and in excess of its jurisdiction in that the issues sought to be addressed by Respondent under Southold Town Code Sections 100-118 D & E were not the subject of the Building Inspector's determination and, therefore, are not properly before the Respondent. Respondent's jurisdiction extends only to appellate review of the Building Inspector's determinations, not to issues raised de novo at the Board of Appeals level. 17. The evidence addressed at the hearing demonstrates that Petitioner is entitled to the relief as requested. Neither ground for revocation of the building permit asserted by the Building Inspector is supported by the evidence on the record: (a) Southold Town Code Section 100-142 D permits revocation where a stop work order is not obeyed. Even a cursory review of the alleged stop work order in this case reveals that it was issued with respect to the wrong property i.e. 1830 Pike Street, not 140 Pike Street, and that it fails to comply with the Southold Town Code as to substance, to wit: it fails to contain a statement of conditions under which work may be remedied. Moreover, there is no evidence on the record that the stop work was in part, violated. Copy of relevant Code Sections annexed as Exhibit K. (b) Southold Town Code Section 100-142 C permits revocation where the work being performed is not in accordance with plans. There is no evidence on the record that the work was not being performed in accordance with plans. 18. Petitioner will be irreparably injured unless Respondent is enjoined from its, totally illegal and arbitrary attempt to assert original jurisdiction over on as yet unalleged violation. Petitioner has completed the hearing process and is entitled to a decision thereon within 60 days of the closure of the hearing. There is no provision in law for reopening the hearing in the manner assured by Respondent. Petitioner's premises stand in a semi-constructed status open to the elements and deteriorating daily to Petitioner's detriment. To subject Petitioner to such a perversion of the administrative process without jurisdiction would cause undue hardship and expenses and would legitimate the illegal usurpation of power by Respondent. 19. No prior application for the relief sough herein has been made. Petitioner has no other adequate remedy at law to redress the wrongs complained of herein. WHEREFORE, Petitioner prays that judgment be granted herein: 1) reversing, annulling and setting aside the Order made by Respondent on April 14, 1988; 2) granting Petitioner the relief sought in his appeal to Respondent; 3) prohibiting Respondent from conducting any further hearings in this matter; 4) pending the hearing and determination of this proceeding enjoining Respondent from conducting any further hearing on Appeal No. 3701, and; 5) granting Petitioner such other and further relief as is just and proper. Dated: Mattituck, New York May 10, 1988 WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner 10315 Main Road, P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, New York 11952 (516) 298-8353 SCHEDULE A ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements thereon'erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a concrete monument set on the southerly side of Pike Street at the northwest corner of the premises herein described adjoining land of late of George P. Bergmann 'on the West, said monument being 140 feet as measured along the southerly side of Pike Street East from its intersection with the easterly side of Westphalia Avenue, from said monument of beginning: RUNNING THENCE along the southerly side of Pike Street, North 56 degrees 39 feet 50 minutes East 40.0 feet to a cross cut in the concrete and land of Conklin; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Conklin and land of Estate of George H. Riley South 29 degrees 36 feet 10 minutes East 95.0 feet to a concrete monument and land of Estate of George H. Reilly; RUNNING THENCE along said land of Riley, South 56 degrees 39 feet 50 minutes West 40.0 feet to a monument and land of late of George P. Bergmann; RUNNING THENCE along said land late of Bergmann, North 29 degrees 36 feet and 10 minutes West 95.0 feet to the concrete monument and place of BEGINNING. BEING and intended to be the same premises conveyed to the party of the first part by deed dated 7/6/84, recorded 7/10/84 in Liber 9597, Page 155. WORM no, 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk'• Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. .Z8935. . . . . Date - XOruary. . . . . . . . . . . . THIS CERTIFIES that the building at located 4 P • , 19. .78 .1 . p. . .��Ce„S t.. . . . . . . Street Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . Block No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated . . .Maroll . . . • 8 . . . . . . .. 1977. . pursuant to which Building0 dated . . . � Permit No.•9. ,7,4Z, , 1 arch. . . .6 . . . . . . . .. 19. .7.7, was issued and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate Is Issued Is . . .Restaurant .&. Apartinexi.t • , , , , , . . . TA4 certificate is issued to . . . . . . . . .JOSeAh.Laxtge�. , . , , , , , • .. . , . ' . .. .. . . . of the aforesaid building. (owner, , Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . , . . , NiR . , , , ' UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. , N373999 N373997 40 . . . HOUSE NUMBER . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street . . . . , pike Street . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mattituck, .NY . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .... •. Building Inspector •r�' v-�,y..r,�•i�.�2`'S•k _"�.. .:��h `r� .'.' ::�;�/� �y.-.�,.r.. Ati ;'�r. .s7�ft �4 H raw ,, ' - .,�• , �,' .TOWN OE !_�p/`� - ti:. . � .�-s.�:� �.. - • 61JILDIN43 DEPA�'�I�A .. •�•:�� �#c^-�-''' -';•ice.. ; TOWN HALL-�, �: • :. SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) C� 19$�r Dote ...N..................................................., N.. M 15428 Permission is hereby granted to:' NN..wp. •N•N. �jjJJ`• • .....• 0.��...•...•.•..•.. •• •••I•• /.$,4 o . �// pu ... ...............,............................... ........................... Ail 2,0 .......:...i...... ....«:... ... ...r -. /LA� �WK� Q , ....to ..�..........................................: .. ...�....... 44ZU" .. 0.0. N:NN....N.fr1.. ..N•.N....NN.N.. ...... 1. . .. •• .NNN •NN• •NN•\ ....................M•N•NN ...................... .. .. at •remise: located at ...N«.......:...:......•.-..•.•NN.NN..N.uNNy1•u.NNN••••••.••...............»..»............. N N....:M.:�• �-� .N ................)N• • .. •.N.• •NNN......... ..................................................A.NR. NN....•......`.... ......... . .................................................+ � /............N........................................A...A N I•N•........NN...N••N �.•. County Tax Mop No. 1000 Section . .... ................... Block ................... N. Lot Na ....'.................... pursuant to application dated ...... '!..:K '::�,.•r•...................... 191`, and oppraved by the Building Inspector. Fee $........................ Budding !••^.'�Y^�,�` Ex ....-. •w - I ,wA IAA .. - _ A"� "�^."' FORM NO. b TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION Date .,,,September 22 , 19 87 CHARLES T...'.&..JEAN..ZAHRA .... .... . .. ........ .......... ..................... (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 PIKE STREET, MATTITUCK, NEW YORK 11952 ................................................................................. (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: CH 100 Zoning Ordinance ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinances-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that STOP ALL WORK NOT IN CONFORMITY WITH THE (state character of violation).. ..��� ����� �� PROVISIONS OF THE PLANS OR SPECIFICATIONS OF THE BUILDING PERMIT. ................................................................................. ................................................................................. ..............................I................................................ CH 100 XIV 100-14 3 inviolation of ........................................................................................................... ...........ect.on (State section or paragraph of applicable law, ordinance or regulation YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the law and to remedy the conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ......A.. ONCE ........................................................... September 19. 87 dayof .................................................... .. ... The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 1830 pike Street. Mattituck, ........................County of Suffolk, New York. ........................................................ Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of low may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 14 1-04-05 ... .... .. ...0...... . . ...... Building Inspector . 1 . BUILDING .DEYARTMLNT, APPEARANCE TICKET NO: TOWN OF SOUTHOLD tiuuthedd. New Yurk 11971 Issued to: commission of the offense of-. f ast Name M I L Last Name to Number and Street r ,� �, contrary to the provisions of r, Sta zip Section /DO -1 y3 City of Town YOU ARE HEREBY directed to appear at the Justice of the code o the Town of Southold Court,Town of Southold(Town Hall)53095 Main Road Dated: ? '� (State Route 25), Southold, New York 11971. Issued and ubscribed b On the O^ day of ro r at 9' D_o'clock in the AM. Building Inspe�ctor, TowniofSouthold in connection with your alleged IF YOU FAIL TO-APPEAR ON THE DATE AND TIME INDICATED, A CRIMINAL SUMMONS OR WARRANT FOR YOUR ARREST MAY BE ISSUED. Cx A I-b ;� b FORM NO. $ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD, N. Y. ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION DateNovember..5............................. 19..87. TO CHARLES T:. S JEAN ZAHRA........................... .. (owner or authorized agent of owner) 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, New York 11952 . ............................................................................. (address of owner or authorized agent of owner) PLEASE TAKE NOTICE there exists a violation of: CH 100 Zoning Ordinance ' ............................................ Other Applicable Laws, Ordinonces-or Regulations ............................................ at premises hereinafter described in that ,,,,Tou• ... r bu.ildi. . ng. ..perm. it. ...no. ......15428. . . ....Z...i.ssued... .... . .... .... .. .. ......... . .. .. . . . ... . .. . .... . (state character of violation) October 27 , 1986 is hereby, revoked.......Reason.