The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About3908 SCOTT L. HARRIS APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS � :'' ' ;''�' '• + � i �� ''^•, '�{ Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman `';;�' (, Charles Grigonis, Jr. +�t �� f.' �," 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. 3908 Application of ROBERT OCHSENREITER and EDWARD LENCESKI. Variance for reversal of a building permit to construct a one-family dwelling. Property location: 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 139, Block 3, Lot 14. At a Meeting of the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals held on May 15, 1990, the following action was taken: WHEREAS, public hearings were held on February''1, 1990, March 29, 1990 and April 19, 1990 in the Matter of the Appli- cation filed under No. 3908; WHEREAS, at. said hearings all those who desired -to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have carefully considered all A.,sstimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present and previous zoning classifications, and the surrounding areas; and Page 2 - Appl. No. 3906 Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski Property Owner: Inland Homes, Inc. ZBA Decision Rendered May _15, 1990 WHEREAS, the Board made the Following Findings of Fact: JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS 1. One of the first issues raised in this matter is whether or not this Board has jurisdiction based upon the timing of the filing of this application for a reversal of 'a building permit issued by the building inspector under Permit No. 18;'55 on August 8, 1989 and/or concerning construction commenced under said permit .approximately five to six months late (above ground construction) : 2 . Some of the past applications considered and decided by this Board have included requests for a reversal (or otherwise related to an improper building permit or improper construction related under a 7uilding - permit) based upon written determinations or action of a Building Inspector, including but not limited to determinations under: (a) A building permit issued by the inspector which were issued months before and were still pending during the processing of a review of this Board, and that either did not involve construction or improvements under said building permit or did involve construction or improvements under said permit, and as much as a year from the date of issuance of the building permit (Article .XXVIII, Section 100-281H authorizes work to be "commenced within twelve months after the date of issuance. ") ; (b) the guise of a building permit and which construction was built (within a year from the issuance date of the permit) , and which was built "in error" under the zoning code provisions and was reviewed by the Board of Appeals for consideration of the nonconform- ance under the zoning code; (c) A building permit issued and late issued a stop work notification by the building inspector to suspend all building activities, pending a final determination (after review) by the Board of Appeals; (d) A determination, requirement, order, or decision made by the building inspector (in addition to other reviews conferred by law) - (Reference: Article XXVII, Section 100-271 — Powers and Duties of the Board of Appeals) . Page 3 - Appl. No. 3906 Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski 3. The following time periods are submitted for the record concerning the application .for building permit; under review, and activities related thereto: (a) Application filed August 2, 1989, ( issued on August 8, 1989) for the construction of a 26 ' x 40 ' deep dwelling (envelope) with sideyards at 14' and 10 ' with handwritten notation " . . .as per Building Zone Ordinance 1966 Section 307, sideyards" (reverse side, page two) . (b) Building Permit No. 18355Z issued August 8, 1989 concerns premises referred to as "565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 139, Block 3, Lot 14, " owned by Richard Garcia, who later sold the land as a vacant plot-on October . 2, 1989 to Inland Homes (see Deed at Liber 10950 page 172) . (c) on or about August 30, 1989 excavation started and on August 31, 1989, forms for a foundation were placed. (d) by letter dated October 18, 1989, an attorney for - neighbors residing in the immediate vicinity notified the Southold Town Attorney's Office of the circumstances of the subject land as a merged parcel, and questioned the validity of the vacant land .. as a separate buildable parcel for a new dwelling; (e) shortly after this letter was sent to the Town Attorney, the media was made aware through the local newspapers published in the Township that a review was being made by the Town Attorney's Office as to the validity of the subject building permit and the vacant land conditional Certificate of Occupancy also issued during 1989; (f) On December 11, 1989, the Town Attorney replied by ,letter indicating the results of his review, opinionating that the Code does not show a clear legislative intent by the Town Board, although final interpretation rests with the Board of Appeals both under the Town Code and Town Law. At no time did an interpretation request be made through the Board of Appeals by any person or representative; and the Town Attorney's written response dated December 11, 1989 was not furnished to the Board of Appeals (until January 19, 1990 - the time of the filing of this application under Appl. No. 3908) . Jurisdiction concerning Page 4 - Appl. No. 391 'Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski ZBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 interpretations is with the Board of Appeals (see Article XXVII, Section 100-271D of the Zoning Code of Southold Town) . (g) It is understood that during the first week in January, 1990 the foundation was :prepa"red $ion January 8, 1990, the foundation backfilled. (h) The next day (January 9, 1990) certified-mail notices were sent to the adjacent property owners and to the owner of this parcel (Inland Homes, Inc..) and his attorney, -.)of notifica- tion and intent to file this Petition to the Board. of Appeals; (i) On January 15, 1990, deck framing was started; (j) On January 19, 1990 the Petition and accompanying papers were. filed with the Southold Town Clerk and Board of Appeals; (k) On January 23, 1990 a written memorandum was delivered to the Building Inspector requesting that a "stay be issued concerning the construction" until this Board of Appeals ' application has been decided upon and further requesting his. presence at a hearing of the Board to be held February 1, 1990 at 8:15 p.m. (together with delivery of copies of documents pertinent to the file) ; (1) On January 26, ' 1990 the Building Inspector responded to the Board- of Appeals ' memorandum and suggested that the Board, at this point, "get in touch with the Town Attorney' s Assistant to be brought up-to-date"on events which have taken place to this point, " - and confirmed that a representative from the Building Department will be present at the Board's February 1, 1990 hearing; (m) On February 1, 1990 the Building Inspector, was personally . served with copies of the Notice of Petition with Exhibits filed with and under consideration .by the Board of Appeals; (n) On February 1, 1990 the first of three hearings were held by the Appeals and Zoning Board, at which time the question of jurisdiction of the Board of Appeals was discussed at length between the attorney for the property owner, the Board of Appeals members, and the applicant (s) . The hearing was recessed to another date in order to consult with legal counsel. Before continuing with the other two hearings, it was deemed to be appropriately within the jurisdiction of the Board of Appeals; that the application was timely made, having been filed within 15 to 20 days of the construction of the foundation, filed approximately 20 days after the above-ground construction was commenced, and filed within the period of time that the subject build- ing permit was pending, all of which are not unreasonable time periods based on past precedents and practices of this Board. Page 5� - Appl. No. 39---" Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski ZBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 REQUESTS UNDER Z.B.A. APPLICATION 4. By application No. 3908 filed January 19, 1990, the follow- ing requests are under consideration: (a) Reversal of determination of building inspector in granting Permit No. 18355 for the reason that the property upon which the new dwelling is to be constructed is not a buildable lot and has not been held in single and separate ownership since April 9, 1957 as required by'Article XXIV, Section 100-281A (7) , etc. (b) Reversal of determination of building inspector in granting Permit No. 18355 for the reason that the property does not conform to Article IIIA, Section 100-30A (3) and Bulk Schedule of the Zoning Code as to the minimum requirements for lot area, width and depth; _ • (c) Reversal of determination of building inspector in granting Permit No. 18355 for the reason that the property in ques- tion does not conform to the Bulk Schedule requirements in this A-40 Zone District and does not comply with the requirements of Article XXIV, Section 100-244 of the Zoning Code as applies to nonconforming lots legally in existence , as of the date of that section (adopted on or about February 15, 1989) ; (d) Reversal of Vacant Land conditional Certificate of Occupancy dated November 28, 1988 issued to Leonard F. and Ave Maria Spano (#Z17543) for the subject premises described as "505 Bayer Road, Mattituck, NY, County Tax Map #1000-139-3-36, Map. of Mattituck Heights Lot 36) . GENERAL HISTORY 1957 THROUGH 1989 5. On July 24, 1935 and prior to the enactment of zoning in Southold Town, the Map of Mattituck Heights was .filed with the Suffolk County Clerk. The subject parcel, referred to as Lot #36, is shown on this 1932 Map as a 50' wide by 150 ' deep lot. ` • Page 6 - Appl.,. No. 3908 Application of ' Ochsenreiter & Lenceski ZBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 GENERAL HISTORY (continued) 6 . On April 23, 1957 the Southold Town Zoning Code and Zoning .Maps were adopted, and from that point in time up until November 1971, the subject premises : (a) was locatedin. the A-Residential/Agricultural Zone District, requiring a minimum lot size of 12,500 sq. ft. per lot; and (b) was included in the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" which excepted certain subdivisions from the minimum lot size_ requirements . (Map of Mattituck Heights of 1932iincluded) ; 7. During 1971 the zoning code and zoning maps were amended, and lots located in the A--Agricultural/Residential Zone District were required to meet a minimum of 40,000 (instead of 12,500) sq. ft. for con-struction of a new dwelling. Also in 1971, the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" (Article I, Section 100-12) was modified, deleting the subject Map of Mattituck Heicrhts, and, including but not limited to, adding others. It is noted that many other subdivisions preexisting of the zoning code which were also not town approved were not added to the "Excepted List" (examples are: Peconic Bay Properties Inc. ; Reydon Shores of 1936 ; Founders Estates of 1927, etc.) . S. In March 1983 the minimum lot size requirements was increased from 40,000 to 80,000 sq. ft. per lot, and again the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" at Article I, Section 100-12 was modified, and again the Map of Mattituck Heights was not included. 9. During 1989, the Zoning Code and Zoning Maps were amended, changing the zoning of the subject parcel from "A" (80,00.0) to "R-40" (40,000 sq. ft. minimum) . There was no change at this'. time in the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" at Section 100-12; the Map of Mattituck Heights and other similar subdivisions (filed prior to zoning/1957) . 10. At no time during the period from November 1971 ' to ,,,, - June 26, 1989 was there filed any record to ehow •an intent to reseparate the subject merged parcels. The record is clear that the merger of the property (35&36) for this 18-year period remained unchanged. Page 7 - Appl. No. 3908 Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski ZBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 PRIOR ZONING APPEALS RECORD 10. There is no 'record of any prior application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals concerning a reduction in lot area or width or the set-otf of this parcel from the adjoining parcel. 11. The division of any `lot of a size 15,000 sq. ft. into two 7,500 sq. ft. lots has required considerations) from the Board of Appeals since the adoption of the- zoning code and zoning maps in 1957 to the present time Aprecedents in Town building department records and zoning board of appeals ' records) . Fj,TST OF CHANGES OF OWNERSHIP 1945 - 1989 12. The subject property (referred to as Lot No. 36 on the Map of Mattituck Heights) was acquired by Paul and Helen Bittner by deed at Liber 5867 page 188 on November 19, 1965. The adjoining property (referred to as Lot No. 35) was also acquired by Paul and Helen Bittner on September 5, 1945. (Approximately a year after the second parcel was acquired in common ownership, the Town Board ' adopted an "Excepted List of Subdivisions" and included Mattituck Heights.) 13. On April 11, 1972, both Lot Nos. 35 and 36 were conveyed by single deed to Leonard and Ave Spano by deed at Liber 7140 cp 32. On this date, Lot No. 35 remained vacant land; and' having: been in common ownership together with the adjoining land (No. ' 36) , for. a total combined lot area of 15,000 from April 11, 1972 until June 26, 1989. Although the common ownership of the two contiguous Lot Nos. 35 and 36 merged the property into one nonconforming 15,000 sq. ft. lot with an existing one-family dwelling constructed thereon, there was no intent by the town or by the owners of this property during these 18 years to legally divide or set-off 7,500 sq. ft. (50 ' x 150' ) for the future construction of another dwelling. All the amendments of the zoning codes are clear that only one dwelling is permitted per legal lot in the A and R-40 Residential Zone District. 'Page 8 - Appl. No. 390 -Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski ZBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY OF RECORD 14. Furnished in the record are the following Certificates of Occupancy: (a) Certificate of Occupancy (Pre-C.O.) issued March 1, 1972 by Building Inspector H. Terry certifying that the adjacent "building located at Bayer Road, Mattituck Hts. Lot No. 35 and 36 . . .conforms substantially to the requirements for one-family dwelling & housing code built prior to April 1957 . . .and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of law . . .issued to Mr. and Mrs. Paul Bittner, Owners . . .' House #505 inspected February 29, 1972. . . . " (Lot No. 35 and 36 combined as noted therein totalled 15,000 sq. ft. in lot area) . (b) Certificate of Occupancy (vacant land) issued Novem- ber 28, 1989 by Building Inspector V,,;. Lessard concerning -House #505 Bayer Road, Mattituck stating the following: . . .M/0 Mattituck Heights Lot 36 conforms substantially to the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code. . . premises are located in the 'A' Residential Agricultural Zoned District. . .YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the above referenced lot may be built upon only after the issu- ance of a building permit and compliance with the following requirements . . . : (1) That the lot is held in single and separate ownership and has been held so prior to the adoption of any amendments to our Town - Zoning Ordinance which may have increased the require- ments for lot width or area, or may have amended front, side . . .setback requirements (6) That the Board of Zoning Appeals approval has been obtained. . . . (Emphasis added) 15. It is also noted for the record that: (a) the 1972 Pre C.O. was not a vacant land certificate and made reference to the dwelling as existed on both lots (35 & 36) at 505 Bayer Road; the total combined area is 15, 000 sq. ft. (b) the 1989 Certificate of Occupancy is a vacant land conditional certificate making references to: (1) #505 Bayer Road, (2) the condition that Board of Appeals approval be obtained, (3) the condition that a search be filed to show that the lot was either a single and separate lot or otherwise, and which search was not furnished as required. Page 9 Appl. No. 3 Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 BUILDING PERMIT TIME PERIOD FROM AUGUST 1, 1989 TO THE PRESENT 16 . There is no other record, to the best of this Board' s knowledge, that there ever was any building permit .filed or issued for the construction of a new (or second) dwelling on this tract of land (36) . 17. The only building permit of record for a new dwelling as issued on August 8, 1989 was granted based upon an incomplete application form concerning premises at "565 Bayer Road. " Questions #5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 were left blank; however, sketched was a diagram indicating a proposed building envelope on a 50 ' x 150 ' rectangular tract of land with setbacks. LACK OF APPROVAL(S) FROM THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FOR THIS PARCEL AS A SET-OFF DIVISION OF LAND 18. No information has been furnished for the record to show that an application is now pending or was previously made and approved to re-separate the tracts of land referred to as Lot Nos . 35 and 36 on the preexisting (1932) Map of Mattituck Heights to the Southold Town Planning Board; and upon information and belief, no action was taken by the Town Planning Board to approve or other- wise sanction this tract as a 7,500 sq. ft. lot in a grandfather or exemption clause separate and apart from the adjacent merged tract, also a 7, 500 sq. ft. tract. 19. No action was taken by the Town Board from 1971 to the present time in the Town Code to approve or authorize an exemption or grandfather clause comcerning this preexisting Map of Mattituck Heights, or Lot No. 35 and 36 as separate tracts .-.of land: BUILDING INSPECTOR - BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 20. Article XXVIII, Section 281 of the Zoning Code clearly provides that " . . .No building permit shall- be issued unless the proposed construction or use is in full conformity with all the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of all other applicable laws, ordinaac:es, rules and regulations. Any building per issued in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be null and void and of no effect without the necessity for any proceedings, revocations or nullification thereof; and any work undertaken or use established Page 10 - Appl. No. 1 _ :'8 Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 pursuant to the issuance of a permit in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be invalid. . . . " 21. Article XXVIII, Section 100-281A (7) also provides: . .A. Applications. Every application for a building permit shall contain the following information. . . : (7) An application for a building permit for construction on a vacant lot which is not on an approved subdivision map shall be accompanied by a certified abstract of title issued by a title insurance company which shall show single and separate ownership of the entire lot prior to April 9, 1957. VARIANCES REQUIRED AT TIME. OF ISSUANCE OF PERMIT 22. In considering many of the facts in this case, it is apparent by this Board that the following areas of the zoning code have not been appropriately addressed or applied for, and no authority has been given to any other board, officer or employee of the Town of Southold to waive or grant variances thereunder: (a) insufficient lot area (from 40,000 to 7,500 sq. ft. per lot) (b) insufficient lot width (from 150 feet to 50 feet) (c) insufficient lot depth (from 175 feet to 150 feet) (d) insufficient side yard (from 15 feet to 14 feet) (e) insufficient total sideyards (from 25 feet to 24 feet) (References: Article IIIA - R40 Zone District, and Zoning Code Bulk Schedule, etc.) VALIDITY OF BUILDING PERMIT 23. Pursuant to Article XXVIII, Section 100-281 of the Zoning Code, the subject building permit was issued• in violation of the zoning code, as noted, -' supra, and the permit must be deemed to be invalid, null, void and of no effect. Paige 11 Appl. No. Application of Ochse iter . & Lenceski Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 24. "In case any building or structure is erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, repaired, converted or maintained, or any building, structure or land .is used in violation of this chapter (zoning) or of any other regulations made pursuant thereto, in addition to other remedies provided by law, any appropriate action or proceeding, whether by local process or otherwise, may be instituted or taken to prevent such unlawFui erection, construction or reconstruction, alteration . . .maintenance or use or to restrain, correct or abate such violation or to prevent the occupancy of said building, structure orJand or -to prevent any illegal act, conduct, business or use in and about such premises. " (Reference: Zoning Code Article XXVIII, Section 100-286 - Remedies) (Emphasis added) Z.B .A. DETERMINATION 25. It is the position of this Board that the permit in question is and was not a valid permit since the permit was not issued in conformity with certain provisions of the zoning code (Article XXVIII, Section 100-281) including but not limited to the following areas (see Findings of Fact, supra) : (a) Nonconformance concerning several area regulations under the Bulk Schedule (area, width, setbacks) ; (b) Lack of town approval concerning the re-separation of the northerl_z one-half from the southerly one-half of the subject land as two separate 7, 500 sq. ft. lots (zoning code and subdivision code regulations) ; (c) Lack of evidence concerning the requirements of the zoning code as to proof of single and separate ownership and/or a deter- mination and/or interpretation by the Board of Appeals, particularly due to the substandards of the property, etc. ACCORDINGLY, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, seconded by Mr. Goeh- ringer, it was RESOLVED, that the Building Permit referred to as #18355 is HEREBY DETERMINED to be INVALID, thereby nullifying and voiding the effects under said permit; and BE IT FURTHER Page 12 - Appl. No. 3908 Application of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 RESOLVED, to GRANT the request under this Application for a REVERSAL of determination by the building inspector in the erroneous issuance of Building Permit iQo. 18355; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that prior to issuance or reissuance of any building permit, certificate of occup t-xcy or otherwise, that further application(s) be formally filed, through normal proce- dures, for consideration by the Board of Appeals, including but not limited to the following areas of the zoning coda: (a) insufficient lot area; (b) insufficient lot width; (c) insufficient lot depth; (d) insufficient sideyard setback at the easterly side; (e) insufficient total s ideyards; (f) such other and further relief as may be deemed necessary under the zoning code (such as excessive lot coverage, etc.) GERARD P. GOEHRINGE , CHAIRMAN FOR THE BOARD OF A111PEALS BY ITS MAY 15, 1990 ACTION • TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARS _OWNER STREET VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT t rnA11 4 mv.5, TAG ' 1 ,1�3�, �t� �0 n f�;+�V �.:�.I ,l c", FORMER QWNER N E ACR. J P her CA nu VD S W TYPE OF BUILDING �aro+A rm b RES. SEAS. VL. d FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS 41 V '7. r' . ► �fo L f� �1 -�� no c� (jet "145 Tweir,, ocrne5,`rn e- AGE BUILDING CONDITION NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE -,-FARM Acre Value Per Value . Acre Tillable 1 Tillable 2 Tillable 3 Woodland _ Swampland FRONTAGE ON WATER Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD G M > House Plot DEPTH BULKHEAD Total DOCK I FOR APPROVAL OF CONSTRUCTION tF / 17 Single Family Residence Only DATE rZ • OS REF.NO. SO— - Lt �t APPROV EQ a.0 50 .2�. EXPIRES TWO YEARS FROM DATE OF APPROVA Qj C P rp �f ^�'� �„ �R T P r � HIRED • - M � ail :�'-��t/,G J ,,. ., .. _ ..,.,...-., - ( C -1 r :-i �, t n�n,�r r 3in t fit; y T / u h r + tot� "r f l 4 7 F 4::$1 ti� ,lAM house Jioust bvJ4 7 - 7 f1 - rt- N�u sE i t U `� — — ---� ` " V •; wec� ;' ._:ion oc�Jv-fi.:�at OSN. I am familiar v�rith t�9 ar at or/1�}�ncvtriielxs t s ✓V, J['.. J ''.a `r t^'l T• 1 , a 'a �� t1'IP. � �" ' M0.JQ�(1 /K for S.fi'j Ia 1=P,rni {� ,Si.�rvnm,--� �<iC J,i i .bid y Co U/ cortdiortS 5@j �Oriil tiid�ii:iiy3ii Z2i1 t�I� r3arrnit �O w`a �5�(� 2 %gnaturO ------ -----------— -- — -- ------ .: r uJEt1.$ „" S'12iz,N'�' '"'.•."..`_._._.�" _ C:V L.dU. (t: r; C( ��. /?,I r.. , ! �,r':�_< f''r' ._.�'L�-f ; / ': 30, 1972 No -f-- Zo-r J�/I!.•{P �V�-�l'3`)r%�'rr / ��.�:+ L_..(L"•�'�',:i ti�. .:1� L:'7 i''��. �.��r�'v� _f'�>>" - I '^�- I �j r e_C' {:gip r. -f% Ne V,/ rf�cam" - I� 1 AK /Y2 1� 1bOD .. J ?�� - drlJi 9E•�'LC 69" A R E C E I V E D TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK JAMM9950' DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL DATE ,January. 8,. 1990 Southold Town Clerk TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 1 (We) Robert J.. Ochsenreiter„&.,Edward„Lgf.ceski,,,,of Bayer„Road,, Mattituck?,.NY.. 11952 'Name of Appellant Street and Number TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NE14 YORK HEREBY APPEAL TO ....................................................... ......... Municipality State THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON APPLICATION FOR PERMIT_NO. .......1 3557................. DATED ...........August..8r..1R89............... Issued WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR PTO INLAND HOMES, INC. ................................................................................. Name of Applicant for permit of P.O. Box 117, Mattituck, New York 11952 ................................................................................................................................ Street and Number Municipality State ( ) PERMIT TO USE ( ) PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY (XX) Vacant Land Certificate of - uc one ami_ y weh ing. 1. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY ...565 Bayer„Road, Matt i<uc1c, ,New,Yorl�„(„R-4Q,,,,,,.... Street /Hamlet / Use District on Zoning Map District 1000 Section 139 B1 ock 3 Lot 14 ..Current Owner Inl and Homes; Inc. .. .................................... .......................................... Map No. 1184 filed 7/24/35 Lot No. 36 P r i or OwnerLeonardr S nriar i&a Anne M. Snano, ux INVOLVED 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE A23NDM : (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article XXIV Section 100-244 / 1,00=2f31 ,100-30A.1-100-30A.4,100-12,100-32 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 Law Chap. 62 Cons. Laws Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 ( X) Revocation of Building Permit and Vacant T.anrl ('.art-ifirato of nCcupgricy Upon Informatt�'. nd Belief 4. PREVIOUS APPtUE aA previous appeal OhXX$(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 made in Appeal No. ................................Dated .......................................:.............................. REASON FOR APPEAL ( ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 ( ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (XX) To revoke building permit is requested for the reason that Building Permit and Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy were inipruperiy issued. Form ZBl (Continue on other side) R,ASON FOR APPEAL Continued rii) V1314) 3A 1. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practical difficulties or unneces- sary HARDSHIP because ''�=� � SEE SCHEDULE A 2. The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because SEE SCHEDULE A 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because SEE SCHEDULE A STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss ......... ........... L............................... COUNTY OF SltFPXK ) gnature Sworn to this ................. day of.......... ........... .. .. .. ...................... o ary Pub is OAtOM M" �WiP /4�CW91.1l1L U��1' - � Southold Town Board of Appeals :afv MAIN ROAD — STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.1., 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, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN dff c - ' --� Southold T®w�a ®ard of eals 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. 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 THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, 1990, at the following times: 7 : 30 p.m. Appl. No. 3902 - HENRY HUNSTEIN. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-30.3 , (100-33)•, as disapproved, for permission to construct accessory building in frontyard area. Property Location: 90 Kimberly Lane and 135 North Bayview Road, Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000, .Section 70, Block 13, Lot 20.20. Page 2 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of February 1, 1990 7: 35 p.m. Appl. No. 3901 - THOMAS ESCHMANN. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, Section 100-3.0 A. 4, (100-33) , as disapproved for permission to construct accessory building in the frontyard area and accessory shower in sideyard area.. Property Location: 495 Mesrobian Drive, Laurel, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 145, Blo.qk 4, Lot 10. 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3905 - ANTHONY J. MERCORELLA. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, Section 100-239.4 B, as disapproved, for permission to construct deck addition to dwelling, proposed construction will be less than 75 ft. from ` the bulkhead. Property Location: 2260 Great Peconic Bay Boulevard, Laurel, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 145, Block 4, Lot 4. 7 :45 p.m. Appl. No. 3904 - HARRIET SPILMAN. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, Section 100-239. 4 B, for permission to construct addition to existing dwelling. proposed construction will be less than 75 ft. from the bulkhead. Property Location: 1730 West Creek Avenue, Cutchogue, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 110, Block 1 Lot 7. 3 . Page 3 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of February 1, 1990 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 3900 - GERHARD SCHREMMER. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance_, Article XXIV, Section 100-244 B, for permission to construct a one family dwelling, proposed construction will have insufficient front and side yard setbacks, lot has insufficient width. Property Location 1380 Oak Drive, Southold, County Tax Map'No. 1000, Section 080, Block 02, Lot 001. 7 : 55 p.m. Appl. No. 3897 - PARKER J. WICKHAM. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XIII, Section 100-132, for permission to construct a building for antique vehicles, proposed construction will have bulk, area and parking regulations and insufficient side yard setback. Property Location: 410 Airway Drive, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section, 123, Block 01, lot 02. 8: 00 p.m. Appl. No. 3899 - AGNES AND CHERYL PAGNOZZI. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIV, Section 100-244 B, for permission to construct an addition to existing dwelling, proposed construction will have insufficient side yard. Property Location: 1450 Jockey Creek Drive, Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 70, Block 5, Lot 17 . Page 4 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of February 1, 1990 8: 05 p.m. Appl. No. 3898 - PECONIC BAY VINEYARDS. Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71 B ( 6) , for permission to use existing barn for winery production and storage. Property Location: 32180 Main Road, Cutchogue, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 103, Block 01, Lot 19.2. y 1 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3882 - BIDWELL WINERIES. Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30, for approval of consumer tasting and retail sales from the winery. Property Location: Route 48, Cutchogue, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 96, Block 4, Lot 4. 3. Lone p.m. Appl. No. 3908 - ROBERT OCHSENREITER AND EDWARD Variance for reversal of building permit to construct Laly dwelling. Property Location: 565 Bayer Road, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 139, Block 3, Lot 14. v . . � � r. Page 5 - Notice of Hearings Southold Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of February 1, 1990 8:20 p.m. Appl. No. - ROBERT AND ETHELLE SCHROEDER. Variance for reversal of building inspector for change of use of land and existing building without obtaining a Certificate of Occupancy. Property Location: 4380 Main Road, East Marion, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 35, Block 5, Lot 4. �U 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 3770 - PORT OF EGYPT. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XII, Section 100-121C - 122, Section 100-239d, as disapproved for permission to construct Boat Storage Building with insufficient setbacks and excessive lot coverage in this Marine II (M-II) Zoning District. Property Location: Main Road, Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 056, Block 04, 06, Lot 10.1, 11, 12. 2, 3 .2, 3 . 3, 4, 6.1. 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 January 22, 1990 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Doreen Ferwerda Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of February 1 , 1990 Copies to the following on or about January 24 , 1990 Suffolk Times , Inc. L. I . Traveler Watchman Town Clerk Bulletin Board (Main Lobby) ZBA Office Bulletin Board (East Hall ) ZBA Board Members (with c6pies of files ) ZBA Individual Files Mr. H. Hunstein 302 Saville Rd. , Mineola , NY 11501 Riverside Homes , as Agent for .Thomas Eschmann 1159 W. Main St. , P. O. Box 274 , Riverhead , NY 11901 Mr. Anthony Mercorella 131 Duxbury Road , Purchase , NY 105U Karen Hagen , Esq . for Harriet Spilman Wickham , Wickham , Bressler Main Road , P. O. Box 1424:; Mattituck , NY 11952 Salvatore DiSalvo as Agent for Gerhard Schremmer 47-39 162nd Street , Flushing , NY 11358 J . Parker Wickham 410 Airway Drive , Mattituck , NY 11952 Louise Beck Schnabel for Pagnozzi 1600 Jockey Creek Drive , Southold , NY 11971 Cheryl Pagnozzi 1450 Jockey Creek Drive , Southold , NY 11971 Mr. Ray Blum for Peconic Bay Vineyards Main Road , P. O. Box 709 , Cutchogue , NY 11935 Mr. Kerry Bidwell for Bidwell Wineries Route 48 , Cutchogue , NY 11935 Daniel Ross , Esq . for Ochsenreiter and Lenceski Wickham , Wickham & Bressler Main Road , P. O. Box 1424 , Mattituck , NY 11952 Daniel Ross , Esq . for Robert & Ethelle Schroeder Wickham , Wickham & Bressler Main Road. , P. O. Box 1424 , Mattituck , NY 11952 Southold Town Board of .Appeals Regular Meeting of February .1 , 1990 . Copies to the following on or about January 24 , 1990 Mr. Theodore Traturis for Robert & Ethelle Schroeddr 5804 7th Avenue , Brooklyn , NY 11220 Mr. Eraklis -Apodiacas for Robert & Ethelle Schroeder 7122 Ridge Boulevard , Brooklyn , NY 11209 Mr. David Gillespie for Robert & Ethelle Schroeder 221 North Road , Greenport , NY 11944 Mr. Merlon Wiggin for Port of Egypt Peconic Associates , 1 Bootleg Alley , Greenport , NY 11944 t Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD' L.1., N.Y. 11971 .'� N� TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN February 7 , 19 9Q . CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. S.E.O.R.A. JOSEPH H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO,JR. TYPE II ACTION DECLARATION' Appeal No. 3908 Project/ApplicantWo-bert Ochenreit`er, and Edward Lenceski County Tax Map No. 1000- 139-3- 14 Location of Project: 565 Bayer Road , Mattituck Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project: Variance for reversal of building permit to construct one family dwelling. 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. An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted with the subject application indicating that no significant adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be project be implemented as planned. It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction --- concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this application to fall under the established list of Type II Actions. Pursuant to Section 617.2jj , this Department is excluded as an involved agency. This determination shall not, however, affect any other agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .23' j . For further information, please contact the Office of the Board of Appeals, Town Hall,, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at (516) 765-1809. tr i , h r Town Hall, 53095 Main Road ZFr>.,..:. P.O. Box 1179 >'?4 `'" � Southold, New York 11971 JUDITH T.TERRY FAX(516)765-1823 TOWN CLERK TELEPHONE(516)765-1801 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CORRECTED TRANSMITTAL OF ZONING APPEAL TO: SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: JUDITH T. TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK .r"� RE: ZONING APPEAL NO. 3908 INLAND HOMES, INC. DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1990 The following is a corrected listing of the attachments that were transmitted to Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Office on January 19, 1990 together with Zoning Appeal No. 3908 application of Inland Homes, Inc. : Notification to Adjacent Property Owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form; Zoning Board of Appeals ' Questionnaire Form; Survey of Property; Deeds; Property Record Cards: Schedule A; Certificate of Occupancy dated 11 /28/88; Application for Building Permit dated 8/2/89: Building Permit dated 8/8/89; together with any other attachments relative to this application. A Notice of Disapproval from the Buidling Inspector was not received with this application. Judith T. Terry�%tC�� Southold Town Clerk yr t i Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 JUDITH T.TERRY FAX(516)765-1823 TOWN CLERK TELEPHONE(516)765-1801 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CORRECTED TRANSMITTAL OF ZONING APPEAL TO.: SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK RE: ZONING APPEAL NO. 3908, INLAND HOMES, INC. DATED: FEBRUARY 1, 1990 The following is a corrected listing of the attachments that were transmitted to Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Office on January 19, 1990, together with Zoning Appeal No. 3908, application .� of Inland. Homes, Inc. on behalf of Robert J. Ochsenreiter and Edward Lenceski: Notification to Adjacent Property Owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form; Letter Relative to NYS Tidal Wetlands Land Use; Survey of Property; Deeds; Property Record Cards; Schedule A; Certificate of Occupancy dated 3/2/72; Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy dated 11 /28/88; Application for Building Permit dated 8/2/89; Building Permit dated 8/8/89; together with any other attachments relative to this application. A Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector was not received with this application. ` t' Town Hall, 53095 Main Road =..f P.O. Box 1179 .."y .y �� Southold, New York 11971 IUDITH T. TERRY TELEPHONE TOWN CLERK (516)765-1801 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals From: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk Dated: Janua;ry 19,. 1.989 Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 3908 application of Inland Homes, Inc. for a variance. Also included is: Notification to Adjacent Property Owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form letter relative to NYS Tidal Wetlands Lund Use; Notice of Disapproval 'from the Building Department; survey of property; and any other attachments relative to this application. Judith T. Terry MAILING LIST FOR MARCH 29, 1990 Suffolk Times Traveler-Watchman Clerks Bulletin Board Z.B.A. Bulletin Board Mr. Merlon Wiggin Peconic Associates P.O. Box 672 Greenport, NY 11944 Anthony Tohill, Esq. 12 First Street Riverhead, NY 11901 Mr. Robert Ochsenreiter 600 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 ' Mr. Edward Lenceski 500 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 NOTICE OF HEARINGS 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 3900- FROBERT 0 P.M. Appl. No: l NOTICE OF HEREBY GERHARD SCHREMMER. AND ETHELLE J GIVEN, pursuant to Section Variance to the Zoning Ordi- ROEDER.Variance for re267 of the Town Law and the nance, Article XXIV, Section l of building inspector for Code of the Town of Southold, 100-244 B, for permission to La ange of use of land and exist- the following hearings will be construct a one family dwelling, g building without obtaining held by the SOUTHOLD proposed construction will haveCertificate of Occupancy Pro- TOWN'BOARD OF APPEALS insufficient front and side yardrty Location: 4380 Main at a Regular Meeting, at the setbacks, lot has insufficientoad,East Marion,County TaxSouthold Town Hall, Main width. Property Location 1380ap No. 1000, Section 35, Road, Southold, NY 11971, on Oak Drive, Southold, County_. ock'5, Lot 4. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1 Tax Map No. 1000,.Section 080,' 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 3770- 1990 at the followingtimes: Block 02, Lot 001. PORT OF EGYPT.Variance to 7:30 p.m. Appl. No. 3902- 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 3897- the Zoning Ordinance, Article HENRY HUNSTEIN.Variance PARKER J.WICKHAM.Vari- XII,Section 100-121C-122,Sec- to the Zoning Ordinance,Arti- ance to the Zoning Ordinance, tion 100-239d, as disapproved cle III A. Section 100-30.31 Article XIII, Section 100-132, for permission to construct Boat (100-33), as disapproved, for for permission to construct a Storage Building with insuffi- permission to construct ac- building for antique vehicles, cient setbacks and excessive lod=' cessory building in frontyard proposed construction will have coverage in this Marine II (M- area. Property Location: 90 bulk, area and parking regula- II) Zoning District. Property Kimberly Lane and 135 North tions and insufficient side yard Location: Main Road, Bayview Road,Southold,Coun- setback.Property j ocation:410 Southold,County Tax Map No. ty Tax Map No. 1000, Section . Airway Drive,Mattituck,Coun- 1000,Section 056,Block 04,06, 70, Block 13, Lot 20.20. .%-% ty Tax Map No. 1000, Section Lot 10.1, 11, 12.2,3.2,3.3,4,6.1. 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3901- 123, Block 01, Lot 02. The Board of Appeals will at THOMAS ESCHMANN. 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 3899- said time and place hear any and Variance to the Zoning Ordi- AGNES AND CHERYL PAG- all persons or representatives de- nance, Article III A, Section NOZZI.Variance to the Zoning siring to be heard in each of the 100-30 A.4, (100-33), as disap- Ordinance, Article XXIV, Sec- above matters. Written com- proved for permission to con- tion 100-244 B, for permission ments may also be submitted struct accessory building in the to construct an addition to ex- prior to the conclusion of the frontyard area and accessory isting dwelling, proposed con- subject hearing. Each hearing shower in sid struction will have insufficient will not start before time allot- i eyard area.Proper- side yard. Property Location: ted. Additional time for' our ty Location: 495 Mesrobian y 1450 Jockey Creek Drive, presentation will be availabl if Drive,Laurel,County Tax Map ,,,:5 P e,' i No. 1000,Section 145,Block 4, Southold,County Tax Map No:' needed. For more information, Lot 10. 1000,Section 70, Block 5, Lot please call 765-1809. 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3905- 17. Dated: January 22, 1990 ANTHONY J. MERCOREL- ---8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 3898- BY ORDER OF LA.Variance to the Zoning Or- PECONIC BAY VINEYARDS. THE SOUTHOLD TOWN dinance,Article XXIII,Section Special Exception to the Zoning BOARD OF APPEALS 100-239.4 B,as disapproved,for Ordinance,Article.VII,Section GERARD P. GOEHRINGER i isson to permission to construct deck ad- 100-71 B (6) for perm CHAIRMAN dition to dwelling, p y use existing barn for winery pro- '11 B Doreen Ferwerda construction will be less than 75 duction and storage. Property 1X, 1/25/90 (7) I ft. from the bulkhead. Proper- Location: 32180 Main Road, 111 ty Location:2260 Great Peconic Cutchogue, County Tax Map Bay Boulevard,Laurel,County No. 1000,Section 103,Block 01, Lot 19.2. 7hx Map No. 1000,Section 145; ' Block 4, Lot 4. 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3882- 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3904- BIDWELL WINERIES.Special HARRIET SPILMAN. Vari- Exception to the Zoning Ordi- ance to the Zoning Ordinance, nance, Article III, Section Article XXIII,Section 100-239.4 100-30, for approval of con- B, for permission to construct sumer tasting and retail sales addition to existing dwelling, i from the winery.Property Loca- Proposed construction will be :' tion: Route 48, Cutchogue, less than 75 ft. from the bulk- ! County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- head. Property Location: 1730 r lion 96, Block 4, Lot 4.3. j West Creek Avenue,Cutchogue, 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 3908- 1 County'Ihx Map No. 1000,Sec- ROBERT OCHSENREITER lion I10, Block 1 Lot 7.3. i AND EDWARD LENCESKI: Variance for reversal of building permit to construct a one fami- ly dwelling.Property Location: 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- tion 139, Block 3, Lot 14. ; �j C COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK ss: Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ./. . . . . weeks successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . :?:�5. . . . . . . . . day of . . . , 19 Sworn to before me this . . . . . . ��.... . . . . . . . day of . . . . . , 19 ` . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .� - . . : - . . . . . Notary Public F3A.RBAPM A. VIT14NEIDctZ NOTARY i'1;13AC, State of New York A �l 1 � NOTICE OF HEARINGS 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 3900- 8.20 p.m: -Appl. Nd:=%1C 1 NOTICE OF HEREBY GERHARD SCHREMMER. ROBERT AND ETHELLE J GIVEN, pursuant to Section Variance to the Zoning Ordi- SCHROEDER.Variance for re- 267 of the Town Law and the nance, Article XXIV, Section versal of building inspector for Code of the Town of Southold, 100-244 B, for permission to change of use of land and exist- the following hearings will be construct a one family dwelling, ing building without obtaining held by the SOUTHOLD proposed construction will have a Certificate of Occupancy.Pro- TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS insufficient front and side yard perty Location: 4380 Main at a Regular Meeting, at the setbacks, lot has insufficient . Road,East Marion,County Tax Southold Town Hall, Main width. Property Location 1380 Map No. 1000,' Section 35, Road, Southold, NY 11971, on Oak Drive, Southold, County r Block 5 Lot 4. THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 1, Tax Map No. 1000,Section 080," Fthe .m. Appl. No 3770- 1990, at the following times: Block 02, Lot 001. T p. EGXPT Variance to 7:30 p.m. Appl. No. 3902- 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 3897- oning Ordinance, Article HENRY HUNSTEIN.Variance PARKER J.WICKHAM.Vari- Section 100-121C-122,Sec- to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- ance to the Zoning Ordinance, 100-239d, as disapproved cle III A, Section 100-30.3, Article XIII, Section 100-132, rmission to construct Boat (100-33), as disapproved, for for permission to construct a ge Building with insuffipermission to construct ac- building for antique vehicles, setbacks and excessive lod=' cessory building in frontyard proposed construction will have age in this Marine 1I (M- ares. Property Location: 90 bulk, area and parking regula- oning District. Property Kimberly Lane and 135 North tions and insufficient side yard tion: Main Road, Bayview Road,Southold,Coun- setback.Property,Location:410 Southold,County Tax Map No. ty Tax Map No. 1000, Section Airway Drive,Mattituck,Coun- 1000,Section 056,Block 04,06, 70, Block 13, Lot 20.20. ty Tax Map No. 1000, Section Lot_10.1, 11,12.2,3.2,3.3,4,6. 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3901- 123, Block 01, Lot 02. The Board of AppeaNQif at THOMAS ESCHMANN. 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 3899- said time and place hear any and Variance to the Zoning Ordi- AGNES AND CHERYL PAG- all persons or representatives de- nance, Article III A, Section NOZZI.Variance to the Zoning siring to be heard in each of the 100-30 A.4, (100-33), as disap- Ordinance, Article XXIV, Sec- above matters. Written com- proved for permission to con- tion 100-244 B, for permission ments may also be submitted 1 struct accessory building in the to construct an addition to ex- prior to the conclusion of the I frontyard area and accessory isting dwelling, proposed con- subject hearing. Each hearing JJJ shower in sideyard area.Proper- struction will have insufficient will not start before time allot- I ty Location: 495 Mesrobian side yard. Property Location: ted. Additional time foe your Jockey Drive,Laurel,County Tax Map 1450 Joc y Creek Drive,', presentation will be available,if I No. 1000,Section 145,Block 4, Southold,County Tax Map No.(-' needed. For more information, Lot 10. 1000,.Section 70, Block 5, Lot please call 765-1809. 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3905- i7. OS Dated: January 22, 1990 ANTHONY J. MERCOREL- P.m.--Appl. No. 3898- BY ORDER OF LA.Variance to the Zoning Or- PECONIC BAY VINEYARDS. _ THE SOUTHOLD TOWN dinance,Article XXIII,Section Special Exception to the Zoning BOARD OF APPEALS 100-239.4 B,as disapproved,for Ordinance,Article.VIl,Section GERARD P. GOEHRINGER permission to construct deck ad- 100-71 B (6) for permission touse existing barn for winery pro- .•11 CHAIRMAN dition to dwelling, proposed . ) By Doreen Ferwerda I construction will be less than 75 duction and storage. Property 1X, 1/25/90 (7) ft. from the bulkhead. Proper- Location: 32180 Main Road, ty Location:2260 Great Peconic Cutchogue, County Tax Map Bay Boulevard,Laurel,County . No. 1000,Section 103,Block 01, Tax Map No. 1000,Section 1451". Lot 19.2. Block 4, Lot 4. 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3882- 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3904- BIDWELL WINERIES.Special HARRIET SPILMAN. Vari- Exception to the Zoning Ordi- ance to the Zoning Ordinance, nance, Article III, Section Article XXIII,Section 100-239.4 j 100-30, for approval of con- B, for permission to construct sumer tasting and retail sales addition to existing dwelling. from the winery.Property Loca- Proposed construction will be tion: Route 48, Cutchogue, II less than 75 ft. from the bulk- ! County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- head. Property Location: 1730 lion 96, Block 4, Lot 4.3. West Creek Avenue,Cutchogue, 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 3908- J County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- AND EDWARD LENCESKI:'• ROBERT OCHSENREITER-; Lion ty Block 1 Lot 7. I , Variance for reversal of building ' permit to construct a one fami- ly dwelling. Property Location: 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- tion 139, Block 3, Lot 14. C COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK ss: Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /. . . . . weeks successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . .-:?5- . . . . . . . day of . . . . . . . . ., 19 Sworn to before me this . . . . . . QS_. . . . . . . . . day of . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notary Public BA.R APA A. SCNi`I IDE"R N4Tr.iiY f'U„ In, S'ata of Nevi fork C�iiili.l.rJiYl1 t:�NiicS �3/ S l i' 0�CONCRETE C -P. L . 0. Box 149. t-� TON, NEW YORK 11977 d Homes 9-15-89 DATE -�.� JOB N0. - - _.,._..........._ _.._..._-------•-------------- -----------_ -------..._ 17 JOB NAME _._._..._._.____. _ tuck NY 11952 Ba er Avenue ' Lot # 394 JOB LOCATION ---�•y DESCRIPTION ' PRICE AMOUNT Total price for job $3,800.00 Amount due for walls $2,400 00 ------------ 5 1 1 ,--. p. ,!------------- r CyM r ENT Time 09:38 Dat e 08-30-89 -N�-y��!✓� G1:i Operator HWT TO r : L4 �1L ll� � 7 ► 2 Tr a: 'TCJCI� � OB-30-89 •' • eo, TERM F r Grass Wt. 17440 . 1b µ1 to Tare Wt. 12820 lb Net Wt. 4620 lb PSpI rtJ Net Taros 2. 31 try -v� < �1� a nl 00 I' LITHO IN U.S.A. TOPS 165 FORM 3409 - TOPS M' FOgM S4Ua . 5. S Ticket No. 5827 SOUTHOLD LANDFILL Time 09:38 Scale No. 1 CUTCHOGUE, N. Y. Date 08-30-89 Operator HWT VEHICLE ID CT9037 Time In 09: 17 Date In 08-30-89 MATERIAL ID LA LANDCLEARING DEBRIS ACCOUNT ID C3 CHILTON, gOBERT BOX 5B PECON I L' NY 11958 Price 4 Ton 20. 00 Gross Wt. 17440 lb Net Charge $ 46. 2C) Tare Wt. 12820 lb Net Wt. 4620 lb Net Tons 2. 31 to Transaction Type - Credit ' �� , _ r � r. / lam•!.,' � , N. •.4r fir. 'i ip�'�1 Nw /MYi WI,Vr Qbl - .aL �ti 4�'t+..C.. .sir �P lob, `• •,��+• v�..+, ' $�P y, .7{�,LQO�P : n Ev ti :' t I }.Y F t �.c.4 4, t 1 -v.3af�,6 .g t ►,11� `y`r. J � i +� v {�+'��a r7 r�/�fl r'' 1� t �.vp�'{�� _ �j y,9 a•t�L +��j Fr3��:Y��'�1 �1'r/ � 1�✓y �i O yI i�'i�l r�i ��`IrtiV,1'Nt `� ♦e� i w � yr y414, - •r..r"^��- ��N�'• -+n,�.�..-�r .3P'm.- y'�v i..,. n .. J7o '- 1 "r •y. Mize zii�-990�2 3 a � 1 - APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS -i . ' - SCOTT L. HARRIS 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 SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 r TO: Victor, Lessard, Principal Building Inspector FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals DATE: April 13, 1990 RE: Z.B.A. Hearing of April 19, 1990 In regarding Inland Homes Appl. No. 3908, it would be greatly ' appreciated if you could attend our next Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on Thursday, April 19, 1990. Attached is a copy of the Notice of Hearings for your information. We have found it very helpful having you attend our previous meetings. CLAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.J MAIN ROAD, P.O.BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND WILLIAM WICKHAM NEW YORK 11952 MORTGAGE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER 516-298-5300 ABIGAILA_WICKHAM 516-298-8353 - TELEFAX NO.516-298-2012 DANIELC.ROSS TELEFAX NO. 516-298.8565 KAREN J.HAGEN HUBERT F.SULLIVAN ' February 1, 1990 Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: In the Matter of the Petition of Robert J. Ochsenreiter and Edward Lenceski Gentlemen: This will confirm that Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, P.C. is withdrawing as counsel with respect to the above referenced application. The applicants will be appearing in support of the application on the hea ing date. Y r urs, 1 C. Ross DCR:vm cc: Mrs. Mary K. Johnson Mr. Howard and Gertrude Jeavons Mr. Walter Armbrust Mr. Richard Garcia and Mrs. Corinne Lessard Garcia Inland Homes, Inc. William Moore, Esq. �� Fo C y `. JAMES A.SCHONDEBARE L Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN ATTORNEY O �O\ P.O. BOX 1179 P. Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1939 MATTHEW G. KIERNAN OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY FAX NO. Asst. Town Attorney TOWN OF SOIftHOLD (516)765-1823 December 11, 1989 Daniel C. Ross Wickham, Wickham & Bressler Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Construction on Bayer Road, Mattituck Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-139-3-13 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-139-3-14 Dear Mr. Ross: r As a result of your letter of October 17, 1989, 1 have reviewed the history of this parcel and applicable law. You are correct in pointing out that under section 100-12 of the Town Code the filed map subdivision called "Amended Map of Mattituck Heights," is not listed along with other exempted subdivisions. However, as shown in the Zoning Code of 1966 this subdivision was listed as exempt. Of the nineteen listed subdivisions exempted in 1966 only three are presently listed in section 100-12. What then is the status of the other sixteen subdivisions? I have researched this matter and have determined that as each subdivision was developed the need to exempt same no longer applied, hence, the subdivision was omitted from the section. It is the opinion of this office that the parcels in question are part of a legal and exempt subdivision, and to hold to the contrary would jeopardize every landowner who has not built upon their lots located in- the other sixteen subdivisions. The remaining issue is whether or not a merger occurs when a person owns two or more contiguous parcels which. parcels are located in a filed map subdivision and which subdivision is so recognized by the Town. r ) -Wickham, Wickham & Bressler December 11, 1989 Page 2 A review of the Code does not show a clear legislative intent by the Town Board that a contiguous parcel owned jointly in a legal and recognized subdivision merger. . Absent such a clear direction I would not assume same by implication since the practical ramifications are enormous. It is the opinion of this office that the building permit issued is valid; however, as you know the final interpretation of the Zoning Code rest, both under the Town Law and the Town Code, with the Board of Appeals. Very truly yours, Ja A. Schondebare T n Attorney JAS:mis cc: Town Board Building Department LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD. P.O. BOX 1424 MATTITUCK, LONG ISLAND WILLIAM WICKHAM MORTGAGE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 516-2 9 B-5 300 ABIGAIL A.WICKHAM 516-298-8353 TELEFAX NO.516-298-2012 DANIEL C.ROSS TELEFAX NO.516-298-8565 KAREN J.HAGEN HUBERT F.SULLIVAN February 1, 1990 Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold Southold Town Hall r, Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: In the Matter of the Petition of Robert J. ochsenreiter and Edward Lenceski Gentlemen: This will confirm that Wickham, Wickham & Bressler, P.C. is withdrawing as counsel with respect to the above-: referenced application. The applicants will be appearing in support of the application on the hea ing date. y r yyurs, i C. Ross DCR:vm cc: Mrs. Mary K. Johnson Mr. Howard and Gertrude Jeavons Mr. Walter Armbrust Mr. Richard Garcia and Mrs. Corinne Lessard Garcia Inland Homes, Inc. William Moore, Esq. B 1 51—Affidavit of Service of Sumry or Subpoena: ®1973 eY JULIUS BLUMBERG.INC. Personal or Alternative MeY Corp,or Ind.: PUBLISHER,NYC 10013 Military Service.7-87 \\ , ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS _TOZ'N OF SOUTHOLD, COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, STATE OF NEW YORK Index No. In the Matter of the Petition of AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT J. OCHSENREITER and EDWARD LENCESKI SERVICE OF AN. APPEAL FROM DECISION OF " BUILDING INSPECTOR SUFFOLK COUNTY,NEW YORK STATE: MARY ANNE CORWIN being sworn, says:Deponent is not a party herein,is over 18 years of age and resides at 650 Flanders Road, Riverhead, New York 11901 - On February lst;19 90 at (9;S_,S_F.M.,at Southold .Town.Hall, Main Road, Southold,- New York deponent served the within� �; � FiXon Southold Town Building Department defendant therein named, Appeal from Decision of Building Inspector INDIVIDUAL by delivering a true copy of each to said defendants personally; deponent knew the person so served to be the person described as said 1 t. ❑ defendant therein. �,py� $Y'- P t�9 50U LseRroRnryroN a ��nIMLCL , �J- ee ration,by delivering thereat a true copy of each to �� ;�h �1'�� p e- U, 2.CJ personally,deponent knew said corporation so served to be the corporation described in said summons as said defendant and knew said individual SUITABLE to be �V\S?Qe�" thereof AGE PERSON by delivering thereat a true copy of each to r' a person of suitable 3, ❑ age and discretion.Said premises is defendant's—actual place of business—dwelling place—usual place of abode—within the state. AFFIXING TO � � DOOR.ETC. by affixing a true copy of each to the door of said premises which 1s dafendant's—actual place of business—dwelling place—usual place of abode 4. ❑ —within the state.Deponent was unable,with due diligence to find 11 defendant or a person of suitable age and discretion,thereat,having called there `s g :4 MAILING TO Deponent enclosed a copy of same to a postpaid^envelope properly addressed to defendant at defendant's last known residence, at RESIDENCE USE WITH 3 OR 4 and deposited said 5A. ❑ envelope in an official depository under the exclusive care and ctistodyof the U.S.Postal Service within New York State. MAILING TO Deponent enclosed a copy of same in a first class BUSINESS postpaid envelope properly addressed to defendant at defendant's actual place of business, USE WITH 3 OR 4 at � '` in an official depository se. ❑ under the exclusive care and custody of the U.S.Postal.Service within New York State.The envelope bore the legend"Personal and Confidential" and did not indicate on the outside thereof,by return address;or otherwise,that the communication was from an attorney or concerned an action against the defendant. DESCRIPTION d'Male '❑White Skin ❑ Black Hair O'Whtte'Hair ❑ 14-20 Yrs. ❑ Under 5' ❑ Under 100 Lbs. USE WITH � -_- 1.2.o�r33 ❑ Female ❑ Black Skin ❑ Brown Hair .❑ Balding ❑ 21-35 Yrs. ❑ 5'0"-5'3" ❑ 100-130 Lbs. L�I ❑ Yellow Skin ❑ Blonde Hair ❑ Mustache ❑ 36-50 Yrs. ❑ 54"-578" ❑ 131-160 Lbs. ❑ Brown Skin ❑ Gray Hair ❑ Beard 9-51-65 Yrs. B159"-610" ❑ 161-200 Lbs. ❑ Red Skin ❑ Red Hair ❑ Glasses ❑ Over 65 Yrs. ❑ Over 6' l-Over 200 Lbs. Other identifying features: USE IN NYC CIVIL CT. ❑ The language required by NYCRR 2900.2(e),(/)&(h)was set forth on the face of said summons(es). MILITARY I asked the person spoken to whether defendant was in active military service of the United States or of the State of New York in any capacity SERVICE whatever and received a negative reply.Defendant wore ordinary civilian clothes and no military uniform.The source of my information and the ❑ grounds of my belief are the conversations and observations above narrated. Upon information and belief I aver that the recipient is not in military service of New York State or of the United States as that term is defined in either the State or in the Federal statutes. Sworn to before me on February 1, 1990 _.___ P--- ULQ ___ AL10E C.MaeDONAW n namebeneath si 1Votary Public`State of New York Y NE CORWIN C f ,n L o�ar�i s�k1c,�t,rtttyy; Notary Pub is CommiSSion Expires Dec.119 qQ License No. ...................................... I STRUCTIONS: Check appropriate boxes and fill in blanks. Delete inappropriate italicized language and military service allegation if not applicable. l� APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS .....F =.` : w SCOTT L. HARRIS M Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr.Serge Doyen, Jr. _Town Hall. 53095 Main Road `" Joseph H. Sawicki P.O. Box 1179Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 TO: Building Department . ��,,,,{{ FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals-06 DATE: May 4, 1990 ' RE: Certificate of Occupancy In regarding Ochsenreiter/Lenceski (Inland Homes) Appl. No. 3908, we are inquiring about a Certificate of Occupancy which may have been recently issued on this parcel. Please notify ds if a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued at this time, also if any new information regarding this particular parcel has been added to your file. Thank you for your assistance on this matter. ZBA/df cc : Town Attorney' s Office ' �d f S J✓lfp VICTOR LESSARD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road PRINCIPAL BUILDING INSPECTOR P.O. Box 1179 z , �•` � `,x.' - -' Southold, New York 11971 (516)765-1802 FAX(516)(516)765-1823L- -b D - OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR OW 8 No TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: BUILDING DEPARTMENT`" '\� SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY DATED: MAY 8, 1990 This is in response to your memo dated May 4, 1990 regarding ZBA Appeal #3908. No Certificate of Occupancy has been issued as of this date. No further new information has been added to this file. Please note an Attorney informed me that Supreme Court has issued a determination within the last month which states that old subdivisions that are mostly developed have a vested right or interest. Suggest you have the Town Attorney check to get first hand determination. VGL:gar cc to : TOWN ATTY o yam, Ln 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. JOSEPH H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. TO: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals DATE: January 3.1, 1990 We have received your memo dated January 26, 1990, regarding Appeal No. 3908, Ochsenreiter/Lenceski (Inland Homes) , property location: 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 139, Block 3, Lot 14, Subdivision Mattituck Heights. We have been in touch with the Assistant Town Attorney on this matter and have declined a discussion between the Building Department, acting Town Attorney and the Zoning Board of Appeals. Enclosed you will find a copy of the file for your information. If you require any further information, feel free to contact us. w a� °� 11 klan tdrdi VICTOR LESSARD :< Town Hall, 53095 Main Road PRINCIPAL BUILDING INSPECTOR ,Z P.O. Box 1179 (516)765-1802 Southold, New York 11971 FAX(516)765-1823 OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPALS FROM: BUILDING DEPARTMENT DATE: January 26, 1990 Your memo of January 22, 1990, received January 25, 1990 is a bit confusing in that it doesn' t specify the property in question. Because a request has been made for a copy of the excepted list indicating the Amended Map of Mattituck Heights , I would have to guess that you are referring to one of the projects going on Bayer Road. At this point , I would strongly suggest that your Board get in touch with the Assistant Town Attorney and be brought up to date on what their office has done with the matter to this point . Again, I am guessing you are referring to the New Dwelling being constructed by Inland Homes . At present , I have no knowledge of any Ochsenreiter/Lenceski. Until all these are made familiar to the building department , and a discussion between the Building Department, Board of Appeals , and acting Town Attorney takes place , this department feels it should do nothing to jeopardize the Town's position in this matter. As to your request that a representative from Building Dept . at your February 1 , 1990 meeting, most certainly their will be someone there. � .s . APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman �. p Charles Grigonis, Jr. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. Joseph H. Sawicki P.O. Box 1179Southold, New York 11971 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 TO: Building Department FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals; DATE: May 9, 1990 RE: Certificate of Occupancy We are in receipt of your memo dated May 8, 1990 regarding Appeal No. 3908. Please clarify the second paragraph of thisy memo in respect to the information received by an Attorney. Thank you for your cooperation on this matter. ZBA/df cc: Town Attorney ::y> Hill. - , Town Hall 53095 Main Road VICTOR LESSARD PRINCIPAL BUILDING INSPECTOR :.1. wl g' P.O. Box 1179 (516)765-1802 �� `.:=�;,t. ��;�.� � Southold, New York 11971 FAX(516)765-1823 OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR r1w TOWN OF SOUTHOLD9 May 9, 1990 TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: BUILDING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: REPLY TO MEMO MAY 9, 1990 REFERENCE APPEAL #3908 Your May 9, 1990 response to my May 8, 1990 response to your May 4, 1990 inquiry on Certificate of Occupancy on your case #3908 was quite clear in my eyes. The second paragraph was information imparted to me in conversation at a function I was attending. I felt it would behoove the Town and your board to check to see if such a ruling existed. I mentioned attorney only in passing be- cause of credibility to such information. Friends do talk to' friends regardless of their livelihood. This friend is not in- volved in this case what-so-ever. VGL:hkd cc: Town Attorney Southold - Town Board of Appeals �1Ir MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 P.O. BOX 1179 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.•Y. 11971 •r'o1 :dal l�� • 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: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals DATE: January 23, 1990 RE: Request to attend Regular Meeting on February 1, 1990 On January 22, 1990 at a Special Meeting the following Application 3908, Ochsenreiter/Lenceski (Inland Homes) , was set, up for a public hearing on February 1, 1990 at 8:15 p.m. in the Meeting Hall, Town Hall. The Z.B.A. respectfully request your presence at that hearing with any or all reference regarding the file (excepted list indicating amended map of Mattituck Heights) . It is advised that you request -the builder to "stay" construction until this matter is decided upon. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. NOTICE OFREARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN y Pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and th�f the Town of Southold,will the following hearings STATE OF NEW YORK) be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at )SS: Regular Meeting a,at the Southold Town Hall,Main Road,Southold, ' COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) NY 11971, on THURSDAY MARCH29. 1990 the folloi , banes: , . ng Patricia Heaney of Mattituck, in -, w 7:30 p.m, Appl No. 3770— PORT OF EGYPT. Variance to the said County, being duly sworn,says that he/she is Principal Zonutg O"di�+�Article M sec. Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, lion 100-121C- 122,Section 100- 239d,as diapprmd for Penn,. published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of to txxtstruct Boat Storage Building Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of which With insufficient setbacks and exces- -sive lot covera$e in this Marine II the annexed Is a printed copy,has been regularly published in .fM-10 Zoning District. Property. said Newspaper once each week for 1 weeks :Location:Main Road,Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000,s successively, commencing on the 2n— day of 056,Block 04 06 �i1On 19�lZZ,3Z,33.4,6.1.•'Lot' 7:35 p.m, Appl. No.`3908— I ROBERT OCHSENRF, R A� , evDewrsa�l D of i�YCESIQ Variance for , struct a one familybuilding Permit to con-;� - enY Location:56S Belling.Prop MattituckTax M Road, „n 'Principal Clerk ' 1�.Section 39 County x Map No. /. .f'/ / ,/l . i / ".C: /i�4 -B1�3,Lot 14. /:.L.L�`L� �, The Board of App�will at said / am and PLa hear any and all sons or representatives desiring �r� heard in each of the above`m'g to Sworn to b f�re this Written masers. HnH York ah mined Pnor to the wul o be sub- day of // rCi �` 19 OTf�RY PUt?'` �: subject hea ' on of the Suitolk +�,`84W60/ fig. Each hearing will brt;ary]�}�/ not scan before time allotted.Addi- r%►" I Term Banal time for your Presentation will be available,if needed. For more information,please call 765-1809. Dated March 26,1990 BY ORDER OF THE SOU MOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P GOEHR1NGER r .. CHAIRMAN 6614= BY Dom Ferwerda, T � r �i NOTICE OF HEARINGS permitted lot coverage,and will t,� Section 100-30 A.3, Article NOTICE IS HEREBY have insufficient side yard set- XXIV, Section 100-244, Bulk GIVEN, pursuant to Section backs. Property Location: 310 and Parking Area, Article 267.'of the Town Law and the Linda Road, Mattituck,Coun- and Section 1Area,.4,build- Code of the Town of Southold, ty Tax Map No.:1000, Section ' ,.,'',ing setbacks from water or"wet- the following hearings will be 106, Block 1,.Lot 14. lands, for permission to con- held ..liy. the SOUTHOLD " 7SO.p,m:4App1. No:., 521 ' struct a one familydwelling- ,TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS EILEEN VILLANL Variance to;.:; 'Property Location 55' :Glen at„a.Regular..Meeting, at the the.Zoning Ordinance, Article Court, Cutchogue,County Tax ;'.Southold. Town Hall,. Main XXIII, Section 100-239 B, for-':', Map No. 1000, Section'083, 'Road,Southold,N.Y. 11971,on permission to construct deck ad-.' Block 01, Lot 01. THURSDAY,APRIL 19, 1990, dition to existing one family,: 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3922' at the following times: dwelling,proposed construction. ROBERT AND' THERESA ,• � �;7:30 p.m. Appl..No. 3926- will be within 75 ft.of water or,. TURNER.Variance to the Zon- MURRAY JACOBS. Variance wetlands. Property Location:` ing nce,Article III,Sea to the Zoning Ordinance,Arti- Private'Road 925 Wood Lane, ing Ordina.. rdina A.4,Bulk and Park-` cle III, Section 100-33, as dis- Peconic, County Tax•Map No..',; ing area,for permission to con- ' .F, approved for permission to con- "'1000,Section 086,Block 06,Lot, struct an accessory shed in side 10 struct an attached swimming t 4�yard,accessory buildings maybe ..7:55 • ' `1 -�' '` ' �'`��pool to house. Property Loci- p.m. Appl. No. 3919 tion: 1525 Albo Driv Laurel; located in the required rear yard. THOMAS COLLINS.Variance County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- Property Location: 1180 Sage to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- tion 126, Block 03, Lot 17. P.Boulevard, Greenport, County cle XXIII,Section 100-239 4.A - 8:15 p.m. Appi."No. 3925=1 `';Iaic Map No. 1000,Section 53, for permission to construct a ELSIE PARKIN. Variance to Block 5, Lot 9. deck addition to a one family the Zoning Ordinance, Article 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3927- g dwelling,proposed construction III A,Section 100-30 A.3,Bulk MARK. AND ELLIE GO R will be less than 75 ft. from the and Parking Regulations in this: • DON. Variance to the Zoning bulkhead. Property Location: Division of"Land. Property. Ordinance, Article III, Section 305 Dawn Drive, East Marion, Location: f., Skunk o Lane, ,;,100=33,as disapproved,for per- County Thx Map No. 1000,Sec- Cutchogue, County Tax Map .:mission to construct an acces- tion 35, Block 5,-Lot 20. •t...,. No. 1000,Section 104,Block 04 sory building to tennis court 8:00 p.m. Appi. No. 3930- L 27: ' located in front yard,accessories JOHN C. PERRONE. Special ,/g;20 permitted in the rear yard area p.m.Appl. No. 3908 Exception to the Zoning Ordi- T'ROBERT OCHENREITE only.Property Location:Private nance, Article X;, Section "AND EDWARb LENCESKI. Road 97,Fords Road,Southold, 100-101B, for permission to oc- / Variance for reversal of a build County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- cupy and use as a billiard par �� ing permit to construct a one tion 087, Block 01, Lot 18.4. for for commercial recreation. Con: y dwelling.Property I:oca- 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3928- Property Location:Main Road, 565 Bayer Road, Matti- SAMUEL AND RACHEL State Road 25, Mattituck;' County Tax Map No. },•SALZMAN.•.Variance to the County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec 1 Section 139,Block;3,Lot Zoning Ordinancei Article III A, tion 122, Block 6, Lot 31. Section 100-30 A.3, as disap- 8:05.p.m. Appl. No. 3914- The Board of Appeals will at proved, for permission to con- EVA HALLA. Variance to the said time and place hear any and 'struct addition to an existing Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, all persons or representatives de- dwelling,proposed construction _ siring to be heard in each of the :will have insufficient front yard above matters. Written com= setbacks.Property Location:65 ments may also be submitted . Old Salt Road and 400 Rochelle prior to the conclusion of the Place, Mattituck, County Tax subject hearing. Each hearing ::Map No. 1000, Section 144, will not start before time allot- Block 5, Lot 22. ted. Additional time for your ALI p.m. Appl. No. 3920- presentation will be available,if .. LIOS. Variance to the Zon- needed. For more information,• ing Ordinance, Article XXIV, please call more in Section 100-244,as disapproved, Dated: April 9, 809. ' ;for"permission to construct a ORDER OF deck addition to existing pool, THE SOU BY BY OLD 'DOWN proposed construction exceeds BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN - By Doreen Ferwerda 1X, 4/12/90(80) NOTICE 04' IfiLWRINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,pur- pr vcd,lfor permission to construct 1000. Section 083, Block 01, Lot suant to Section 267 of the Town an accessory building to tennis 01. Law and the Code of the Town of court located in front yard, acccs- 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3922 - Southold, the following hearings sorics permitted in the rear yard ROBEIZTANDIIIERESA IIJIZNER will be held by the SOUT110LD area only. Property Location: Variance to the "Zoning Ordinance, TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at a Private Road H7, Fords Road, Article III, Section 100-30 A.4, Regular Meeting, at the Southold Southold, County Tax Map No. Bulk and Parking area,for permis- Town hall, Main !toad, Southold, 1000, Section 087, Block 01, Lot Sion to construct an attached NY 11971,on TIIURSDAY,APRIL 18.4. swimming pool to house. Property 19, 1990, at the following times: 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3928 - Location: 1525 Albo Drive,Laurel, 7:30 p.m. Appl. No., 3926 - SAMUEL AND RACHEL SAL"Z- County Tax Map No. 1000.Section MURRAY JACOBS.Variance to the MAN.Variance to the'Zoning Ordi- 126,Block 03, Lot 17. Zoning Ordinance,Article III,Sec- nance, Article III A, Section 100- 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 3925 - Lion 100-33, as disapproved for 30 A.3, as disapproved, for ELSIE PARKIN. Variance to the permission to construct an acces- permission to construct addition to Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, sory shed in side yard, accessory an existing dwelling, proposed Section 100-30 A.3,Bulk and Park- buildings may be located in the re- construction will have insufficient ing Regulations in this Division of quircd roar yard.Property Location: i front yard setbacks. Property Land. Property Location 7575 1180 Sagc Boulevard, Grccnpon, Location:65 Old Salt Road and 400 Skunk Lane, Cutchoguc, County County Tax Map No. 1000,Section Rochelle Place, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 104. 53,Block 5,Lot 9, Tax Map No, 1000, Section 144, Block 04,Lot 27. 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3927 - Block 5,Lot 22 P r-8: p� No. 3908 - MARK AND ELLIIi GORDON.Vari- 7:45 p.m.Appl.No.3920-A. ROBERT OCHSENREITER AND ance to the'Zoning Ordinance,Arti- LIOS.Variance to the Zoning Ordi- EDWARD LENCESKI.Variance for cle.EI, Section 100-33, as disap- nance,'Article XXIV,Section 100- reversal of a building permit to _ 244, as disapproved, for permis- construct a one family dwelling. Sion to'constmct a deck addition to Property Location 565 Bayer Road, existing pool, proposed construe' Mattituck, County Tax Map No. lion exceeds permitted lot cover- �1000, Section 139, Block 3, Lo age,and will have insufficient side pq, yard setbacks. Property Location: The Board of Appeals will at said 310 Linda Road,Mattituck,County time and place hear any and all par- Tax map No. 1000. Section 106, sons or representatives desiring to Block 1,Lot 14. be heard in each of the above mat- 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 3921 - ters. Written comments may also EILEEN VILLANI.Variance to the be submitted prior to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, conclusion of the subject hearing. Section 100-239 B, for permission Each hearing will not start before to construct deck addition to exist- time allotted. Additional time for ing one family dwelling, proposed your presentation will be available, construction will be within 75 ft. if needed. for more information,') of water or wetlands. Property please call 765-1809. Location: Private Road 925 Wood Dated April 9, 1990 Lanc, Peconic, County Tax Map IIYORDEROP No. 1000, Section 086, Block 06, 771E SOUM IOLD TOWN Lot 10. BOARD OF APPEALS 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 3919 - GIZZARD P.GOEIIRINGER THOMAS COLLINS. Variance to CI.IAIRMAN the Zoning Ordinance, Article By Dorcen Pcrwcrda XXIII,.Scction 100-239 4.13, for 6644-1TA12 permission to construct a deck addition to a one family dwelling, , proposed construction will be less than 75 ft. from the bulkhead. Property Location: 305 Dawn Drive,;East Marion, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 35, Block 5,La 20. 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 3930 - JOI IN C.PERRONE.Special Excep- tion to the Zoning Ordinance, Ar- ticle X, Section 1 00-1 0 1 13, for Permission to occupy and use as a billiard parlor for commercial rccre- ation. Property Location: Main Road, State Road 25, Mattituck, , County Tax Map No. 1000,Section 122, Block 6,Lot 31. . 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 3914 - EVA IIALLA.Variance to the Zon- ing Ordinance, Article III A, Sec- tion 100-30 A.3, Article XXIV, Section 100-244, Bulk and Parking Area, Article XXIII, Section 100- 239.4, building setbacks from wa- ter or•wetlands, for permission to constrict a one family dwelling. Property Location: 55 Glen Court, Cutchoguc, County Tax Map No. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK ss: NOTICE.OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section Patricia Wood,. being duly sworn, says that she is the 267 of the Town of Southold,aw and the Code of the Town Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN .,.the following hearings will be a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; .held by the SOUTHOLD and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS has been published in said Lon Island Traveler-Watchman at a Regular Meeting, at the . P g Southold Town Hall, Main once each week for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . weeks Road,Southold,NY, 11971.on THURSDAY, MARCH 29, a� 1990, at the following times: successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ' 7:30 p.m. Appl. No. 3770- PORT.OF EGYPT.Variance to, day e %`► , 19 �v the Zoning Ordinance, Article XII,Section 100-121C-122,Sec- tion 100-239d,was:disapproved for permission to construct Boat " " " " " " " " " " " " ' " - Storage Building with insuffi- cient setbacks and.excessive lot coverage in this Marine II (M- II) Zoning District. Property .-.� .Location: Main Road, Sworn to before me this . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . day of Southold,County Tax Map No. 1000,Section 056,Block 04,06, Lot 10.1,11, 12.2,3:2,3.3,4,6:1: . . . . . , / . . . . .'..` . . . . . . . , 19 . . . 7:35 Pm. Appl.,No.. 3908- ROBERT OCHSENRETER AND EDWARD LENCESKI.' .Variance for reversal of.building permit to construct a one fami- ly dwelling.Property Location:.; 565 Bayer. Road,:.