=,,,not•„follovi,ng,•,plans , did not comply with a stop work order: ................................................................................. ...... •,•. - inviolation of .............................100-.......142.......C.....b.....D............... ..........................r. ... ................... (State section or paragraph of applicable law, ordinance o regulation) YOU ARE THEREFORE DIRECTED AND ORDERED to comply with the low, and to remedy the 6th conditions above mentioned forthwith on or before the ...................................................................... day of ..... .., Novembe.r............................ 19....87 The premises to which this ORDER TO REMEDY VIOLATION refers are situated at 140 Pike •Street , Matt,tituck.... .....County of Suffolk, New York. Failure to remedy the conditions aforesaid and to comply with the applicable provisions of law may constitute an offense punishable by fine or imprisonment or both. 1000- 14 1-04-05 .. .......... Building Inspector TOWN Of iOUTHALO. NAVY PARK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL NO. DATE Ilseamhsx..l..,. 9.a7 TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. G)iAii1,ES:.zAllu.. .. .............................of 1830-Fike-StreaLa ......................................... Name of Appellant Street and Number Town of Southold, ,..,.New..York.......HEREBY APPEAL TO ................................................�.. ................................... Municipality State THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON BUILDING mXaMM PERMIT NO. . .15420z..................... DATED ... .................... WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO CHARLES ZAHRA ................................................................................. Name of Applicant for permit of .A.f..SAut�]Aard............IkW..yoxk............................. Street and Number Municipality State ( ) PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY (KX) RE: Building Permit 1. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY .P kCe.,Stregt�....Mattituck ,,,, A,,,,, ,,........ Street �Hamlet /� �Use"District on*�Zoning Mop District 1000 Section 141Block 04Lot OS Jean Zahra Lot No. Mop No....................................... . ............. Current Owner Charles Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article XIV Section 100-71.42(c&d)Revocation of Permit 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) ( ) A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Mop ( ) A VARIANCE due to lack of access (State of New York Town Low Chop. 62 Cons. Laws Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 (XI Reversal of Determination of Buildingz Insyector-Revocation of Building Permit 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous appeal (k=d (has not) been mode with respect to this decision of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ) request for a special permit ( ) request for a variance andwas mode in Appeal No. ................................Dated ...................................................................... REASON FOR APPEAL ( .) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 ( ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (XX) A reversal of determination of building inspector-revc&at ion of building permit is requested for the reason that neither ground set forth in .the revocation supports the action taken. All work pursuant to .the permit has been performed in accordance with plans and approvals of the Building Department. The stop work order was not violated ., and, in any event, was invalid. Accordingly, the decision of the building inspector should be reversed. Copy of revocation of Building Permit is annexed hereto. ft m ZB1 (Continue on other side) _j -p'. r , REASON FOR APPEAL ConNrnud 1. Stop Work Order fails to comply with Section 100-143. This action requires that a stop work order state the conditions under which the work may be resumed. A copy of the stop work order is attached hereto. It is apparent that the foregoing code requirement was not met and that, therefore, the stop work order is invalid. 2. The stop work order does not apply to the subject premises. The stop work order by its terms applies to premises at 1830 Pike Street, Mattituck, NY. However, the premises for which a building permit were granted and for which the building permit was revoked are located at 140. Pike Street. Copy of Building Permit is attached hereto. The premises at 1830 Pike Street is the applicants residence, about which there is no dispute. 3. Even assuming that the stop work order was issued in compliance with the code and applied to the proper premises, the stop work was not violated. The applicant did nothing after the issuance of the order except clean up the job site. Apparently, the building department recognized this fact when it withdrew its criminal prosecution for violation of stop work order because of its stated inability to prosecute the case. 4. All work on the premises has been conducted in accordance with the approved plans and specifications and instructions of the .Building Department. There is no basis for the claim that work was done not in accordance with plans. WHEREFORE, it is respectfully requested that the determination of the building inspector revoking the building permit be denied. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss55 ..2� ................................... COUNTY OF Suffolk ) CHARLES ZAHRA�ture Sworn to this .........Lat............................... day of..........Decembex............................... 1987 ......Notary Public............................. EFUCioNaweRESUM llelrr Napd%82hft M 1 c oar o�.�"iw�►a�. �1 rx Southold Town Board ofAppeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 f• TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Appl . No . 3701 - Charles Zahra Location of Premises : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck County Tax Map No . 1000-141-04-05 Findings of Board based on familiarity with activities at the subject site on at least a weekly basis , 4 to 5 days per week , before establishment closed in 1984. Spoke to family member of prior owner who managed "The Coffee Pot" and who indicated business closed in November 1984 . Any occupancy- on the second floor was occasional . Any occupancy was limited to sleeping since there was no kitchen or cooking facilities on the second floor , and prior occupants came downstairs to eat at "The Coffee Pot . " Tfie subject building was boarded up at the time North Fork Bank acquired the premises , and there was no occupancy on the second floor as a residence since that time . Findings of Board based on familiarity of operations of recent re-construction , renovations , etc . to include new basement foundation , first floor including additions to east side and rear, lifting of the second-story , and removal of second story , etc . Building remained boarded up until re-construction commenced and removal of portions of the building , and of course until the present time . ( Photographs and notations from 3/7/88 attached hereto . ) 3/14/88 f' • J' D Z � Board of A eals Southold Town MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI April 15 , 1988 Eric J . Bressler , Esq . Wickham , Wickham & Bressler , P . C . Main Road , Box 1424 Mattituck , NY 11952 Re : Appl . No . 3701 - Charles Zahra Dear Eric : Transmitted herewith for your perusal and record is a copy of the official findings and determination rendered by this Board , the original of which has this date been filed with the Office of the Town Clerk . Please 'note that this matter has been set down for a further hearing to be held on May 12 , 1988. In the interim , please furnish us with a complete copy of the Contract of Sale between the North Fork Bank and the Langers , and between the North Fork Bank and Charles Zahra . A copy of the Notice of Hearing as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman , Inc . and Suffolk Times , Inc . by our office will be forwarded to you in the near future . Yours very truly , GERARD OPG `GE OEHRINR� 1k / CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copies of Decision to : James A. Schondebare , Esq . (Town Attorney) Robert H. Berntsson , Esq . (Asst . Town Attorney) Mr. Victor Lessard , Executive Administrator Southold Town Building Department • oc��FFOCx�O y Southold Town Board of Appeals • MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD. L.L. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3701 Application Dated December 10 , 1987 TO: Eric J . Bressler , Esq . as Attorney [Appellant (s) I for CHARLES ZAHRA Main Road Box 1424 Mattituck ,, NY 11952 At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on April 14 , 1988 , the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ ] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ X] Request for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV , Section 142 of the Zoning Code for a reversa of getermination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property : 140 Pike Street , Mattituck , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 5 . Zone District: B-1 General Business . WHEREAS , public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988; and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS , the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning, and the surrounding areas ; and WHEREAS , the Board made the following findings of fact : 1 . This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . The revocation was issued on November 5 , 1987 . 2 . The property in question is located in the "B-1 " General Business Zoning District and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 005 . 3 . The subject premises contains a total area of 3 ,800 sq . ft. with 40 . 0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck , Town of Southold. (CONTINUED ON PAGE TWO ) DATED: April 14 , 1988 . CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) Page 2 - Appl . No . 3701 ` Flatter of C,HARLES ZAHRA ' Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 4 . The subject premises is presently improved with a partially completed one-story concrete foundation with exterior walls . Previously , the premises was improved by a two-story structure which was nonconforming as to various setback require- ments and as to use . 5 . The building permit was revoked under Article XVI , Section 100-142 of the Zoning Code which reads as follows " . . . The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances : A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application , plan or specifications on which the building permit was based . B. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance with the applicable law. ' C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application , plans or specifications . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector . 6 . Hearings were held on this application on February .18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 . The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters of personal knowledge in the record . This was completed by March 14 , 1988 , and the hearing was closed at the Board ' s Regular Meeting on March 17 , 1988. 7 . Based on the facts in the record , it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the Building Department. It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure . Indeed , the second story has been totally removed and the first floor has been completely rebuilt. The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new struc- ture when compared to the prior structure . 