*Mattituck,: Notary Public BAPpARA A. S 1WEIGI:R County Taz Map No.1000,Sec NCT,1aY PUBLIC, Slate of New fork lion 139, Block 3, Lot 14...:' f, ;g0 ;gB The Board of Appeals will (ii; ' ,.l '• ;k au at is �,'S:[�i:, G ntY said time and place hear any and Coin iutt L;cPir:s 3�/9 all persons or ,representatives desiring to be,heard,in each of .. the above matters.Written com- ments may also be.submitted..:. prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before:.time allot- ted. Additional time for your presentation will be available,if .. needed. For more information,. Please call 765-1809. . Dated: March 26, 1990. BY ORDER-OF THE. SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN.. By: Doreen Ferwerda i 1X-3/22/90(8) FO i-7, T Southold Town Board of Appeals 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, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN dff Y�, y � APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ti . =' ''"' SCOTT L. HARRIS Gerard P. Goehrin er, Chairman -� '� Supervisor g �. :: Charles Grigonis, Jr. _ 1 � " i� Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Serge Doyen, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Joseph 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 TO: Harvey Arnoff, Esq. Town Attornev Matthew Kiernan, Esq. Assistant Town Attorney FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals)10 DATE: May 16, 1990 RE: Appl. No. 3908 - Inland Homes (Ochsenreiter/Lenceski) t In the latter part of August of 1989 I was approached by Eric Bressler who indicated to me that construction in the way of a foundation commenced on a lot which was owned by Victor - Lessard's daughter. Subsequent to August 9, 1989, this lot was sold to Inland Homes, Westphalia Road, Mattituck. Mr. Bressler asked me what he -thought he should do concerning the construction and what appeared to be a merged lot (merged with the house) . I told him that all inquiries as to complaints on building permits should be directed to the Town Attorney. On or about early September 1989, on my lunch- hour, I conducted .a single and separate search of said property. It indicated that the house lot was purchased by Paul Bittner and wife in 1942 and in 1962 they purchased the lot in question, which is — now being constructed upon. In 1962 the zoning was 12,500 sq. ft. or 100 by 125. This lot was approximately 50 by 150 or 7500 -sq. ft. which rendered the lot substandard at the time it was purchased. It should be noted that these parcels were merged in the same name subsequent to its purchase in 1962. In 1974 or there about, Mr. and Mrs. Spano purchased the property (both parcels) in both their names, thereby continuing the merger. This continued until 1989 when they deeded the house parcel to the Garcias and I believe the lot to Mrs. Garcia, thereby creating an illegal set-off. Mrs. Garcia then deeded her rights in the lot to Inland Homes on or about August 9, 1989. i i 'Ile F Page _ 2. This Board was unaware of the memo between Dan Ross and Jay Schondabare until early December when a discussion ensued between Mr. Schondebare and myself regarding the legality of this parcel. He told me that he had spoken to a surveyor in town who had told him that older subdivisions were dropped from time to time from the exempted list. I asked why he did not speak to John Wickham, Henry Raynor, or Howard Terry concerning this particular situation. In any case, I told him that in my opinion that the subdivision was not on the exempted list of the present code, it was not exempt. Miraculously, approximately two days after, Mr. Hiltz called me at my home and I told him the same thing. The only other knowledge that I have is, on or about January 9, 1990, construction above ground commenced on. the site and on or about the 15th of January 1990, an application made by Mr. Ochsenreiter and Mr. Lenceski came in to our Board to overturn the permit. Please be advised that these are statements of opinion based upon fact, with full knowledge that they are as accurate to the best of my ability. ZBA/df 1 VICTOR LESSARD '='C '�'' - • �. �'i'.t � Town Hall, 53095 Main Road PRINCIPAL BUILDING INSPECTOR _� . : ,i„ P.O. Box 1179 (516)765 1802 {,; ``y . ` Southold, New York 11971 FAX(516)765-1823 OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: BUILDING DEPARTMENT' �-'c SUBJECT: CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY DATED: MAY 8, 1990 This is in response to your memo dated May 4, 1990 regarding ZBA Appeal *3908. No Certificate of Occupancy has been issued as of this date. No further new information has been added to this file. Please note an Attorney informed me that Supreme Court has issued a determination within the last month which states that old subdivisions that are mostly developed have a vested right or interest. Suggest you have the Town Attorney check to get first hand determination. VGL:gar cc to: TOWN ATTY rh APR SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK ----------------------------------------X SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS HEARING, In the Matter of ROBERT OCHENREITER and EDWARD LENCESKI, Applicants \. ----------------------------------------X 53095 Main Road Southold, New York 11971 . April 19, 1990 BEFORE: GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, r Chairman. BOARD MEMBERS: CHARLES GRIGONIS,, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. JOSEPH . H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. ALSO PRESENT: DOREEN FERWERDA c. 1 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : STATE OF NEW YORK 2 APR z Q in --------------------------------------- SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 4 HEARING, In the Matter of 5 ROBERT OCHSENRETER AND EDWARD LENCESKI , 6 Applicants. 7 -----------------------------------------X 8 53095 Main Road 9 Southold, New York 11971 10 March 29, 1990 8 :18 P.M. 11 12 B E F O R E 13 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, f 14 Chairman. 15 BOARD MEMBERS: 16 CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. 17 18 SERGE DOYEN, JR. (Absent) JOSEPH H. SAWICKI 19 20 DAMES DINIZIO, JR. - " 21 A P P E A ,R A N C E S 22 MOORE & MOORE, ESQS. 23 Attorneys for the Applicants Main Road Mattituck, New York 24 BY: WILLIAM MOORE, ESQ. 25 16 . answers the questions. It shows we did not file untimely and we applied to the proper jurisdiction as directed by Mr. Schondebare, (phonetic ) Town Attorney at that time. Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Hearing no.,.further ques- tions or -comments . . . Mr. Zahra, you have some- thing to say? MR. ZAHRA: The name, Zahra, was mentioned tonight . It appears that Mr. Lessard may have thought , I 'm speculating, that this person was related to me and that ' s why he came in defense of using it . I want to clear it for the record that it just became known to me that that lady lives on that street , this past week. I believe her name is Sara Zahra and there' s no relation whatever. I don !t know if I 'm standing up here in her defense or mine. MR. LESSARD: That was .not the point that we had. THE CHAIRMAN: We thank the audience, appli- cants and attorneys and Mr. Lessard for coming in and for everyone ' s courtesy. r I make a motion to close the hearing and 15 . THE CHAIRMAN: Filed with the County Clerk's Office? MR. LESSARD: Yes. We don't know if it was .ever filed. . .I won't discuss it. The hell with it . It has nothing to do with this. THE CHAIRMAN: Do we have' any other questions, Jim? MR. DINIZIO: No. THE CHAIRMAN: We thank you very much. Is there anybody else that would like to say anything? Mr. Moore, do- you have anything further? MR. MOORE: No. W THE CHAIRMAN: Anybody else in the com- munity? Any other applicants? 0 S MR. LENCESKI : We just have two additional Z exhibits that. we 'd like to add. We have one for 0 m Mr. Moore to examine and one for the Board. Basic 0 ally, it ' s a chronological summary of the dates I Z have that I was here at the first two hearings. There were objections made by the Counsel involved in the Inland Homes . Both questioned our timeli- ness in filing the petition, also our jurisdiction- al choice of who we filed to and this more or less 14 . answer your question about the title search on vacant land, I talked to Matt and I talked to Robbie. Before Matt I talked to Jay Schondebare (phonetically spelled) and I said to him, "How am I supposed to handle the subdivisionsthat were stamped and approved by the Planning Board. They never merged. " And he said, "Well do they merge or don't they merge?" Okay, I said, "Well, you know as well as I do that people come out and buy lots if they stand a chance, and grab one on either side for their kids. They do that . How do you want to handle that?" He said, "Okay fine, forget the title search" he said, "for all improved sub- divisions that are approved by the Planning Board, all those on the excepted list. " With that , what I had in mind, anytime. one of those came up, I would not get ' a title search for it . I would make sure that we had a signed subdivision and I have a copy of every subdivision that ever happened. THE CHAIRMAN: You mean signed by the Planning Board? MR. LESSARD: Yes. It is not -.worth a fiddler' s hoot if , I try to collect by the County Planning Board. That ' s bogus. 13 . Now my only problem with that, I really don't understand why we didn't get a single and separate search on this one. You're clearly stating you thought there may have been one, you were not really sure at that time. Are there any single and separate searches that you have received that you immediately threw out because they were, using your phrase, "bogus? Or anything you showed to us to indicate that they did not specifically . . . they were not germaine to the issue? .T MR. LESSARD: When you say, "bogus" title search, the way that was done, part of the time they W would give the history of the property back to f before zoning. Then you would get a report . The. N 11 second page of the lot to one side, . the third page, O Z the lot to the other side, okay. Then you would. . ZZ Z get a report the bottom title search indicated m 0 there was no -contiguous property. Now the thing " that makes that "bogus" is that that is not so because if you can, in relation to the second and third page, put a time frame of all three pages in front of you, you can see that it ' s contiguous. �� That ' s what I mean by "bogus" title search. To c c 12 . MR. DINIZIO: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: The only other thing I have I remember the question, I don't remember if it was before this particular hearing actually commenced but when the application was filed with us or during the time between the two hearings, certainly, it was not between those two hearings, but back before this, I went to your department and requested an application for vacant land C.O.s. Now it is my understanding presently, that the Building Department is not granting any more vacant land C.O.s. MR. LESSARD: ( Interjecting) The resolution passed. Nobody is getting any of them any more. MR. DINIZIO: I went to the Legislative Hearing last week and we were told at that time, it did pass as you concurred. MR. LESSARD: When I received the applica- tion it clearly stated that it requests a single and separate search. THE CHAIRMAN: For the applicant to go before your department , okay . . . with the request to see if this particular lot did stand and was not merged with any other parcel. • 11. "John, you're talking of putting subdivisions, the exception list, how do you take them off? Does the Town Board pass some legislative action, resolution, to remove. these and another one-•.to put new ones when they're developed? We just took them off, they were just t,4king up space?" You have to put yourself back in the late 60 ' s and early 70 ' s and you've got a whole different ballgame than what you're looking at today. You people have to make a decision because they were doing this and that was the past practice. . .,How the hell do you legally stop this stuff? Wh'o's going to be penalized because you say, "Stop, " and then the next day somebody steps into something. W f 4 That ' s not my problem. That ' s yours. I 'm glad N 0 I 'm not sitting up there. W MR. DINIZIO: That 's what I 'm searching for. Z Z m MR. LESSARD: I 've probably confused you. 0 MR. DINIZIO: Well certainly the whole u thing confuses me. I still would like, if you could show me, a situation similar to this one. MR. LESARD: I ' ll try, Jim. I was away and things have been crazy. I ' ll try. That ' s �� the best I can tell you. 10 lot to somebody else and I think the fourth lot went to the fellow that fixes washing machines. I don 't know his name, Raynor? THE CHAIRMAN: . Thank you. MR. LESSARD: You may have a problem. I didn't want to create a whole damn cloud here. I was trying to keep it so we would not lose sight of the fact what we were here for in the first place. Anything else I can help you with or I didn 't answer? MR. DINIZIO: I 'm still somewhat confused. I ..look to' those basically; as being a layman. I would probably say I don't understand fully, as most people do, but it just came to me , if I black out the names,okay, what would pop up to me is that these two here would still have been unusual compared 'to the rest of them: What I was basically looking for, if there is an identical situation to this amongst the houses in the general area . . . MR. LESSARD: ( interjecting) You're asking for a long shot , Jim. I think what we're looking at here, I talked 'to Mr. Wickham, I hate to keep using his name. I talked to him. I said to him, 9 . these records that would go to the extreme of splitting-,a lot and putting another house on it and actually issuing a C.O. for that . These don't say that they list a lot and put a house on it , that that actually really happened here. What I was basically looking faz, I think you said that it is common--practice to go to those excepted lists and do that . What I 'm basically looking for in this development is where was it done? MR. LESSARD: I .didn't have time to re- search all those vacant land lists. I gave, I don't know how many houses were on them but they were contiguous lots. THE CHAIRMAN: Were houses on them or not? MR. LESSARD: I don't know as far as this particular . . . 'I don' t think the Board should be separating one against the thirteen. This particu- lar subdivision for whatever . you are looking, you should look under Kominsky or to Lesko (phonetic- ally spelled. ) I think another lot went to Acardi (phonetic) or something like that . That ' s just one example again. Frank Oliver, too, he hacked t off pieces for his daughter, Pamela and then another 8. builds a house on it and sells it. to Clancy. I would never be the one to go out and tell you where All these lines are but this was a continuous prac- tice right along. I did what you said. I got hold of John Wickham. I don't know what the hell is going on, what you people were doing back in the 0 60 ' s and 70 ' s and I said, "How do you handle the subdivision?" and he said, "Whatever it called for atthat period of time. If a person hacked off a piece and filed it and the County didn't object, it was fine with them. " And I said, "You've got to be kidding me?" and he said, "Hell, no. How • :r do you think Schoolhouse Road was developed? They just hacked off every time they needed another lot . " W So, you know, you people are faced here with a 0 W N problem procedure. How are we going to stop it or O O should we stop it or should we recreate a whole z W z bag of worms. I would not want to be in your shoes . . O I can tell you that right. now. 0 u u THE CHAIRMAN: Are you all done? W a MR. LESSARD: I 'm not finished. MR. DINIZIO: I still think maybe I 'm missing something but I 'm searching but still didn' t find anything. THE CHAIRMAN: I have not found anything in 7 . and his widow got married again and Ocean Ryder bought two lots vacant, one the house was on it, in 1972 or whatever it was. So there was no problem there but then you see another notation .where in 173 , I think May of 173, apparently George Taylor here I 'm guessing,\,.he could probably tell you better plus offer some kind of situation where he bought maybe, three-quarters of the next lot to him. Okay, no lot line changes , no nothing, just by deed apparently filed with the County. . Then you have two lots after that, that involve the Lenceski' s . They come along in 1985 . They want a house. Fine. They buy two lots but in buy- W ing two lots here, I could never understand all f LL this time, nobody stays in the subdivision. They 0 bought two lots like everybody else but then bought z thirteen feet on• the east and- ten feet lot on the W Z Z west . Now you can't blame these people. They m 0 bought what was offered to them. And then we go W down to Clancy which is next door. Stacy, I think a the guy' s name is, he buys this lot and he gets in a push and shove with Mrs. Zahra where he sells that , dumps it to Gastar (phonetically spelled) who 1 c c 6. least three and the thing that amazes me in this whole thing, in researching this, you have to keep in mind -what we 're after here. You see, we 're going out and creating another can of worms. It 's not going to answer it . . So I chid it but I didn't . do it. I didn't put that much time into it. What I did find out is the subdivision is filed with the County in 1927 and the Town went into zoning in 1957 and from that I could tell the first piece of property to go single and separate. Again, you have not got that much research. Now Zahra here, the subdivision, I 'm not picking on Zahra or anybody else. I don 't want to start with that nonsense. Here with that subdivi- sion, that was excepted by the County and went into zoning before we ever put the exception list . The first thing that happened, instead of buying lots according to the subdivision that ' s hacked out between two lots and as you go down through the process, the immediate neighborhood, because they didn't want to go 86 lots . It ' s a hell of a lot of lots. We started the other side, Ocean Ryder, I hope I said that right , that property originally belonged to Rodney Cox who died in 166 5. I looked through all' of them and the only one I could find that really actually divides the lot to build a house, it seems, correct me if I 'm wrong that most of those contain, if there- was -something with' a lot line, it was just the neighbors got together and divided up a lot that was between them to expand the lot .. MR. LESSARD: Yes, it is horrendous. Under that subdivision they got away with murder in that one MR. DINIZIO: But there' s no other instance where the lot was actually taken off another piece of property was separate and a house built on it_ I don't believe, if 'you researched under . . . MR. LESSARD: Well first off, it is hard W to trace back through the present.- Assessor' s f 0 cards but Walter, there ' s a good chunk of this N O S subdivision, but .to get it up to my generation, if Z Z you would, the Kray' s (phonetically spelled) Z 0 m divided up the property and sold it to the Olivers, o - the Komisky' s (phonetically spelled) and they were Z in the same subdivision but away from the problem. So I didn 't go too much into it . I know there was dots bought and sold. Komisky' s, then Fred Kray had three or four of them. Frank Oliver had at 4 . THE CHAIRMAN: My question to you, was there single and separate searches of this particular parcel and did you receive them, to your knowledge?. MR. LESSARD: Not that I 'm aware of. The only thing I could say to this is, there was a title guarantor at the closing and there was a lawyer for the seller and a purser for the bank _ and I 'm sure they all did their homework. Of course, there ' s nothing guaranteed in that either ( because no one ever questions the title search :P for single and separate because it was the exemp- ted list . That ' s what this is all about . It was W 1966. . .you have a copy.. It was 166 or 167 , what- ever it was. I have it here. I have one dated N 0 here May 24 , ' 66. That ' s the one I gave you. I Z don 't know if I "received it from you or the Town W Z Z m Clerk from me. That was from me, you requested 0 it last time. I thought I had given one to Jim.. u Apparently I didn 't . THE CHAIRMAN: There ' s one other question which escapes me at this particular time. Do you have any questions? '� MR. DINIZIO: Just the property tax record. 4 r 3 . THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, we have it. Thank you. For the record, I have sent Mr. Lessard a memo requesting him to come tonight, to just continue one other discourse that we were dis- cussing and he did come and we appreciate that. Could I ask you to- use the microphone, Mr. Lessard? We were discussing lots built on single, separate ownership as opposed to lots bought on merged parcels of vacant land C.a. 's at the last meeting. It is my understanding that, at that time I was talking`'to you, that we were dis- cussing the single and separate searches. You used the word, by name, "Bogus, " referring to single, . separate searches that you received in the past . Is that correct? .MR. LESSARD: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Concerning lots, I assume that you had requested single and separate searches on, is that correct? MR.LESSARD: Yes , title searches. The only difference between a regular search and a single, separate search thev 're really searching the tproperty around to make sure that it was not part of any other parcel. That ' s my understanding of it . C C 2. C (HEARING RE-CONVENED) THE CHAIRMAN: The final appeal of the evening, recessed from last meeting on behalf of Robert Ochsenreter and Edward Lenceski, Number 2908. It ' s probably the first time I 've pronounced it correctly. This particular recess was requested for Mr. Moore. So I 'd ask, Mr. Moore, if you'd like to proceed. MR.MOORE: Good evening, William Moore, Suite 3 , Clause Commons, Main Road, Mattituck. I apologize. There' s been a lot of work that was going on. When we were done, when we ended, there was a request by the Zoning Board of Mr. Lessard that he provide it specific vacant land C.O. ' s list on the tax property part . So if I may just simply request those pieces of information which are in your file already, become an official part of the record. I have nothing more to add. That was work I was going to get together and submit . I 'm glad Mr.Lessard has already done that and got it in to you. Do we have a clean copy of this to put in the file? 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) •� . 1. -�:� `i a ee►►t.� � �. // p�J [ L Z Date Permission is hereby granted to: _ J, 07 to ........ 2.-1,�7z . .. .... of premises locate a .... . . . -�-- . ..... ...............Q... ............... . ............................ ... ..?...... . ' .: ..!_ .. t;: .................................. ............................. ::.:::............. .`. 4q.,t... • �'iwtt9iG'�• • ................. ...:............. . ....................... ............/.�.��..�.. ..-.... v............................................. County Tax M'op No. 1000 Section ...1-3..7.... Block .....;,,/........... Lot No. ......�.. ...•,,, pursuant to application dated ..........C. J .............., 19... � and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee $.�a:�A.S.CJ...[. � .. - .... .: .:....... .. Buiidin I.- g I nspcctor Rev. 6130180 EXHIBIT J THE FOLLOWING PERTAINS TO LOTS 35 & 36 AT BAYER RD. , MATTITUCK, NY ----------- .. i -LONG ISLAND• TRAVELER-WATCHMAN AGE TWp ` THURSDAY, OCTOBER 26, 1989 i OfficialsQuestioned . : Dau titer's Per*m' it g - SOUTHOLD' ' A Mattituck _�In August, Ross said,a building' lawyer .wrote to Town Attorney permit was issued to Inland Homes : James Schondebare this week ques-. .to construct,a single-family house . tioning the legality of a building 'on the vacant lot. permit issued for one of two lots in- "A foundation went in and some volving Principal Building Inspec- .of the neighbors made noise and for Victor Lessard's daugher,Cor- asked us to investigate,"said Ross,' inne Garcia. adding: "In our opinion the two Attorney Dan Ross said he•'had lots were merged and Lot 36 does been retained by neighbors to find not exist as a legal building lot:' ' out why a building permit had been Lessard,who was visibly upset by issued for construction of a single- the suggestion of any wrong doing, family house on a 50-foot by said that his son-in-law had sold the 150 foot lot on Bayer Road in Mat- vacant lot in July to Robert Hitz, ., tituck.. According. ,to• county owner of Inland Homes, shortly records, he said, a subdivision after he purchased it from Spanos known as Mattituck Heights was in June . filed in 1938, indicating two lots, "I am not surprised at this;look each of 7,500 square feet. ' where it is coming From;' he said, A house was built on one lot,and noting that Ross works in the same the other remained vacant until this' law firm as Eric Bressler, whose summer when foundation work client,Charles Zahra,and Lessard began for a.house on Lot 36, he have been involved in numerous bit- ' said.'The lots, he maintains, were' ter legal disputes for several years. legally merged,because through the' "Now they are trying to get at my years they were not held in single family,but they won't say who fil- and separate ownership, and ed a complaint;' Lessard said. "I therefore not exempt from' the want to know who all the players town's subsequent rezonings. ark+t Ross said the lots were owned by Lessard said the subdivision was Leonard Spanos from 1972 until "exempted in the town's building June, 1989, when he sold the lot zone ordinance in 1966;' and the with the house to Lessard's lots are listed as separate on the daughter and her husband,Richard `Suffolk County Tax map. Garcia.On the same day,Ross said, That may be, Ross replied, but Spanos sold the vacant lot to the lots were not exempt from the Richard Garcia only.Ross also said town's new zoning ordinance ,.that in November, 1988,Spanos ob- .enacted in,1989, "and we believe 'twined a vacant land certificate they are in he said.. from•the town's building depart- —Lydia Tortora men+.5�"edbr yicW Lessard... A22 The Suffolk Times *.-October 26, 1989 1 14A , /eBuildn o I�a� e ses u s ions _ By.Bill Fallon — neighborhood zoning..(The zone is R- Inland Homes could not be reached for- ' Mr.Ross,the two parcels became one MATTITUCK `There is i house 40,or one acre;at 7,500 square feet,the. comment and Mr.'.Garcia's telephone; ..between 1972 and 1989, when it was going'up in Mattituck on;less:than.1/4 Garcia lot Is less.than:1/4 of that.)Mr. number is not listed. occupied by Mr. Spano Wider a single r acre in a neighborhood zoned one acre It Garcia bought the:Property on June 26. •Seeking a '.Clarification CO:-The:previous owners, identified is being built with two valid BuildingAr Zessard said,he sold it in July.to Neighbors-of.:the property have' . only as the Bittners, bought the unde- Department permits,but neighbors have Inland Homes.of Mattituck. Curt.Hor- protested to the town attorney's office.'.: veloped parcel in 1965,effectively dou- asked_the town attorney to clarifythe ton of the Building.Department issued --:Technically,they are asking fora clan blingtheir.yard. . : ... :reason the:permits were issued`in the� `the building permit Aug.8.The lot was cation of the ruling that'allowed the .Mr:.Ross points.to three elements of Est place.' lot was owned bnefly.by h,reinspected,Sept. .13 and thebuilding; Y construction to begin.They are not sa- .the Town Code that appear to buttress =the principal building uispector's son hermit remamed valid as of 'uesday. Ong the town.Accordmg to their lawyer the neighbors'.opinion thai the building .in Mr. the:.time the first and is gal One of them says single and second permits were issued. 'separate ownership of a parcel had to be According to Danny Ross, lawyer for a ra e c 010 o e e p mot ` demonstrated before April 9,1957, to-'.. the neighbors,the lot in question is ad -subdivide a iot within an nnexempted . Continued from page A3 selves i.ong Island developer Nick: subdivision.. Jacent.:to a similar "sized lot which.in panes engaged in the construction in Racanelli is mentioned in this connec 'Town attorney lames Schondebare ' cludes the residence`of Richard Garcia " + ilustry on Long Island. It further alleges tion several times in transcripts of taped :.said Monday that he has_been . �Vlr. arcia is marriedo the former '�Coiine Lessard, daughter°pf Victor ` e Lucchese Crime Family, act- conversations.included in the Sept. 7 •"swamped" with work since assistant Lessard,a town bui�din rn8 through the"defendant .nano loner;.Mr.Racanelli,who has hot been "town attorney Rob Bemtsson moved and $ • "" "nominated the affairs of Laval 66"tic-': accased:of an illegal activi. also:_ he had not read the letter in question. - The two-lots were separate until . y g ty; 1972,when a single ceitif sate of occu -"cording to a letter dated Sept 7, i989, contributed$1,000 to Mr.Caracciolo Thus he would not comment on the sit- =fiom the Criminal Division of the U$. 'Asked wh Local 66 contributed to : uation pancy was issued 6.'the then-owner, y . Leonard Spano. In 1973, the Town Departrrient of Justice to Judge Mishler. Mr..Caracciolo's campaign, union at ;Another."Case. Pending The same`letter refers to..a select torney Jeffrey Dubin said,`Tt would be-` the. PerDepartment Board exempted 52 subdivisions-from � �" Meanwhile the law that could have let Mr.-Spann club. of concrete contractors,organized ;hard to say,because their PAC(political :. - Building 1 t in part by Peter Vario, which met-to'' :action -committee ..has contributed issued a CO to Charles Zahra for his get around the law and make two lots, share information on min bids"in moue ) Pike Street, Mattituck, swimming pool but Mattituck Heights=3he site of.the-J, �PCO g .-. y to.many candidates — as do order to allocate.jobs`"among them-;,,Y;many corporations and unions." last Friday after the town attorney with= disputed lot— was not included..Mr drew the charges that the pool was ille- Lessard said Tuesday.that Mattituckgal. Heights is an exempted subdivision - ' Judge Frederick Tedeschi agreed with When a reporter told him the"3'own Code speoifes the exempted subdivi eat a ::: atthed ` town attorney James Schondebare when Mr.Schondebarn.said the pool warranted sions m Southold Town and.Mattituck h Low >��R itemarlis a CO.One hour later,the Building De- Heights is not among them,Mr Lessard Tues,'October 17 65 38 T Sun,fair to warm to a.m.showers . ' said it was uan oversight." Wed..�6 t er 18 -57 46 `0.54 Ram on through to clear 6 colder went was on the scene and issued a Mr.Lessard issued avacant certif-care 7 hurs.,October 19 . 48 42 0.22 . Cloudy,windy&rain -CO. It is too late to swim, but it is a Fri..October 20 57 44 0.52 Rain&wind on through victory for Mr.Zahra,who still has an- of occupancy(CO)for the property last Sat. 21 70 40 1.85" Ram;heavy at times to clearing other case in state Supreme Court November,when it was.still owned by Sun.,October22 53 43 0.00 ,- :5un,breezy.fair Uocoder against the Building Department con- ,Spano.A vacant CO means a lot is Mori..October 23 W 39 0.00 Sun,breezy,cool to mild pm.. big enough to build on,even though the'..:;`:.'; (Courtesyoreenport Utilities) testing the stop work order on his Cof- =1ot in question,is too small for the (Readings taken In a.m.for previous 24-hour period) fee Pot Restaurant on Pike Street in s - �. 'Mattituck. - - LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM 8& BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD.P.O.BOX 1424 WILLIAM WICKHAM MATTITUCK.LONG ISLAND. MORTGAGE OFFICE ERICJ.BRESSLER - NEW YORK 11952 316-298-5300 ABIGAILA.WICKHAM 516-298-8353 TELEFAX NO.516-298.2012 OAREN . AGE TELEFAX NO. 516.298.8565 HU ERT F.SULLIVANOctober 17 1989 HUBERT F.SULL . � ' • 1 Town of Southold Town Attorneys Office w Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Attention: James A. Schondebare, Esq. Re: Construction on Bayer Road, Mattituck Suffolk County Tax Map #1000/139/3/13 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000 139/3 14 Dear Mr. Schondebare: We have been retained by certain individuals residing on Bayer Road in Mattituck with respect to the current construction on property designated on the Suffolk County Tax Map as 1000/139/3/14 ("vacant property") which encompasses an area of 7,500 square feet. Specifically, a _ question has been raised as to whether the vacant property is a valid building lot due to its contiguity to the -property to the west designated as 1000/139/3/13 on the Tax Map and upon which there presently exists a house ("residential property") . We are contacting you prior to making an application to the ZBA for reversal of the Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy No. Z-17543 dated November 28, 1988 ("C.0. 11) and the Building Permit No. 18355Z dated August 8, 1989, ("Building Permit") in an attempt to avoid needless litigation. It is our position that the vacant property merged with the residential property, thus rendering the vacant property unbuildable at the present time. I have enclosed to aid in your review the following: 1) Certificate of Occupancy No. Z4575, dated 3/2/72 covering both the vacant and residential property.; 2) Application for Building Permit No. 18355Z dated 8/8/89; 3) Correspondence from SCTIC Inc. dated 9/13/89; 4) Vacant Land C.O. No. Z-17543 dated 11/28/88; ' 5) � Building Permit No. 18355Z dated 8/8/89; 6) Town of Southold Property Record Card re' ' 1000/139/3/14 and 1000/139/3/13 ; 7) Survey of properties dated 3/30/72 ; Turning first to the facts, it appears that both the referenced properties were owned by Leonard Spano and his wife from 1972 to 1989. It appears that the residential property was deeded by Andrew to Bittner in 1945 (L. 2485 p. 49) and the vacant property was deeded by Amburst to Bittner by deed dated 11-19-65 (L. 5867 p. 188) . Both properties were deeded to the Spanos by one deed dated 4-11-72 (L. 7140 p. 32) . The vacant property (1000/139/3/14) upon which the C.O. and Building Permit were issued is shown as lot 36 on the "Amended Map of Mattituck Heights, Property of Gustav Bayer, at Mattituck, Suffolk County, New York" filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office July 24, 1935 as Map No. 1184 . The residential property to the West (1000/139/3/13) is shown as lot 35 on the Mattituck Heights Map. Both . properties were held by Leonard F. Spano and his wife under the deed dated April ll,. 1972. The residential property was transferred to Richard Garcia and Carmine Lessard Garcia by deed dated June 26, 1989 and recorded on July 7, 1989 at Liber 10891, page 166. The vacant property was conveyed by the Spanos by deed to Richard Garcia dated June 26, 1989 and recorded on July 7, 1989 at Liber 10891, page 170. Turning next to the Southold Town Code sections, I would first note that both properties are presently in an R 40 (one acre) zoning district. As noted, the property upon which the building permit was granted is approximately 7,500 square feet. Consequently, the property upon which the building permit was granted does not have sufficient area to satisfy the requirements of a buildable lot under Article IIIA section 100-30A.3 of the Town Code. Neither does the property satisfy the requirements of Article XXIV section 100-244 of the Code which pertains to nonconforming lots. To be a buildable lot section 100-244 requires in part that . the lot was held separately and did not adjoin another lot or land in the same ownership at the effective date of Article XXIV. The effective date of Article XXIV appears to have been January 10, 1989 by L.L. No. 1-1989. You are also 2 referred to Southold Town Code Sections 100-32, 100-12, 100- 281(A) (7) and section 265(a) of New York State's Town Law for additional statutory law relevant to this issue. Based upon the facts set forth previously. and the applicable law referred to above, it appears that the vacant property upon which the building permit and C.O. was issued is not a buildable lot. Would you please review the foregoing at your earliest convenience and advise. Ztruly ours, tatt-75 3 JAMES A.SCHONDEBARE Ln Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN ATTORNEY yO • �!' P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 1 1971 TLIEPHONE (516)765-1939 MATTHEW G. KIERNAN OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY FAX NO. Asst. Town Attorney TOWN OF SOUfHOLD (516) 765-1823 December 11, 1989 Daniel C. Ross Wickham, Wickham & Bressler Main Road P.O. Box 1424 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Construction on Bayer Road, Mattituck Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-139-3-13 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-139-3-14 Dear Mr. Ross: As a result of your letter of October 17, 1989, 1 have reviewed the history of this parcel and applicable law. You are correct in pointing out that under section 100-12 of the Town Code the filed map subdivision called "Amended Map of Mattituck Heights," is not listed along with other exempted subdivisions. However, as shown in the Zoning Code of 1966 this subdivision was listed as exempt. Of the nineteen listed subdivisions exempted in 1966 only three are presently listed in section 100-12. What then is the status of the other sixteen subdivisions? I have researched this matter and have determined that as each subdivision was developed the need to' exempt same no longer applied, hence, the subdivision was omitted from the section. It is the opinion of this office that the parcels in question are part of a legal and exempt subdivision, and to hold to the contrary would jeopardize every landowner who has not built upon their lots located in the other sixteen subdivisions. The remaining issue is whether or not a merger occurs when a person owns two or more contiguous parcels which parcels are located in a filed map subdivision and which subdivision is so recognized by the Town. � c Wickham, Wickham E Bressler December 11, 1989 Page 2 A review of the Code does not show a clear legislative intent by the Town Board that a contiguous parcel owned jointly in a legal and recognized subdivision merger. Absent such a clear direction I would not assume same by implication since the practical ramifications are enormous. It is the opinion of this office that the building permit issued is valid; however, as you know the final interpretation of the Zoning Code rest, both under the Town Law and the Town Code, with the Board of Appeals. Very truly yours, )Ja A. Schondebare n Attorney JAS:mis cc: Town Board Building Department 7 B 399—RegoM for Judtdd InI tendon,22 NYC 7.6.10-86. \\\\\\ JULIU9 BLUMNER6. INC.. PUBLISHER 62 WHITE STREET.NEW YORK.N.Y.10013 Ir �J N (1} For Clerk only Supreme Court, Suffolk County Full title of action Purchased L5 � 0 V is tAsn D INLAND HOMES, INC. , t� _ .........1i..;........... R v JAS entry dat For a Judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR ..........•-•-......... ..... Name of assigned judge REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL against Perifioner(s) INTERVENTION ................• .-•-•--•......_.Date of assignment •- GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , SERGE DOYEN, JR. ; JOSEPH H. SAWICKI , JAMES DINIZIO,. JR. , constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF ❑ Issue joined (date............................................................ ) (check if applicable) APPEALS, ❑ 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. V"33 wp� ❑ The Transit Authority(or MABSTOA) is a party to this action. Res ondern(s) ' NATURE OF JUDICIAL INTERVENTION (check) Request for preliminary conference ❑ Other ex parte application D Note of issue and/or certificate of readiness JJ Notice of petition(return date..Aug-us.t--.-2�--r--••-1.9.9.D--.---..) D Notice of motion (return date ...............•----------...._.... ...--..---) Relief sought .....A,r.t.i.c-Le....7$.....reversal----a-nd-----•-•--•-- Relief sought -..................-........---................••-........ -a-nnu-l-ment....of....d-ec si-on....o-f....Res-pondent-- .................................................................................................................................. ................................................................................................... ............. ❑ Notice of medical malpractice action -1 Order to show cause ❑ Notice of dental malpractice action (Clerk will enter return date ....................................................................) ❑ Statement of net worth Relief sought....................................................................... ❑ Writ of habeas corpus ................................................................................................... ❑ Other(specify): .....................••------....-----..............------._....---...---•--......----------......---------------------......._... -----------------........------...........----.---.......................--••-/= c.--. . .'.- ..... . NATURE OF ACTION OR PROCEEDING (check) JUL 10 1990f� tort Special Proceedings Southold ? _4 7 Motor vehicle ❑ Tax certiorari 7 Medical malpractice ❑ Condemnation Dental malpractice ❑ Foreclosure I Seaman ❑ Incompetency or conservatorship Airline Other special proceeding, including but not limited to: 7 Other tort, including but not limited to personal injury. ❑ Article 75 (arbitration) Property damage,slander or libel (specify): ....... ❑ Article 77(express trusts) .................................................................................................................................. 3D Article 78 ................................................_................................................................................ ❑ Other(specify):...................................... OTHER ACTION I Matrimonial (contested) ❑ Contract ] Matrimonial(uncontested) ❑ Other(specify):......................................................................................... 'lstructions: 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. n 11 Attorney(s)for plaintiffs)/petitioner(s) 3. . Name ►+`~ Address Phone Pachman & Oshrin 366 Veterans Memorial Highway (516) 543-2200 P.O. Box 273 Commack, NY 11725 Attorney(s)for defendant(s)/respondent(s) Name Address Phone Harvey Arnoff, Esq. Southold Town Hall (516) 765-1800 Southold Town Attorney Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Name of insurance carriers(if applicable and available) Not applicable RELATED CASES(if none, write"NONE"below) Title Index q Court Nature of relationship None 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 riled in this action or proceeding. Dated:.....J.u.1.y..................... ...�9.9 0....... Signature—type name'b.........elow............................ me Pachman & Oshrin Attorney(s)for Petitioner Office&W.O.Address 366 Veterans Memorial Highway P-0. Box 273 Commack, N .Y. 11725 SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK --------------------------------------- x NOTICE OF INLAND HOMES, INC., x PETITION Petitioner x x Index No. For a Judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR x x x Assigned against x Judge: GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. , x SERGE DOYEN, JR. , JOSEPH H. SAWICKI, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , x constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, x Respondent. x ---------------------------------------------------------- x PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, upon the petition of Inland Homes, Inc. , verified the 04-K day of July, 1990, and the exhibits and documents attached, copies of which are annexed hereto, an application will be made at an IAS term of the Supreme Court, to be held in and for the County of Suffolk, at the courthouse at Griffing Avenue, Riverhead, New York, on the 24th day of August, 1990, at 9:30 a.m. or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard for a judgment pursuant to CPLR Article 78, reversing and annulling the decision of the Respondent in Appeal Number 3908 and for such other and further relief which the Court deems just and proper.. Answering affidavits, a certified transcript of the record of the proceedings under consideration, and legal memoranda shall be served at least seven days before such time. Dated: July ( 0 , 1990 Yours, etc. Pachman & Oshrin Attorneys for Petitioner 366 Veterans Memorial Highway P.O. Box 273 Commack, NY 11725 (516) 543-2200 To: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals SUPREME COURT COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------- PETITION X INLAND HOMES, INC. , Petitioner x Index No. x For a Judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR x x Assigned against x Judge: x GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES GRIGONIS, A. , x SERGE DOYEN, JR., JOSEPH H. SAWICKI, JAMES DINIZIO, JR. , x constituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, x Respondent. x ---------------------------------------------------------- x TO THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, SUFFOLK COUNTY: The petition of Inland Homes, Inc. respectfully shows: 1. The petition of Inland Homes, Inc. , a New York corporation, with principal offices at.315 Westphalia Road, Mattituck, New York, is the owner of real property located at Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York with the Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000-139-3-14 which property is more particularly described as follows: ALL that certain plot, piece. or parcel of land, with the buildings thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, known and designated as Lot #36 on "Amended Map of Mattituck Heights, Property of Gustav Bayer, at Mattituck, Suffolk County, New York" and filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office on July 24, 1935 as Map #1184, which said lot is more particularly bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the northwesterly side of Bayer Road, where same is intersected by the division line between Lots #35 and #36 on the above map, which said point of beginning is located on the northwesterly side of Bayer Road distant 100.00 feet west of the intersection of the southerly side of Grant Blvd. with the westerly side of Bayer Road; RUNNING THENCE South 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds West, along the r i - U northwesterly side of Bayer Road, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point marking the division line of the herein described lot and Lot #35; THENCE North 58 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds West, along the division line of Lots #35 and #36 a distance of 150.00 feet to a point; THENCE North 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds East, 50.00 feet to a point marking the division line of Lots #36 and #37; THENCE South 58 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds East, along the division line of Lots #36 and #37 a distance of 150.00 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. The petitioner's property is located in the "Low Density Residential R-40 district". 2. The respondents GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR., SERGE DOYEN, JR. , JOSEPH H. SAWICKI, and JAMES DINIZIO, JR., at all times herein mentioned constituted and still constitute the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS (hereinafter referred to as "Zoning Board") of which the respondent GERARD P. GOEHRINGER is the chairman. 3. This proceeding is brought pursuant to Article 78 of New York Civil Practice Proceedings Law to challenge the decision of the Zoning Board in Appeal number 3908 which was, upon information and belief rendered on or about May 15, 1.990 and filed in the office of the Southold Town Clerk on June 11, 1990. 4. In its decision in Appeal No. 3908, the Zoning Board determined that a building permit issued to the petitioner for the construction of a single family residence was invalid thereby reversing the decision of the building inspector who issued the permit (Decision attached hereto as Exhibit A) . 5. The building permit in question was issued on August 8, 1989 for the construction of a single family residence on the petitioner's property (Copy of permit attached hereto as Exhibit B) . 6. On August 30, 1989, excavation was commenced on the property and on August 31, 1989 the foundation was poured. 7. A petition to the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals was filed by attorneys representing neighboring property owners appealing the decision of the building department to issue the subject building permit to the petitioner. 8. The petition was not filed with the Zoning Board until January 19, 1990, a period of 165 days from the issuance of the building permit. 9. In the petition to the Zoning Board, the neighbors acknowledge that the building permit was issued August 8, 1989 and that work was begun on August 30, 1989. 10. Pursuant to New York Town Law Section 267(3), The Zoning Board of the Town of Southold has no established rule setting forth the time in which an appeal must be filed with the Zoning Board from a decision of the building department. 11. The failure to appeal the building inspector's decision to grant the building permit to the petitioner until 165 days after the permit was issued constitutes an unreasonable delay and renders the Zoning Board's action on the appeal jurisdictionally defective. 12. The decision of the ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS contains only groundless conclusions and provides no findings upon.which to base its determination. 13. The determination contained in the Exhibit A decision is arbitrary, capricious and totally without any basis in law. 14. Thirty days have not expired since the filing of the Exhibit A decision with the Office of the Southold Town Clerk. 15. Petitioner is a party aggrieved by the Exhibit A decision. 16. Petitioner has no adequate remedy at law. 17. There are no previous applications made for the relief sought herein to this or any other Court. C - WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that a judgment be made and entered herein annulling and setting aside the decision of the Respondent ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, and directing the reinstatement of the building permit previously issued to the Petitioner. Dated: Mattituck, New York July 10, 1990 INLAND HOMES, INC. By: Robert Hiltz STATE OF NEW YORK ) ss. . COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) I, Robert Hiltz being sworn, say: I am the President of Inland Homes, :Inc., a . domestic corporation and a party in the within action; I have read the foregoing Petition 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 Town knowledge are as follows: information filed in Respondent's office. INLAND HOMES, INC. By: Robert Hiltz Sworn to before me on the O da of July, 1990 V VMI AM D.MOORE Nbrary Public. t3aft 2728 of Now Yb* Qualified in Suffolk County Commlasion Expires January 31,199tr 92� . -. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS `- °r; f, " ''.i'.'' t r%� SCOTT L. HARRIS 3Arard P. Gcehringer, Chairman *.:^ Supervisor Charles Grigonis, Jr. '' • '�j� ��•}i' Serge Doyen, Jr. - 8,'{V' Town Hall. 53095 Main Road Joseph H. Sawicki � P.O. Box 1179 James Dinizio, Jr. BOARD OF APPEALS Southold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Telephone (516) 765-1800 ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS Appl. No. 3908 -Application of ROBERT OCHSENREITER and EDWARD LENCESKI. Variance for reversal of a building permit to construct a one-family dwelling. Property location: 565 Bayer Road, l Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map No. 1.000, Section 139, Block 3, Lot- L4. At a Meeting of the Southold Town zoning Board of Appeals held on May 15, 1990, the following action was taken: WHEREAS, public hearings were held on February 1, 1990, March 29, 1990 and April 19, 1990 in the Matter of the Appli- cation filed under No. 3908; WHEREAS, at said hearings all those who desired to be heard - were heard and their testimony recorded; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have carefully considered -all :sstimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; and WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are . familiar with the premises in question, its present and previous zoning classifications, and the surr-:)unding areas; and • ��Ctfla ! J � /as 2. - Appl. No. 3906 lcation of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski �•.0roperty Owner: Inland Homes, Inc. ZBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 WHEREAS, the Board made the Following Findings of Fact: JURISDICTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS 1. One of the first issues raised in this matter is whether or not this Board has jurisdiction based upon the timing of the filing of this application for a reversal of 'a building permit issued by the building inspector under Permit No. 18*55 on August 8, 1989 and/or concerning construction commenced under said permit .approximately five to six months late (above ground construction) ; 2. Some of the past applications considered and decided by this Board have included requests for a reversal (or otherwise related to an improper building permit or improper construction related under a building permit) based upon written determinations or action of a Building Inspector, including but not limited to determinations under: (a) A building permit issued by the inspector which were issued months before and were still pending during the processing of a review of this Board, and that either did not involve construction or improvements under said building permit or did involve construction* or improvements under said permit, and as much as a year from the date of issuance of the building permit (Article XXVIII, Section 100-281H authorizes work to be "commenced within twelve months after the date of issuance.") ; (b) the guise of a building permit and which construction was built (within a year from the issuance date of the permit) , and which was built "in error" under the zoning code provisions and was reviewed by the Board of Appeals for consideration of the nonconform- ance under the zoning code; (c) A building permit issued and late issued a stop work notification by the building inspector to suspend all building activities, pending a final determination (after review) by the Board of Appeals; (d) A determination, requirement, order, or decision made by the building inspector (in addition to other reviews conferred by law) - (Reference: Article XXVII, Section 100-271 - Powers and Duties Of the Board- of Appeals).. ,A, 3 - Appl. No. 3906 /: plication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski 3. The following time periods are submitted for the record concerning the application .for building permit- under review, and activities related thereto: (a) Application filed August 2, 1989, ( issued on August 8, 1989) for the construction of a 26 ' x 40' deep dwelling (envelope) - with sideyards at 14' and 10' with handwritten notation " . . .as per Building Zone Ordinance_ 1966 Section 307, sideyards" (reverse side, page two) . (b) Building Permit No. 18355Z issued August 8, 1989 concerns premises referred to as "565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York, County Tax Map No. . 1000, Section 139, Block 3, Lot 14, " owned by Richard Garcia, who later sold the land as a vacant ..plot-on October • 2, 1989 to Inland Homes (see Deed at Liber 10950 page 172) . (c) on or about August . 30, 1989 excavation started and on August 31, 1989, forms for a foundation were placed. (d) by letter dated October 18, 1989, an attorney for neighbors residing in the immediate vicinity notified the Southold' Town Attorney's Office of the circumstances of the subject land as a merged parcel, and questioned the validity of the vacant land as a separate buildable parcel for a new dwelling; (e) shortly after this letter was sent to the Town Attorney, the media was made aware through the local newspapers Published in the Township that a review was being made by the Town Attorney's Office as to the validity of the subject building permit and the vacant land conditional Certificate of Occupancy also issued during 1989; (f) On December 11, 1989, the Town Attorney replied by letter indicating the results of his review, opinionating that the Code does not show a clear legislative intent by the Town Board, although final interpretation rests with the Board of Appeals both under the Town Code and Town Law. At no time did an interpretation request be made through the Board of Appeals by any person or representative; and the Town Attorney's written response dated December 11, 1989 was not furnished to the Board 9 Appeals (until January 19, 1990 - the time of the filing of this application under Appl. No. 3908) . Jurisdiction concerning � , •,;.4 Appl. No. 3906 ,:tication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski / M Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 interp retations is with the Board of Appeals (see Article XXVII, Section 100-271D of the Zoning Code of Southold Town) . (9) It is understood that during the first week in January, 1990 the foundation was prepared & on January 8, 1990, the foundation backfilled. (h) The next day (January 9, 1990) certified-mail notices were sent to the- adjacent property owners and to the owner of this parcel (Inland Homes, Inc.) and his attorney, ,of notifica- tion and intent to file this Petition to the Board of Appeals; (i) On January 15, 1990, deck framing was started; (j) On January 19, 1990 the Petition and accompanying papers were filed with the Southold Town Clerk and Board of Appeals; (k) On January 23, 1990 a written memorandum was delivered to the Building Inspector requesting that a "stay be issued concerning the construction"- until this Board of Appeals ' application has been decided upon and further requesting his presence at a hearing of the Board to be held February 1, 1990 at 8:15 p.m. (together with delivery of copies of documents pertinent to the file) ; (1) On January 26, ' 1990 the Building Inspector responded to the Board- of Appeals ' memorandum and suggested that the Board, at this point, get in touch with the Town Attorney' s Assistant to be brought up-to-date"on events which have taken place to this point, " and confirmed that a .representative from the Building Department will be present at the Board 's February 1, 1990 hearing; (m) On February 1, 1990 the Building Inspector was personally served with copies of the Notice of Petition with Exhibits filed with and under consideration by the Board of Appeals ; (n) On February 1, 1990 the first of three hearings were held by the Appeals and Zoning Board, at which time the question jurisdiction of the Board of Appeals was discussed at length between the attorney for the property owner, the Board of Appeals members, and the applicant(s) . The hearing was recessed to another date in order to consult with legal counsel. Before continuing with the other two hearings, it was deemed to be appropriately within the jurisdiction Of the Board of Appeals; that. the application was timely made, having been filed within 15 to 20 days of the construction of the foundation, filed approximately 20 days after the above-ground construction was commenced, and filed within the period of time that the subject build- ing permit was pending, all of which are not unreasonable time periods based on past precedents and practices of this Board. Appl. No. 3908 .4ication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski ;,AA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 1 REQUESTS UNDER Z.B.A. APPLICATION r 4. By application No. 3908 filed January 19, 1990, the follow- ing requests are under consideration: (a) Reversal of determination of building inspector in granting Permit No. 18355 for the reason that the property upon which the new dwelling is to be constructed is not a buildable lot and has not been held in single and separate ownership since April 9, 1957 as required by Article XXIV, Section 100-281A (7) , etc. (b) Reversal of determination of building inspector in granting Permit No. 18355 for the reason that the property does not conform to Article IIIA, Section 100-30A (3) and Bulk Schedule of the Zoning Code as to the minimum requirements for lot area, width and depth; ' - (c) Reversal of determination of building inspector in granting Permit No. 18355 for the reason that the property in ques- tion does not conform to the Bulk Schedule requirements in this A-40 Zone District and does not comply with the requirements of Article XXIV, Section 100-244 of the Zoning Code as applies to nonconforming lots legally in existence as of the date of that section (adopted on or about February 15, 1989) ; ' 0 (d) Reversal of Vacant Land conditional Certificate of Occupancy dated November 28, 1988 issued to Leonard F. and Ave Maria Spano (#Z17543) for the subject premises described as "505 Bayer Road, Mattituck, NY, County Tax Map #1000-139-3-36, Map of Mattituck Heights Lot 36) . GENERAL HISTORY 1957 THROUGH 1989 5. On July 24, 1935 and prior to the enactment of zoning in Southold Town, the Map of Mattituck Heights was filed with the Suffolk County Clerk. The subject parcel, referred to as Lot #36, is shown on this 1932 Map as a 50' wide by 150 ' deep lot. 6 - Appl. No. 3908 ,pplication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski fLBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 GENERAL HISTORY (continued) 6 . On April 23, 1957 the Southold Town Zoning Code and Zoning Maps were adopted, and from that point in time up until November 1971, the subject premises : (a) was lodated in. the A-Residential/Agricultural Zone District, requiring a minimum lot size of 12,500 sq. ft. per lot; and (b) was included in the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" which excepted certain subdivisions from the minimum lot size requirements . (Map of Mattituck Heights of 1932'lincluded) ; 7. During 1971 the zoning code and zoning maps were amended, and lots located in the A.-Agricultural/Residential Zone District were required to meet a minimum of 40,000 (instead of 12, 500) sq. ft. for construction of a new dwelling. Also in 1971, the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" (Article I, Section 100-12) was modified, deleting the subject May of Mattituck Heights, and, including but not limited to, adding others. It is noted that many other subdivisions preexisting of the zoning code which were also not town approved were not added to the "Excepted List" (examples are: Peconic Bay Properties Inc. ; Reydon Shores of 1936 ; Founders Estates of 1927, etc.) . 8. In March 1983 the minimum lot size requirements was increased from 40,000 to 80,000 sq. ft. per lot, and again the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" at Article I, Section 100-12 was modified, and again the Map of Mattituck Heights was not included. 9. During 1989, the Zoning Code and Zoning Maps were amended, changing the zoning of the subject parcel from "A" (80,00.0) to "R-40" (40,000 sq. ft. minimum) . There was no change at this` time in the "Excepted List of Subdivisions" at Section 100-12 ; the Map of Mattituck Heights and other similar subdivisions (filed prior to zoning/1957) . 10. At no time during the period from November 1971 * to June 26, 1989 was there filed any record to show an intent to reseparate the subject merged parcels. The record is clear that the merger of the property (35&36).for this 18-year period remained unchanged. 'Ag' e . 7 - Appl. No. 3908 jApplication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski ZBA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 PRIOR ZONING APPEALS RECORD 10. There is no record of any prior application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals concerning a reduction in lot area or width or the set-off of this parcel from the adjoining parcel. 11. The division of any lot of a size 15,000 sq. ft. into two 7,500 sq. ft. lots has required -consideration(s) from the Board of Appeals since the adoption of the- zoning code and zoning maps in 1957 to the present time ( precedents in Town building department records and zoning board of appeals ' records) . HIslogy OF CHANGES OF OWNERSHIP 1945 - 1989 12. The subject property (referred to as Lot No. 36 on the Map of Mattituck Heights) was acquired by Paul and Helen Bittner by deed at Liber 5867 page 188 on November. 19, 1965. The adjoining property (referred to as Lot No. 35) was also acquired by Paul and Helen Bittner on September 5, 1945. (Approximately a year after the second parcel was acquired in common ownership, the Town Board ' adopted an "Excepted List of Subdivisions" and included Mattituck Heights.) 13. On April 11, 1972, both Lot Nos . 35 and 36 were conveyed by single deed to Leonard and -Ave Spano by deed at Liber 7140 cp 32. On this date, Lot No. 35 remained vacant land; and having been in common ownership together with the adjoining land (No. ' 36) , for a total combined lot area of 15,000 from April 11, 1972 until June 26, 1989. Although the common ownership of the two contiguous Lot Nos . 35 . and 36 merged the property into one nonconforming 15-,000 sq. ft. lot with an existing one-family dwelling constructed thereon, there was no intent by the town or by the owners of this property during these 18 years to legally divide or set-off 7,500 sq. ft. (50' x 150' ) for the future construction of another dwelling. All the amendments of the zoning codes are clear that only one dwelling is permitted per legal lot -in the A and R-'40 Residential Zone District. 8 - Appl. No. 3908 Akication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski /ZhA Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY OF RECORD 14. Furnished in the record are the following Certificates of Occupancy: (a) Certificate of Occupancy (Pre-C.O.) issued March 1, 1972 by Building Inspector H. Terry certifying that the adjacent "building located at Bayer Road, Mattituck Hts. Lot No. 35 and 36 . . .conforms substantially to the requirements for one-family dwelling & housing code built prior to April 1957 . . .and conforms to all of the require- ments of the applicable provisions of law . . .issued to Mr. and Mrs. Paul Bittner, Owners. . . House #505 inspected February 29, 1972 . . . .11 (Lot No. 35 and 36 combined as noted therein totalled 15,000 sq. ft. in lot area) . (b) Certificate of Occupancy (vacant land) issued Novem- ber 28, 1989 by Building Inspector V. Lessard concerning House #505 Bayer Road, Mattituck stating the following: ". . .M/0 Mattituck Heights Lot 36 conforms substantially to the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code. . . premises are located in the 'A ' Residential Agricultural Zoned District. . .YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the above referenced lot may be built upon only after the issu- ance of a building permit and compliance with the following requirements . . . : (1) That the lot is held in single and separate ownership and has been held so prior to the adoption of any amendments to our Town Zoning Ordinance which may have increased the require- ments for lot width or area, or may have amended front, side . . .setback requirements (6) That the Board of zoning Appeals approval has been obtained. . . . (Emphasis added) 15. It is also noted for the record that: (a) the 1972 Pre C.O. was not a vacant land certificate and made reference to the dwelling as existed on both lots (35 & 36) at 505 Bayer Road; the total combined area is 15, 000 sq. ft. (b) the 1989 Certificate of Occupancy is a vacant land conditional certificate making references to: (1) #505 Bayer Road, (2) the condition that Board of Appeals approval be obtained., (3) the condition that a search be filed to show that the lot was either a single and separate lot or otherwise, and which search was not furnished as required. • , 7 9 - Appl. No. 3908 % lication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski JJecision Rendered May 15, 1990 BUILDING PERMIT TIME PERIOD FROM AUGUST 1, 1989 TO THE PRESENT 16. There is no other record, to the best of this Board's knowledge, that there ever was any building permit .filed or issued for the construction of. a new (or second) dwelling on this tract of land (36) . 17. The only building permit of record for a new dwelling as issued on August. 8, 1989 was granted based upon an incomplete application form concerning premises at "565 Bayer Road. " Questions #5, 6, 7, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 were left blank; however, sketched was a diagram indicating a proposed building envelope on a 50 ' x 150 '• rectangular tract of land with setbacks. LACK OF APPROVAL(S) FROM THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FOR THIS PARCEL AS A SET-OFF DIVISION OF LAND 18. No information has been furnished for the record to show that an application is now pending or was previously made and approved to re-separate the tracts of land referriad to as Lot Nos . 35 and 36 on the preexisting (1932) Map of Mattituck Heights to the Southold Town Planning Board; and upon information and belief, no action was taken by the Town Planning Board to approve or other- wise sanction this tract as a 7,500 sq. ft. lot in a grandfather or exemption clause separate and apart from the adjacent merged tract, also a 7, 500 sq. ft. tract. 19. No action was taken by the Town Board from 1971 to the Present time in the Town Code to approve or authorize an exemption or grandfather clause concerning this preexisting Map of Mattituck Heights, or Lot No. 35 and 36 as separate tracts .:of land. . BUILDING INSPECTOR - BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 20. Article XXVIII, Section 281 of the Zoning Code clearly Provides that " . . .No building permit shall be issued unless the Proposed construction or use is in full conformity with all the Provisions of this chapter and the provisions of all other applicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. Any building in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be permit nulland issued vo d and of no effect without the necessity for any proceedings, revocations or nullification thereof; and any work undertaken or use established - c ` "d 10 - Appl. No. 3908 'pplication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 pursuant to the issuance of a permit in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be invalid. . . . " 21. Article XXVIII, Section 100-281A (7) also provides: ". . .A. Applications. Every application for a building _ permit shall contain the following information. . . : (7) An application for a building permit for construction on a vacant lot which is not on an approved subdivision map shall be accompanied by a certified abstract of title issued by a title insurance company which shall show single and separate ownership of the entire lot prior to April 9, 1957. VARIANCES REQUIRED AT TIME OF ISSUANCE OF PERMIT 22. In considering many of the facts in this case, it is apparent by this Board that the following areas of the zoning code have not been appropriately addressed or applied for, and no authority has been given to any other board, officer or employee of the Town of Southold to waive or grant variances thereunder: (a) insufficient lot area (from 40,000 to 7,500 sq. f t. per lot) (b) insufficient lot width (from 150 feet to 50 feet) (c) insufficient lot depth (from 175 feet to 150 feet) (d) insufficient side yard (from 15 feet to 14 feet) (e) insufficient total sideyards (from 25 feet to 24 feet) (References: Article IIIA - R40 Zone' District, and Zoning Code Bulk Schedule, etc.) 21 VALIDITY OF BUILDING PERMIT ~ 23. Pursuant to Article XXVIII, Section 100-281 of the Zoning Code, the subject building permit was issued in violation of the zoning code, as noted, ' supra, and the permit must be deemed to be invalid, null, void and of no effect. 1 • �e 11 - Appl. No. 3908 - plication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 1 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS 24. "In case any building or structure is erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, repaired, converted or maintained, or any building, structure or land is used in violation of this chapter (zoning) or of any other regulations made pursuant thereto, in addition to other remedies provided by law, any appropriate or proceeding, whether by local process or otherwise, may beaction instituted or taken to prevent such unlaF_ul ersction, construction or reconstruction, alteration . . .maintenance or use or to restrain, correct or abate such violation or to prevent the occupancy of. said building, structure or land or to prevent conduct, business or use in and about such pre re any illegal act, mises., (Reference: Zoning Code Article XXVIII, Section 100-286Remedies (Emphasis s added) Z.B .A. DETERMINATION 25. It is the position of this Board that the permit in question is and was not a valid permit since the conformity with certain Permit was not issued in Section 100-281) including but notlimited the ztol the ng cfollowin ode (Articler XXVIII, (see Findings of Fact, supra) : g areas (a) Nonconformance concerning several area regulations under the Bulk Schedule (area, width, setbacks) ; (b) Lack of town approval concerning the re-separation of the northerly one-half from the southerly one-half of the subject land as two scllara-i 7,500 sq, ft. lots (zoning code and subdivision code regulations) ; (c) Lack of evidence concerning the requirements of the zoning code as to proof of single and separate ownership and/or a deter- mination and/or interpretation by the Board of Appeals, particularly due to the substanda:rds of the property, etc. ACCORDINGLY, on motion by Mr. Dinizio, seconded by Mr. Goeh- ringer, it was RESOLVED, that the Building Permit referred to as #18355 is HEREBY DETERMINED to be INVALID, thereby nullifying and voiding the effects under said permit; and BE IT FURTHER • ` sge 12 - Appl. No. 3908 •' A°pplication of Ochsenreiter & Lenceski / Decision Rendered May 15, 1990 RESOLVED, to GRANT the request under this Application for a REVERSAL of determination by the building inspector in the erroneous issuance of Building Permit No. 18355; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that prior to issuance or .reissuance of any building permit, certificate of occupancy or otherwise, that further application(s) be formall%r filed, through normal proce- dures, for consideration by the Board of Appeals, including but not limited to the following areas of the zoning code: (a) insufficient lot area; (b) insufficient lot width; (c) insufficient lot depth; (d) insufficient sideyard setback at the easterly side; (e) insufficient total sideyards; (f) such other and further relief as may be deemed necessary under the zoning code (such as excessive lot coverage, etc.) GERARD P. GOEHRINGE , CHAIRMAN .' FOR THE BOARD OF A EALS BY ITS MAY 15, 1990 ACTION ,. Southold Town Board of Appeals -9- May 24, 1973 buffers should be .required. For instance, the lot where the little old house is has a lot of trees. There is another row of trees between that house and. Smith's. I don't see why they all have to be demolished. THE CHAIRMAN: I think you should be aware Airs. Tiedke that the existing parking lot does not have a buffer zone. THE CHAIRMAN: Are there any other questions? After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to expand a new and used car lot on premises located on the south side of Main Road, Southold, New York. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant subject to site plan approval of the Southold Town Planning Board, The Board finds that the public convenience and welfare and justice will be served and the legally established or permitted use of neighborhood property and adjoining use districts will not be permanently or substantially injured and the spirit of the Ordinance will be observed. On motion by Air. Gillispie, seconded by Air. Hulse, it was � RESOLVED, RJ.chard F. Mullen, Jr, , 1835 Mill Creek Drive West, Southold, New York, be GRANTED permission to expand a new and used car lot located on the south side of Main Road, Southold, as applied for, subject to the following conditions: 1. That on the southerly boundary of Lot No.]„ a buffer(' strip of 10 feet of presently maintained trees be maintained. ,..-. . 2. Subject to site plan approval of the Southold Town Planning Board. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, Grigonis, PTJDLIC IT.EAIRING: Appeal No. 1770 - 8:15 P.M. {r.S.T. , upon application of Lorraine W. Drury, 138-71st Street, Apt. D-7, Brooklyn, Now York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III,. Section 301 and the Bulk Schedule, for permission to divide lots with less than required area. Location of property: Lots 22 and 23, Map of Mattituck Estates, Mattituck, (f New. York. Fee paid $15.00. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the appli-cation for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication .in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. ` y C Southold Town Board of Appeals -10- May 249 1973 TIm CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? WILLIAM ESSEX, ESQ, : My clients bought Lot 7r23 in 1968 and built a house on it. A couple of years later they bought Lot No. ' 22 and put it in. Mrs. Drury's name. I have a Deed showing they were purchased in single ownership. Now, with . the death of Mr. Drn.u^y there is a mortgage, THE CHATMIM This is an approved subdivision map. These lots are all one half acre or better. M. ESSEX: It would be a great hardship if my client could not divide the lots. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this application? (There was no response. ) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to divide lots with less than required area, Lots 22 and 23, riap of Itztti.tuck estates, 114attituck, New York. The findings of the Board are that this is an approved map and that the Lots are one half acre or better. The Board agrees with the reasoning of the applicant. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship; the•hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all' properties alike in the immediate vi c i.nity of this property ty and in the same .use district, and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood, and will observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr.� Grigonis, seconded by Tyr. Hulse, it was RESOLVED, Lorraine If. Drury, 138-71st Street, Apt. -D-7., Brookl..yn New York., . be GRANTED permission to divide .lots irLth less, than required area, Lots 22 and 23, Map of Mattituck Estates, Matti:•tuck, New York# , : . as applied for. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Iul.se9 . Grigoni.s.' t viycl, ► vi ; .'^� i,- �•• -, -_ ij'tl ii jr-.