8 . Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted , the facts before the Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit . Specifically , the evidence would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building . This would violate Section 100- 118E of the Zoning Code . The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would also subject the project to compliance with present building code requirements under the New York State Building Code . 0 Page 3 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 9. Based on the personal knowledge of the ,Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner , it further appears that the use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in excess of two years . This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100- 118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render the revoked building permit invalid . 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held . Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code . These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this juncture . Since no vested rights .can be obtained under an illegal permit , it would appear to be in the applicant' s best interest to have these issues resolved now in addition to the limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board. Nor can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment ' s revocation of the building permit. 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100- 118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr . Grigonis , seconded by Mr . Goehringer,it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of the Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING , to be held on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sec- tions 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . * * lk R, CWXIRMAN 1' LAW orrlccs WICKHAM. WICKHAM 8t BRESSLER. P.c. MAIN ROAD.P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK.LONG ISLAND NEW YORK 11952 MORTGAGE OFFICE WILLIAM WICKHAM 516-298.5300 ERIC J.BRESSLER 516.298.8353 ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM DAHIEL C.ROSS March '17, 1988 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Hall - Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Appl. No. 3701 - Charles Zahra Location of Premises: 140 Pike Street, Mattituck County Tax Map No. 1000-141-04-05 Gentlemen: We are writing to you pursuant to the discussion at the last hearing date concerning: 1) items requested by the Board; and 2) a response to the Board "findings" after inspection. Accordingly, enclosed are copies of the deeds into the North Fork Bank & Trust Company and Charles Zahra, as requested by the Board. We have reviewed the "findings" of the Board dated March 14 , 1988 with respect to the premises and offer the following comments: 1. The extent or expiration of a non-conforming use is not an issue in this proceeding. It was not advanced as a ground for revocation of the building permit 'by the Building Department either in its notices or at the hearing. No questions concerning same were put to either the applicant or the building inspectors prior to the Board cutting off further oral testimony. In the event that expiration of a non-conforming use is the subject of a subsequent hearing or determination or proceeding, we will be prepared to address it at That time. 2. The "observations" were not introduced at the hearing and are not based upon testimony at the hearing or detailed statements of information within the personal knowledge of individual board members. As such they are not properly part of the record and may not be relied upon. 3. Mr. Zahra is in Florida this week on vacation, so I have been unable to discuss the matter fully with him. However, I have been advised by Gail Wickham, who represented the North Fork Bank & Trust Company in the purchase from Langer and the sale to Zahra, that she spoke to the Langer's daughter and was told that her family was actually living in the "upstairs apartment" and had been for some time. The Bank allowed the Langers and their family to remain in possession for several months after the Bank purchased the property. It is her recollection that the restaurant was, closed before the apartment was vacated. As Gail and I are leaving today for a brief vacation, we have not had adequate time to ascertain the dates of these events, but in any event, this issue should not form the basis for your decision, in whole or in part. 4. Notwithstanding the foregoing, and without waiving any such objection, we annex an affidavit from Bayne Midget, maintenance supervisor for North Fork Bank & Trust Co. demonstrating the existence of the upstairs apartment as a full dwelling unit. 5. Finally, we note that the gratuitous statements of the Building Inspectors concerning the type of construction are also not properly before the board, as such issues did not form the basis for the revocation. In any event their conclusions are not supported by fact and are erroneous under 9 NYCRR. In summary, because of the narrow scope of this appeal and the corresponding lack of notice and opportunity to be heard, as outlined above, we urge the Board to resolve the appeal in favor of applicant on the bases presented to it by way of the notice of revocation. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, Eric qJ. Bressler EJB:pmf enc. } s j § 100-141 SOUTHOLD CODE § 42 ZONING § 100-144 .! I [1) New buildings and additions and al '• existin buildings: Where he finds that there has been any false statement or g gs: one hundred dollars v misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application, plus twenty cents($0.20) for each square ;pig or specifications on which the building permit was { floor area in excess of one thousand based t square feet. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error [2) Accessory buildings and additions and and should not have been issued in accordance with the i ' R tions to existing accessory buildings: applicable law. five dollars ($25.), plus fifteen cents ! each square foot of floor area in excess Where he finds that the work performed under the permit hundred (500) square feet. ,� is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions (d) Foundations constructed under existing of the application, plans or specification. seventy-five dollars ($75.). F: Where the person to whom a building permit has been t ! issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by (e) Swimming pools, together with required the Building Inspector. fencing: one hundred fifty dollars ($150.). (f) ,All other structures (i.e., fences, etc.) and i and alterations to such structures: tw 143. Stop orders. [Amended 8-26-76 by L.L. No. 3-19761 j dollars ($25.). ver the Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to i (9) Signs. the fee for all signs,except signs pe that work on any building or structure is being prosecuted § 100730C(6Xa), shall be one dollar ($1.) fot: ' n of the provisions of the applicable law, ordinances or I i i square foot of sign area, with a minimum ns, or not in conformity with the provisions of an ap- i. twenty-five dollars ($25.). plans or specifications on the basis of which a building was issued,or in an unsafe and dangerous manner, he shall (h) Demolition and/or removal and/or relocation the owner of the property, or the owner's agent or the building: ten dollars ($10.) minimum and five ($0.05) for each square foot in excess of performing the work, to suspend all work, and any such shall forthwith stop such work and suspend all building hundred (300) square feet of floor area. s until the stop order has been rescinded. Such order and (2) For the purposes of this Subsection J. cellars shall be in writing and shall state the conditions under attached garages and any habitable area s the work may be resumed, and may be served upon a person s included in the calculation of floor area. it is directed either by delivering it personally to him or [ the same upon a conspicuous portion of the building I` construction and sending a copy of the same by certified j § 100-142. Revocation of permit. The Building Inspector may revoke a building ; theretofore issued and approved in the following instanm 44. Certificates of occupancy. A certificate of occupancy shall be applied for from the �c is Building Inspector and it shall be unlawful to do any of the • . following until a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor: o- 'fir i .D CODE °' ZONING § 100-144 ,s and additions he finds that there has been any false statement or dings: one hundred �- cesentation as to a material fact in the application, .ents($0.20)for each. or specifications on which the building permit was i,4 1 excess of onet3 I he finds that the building permit was issued in error t iildings and additiop> should not have been issued in accordance with the ting accessory builds' " bIs law. 5 �25.), plus fifteen ! ; i he finds soot of floor area in that the work performed under the permit )1 pt square feet. 4� O being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions I , :$he application, plans or specification. aructed under exists;.' -. the person to whom a building permit has been ! ; rs ($75.). 'Jr ed fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by together with requi,` 'Building Inspector. ' fired fifty dollars($16p: id b res (i.e., fences, etc.) to such structures:'. Stop orders. [Amended 8.26-76 by L.L. No. 3-1976] r the Building Inspector has reasonable grounds to _11 signs,except signs work on any building or structure is being prosecuted t hall be one dollar # n of the provisions of the applicable law, ordinances or gn area, with a mini , or not in conformity with the provisions of an ap- •s ($25.). plans or specifications on the basis of which a building r removal and/or reloca, V issued,or in an unsafe and dangerous manner, he shall ! owner of the property, or the owner's agent or the ars ($10.) minimum and° orming the work, to suspend all work, and any such ` square foot in ex forthwith stop such work and suspend all building uare feet of floor area.. 