� 1\\ I HARVEY A. ARNOFF SCOTT L. HARRIS Town AttorneyU. _ _ "c- Supervisor MATTHEW G. KIERNAIV `=' Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Assistant Town Attorneyy°�:;�, P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN, ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Matthew G. Kiernan, Assistant Town Attorney M G DATE: March 21, 1991 RE: Inland Homes v. Goehringer, et al. As I have previous advised Linda Kowalski, we have received a Memorandum Decision from Judge Baisley with regard to the above-referenced Article 78. A . copy of Judge Baisley's Decision is annexed hereto for your review. The crux of the Court's Decision is , found on page 5, which states that the Petition is granted, the ZBA's resolution is annulled and the proceeding is remitted to the Zoning Board for purposes of directing the Building Inspector to reinstate the building permit. Judge Baisley's Decision is based on his finding that the appeal to the Zoning Board by the aggrieved property owner was untimely. Specifically, the Judge found that the delay of over 3 months, from October 17, 1939 the date when the aggrieved parties had notice of the issuance of the building permit, to February 1, 1990 the date when the aggrieved parties filed their notice of appeal, during which time Inland Homes erected the foundation and commenced the framing of the building, is, standing alone, unreasonable. Judge Baisley also correctly pointed out that the Zoning Board has failed to establish a time period within which an aggrieved party must appeal a determination by the Building Inspector as required by Town Law Section 267 (3) . Since receiving the decision I have been assisting Linda Kowalski on drafting a rule which would satisfy the requirements of Town Law. Petitioner has advised that a proposed Judgment will be submitted for Judge Baisley's signature on March 25, 1991 . Until we are served with a signed copy of the Judgment with Notice of Entry, technically, this decision is not in effect. We will advise you upon being so served. Should you have any questions with regard to Judge Baisley's Decision, or its impacts, please feel free to contact me. cc: Town Board FdR" film MEMORANDUM SUPREME COURT. SUFFOLK COUNTY SPECIAL TERM INLAND HOMES, INC., Petitioner, By BAISLEY J. S. C. For a Judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR, -against- GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES DATED FEBRUARY 21, 1991 19 GRIGONIS, JR., SERGE DOYEN, JR., JOSEPH INDEX #90/14214 H. SAWICKI, JAMES DINIZIO, JR., Con- Ref. Date 11/2/90 stituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARE CDISPSJ OF APPEALS, Respondents. PACHMAN & OSHRIN, ESQS. ! HARVEY A. ARNOFF, ESQ. Attorneys for Petitioner Attorney for Respondents 366 Veterans Memorial Highway 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 273 Southold; New York 11971 Commack, New York 11725 In this proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78, the petitioner seeks review of a decision of the respondent zoning board of appeals (the "Board") which reversed the determination of the Building Inspector of the Town of Southold (the "Building Inspector") to issue a building permit to the petitioner. The Board's decision, dated• May 15, 1990, granted an appeal by certain aggrieved property owners, reversed the Building Inspector's determination to issue a building permit to the petitioner, and invalidated the building permit issued to the petitioner. The petitioner challenges the Board's decision on two; grounds. First, the petitioner contends that the Board's decisi a on is based upon n untimely appeal of the Building Inspector's determination to issue the building permit by the aggrieved property owners. Second, the petitioner asserts that the Board's decision is arbitrary and capricious, since it is not supported by findings or by the evidence in the record. The decision of the Board is annulled and this proceeding is remitted to the Board for the purpose of directing the Building Inspector to reinstate the petitioner's building permit. The facts underlying this proceeding are as follows. On August 8, 1989, the Building Inspector issued a building permit to the petitioner for the construction of a single family dwelling at 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York. On August 30 and August 31, 1989, the petitioner excavated the property and prepared the footings for 'the building's foundation. By letter dated October 17, 1989, an attorney retained by certain residents in the area of the petitioner's property wrote a letter to the Southold Town Attorney questioning whether the petitioner's parcel was a valid building lot. The residents did not submit any objections to the Building Inspector or to 'the Board. By letter dated December 11, 1989, the Southold Town Attorney stated that the building permit issued to the petitioner appeared to be valid, but noted that the final interpretation of the zoning code was within the province of the Board. Early in January, 1990, the petitioner erected the foundation for the structure. On January 15, 1990, the petitioner commenced the framing , for the building. On January 19, 1990, the above mentioned residents filed a notice appealing the Building Inspector's decision with the Board and the town clerk. . On February 1, 1990, the .aggrieved residents served the Building Inspector with the notice of appeal. On February 1, 1990, -the Board commenced a series of hearings on the appeal. After the first hearing, the Board concluded that the residents filed their appeal in a timely manner pursuant to the past practices of the Board, since they filed their notice of appeal with the Board within twenty days after the petitioner erected the foundation and commenced framing the building and while the building permit was still valid. The Board failed to establish a time period within which- an aggrieved party must appeal a determination by the Building Inspector as required by Town Law §267 (3) . By failing to prescribe such a period for appeals, the Board deprived both the petitioner and,the aggrieved property owners of the knowledge of when the Building Inspector's decision to issue a building permit to the petitioner became final. See, Maroney v. Friere, 74 Misc. 2d 339, 343 N.Y.S. 2d 183 (Sup. Ct., Westchester Co. 1973) . Furthermore, by failing to specify a general time period for appeals as required by statute, and by deciding the timeliness of appeals on a case-to-case basis, the Board acted arbitrarily and capriciously a and in excess of the authority granted to it by Town Law §267 (3) . See, Id. ; Ehrenberg v. Persons, 8 A.D. 18, 185 N.Y.S. 2d 369 (4th Dept. 1959) . In failing to prescribe a time period for appeals pursuant to the statute, the Board divested itself of the power to determine the timeliness of appeals from determinations of the Building Inspector. . See, Ehrenberg v. Persons. - 2 - Accordingly, the determination of the Board that the aggrieved residents' appeal of the Building Inspector's decision to issue a building permit to the petitioner was timely is arbitrary and capricious and in excess of the authority granted to the Board by statute. The Court must now determine, without reference to the determination of the Board, whether the appeal to the Board of the Building Inspector's determination to issue a building permit to the petitioner was timely. See, Ehrenberg v. Persons; Cave v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Village of Fredonia, 49 A.D. 2d 228, 373 N.Y.S. 2d 932 (4th Dept. 1975), appeal denied 382 N.Y.S. 2d 1030. The determination of whether the appeal was timely is governed by a standard of reasonableness. In deciding whether the appeal to the Board was timely, the 'Court must consider the date upon which the appealing parties were chargeable with notice of the issuance of the building permit to the petitioner, the time within which the appealing parties made their appeal, and whether any action by the petitioner or the respondents caused or contributed to any delay in taking the appeal. Id. In the instant proceeding, the aggrieved residents who appealed to the Board clearly had notice of the issuance of the petitioner's building permit on October 17, 1989, the date upon which their attorney wrote a letter to the town attorney regarding the petitioner's building permit (in fact, it would be reasonable to charge the aggrieved residents with notice of the issuance of the petitioner's building permit on August 31, 1989,' the date that the footings were prepared after the excavation of the property) . However, the aggrieved owners did not appeal the Building Inspector's decision to issue the petitioner's building permit until February 1, 1990 (the date on which they filed their notice of appeal with both the Board and the Building Inspector) . See, Town Law §267 (3) . The delay of over three months, from October 17, 1989 to February 1, 1990, during which time the petitioner erected the foundation and commenced the framing of the building, is, standing alone, unreasonable. The respondents contend that the aggrieved residents' delay in appealing to d x the Board was justified by and was the result of the fact that the Town Attorney did not respond to their letter dated October 17, 1989 until December , 11, 1989. In support of this proposition, the respondents cite Matter of Pansa v. Damiano, 14 N.Y. 2d 356, 251 N.Y.S. 2d 665 (1964) . In Pansa, the petitioner challenged the issuance of a building permit to a neighboring property owner. - 3 - I After learning of the issuance of the permit, the petitioner met with a number .of city officials, including representatives of the building department, which issued the permit, and demanded. that the city revoke the permit. Thereafter, at least one city official told the petitioner that he would be informed of the board's decision on his demand that the city revoke the permit and that he could appeal the decision to the board of appeals. On the day the petitioner received notice that the city would not revoke the permit, he appealed to the board of appeals. The Court of Appeals held that, on the facts presented, the petitioner was not required to appeal to the board of appeals until the city rejected his demand for revocation of the permit with some formality. The Court's holding in Pansa does not control the outcome of this proceeding for a number of reasons. First, the aggrieved residents in this proceeding, unlike the petitioner in Pansa, never requested that the town revoke the petitioner's permit before they appealed to the Board. Instead, on October 17, 1989, the aggrieved residents wrote a letter to the town attorney in which they questioned whether the petitioner's property was a buildable lot. Even if the Court were to consider the letter as a request or demand for revocation of the petitioner's building permit, the aggrieved residents did not address the demand to the Building Inspector, the offical who issued and who could therefore revoke the permit. The town attorney does not possess -the power to revoke a building permit or to reverse a decision of the Building Inspector. Furthermore, unlike the petitioner in Pansa, neither the respondents nor any town official induced the aggrieved residents to delay an appeal to the Board until after the town attorney answered their letter. As a result, the fact that the town attorney,, in his response to the aggrieved residents' letter, noted that the final interpretation of the zoning code was within the province of the Board does not provide any excuse or justification for the residents' delay in appealing to the Board. Finally, in contrast to the petitioner in Pansa, the aggrieved residents herein did not file their notice of appeal pursuant to Town Law §267 (3) until February 1, 1990, over a month after the town attorney s response to their letter. This delay, in inself, is unreasonable. Accordingly, the aggrieved residents were not justified in waiting until after the town attorney answered their letter before appealing to the Board. _ 4 _ . a In view of the foregoing, the petition is granted, to the sole extent that the decision of the Board reversing the Building Inspector's detrmination to issue a building permit to the petitioner and invalidating the building permit is annulled and this proceeding is remitted to the Board for the purpose of directing the Building Inspector to reinstate the petitioner's building permit. Settle judgment. t J. S. C. y - 5 - y> FORK NO. 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 o 18355 Z Date ... .. .....00........................ 19QQ .�1..✓ Permission is hereby granted to: ...... . .. .j/ . ... .rGA",e • ro ....... .. .. ... . ... . .. ... . .... O.... .C... .. ... . .. ...... ... .. . .. ..... ....•ram! ......... .... ............. .......................... atpremises locate a ....... �... . ..• ................................... . .......................................... if•. . . ... . . .... .... .....f/......... %.g..... ........ ..............................................L ....<..... .......�........................................................... ..... County Tax Map No. 1000 Section ... .7.... Block ,,,,�,........... Lot No. pursuant to application- dated . ................, 19..fZnd approved by the Building Inspector. Fee Building I for 0 Rev. 6/30/8 M BOARD OF HEALL-1- // I 0 0 '/�(' 3 SETS OF P�ANS •'�••• . s FORM NO.1 SURVEY . r Ab��--- G-o�pfTOWN OFSOUTHOLD CHECK •LBUILDINGDEPARTMENT SEPTIC FORM •............TOWN HALL NOTIFY �OF SOUTHOLD,N.Y. 11971 TEL.:765.1802 CALL ••• •.. MAIL TO: 19�0/.�c/� proved .E� .U....,199 Permit No..! ;approved a/c .................. (Building Inspector). APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date .Al4Bl1S.ti.z..... .,1989. INSTRUCTIONS 'r?.l a. Thus application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector,with 3 s of plans,accurate plot plan to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showing location of lot and of buildings on remises relationship to adjoining g p p � g premises or public streets areas,and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this appfi- ion. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Pi.emit. d. Upon approval of this application,the Building Inspector will issued a Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit :II 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 ill 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 ilding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold,Suffolk County,New York,and other applicable Laws,Ordinances or gulatiops, for the construction of buildings,additions or alterations,or for removal or demolition,as herein described. c applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws,ordinances, building code,housing code,and regulations,and to nit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. ... ],N),AND H911.ES .. (Signature of applicant,or name,if a corporation) • ..$4X.117....�att�t�ck,..N..X..1J.95�.. .. (Mailing address of applicant) •f ile whether applicant is_owner,lessee, agent,'architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. General• Contractor .......................................................... :nre of owner of premises INLAND•HOMES i.li3C.. ......... ................. ............... (as on the tax roll or latest deed) N •applicant is a corporation,signature of duly authorized officer. .RQbert.E..Ri,ltz.,. Prey..,........ (Name and title of corporate officer) ILL CONTRACTOR'S MUST BE SUFFOLK COUNTY LICENSED Builder's License No. Plumber's License No. .. .24.551.E. Electrician's License No. ..3635X.... ..... Other Trade's license No. Location of land on which proposed work will be.done. .5Q-`5-.Auer.Aoq.d,�,J%tt;.tuck,..19 X.,... 565.$eyer.Rd... ai+ i.tuck,.N..XI............ (house Number Street ........Hamlet......... .. .....•..... County Tax Map No. 1000 Section ..�.19......... Block •3. ...... Lot....14. ..... Subdivision...11attitur,.k.Hei.ghts.............:.Filed Map No. .L92....... Lot ...•.36. (Name) State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a.Existing use and occupancy ...... �.... b.Intended use and occupancy .... L•Family.Dwelling,......... 71 _i �. iva(ue of work)-'heck wu:cu appucaule): New !Budding ,,X,,',•,:, Addition .......... . Nteratrou ...:.::-. Rcpair .... Removal .............. Demolition . Other Work............. �� .. (De,cription. . d. Estimated Cost.7 ��........................ Fee �.PZ .I.l.!!. - (to be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling,number of dwelling units............... Number of dwelling units on each floor._............ Ifgarage,number of cars ............................ ......................... 6. If business,commercial or mixed occupancy,specify nature and extent of each type of use .................. 7. Dimensions of existing structures,if any:Front............... Rear .............. Depth ............ Height ...............Numberof Stories ..................................................... Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions:Front ................. Rear ................ Depth ......................Height ......................Number of Stories......... .... 3. Dimensions of entire new construction:Front ...a ........ Rear ....`2.6 .Depth ... .4. Height ...Of....... Number of Stories....�.... ........ 9. Size of lot: Front ....S.4............... Rear. ..,S. ............ .... .. .......... •• .•' Depth •��Q• 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 ............................Will excess rill be removed from premises:••••.•Yes 1.1. Name of Owner of premises ....................Address ...................Phone No. ............ Name of Architect ...........................Address ...................Phone No. ............. Name of Contractor .............. .. Phone No ............Address ....:. ........... . ....:.......t5. Is this property located within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? *Yes ....: No ..... *If yes, Southold Town Trustees Permit ma be reguired. PLOT DIAGRAM Locate clearly,and-distinctly all buildings, whether.existing or.proposed, and.indicate all setback dimensions fr property GnesAiive street and'block number or description according to deed,and show street names and indicate whet interior or corner lot. ' �0 I 1G sm y STATE OF NEIY:YORK, S.S cowry OF.,SUFFQ.TA....... ............Robert. B. Hilt ........ ......... being duly sworn,deposes and says that he is the applicr (Name of individual signing contract) above named. �.. Ilcis the .........Co1Xi=aet=............................................................. (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 t application;that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief;and that t work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application.filed therewith. Sworn to before me this ..............a.../:'�' ...day,�o/f...... 1:otary Public, • :4-K,./•�.•.. L i �.....•County•�`�•� ....... ... JJ ...otapp. �►HiHKDEVDE Robert E. Hiltz -(Signatdte hca: NOTARY UBII44 a�n�a New York Na 470787{SuttMY Coun T—Ewa mwhAto `� el SCTIC Incorporated "FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY TITLE INSURANCE" BOX 1269 • RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 • (516) 727-4270 �D �X 1112 4/ a9-SsJ (f'7�c2 0� Mo0 113 oa 63 CTl 0/9 o7JD Aoe ll�`P Z&PVQCat 467 A�«Ic& 76 -72- ad 7r yQ 3Z SO4fi o �-e4jV r Cueroa 0/j Lw Eta, ., C C . SCTIC incorporated "FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY TITLE INSURANCE" BOX 1269 • RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 • (516) 727-4270 bad 779/ 3 fyA! �7111t1.M��Mltr�aAlia�NlittiAlat♦Itrta♦Mt•/�� t d:r p�lr t�,�k. fi Ttaa+rinatlar..r+ N 1Zct;,�a.i« ACril a.:.. n.arr.t i`a�aastT'� f�iMt7Jt 3-A 8 he an 'za..cY YSaA uU+rltar�both realdi .J '~ 5 �rar qct} Ira r - �riet or raeeitvrle Torn--of awtml0 Cwtaat £r y��afre L• a� � o-rof•.r�Tort -- Mr- n t yrrt}r Nr"-pt.;L3MAR$$A FA1O and AVi Pl SPAfO hla alta'f. x i' ^�yA`�, r 2 raalding•yt 170 Prlaellla#rarw�flirarhaaQr-Saffeflc Cwrat�yr �, nA.1F 2t -pni•i Jn,'and prt, fix:" n e'; dat tl•0•r9dr Nr ppRR iardrter•7 Tas tiro rA 2 y�" P"� pW bt da prq.l ae raed Pt dory Mr/Pr rd nYr.rr dr paf ad sirattaf pr►rd r yr�, � r � 1<Kr;rra ralu•�Nl►r Tnldta•d�rwwr ,,. a. ..�.__ � .p. t�; ty y.r,.F� 'AiLNt.utr d�P•r�•pr.Q.l aa .taYY+r riitiadlaPr��r►Qtr�� _�.:� . > J.�a r X t ;A•srd l�eai>at�llattltnLOW-35 alt laa�r lattaft� Imw.3:&ub QaalSmatad-aa:Lats+'3S MA}L.=wMals�Aai ff -3�- 19aLghts i tropel ar*Mal apse.1 at luttitwat.Suffi i, .r •:. g - } i a l 11wt fork'► t11ad !a tsa Suttalli Cao tt Chet*0lfla►�-�� 19o5 aar map.i 11Bh�e-s• { :( z,'' . rithf,rar.-rapialtpt tact Ella t 1 5 '4�- }�.�r`zo ;,�1akSaaiAa�nr.tp;.Lmt Craatr"t p+aa►:al ittltaah%1tT_r+My 1 " s d rgaasa,an toet•vool7i malt rlOt y5 ) µ A aL'7fdQQlaAaaQ.anl aSaltkar Aea�a fi ��ti�_�,'�`rt�., `e � s'•wfarlt,.dlraatim_a taM ,tom" '° i y' v+•y `saQrtharlt'diraatl0a aoa-Or�aQ:.tnarsT laws+lasallal �� . Y� r� •t.J art lta.tt-saeart Y✓ri�>E mad"tts a.T.e°-ta Y.aat� e 4 �[ F}�� s� earl ot:i a�,Ciaati:thaeaa 2"md yua aaaa�2t_eawtr 4 i. l,r�.Croak q.lain at Dalrart Y.= b; Qlraatlaar alal the,traatem Oaaa art at 2dae tl! QaL1 ash �,. thlrtg feat La i mom»ta_raoiFntistt..tha r1rLM f.I , .. ). >S'xr Ra/i.aad yidchaaX#aallaa.xtLa P0111Cat➢latio }.. 17 RIOr.!' i, '��Y�'y's: �r t a r} ,�t Ei r r �r aK s s � *•rE:. T[a'dTNPj:•A.i:idt abaat i0rrrrC J ri:•IIa P•a►a4ir•ti *rd r a� o.A.af+�'sa:rab.r.dr.rtt.d pr sirs a�rlt.An�FaTO 7�XwQ 'v' a j iad a1 thi:ri.nr a isslbd.Yr prtf•d dJ 1.r pri�rty r't ;TO VA L Alm ..�•i � r W•h. �rrtlr PrQ.A ia.nrt tri,r bra atavrata �m 1;.'-± �p�SpSp� ��1�F�yaP.,y.'t ',r�� GP�•h�,°^ tr Q. J ry ^j; -u 3 # •�t ��y"Y-may A7CB�►pnfd Je Mr pr(is.e.riraAt da j..y:�l da it pas lr ra�r.r.id� t• a, err� trMe'm.'i+:lpa�wMw brresawdrrF�1'.arw.��pri�ak-• --''� �� `Z'�. te- t\fsdrp.m..f r!e Mc puA m a'9warwa Sa•is l.f d as la la.r.tar,.ss�r�►i� 1 is pN t'a'�b dr5.wtw;�g7.�tA.•.eenal.wis M•t�.w..}mr•rd.ilWd.,riw.r�r�.i.a�+.+^ + � 'yF�i .'�nllua st s trot/5ra!t.r yp6al6rrt brMr�pt.d pros Mr artd er irwrr��taa A qwr +: sfr'a,� ifs ter.d/.e Gr tSr atw.ro.t dr Hr.i-wl.:mpr.rrartat M•*+rtr.,rsat.pnt vl tlr rai.ksasyi�' �,,' ' �T"t ` � .�:ta.�-"i!t,�'•tt"grad as(�`r l iw.rt� M.. ;iA:`ver�.i a�:.�drs...►r.�..a.-c- -� 'a't '• �, gwwfllttfwtlariUc pry.f Mr Ate pr in die on.e.d tlii•.4ltLr ,a�N••��^ s3.4. i - - �7srt� Q' SIATt^ • r - �. r�.,��''�.,F�y •�� ,r,-t ,�. `� t a en �It nor L lk�, 4_ � -i fr � � tL l• 4 -.�'•4 S'§ 'ti} y. .�4t i Yw y.✓ (_ty- � _, t ,, L i 1 } � b r k s, �' i.jR'li t• Y.f � �{�� i 0 1•wgts .. � f d`Iti j •�. ! {,,1 yr: G 'tic Iffy tv 1119 h 1 R to Mi 1 T r � tL rh��.� i +}{�, '��, * rl •t�< t\r..�,t i4Q/ '��T F'ti tS X-:V�i :Lit} vz yam rx �`;:<51.�� 1 ��t��•`�;�6. ��':5:.``\yl,.ir.1 ,�}�.'x��R=1•:� :.if`•.v;.�i i2�( .'i i �9..1w-"i.,, ,T'. :'yt• +O (.p� .4 1._ 'h \,p}��flt,�..(rvJ, V ��!'j j�' t•s, kSlliri^�'iltdt•� +LiM'�_ gm l0%1N1157 SCHEDULE "A" All that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the r. buildinge theire on erected, situate, lying and being at t Mattituck, town of Sci%thold Suffolk County, New York• known Kai I and designated as lot 135 on "amended map of Mattituck ,,Heights property of Gustav Bayer at Mattituck Suffolk w I. County, New Yurk" and filed in the Suffolk County Clerks office on July 24, 1935 as map 11184, which said lot is more particularly houndri and described as followas r, BEGINNING at a point on the r.urthwesterly aide of Rayer . , 1 Road, where same is intersected Ly the division 1'ae between Iota #35 and / 36 on the above map which said point of ° Ibeginning is located on the northerly ride of Bayer Road .oW distant 150.00 feet west, of the.'ititersection of the I southsrly side of Grant Blvd. with the westerly side of a Bayer Road. � •;��;�.t .,,_.,:;.•: RUNNING THENCE south 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds west, of the northwesterly side of Bayer Road, a distance of 50.00 feet to point marking the division line of the herein E described lot and lot i34. ,., . THENCE North 58 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds west along � *'• said division line a distance of 150.00 feet to a point; THENCE north 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 secondq east e distance of 50.00 feet to a point marking tt 4 division line I ' s of lots 035 and 136. THENCE south 5r degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds east, along I J the division 1:-e of lots t35 and i 36 a distance of 150.00 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. BEING AND INTENDED to "e art of the same P premises conveyed • -. to Parties of the fir. • part by deed dated April 11, 1972, and recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the Count of , 4y`11, Suffolk on April 12, 1972, in Liber 7140 Page 32. �Y w►weei . y iy '•ki• y t /+{/.��t � S�p�.ty� W� S 'u '� i ' '� •',M� � q2F.'•� �. t ,. 'P } +{ ,a,.�� "' :i 't•�,EGWf7 -�,N�'tl�,1 t< w " •'e,i 'a { f,s' ��.W' i' Y r?^;f. '. 'y i'Y•' ' d'tM' C . �t^i. A F��' »i :. °.S •� yJ�,y.';� .(�f..,.� + , .t�.3i��}•�A.x�}�.,..{;' _i�v\ '� _;e t ` Y�' 4:'ye.��''la t`�t^";J�t.,;:"�i�. i��y Y�y'k .+<... FUlm `J �11A SUFFOLR sh nAA a imr"m Comm of St7PPOLK ,r ® 0 1M thy of June 19 89,betom sae Ue t%e �re day of June 19 89,before me ; M, CNN pe*se-any on+e '•Leonard F. Spano Ave M. Spano f Imir to be the indisidtal dmeribed In and who to ate haorra to be the irdnidod described in and oa, fhe (greroinir instrument.and ocknowkdred that es1r, n vted the toroing �,and ��dotelaaessad Same. extent ed theELU saute `` it 1 DO��tC.!ta►e d vw YoA ° p't ,'+ tdo.52.31o9t16Cb�r tY ►WEARY!No UB 52.31MW e 4aais F.e 2s 199C Q"Iif0tFeb.SuftAL�nty ?MmE1M : " v64'' ° s su"Op am 1/OIK Comm O/ ffr sTAT!O/NtM yOtg.t.OrNfy O/ � day of la ,before me On the day of 19 .before me i? J eame personalk pane sat!norm,+hq btdttg by we dnie twor- did depose and the cubseribmg witness to the foregoing instrvmem, with dot. .be resides at Na whrlm [ am Personally acquainted, who. being by me duff o• `''� ; � sworn,did depose and say that he resides at No. fc,ib the " e �*►.�`� .,:.,'�.` I rya. [te ir,oa, b� m ,�� ...,�•r the cml+rntien described pad tahidt exeeeled fire foregeirtr instrtmtertt:that he to be the individual iteowe the seal of said corporation; that the peat affaed described io•and who executed the foregoing instrtanem: b trill iN9rdt"I at is attth corporate seal; that it was so that he, said subwribing witness, was present And saw y, e of by the board of;directom of said mrpm. exectee the same;and that be,sa;d witness s OW signed It now thereto by Ulm order. at the mm tinte subscribed It same as Witness pub Salt O!!d �tfttw t:orantsxr AcAma Caom at'a Acts stcnoN It NMI are LOT covw. "OR TOWN a Reeerdxl al R e9uet of CHIGGO TITLE INSURAN(=OOMlANT } ft�tti ti fif t�!tiff Mti1 M mu Itmum by Mall to 'l �s " it .4 .::Dirf►t►rte!tr Richar + F. Lark Fsq.t.. < ,r4=fCA00�� Main Road - Box 913 +■ ti>tT1tiA11fC! ColalisAllfT Cutchogue, New York 11935 zip N& jra ri S l t:v o its 1 <ti.. , .s 'r • r. .rye C � , •*.•Jj`r is t ` 1F''' � • 1 � • J,. O � f Is t ` °• �j'hT4 tip. c ;'�s a • y s.. ♦ I�• ♦Ili a f ' I r �;�'J a i• K f 1' �• -� 2 r• ss C t`• sh•`�k� arvl•. t=: -; .I0• ax 47 +•v= I Y > e N �t .f\ • 4 1 l I y e t III •�\ f, �Y4Y, i s a7 � t Y, • � ty _ is- j � Ty�. • � iV r• `. r 1'. T �R }fit��t Jj, •t= •.. 7Y `+�� FDA' �•} r.:°t.f � •.�`t�� ti��a.►rR• �r. " 4� i 1. T q7'� • ��F •.� i•�; r f • • , ..r,, t f `` '2• �. � •1•a��.• h Pr. ♦ r t �w/r .c�s��:;►+1�• fr v�t•. �:.>; .der`_1.. � i..•':a�.. .•'r,s ! 4 N.,1. , 4 •��5♦x,�•• 5�.'� N rr -rY • r� �tYa>t•..J• 1 i �)♦r''_.1iL 5J-i.'..r— i �i_►a,y..:lI,��11...£7 J t,�f•. 'l"a•!:. x, •ej a,[�ir�F, t • � t x,�,, 'F. b4 � r•' �7. .jam�r�, � } • 4 a^Sk R ` 14. dzi r lY 1 1 �c. •� y� 5�. t,• i 1 y = � 4� • '•••:"lit 'k- � x,, 1 7' 7 t; � f t-.�7 •� 4.. t• ,r r '+ i� .s t '1't7.r l�RrJ" +r P •rµ fi .+stY+,R•. 1``�rNyf•�i'/ � � „� �}'FY �1 o�1'r' 4 'a � t• ,•F`j`"Cir frt'��%'. �..t=;c• a u •+ �• .. f .:. /►a.�t•, • [ r .1 ,,.}3 i•� y,.�{Y.,�� J•--77,,"h,a Q t •�}�t a .':f•Ar �r °1 f� r.t r}�►.- Y _,,f..'� •�•:r71r •., Y •'�•:• �r �r�t 1 � �t:. ^f 'S a: ]h 7r , �,.-r,ltr�»cal i� i•t.rl:q�`:�r.6��r7 �tT•�iP'r,'�f ` � K 1. Y{A+�•+,.• .f jYq '1�-1 `:tiY� •r�ijj�i%Y�7fY� ��-Sy>;, {r,•rT hn�l,l i..l- Mr�l,)^i K9+ .�,1 }• ��Y�Z •f• _'t �•tNRN wj. `w•.'7•, %`117 P •��r•S,�Yi�r:,'.:,At,�. .,�r.�` •:''7{ i�., •!i .�ef Ff iw a••S.I�.,•,:�nr•a (h '.r �Y Yr•. t�+x� der��`r�••�; r•:+.�.. .�:i tl/..'•{: �i• +.�;:. L Yt^��s�•1r,.. % .t,�.,'•.r6 �fy�J� K�Z., ��t j+ R,.ry b3, � � F� �ir !••T�' fly •��a �t "T �� ' r t.,1;�31 1 , '",4.� /.•.JI. �r.' ,',y7 M w•. -1 ' ,f R�1�1.. . u')• t i 1-. it.,Y.�: 11t4!• �N •� 6•.ly,• 'lit. ,•R F �a��!i�>�� :},,. �.••�i� iiii• '•� L 1�•,. • .rt•.• .f ��t�.i�}or��l li '+ult�,t,:�;�'�,�'�r' �}' sl'-r.. ��/ �tt�-•;j4._ /sy�� . ��4 �4�'s/� P T.1 L c,r, '. ..y �.:�� Y,•� Rr� ��:; � s 1 e� ♦yy�, r � .' •�� .p .r �•�1•'.o 1� �••� �-Ir` :YYa'A' S �.ggS 1'1/ �)T7 �� ••# �'i•• N •}Hw �� tq ,! 1��;• * •��„_MI�•°� '� R°' i �1, =yr, ,j�' `•�.y� �5 "Si �� a. t'y.� c a.�y��sr�� Y :: ,,,��' - �,..'i. '1 ;a.ra �� ;.�r�'1•`� '!�f � its.:�+ r+jt; y.X%�..��.w{' •S�'�!5?.�[74 Y sT'a Sk��JPir•�1' �" .._:,. ��• �fat'a'{,+ .r-:..fir i ''� �. •a�� S- �y,-• ;._ . ..� r�s,�.. .�i`s�+ �rt, f�. .r �•.yX T��i�f. Y �i• v •.r• SCHEDULE A All that certain plot, piece or rcel of land, with the buildings 'thereon erected, situate, lying and being at llattituck, To-.m of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, known. and designated as Lot #36 on 'tmend,ad )tap of Nattituck Heights, Property of Gustav Bayer. at Mattituck, Suffolk County, New York' and filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's F '� trti:•s5;,,. Office on July 24, 1935, as Me( 11184, which said lot is more particularly bounded and described as follows: saf BEGINNING at a point on the northwesterly side of Bayer s Road, where same is intersected by the division line between a °` I Lots # 16 and 137 on the above snap, which said point of a beginning is located on the northwesterly side of Bayer Road, distant of 100.00 feet west of the intersection of the southerly side of Grant Blvd., vit-h the westerly side of Bayer Road; j x•g..J•• t RUNNING THENCE South 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds West, `" ilon the northwester) side of Bayer Road a distance of s "� 9 Y Ye 50.00 feet to a point marking the division line of the .3 herein described lot and Lot #35; e� THENCE North 58 degrees 55 minutes "30 seconds West, along the division line -of Lots 135 and 436 a distance of 150.00 c'F w feet to a point; ....... ='4n THENCE North 31 d-vgrees 04 minutes 30 seconds East, 50.00 ti ' k^ feet to a Point marking the division line of Lots i36 and s, E #37; THENCE South 58 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds East, along �.:. ' ,�• .;� I the division line of Lots #36 and 137, 1 distance of 150.00 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. BEING AND INTENDED to be art of the same !!! p premises conveyed • :+ '+* "�. r`. to parties of the first part by deed dated April 11, 1972, . i and recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk on April 12, 1972, in Liber 7140 Page 32. f!lirr+ 71 _ diM 1MAf . i ' '� -y;�'"ti 1' �t' �i �+ 'r�.v?4 's<:�•`1C, ' t��*ia' - �^f+ � t �a y�,t._�'n," YE. -' a .•r ?'h,t rJ ! N.q r�3 fj,j�y ;+�4 !�• .tj t� !'. .� .-t'� ��s1_4 . ,+ t 'apt1U'' (�f�if f t� .�Y i #.•Y V.1- �� a at � ♦ ter..tHi•, " V L. '.t ,v.. yt •'epT`+i+': `�-.; Sr- �• i+.J.�'tik•.-� .+ `.1 k�ie��r .'Ci �. � .��' £t•y: ;1'µ..�'o� •.k�.�� x:• �y� ��'�t'Y �fe.CIL ".Y" ..Yp �� •y f "" f. •�' �rrtT tw. t t r �`i� �'�r r •4 � `il� �+y�yy .'• :� .•* •/ '�} �� yf�.�Sa. y'•,�ij w�•/ `�` �`A i�t"�w .r•fi� ~�I�'•Orf•F-'3 .• .�� +�f I ym - TOCXTHM wi+a1>igla.tide lad hrtetest,it rry,of the party of the first put m and W any streets aed I t+s&:beti[the above described rteinrses to t!x center Imes thsreot, Y- Jr 70=THM with the appiamenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to • Mid prises. v r • + 70 HAVE AND 7n HOLD the premises herein granted-into ' e party of the second part,the heirs or .tiE ";k'.; weeeaaon sad assigns of the'srtY of'he secnrtd part forever. i M ts: r � + �� Ewa,. •� : �• ;:.tee. A• e * s-:. a �Fa AND the of the first art cuvemants that the party of the first part has not done or sufrered as m ` '��'('"•.:�'tc�,.. Party P Pa Y i'a Y�• B whereby the said premises have been incumber-d in any way whatever,exccpt as aforesaid. AND the party of the first part,in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Law,covenants that the party of iEt:- t the first port will trerive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to rerrive such consid- `''r- esttion as a trust tend to t,r applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvemrnt and wi-apply ' s� r': PP• P•� i Y• R h Ow same first to the payment of the omt cf the imprommrnt lxforr using any part of the total of th-same for # 4 t. T1he word"party"shall he ronstrued as if it read"Parties" v-hrnever the sensr of this indenture so requires. n IN WrrNEM WHEREOF,the party of the first part ha.July executed this deed the day and year first at'm -� '• ��• written . IIx rtst3 a Ax �t fit.. • ??//y� /' � °o°f. LLONARD F. SPANT •err*r7,3 c.; - I s 'Y4�^fr TO I►, ' 1 1 f' s�' • Yr s. �.,. E.r' 311 C.: .• .v • , �I: • kris 3 r' t �f l•.kir'i • •• I 1 .4 r m. •y '. r, I a IRichard F. Lark, � � 1 kaT } lr • i��rF. I I' � � •FkY§r: LY � 71 ��1 ft. :/ '' ♦ L r.ylr�, # is ��7�� ;, •ha y�,' t4 ta•r s;44Vt1 �'.,�iF ��rt.�}�1 f}. f �7i•1 it 7'�;y ' `�i.'i�1. t�yr��,j"� �i rj�sr 1 ��j��t�• lyts �. 1 +.ri'�'12 �141r'tf, �`� �� r.l.:��j'a��Y:v k..y t:. !,Y.r rt}\!t0 a1IJ .��: 4:: •,!r •'Y:" •l l,,r♦l o:r �-•,•+: .4'r♦ - '!"� • v't7�� , L "�,#ti' .,',,tt.'.l� Ia ,'. �.'t=�tN-f�yL,,'sS,l I'��"".E..'.��rii-�! 1.xr'-i.Z!•;'v��t.cp.��t �d i_ ! k� .�� r 1 -�t�T Pitt ♦' ,t',!� .r�•- � " ' �(�' a:�Sr.^;.-"�. S •� V `, r\ � iR •j•1�:,of '..I•f• 1.`a' <•.�.t•4k�.t if�l '.J• i �•�j5'!4e..Zi.61�~: �f T44 �1� :�-j�''♦� .t'Nrryt.Y`( a}::\ ,'S ry;•- ..;K�-i lF l j�<.TC4 � ,�tt1"!`'.:p; ��'1 •�r�r� w, Y } Cr+. Y�.�- I+_. •Y \�.,. 'Y•• \. 'i { j �, .P'•� Ir •'11 � Ysi,�i. N.- � �' n y). ..�•,,sYwY ��f•v.r. y ..�.r r=•�' I; :tAr�r\•a,•♦.y1t.'.• r.� ��t.:� +�. yv • �'�t#Y � ♦•}.�1J• l(.r .rrt I � �1 •4 .?ta ♦ ,•�.I.i. .•.\ -ram- i• :s '�. ••�.'�� ►- s• � .�r1,!{:' qt. .!-E W ��. Sy.. 765-1802 ` TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OF-CE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR P.O. BOX 1179 TOWN HALL SCUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 VACANT LAND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NO. Z-17543 DATE NOVEMBER 28, 1988 Location 'of Property 505 BAYER RD. MATTITUCK, NEW YCRK NUM-.ER STREET HAMLET . COUNTY TAX MAP # Section 139 Block 3 Lot 14 SUBDIVISION M/0 Mattituck Heights Filed Map # Lot 36 conforms substantially to the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. The Premises are located in the'A'RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL Zoned District. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the above referenced lot may be built upon' only after the issuance of a building permit and compliance with the following requirements of the Town and the rules and regulations of such additional State and County agencies or regulations thereof that may be applicable. 1. That the lot is held in single and separate ow rship and has been so held prior to fhe adoption of any amendment to our Town Zoning Ordinance which may have 'increased th requir ents for lot width or area, or have amended front, side, or ear y d set back requirements. 2. That if this lot is si t d within an ppro ed subdivision that all necessary road, drai^. ?-It nd other re *re improvements have been completed in accord v h e rules and re ations of the Planning Board and those of th H' hway Department the Town of Southold. 3. That he lot receiv Health Department proval as to water and sep systems. 4. Th t t Department of Environmental Co servation approval has been ob ain d. S. That the Board of Trustees approval h s been obtained. 6. That the Board of Zoning Appeals app oval has been obtained. YOU ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that this Bui ding Department has made no independent determination as to the appl' ability of any one or all of the above in issuing this Vacant Lot Certifi ate of Occupancy. The-Certificate is issued to: LEONARD F. & AVE MARIA SPA.%iO (owner, xxxxxxxx• of the aforesaid lot. /l �-t.0 BU INSPECTOR bc Rev. 12/29/87 - � 1 JEFFERSON INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK HARBORSIDE FINANCIAL CENTER-702 PLAZA 3 JERSEY CITY,NEW JERSEY 07311-3892 TEL.(201)433-7677 TELEX: 132 511 CERTIFIED MAIL/RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED P 163 053 050 L . D July 26, 1990 cc: Town Board -� Town Attorney Chief of Police Supt. of Highways Grii ngg E Southwick IVl the town of Southol Wm.F. ullen,Jr. Building Dept. 53095 Main Street A peals Board Southold, N.Y. 11971 Panning Board Att: Scott F. Harris, Presiding Official RE: Claim No. 10C- --� Insured own of Southold Claimant Inland Homes Incor ated Dear Sir: The Jefferson Insurance Company acknowledges .receipt of a Request For Judicial intervention filed in the Supreme Court of Suffolk County. We have Established a file under your Public Officials Liability policy, JP0430306, incepting 1/1/90 to 1/1/.91. There is a $10,000 deductible which applies to indemnity as well as expense payments. A review of the correspondence received indicates that the notice of petition is returnable on August. 24, 1990. The petition seeks relief under Article #78 for the reversal and annulment of a decision by the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals. In their decision, the Zoning Board of Appeals found that the building permit issued to Inland Homes on August 8, 1989 was defective and therefore void. Jefferson Insurance Company does not imply that the allegations within the petition are correct but brings the issues to your attention as the basis of our declination of coverage. With this in mind your attention is directed to the Public Officials policy issued to Southold effective 1/1/90. Specifically you are requested to review Exclusion "D" as amended and endorsed under endorsement number GP02178 which reads as follows: AAM "A TR, MEMBER A MEMBER OF THE A GROUP AME IGANASSOCAnoNOF MANAGING GENERAL AGENTS Scott F. Harris July 26, 1990 Page ( 2) EXCLUSIONS D "This policy does not applyl-to .any claim: D. Based upon or arising out of' ''condemnation of any form, adverse possession ; dedication by adverse use, for any zonings or land use statute, ordinance, rule, , regulation or restriction, or any regulatory takings;" . In addition, the complaint seeks injunctive relief. Therefore you are requested to review Endorsement L of this policy which.-reads as follows: EXCLUSION L "This policy does not apply: L. Based upon or arising out of demands or actions seeking relief or redress in any form other than money damages including but not limited to claims for injunctive relief in any form whatsoever; " Based on the facts as outlined in the petition as compared to the exclusionary language of its policy, Jefferson Insurance Company concludes that there is no coverage for this loss. However, should a civil action complaint be filed upon you seeking damages, the Jefferson respectfully requests to review the complaint and comment on the coverages provided by its policy. Presently, Jefferson expressly denies coverage for the above captioned action. Therefore, we will be unable to tender a defense for the Request For Judicial Intrevention, nor will we be responsible for the expenses related to this action. Should further questions arise, I am at your disposal. Scott F. Harris, July 26, 1990 Page (31` Since ely Regina iPasalegne Casualty Claims Analyst RD:adm cc: Smith Special Risk Associates Incorporated #1 Blue Hill Plaza Suite 1800 P.O. Box 1745 Peril River, N.Y. 10965 Att: Debbie Gardenier rJUL 9 1990 l July 6, 1990 Scott Harris, Town Supervisor Town of Southold Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Rd. Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Harris: Enclosed is a copy of a Zoning Board of Appeals decision rendered May 15, 1990 and mailed to me on June 6, 1990 concerning a recently constructed house on Bayer Road in Mattituck. As of this date, it appears that the Town has taken no action beyond what is contained in the ZBA proceedings. To the best of my belief, a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the house and, also to the best of my belief, this is still in effect. The house is being actively advertised for sale as, again to the best of my belief, a mother/daughter (1). I expect that the Town of Southold will enforce its laws without requiring me to incur legal fees beyond what I have already spent. I am herewith requesting that the Certificate of Occupancy issued for a house built with a building permit deemed ". . .invalid, null, void and of no effect." be withdrawn and that the Town of Southold take further action to ensure that the value of my property, located directly across Bayer Road from the subject house, will not be reduced. -S cerely,. Robert J. chsenreiter cc: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ZBA . r Page 12 - Appl. No. 390 Application of Ochsen;reiter & Lenceski Decision Rendered May' 15, 1990 RESOLVED, to GRANT the request under this Application for a REVERSAL of determination by the building inspector in the erroneous issuance of Building Permit No. 18355; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that prior to issuance or reissuance of any building permit, certificate of occupancy or otherwise, that further application (s) be formally filed, through normal proce- dures, for consideration by the Board of Appeals, including but not limited to the following areas of the zoning code: (a) insufficient lot area; (b) insufficient lot width; (c) insufficient lot depth; (d) insufficient- sideyard setback at the easterly side; (e) insufficient total sideyards; (f) such other and further relief as may be deemed necessary under the zoning code (such as excessive lot coverage, etc.) RECEIVED AND FILED BY FORARD THEPBOARDHOFNAE EALSABY AN THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK ; ITS MAY 15, 1990 ACTION ; DATE (,81 ► l°�a HOUR Town Clerk, Town of Southold 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 February 1 , 19 96 . CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. JOSEPH H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO, JR. TYPE. II ACTION DECLARATION Appeal No. 3908 Project/ApplicantW6bert Ochenre ter and Edward Lenceski County Tax Map No. 1000- 139-3-14 Location of Project: 565 Bayer Road , Mattituck Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project: Variance for reversal of building permit to construct one family dwelling. This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertairLng 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. An Environmental Asses.sme-nt (Short) Form has been submitted. with the subject application indicating that no significant adverse environmental effects are likely to occur should be project be implemented as planned. - It is determined that this Board' s area of jurisdiction concerning setback, area or lot-line variances determines this application to fall under the established list of Type II Actions. Pursuant to Section 617.2jj , this Department is excluded as an involved agency. This determination shall not, however, affect any other agency' s interest as an involved agency under SEQRA 617 .23' 3' . For further information, please contact the Office of .the Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at (516) 765-1809. tr f S f SOUTHOLD., iOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEAL' 1 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : STATE OF NEW YORK 2 -------------------------------------------X Ilk 3 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 4 PUBLIC HERRING, in the matter of Appl . No. ROBERT OCHSENREITER 3908 5 and EDWARD. LENCESKI , 6 7 Applicants. -------------------------------------------X 8 Main Road, Route 25 9 Southold, New York 11971 10 February 1, 1990 8 : 15 P.M. 11 12 B E F 0 rR E 13 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, 14 Chairman. 15 A P P E A R A N C E S 16 ANTHONY TOHILL, ESQ. = 17 Attorney for Property: Owners 12 First Street 18 Riverhead, New York 11901 s 19 Z & 20 BOARD MEMBERS: SERGE DOYEN-, JR. 21 CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. W JOSEPH H. SAWICKI 6 22 JAMES DINIZIO, JR. 23 24 25 1 ` 2 2 THE CHAIRMAN: The next appeal , and 3 I will read the legal notice before we take 4 any testimony: 5 Robert Ochsenreiter and Edward 6 Lenceski , Appeal Number 3908, and the legal notice recieved upon Appl . 3908 . Variance 8 for reversal of building permit to construct 9 a one family dwelling. Property location: 10 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, County Tax Map 11 Number 1000 , Section 139, Block 3 , Lot 14. 12 The applicants have provided me with 13 a survey, which is from Robert Van Tuyl , 14 P.C. I don' t see a date on it . Yes , I do. 15 March 30 , 1972 . The nature of this appli- 16 cation is for the existing building permits 0 0 17 on the house as partially constructed on 0 18 Bayer Road in Mattituck. It is on a 50 by s 19 150 foot lot. I have a cop y of the Suffolk W _ m _ 20 County Tax Map indicating this and surround- 21 ing properties in the area. z z - W 6 22 Is there anyone that would like to be 23 heard? 24 MR. TOHILL: I am an attorney repre- 25 senting the property owner. I intend this r t < 1 3 2 evening to make a series of applications to 3 the Board challenging the ability of the 4 Board to hear the application for jurisdic- 5 tional reasons , and I am wondering, in terms 6 of housekeeping, how you would like to 7 proceed? Would you want me to do that 8 first? Would you want to hear from the 9 objecting petitioners first? I would like, 10 for reasons that hopefully never become 11 apparent in this room, not to reach the 12 merits of this matter tonight . 13 THE CHAIRMAN: That is the reason why 14 I called on you first , Mr. Tohill . Let me 15 ask who is representing the two applicants , 16 and see how that counsel feels if counsel is 0 17 representing Mr. Ochsenreiter. 0 18 Are you represented by counsel? 19 MR. OCHSENREITER: We are not . Z Y 2p THE CHAIRMAN: Would you like to hear 4 m O 21 your case first since you have brought this u z W 22 application before us? 23 MR. OCHSENREITER: Yes . 24 MR. TOHILL : Am I correct in saying 25 you are reserving my right to challenge the r 1 4 :r 2 jurisdictional questions without reaching 3 the merits? 4 THE CHAIRMAN: I would say yes . 5 MR. TOHILL: Thank you. 6 MR. OCHSENREITER: My name is Robert m 7 Ochsenreiter. I live at 600 Bay Road, in 8 Mattituck, and I am one of the signatories 9 of the petition that is before the Board. 10 I think the merits, as far as we are 11 concerned, are contained in this . I would 12 like to say we feel it is we who suffer a 13 financial loss to the reduction of property 14 values by having a rather large house on a 15 rather small lot constructed directly across 16 from us . 0 17 THE CHAIRMAN: Can I ask you just a 0 0 18 couple of questions , Mr. Ochsenreiter? 0 z 19 MR. OCHSENREITER: Yes . m 20 THE CHAIRMAN: There appears to be a s 21 time period between the actual inception of 0 V 22 the start of this particular premises and 23 the time that you have brought this 24 application before us . I will be honest 25 with you. I observed that there was a r 1 5 2 period of time that just the existing 3 foundation was placed in the ground and 4 stayed there for a period of time before the 5 actual construction commenced. 1 6 Is there any particular reason why 7 you waited until they actually started the 8 wood framing of the house? 9 MR. OCHSENREITER: I contacted Mr. 10 Ross of Wickhkam, Wickham and Bressler 11 in . . . I believe it was October. I cannot 12 be sure of the date. He did contact Mr. 13 Schondebare concerning it . I left it in his 14 hands until the above-ground construction 15 started on January 15 , which was a holiday. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: You want to say for e a 17 the record Mr. Schondebare was not . . . I 0 a 18 don't know if he was the attorney at the 0 a 19 actual start of that construction. What was 20 the date of your- letter? m 0 21 MR. . 00HSENREITER: December 11, 1989. 22 THE CHAIRMAN: He was the attorney at 23 that particular time. Could I have a copy 24 of that letter? ti 25 MR. OCHSENREITER: Sure, r r r 1 6 2 THE CHAIRMAN: I think I may have one 3 in the file. 4 MR. OCHSENREITER: This is the only 5 copy I have. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: We will return it to 7 you. 8 So at the time that the wood framing 9 construction actually started, it was 10 approximately the time that you started with 11 this particular application or commenced 12 this application. 13 MR. OCHSENREITER: We had commenced 14 prior to that . I 'believe in October, but I 15 cannot be sure of the date. I believe the 16 original letter to Mr. 5chondebare was dated o 0 17 in October from Mr. Ross . 0 18 THE CHAIRMAN: Was there at any time s 19 that you felt there might have been a stop w m _ 20 work order on this particular property? 0 21 MR. OCHSENREITER: I don' t know. W 22 From my direct knowledge, I don' t know. 23 THE CHAIRMAN: I thank you very much. 24 We will see what develops. 25 e s 1 7 2 MR. TOHILL : Could you ask Mr . a 3 Ochsenreiter whether or not he ever went to 4 see the Building Inspector, or Mr. Lenceski? 5 THE CHAIRMAN: I think I will ask him 6 at the end of the hearing. 7 MR. TOHILL: Can I ask him? 8 THE CHAIRMAN: You can ask me to ask 9 him. 10 MR. TOHILL: Please. I would like 11 you to now. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Ochsenreiter and 13 Mr. Lenceski , at any time did you go to the 14 Building Inspector and request a stop work 15 order on this permit? 16 MR. OCHSENREITER: No, I did not . 0 17 MR. TOHILL: Thank you. 0 0 18 Mr. Chairman and members of the 0 19 Board, I would like to make an application W m 20 which has three subparts; two of them are a s 21 little bit lengthy and one is quite brief . 0 22 The first subpart is that the Board 23 is without jurisdiction because the 24 petitioners have failed to comply with 25 Section 267 , Sub 2 of the Town Law. In r 1 8 2 substance, Section 267 , Sub 2 of the Town 3 Law says that when this Board acts on this 4 kind of application it does not have what is 5 called original jurisdiction, but instead 6 only appellate jurisdiction. m 7 What that means , following up on the 8 concession of facts that was just made by g the petitioners , is that the failure to go 10 to the Building Inspector and ask for a 11 determination, the same determination they 12 are asking from you tonight , means that the 13 first time that the Town of Southold is 14 being asked for that determination. . . . the 15 original time is tonight . You have no 16 authority to do that . The reason is Section 17 267 , Sub 2 of the Town Law says your juris- 0 0 18 diction is appellate only on an application s 19 of this type. W 20 The Town zoning ordinance takes the 21 language exactly. It is the first u z 22 subsection of the four subparts that gives 23 you jurisdiction to hear appeals , variance 24 interpretations, and matters of that type. �� 25 The result of that is that there is no 1 - 1 9 2 application ,bef.ore you from any prior order, 3 requirements, decisions ; or determinations 4 made by an administrative official charged 5 with the enforcement of the zoning 6 ordinance. 7 Inquiry of the Town Attorney is not 8 inquiry of that official who . . . had an 9 administrative official in this Town been 10 appointed under Section 138 , the Black 11 McKinney's Town Law, with the sole duty of 12 enforcing the zoning ordinance . . . absent 13 that under the decided cases there is no 14 jurisdiction. It is not in dispute and 15 indeed if you look in your file there is a 16 memo from the Building Inspector to you, 0 F 17 dated January 26, 1990 , in which he says he a 0 0 18 has no knowledge of either Mr. Ochsenreiter s 19 or Mr. Lenceski . There is not any < 20 allegation in any of the papers that were m _ V 21 filed by Daniel Ross of Wickham; Wickham and 0 u z W 22 Bressler, on the 19th of January, saying 23 that they ever went to the Building 24 Inspector or to anybody in the Building 25 Department, even to Kurt Horton (phonetic r r, 1 10 ' { 2 spelling) , who issued the building permit . 3 There is a case decided in New York 4 entitled Hilbert against Hass. It is from 5 1987 . It is the Reporter's Report , at 6 283 N.Y. Supp. 2d 440 , and in that case the m 7 Supreme Court of Suffolk County ruled 8 specifically on exactly the same issue. If 9 there is no prior determination from the 10 Building Inspector, you don' t have juris- 11 diction. The same issue was raised by the 12 Second Department Appellate Division in the 13 case reported in the New York Law Journal , 14 on June 13 , 1989, six months . The same 15 resolution occurred. The law has never been 16 changed on it . There is a reason. 17 Right now, you are about to hear, 0 V 0 18 whenever you reach the merits , and I hope 's 19 you don't, but if you were you will hear the m 20 petitioner's side of the case . You will 0 21 hear the property owner's side of the case, , Z 22 but we will . . . actually we are here almost 23 by our pleasure but you have nothing in the 24 record framing the record from the Building �,_ 25 Department . t 1 11 2 Just to point out to you how the 3 order is written, in Section 267 of the Town 4 Law one of the things that could have 5 happened if the right procedure was 6 followed, if they had bothered to go to the Building Inspector, is that he could have 8 issued' a stop work order. The Building 9 Inspector could have revoked our building 10 permit . - If that were to have happened, Mr. 11 Ochsenreiter and his neighbor would be home 12 with Newsday tonight , and I would be here 13 with my clients . That is the way that the 14 statute was written and that is the way it 15 makes sense; but to have the Building 16 Inspector excluded at every step from the 17 administrative procedure makes you the 0 18 Building Department . It makes you the 0 19 Building Department . Now you get to fill in 20 all the gaps . You get to second guess him m - 0 21 and, again, if we ever reach the merits on u z 22 this particular controversy . . . I don't 23 think you will find any of the questions and 24 none of the answers for certain written in 25 the zoning ordinance, putting everybody at a A 1 12 2 disadvantage. It puts the Town of Southold 3 at a disadvantage. It puts my client, the 4 property owner, at a disadvantage, and it 5 puts you at a brutal disadvantage. 6 I can right the record in this 7 proceeding. The Building Inspector can 8 remain silent in this proceeding. Worse 9 than that , the petitioners could try to 10 right the record. Maybe they know and maybe 11 they know less . The point is, the only way 12 in which this is supposed to work, under 13 every decided case that I have been able to 14 find since 1967 in the State of New York, is 15 that you first go to the Building Inspector. 16 He then makes an order or determination. 0 17 That is the exact language under 267 , sub 2 0 18 of the Town Law, and then whoever is injured 19 or hurt or claiming to be a challenging W 20 party gets to come here to the Zoning- Board a m 21 of Appeals . u z 22 Historically, according to the 23 Special Town Attorney who was asked to look 24 into this today, this Town has from time to �_ 25 time read that ordinance differently . a 1 13 2 Unfortunately, I did not know that ever 3 before, but by the time this evening that I 4 was able to research the point that Special 5 Town Attorney had left his office and the 6 volume, the text, the case that says you are 7 reading it . . . in other words, it is what is 8 called surplusage, and that is not in my 9 library but in the Supreme Court library. I 10 will dig it out and have it sent on to the 11 Town Attorney and Special Town Attorney. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Special Counsel . 13 MR. TOHILL: The point is that if you 14 have done it in a manner in the past that 15 the surplusage says , and under all the 16 decided cases it would be done differently, 0 0 17 this is not the wrong time to start to do it 18 the way the decided cases dictate we should s 19 do it . There is no record. That is the 20 problem. 0 21 For the Board tonight, the second u z W 22 part of this application is that the 23 application is untimely as a matter of law. 24 On my investigation, and I think everybody 25 is in agreement, also Section 267 , Sub 3 of r • Y 1 14 2 the Town Law requires that you have local 3 rules of procedure. You do not. You are 4 not alone in that category. Many zoning 5 boards out here do not follow that rule and 6 they do not have to. One of the rules of procedures , if 8 you did have them, would be how long after 9 the disagreement of that order or the 10 determination from the Building Inspector 11 are you allowed to challenge him. Can you 12 wait forever or are you required to do it 13 within 15 days , or 30 days , or 45 days , or 14 whatever? If you had that in your procedure 15 written, that would stand, but absent that 16 the rule is one of reasonableness and there 0 0 17 are three key dates in the rules of reason- 0 18 ableness and there are loads of cases which 19 I have given to the Town Attorney on the m 20 point . e 21 The first key date is the date of the u z W 22 building permit . The second key date is the 23 date that the property owners . . . who are 24 petitioning, objecting, in challenging ought `� 25 to have known when work was started, that ' a • 1 - 15 2 building permit had been issued. A building 3 permit could be issued here and nobody would 4 know. So in fairness to the objectants , 5 they have to be given a chance to know. The 6 third key date is when they file the appli- cation with this Board. 8 Let me go through some of the dates . 9 I don' t think there is any disagreement 10 anywhere of any of these dates . The .11 building permit is dated August 8, 1989. 12 The construction started with the excavation 13 of the foundation on August 30 , 1989. The 14 foundation was installed on August 31, 1989. 15 The subs and material men were ordered to do 16 the work and entered into contract with the 0 17 gentlemen, with my clients , during the month o : 18 of December of 1989. We ordered the lumber s 19 to be bailed and held, meaning segregated Z m 20 and prepared for delivery to us for the o " 21 construction of the entire house off the 6 22 entire lumber list on January 5, 1990 . 23 The work resumed not on January 15, a 24 holiday, but instead we had heavy equipment 25 brought to the site on January 8, 1990 . f 1 16 2 The date of mailing in your record on this 3 application by the petitioners, stamped by 4 the Mattituck Post Office, is January 9, 5 received by us January 10 . No petition was 6 filed as the rules required ten days later. ; 7 Nothing was in the Zoning Board office for 6 us to examine ten days later. 9 The date of filing of the petition 10 that is before the Board tonight was January 11 19, a Friday . . . January 19, 1990 . On 12 January 19, 1990 , the condition of that 13 house is that it was completely framed out 14 and Saturday, January 20 , 1990 , before we 15 even knew any petition was ever filed . . . we 16 were never sent a copy of it by anybody . . . 0 a 17 I bought and paid for ours to Judy Terry for 0 18 25 cents a sheet . 0 19 Before we ever knew the petition was m 20 filed, the roof went on. The house for 0 21 everybody who has been by to see it is u z 22 virtually complete. Two people have already 23 offered to purchase, two people from this 24 community. One hundred and sixty-four days r 25 have lapsed between the date of the building 1 17 2 permit and the date the petition was filed. 3 In 1973 ,. ,the Supreme Court of the 4 State of New York, in the case entitled 5 Marone versus Friere, 343 N.Y. Supp. 2d 183, 6 ruled as a matter of law a delay by 7 objectants , such as the objectants here 8 tonight ,. of 120 .days is unreasonable. 9 Going back to the first point I made, 10 if it is unreasonable as a .matter of law 11 they may not proceed. In the name of 12 fairness , the courts have said if you watch 13 the guy, and you watch him, and you watch 14 him, and then after he invests by entering 15 into contractor delivery of lumber or 16 whatever he is doing, and then make your 0 17 first move, the courts are not going to open 0 LL 18 up the Zoning Board for that type of 0 0 s 19 procedure. That simply is not fair.. W 4 20 The same rule was upheld by the 0 3 21 Supreme Court, `Suffolk County, July 29, u 22 1988 . I am holding a copy of the decision 23 in my hands . I have some familiarity with 24 it . It involves the Town of Shelter Island. ( 25 I represent the people in the exact same I . F, 1 18 s 2 position; different clients, same legal 3 argument, same everything. And Justice 4 Luciano (phonetic spelling) said as a matter 5 of law you waited . . . 120 days is too much. 6 Seeing the Town Attorney or seeing m 7 Daniel Ross , who has been their attorney 8 since 1986, doesn' t help for curing anything g because Daniel Ross is not the officer 10 appointed under Section 138 of the New York 11 Town Law to enforce the zoning ordinance of 12 the building codes . In this municipality, 13 that person is seated in the second row, but 14 he is not being consulted by anybody on the 15 objectants ' and petitioners ' side and that 16 is what the record says tonight . That is 0 17 what the code record says and that is what 0 18 the live records say. So that my client has 0 19 then got to spend a lot of money . . . a lot m 20 of money while they waited. u 21 THE CHAIRMAN: Is that the third 0 22 point you just brought up? 23 MR. TOHILL: No. The third point is 24 that under Section 267 . 3, in order to �__ .25 perfect jurisdiction before this Board, l 1 19 2 among other things , for the same reason I 3 mentioned I have ad nauseum this evening, 4 they have to file the application with the 5 Building Inspector, meaning -the petition 6 that you received on January 19. It says in 7 the Town Law, you read it, "Such appeal 8 shall be taken within such time as shall be g prescribed by the Board of Appeals by 10 general filing --°', here it comes , -"-- with 11 the officer with whom the appeal is taken. " 12 That gentleman, pointing to Victor Lessard, 13 by filing with the officer from whom the 14 appeal is taker.. 15 By the way, there was no appeal 16 taken, was there? They forgot to talk to 17 him. Then they forgot to file with him. It 0 0 18 says with the Board of Appeals , a notice of ig appeal . So for the third reason, this was 20 not done, and for the second reason, the m 0 21 untimeliness, you don' t necessarily need to V 2 22 reach the third reason because the untimeli- 23 ness .as a matter of law and this proceeding. 24 Now I would like to be able to i_ 25 reserve any other position that I wish to , 1 20 2 take during this proceeding, until such 3 time -- and I assume it is not tonight -- 4 you would have an opportunity to consult 5 with counsel to review the. law .issues and 6 render a decision on these procedural 7 issues . I think that would be a sensible s way of proceeding for a number of reasons . 9 One, a number of people will be 10 required to be present here tonight or then, 11 whatever night we reach the merits. That 12 list is getting longer with every day of 1.3 investigation on my part of the people who I 14 will call . It will be not only inconvenient 15 for a number of people to reach the merits 16 without an opportunity to rule on these 0 a 17 prior issues , but I have been practicing 0 0 18 zoning law for eighteen years here in the s 191 five eastern towns and elsewhere on Long K 20 Island. I have been involved in some very m 21 contentious proceedings . u z W 22 I have been involved in proceedings 23 where property owners have been hurt . I 24 have been involved in proceedings where `' 25 people have lost money. I have been 1 21 2 involved in proceedings where people have 3 lost government and municipal positions . I 4 have been involved in matters where people's 5 blood pressures reached the point that an 6 internist 's medication was not necessarily the answer. I believe I am going to reach e all of these points in this proceeding 9 before we are completed and I would like to 10 avoid every single one of .them. 11 If the matter is resolved on the 12 technical issues and if somebody wishes to 13 challenge, the Supreme Court is twenty miles 14 to the west . The same Supreme Court that 15 decided the case I am holding in my right 16 hand, on July 29, 1988 , involving the same 0 0 17 issues in the adjacent township. I would a 18 ask that be in which the Board is entitled 0 s 19 to proceed and we see where we end up at 20 that point. Thank you. 0 V 21 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Ochsenreiter and u W G 22 Mr. Lenceski , of course it is at this 23 particular time I will ask you if you have 24 anything else you would like to say and then 25 we will then go into a short conference with f 1 22 2 the present Town Attorney, Mr. Matthew Al 3 Kiernan, sitting right across from me, and 4 we will have two options at that particular 5 time; either to continua with the hearing or 6 to recess the hearing at this particular point and then take the transcript, which 8 this lady is nicely putting together for us, 9 and giving it to both counsel and to special 10 counsel and to deal with these particular 11 issues that have arisen tonight based upon 12 what Mr. Tohill has said. 13 So I will just ask you if you' have :k- 14 anything you would like to say for the 15 record? Yes, Mr. Lenceski . 16 MR. LENCESKI : Edward Lenceski , 500 0 0 17 Bayer Road, Mattituck. I need a few of 18 those medications right now. I am very s 19 nervous . 'I am not a public speaker. We 20 talk about procedures . Mr. Tohill talks o 21 about procedures, about procedures we have V Z 6 22 here. Mr. Ochsenreiter and myself did have 23 counsel at one point in time. We do not 24 have him any more, for a reason we really 25 are not sure of . r 1 23 2 We are lay people that basically are 3 asking the Town of Southold . . . and here we 4 are talking about jurisdiction. Okay. We 5 have the Town Planning Board. We have the 6 Town Zoning Board. We have a Town Building 7 Department . As far as I am concerned, that 8 is all the Town of Southold. One may not 9 have jurisdiction. This is something, who 10 is jurisdictioning here? We are talking 11 about procedure, about our timeliness . 12 We were told by Mr. Ross ' office 13 that he spoke with Mr. Schondebare and Mr. 14 Schondebare, for some reason, seemed to push 15 this answer off to somewhere. He put it at 16 a distance, not responding right away. We 17 were given the impression, back in November, 0 18 that the building was not going to be put up 19 until the question of whether or not that 20 building permit was properly issued and the a 21 vacant land CO' s were properly . . . were 22 answered. There is a question here of the 23 property owners, Eva and Leonard Spano (pho- 24 netic spelling) , owning Lot 35 . . . 35 and 25 36, in the petition. There is a copy of 1 24 2 their deed that lists 35 and 36 as one 3 parcel . My deed across the street lists my 4 lot, whatever, they have 58 and 59, as one 5 parcel . 6 We questioned how can we go about m 7 subdividing our land. I called the Town 8 Planning Board. I was told if you would 9 like to subdivide your land you have to file 10 a petition to the Building Department asking 11 them is this legal . The Building Department 12 will deny this because of the fact they have 13 a one acre zoning in your M40 , or R40 A` 14 region. At that point the next procedure I understand is we would have to file an 15 16 appeal to the ZBA requesting a variance to a 17 build or to subdivide our undersized plots . 18 My question to the Town of Southold, 0 19 and I don't know who has jurisdiction, is W 20 how was the lot across the street sub- m V 21 divided? Was it done with proper procedure? 0 V ' 22 Was a site plan filed and an application for 23 the subdivision, a legal subdivision, filed 24 with the Town? ' 25 . L 1 24 2 their, deed •that, lists 35 and 36 as one 3 parcel . My' deed across the street lists my 4 lot, whatever, they have 58 and 59, as one 5 parcel . 6 We questioned how can we go about subdividing our land. I called the Town 8 Planning Board.- I was told if you would 9 like to subdivide your land you have to file 10 a petition to the Building Department asking 11 them is this legal . The Building Department 12 will deny this because of the fact they have 13 a one acre zoning in your M40 , or R40 14 region. At that point the next procedure I 15 understand is we would have to file an 16 appeal to the ZBA requesting a variance to 0 0 17 build or to subdivide our undersized plots . 18 My question to the Town of Southold, 0 19 and I don' t know who has jurisdiction, is m 20 how was the lot across the street sub- a 21 divided? Was it done with proper procedure? W 1 22 Was a site plan filed and an application for 23 the subdivision, a legal subdivision, filed 24 with the Town? z 25 1 25 ` 2 THE CHAIRMAN: I have no idea. It ti 3 would not come before me, anyway. 4 MR. LENCESKI : Okay . This is .our 5 question. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: What the procedure 7 would be? 8 MR. LENCESKI : We are looking at. the 9 whole thing here in that those were two 10 separate lots, two separatly divided Hots . 11 We understand that there are exceptions that 12 were mentioned, exceptions under 1966 codes 13 or prior to that there were certain sub- `.. 14 division maps . We also had in the code, in 15 the ' 89 code . . . deleted Mattituck Heights 16 as an exception. We wonder what the e 0 17 precedent is . 18 On our street there is approximately `s 19 four or five additional situations, very Z m 20 similar to the situation across the street , 0 21 where there is a house on a double or triple u z W s 22 building lot . In other words , the original 23 1938 subdivision, everybody subdivided. ' - 24 There were little 50-foot frontage lots t 25 where the area was developed by people, 1 26 2 developed and put two or three lots , put 3 their house on one or two and had the lot on 4 the side. There is a question of whether or 5 I not these things merge. I don' t think that ' s 6 the point . The point here is was that Spano 7 deed . . . that CO says Lot 35 and 36 were 8 deeded for one family use. How did that get 9 subdivided? If we breached protocol and 10 appealed to the wrong Board, this was at the 11 direction of Dan Ross . Unfortunately, now I 12 don' t know what the Town Board or what the 13 Zoning Board is going to have to say about C 14 this hearing. We ask you for advice. 15 Should we file to the Building Department? 16 At this point, the house is mostly 0 17 completed. You hate to see people build a 0 18 house like that, but I know if I were the s 19 builder and I had a building permit I would ° 20 not go ahead and build to the procedure m 0 21 before that was . . . that building permit was `u z W 22 properly issued. 23 There is also . a question, if it was 24 properly issued, does that house size exceed 25 the Town zoning law under ' 66 regulations? I 1 27 2 It seems the ' 66 Zoning Board code allows 3 the house on a nonconforming lot to not 4 exceed 25 percent of the lot area. It seems 5 the house across the street, , ac.cording to 6 the building permit files , is a 2,028 square m 7 foot house on a 7 ,.500 square foot lot which s exceeds the 1966 code. The 1989 building, . 9 code downgrades to 20 percent. So again, 10 that house size exceeds it . . 11 When we look at the house it looks 12 like a very big lot it is on. As far as how 13 it affects the neighborhood, we are looking 14 at real estate comparative values . When the 15 parcel across the street sold, the asking , 16 price for the Spano house was $150 ,000 . 0 0 17 When they sold, they sold us two separate V 18 parcels for one hundred five and forty-five 0 19 thousand. When real estate comparative is W 20 done people are going to say what the- houses m a 21 of the neighborhood sell for. They are 22 going to say the house across the street 23 sold for $105,000 . It is not going to help 24 our comparative real estate value and this t-_ 25 is what we are concerned about . t 1 28 2 We are ,all concerned about precedent . 3 Does this set any kind of precedent , to 4 allow other owners in the neighborhood who 5 had to do the same exact thing and this is 6 to subdivide their property and put a house 7 up? I would like to do it . Mr. Ochsen- 8 reiter would like to do it . We could make a 9 nice profit. Maybe we should call the 10 Building Inspector and ask for this building 11 permit right away. Maybe that is the 12 procedure. 13 That is about all I have to say. 14 Thank you. 15 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 16 MR. TOHILL : Just to explain for the 0 0 17 record on that point, we are dangling two 0 18 offers right now; each of $165 ,000 for that s 19 house. I said that so everybody understands 20 in terms of damages , what 's at stake here, 21 $165,000 . u z 22 Could you, in talking about this with 23 special counsel and Town counsel , give some 24 consideration to rendering a decision before �._.. 25 everybody . . . assuming you judge against 1 29 2 me . . . I always think the worst case . 3 assuming you vote against me on this appli- 4 cation, could you do it in a way where you 5 do it nicely but also that you do it on one 6 night where the hearing doesn' t occur two 7 minutes later, because at that point we 8 don' t know on our end of this what is 9 happening? But if you do it one night and 10 the hearing occurs two weeks or four weeks 11 later, that would be a better way for us to 12 do it because this hearing is going to take, 13 I have a hunch, maybe all night and . 14 THE CHAIRMAN: We have been going 12 15 to 16 hours on a hearing. We have four 16 consecutive nights of four hours. o. 0 17 MR. DINIZIO: You know, on what you 18 just mentioned to us , I have a couple of 19 questions . Perhaps you can clear them up. 20 I would just like to know, are you a 21 saying that because the applicant waited V t W 22 such a long period of time and because the 23 people spent so much money that there is no 24 longer a challenge? �- 25 MR. TOHILL: This is a combination of r 1 30 f 2 the two. The .courts have held that without 3 the sp ending of money by Inland Homes , if 4 you wait too long you lose your position to 5 object . . . without the spending of money. 6 The exact wording in the Marone case, which I don' t have in front of me, is that the 8 delay of more than 120 days , in this case it 9 was 127 I think, the delay of 120 days is 10 unreasonable. 11 In that case, and I hope p you will get 12 a chance, each of you, to read it , you will 13 be stunned by the factual overlap from that 14 case to this case. The objectant, the 15 person in the position of these gentlemen, 16 was an attorney I am sad to report . He 17 watched a neighbor with a building permit . s 18 He knew the neighbor had a building permit 19 and he waited until the neighbor started the 0 20 excavation. Then the next day, he went into 0 21 the Building Department, filed the Zoning W 6 22 Board application, and when the case came up 23 the Zoning Board said you came in too late. 24 We are dismissing your application. i 25 He then sued the Zoning Board, went L JI 1 31 2 to Supreme Court , and the Supreme Court said 3 you waited too long. One hundred twenty 4 days is too long. You waited. It was 127 5 or 137 . 6 I mentioned before the number of days 7 that we have here, and it pales in compari- 8 son because you have here 164 days. Now, g the court in New York, as I mentioned to 10 you, in a similar dispute involving Shelter 11 Island and the house under construction 12 there, in the last 18 months the Supreme 13 Court in Riverhead picked up the same points 14 and used it again . . . so that it is a combi- 15 nation. It is first and standing alone , the 16 120 days is too much . . . here, 164; and 17 second, if they watched the man or if they 0 0 18 ought to know that the man is now spending 0 19 money or, as in this case, engaging the con- 20 tractor, having already dug the foundation 21 back in August \ . . . by the way, August . . . I u z 22 mean, that is a sure sign that somebody has 23 got a building permit to do something . . . 24 having done that and waited until he engages 25 in contractors , the sub, and then waits i i 1 32 2 until he engages in material men and then 3 puts his so-called bail and hold order, 4 which lie did with the entire lumber list , I 5 am saying without any question there isn' t a 6 single case in. the history of New York that 7 allows these people to proceed at this 8 point . 9 Having said that , they said, "Where 10 is your lawyer?" That is not this Board' s 11 concern. That is not our concern. They 12 have a remedy. They have a remedy for that , ( 13 but it is not this Township or this Zoning 14 Board resolving the problem on it , certainly 15 not our problem. So we should be permitted 16 to proceed. The long silence and long 0 0 17 failure to take a right when they came in 18 the front door of this building has great s Z 19 legal significance. L m 20 That Building Inspector is not here 0 21 for nothing. Under Section 138 of the Town V L 22 Law, and I invite you all to read it , it 23 says what he is supposed to do. And if you 24 read what he is supposed to do, one of the 25 things is issue orders and determinations on 1 ' 33 2 the complaints of people like Mr . Ochsen- 3 reiter and Mr. Lenceski . That is exactly 4 what his role is , but failing to consult him 5 and leaving him in the dark and talking i 6 instead to your own attorney, is hardly the 7 -key way to get to this Board.' I am sorry. I 8 MR. DINIZIO: In that same vein, 9 would you have any idea how Bong it would 10 take for the Building Inspector, or how long 11 by law does he have to issue a determination 12 on the stop work order? 13. MR. TOHILL : I don' t know of any case 14 where they say that the Building Inspector 15 took too long. There are some where having 16 been asked the question the Building 0 17 Inspector remained silent andididn' t give I 0 18 any answer. For example, whe you have a 19 chance to read it, the one I mentioned W _ 20 earlier from 1967 , the Building Inspector of 21 a greenhouse . . . which is in the Town of 22. East Hampton, by the way . . . lwas asked the i 23 question so that they did at Beast that part 24 . . . done there. He was askedlthe question. 25 Surprise. He gave no answer. i i ; 1 34 2 Next surprise: The applicant went to 3 the Zoning Board. Next surprise: They 4 lost . Next surprise: The Court said asking 5 him the question and getting silence back is 6 not enough to give you a Zoning Board of Appeals jurisdiction. In other words , if 8 you have half of it, the question asked to 9 the Building Inspector with no answer, that 10 is not enough to give you an order and 11 determination. 12 Under 267 , Sub 2 , that I mentioned 13 here, you do not even get the half . They 14 ignored the Building Inspector. Everybody 15 conceded they ignored the Building Inspec- 16 tor. That was a fatal defect . It was not 0 0 17 done by Mr. Ochsenreiter or Mr. Lenceski , 18 as if they knew how to operate in the Town 0 19 government , but it was done presumably by an Z 20 attorney who was licensed to practice, to 0 21 live in this community and practice in this u z i 22 . community with the firm that has. been 23 here . . . I know they have represented my 24 client too, since 1986. I guess they know `-_- 25 what they are doing in this area of the law a 1 35 f 2 and if they made a problem that 's now going a 3 to become a problem for these objecting 4 neighbors . 5 As I say, that is not for us . That 6 is not for you. That is for them, Mr. Ross , 7 Wickham, Wickham and Bressler, and these two 8 neighbors . 9 MR. DINIZIO: So I guess we could 10 pretty much assume the building permit was 11 posted for a year and a half out in front of 12 the house. 13 MR. TOHILL: No. You don' t seem to a 14 , assume that . . . .-.hen the foundation went 15 in . . . august 30 , that is the kind of in- 16' dicia that the court will recognize as the 0 17 moment when the neighbor ought to know that 18 something happened and, as a matter of fact , a " s 19 they did know that something happened and m 20 they started a chain of events that brings 21 us here this evening. u i 22 Unfortunately, the key ingredients 23 are all missing . . . consulting the Building 24 Inspector and waiting, and waiting, and l.. 25 waiting . . . even sending the mailing notice 1 36 2 saying you can . examine the petition in the 3 i 3 Zoning Board office five days from this date 4 and doing that on January 9, having received 5 on January 10 and then not filing it until 6 January 19, and then not giving a copy, not 7 even a courtesy copy, from the petitioner's - 8 counsel to their own clients, Inland Homes , 9 creating a situation where I came in and '10 Doreen kindly gave me a copy with the bill 11 to pay down at Judy Terry' s office. That is 12 the way this works . 13 So that was when itiTe first got to see 14 exactly what they were saying . At that 15 point, the house was completed on January 16 19 . As I said to you before, the roofer was 0 0 17 coming on the site on Saturday, January 20 . 0 18 The house was roofed, that is to say, the 19 shingles were put on the sheathing that was 20 already on the house that had walls , was 21 completely framed out exactly as you see it u z 22 standing there today. 23 THE CHAIRMAN: Can I ask a question? ` 24 What is the present condition of the house? `.. 25 r 1 37 , 2 MR. TOHILL : It is subject to the 3 completion of the interior wallboards . . . 4 interior wallboard installation, plumbing, 5 electricity, everything is done . . .doors , 6 windows , everything. 7 (Whereupon, pictures were handed to s the Chairman by Mr. Lenceski . ) 9 MR. TOHILL : Could we have for the 10 record an indication as to the date that 11 they were taken, which is ten days ago? Let 12 me see them. Are these the ones taken . . . 13 no. 14 THE CHAIRMAN : I have pictures in my 15 office, Mr . Tohill . It was taken Sunday 16 morning, 7 :30 . 0 17 MR. TOHILL: Okay. I don' t think 0 0 18 there is any question that the house is 0 19 completed; is there? W m . 20 THE CHAIRMAN: There is no question u 21 that the exterior wall was completed. That u z W 22 is correct , yes . 23 Do you have any other questions , Jim? 24 MR. DINIZIO: No . Just that I went 25 by there. I went by there yesterday, 1 38 2 the day before, � and quite honestly, I didn' t C 3 see the building permit . What I am saying, 4 all I am asking is that it was posted. 5 MR. TOHILL: It was given to me as 6 part of this proceeding . I asked for that . 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have it with 8 you? 9 MR. DINIZIO: I need to basically 10 understand to make my decision how, or have 11 some idea when these two gentlemen were 12 aware that a house . . . not a garage . . . not 13 a building . . . that could go alongside a 14 house . . . okay . . . and be part of those two 15 lots . . . that would not be residence. I 16 need to know when they were aware of that . 0 17 A building permit being out front? Sorry, 0 18 anything could be going up . s i 19 So, all I really want to know is if z 20 that building permit was posted outside and a 21 when it was posted outside, and obviously it u z 22 is not there now. 23 14R. OCHSENREITER: Could I just say 24 one thing as a citizen? I petitioned the 25 government of Southold for redress , and I 1 39 2 got a letter dated October 17 , or there- :., 3 abouts . 4 THE CHAIRMAN: I have the letter . 5 MR. OCHSENREITER: The one I gave you 6 from Mr . Schondebare' s office. I assume he 7 had . . . at that time he was an official of 8 the Southold Town government . I took that 9 to mean he had been informed. What the 10 procedure was from there, I have no . . . 11 obviously, no idea. Nor do I think I am 12 required to have. My delay was not to see 13 the house go up . I assumed, based on Mr. 14 Schondebare' s letter, that it was under 15 consideration. 16 THE CHAIRMAN: Could I just ask you a 0 0 17 question, Mr. Ochsenreiter? 18 In other words , what you are saying o . 19 is that because of the lack of wood con- 20 struction you assumed that something was 21 happening concerning Mr . Schondebare's V Z 22 action concerning this particular project . 23 Is that what you are saying? 24 MR. OCHSENREITER.: Precisely. The �. 25 foundation was put in . . . forgive me for 1 � ' 1 , 1 40 2 some of the dates . . . and it sat for quite a 3 while. It was prior to October 17 . The 4 foundation was put in. Above-grade con- s struction started on Martin Luther King Day, 6 January 15 , with the foundation. It sat from October until such prior, to Martin 8 Luther King Day when it was backfilled, and 9 above-grade construction started on the 10 19th. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Och- 12 senreiter. If there is nothing right now, I 13 would like to just take a five minute recess 14 with the attorneys in the Town Board room 15 . . . assuming it is unlikely we will dismiss 16 the case . . . at which time I will come back 0 0 17 and only deal with the particular issues 18 that you mentioned and my particular opinion 0 19 concerning the way I feel this particular 20 case should go . It is very simply one 0 21 person of the Zoning Board mentioning this , u 6 22 and I will tell you the way that I feel 23 concerning this . 24 I reviewed the foundation since its 25 inception . I have discussed this issue on r I 1 41 . ` 2 December 13 , with .the owner of the property, 3 Mr. Robert Hill (phonetic spelling) , who I 4 have known for 23 years and in fact built my 5 first house. My discussion on December 15 , 6 or thereabouts , with James Schondebare 7 concerning this letter that Mr. Ochsenreiter 8 gave me tonight . . . and I will afford you a 9 copy of it , and I give Mr. Ochsenreiter a 10, copy of this back again . . : right after I 11 discussed it with . . . i 12 MR. TOHILL : When you said you knew 13 about the foundation from the inception, 14 what is the inception date; August 30? 15 THE CHAIRMAN: Inception date was 16 about mid-October. 0 a 17 MR. TOHILL : How did you learn about i8 it? s 19 THE CHAIRMAN: I rode by and saw it . m 20 MR. TOHILL: Did somebody ask you to? 21 THE CHAIRMAN: No. u z W 22 I need a motion for a recess of five 23 minutes . So anyone in favor . . . 24 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. r . - 25 e 1 42 2 (Whereupon, a brief recess was taken 3 at 9: 23 p.m. and the proceeding resumed at 4 9: 33 p.m. ) 5 THE CHAIRMAN: I need a motion to 6 reconvene. m 7 BOARD MEMBERS: So move. 8 THE CHAIRMAN : All in favor? 9 BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 10 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Tohill , for the 11 record, and applicants, we have discussed 12 this matter with the Town Attorney. It is 13 encumbent upon us to really question what 14 has been brought to us tonight in reference 15 to the lack of having the jurisdiction in 16 this particular hearing of this case. We e E 17 have to question that in definitely two a 0 0 18 modes . We have to again take it to our s 19 attorney and to our special counsel , and we Z 20 can only do that once this transcript is m 0 21 transcribed into clear and concise form. u z ' 22 So we are going to have to recess 23 this hearing, and to deal with that on this 24 particular basis . I will tell you for the 25 record, Mr. Tohill , that when I rode down l f ( t I 1 43 2 Bayer Road after reading something about 3 this in the newspaper, I honestly and truth- 4 fully thought that this foundation was for 5 the garage or something other than what it 6 was for because it was a rather small foundation. That was sometime mid-October, 8 mid- to late October in this particular 9 case, and that is my feeling on the whole 10 situation. What happened or what transpired 11 after that, I cannot tell you. 12 I also can tell you, however, ' though, 13 that before us is a case . . . and I will not 14 discuss the merits of it . . . not before us , 15 but before Article 78 has been filed with, I 16 believe, Judge Luciano (phonetic spelling) 0 0 17 . . . it may take more for the 25,000 square 0 18 foot building, the period of time that s 19 elapsed between the building permits and the m 20 actual commencement of the construction is 0 21 much more time than existed in this u z W • 22 particular project . 