'until the stop order has been rescinded. Such order and. cel be in writing and shall state the conditions under this Subsection J, Id any habitable area. work may be resumed, and may be served upon a person :tion of floor area. it is directed either by delivering it personally to him or ! ' y the same upon a conspicuous portion of the building i traction and sending a copy of the.same by certified ! �f ay revoke a building. d in the following ins . Certificates of occupancy. (( ! certificate of occupancy shall be applied .for from the III ilding Inspector and it shall be unlawful to do any of the llowing until a certificate of occupancy is issued therefor: )70 10071 a•sr,-87 :I 1 I ZONING § 100-118 onconforming uses. arwise authorized as a special exception by the Board '� gs hereinafter provided, the following provisions shall i I :I" pconforming uses: i .]awful use of a building or premises existing on the " 'Ve date of this chapter or authorized by a building .t issued prior thereto may be continued although `. t use does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, i such use maybe extended throughout the building lly acquired to said date. nconforming use of a building or premises May be d to a use of the same or higher classification ac- viffe_k, to the provisions of this chapter. I + s ver a district shall hereafter be changed, any then ` sting nonconforming use of a building or premises in ; ed district may be continued or changed to a use Chang provided that all other a similar or higher classification, p j t lations governing the use are complied with. never a nonconforming use of a building or premises been discontinued for a period of,more than two (2) higher classification or to a s or has been changed to a nforming use, anything in this section to the contrary { twithstanse of such building ding, the nonconforming u premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance refor shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals, hereinafter provided. Y nonconforming building may not be reconstructed or cturally altered during its life to an extent exceeding aggregate cost fifty percent(50%) of the fair value of the wilding, unless the use of such building is changed to a Conforming use. j A nonconforming building which has been damaged bMire °� or other causes to the extent of more than fifty pe ; (60%)of its fair value shall not be repaired or rebuilt unless a use of such building is Changed to a conforming use. ,I 1 10053 -es E-xh b �� STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss.: I, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in'the courts of New York State, ❑ Certification certify that the within By Attorney has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy. 0 m ❑ Attorney's state that I am Affirmation the attorney(s) of'record for a in the within action; I have read the foregoing y and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. The reason this verification is made by me and not by The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: I affirm that the foregoing statements are true, under the penalties of perjury. Dated: The name signed must be printed beneath STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SUEFOI,K ss.: I, being sworn, say: I am the Petitioner d"I .. c In ivi uAH a in t am e within action; I have read the foregoing m Verification Petitio and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to 'a the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true. a corporate the of ❑ Verification a corporation and a party in the within action; I have read the foregoing and know the contents thereof; and the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to he true. This verification is made by me because the above party is a corporation and I am an officer thereof. The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows: Sworn to before me on 19z May 10 v 88ELLEN M.URBANE The name signed.. ust he printed eneath Notary PuNa A8>ll$�94 C'fiAFLT�ES ZAHRA Notary Public Quelitied in SuNof�l commission l2w STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF SS.: (If both loxes are checked—Indicate after names,type of sorvice:used.) I, being sworn, say; I am not a party to the action, am' over 18 years of age and reside at On 19 I served the within x ❑ service by depositing a true copy thereof enclosed in a post-paid wrapper, in an official depository under the exclusive care m By Mail and custody of the U.S. Postal Service within New York State, addressed to each of the following persons at the last known address set forth after each name: Personal by delivering a true copy thereof personally to each person named below at the address indicated. I knew each person y ❑ Service on served to be the person mentioned and described in said papers as a party therein: Individual ca Sworn to before me on 19 ---...------•----•--•---------•--•-------------•...------------•----------..---- The name signed must be printed beneath NOTICE of ENT Index No. Year 19 Sir:-Please take notice that the within is a(certified) SURRFME COURT OF THE STATE OF NMi YORK true c4y of a COUNTY OF SUFFOLK duly entered in the office of the clerk of the within named court on 19 In The Fatter of the Application of Dated, CHABLES ZAHRA, Yours,etc., ?4 lr—KHAM. WICKHAM&BRESSLER,P.C. Petitioner, Attorneys for Office and Post Office Address For a Judgment Pursuant to ARTICLE 78 of the CPLR MAIN ROAD,P.O.Box 1424 MATT"CK;NEW YORK 11952 ^ -8g3in8t- v SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APEPEALS, To Vtorney(s)for Respondent. REC 5VEQ J NOTICE OF SETTLEMENT ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE NAY l 1 1988 - 3ir:-Please take notice that an order and Sonthn(a T„u,,, f-IPrk VERIFIED PETITION if which the within is a true copy will be presented 'or settlement to the Hon. WICKHAM. WICKHAM&BRESSLER,Pam; Attorneysfor Petitioner ^ \ one of the judges of the within named Court, at Office and Post Office Address, TelephoneF ;n 19 MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 MATTITUCK,NEW YORK 11952 it M. 'dated, (516)298-8353 cc:Town Board Town Attorney Yours,etc., Chief of Police TICKHAM, WICKHAM&BRESSLER.P.C. To Supt. of Highways 411orneysfor Grlffing & Southwick Ins. McMann-Price Agency Office and Post Office Address Attomey(s)for William Mullen r MAIN ROAD,P.O. BOX 1424 Building Dept. Service of a co of the within Appeals Board - MATTITUCK,NEW YORK 11952 copy is hereby admitted. Stype Agency Dated, ro _ lttorney(s)for Attorney(s)for 3900-JULIUS BLUMBERG.INC,LAW BLANK PUBLISHERS.NYC 10013 Memorandum from . Southold Town Board of Appeals TOWN HALL, SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 765-1809 'Date: 5/12/88 To: James A. Schondebare , Town Attorney Robert H. Berntsson , Asst .. Town Attorney From: Z . B. A. Office Re : Pending Appeal - Charles Zahra #3701 Attached for your records is a copy of the Order to Show Cause , Verified Petition , and Request for Judicial Intervention , as briefly discussed yesterday (with Rob) . Mr. Yakaboski 'expects the issues to be raised May 24th , and will advise as to whether we will be permitted to continue the hearing (s ) in June [pursuant to our ' interim ' decision rendered April 14 , 1988 . Copies have been distributed to the Town Clerk , Z . B. A. Members , Frank Yakaboski as Special Counsel , and the Supervisor. The hearing advertised by us for tonight ' s meeting will be adjourned tentatively until June 9th , subject to confirmation by Frank Y . and/or Eric Bressler by our advertising deadline of May 27th . -7�2 Memorandum from . . . . Southold Town Board of Appeals TOWN HALL, SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 765-1809 -Date : 5/1 1 /88 To: Town Clerk Judith T. Terry From: Linda , ZBA/'�� Attached for your records under Z . B. A. Appl . #3701 for Charles Zahra , which is still pending at this time , is a copy of an Order to Show Cause and 'Verified Petition served upon me today at approximately 2 : 40 p .m . Francis J . Yakaboski , Esq . has been and is our Special Counsel in this matter and expects the Court to T=- address the issues raised on May 24th , �,: at which time we will know when to calendar this matter for continued hearing (s ) during June . Copies have also been distributed to the Z . B. A. Members , the Town Attorney ' s Office , and the Supervisor. . Ha_ - g a i k FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. .z8.935. . . . . . Date . .February . . .. . .16. . . . . . 19. 78 THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at .140. .Pike. .St.. . . . . .. . . . . . . . Street Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . Block No. . . . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . conforms substantially to the Application for.Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated : . 11arch . . . . .8 . . . . . . ..1 19 7..7 - pursuant to which Building Permit No. 9074?. . dated . . . .ii.axch. . . .8 . . . . . . . .. 19. .77, was issued, and conforms-to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of the law..The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . . .flestaurant .& Apartment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The certificate is issued to . . . . . . . . .Joseph.Lamer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (owner, ls"ee�' �tYei � of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval TVR UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE No. . N373999 N373997 HOUSE NUMBER . . .4�. . . . . . . . Street . . Pike Street NY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I att. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Inspector FORM NO. 6 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Building Department Town Clerks Office Southold, N. Y. 11971 APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Instructions. A. This application must be filled in typewriter OR ink, and submitted in DUPLICATE to the Building Inspector with the following; for new buildings or new use: 1. Final survey of property with accurate location of all buildings, property lines, streets, and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. Final approval of Health Dept. of water supply and sewerage disposal—(S-9 form or equal: 3. Approval of electrical installation from Board of Fire Underwriters. 4. Commercial buildings, Industrial buildings, Multiple Residences and .similar buildings and installations, a certificate of Code compliance from the Architect or Engineer responsible for the building. 5. Submit Planning Board approval of completed site plan requirements where applicable. B. For existing buildings (prior to April 1957), Non-conforming uses, or buildings and "pre-existing" land uses: 1. Accurate survey-of property showing all property lines, streets, buildings and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. Sworn statement of owner or previous owner as to use, occupancy and condition of buildings. 3'. Date of any housing code or safety inspection of buildings or premises, or other pertinent in- formation required to prepare a certificate. C. Fees: 1. Certificate of occupancy $5.00 2. Certificate of occupancy on pre-existing dwelling or land use $5.00 3. Copy of certificate of occupancy $1.00 Date ...... .3.J..�. .�,. .... New Building ................ Addition ..... X . ....... Old or Pre-existing Building ...X.:..... Vacant Land .............. Location Of Property .........L...r.1.1. ...... .. ...........f ..(..!...l..l.:::C: ..........t...� 02 . Owner Or Owners Of Property .:.'..(. .. .l..!.l.1.:S........ ..�SFf'!.`.1......L ,/1/G� ............ ' ,Subdivision �... ..�..,,,r. ¢y..�:^......... � ,,...Lot No. ...... Block No. .....Z",/,...... . House No. ccy Z 3 b ermit o. .7`:� �. '.... bate Of Permit :��1!j.7....Applicant . c.?' ..:/ `4 0 Health Dept. Approval Labor De/ Approval E .Z 1t .(u..-; /s- t:LccP PU 37.31� Underwriters Approval ..b1..NDH-,`=c� .N 3 Planning Board Approval ............................... ..... Request For Temporary Certificate ...:.................................... Final Certificate ...X111 .............. ........ .. Fee Submitted $ b Construction on above described building and permit�meets,�ll applicable codes and regulations. Applicant ��t .................................. . .................. .�. ........... Sworn to before me this /3 9� ..d.. . ,.... day of .. ... ............�... (stamp or seal) t tJ0 o SUSAN 1• DENNIS , Notary Public .. / County ....... ..................... Coun '.. UEPC,'!tata of New Yak c2 .'• �g0. /J :-.�622902 O`P,t,�t �o2a v,6s Moss / Suffolk CoYWV of� Qd ras March 30. R9,U 0oSS`0�1 Lo0 `\//► ,.. �7 1 1 , 1 I. t . .,\{ FOSM NO. 2 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD , •l ,':.BUILDING DEPARTMENT , , , TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE ;" *- SOUTHOLD, N Y ;u � , ;. r :.1 J 'r h� a { � C< {.' - k - e )t CIS r Jx4 - i� n i 1 F I r t �u xL� t:r z -.,r :.,J i - t y t.y . s .'ri itti +jrdiX:rAI F` UILDING PERMIT k �_ ,,ir;kr�l+ ry�3 prJ Y�sJUI ,..,,....%I,�-,'..-,.,:I',;,��.,�.j!..��.;,,..'I.�-.,�,:.�,,..t..t�-..,:I.,,,..1...I!.�.,.­.1 z.1 I...,�1�,_,�..",..,._.,.t %.:,.t,.(I'�t;1 !.�.I..ii..;.,_­4.,-*.;.1��.--r..�:,....',�­,.;,.,.-,....,.---!....1..,,1�:.�.-'­2.,.-::.'�,.--`_�;�...�-._,--`��!-.­,..,,-..'.�.,,.,*.-.tt.-..,'.:­,�,''.J.I...-..�.-..:.�....,...­-:.!:,;;71�.�.,.e,,,.­­._..;.',"­,*...�,.:.1..;'...l..,",...-�..;,.t��.,�-(,_..�,.*,I--,',:�1.,r.,:�,....-.''....--.I:-i i��',_:..tf,��-,. "1,.l,.:f";.�1�.­.:",.".,;-_�.1.I.--�;.�t�-.."" ­..1-..­"­.-.-I Nt,.""..;'.-�;.-",E,t.­"!.,4�"!-j.,­�,", -1 t x I 1 1 - _- 4 '` 4 r ,,ti .,tt45T, ,� ,yx ?r II -t.t r 1 r - ;.,:` F?. 7,. �;.' 1 a; rr�::` k a 1 _ 'I ., VN f .'t3'r 7x"" '41, 1. t (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON TH.E PREMISES UNTIL FULL , j'',�' ', a" ,;},'�w- Y't ;•�1 COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED' ;L;I r,$z fi} `� 6 '.15 _I {IrY S. ! 2 �. AJ , } '1 t:lir; ` y tT. t} ta tJ1 kf. �,y� A + ray` -Y lt`-ir l4 .� F} r r �xt , t j' v+4r( ry, h. r u .3k. rr fi' araLy L .'r ts,;_i .! t 1 r 1 a ,� ) J r 1 1�'te r- i�sA t s t r t !I rr M t L, s ! } 11 i s y f a ♦ t it ((its t�jl "7P, y 1 Q 1 S )) } I ' Ir I t ;. ; S) C { :.1 , 4 + 59Y t`f A ''� Y'# *r'd;S P 1 t' r 1 1 1 I "{ k J r t 1 q z 1 r t 1 A v 1;tits 1 �y{ 4r yto., tf r, i .y r !r t Of �f� � r'�t,1 1 { 1, Cis,z o;y rr W+„ {i!> e r A •,; !, 1lfi`I` 7 f'X'xs� n r ,,f'1,73,f4 t N o ! 9 0'7 4 Z Date mar.01 .. � 19 77 , fi�r,9 f 1 .I,, S; -� ,,ee + > I I '.Y:'} V.Al-- .5 3 't a F.y , _ i' 1 , F,u r 4�. yr3is rtt F- Permission is hereby granted to: "tix ti - Josegh Langer • • z, I A T ,4:At,}� . , . t ,l? ke St MattitucY Rt }eft 1. , i a r �r t�`r IAs�� y •,r .....• ...... .... .. tit h r�i{ W 1, `,. 4-.4 h !. ... .. . . k: •YF t J 1y t to make.,alteration,.&..bu ],d dd.�,. 1.Q..n..o ...aXistIng..72>�� mas.�..bu�,�. ,�ng a " �1: "7 Ll +rt f ' r�>J , _t r . ,` .. ....... ... ...... .......... ..........::................. ................. . .................... - �. .. . ' at premises located at .....S/.•S•.Pike..•St......(E/••.-Bank..EntaraxiCt3)..... t . , ............. . ....... Sattituck.:..:.N..Y.....:.... s r. •� n 1 _ ' r '� i 7 ;!1ti l YjJ ! 7 1 `' .f .. • • •..•...• .•• ••• • •• • • •.• ••.•••..• ••• t •• ,�\ •17 yJ c ' pursuant to application dated .......: Maw...... .$.... 19 and approved by the - 77, 'I f It J it ,-'- Building Inspector. ;'t . . . x :, , Fee $..., t00.......:. i'. . . .. . . ( ss '•',: i . ....... .... ... ,i . uil •ng Inspector . . . .... - ","'.;- 6. r1.S W*r 5 . . _ I 4. }> t. r a !c i, a, .Yfirn �' ' " {. a , n J r)V i37., 1 1 ,,- < , III g-' Lry,rr� _ '7r L -zar"i'S d Svs'l ' - Bch 1`L t ,t r ; ¢ - ... ..,. ... ... ._ �r.-er.-.Y.4.: . +.- _. . . - . . rt..r..-...a..-f.1..i u,i.WSw_nff�I. , ..., y:��.� — THE NEW YORK BOARD 'OF FIRE UNDERWRITERS r' S BUREAU OF ELECTRICITY I 85 JOHN STREET, NEW,YORK, NEW YORK 10038 Date February ! , { 0,78 Application No.on file o i1 ,6 4 Al (� THIS CERTIFIES THAT ��i 7 onlythe electrical equipment as described below and introduced b the applicant named on the above application number in the remises o rr Y PP � PP P I The,. C• f tee: Pot,• • ?ox 247, Pike Street, -'latt!tuck,'••L. ! . in the following location; ❑ Basement Ea lst Fl. ❑ 2nd Ft. Section block was examined on January 30), 1978 and found to be in compliance with the requirements of this Board. FIXTURE RECEPTACLES SWITCHES FIXTURES RANGES COOKING DECKS OVENS DISH WASHERS EXHAUST FANS OUTLETS INCANDESCENTI FLUORESCENT I y�ppgY AMT. I K.W. AMT, I K.W. AMT. K.W. I AMT. K.W. AMT. H.P. -9 15 9 !• jt2 ! DRYERS FURNACE MOTORS FUTURE APPLIANCE FEEDERS SPECIALREC'PTJ TIME CLOCKS BELL UNIT HEATERS MULTI-OUTLET DIMMERS MS AMT. K.W. OIL H.P. GAS H.P. AMT. NO. A.W.G. AMT. AMP. AMT. AMPS. TRANS. AMT, W P. SYSTE NO.OF FEET AMT. WATTS (j• r 2 30 SERVICE DISCONNECT NO.OF S E R V I C E AMT. AMP. TYPE METER I 2W 1,0.3W'3 0 3W 3 0 AW NO,OF CC.COND. A.W.G. NO.OF HI-LEG A.W G. NO.OF NEUTRALS A WW G, EQUIP. PER.0' OF CC.COND. OF HI-LEG OF NEUTRAL OTHER APPARATUS: Motors : ! — t/2hp 1-4. 0 kw Ala tsr h--ater PAID AMOUNT PLEASE REMIT BY CHECK OR MONEY 24.00 ORDER TO THE ORDER OF THE NEW 4YORK BOARD OF FIRE UNDERWRITERS AS CASH SENT BY MAIL WILL BE AY Kenneth J . Langer RISK OF SENDER. Box 247 Pi ' Straet Math tuck.,' t . ! ! 9 �/�/j•1 'l ^ Per D THIS IS YOUR BILL FOR SERVICE RENDERED AND IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.THIS BILL PAYABLE AT THE NEW YORK OFFICE,85 JOHN STREET,NEW YORK,N.Y.,10038 Is THE NEW YORK BOARD OF FIRE UNDERWRITERS' BUREAU OF ELECTRICITY 85 JOHN STREET, NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10038 Date Fef)ruary ! , 1978 Application,Yo.on file 9{)?'7( ;) THIS CERTIFIES THAT IN 3%3 9 0 9 only the electricatequipment as described below and introduced by the applicant named on the above application number in the,Jprendsrs of Kenneth' JOS0%ph Lander, Pike Street, -Matti-tucic, L, f , in the folloicing location; ❑ Basement ❑ 1st Ft. ❑ 2nd Fl. was examined on v Section Block Lot. J a r U a rV j 0 i I a 7 anal found to be in compliance with the requirements of this.Board. FIXTURE FIXTURES OUTLETS ECEPTACLES SWITCHES RANGES COOKING DECKS OVENS DISH WASHERS INCANDESCENT FLUORESCENT EXHAUST FANS °yAPONr AMT, K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. K.W. AMT. H.P, ' d II 4 d —DRYERS FURNACE MOTORS FUTURE APPLIANCE FEEDERS SPECIAL REC'PT TIME CLOCKSELL ? T• K.W OIL H.P. GAS H.P. AMT. NO. A.W.G. AMT. P. AMT. AMPS. TRANS, UNIT YSTE HEATERS MULTI-OUTLET DIMMERS SMS NO.OF FEET AMT• \VATTS 20 SERVICE.DISCONNECT_.._- NO.OF METER '- �« . . S _ E.. R. V I C E T• P• TYPE EQUIP. 1�'2W 10 3W`3,0'3W 3,0'4W NO.OF CC CONO. q,yr,G. < PER B' OF CC.COND. NO.OF NI•LEG OF'HW.I•IEG NO.OF NEUTRALS A.W.G. OF NEUTRAL OTHER APPARATUS: E C i F. I . E 1 Smoke detector F PAJ L) AMOUNT PLEE1 `3 a 00 ORDER TOM THE ORDER OFT EBY CHECK ORONEW :1P n ri e } . YORK BOARD OF FIRE UNDERWRITERS �O 2 P 11 L is r ci e r AS CASH SENT BY MAIL WILL BE AY I DOX 247 rI 4RISK OF SENDER, _ I' �? �i rapt i I Per f THIS IS YOUR BILL FOR SERVICE RENDERED AND IS NOT A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE.THIS BILL PAYABLE AT THE NEW YORK OFFICE,85 JOHN STREET,NEW YORK,N.Y.10038 FORM NO. 1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT -` �� _ �' -ru �V TOWN CLERIC'S OFFICE c`j SOUTIIOLD, N. Y. Exam -t ..... ..... ., 1.97 APPlication No. � .............. fined •• .. Approved 19........ Permit No. . Disapproved a/c ................................................... .................................. •.......... .......................... ... 7PRMIT (Building Inspector) APPLICATION FOR BUILDIN Date ........ ......................., 19...7.1. INSTRUCTIONS r a. This.application must be completely filled in by typewriter or' in ink and submitted in triplicate to the Building nspector, with 3 sets of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. n b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or reas, and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this application. 'v' c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Inspector will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit . . hall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose whatever until a Certificate of Occupancy hall have been granted by the Building Inspector. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Department for the issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the " uilding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or egulations, for the construction of buildings, additions or alterations, or for removal or demolition, as herein described. he applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinances, building code, housing c e, and regulations, and to dmit authorized inspectors on premises and in buildings for necessary i e(;b ns. ... . (Signature of licant, ¢ name, if a corporation) 1 .................................................................................................. (Address of applicant) Mate whether applicant is owner, less , agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. �,.; �: ��.....-' !a'�: .%�.!✓..( C9-t'/1�........................................................................................... ..... ......1.. ..;...................... ..y. ... c� X Name of owner of premises .......Ll. �� �::.: :......... .:.. .:i....... '" ................................................................................. If cpplicant is a corporate, signature of duly authorized o cer. J' (Name and title of corporate officer) Builder's License No. .................................................... F. Plumber's License No. ................................................ Electrician's License No. / L/ ............................................ Other Trade's License No. .............................................. I• Location of land on which, proposed work will be done. Map No.: ... .. .. .... .............. Lot No. ........................ Street and Number ... ..... ................................................ Municipality z• State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy off proposed construction: a• Exisiting use and occupancy .........iel�4 li;� lX�C��. .� J�/. �`:....1 .:E.r ......................................... b. Intended use and occupancy C 1107/...... ` �'�f� ! •••• 12�...... .. .... .................... 150 (to­�e paid on filing this application) "LlSiness, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and 'extent of each type of usea�-�� ..... � Height ------- Number of Stories. --.—.---_------',-_-------------,_--..~—.------.`-- / 9 Size of |o*' Front ......................................................... Reor.-- -------_----' Oaot� —_..--_.--~�8 � ' — ' 1O. Dote of Purchose ........................................................Name of Former Owner .................................................... 0 ll. Zone or use district in which premises are situated —.--_-__----__-_---__.-__—......-_.----_---.. 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation: ........................................................ ' 13. Will lot be regro6ad --.----.--- Will excess 6U be removed from premises: [ ] Yea ' � � No 14` Monno of Owner of premises -----.---.---_---__-- Address ................................ Phone No' .�......~....'~ Nome of Architect .............................................................. Address.................................. Phone No. ...................... Name of Contractor ---.--.—_--..---_.-....___ Address ................................ Phone No. ...................... ' PLOT DIAGRAM clearlyLocate all buildings, whether existing or proposed, and indicate all set-back dimensions from property lines. Give street and block number or description according to deed' and show street names and indicate whether interior urcorner lot. ` y ' ` ' STATE OFNEW jk /�S �COUNTY OF �� '' W�l��d --.---_--_----_-----._-_-------_-_----.boing duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the oppUconi (Nome of individual signing contract) above named. contractor Heis the —.......—.—.—.....—.........--.......---.—..-'.---..''''------'--'---'--------''---~~----''--------... (Contractor, agent, corporate officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to performor have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief; and thor the work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application filed therewith. Sworn to before me this S±h March 77 - day of l9 ' .-_—.—_---. .�--........��������.�—�--' .��.�.. NotaryPublic, .---.----_—r-.,.—'.---... County -- ............................................................................................ / (Signature of applicant). EL|ZAaow xnm ncvuLz NOTARY puou:. State cj/ n sx�No. 12;sn. Suffolk ���° 5'6°3.y�5(� 40��0 1r�cdnc✓et ---._...._.._ { a id A. a .,raw" 0,= o —1 MM UNAUTHORIZED ALTERATION OR ADDITION ' -/7-7e-,tjj/;-17ant - !" TO THIS SURVEY IS A VIOLATION OF SECTION 7209 OF THE NEW YORY T r.yL EDUCATION LAW. C.a V COPIES OF THIS SU7YCY 1n.4P NOT 6 he C ur�/ T��• _ pp -ter /' THE LAND SURVEYOR'S ,t:;:_D St A.I. '' / "'. [y • 9' Cc EMCOMI) SEAL SHALL N::'f 0C C�i15t _ . TO EE A VALID.iI;UE CJ(. ♦ // GUAPANTE:S INDICAT.I. NIKON SHALL R.'JN ..�+ {1�YI G Ir:. � V c 1 TU 10 `,. 014LY TO IIIL 0L..S..., F,,I; Vi.wM IIIE SURVEY • 15 PREI•Aur). A,.D O„ Hd C:IIALF 10 THE TITLE COf:EANY, i; 1':;i:�i;r.:!.°. A;,..,CY ANDt!_f TO iF. nSS.::'_iS JF IM LCMli\:G INSFI• ���•^�nsr.(7 ��f/►71�5(/�K{r��/�7�•'��' -...._.._._... ..,.,.,,..,,_..,� -� � TUIION•0JARANMS AL':NUT 1R1,NSFiRACLE f ..-.-��..•��..�.+..�_.�..w..-.TfJ�ni"•TII`'�!_F'\1HH1I�Ne4(IP.-ti,Iw.F.(1lIFNT�_..-.__....._.. ,. �CL.../ /,F-�©!" I , /V• r5t 1 All I v 14} P '1A.Yi r'JZq�w 3 err r' .�•{ 5.,,( L 1� • j t i tk r t • ♦ •- • - •..:r f 7 'Skaf+'gt7�tit C$ry^r lle r� '' P t � • _ Y� L 4 i I '' 7n l�f,�.�}Ti���T��. F`�'+Fha''�'•1j4+•{ s a 4 P • • hp �• rh+. t _ • • • ••1 �� :�r r i 4 ti.M r A' S 4. e 5�r t 6 r' i, r r 5e x. A i .' ' 4w n. q it rra 14 4 t7 F+� + , + + + F i d a., � t�4 � t" •r{'r 1�a?.. •lyif g t .r it t «d a>q L az � � k '^lt�;;'"�}{',�"�([CC`�E��j 7 • � • '� ' i P +,, r9 7h b z d�r r .. �` pXi ,50 ,, k{p�f`:,; 4 i<< ••t. t r a *. rW'� ?$ Sr r I d °��ty� yLtt ;f' — • f� , r i _ s I r + 'r` 4 r 7; 71:r" � �'S7� �' V-, �+<r .aid:' • � � ti.. '# ; a k " •�a t+q� t �� I r - a is . r v 16y • � r. s tya7 r + t y,. Imd1 f a t'tDr i.r fx- 6P` 4 a f1 J Memorandum from . . . Southold Town Board of Appeals TOWN HALL, SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 765-1809 Date: 7/11 /88 To: Frank Isler , Esq . From: Linda Re : Matter of Charles Zahra Attached as requested today is the original print of Drawing #86-048 pp . 1 -4 which was received by our office 2/17/88. Thanks . II_" "-. -.... -I----- . " - � - I ..."��_ . � ,1-10" . . I . . . � . -. . � ' .- . . I I" .- - . 1 ._ - . - - . (•r-. tJ'1'rtr! !uu-'ter","J.. L.rw-r... i -.J,�+._�w�.+--..+ :(_.—- 4 - .. �{'.•. '." �:Wrs-y' "{wr wr.i.w•yl yy,..p C1 'i I.l �ra.•••t .._ .. - . �. f '�.-/`"1'•.Y,�M' y, rw..� -..e•�_.w..-iw. SriTr' r..� _ _..I�-.:,---'....:."'...1'_­.;.-�.I�-.._."­—....--.,_.�*.-.I*:;1.'�*1,.,..,,_.-.'I--.',T.�.._."."-_I-.--",:1 I-,�..�--;�­L�..I I.--,;_­.�-�1'''�:,"...I_,.."t:.�­­��-�,�-­,I-.7-_!.—I_�_',-."Z 1_-,-I.-.-'-.1-.--...-_'",�.'"'".''",'`,-.-_I%-.y1'j.�...:­��...;...c'.,'�-..�.-1":,..1,,._.�I,-._:t'.'-,/",.-I::.1_-I1.,�I,_.-�.I.I..�.,,'..�W.;;,-�...II,..,.-4_-�..._M.I-..?.i-,_.-,.­"_--.-.�.,._-',_..-,"':....-�.iI'".�I'-.,-.-.�1:,'',­,t_;'I..�'I-�"1-'.�_�..,11'.__.,�,.,_2..r�..­..,.'.'I�,._'--.I'-II­''.'�"�,."...�I.A.1,l­-._�.,�,,.*i��I­*,-I.,'".:-.-.'-I'',n-.,r-,-._,�..-."r..- ,6.`-.—,.­I.�_-,.l 1-_I_'_.",.�".%....-'j�..,I.,'�'*�I/­�,��I�,:.''_�1.-.l I�_.-�--,-- ..'1I-_..1:­,l.._:I,.,:I..A,.'.i"I:'.�..�,1�-.-..,----..,-�.j--�.�._��.m-��.:,..-­"�-�.�­.-,.c-;:;�.I.,..:'. �..,"�&V---�':,1",..1 l.II.'-,I.,-,.,"'-'l.-,'--.''..'' :-�.-._-.-�.-",.4..-��.---��.:�,,.".,._.:I.'�.�'.�.,.-".:_'__'�,-,_-:.-��.�,";,-.�-1.,�_j'-�,..��;r�-..''.,-.�.,,..�:-*� 4.3-�C:..--1--�'- :_:''.­','FJ- e. u .y---•..._.•..,..._I._.-. •a..-`-•'- ,.a'..j.,%r:-,,,,,....,.. .. "",...�''._ -..,.k.�--==_ -..�_tv'...w.yi:+-.ac c+�st' - __• ._ .. '- V r . ._ . • .. . - .. .-' _ . I,. - _ -. j. ,.._... ,, _ _ N-- .. .. {'- ' k - - ' _... _ - . -q;A. r: `� • - - I, . - . ( IE. - .r.. - 4 t 't, t ' - - -.. �F .: , - . - ,. - . I. - _ ' . , !. 3 (`c.. `_ tip - ' : - - - -* - - ,- - _ ,� ' . III - )s -rcKeti 218° Ste_, " u Y,�..�t. ti g: , - p, _ ,:,. - r Sic.' t-iC' - �r - X •' .: e" E"I1'i�. } j r 4 (i vA).M �,- �WI.Q4Q- 'r'.c T. G] /C► �`j _ .!_4 : i^ -/ : � - VP ' .'i. - e • ::-?,' Y '""'p ��,i,-,. % +t'., w'�' n ..4' .rr Y ;- �'( -F-. y i.:.cx Z•R^•-1r•r^i^,+�e.Z-a x `� lt.n.aZ r'> s :f, y .l �(r�..4 I J1ti f �rtK y f{' I& °-•,�:L - y G q tYd 1 •"�.. ° v..r,7t r y „r `y 4.. ars ,yam SR ��...rw. J gyp! "♦ Xi r,,/+c� f :l1 �.. su ,F. �T a+ a z d n 3w�•rjr+',e S# .h-' -1Z.1.-...,..".--­�.-:1-.1'�..­_R iI1...��"-I:—I"',.,.'."1._,._-"'' t r s' `r.+d. CF ,e„�, ,r .r fF'srr.+..r`�'� 7 w}Y - i 1 A..7 J z„r. ; Y- _ ._ I. z > ( 4S T tcx y�.�.ts: < r 5i t bh- •'•' i �T S4�-7 4 }'♦p�`3 $_ "�t' "a..,b �',i,''•, _ '; ''i'?' f l j i i ,,, - 'ys- aY rs�`'` K s' {y� .r iy ,a f"'1i� j''•,�� `_S- f*L., Ly-'`S -; -k . r, t v Te, . , r `rF ..3 :.�t:... ,, `ate `;1 Y b r. ""'°� ,r h €. u -.l t.. ''t.,- s,_ t .n - ' uY r T 3.- 1 y ,� y e �.d>•� 3^'.s' `' rt �a' c c r /e k4 Y'<+� ° r"ask wG*ss�'�► +`v <t ' �,ra� t� h a t w ;�' l� 'a� } i.�4:i \ � 'r~��- tr• -., 1." ' '*_. R. r ^. Yy9'P 5.u3s�°-��-' 7k' ~ -L( ,Gq = r i'7. .'r K' 'T.. �'d e. '�>s {Y '�-,"•ai1° r }s `s„` " }a4. ., ` y.`R�nti c�.Vrr22 ' y. �;. t Y .st e, L y C = t`A ,,,�,v Tt s'( yz tI­ : ' G1/�ir �` : 71r � ► �7wr �1'� '!`Gt?'� i.,l.f T ( a4� r 43� R�lA�iKE A,1E.�lIYRHEII®,ti.�lt.y "'r '}_ 5 6,?2?• 41�� h { 4 x f ur z(�. r,. z c.:t. �J !:i, 1'r. yil: r ._!-._��.� ,'�. <� ' OA �'f.�.1'�-5'fi.._ �,�1.Z,.-''v':..�rat" z: o � .. r �.�.-rf ti..^� .. kfy .: -, �'._- .a_.,. �c•Cr:'.s 1 .tl a'ay._A_',o.•." -..i 41" �5..�,`` t8''. �. .v,_- Southold TO wn Board Appeals 51P MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAwICKI '-NOTICE 'OF HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN , pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of- the Town of Southold , that . the following matter will be held for a public hearing by the SOUTHOLD 'TOWN 'BOARD 'OF 'APPEALS at the Southold Town Hall , Main Road , Southold , New York , on THURSDAY , MAY 12 , 1988 in accordance with this Board ' s action rendered April 14 , 1988 : 7 :45 p .m'. Appl . No . 3701 - CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV ,- Section 142 , Article XI , - Sections 100-118 (D & E) of the Zoning Code . Application Requests Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector in his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property 140 Pike Street, Mattituck , NY; -County Tax Map District- 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 5. Zone District: "B- l " General Busf.ness-. Dated : April 14 , 1988 . BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS. GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN Linda Kowalski , Board Secretary -------------------------------------------------------------x ! t,.(/� L� 1 OG�F J Southold Town Board ofA eals PP MAIN ROAD - STATE' ROAD . 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., ,N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN,JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Ap r i 1 15 , .'1988 Eric J . Bressler, Esq . Wickham , Wickham: &. Bressler , P. C. Main Road , Box 1424 Mattituck , NY 11952 Re : Appl . No. 3701 Charles Zahra Dear Eric : Transmitted herewith for your perusal and record is a copy of the official findings and determination rendered by this. Board , the original of which has this date been filed with the Office of the Town Clerk . Please note that this matter has been set down for a further hearing to be held on May 12 , 1988. In the interim , please furnish us with a complete copy of the Contract of Sale between the North Fork Bank and the Langers , and between the North Fork Ban* and Charles Zahra . A copy of .the Notice of Hearing as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman , Inc . and Suffolk Times , ,Inc . by, our office will be forwarded to you..in the near future . Yours very truly , GERARD P . GOEHRINGER lk CHAIRMAN .Enclosure Copies of Decision to : James A. Schondebare , Esq . (Town Attorney) Robert H. Berntsson , Esq . (Asst . Town Attorney) Mr. Victor Lessard , Executive Administrator Southold Town Building Department Y v - V Southold Town Board of Appeals ,� v ( MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765 1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF-APPEALS Appeal No. 3701. Application 'Dated December 10 , 1987 TO: Eric J ... Bressler , Esq . as Attorney [Appellant (s) ] for C.HARLES ZAHRA Main., Road , Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on April 14 , 1988 , the above appeal was considered, and . the action indicated below was taken, on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New. York' Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under .the Zoning Ordinance Article , , Section j ] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance . Article , Section [ X] Request for Reversal of Determination of Building Inspector Application of 'CHARLES ZAHRA under Article XIV , Section 142 of. ' the Zoning Code for a reversal of Determination of "Building Inspector in .his Revocation of Building Permit #15428Z issued October 27 , 1986 . Location of Property : 140 . Pike Street , .Matti�tuck , NY ; . County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 141 , 'Block' 4 , Lot 5 . Zone District : B-1 . .Gener.al. .Business . . WHEREAS , public hearings were held in the Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 on February 18 , 1988. and March 3 , 1988; and WHEREAS , at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application ; and WHEREAS ,, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning , and the surrounding areas ; and WHEREAS , the Board .made the following findings of fact : 1 .' This is an application requesting a reversal of the determination of the Building Inspector of his Revocation of Building Permit #15428.Z issued October 27 , 1986 . The revocation was issued on November 5 , 1987 . 2 . The property in question is located in the "B-1 " General Busine.ss Zoning District- and is identified on the Suffolk County Tax Map as District 1000 , Section 141 , Block 4 , Lot 005 . 