23 MR. TOHILL : I am familiar with the 24 case. I have spoken with Richard Larke, t 25 that told me he didn' t know anything about L 1 44 2 the area of the law on the night he was here 3 and that the first he learned about it was 4 to read the document I was holding in my 5 hands a few minutes ago . 6 THE CHAIRMAN: So at this particular m 7 time, unless anybody has anything else they 8 would like to discuss , anything that you 9 would like to discuss concerning . . . 10 MR. TOHILL : No . Just to say , again 11 for the record, I am reserving every right 12 that my clients have to raise every Ae- 13 objection as necessary to protect my 14 clients ' interest and if it becomes 15 necessary to do that , we will do it . I 16 would like you to keep in mind, if you can, 17 that housekeeping side of it just so it is 18 easier for everybody if that is the 19 direction we are going in. 20 THE CHAIRMAN : Mr. Ochsenreiter. 21 MR. OCHSENREITER: May I submit V x 22 copies of two newspaper articles, both dated 23 October 26 , 1989; one from the Suffolk Times 24 and one from the Traveler-Watchman, �- 25 concerning this building? l 1 45 2 MR. TOHILL : Could I just see them? 3 I have not seen these articles before, but I 4 believe we are now reaching the merits and I 5 think the Board has already ruled we are 6 going to hold off on doing that . I have no 7 objection if , when we reach the merits, I 8 don' t believe we can keep anything out 9 including the 'Kitchen sink. Right now, if 10 these come in, I want to get into the merits 11 and I am telling you a number of people are 12 going to get called and some are going to be 13 a little surprised when they are called. 14 THE CHAIRMAN: Why would you have an 15 objection to this gentleman entering them? 16 MR. TOHILL : Because I would have to 0 17 do something to meet the contents of the 18 newspaper articles , and I understand what he s 19 is trying to do. We are starting the hurt W m 20 part now. I mentioned before, I said people 21 will get hurt . I •am trying to avoid people u z W 22 getting hurt here tonight and if you tell me 23 you want to put this in I am going to take 24 it as permission to start the hurting and I f �` 25 am going to do it and people are going to l� • 1 46 2 get' hurt and they are sitting in this room 3 tonight . I don' t want to do it . 4 I have taken a lot of steps in the 5 past ten days to avoid this happening and if 6 anybody can tell me the reason that this has something to do with three legal points that 8 I made tonight involving Section 267 , Sub 2 9 and 267 , Sub 3 , and Hilbert versus Hass, if 10 somebody can tell me what these articles 11 have to do with that , I am here to listen to 12 it . If they can' t intelligently connect 13 these to that and that is what the Board has 14 already decided . . . only deciding right now 15 . . . then I am saying to you that we have 16 moved beyond the housekeeping procedural 0 17 preliminary issues we have been discussing "s 18 all night . a 19 THE CHAIRMAN: This is the way we are Z Y 20 going to take care of this . We are going to 0 21 ask you to move outside with counsel and Mr. V Z W 6 22 Ochsenreiter, and discuss this particular 23 problem to see if he can enter this in at 24 this particular time. 25 MR. TOHILL: I very much ap preciate I C C 1. I 1 47 s� 2 what you are doing but there are parts to 3 this where I will not , as an attorney 4 licensed to practice who values the license, 5 engage in this conversation off the record, 6 outside of this room, with this gentleman 7 standing to my immediate left or the other 8 gentleman who was here this evening or 9 anyone else who is individually involved. 10 There are reasons that will come out 11 ultimately, not maybe in this quorum but 12 they are certainly going to come out in 13 another form, and more of what I am trying 14 to avoid is going to Occur. 15 If you send me out of the room I am 16 going to be obligated to explain to this a 17 gentleman what I am being so mysterious 18 about with you. I don' t really want to do s 19 that because somebody who is not here m 20 tonight and somebody who is here tonight are 0 21 going to be the first two people hurt. I Z W s 22 don' t want to do that. I don' t want to do 23 it . If he doesn' t know what I am talking 24 about, rather I know he doesn' t know what I i 25 am talking about, the best move for w v 4 y 1 - 48 2 everybody is that we pass on this tonight 3 and hold it for another day and if it comes 4 to the other day then everybody is going to 5 have to be invited and you are going to host 6 an evening that is going to be very interesting here. But until then . . . until 8 then, let 's hold off on it in the name of 9 civility, in the name of some nice people 10 who shouldn' t be hurt , in the name of people 11 who are not even here tonight . 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Let me ask Mr. Ochsen- 13 reiter a question. 14 I have not read those articles since 15 they appeared in the October 26th issue. 16 What was the specific reason why you wanted a 17 to enter them? 0 18 MR. OCHSENREITER: Simply because the s 19 question of timing came up and why we waited W m 20 so long. 0 21 MR. TOHILL: Newspaper reporters are _ W 22 not going to resolve the problem. The 23 newspaper or the reporter is not going to 24 testify on the cold document that I did not ` 25 even get to cross-examine. ~ t t j( 1 49 2 That is not going to resolve any of 3 the issues that I have raised and placed 4 inquiry in your lap . When you have the 5 opportunity to speak to counsel and when' you 6 have the opportunity to review the rase law, you will see that you have the information $ you need right now to decide the motion on 9 any of the three bases , but to have 10 from the Traveler- 11 Watchman or Bill Fallon (phonetic spelling) 12 from the Suffolk Times personally appear 13 here in pieces of paper that don't talk. 14 I was not 'born yesterday. None of 15 you were, and we ought not ruin the record 16 as it now stands by putting material in E 17 there that is not anything except inflam- 0 is matory and intended quite honestly do to a 19 nothing but sell newspapers . 20 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. At this o u 21 particular point do you have any objection 6 22 to withdrawing this? 23 MR. OCHSENREITER: Fine. 24 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. I appre- i 25 ciate it . R, v i 1 50 r 2 MR. DINIZIO: Not withdrawn. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: At this particular 4 time. 5 MR. DINIZIO: Just the information. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: At this particular 7 time, only at this particular time. Not the 8 application. 9 Hearing no further comments , I make a 10 motion recessing this hearing some time to 11 the latter part of February. As soon as we 12 get the transcript , we will afford counsel 13 and special counsel with those to discuss it 14 and we will then readdress this issue by 15 advising to the public and we will be back 16 here and hopefully we will do it as expedi- 0 17 tiously as possible. o 0 18 We thank you all for coming in. a Z 19 MR. TOHILL: Could you simply state o 20 you will have Doreen or somebody notify Mr . 21 Ochsenreiter, Mr. Lenceski , and me when that V 2 W 22 is so I am not pinned down to reading the 23 Traveler or the Times? 24 THE CHAIRMAN: We have never done 25 that , Mr. Tohill . I would suggest calling e � 1 51 2 our office on the 16th of February, the day 3 after our next scheduled meeting. Thank you 4 very much. 5 I offer that as a resolution, 6 gentlemen. BOARD MEMBERS: Aye. 8 g 10 * ,� 11 12 13 �r 14 I , CRIL ROSCHEN, do hereby certify that I am 15 an Official Court Reporter and that the foregoing 16 constitutes a true and correct transcript according a 4 17 to my official stenographic notes . 0 18 19 W GAIL ROSCHEN 20 Official Court Reporter m 0 21 u z 22 23 24 25 1 SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS v 12 aD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK : STATE OF NEW YORK � 2APR 2 0--------------------------------------- gyp. SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 4 HEARING, In the Matter of 5 ROBERT OCHSENRETER AND EDWARD LENCESKI , 6 Applicants . 7 -----------------------------------------R 8 53095 Main Road 9 Southold, New York 11971 10 March 29, 1990 8 : 18 P.M. 11 12 B E F O R E 13 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, 14 Chairman. 15 BOARD MEMBERS: 16 CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. 17 18 SERGE DOYEN, JR. (Absent) JOSEPH H. SAWICKI 19 20 DAMES DINIZIO, JR. - _ 21 A P P E A R A N C E S 22 MOORE & MOORE, ESQS. 23 Attorneys for the Applicants Main Road Mattituck,' New York 24 BY: WILLIAM MOORE, .ESQ. 25 i 2 2 THE CHAIRMAN: I guess we are ready 3 to reconvene the last hearing of the a evening, and that is a hearing that we had 5 heard prior to this hearing. So there is no 6 need to read the legal notice.. There was significant testimony taken at that prelimi- 8 nary hearing, and this is a hearing in 9 behalf of Mr. Ochsenreter and Edward 10 Lenceski . It is Appeal Number 3908 . 11 I have certain questions which I want 12 to mention, but I will start off by saying 13 that we have discussed this hearing with 14 Special Counsel and. we have discussed this 15 hearing with the new Town Attorney. It is 16 our opinion, at this particular time, that 17 there is standing for these two gentlemen to 18 come before us and at the culmination of 19 this hearing and encouched within any 20 decision we will have a minimum and maximum 21 time in reference to what we refer to as 22 standing for specific applications and in 23 this particular area which concerns reversal ; 24 of building permits, and it will be some- 25 thing that we will be dealing with in .a � � l 1 3 r 2 precedent basis throughout the remaining 3 seeming years of our tenure on this Board. 4 At this particular time, I will ask 5 Mr. Ochsenreter and Mr. Lenceski if they 6 would like to say anything for the record. 7 MR. OCHSENRETER: Mr. Goehringer, is 8 this reconvening? 9 THE CHAIRMAN: It is a continuation, 10 but we have to reconvene it . 11 MR. OCHSENRETER: Robert Ochsenreter, 12 600 Bay Road, Mattituck, New York. 13 Do you want me to repeat my testimony 14 of the last session? i 1 15 THE CHAIRMAN: No. It is part of the 16 permanent record. 17 MR. OCHSENRETER: I would have noth- 18 ing further. 19 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there something you 20 would like to repeat, Mr. Moore? 21 MR. MOORE:. William Moore, Clause 22 Commons, Suite 3 , Main Road, Mattituck, from 23 the firm of Moore and Moore. We are being 24 substituted for Mr. Tohill ,, who was. here at 25 the last hearing � r< A 1 1 y 4 2 At this particular point , let me 3 begin by renewing the motion Mr. Tohill 4 raised at the last hearing. He cited 5 specific sections , Section 267 , Subdivision 6 2 , of the Town Law. The petitioner' s 7 failure to obtain a determination from the g Building Department before commencing this 9 appeal . 10 There is a memo in the file of the 11 ZBA, from the Southold Town Clerk, which 12 states material being transmitted from the 13 Town Clerk to the ZBA does not include a 14 notice of disapproval from the Building 15 Department . He speaks at length about the 16 failure of the petitioners to come to the 17 Building Department and challenge or request 18 any determination from that department with 19 respect to the permit that was issued. Mr . 20 Tohill previously set forth the basis of the 21 Appellate jurisdiction of this Board and 22 also the Board that had to review prior 23 decisions and asked action of these who are 24 charged with the enforcement of the- Town 25 zoning codes . t i 5 2 As he stated and I repeat again, this 3 jurisdiction has not been established from 4 this appeal . The prerequisite steps have 5 not been taken for this appeal to reach it . 6 The second motion relates to Section 267 , Subdivision 3, in that this appeal is 8 untimely as a matter of law. I appreciate 9 the desire of this Board to at some time . . . 10 I don't know that within the context of this 11 decision it would be appropriate to hear 12 affidavits what your rule will be regarding 13 appeals . I think that will be a procedure 14 you can use to create a set of rules and 15 procedure to the extent you want ,to have 16 them regarding the appeals of determinations 17 of the Building Department . 18 THE CHAIRMAN: I am reminiscent of 19 saying that we will take these to the legis- 20 lative committee and make them embody within 21 the area of 267 or any applicable areas of 22 which they will pertain. 23 MR., MOORE: The key period of time 24 when you go to make an appeal is when the 25 period begins to run. It',begins •to run when 1 6 2 the person who -is, going to complain about a 3 decision. becomes chargeable with Notice of 4 Issuance of the permit of which it 5 complains . Now you have a copy of the 6 building permit in your file, dated August 7 8, 1989... Work began on this site with 8 clearing and excavation for the foundation. 9 This work took place August 30 , 1989. 10 Now _I have some information. that was 11 not presented the last time and they are 12 some bills to support this time frame of 13 which we are speaking. The first is a bill 14 for Robert Chilton and it is in reference to 15 work performed on 8/30 , Bayer Road, for 16 Inland Homes . This is the clearing of the 17 property. Also included in the papers I 18 gave you are receipts from the Southold Town 19 Dump, receipts made out to Robert Chilton 20 for land cleared. The delivery date of 21 receipt is 8/30/89. 22 I have for you a receipt from Eastern 23 Concrete, Incorporated, 9/15/89, indicating 24 their accepting $2 , 400 for work. that was,. 25 done for Inland Homes on Bayer Avenue. I a a a a a ' I 7 ' 2 mean, I gave you those. 3 The time in which 'to appeal begins 4 when a person complaining should have 5 notice. If you get a building permit and 6 sit on it for six months , one could not 7 expect anybody to know about it . But when 8 you take action on a permit and the person 9 lives , as the petitioner stated in their 10 petition, on Bayer Road, 'across the street 11 from this property, you have notice of what 12 is going on. = 13� Now, the petition is a sworn state- 14 ment by both petitioners . In that sworn 15 statement they state that their attorneys 16 wrote to the Zoning Board of Appeals in a 17 letter dated September 13, 1989, with 18 respect to the property which is the 19 subject of this appeal , and that they . . . I 20 mean the attorneys . . . I presume were in- 21 formed that no variances ,have been granted 22 with respect to this property. So even as 23 of September 13 , 1989, inquiries were being 24 made by these petitioners according to their 25 sworn statements to the Zoning Board by i ri t . 1 g 2 their attorneys. ' 3 Now, the petitioners never spoke with 4 Inland Homes . Inland Homes never suggested 5 to them that they were not going to take any 6 action on this permit . They were going to 7 sit on it . These petitioners were g represented at one point by the office of 9 Wickham, Wickham and Bressler. 10 Mr. Tohill raised briefly a third 11 reason for dismissing, related to Section 12 267 , Subdivision 3 . Mr. Tohill wrote to Mr . 13 Kiernan, the Assistant Town Attorney, on 14 February 1 , 1990 , stating forth the basis 15 upon which we have been speaking for dismis- 16 sal , either lack of Appellate jurisdiction 17 . . . because there is no determination from 18 the Building Department on which this appeal 19 was founded. Petitioners contacted the 20 Building Department , and had not requested a 21 decision from the Building Department before 22 they filed their appeal . 23 Mr. Tohill later also addressed the 24 failure to file the appeal in a timely 25 fashion, in which you give permits and the. 9 r 2 basis, rather to show when work was being 3 performed. 4 Lastly, he advised in this letter to 5 the Assistant Town Attorney, dated February 6 1, 1990 , which has the day of the public 7 hearing, that the petitioner had failed to 8 file their appeal with the Building Depart- 9 ment . That is a requirement of Section 267 , 10 Subdivision .3 . 11 Now the Zoning Board of Appeals has a 12 letter in their file indicating that the law 13 firm of Wickham, Wickham and Bressler with- 14 drew as counsel , a letter dated February 1, 15 1990 . A copy of that letter was sent to Mr. 16 Garcia, and signed for by Corinne Lessard 17 Garcia. I have a copy of that letter and 18 the envelope indicating the postdate of 19 January 31 . I would like to give you that 20 as well . . . postmarked letter, January 31, 21 dated February 1, withdrawing his counsel . 22 Now on the very date of the hearing, 23 February 1, 1990 , after petitioner's counsel 24 was withdrawn, a copy of the appeal 25 miraculously gets filed with the Building 1 10 2 Department at 2: 55 that afternoon. The 3 affidavit of service is sworn to before a a notary public who I have reason to believe 5 is the secretary of, the law firm of Wickham, 6 Wickham-and Bressler. I believe they have 7 withdrawn counsel at that point . s I would like to believe the 9 petitioners were aware of that requirement , 10 and in all good honesty, I would like to 11 believe they knew they had to file that 12 appeal on the day of the hearing. If I 13 believe they have withdrawn counsel at that 14 point , I would like to believe the 15 petitioners were aware of that requirement , 16 and in all good honesty I would like to 17 believe they knew they had to file that 18 appeal on the day of the hearing even though 19 the .original was filed January 19, 1990 .y 20 This was some last minute housekeep- 21 ing paper work that would have seriously 22 challenged the jurisdiction of this Board, 23 because Section 267 , Subdivision 3 had not 24 been complied with. I don' t know how that . 25 appeal got filed with the Building Depart 1 11 r 2 ment in the afternoon of the night of the 3 hearing; after the attorneys had ,withdrawn 4 as counsel . I reserved my motions . They 5 were raised before. 6 I would like . to get down to the 7 merits. of this a little bit, and to that 8 extent I would like to call upon Victor 9 Lessard to describe to the Board the basis 10 and justification upon which a building 11 permit like this might be issued. 12 MR. DINIZIO: Can I ask a question? 13 I would just like to ask a couple of ques- 14 tions . 15 Number one is , to your knowledge, is 16 a building permit required to clear land? 17 In other words , if you want to smooth out 18 your land, take a tree off , are you required 19 to get a building permit? 20 MR. MOORE: In residential property, 21 I don' t believe so. 22 MR. DINIZIO: Number two, does' it 23 require the assistance of an attorney to 24 file with the Building Department, the d 25 permit? . ' I I 1 t 12 2 MR. MOORE: I am not saying it does . r 3 I only question that the appeal was filed 4 January 19th. The hearing was scheduled for 5 February 1 . I 'm sorry . . . February 1 . . . 6 the appeal got filed with the Building 7 Department . I am troubled by the continued 8 appearance. of one of the attorneys from the 9 law firm. 10 MR. DINIZIO: But I mean, you don' t 11 have to be represented by an attorney. 12 MR. MOORE: I am not saying you have 13 to be represented by an attorney to appear 14 before the Zoning Board to file papers for 15 the Zoning Board. 16 MR. DINIZIO: Or with the Building 17 Department? 18 MR. MOORE: Or with the Building 19 Department . 20 THE CHAIRMAN: May I clear that one 21 issue up because I had a discussion with Dan 22 Ross, who is a member of the firm of Wick- 23 ham, Wickham and Bressler, in around my 24 lunch period of that particular day of 25 February 1. He told me he was withdrawing J 1 13 2 his counsel as of 4: 30 that afternoon. 3 MR. MOORE: I had received a copy of 4 the letter. I am CC on that letter , as 5 well . g THE COURT: That's what he told me. 7 He said, "What time does your office close?" 8 I said, "Five o' clock. " 9 He said, "Somebody will be there by 10 4 : 30 and they will formally withdraw as 11 counsel . " 12 I said, "I am just telling you we are 13 having a jurisdictional problem in reference 14 to having this hearing or not having any 15 hearing, and at this particular point we 16 have not determined it. " 17 MR. MOORE: Thank you for the clari- 18 fication. 19 THE CHAIRMAN: That is my only 20 conversation on the letter presented to you 21 with the photocopy of thei envelope post- 22 marked January 31, of a letter dated 23 February 1, and the letter makes no 24 reference to the time in which, or by which 25 they are withdrawing as counsel . If the r ' 14 2 petitioners figured it out and they brought 3 the papers in, that 's great . 4 I just wanted to mention that , as you 5 know, I have had discussions about this with. 6 the new Town Attorney. We have had in the i past sworn witnesses in and attorneys in, 8 and so on and so forth. Everybody here, we 9 know they have been before us before, in- 10 - cluding a number of attorneys, and so on and 11 so forth. We don' t think that is particu- 12 larly necessary. I just wanted you to be 13 aware of that, as well as myself . 14 MR. MOORE: No problem. I won't let 15 it go at that . If we can have perhaps 16 Victor explain the policy of the Building 17 Department and explain how the Building 18 Department permits get issued. I think we 19 may be along way to determining how the 20 code is interpreted in this Town. 21 MR. LESSARD: My name is Victor 22 Lessard. I am the principal Building In- 23 Spector for .the Town of Southold. 24 Now would you please ask me what, you 25 want to ask me? 1 2 15 ` MR. MOORE: Sure. The building 3 permit in this instant case was signed by 4 Kurt Horton. I think that 's fair to say. A 5 copy is in the file. 6 Do you agree with . the decision of Mr. 7 Horton to have issued that building permit? 8 MR. LESSARD: Absolutely. 9 MR. MOORE: Would you explain for the 10 people here the basis upon which that build- 11 ing permit is issued? 12 MR. LESSARD: Before a building 13 permit can be issued, the first thing that 14 has to be researched is the fact that the 15 property that the building permit is being 16 applied for is a single and separate plot 17 that he is building on. This was done by 18 first researching that property back in 19 November of . . . I believe, 1988 . I have the 20 records here to back it up, and found that 21 this subdivision was on a separate list in 22 1966, along with 16 others . . . excepted 23 subdivisions. 24 When I first got here in 1.988 , I 25 questioned that then Town Attorney about r - 16 2 these exception lists of subdivisions that 3 come and go, and his interpretation was once 4 they are almost all developed they just take 5 them off the list because everybody knows 6 they are . excepted and it makes room for 7 others. 8 When the vacant land was applied for 9 this , I said no because. I had done like I 10 always do. I went to the codes back, and, it 11 was not there under the present list . . . on 12 the present list . The real estate agent 13 that was applying -for this went down to the 14 Town Clerk's Office, where it was found on 15 this exception list , went over to the Town 16 Attorney, had a conversation with him, who 17 verified that it was good, who then came 18 back to me and stated that . I then got a 19 hold of the Town Attorney. 20 MR. MOORE: Would you identify which 21 Town Attorney that was? 22 MR. LESSARD: Jay Schondebare. 23 I then verified it with the Town 24 Attorney and I wrote the vacant land. 25 I also would like to. say at this l 1 1 1 17 2 point in time, since 1983' I have written at 3 least 98 percent of all the vacant land CO' s 4 in Southold Town. In order to do that you 5 have to go through a lot of research. You g have to go to the Planning Board. You have 7 to find out if it is an approved subdivision 8 and file. If you can't find it there, you 9 go through the exception ,list . If you can' t . 10 find it there, you go over to the Tax Asses- 11 sor's Office and see what. they have on 12 their's because every subdivision in the 13 world is filed over there. Then if you 14 can' t find it there, you go back to what is 15 known as the grandfather list , which I am 16 sure this Board understands because I under- 17 stand they were involved .in that in the 18 ' 70s . 19 once it is found in one of those 20 places , then I check with� the Town Attorney 21 and tell him what I have found and I get the 22 green light from him. That is what Town 23 Attorneys are for, as far as I am concerned. 24 They are the legal arm. This is how this 25 was done. 18 's J 2 While I am at it , there was reference 3 to an article in a November rag known as the 4 newspaper out here, who indicated that I had 5 done something crooked because my daughter 6 was involved in. this . I want the record to 7 show that my daughter knew nothing about 8 this property until three months after that 9 vacant land was issued. Now I can under- 10 stand why this factory publishes this crap. 11 It sells newspapers and they have no regard 12 for somebody's character or whatever. But 13 again, I will state, I wrote 99 percent of 14 all of the vacant land CO's in this Town 15 since 1983 . Okay? What else can I tell 16 you? 17 MR. MOORE: Was this property from 18 the excepted subdivision list? 19 MR. LESSARD: Yes , it was under May. 20 On the May 24, 1966 zoning code, on the last 21 page. I believe I gave the Zoning Board of 22 Appeals a copy of that . • 23 THE CHAIRMAN: I never received one. 24 MR. LESSARD: I am sorry. I gave it 25 to Jim. I have it anyway. I 1 19 2 MR. DINIZIO: I saw it , but I have 3 not . . . 4 MR. LESSARD: I gave a copy. I gave 5 it to you. I would also state that the 6 research goes back to 1980 , about the time 7 the grandfather list died. On a quick 8 reference, there has been' at least 50 of 9 these vacant lands written, okay? I want 10 the Board to understand that . 11 MR. MOORE: Does this refer • to vacant 12 land CO's on subdivisions that were on the 13 exception list but don' t appear on the list 14 now? 15 MR. LESSARD: That is correct . The 16 list that we are referring to in 1966 had 16 17 listed, and of those 16 there are three left 18 today. These three did not move like the 19 rest of them. So they kept them, and new 20 ones were put on. Somewhere in 1970 , 21 probably in November when the Town flipped 22 over to one acre zoning, this list was 23 changed. I am only guessing. There is no 24 resolution or anything to put on, take off , 25 or move around. 1 20 2 I would also state, and that is in 3 1970, the names that were added had lots 4 smaller than this . one. Even though we went 5 to one acre zoning. g MR. MOORE: So if I understand, there 7 were subdivisions added in 1970 . I .can 8 think of one in particular, the Tuthill 9 (phonetic spelling) subdivision. Is that 10 the one you are referring to? 11 MR. LESSARD: That is one of them. 12 Yes , sir. That is five houses, I believe, 13 quarter lots off of Bray Avenue. 14 THE CHAIRMAN: In Laurel . 15 MR. MOORE: That subdivision had. been 16 on the previous exception list . 17 MR. LESSARD: No, it had not . 18 MR. MOORE: There are subdivisions on 19 the exception list today that have been on 20 the exception list since 1958 . 21 MR. LESSARD: In all probability, I 22 didn' t bother to research that . I couldn' t 23 answer that . 24 MR.. MOORE: I haven't got any further 25 questions for you. 21 , 2 THE CHAIRMAN: I have a couple of 3 questions . My problem is that I want the 4 code book, and it is locked in my office. 5 So if you wouldn' t mind . . . 6 MR. MOORE: I have it . 7 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 8 MR. DINIZIO: Can -I ask a question? 9 THE CHAIRMAN: Of Victor? 10 MR. DINIZIO: Yes . 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. 12 MR. DINIZIO: I just want to ask one 13 question. Have you issued any vacant land 14 CO's for this subdivision in the past that 15 you can recall? 16 MR. LESSARD: I believe I issued two 17 of them to a Rudy Johnson (phonetic spell- 18 ing) . 19 MR. DINIZIO: A situation adjacent to 20 the . . . 21 MR. LESSARD: Yes , they are all 22 connected, I believe. Rudy Johnson wanted 23 them because he knew he was dy ing and he 24 wanted to get this cleared away for his 25 nephew and niece. r, , 22 J 2 MR. DINIZIO: You know about the 3 date, what time it was? 4 MR. LESSARD: Two years ago . . . three 5 years ago. There was also a house. There 6 is also a vacant lot across the street from . 7 . . . in fact . . . right next-door to one of 8 these gentlemen here. There was issued a 9 permit and a brand new house went up in 10 1984. I had no problem with it . 11 MR. DINIZIO: Could you get copies of 12 that? 13 MR. LESSARD: What's that, sir? 14 MR. DINIZIO: Of the building permits 15 and the plans of the vacant land CO's? 16 MR. LESSARD: I will try. I will 17 try, certainly. 18 MR. DINIZIO: Thank you. 19 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have anything 20 else, Mr. Moore? 21 MR. MOORE: Nothing for Mr. Lessard. 22 THE CHAIRMAN: I still have a ques- 23 tion I would like to ask him. I �am still 24 searching for it , .and I will. be with you in 25 a moment. This is highly irregular, but 1 23 2 MR. MOORE: Maybe we can help you 3 find the section. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: No. It is not the 5 section. It is something-....else I want to 6 look for, but I . will do it from the top. 7 Okay. It is highly irregular that I ' do 8 this , but I have a particular problem with s these vacant land CO's and this is the 10 second time in my history of the ten years 11 on the Zoning Board of Appeals that I have 12 come down. One was for the code condos and 13 you must excuse my writing. 14 (Whereupon, the Chairman began to 15 draw on a blackboard. ) 16 THE CHAIRMAN: What we have here is 17 basically two lots.. We really have four 18 lots , and truthfully, what Victor has said 19 is exactly correct in reference to some of 20 the procedures that have gone on in the past 21 within this Town in reference to grand- 22 fathers of subdivisions , and soon and so 23 forth. I can remember there was a last 24 grandfathering of subdivisions , ; some 340 25 lots at one time that the Planning Board 1 24 2 very 'simply ran through as an agenda item 3 and I believe I presently have them. 4 My ultimate concern is the fact that 5 many times I have felt , and it is not neces- 6 sarily this particular time, this is a 7 generalization which I am dealing with, s that Building Departments deal with a single 9 and separate issue based upon the way they 10 perceive those particular lots to be as this 11 comes out of the Suffolk County Real ' Proper- 12 ty Tax Services in Riverhead and they are 13 the mappers for Suffolk County and those 14 maps are the ones that all the ten Towns 15 have and are presently contained in the 16 office of our Building Inspectors . 17 If we could, for a moment , deal with 18 these particular- two parcels which again 19 could be four. This particular one over 20 here, which we will refer to as Parcel A, 21 Sub 1, Sub 2 and Parcel B . . . Sub 1 . . . Sub 22 2 . . . is basically one issue that I have 23 seen in the past as being somewhat of the 24 pitfall . of maybe this Building Department 25 and others in question. 1 25 2 Parcel A very simply denotes two 3 lots . For the purpose of an explanation, 4 they are 50 by 150 foot lots. The straight 5 line down the middle of these lots very. S 6 simply means that these particular lots , 7 based upon the Suffolk County Property s Services, and I am not speaking for them,. s but I happen to know several mappers and I 10 use their office quite a lot in my 11 particular position with the County, very 12 simply means that these two lots were pur- 13 chased separately. They were purchased 14 separately. 15 There is no indication of when they 16 were purchased. If it was prior to zoning, 17 subsequent to zoning, prior to one acre 18 subdivisions , subsequent to two acre 19 subdivisions. This particular one, if we 20 can perceive it also showing the fine dotted 21 line, is 100 by 150 and there is a fine 22 dotted line down the center of this par- 23 ticular one. 24 What this very simply means is that 25 this parcel was bought at the same time in 26 2 one particular block on one particular 3 piece. 4 Now what concerns me an awful lot 5 regarding this, some of the problems we have 6 with the vacant land CO's, is that when the 7 subdivision is shown with a full line down g the center, and now remember these do not 9 show any improvements on them, they are 10 solid black lines , that they are perceived 11 to be in single and separate ownership 12 because that is the way they are shown in r 13 the individual maps . When you have the 14 dotted line we assume that it is one piece. 15 Now in the encroachment there would be a 16 house here or there would be a house over 17 the whole center of the line . . . same situa- 18 tion over here. The house could be in the 19 center and we wouldn't know that unless we 20 had a survey. 21 What , in effect , I have been saying 22 is that this is not a proper procedure in 23 dealing with the application by an outside 24 applicant or person in this Town or out of 25 this Town in requesting a vacant land CO. 1 27 2 I thank you for bearing with me and. 3 my illustrations . The only question I have 4 of Mr. Lessard is that it is my understand- s ing in the code respective of the issue of a 6 1966 exception list or 1989 exception list , 7 it is -clearly stated, in my understanding, 8 that the Building Inspector is to request a 9 single and separate search for the 10 particular parcel that is requesting, that 11 vacant land CO. That is my understanding. 12 Now if I am incorrect in that , why am I AAr 13 incorrect in that? 14 MR. LESSARD: It is my understanding, 15 through three attorneys now that work for 16 the Town, that if it is an improved sub- 17 division, if it is an excepted subdivision, 18 it doesn't need a title search, number one. 19 We put that in. We put that in two years 20 ago or whatever it was , Gerry, and if you go 21 see the so-called title searches that I have 22 looked at, I believe I found one in the last 23 15 that were zoned bogus . 24 As far as this diagram is concerned, 25 yes , if you have two lots indicated with a 1 28 It 2 solid line, the control factor on that would 3 be subdivision or no, where that house is. 4 If that house is going through that middle 5 line, that person will not get a permit 6 until he gets an attorney who files a paper 7 with the. surveyor' s office merging those two 8 lots . 9 The dotted lines are good examples of 10 that . The Nassau Point properties show up 11 to six dotted lines on what the County 12 considers one piece. We have Nassau Point 13 properties, one, two, three and four ex- 14 cepted. It tears me up to have to say yes . 15 They are separate lots . Okay. Some of them 16 are 40 feet wide, but the law is the law. 17 Now as far as the County is con- 1s cerned, this is the greatest problem in the 19 world for the Building Department because 20 back in the ' 70s , in the grandfather list 21 and all of that , people had the bad habit of 22 hiring an attorney, laying out the property, 23 circumventing the Town, filing with the 24 County, and we have to pick that up and say, 25 "Fine, but now you have to come here to the 1 29 2 Planning Board and property subdivide ac- 3 cording to the Town rules . " 4 Case in point , Blue Horizons up here 5 in Peconic, even when we had accepted the 6 Master Plan and you can see it on the map. 7 I will take you right out there. There are 8 48 lots in Blue Horizons, but there isn' t . 9 There are eight lots up on the Sound. The 10 rest is laid out to preserve, but that was a 11 bad habit here in the ' 70s . To hell with 12 the Town. We will circumvent them, get an 13 attorney for help, and bound file them with 14 the County. 15 Another problem I had in the early 16 part of the ' 80s , the law says when you have 17 a minor subdivision, the applicants, not the 18 Planning Board, the applicants must file 19 with the County within 90 days or the sub- - 20 division becomes mute. I can take you in 21 the Planning Board and show you 200 lots 22 that never hit the County, the so-called set 23 off nonsense they were doing out here. That 24 � is another problem. It is not an easy 25 matter. In fact , we talked to the attorney. 30 'C, 2 I don' t believe this Town will ever 3 issue any more vacant lands. It isn' t worth 4 it. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: I understand that , 6 Victor, but I thought the reason for the 7 single and separate search was to clear that 8 matter up., I thought that was the reason 9 for . . . in 1988 , the reason for making that . 10 MR. .LESSARD: That is true, Gerry, 11 but this Town Attorney said to me if it is 12 an improved subdivision or on the excepted 13 list there is no need for the search. It is 14 there. The record is there. The record is 15 in the assessor' s office. The only time 16 that you go for that is if there is no clear 17 subdivision that has been approved. Now you 18 want to know how that lot got there and the 19 chain of command obviously. 20 THE CHAIRMAN: You are referring to 21 prescribed property only. 22 MR. LESSARD: Absolutely. 23 THE CHAIRMAN: The problem I have is 24 that when I discussed this with Mr. Hills 25 (phonetic spelling) on. or about the loth of 1 31 2 December 1989 , I turned to the excepted list 3 and the present code and, of course, did not 4 find the amended map of Mattituck Properties 5 on that . On that basis I called and said to 6 him, at that particular time, that I didn' t 7 see it there and it does not appear to be 8 excepted at this particular point, meaning 9 excepted, and for the life of me I don't 10 know how one can go back to a 1966 code. 11 Now I understand that is what Jay 12 Schondebare did, because I spoke to him 13 concurrently the next day' after I spoke to 14 Mr. Hills and he told me he spoke to the 15 prior surveyor who was imported by the Town 16 at one time, and he indicated to me that 17 what you had given as testimony tonight was 18 the reason for these excepted lists, or 19 excepting them, and therefore the loss of 20 these will not be carried through to the 21 entire code up to the present day. 22 The only problem I have with that is 23 that in 1966 it would be assumed that this 24 particular subdivision could be on the 25 excepted list , because we had 12, 500 square 1 32 2 foot zoning at that time. Our zoning was 3 100 by 125 . Those lots are 50 by 150 . So 4 they have very simply lacked by 5,000 square 5 feet, the normal square footage that would 6 have made them actually legal . That was the 7 reason why I assumed they were on the 1966 8 code. I ' mean, I could be wrong. 9 MR. MOORE: If I could interject. If 10 I understand you, doesn' t it make a lot of 11 sense to be on the excepted list if the 12 subdivision at the time comprise what the 13 zoning at that time? 14 THE CHAIRMAN: That is correct. That 15 is the reason they were on it . 16 MR. MOORE: You have identified the 17 problem here, which is the January 1989 18 adoption of the new Master Plan included in 19 this new version of 100-244. That section 20 of the code doesn' t work with the exception 21 list . It just doesn't make sense. One of 22 it has to go, and you hear the Building 23 Department is doing its very best to inter- 24 pret and apply the code, and the back end of 25 the new 'code is this nonconforming lot 33 2 provision requiring single and separate 3 search. If the Building Department inter- 4 pretation is that it was from the exception 5 list and those 1966 lists are still good, he 6 is not going to say I need a single and 7 separate search. That's where you get the 8 problem with the code, in that respect . 9 THE CHAIRMAN: We don't have a 10 problem with the code, because I said to Jay 11 Schondebare at that particular point . . . I 12 said I will take it to the Board. But in 13 his office, at that particular point, as I 14 sat in his office I told him that the 1966 15 code no longer applies . It is phased out . 16 It is no longer with us . We are dealing 17 with it based upon the 1989 code. There- 18 fore, this lot to stand would require a set 19 off by this Board and very simply a process 20 of the Planning Board, which you are aware 21 of , because we do it concurrently. 22 MR. LESSARD:' Two things , Gerry, so 23 we don' t go too far afield here. The vacant 24 land was issued under the other code, not 25 the Master Plan code. Going back to our 1 34 2 theory of this 1966 lot being X amount of 3 feet short of 12 , 500 , using that theory, how 4 do you justify going into 1971 , or November 5 20 , 1970 , into one acre zoning by putting on 6 the exception list something that goes down 7 to 5,000 feet, one-third smaller than the 8 ones that were on there? I don' t understand 9 the theory. 10 THE CHAIRMAN: Well , the only thing I 11 can tell you, if this is a historical docu- . 