3 . The subject premises contains a total area of 3 ,800 sq . ft. with 40 .0 ft. frontage along the south side of Pike Street in the Hamlet of Mattituck ; Town of Southold . (CONTINUED ON `PAGE TWO ) DATED: April 14 , 1988 . CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form ZB4 (rev. 12/81) Page 2 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1988 4 . The subject premises is presently improved with a partially completed one-story concrete foundati.on with exterior walls . Previously , the premises was improved by a two-story structure which was nonconforming as to various setback require- ment-s and as to use . 5 . The building permit was revoked under Article XVI , Section 100-142 of the Zoning Code which reads as -follows : " . . . The Building Inspector may revoke a building permit theretofore issued and approved in the following instances : A. Where he finds that there has been any false statement or misrepresentation as to a material fact in the application , plan or specifications on which the building permit was based. B. Where he finds that the building permit was issued in error and should not have been issued in accordance ,with the applicable law. C. Where he finds that the work performed under the permit is not being prosecuted in accordance with the provisions of the application , plans or specifications . D. Where the person to whom a building permit has been issued fails or refuses to comply with a stop order issued by the Building Inspector. 6 . Hearings were held on this application on February 18 , 1988 and March 3 , 1988 . The hearing was left open at that time to permit the Board to make a physical inspection of the premises and to include matters of personal knowledge in the record . This was completed by March 14 , 1988 , and the hearing was closed at the Board ' s Regular Meeting on March 17 , 1988. 7 . Based on the facts in the record , it appears that the applicant proceeded with work in excess of the plans submitted to the Building Department . It further appears that the applicant has undertaken to completely rebuild the structure . Indeed , the second story has been totally remo.ved and the first floor has been completely rebuilt . The construction also includes increasing the square footage of the new struc- ture when compared to the prior structure . 8 . Irrespective of whether the actual construction complied with plans submitted , the facts before the Board raise serious other issues pertaining to the validity of the building permit . Specifically , the evidence would tend to show that the applicant is endeavoring to reconstruct and structurally alter his nonconforming building to an extent exceeding the aggregate cost of 50% of the fair market value of the building . This would violate Section 100- 118E of the Zoning Code. The Board notes in passing that such extensive reconstruction would also subject the project to compliance with present building code requirements under the New York State Building. Code . J Page 3 - Appl . No . 3701 Matter of CHARLES ZAHRA Decision Rendered April 14 , 1.988 9 . Based on the personal knowledge of the. Board and conversations with family members of the prior owner , it further appears that the . use of the premises may have been discontinued for a period in. excess of two years . This would result in the premises losing its nonconforming status under Section 100- 118D of the Zoning Code and thereby render , the revoked building . permit invalid. 10 . In his letter dated March 17 , 1988 , counsel for. the applicant indicated that issues of discontinuance of the nonconforming use and improper expansion of a nonconforming use were not squarely before the Board at the hearings held . Counsel requested an opportunity to be heard on those issues . 11 . The Board hereby finds that serious factual and legal issues exist regarding the validity of the building permit under Section 100-118 of the Zoning Code and under the State Building Code . These issues go to the very heart of the permit and should be resolved at this juncture . Since no vested rights can be obtained under an illegal permit , it would appear to be in t-he applicant' s best interest to have _ these issues resolved now in addition to the .limited questions applicant formally presented to the Board . Nor, can this Board close its eyes to these issues revealed , in the record when considering the appropriateness of the Building Depart- ment ' s revocation of the building permit. . 12 . Since counsel for the applicant has requested an opportunity to be heard on the issues of the nonconforming status of the property , we hereby set this matter down for a further hearing , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under Sections 100-118D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Now , therefore , on motion by Mr. Grigonis , seconded by Mr . Goehringer,it was RESOLVED , that the Matter of the --Application of CHARLES ZAHRA under Appl . No . 3701 , BE AND HEREBY IS SET DOWN FOR A FURTHER HEARING , to be held ' on the 12TH DAY OF MAY , 1988 , at which time the applicants should be prepared to present evidence regarding the factual issues that exist under- Sec- tions 100-1.18D and 100-118E of the Zoning Code . Vote of the Board : Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki . This resolution was duly adopted . lk GERARD P . GOEHRINGEK , UdKiRMAN P AJ I ,D S 1. Southold, N.Y. 11971 HENRY E.RRAYNOR,Jr.,Chairman TELEPHONE JAMES WALL 765-1938 BENNETT ORLOWSKI,Jr. GF.ORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,Jr. WILLIAM F.MULLEN,Jr. October 26 , 1983 Mr. Charles Zahra P.O. Box. 113 7 Mattituck, New York 11952 _ Re: Site Plan . Dear Mr. Zahra: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, October 24 , 1983 . RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the site plan "Charles Zahra at Mattituck" . Please forward the application fee' in the amount of $25 to our office at your earliest convenience. Thank you. Very truly yours , HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary cc: Building Department { i 1 1 �/ 'Memorandum from . . . OMP BUILDING INSPECTORS OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TOWN HALL, SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 765-1802 dw 2-/^/ ��ID lii�� Southold, N.Y. 11971 HENRY E.RAYNOR,lr.,Chairman TELEPHONE JAMES WALL 765-1938 BENNETT ORLOWSKI,Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,Jr. WILLIAM F.MULLEN,Jr. October 12, 1983 Mr. Edward F. Hindermann Building and Housing Inspector Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Charles Zahra Site Plan__ Dear Mr. Hindermann: Regarding your certification dated September 22 , 1983 , please advise our Board if it is necessary for the applicant to apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals for a use variance for the second floor. We will hold this application in abeyance pending your.. , , response. . . Thank you for your assistance. Very truly yours HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR. ,- CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary " TEL. 765-1802 p��FFULiI��OG TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR _ P.O. BOX 728 Ul ® 1� TOWN HALL . S E P 23 REC'D y� SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 , . September 22 , 1983 Plannning Board Town. of Southold Main Road Southold , NY S.ubject : . Certification of Site Plan Charles Zahra , Mattituck , NY Gentlemen : The above premises is located in a B-1 General Business ' District . . The use of building for retail stores is permitted ... in this district . - The residential second floor apartment i.s. a non-conforming use- for this zone , Art . VII , Sec . 100-70 A ( 1 ) ( c ) . f _ -The lot area and building set backs are non-conforming . for this - district as required under Bulk and Parking Schedule Art. VII , Sec . 100-71 . _' :There is public parking facilities adjacent to this..lot " that ;;would no :doubt .provide off-street parking for the propoP,0, additional.,,store in this building.._-* ,The lack of parking and off-street loading areas is a non-conforming condition: This certification is made in accordance with Art . XIII , Sec . 100-133 C , for Zoning requirements . Yo s truly, � tGc�t� :Edward'-. F.. Hindermann , Bu11 ing & . Housing I,ns.pect:or E F H ec Attch 4 .1 '.. 3t r, - a r " , a } f � FORM NO.3 s 1, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD j. 1 BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL FileNo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Date . U. . . . . . . . . 19 `. .. /� / ' PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application'dated ` �rC . . . .c7. . . . . ., 19G. .�. for permit to construct /./�+`�./�✓ - .OI�A.�:v . .C,r�Fr%! . .c.14 . . . . . ��/l"r�= . . . . . . at Location of Property . . . . cz. . . IV4:/7i,/, House No. Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . .A Block . . . . . .. Lot O�J Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . Filed Map No. .. . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds Building Inspector RV 1/80 - . _ ,h .ter•. l� 4 r ..- .._ �;�wl,- ��_.Y 5k..;r_�, r ..is-• ....r. , c r....vN..t s .i1_�. �.;. `t„��r�������Y:1�T:�c3:�a.F�n='.i,.d.x.'..;a.- --�-.-.s",'.`'..,+u.. '�.4�'. r \I r �- �i RM NO.3 TO SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date . .lay . . . . . . . . . . ., 195. To . /as. . . /�1q. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7::-. 0•. . - 75a)�'. . .!/.3 . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . . . . XA14F . 4. . . . . . . . .1 19 �. for permit to C'IliO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at Location of Property (96.Q . . . . 1. �,C► . . . l'. . . . . . . .c4 �.(r�i . . . House No. ll// Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . . . . . . Block . . . . . . . . . Lot 0.01.'.y. . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . is returned herewith and disapproved on the following groundsASCi. 4or Ate ..Q 1=. . avz/ CX . < r-X. ,ev.41.7..n� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . uilding Inspector� � � � � � � RV 1/80 Q ys:in Ycae MATTOTUCK CHAMBER OF COMMERCE l-1^ --- "j P.O. BOX 1056 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND, N.Y. 11952 } ra J September 16, 1985 Victor Lessard Southold Town Building Department Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Lessard, It has come to our attention that one of our members, Charles Zahra is seeking Town approval on a project located at 600 Pike Street, Mattituck. The Board of Directors has reviewed his project and is anxious to give its approval to Mr. Zahra's efforts. We are pleased to see and eager to encourage efforts such as these. An old and almost useless eyesore is being trans- formed into attractive and valuable retail and office space. This, in the natural course of events, will breathe new life and increased cash flow into the Love Lane area, thus upgrading our business community. This project is very timely since the village has recently sustained the loss of some retail space on the very same street. i We on the Board of Directors feel a strong commitment to stand behind any member who, in our best judgement promotes good business relations, thus enhancing and enriching our WHOLE community! Sincerely, Lois A. Sauthoff, President Mattituck Chamber of Commerce On Behalf of the Board of Directors c.c. Town Planning Board, Mattituck Park District LS:ld LAW O►IICL• WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD- P.O.•OK 1424 MATTITUCK LONG ISLAND NCW YORK 11952 WILLIAM WICKHAM S16-29S-8753 CRIC J.aRcssLCA ARIOAIL A.WICKHAM 19 85 r RAHKJry rAR"I R December 41 Daniel C• oss Southold Town Building Dept. Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Re: Charles Zahra - Pike Street Property Gentlemen: we As attorneys for the Mattituck Park Districrminedat theirvmeetingaoned to advise you that the Park District October 291 1985 it had no objection to the improvements being made to the building by Mr. Zahra. Sincerely yours, S� Abigail A. Wickham AAW:ab cc : Mattituck Park District FORM NO. D TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) N? 14521 Z Date ......'-�o......... 19.X, Permission is herebi granted to: ........ '.1,1�5......'441z�/✓................... ......... .... ........I/V.............. to ..........�..CJA116�lf l....... �t.4.. I`4r-/5c�.....�1�...4,-L�lS. C�................. . ......a.7=F�<<....., . L ...... . ........................................................................... .. of premises located at ..........Q.�0.........1...�..t ...... .........!..:4��Fl.���'!C �../<<. Y. ................................................................................ ................................................................................ ......................................................................//....�........................................................................ ............. County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .....1.'t` ........ Block ..Q.3.......... Lot No. .00...0?-//......... pursuant to application dated ....... ..........�.s�.............. 19 and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee $.. .. G 0. 4-.............. .. .. ........... .Buildin Inspector ►spec Rev. 6/39/80 FORM NO.4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. . Z.1.4 19.6 . . . . . . . . Date . . Fe.b: . �.�. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19$4 . THIS CERTIFIES that the building . . . .O f f i.c.e . f a.Q i l i.t.y Location of Property F 0 0 ,Pike„Street M a t t i t u c k House No. Street . . . . . . . . .Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 1.4 0, , , , . . . ,Block . .Q3 . . . . . . . . . . ,Lot . , . . . 0,04 , , . , . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Filed Map No. . . . . . . . .Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated . June 15, 19 8,5 pursuant to which Building Permit No. , , 1 4 52 1 Z dated . . . . . . . . . 1 /30. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 19 ,8 6 , was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is . . . . . . . . . CPP.vQ1r ,s,t9ra,gq , sli,ed , pf, q, �sting. ,building, ,to , office facilities The certificate is issued to . . . . . . C,h a r t e,s , Z a h r a & wife (owner,lFsM ROAgpR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . of the aforesaid building. . Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . . . . . . . . . .N(A, , , , , , , , . UNDERWRITERS CERTIFICATE NO. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Pp.yi,ding Plumbers Certificate v OL n✓ Building Inspector Rev. 1/81 OP-- P uT � 5 ( =� . Zr*lms TQ so O �+ f 0 0 ri o O E,u i rd i rcg t� �-E Al i WoKur�$n�- j w P- y ! + _a�sscc 7+ i n `Natk Q y bui!dingei j !l O �Cprr. rrrC�tlf ! �/ 00 cv i3 ro a S-T C N N: OR ADDR108 Imo. �awurno+u"t Ar?��Tror+OF z LO T14 waver IS A Vogt StArt 4-= . rlq cil IPPCAV*LAW. G 't"" ;pRES OF�R Oar S mm�l OR RN+G s LSMAL�NOT LAW YALID TKut COPY. � .d5 �, �v/(`�P C1• !� DES II�ICAT ZM ED ME@ON SMALLv:�� G�, /^*' V , G N FOR WMOM 1O t 2 rbofy AT-rfTCJ �° oN M►s Do T i I1r( tuLt CO,,,wVvMG Ar r.�pVE11P+MH+T �• v � c�3 R+sniUtlOM USTED M "� —7 - r. PAS Q i' to l Mt OF,,Rj T14 E go ilAW"t!• �,�! L rr New coo_ I 5�FF0L��, Southold, N.Y. 11971 HENRY E.RAYNOR,Jr.,Chairman TELEPHONE DAMES WALL 765-1938 BENNETT ORLOWSKI,Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,Jr. WILLIAM F.MULLEN,Jr. October 26 , 1983 Mr. Charles Zahra P.O. Box 1137 Mattituck, New York 11952 Re: Site Plan Dear Mr. Zahra: The following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board, October 24 , 1983 . RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the site plan "Charles Zahra at Mattituck" . Please forward the application fee in the amount of $25 to our office at your earliest convenience . Thank you. Very truly yours , HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR. , CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary cc: Building Department SL Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 HENRY E.RAYNOR,Jr.,Chairman TELEPHONE JAMES WALL 765-1938 BENNETT ORLOWSKI,Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM,Jr. WILLIAM F.MULLEN,Jr. October 12 , 1983 Mr. Edward. F. Hindermann Bu.ilding. and .Housing Inspector Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Re: Charles Zahra Site .Plan:_ Dear Mr. Hindermann: Regarding your certification dated September 22 , 1983 , please advise our Board , if it is necessary for the applicant to apply to the Zoning Board of Appeals fora use- variance for the second floor. We will-hold this application in abeyance. pending your., ,,' ° response;<_ , .Thank you for your .assistance . Very truly yours HENRY E. RAYNOR, JR. ,. CHAIRMAN SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD By Susan E. Long, Secretary TEL. 765-1802 \p��FFUL��OG TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR a P.O. BOX 728 Ln TOWN HALL O ® - SOU HOLD, N.Y. 1971 S E P 2 3 REC'D September 22 , 1983 Plannning Board Town of Southold Main Road Southold , NY Subject : Certification of Site Plan Charles Zahra , Mattituck , NY Gentlemen : The above premises is located in a B-1 General Business District . The use of building for retail stores is permitted in this district . The residential second floor apartment is a non-conforming use for this zone , Art . VII , Sec . 100-70 A ( 1 ) ( c ) . The lot area and building set backs are non-conforming for this - district as required under Bulk and Parking Schedule Art . VII , Sec . 100-71 . There is public parking facilities adjacent to this lot that would no doubt provide off-street parking for the proposed additional store in this building . The lack of parking and off-street loading areas is a non-conforming condition . This certification is made in accordance with Art . XIII , Sec . 100-133 C , for Zoning requirements . Yo s truly , Edward- F . Hindermann Building & Housing Inspector EFH : ec Attch . l,. ' FORM NO.3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL File No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . DateU. . . . . . J . . . . . . ., 19 '�� . . ./fix' . . . . . .i�,��. . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . .. 194.�. for permit to construct . -,!C,4l�L��:v . .C,�f'f.%! . .cS4 .� . . �4/���`— . . . . . . at Location of Property �? � . . . . . . . . . . �C;. . . ,JlmT�- . . . . . . /.7.4./7�7 House No. Street Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . .�. �. . Block . . ..-%. . . . . . . . Lot . .OU . . . . . • Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds . .PZ . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Inspector RV 1/80 § 100-118 ZONING § 100-118 § 100-118. Nonconforming uses. Unless otherwise authorized as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided, the following provisions shall apply to nonconforming uses: A. The lawful use of a building or premises existing on the C effective date of this chapter or authorized by..a building permit issued prior thereto may be, continued although such use does not conform to the provisions of this chapter, and such use may be extended throughout the building lawfully acquired to ,said date. B. A nonconforming use of a building or premises may be changed to a use of the same or higher classification ac- cording to the provisions of this chapter. C. Whenever a district shall hereafter be changed, any then existing nonconforming use of a building or premises in such changed district may be continued or changed to a use of a similar or higher classification, provided that all other Cregulations governing the use are complied with. D. Whenever a nonconforming use of a building or premises has been discontinued for a period of more than two (2) years or has been changed to a higher classification or to a conforming use, anything in this section to the contrary notwithstanding, the nonconforming use of such building or premises shall no longer be permitted unless a variance therefor shall have been granted by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided. E. A nonconforming building may not be reconstructed or structurally altered during its life to an extent exceeding in aggregate cost fifty percent (50%) of the fair value of the building, unless the use of such building is changed to a conforming use. F. A nonconforming building which has been damaged by fire or other causes to the extent of more than fifty percent (50%) of its fair value shall not be repaired or rebuilt unless the use of such building is changed to a conforming use. t 10053 z-z5-95 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK I� !\ STATE OF NEW YORK ss: NOTICE OF HEARING Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, NOTICE IS HEREBY GIo a public newspaper rinted at Southold in Suffolk Count EN;;pursuant to Section 267:of. � pP , Y, the,Town Law and the Code of I and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, the,Town of Southold,that.the following matter will be held for has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman a:• public hearing by the once each week for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . weeks SOUtHOLD TOWN BOARD AF�tPPI✓A� at the Southold Town Hall, Main -Road, successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . S. . . . . . . . . . Southold,N_Y,on THURSDAY, MAY 12, 1988 in accordance day of , 19 .� with this Board's action rendered April 14, 1988: 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3701- I �v CHARL-ES ZAHRA under Ar- ticle XIV, Section 142; Article XI, Sections 100-118 (D&E) of the Zoning Code. Application Requests Reversal of Determina- tion of Building Inspector:in his Sworn to before me this . . . . . . . . . S . . . . . . . . . day of Revocation.of Building Permit No. 15428Zissued October 27, , 19 1986.Location of Property:'140 Pike. Street, Mattituck, ' NY, County Tax Map District 1000, Section 141, Block 4," Lot 5. Zone District: '`B-l" General. Business. . . . . . . . . . Dated: April 14, 1988 BY ORDER OF THE I Notary Public SOUTHOLD TOWN BARBARA FORBES BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Notary Public, State of New York .CHAIRMAN No. 4806816 Linda Kowalski, qualified in Suffolk County Board Secretary Commission Expires Ap, 3/. 19 -l•T-5/5/88(50)