12 ment of what is, happening in this Town, very 13 simply, before the adoption of that par- 14 ticular situation of going from 12 , 500 to 15 20 ,000 square foot lots, which was a re- 16 quirement by the Health Department, then to 17 one acre zoning. That was in 1971, as of 18 January 1, 1971 . . . was prior to that date 19 the Planning Board was asked to look at all 20 the .subdivisions and to make a determination 21 in 45 percent . Those subdivisions were 22 built, were improved, and that is what 23 basically ended up on the accepted list for 24 the new code in 1971 . 25 Now, if you ask me presently what 1 35 I , 2 that means , I don' t know. I assume whatever 3 ended up on that accepted list in 1971, that 0 4 is what they had simply looked at . Now they 5 may have missed one or two, but John Wickham 6 who was the Chairman at that time, or Henry 7 Raynor (phonetic spelling) could probably 8 answer the question better than I could. 9 All I can tell you is there was one, and 10 there was subdivisions on that list . They. 11 are available. 12 It was not my suggestion that the 13 prior Town Attorney should be asking a 14 surveyor in this Town how that was arrived 15 at . That person was not an employee of that 16 Town at the time that either the ' 66 sub- 17 division exception list was produced, or the 18 '71, or '72 , or ' 73 . . . whatever the situa- 19 tion is when those areas were revised and - 20 that is what concerns me. Because I think, 21 Victor, you got bad information. I mean, I 22 really do. I think he should have come to 23 us first before he issued that letter and he i 24 should have asked us . 25 MR. LESSARD: Who is that? . 1 36 2 THE CHAIRMAN: The prior Town . Attor- 3 ney, and he should have said to us what do a you think, because I really don' t think that 5 information was correct because he was 6 relying on a person who is not an employee 7 of the. Town . . . certainly had tremendous 8 things for historic value to what exists . . . 9 but was not from the inside of the Town . 10 was not a member of the Planning Board and 11 certainly . . . I mean, if I was going to ask. 12 a question, I would call John Wickham. 13 He is the biggest source of informa- 14 tion. The man is 76 years old and he is a 15 tremendous reference to historical back- 16 ground, just as Charlie is . . . excuse me for 17 mentioning . . . at 73 . Serge is in Europe 18 now. He is not with us . 19 MR. LESSARD: I have a problem in 20 this respect . This was started, a practice 21 long before I got here, because it was a 22 standard practice. I don't know what the 23 Town is going to do, because now we are 24 going one step further. You could have as 25 many as 100 . . . 150 of these not acceptable 37 2 vacant land that had been built on. Do you 3 realize the chaos it is going to start and 4 what legal basis are you going to rely on? 5 THE CHAIRMAN: I think we have to 6 rely on the fact that the vacant land CO is 7 really not worth the paper it is written on. 8 MR. LESSARD: I knew that part. 9 THE CHAIRMAN: Number two, that every 10 one of these vacant land Co's should require 11 a set off by this Board and concurrently by 12 the Planning Board, and that is really the '13 only way you can deal with it . So what I am 14 asking is that from this particular point 15 on, that is basically the area that is 16 adhered to so we don' t have any more of. 17 these problems. And if the legislative 18 committee, which- was organized and used to `19 be the committee, which is part of this town 20 which alters or modifies this particular 21 code, feels that there are other 22 subdivisions that should be placed on this 23 exception list , or accepted list , meaning 24 existing subdivisions we add to the list; we . 25 run over it and add to the list . � 1 1 38 i �g--i 2 My concern is that at 80 ,000 square 3 feet this particular subdivision is not in 4 that exception list . Very simply, we have 5 7 ,500 square foot lots, and that I assume is 6 the reason why it is not there. 7 MR. LESSARD: We have a lot of 5 ,000 8 square foot lots that are on that list . If 9 we are going to take that attitude . . . we, 10 the Town, then I strongly suggest we 11 eliminate all exceptions , all accepted 12 lists . There is no way in my mind that you 13 can take the 10 or 12 or whatever thousand 14 square foot lot and say we are in two acre 15 zoning because the next thing that follows 16 is the guy next-door wants to cut his in 17 half because it is inconsistent with the 18 area. With the domino theory and without 19 realizing, you can forget the two acre 20 zoning. You are down to all quarter acres . 21 I don' t know what is going to come 22 out of this . All I can see, at this point , 23 is there is going to be one hell of a lot of 24 chaos around here. All I did, I . . . the 25 Building Department did, was follow practice 1 39 2 that" was set' ' ong before I got here. I used 3 the Town Attorneys . Mr. Tacka (phonetic 4 spelling) mostly. Bless him. He is gone. 5 That is where I learned my business from. 6 He wrote the .book, and subsequently I worked 7 through three other Town Attorneys. 8 I don' t know what else I can tell 9 you. I live with this thing seven days a 10 week. That may be where the difference is . 11 I don' t know. 12 MR. MOORE: Mr. Chairman, you have 13 made some comments this evening which have 14 given me some food for thought , some avenues 15 of research and some I would like to look 16 into if I may. 17 THE CHAIRMAN: Concerning this hear 18 ing? 19 MR. MOORE: Yes . You raised some 20 information here which could help me. I 21 would like to explore it . My request would 22 be to adjourn , the hearing, not to close it, 23 tonight . So perhaps we can explore this 24 matter a little further. 25 THE CHAIRMAN: We will see who else. '. 1 40 I� 2 wants to speak, , and we will discuss it after 3 that . The purpose of this hearing tonight 4 was to include this one and the other one. 5 MR. MOORE: I am sorry. I didn't 6 gather than from the information I had in 7 the transcript or otherwise. 8 MR. LESSARD: So there is no con- 9 fusion, I had a letter from the Town to be 10 here. I am not here to take either side. I 11 want that very clearly understood here. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Right . I appreciate 13 that , Victor. I -don't think there is any 14 animosity . 15 MR. LESSARD: I don' t want animosity. 16 That is not why I am here. We have a 17 problem and I want the answer to it . 18 THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. Is there any- 19 thing you would like to say, gentlemen? 20 MR. OCHSENRETER: Yes . I do not 21 object to the building permit that was 22 issued in 1984 , two houses down from me, 23 because I understood that , the single and 24 separate ownership. I didn' t get into this 25 on personalities, relationships, real or 1 y . 2 agi_-red. - : ?t beca>>se .. owned a piece 3 of property contiguous to mine , that 4 '-h t '! ot. was not buil It on the 5 was. . . . not bui1dahle . . . because i,,hen we g first bot?C<i1+ _t 1.n 197 i we riot ;;.�o t-±t' . _ ! 1 .:. 7 and those properties were merged someti;re 8 after teat . Ne get one tax jbill . 9 71here has =peen r,-; 'Lot of propert 10 in that neii,i"1lio-rho oCl :where people_ in C:,no,i 11 faith 1 el. ieved they cool& not build on 12 and that was ir!y u;ad=r s aanC i ng and that is 13 t1-le hasis ':.1.ia-it I presented this r_.et.i+i^:a %;i . mr*r. 14 E:,r -T T71+'.''N: iye thank �tL _ir. 15 _s 'h.� e anythi-a ot; :aa.n.t to oa-v f,_r 16 the r ecord P V'ou c c:1 1 E:d me . 17 MS . A-RNBRL'ST: Do,-o4 hl Armbrust , 595 18 Bayer R oad , adjacent -�-o tl- Irn, ;erty in 19 q uesticn . 7 have lived thart!? oince 1930 . 20 The house has tleen up there .Rince 1.972 , an,:l 21 I sold. the property. The lot u;as left .to me 22 by my mother in 1950 , and her name was Katey 23 pa,_izot. . and. 1950 1n d T r e' el c,n 1 24 tilr of ?,ntll -felt t-bat I Could not ta.he 25 _t mfself. . 42 2 The Bettners (phonetic spelling) 3 inquired about it , and I sold it to the a Bettners . I inquired at the Town Hall and 5 was told as long as I held. the lot I could 6 build on it , but after it was once sold to 7 the Bettners , it could not be built on any 8 longer because that was the law at -the time. 9 I don' t know who I spoke with. 10 My husband was alive at the time and 11 he is now deceased 11 years . So he probably 12 knows what date it was-, and I think it was 13 about ' 68 . The Bettners held it, I believe, 14 until 1972 when they sold it to the Spanos , 15 and that was the way the property stood 16 until the Spanos sold it in June of ' 89. I 17 had been in the hospital and I did not know 18 too much about it , but they came and sur- 19 veyed and said that property couldn't be 20 built upon because I was told it could not 21 be built on once it left my hands . 22 I don' t know if there is something 23 wrong in the Town Board, as far as I can 24 see, if they changed their minds . I was not 25 notified that it was bought separately to be 1 43 2 a lot to be built on. Had I been notified 3 . . a but then I had been in the hospital . . . 4 but there was no mail to that effect . So I 5 did not know. 6 That's all I .can say. I really don' t 7 approve of the property, but . . . 8 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you very much. 9 MS. ARMBRUST: Because I think I 10 should have been contacted before it was to 11 be built on, but I did not receive any 12 information beforehand. 13 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Thank you 14 for coming out tonight . 15 Is there anybody else that would like 16 to speak in the applicant 's behalf? 17 MR. LENCESKI : Edward Lenceski . 18 Specifically looking at the situationlwhich I 19 our petition presented to the Zoning Board, 20 okay, is a situation where Lot Numbers 35 21 and 36 were deeded as one single lot of 22 dimensions 100 by 150 to the Spanos back in 23 1972 . In 1972 a certificate of occupancy 24 for a one family dwelling on a lot 100 by 25 150 was issued by the Building Department . 1 1,\ 44 2 In November of 1989, a vacant land CO 3 was issued by Mr. Lessard. We do not know 4 who applied for that permit . My understand- s ing when I contacted the Town concerning 6 dividing my property which is across the 7 street , which is a very similar situation, I 8 was told that, number one, I would have to 9 apply for the variance through the Town. 10 For what? From what I understand, a 11 variance means notifying all the neighbors 12 and having a hearing from the Zoning Board 13 to see if this would be approved. 14 Now this situation, a lot across the 15 street , Lot Numbers 35 and 36, none of the 16 neighbors were notified. This miraculously 17 was done. This lot was split into two. We 18 don' t know how it was done. No variance was 19 ever applied for, from what I understand. 20 We talk about an exception list . We 21 know in January of ' 89, that Mattituck 22 Heights subdivision was deleted. Our peti- 23 tion is how was any building permit issued 24 by the Building Department? 25 At the last hearing we had discussed I `1 • M 1 45 , 2 our timeliness and why did we wait so long 3 to do this. I remember when, when that a foundation went in, in August of '89 , we had 5 no idea what was going up there. When the 6 building permit was posted, we could have 7 gone to the Town and questioned under that 8 building permit what was going on there. 9 We didn't know if it was a garage. 10 There was a rumor in the neighborhood it was 11 going to be a swimming pool . This was a 12 rumor. We did not understand. We did not 13 know what was going on. There was a period 14 of time, from August until February, when no 15 construction at all was done. We do not 16 understand why, if somebody was putting up a 17 house, why there was such a long delay. I 18 don' t know . . . about a foundation took that 19 long to cure . . . but that is not the point 20 here. 21 Getting back to the originally deeded 22 lot that was in the name of Spano, our 23 petition asked the Town Board how a permit 24 was issued and how is this subdivided in 25 this respect? That 's all I can say at � 1 1 1 46 U_j 2 this time. 3 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 4 MR. LENCESKI : Thank you. 5 THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anybody else? 6 Is there anything you would like to say in rebuttal? 8 MR. ZAHRA: Charles Zahra. . I have 9 been going through this for three years . It 10 is a matter of record that I have viewed 11 many documents in Town Hall over this period 12 of time. I have been observing this case 13 and I think the merits of this case fall .on 14 two documents . They are the building zone 15 ordinances of the Town of Southold, which is 16 one dated May 24, 1966, and it lists all the 17 subdivision exceptions , including the 18 property in question. 19 As was mentioned before, and the 20 amendment of 10/30/73, which is, I believe, 21 was incorrectly stated before . . . I think 22 someone mentioned 1970 . . . and you will find 23 you won' t find any of the subdivision -lists 24 from 1966 on this. Basically, that means 25 that in this amendment it caused the 1 47. 2 subdivisions to be completely deleted just 3 as any other ordinance would have the same 4 effect . I have two copies to submit to you. I 5 Mr. Lessard mentioned one of the 6 problems he foresees is a lot of these 7 houses have been built and now could be I 8 deemed illegally built . I. would think the s more serious problem is if this Board 10 upholds what Mr. Lessard has done, I think I 11 it opens the floodgates to all of the sub- 12 divisions to now come in and apply to have 13 to build homes . Even to the extent of an 14 individual having a house up, now having it 15 torn down. He may try possibly. 16 I know of a situation where houses 17 have been built on four and five lots, one 1s house with maybe a swimming pool . It would I 19 behoove him to level that property and now 20 built four or five houses , and I think we 21 are talking about many homes. . . one 22 hundred. That is basically all I have to 23 say. i 24 i THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 25 MS. GARCIA: Corrine Lessard-Garcia. I I 1 48 2 I own the property adjacent to the Inland 3 Home house. Clearing up a couple of mat- 4 ters, at my closing, first , my sister-in- 5 law Susan Lessard researched it . There were 6 two separate deeds at my closing. We paid 7 two separate tax bills, single and separate. 8 There was never a rumor going around in the 9 neighborhood of a swimming pool . Mr. Zahra 10 was overhead at the last hearing telling Mr. 11 Lenceski , "You should have told him it was a 12 swimming pool . " That is what we are dealing 13 with here. It is not all facts . 14 The facts are there are two separate 15 tax bills . I paid two separate tax bills at 16 the closing, Town and County. That is all I 17 have to say. 18 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 19 MS. GARCIA: Also, one more thing. 20 Mr. Ochsenreter is an employee of the 21 Health Department . Now if they were so 22 worried about what ) was doing across the 23 street, I went through the Health Department 24 . . . Mr. Raynor (phonetic spelling) , I 25 believe in January, before I even bought the I I I I I 1 49 , 2 property, and got their approval . Now it is I 3 professional courtesy for him to go and find 4 out these are the systems you have to go 5 through. You have to go to the Health I g Department to get permission to do these 7 things . If there was something going on, 8 the paper work was finished in January. He .9 could have very easily gone and looked it 1.0 up. Thank you. 11 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 12 MR. OCHSENRETER: I would like to say 13 something. I do separate my private life 14 from my business life . I work for the 15 swimming pool and bathing beach section. I 16 have nothing to do with wastewater manage- I 17 ment . I keep them separate. 18 MR. ZAHRA.: This lady just mentioned I 19 that she overhead me speaking to Mr. Lences- 20 ki , instructing him to tell the Board it was 21 in fact a swimming pool . This is totally . I 22 incorrect . If she wanted to join in the 23 conversation, I would have invited her in. 24 What basically had been said . . . Mr. 25 Lenceski at an earlier moment mentioned to I Y Qil t 50 2 me that he was told, as well as Mr. Ochsen- 3 reter, that it was a swimming pool . That is 4 what she overheard me saying . . . was to Mr. 5 Lenceski : Sure. Go tell the Board what was 6 told to you. That it was a swimming pool . .7 okay. 8 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 9 MR. ZAHRA: Now she mentioned a point 10 on having single and separate tax deeds on 11 the property. And this brings up . . . I 12 didn't want to bring this up. I didn' t 13 think it was necessary because it is not a 14 subdivision, but I find a lot of 15 similarities in this case, that is of Mr. 16 Hines, better known to everyone here as The 17 Candy Man, out in East Marion. I would also 18 like to mention Mr. Tohill defended The 19 Candy Man in an article that was an Article 20 78 proceeding and he lost. I would just 21 like to mention, and enter into the record, 22 a couple of articles from that Article 78 23 proceeding stating why he lost as well 24 why the petitioner lost . 25 THE CHAIRMAN: Can you just give a i 1 51 i 2 little foundation on how you do show a i 3 similarity? 4 MR. ZAHRA: I compare the Hines case 5 in Orient to this case with regards to the 6 property being single and separate. It did i 7 have single and separate tax cards . I have 8 copies of them here. I will submit them. 9 Mr. Hines also had single and separate tax 10 cards when he went in to fight his rights 11 and was denied them. It is an Article 78 12 proceeding. I just jumped around here in 13 the interest of time. 14 In one paragraph it says that 15 petitioner's property was purchased as two 16 separate parcels . One was purchased in ' 82 , 17 and the second parcel purchased in '84. The 18 Clerk includes that merge, did a hear by 19 operation of 100-31 of the Zoning Ordinance 20 of the Town of Southold, which excepts lots I 21 held in single and separate ownership prior 22 to '71, from the new one acre requirement . 23 Since petitioner's parcels were purchased in I 24 . 62 and ' 64, merge occurred in ' 64. 25 I ' ll hand that up, if you will give 52 F� 2 me a second to get this stuff together. 3 I want to mention one other thing 4 with regards .to being timely, as Mr. Tohill 5 said, and Mr. Moore tonight again. In Mr. 6 Hines ' case, . the building permit was issued 7 on March 22 , 1985 to contract a one family 8 dwelling on this parcel . December 23 , 1985 , 9 Mr. Hines received the stop work order and 10 revocation of his permit from the Building 11 Department or with taxes being timely, with 12 taxes being eight months later. I just want 13 to mention that for the record. These are 14 single and separate tax cards of Mr. Hines , 15 basically the same as the Garcias . . . who 16 are now Mr. Hines . I will just hand this 17 stuff up and I will be finished here. 18 One other- item I would like to hand 19 up is Exhibit B of Mr. Tohill 's Article 78 20 to the Court . You have a record of this, 21 Gerry, in your office. This is where I 22 copied this material from, for the benefit 23 of Mr. Moore. One paragraph, it says : Each 24 parcel has received a single tax invoice 25 from the Town of Southold. 1 Y 52 - I�.� 2 me a second to get this stuff together. 3 I want to mention one other thing 4 with regards to being timely, as Mr. Tohill 5 said, and Mr. Moore tonight again. In Mr. 6 Hines ' case, the building permit was issued 7 on March 22, 1985 to contract a one family 8 dwelling on this parcel . December 23 , 1985 , 9 Mr. Hines received the stop work order and 10 revocation of his permit from the Building 11 Department or with taxes being timely, with 12 taxes being eight months later. I just want 13 to mention that for the record. These are 14 single and separate tax cards of Mr. Hines , 15 basically the same as the Garcias . . . who I 16 are now Mr. Hines . I will just hand this 17 stuff up and I will be finished here. 18 One other item I would like to hand I 19 up is Exhibit B of Mr. Tohill 's Article 78 20 to the Court . You have a record of this, 21 Gerry, in your office. This is where I 22 copied this material from, for the benefit 23 of Mr. Moore. One paragraph, it says : Each i 24 parcel has received a single tax invoice 25 from the Town of Southold. 1 53 2 I am finished, Gerry. I will just 3 get this together. 4 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes , Mr. Lessard? 5 MR. LESSARD: I did not want to stick 1 6 my nose into this latest thing, but I 7 couldn't let this thing go by and confuse 8 the issue here tonight . 9 First of all , Mr. Hines did not have 10 an approved or excepted subdivision. Mr. 11 Hines had two lots that he put in the iden- 12 tical name, as this Board is very well aware 13 of , because it came to this Board. Mr. 14 Hines came in and said to me, because I 15 wrote the permit , that they were single and 16 separate and he flashed two tax things I saw 17 here. Mr. Hines got his permit and sat on 18 it until after the fruit crop that he had on 19 that second piece of property had matured, 20 which put him into late October. 21 So that knocked the hell out of that 22 time argument I just heard as to bearing on 23 what we are talking about tonight . We are 24 mixing apples and oranges here, and I damn 25 well don' t believe it should crowd this i i I14 I L 1 54 i 2 issue at all . Otherwise, I wouldn' t have 3 said anything. I 4 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 5 MR. DINIZIO: Can I ask you a ques- 6 tion? 7 What was the outcome of the Zoning 8 Board's hearing on Mr. Hines? 9 ` MR. LESSARD: What was the outcome? 10 He had bogus applicationq. He did not have I , 11 an approved subdivision. He already had two 12 or maybe three houses on the other one lot. 13 There was a lot of reasons why the Board . . . 14 if you check the records in the Zoning Board 15 of Appeals you find out right away what it 16 i is all about. 17 MR. DINIZIO: Article 78 we just 18 heard about was after that . I 19 MR. 'LESSARD: Yes . 20 THE CHAIRMAN: It went to the Supreme 21 Court and they reaffirmed our decision. 22 Mr. Moore, is there something you 23 would like to tell us on what you are look- i 24 ing into? I would really dearly like to 25 close this hearing. 1 1 ` 1 55 2 MR. MOORE: I understand. I would 3 like to explore that exception list, and you 4 have indicated some fruitful avenues of 5 information. 6 THE CHAIRMAN: Could you do that? 7 MR. MOORE: . The other half was , Mr. 8 Lessard mentioned issuing several , I don' t 9 know, vacant land CO's or building permits 10 on similarly situated exception area sub- 11 divisions . I would like to explore that 12 fully. That may take time. 13 THE CHAIRMAN: We will put you on for 14 the last hearing on the 19th, but I want to 15 keep the testimony brief so that we can wrap 16 it up. 17 MR. MOORE: That would be fine. 18 THE CHAIRMAN: I don' t say that it' s 19 going to be a pretty good hearing. There is 20 going to be a lot of people here. I don't 21 mean in reference to the numbers . I am 22 talking the length of time of hearings and 23 that is the only thing I can offer you at 24 this particular point . 1� 25 Does anybody have any objections I •R U 1 `> 56 2 to that? i 3 MR. DINIZIO: No. I would like to 4 have the tax, accurate tax . . . 5 THE CHAIRMAN: You want a bill? I 6 MR. DINIZIO: The bills . 7 MR. MOORE: Tax bills we can get you. 8 MR. DINIZIO: I would ,just like to 9 have copies of them. 10 MR. MOORE: That can be easily accom- 11 modated. 12 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Zahra has one 13 other question or statement , if you wouldn' t 14 mind. 15 MR. ZAHRA: I would just like to say 16 one other thing with regard to the material 17 I submitted to you, with reference to The 18 Candy Man or Mr . Hines ' property. My focus 19 of attention was on the fact that he had 20 single and separate tax codes . 21 That is basically it, Gerry, okay? 22 And you have to understand I know so little 23 about zoning. 24 THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 25 Anything further from anyone that 1 57 2 might not be here on the 19th or there- 3 abouts? 4 Hearing nothing further, seeing no 5 further hands , I make a motion recessing the 6 hearing until the 19th, which we will r 7 readvertise if there is a minor change in 8 the date, along with all the other hearings ., 9 MR. DINIZIO: Second. 10 THE CHAIRMAN: All in favor? 11 MR. GRIGONIS: Aye. 12 MR. SAWICKI : Aye. 13 MR. DINIZIO: Aye. 14 THE CHAIRMAN: I thank you very much 15 for your courtesy and for coming in. 16 Thank you, Victor, for your opinion 17 and concern in stating the case. 18 (Time noted: 9:34 p.m. ) 19 20 21 I , GAIL ROSCHEN, do hereby certify that 22 I am an Official Court Reporter, and that the foregoing constitutes a true and correct transcript according to my 23 official stenographic notes . 24 �� GAIL ROSCHEN 25 Official Court Reporter 00 HARVEY A. ARNOFF �� Gy SCOTT L. HARRIS Town Attorney ;< d Supervisor MATTHEW G. KIERNAN • fi I Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Assistant Town Attorney O�,y ��' 1 U S�• P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD • L5 � 15 � 1J L5 MEMORANDUM D TO: Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town f South JU- 13 90 FROM: Harvey A. Arnoff, Town Attorn -- RE: Appl. No. 3908 - OCHSENREITER & L (Variance) DATE: July 13 , 1990 I note that you have received a letter from Robert J. Ochsenreiter regarding the Bayer Road problem. May I suggest that we discuss this at our meeting Tuesday night, so that I may respond to the letter promptly. APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS SCOTT L. HARRIS f: rhrs#` Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman �� •sM'.i?'' `� Charles Grigonis, Jr. Ql �.a� 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 PI L5 � � � U � •1 s._ 11990 TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE June 6. 1990 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Mr. Robert Ochsenreiter 600 Bayer. Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Mr. Edward Lenceski 500 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 3908 - OCHSENREITER & LENCESKI (Variance) Dear Mr. Lenceski, Transmitted for your records is a copy of the recent determination rendered by the Board of Appeals concerning your - application. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copy of Decision to: Mr. Victor Lessard, Principal Bldg. Insp. Office of the Building Department Office of the Planning Board Harvey Arnoff, Town Attorney ll � Ca Lb JUL TOTOW�O SOUS Hot_ DOFFICE July 6, 1990 Harvey A. Arnoff, Esq. Town Attorney Town of Southold 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Arnoff: Enclosed is a copy of a Zoning Board of Appeals decision rendered May 15, 1990 and mailed to me on June 6, 1990 concerning a recently constructed house on Bayer Road in Mattituck. As of this date, it appears that the Town has taken no action beyond what is contained in the ZBA proceedings. To the best of my belief, a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the house and, also to the best of my belief, this is still in effect. The house is being actively advertised for sale as, again to the best of my belief, a mother/daughter (!). I expect that the Town of Southold will enforce its laws without requiring me to incur legal fees beyond what I have already spent. I am herewith requesting that the Certificate of Occupancy issued for a house built with a building permit deemed ". . .invalid, null, void and of no effect." be withdrawn and that the Town of Southold take further action to ensure that the value of my property, located directly across Bayer Road from the subject house, will not be reduced. S cerel , Robert Ochsenreiter ' cc: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ZBA �oc��FFOLI��OGy o APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS rZ}1 SCOTT L. HARRIS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman V�� Supervisor Charles Grigonis, Jr. .y �•� l� �� 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 June 6, 1990 Mr. Robert Ochsenreiter 600 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Mr. Edward Lenceski 500 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 3908 - OCHSENREITER & LENCESKI (Variance) Dear Mr. Ochsenreiter, Transmitted for your records is a copy of the recent determination rendered by the Board of Appeals concerning your application. Yours very truly, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copy of Decision to: Mr. Victor Lessard, Principal Bldg. Insp. Office of the Building Department Office of the Planning Board Harvey Arnoff, Town Attorney 00�� C�Gy s < APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS C=3 SCOTT L. HARRIS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman V�� • �. Supervisor Charles Grigonis, Jr. �01 ��0 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 June 6, 1990 Mr., Robert Ochsenreiter 600 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Mr. Edward Lenceski 500 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Appl. No. 3908 - OCHSENREITER & LENCESKI (Variance) Dear Mr. Lenceski, Transmitted for your records is a copy of the recent determination rendered by the Board of. Appeals concerning your application. Yours very truly,.. lolotm* GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure Copy of Decision to: Mr. Victor Lessard, Principal Bldg. Insp. Office of the Building Department Office of the Planning Board Harvey Arnoff, Town Attorney APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS ?"' `=3IJ— SCOTT L. HARRIS �y ;� �,;• `� Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. :. i Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Joseph 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 TO: Harvey Arnoff, Esq. Town Attorney Matthew Kiernan, Esq. Assistant Town Attorney n/�� FROM: Zoning Board of Appealsf DATE: May 16, 1990 RE: Appl. No. 3908 - Inland Homes (Ochsenreiter/Lenceski) In the latter part of August of 1989 I was approached by Eric Bressler who indicated to me that construction in the way of a foundation commenced on a lot which was owned by Victor Lessard's daughter. Subsequent to August 9, 1989, this lot was sold to Inland Homes, Westphalia Road, Mattituck. Mr. Bressler asked me what he thought he should do concerning the construction and what appeared to be a merged lot (merged with the house) . I told him that all inquiries as to complaints on building permits should be directed to the Town Attorney. On or about early September 1989, on my lunch hour, I conducted .a single and separate search of said property. It indicated that the house lot was purchased by Paul Bittner and wife in 1942 and in 1962 they purchased the lot in question, which is —now being constructed upon. In 1962 the zoning was 12,500 sq. ft. or 100 by 125. This lot was approximately 50 by 150 or 7500 -sq. ft. which rendered the lot substandard at the time it was purchased. It should be noted that these parcels were merged in the same name subsequent to its purchase in 1962. In 1974 or there about, Mr. and Mrs. Spano purchased the property (both parcels) in both their names, thereby continuing the merger. This continued until 1989 when they deeded the house parcel to the Garcias and I believe the lot to Mrs. Garcia, thereby creating an illegal set-off. Mrs. Garcia .then deeded her rights in the lot to Inland Homes on or about August 9, 1989. Page - 2. This Board was unaware of the memo between Dan Ross and Jay Schondabare until early December when a discussion ensued between Mr. Schondebare and myself regarding the legality of this parcel. He told me that he had spoken to a surveyor in town who had told him that older subdivisions were dropped from time to time from the exempted list. I asked why he did not speak to John Wickham, Henry Raynor, or Howard Terry concerning this particular situation. In any case, I told him that in my opinion that the subdivision was not on the exempted list of the present code, it was not exempt. Miraculously, approximately two days after, Mr. Hiltz called me at my home and I told him the same thing. The only other knowledge that I have is, on or about January 9, 1990, construction above ground commenced on the site and on or about the 15th of January 1990, an application made by Mr. Ochsenreiter and Mr. Lenceski came in to our Board to overturn the permit. Please be advised that these are statements of opinion based upon fact, with full knowledge that they are as accurate to the best of my ability. ZBA/df VICTOR LESSARD L Town Hall, 53095 Main Road PRINCIPAL BUILDING INSPECTOR v rn P.O. Box 1 179 (516)765-1802 A Southold, New York 11971 FAX(516)765-1823 v7•�� OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD = 9 May 9, 1990 TO: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS\/ FROM: BUILDING DEPARTMENT rAL SUBJECT: REPLY TO MEMO MAY 9, 1990 REFERENCE APPEAL #3908 Your May 9, 1990 response to my May 8, 1990 response to your May 4, 1990 inquiry on Certificate of Occupancy on your case #3908 was quite clear in my eyes. The second paragraph was information imparted to me in conversation at a function I was attending. I felt it would behoove the Town and your board to check to see if such a ruling existed. I mentioned attorney only in passing be- cause of credibility to such information. Friends do talk to friends regardless of their livelihood. This friend is not in- volved in this case what-so-ever. VGL:hkd cc: Town Attorney ,'mall Lots . 'Big B Trouble g Southold Dis ute Could Set Precedent sOUTHOLD — Hundreds of properties merged and became one Tohill who spoke at the February parcel as the town upgraded the hearing, and William Moore, who substandard lots in old subdivisions zoning code over the years. said he was `.`substituting for could turn into legal building lots g Tohill"at last week's hearing,ask- virtually overnight if the Town And despite a letter sent by the Board of Appeals upholds a neighbors` former attorney, Dan ed that the case be dismissed on a building permit issued in a Ross,notifying the former town at- technicality. precedent-setting case that both torney in October of the complaint, 'str he attornction ey ed maintain n August o30 n- sides say will create chaos at its no action was taken and,'in mid- January, Inland Homes started When the site was excavated and a conclusion. construction of a two-story 2,500-- foundation laid the next day. The The case involves a building per- appeal was filed too late, the at- mit issued in August to Inland and square-foot'house:- appeal Ochsenreiter the torn s said,because the neighbors Homes for a 50-foot by 150-foot lot day Lenceski er-edrtst u tion staed,but should have known that a house on Bayer Road in Mattituck. b the time it came up for ahear- was going up when the foundation Neighbors Robert Ochsenreiter and y was poured.Notifying the town at- Edward Lenceski want the Appeals ing before the ZBA on February 1, P Board to revoke the permit. They the house was nearly completed. torney that the permit may not be valid did not follow proper pro- say the 7,500 square-foot-lot was Request Case Dismissed cedure,the attorneys said.The ob- connected to an adjoining parcel 9 with an existing house,and the tw; Inland Home's attorney Anthony , Small Lots s � Furthermore, Lessard said, the r old subdividion was.exempt from , Continued from Page 1 the town's 1967 Zoning code,mean-. r ti r jections should have been filed with ing that it would not be covered by the Building Department—but subsequent upzonings. He said he weren't until the day of the ZBA has issued"at least 50 of these va- `= hearin . cant CO's that appeared on old[ex- a Town Officials Knew emption]lists"under previous zon- A Y ing.codes. The subdivisions were "The town government was not listed P again when the town u 4r"T notified and knew what was going g dated the code in 1973 and 1989,he on,"said Ochsenreiter,adding that said, because "once they were all from August until mid-January $ developed they were taken off the there was no activity at the site,and * *`` ;� lists to make room for others. � .� � � he assumed that town officials were == _` investigating the matter after Ross sent the letter in October. During that time, he and other neighbors said, there was no M -� "•� �� building permit posted at the site, -Not Good Enough and residents initially had no way But ZBA Chairman Gerald Inland Homes' new house(right)built on a small lot in an old-tired subdivision El 1M Ta&r 'tituck has residents in a furor. of knowing if the foundation was Goehringer said the old tax maps for a garage or an addition to the only mean the two lots were pur- existing house. chased separately and do not in- Subdivision Developed? "When the foundation went in, dicate if the lots were held in single After the meeting Ochsenreiter we had no idea what was going on," and separate ownership at the time said that he and Lenceski both had said Lenceski. `•`We heard rumors of the upzonings. If not, the lots Builder's Dream I houses on property with an attach- that it was going to be a swimming I would be considered one parcel,he Mattituck builder Charles Zahra ed lot adjacent to it,just like the In- pool.» said. said if the ZBA allows undersized land Homes' lot.«But we were told our tax bills "We are dealing with a 1989 lots in all of the old subdivisions to code;'said Goehringer. "Therefore were merged and that it wasn't a be exempt from the town's updated � legal building lot;` said for this lot to stand, it would re- « Permit PrOCCSS Questioned zoning ordinances It will open the Q quire a setoff:' floodgates in all of these subdivi- Ochsenreiter, adding that he in- Moore and Tohill have not g quired about his vacant lot about But Lessard said that his deci- >> argued the merits of the case, but sions were based on a"green light" sions to build homes. five years ago. questions about the validity of the In some of the old subdivisions, "I believe the chaos is just star- building permit and vacant land that had been given by several of one owner may have four or five certificate permit occupancy issued for the town's former attorneys and tiny lots that make up one piece of ting, he said,noting that if the lots the lot were raised at last.week's that one in 15 title searches are property where his home is located, , are exempt, another dozen houses „ could be built on what amounts to hearing. Principal Building Inspec- bogus. If that's the procedure, Lessard �hIt would pay for him to level it I less than one-fifth acre lots in`the for Victor Lessard testified that he subdivision. issued a vacant lot CO for the pro- said, There's going to be one hell and then build four homes;' he of a lot of chaos around here.There said. "We're talking many "I'm just a citizen;'he said. "Wc perty in November 1989. He said could be as man as 150 of these „ gust want to know: was this done that an old filed map indicated that y homes—hundreds. properly." the two lots were once separated, lots:' The hearing will continue on and each received individual tax Thursday, April 19. bills. —Lvdin Tortor.; 0 RECEIVED 'JUL 9 1990 0=9 a VIE - D Southold T...._ i i .l, JUL -9 19M July 6 1990 Southold Town Board 53095 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Members of the Town Board: Enclosed is a copy of a Zoning Board of Appeals decision rendered May 15, 1990 and mailed to me on June 6, 1990 concerning a recently constructed house on Bayer Road in Mattituck. As of this date, it appears that the Town has taken no action beyond what is contained in the Z$A proceedings. To the best of my belief, a Certificate of Occupancy has been issued for the house and, also to the best of my belief, this is still in effect. The house is being actively advertised for sale as, again to the best of my belief, a mother/daughter (1). I expect that the Town of Southold will enforce its laws without requiring me to incur legal fees beyond what I have already spent. I am herewith requesting that the Certificate of Occupancy issued for a house built with a building permit deemed ". . .invalid, null, void and of no effect." be withdrawn and that the Town of Southold take further action to ensure that the value of my property, located directly across Bayer Road from the subject house, will not be reduced. S'ncrely, Ro hsenreiter cc: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman ZBA EXHIBIT J THE FOLLOWING PERTAINS TO LOTS 35 & 36 AT BAYER RD. , MATTITUCK, NY i EXHIBIT J PRESENTED TO SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD, HEARING DATE 04/19/90 DATE HISTORY -- DEVELOPMENT -- EVENT ' 11/19/65 Mrs. Armbrust sells Lot 36 to the Bittners only after being assured that Lot 36 was not a buildable lot by Town Officials. She would not have sold her lot if it was buildable. 03/02/72 Certificate of Occupancy issued by Howard Terry, certifying that Lots 35 and 36 conform to requirements for occupancy as a One Family Dwelling. . 03/30/72 Van Tuyl, Greenport, surveys Lots 35 and 36 as a single parcel, with the dimensions of 100' frontage by.150' deep. 04/12/72 A single deed is recorded with Suffolk County showing the transfer from the Bittners to the Spanos' of a single parcel comprised of Lot 35 and house upon and Lot 36. There does not appear to be any record of a separate deed for 35 or 36 issued as single or separate to the Spanos' . 08/17/88 Building Permit #17324 is issued to the Spanos' in order to add a deck to their house on Lot 35. It seems that a deck was previously added which was removed and then rebuilt. 11/28/88 Vacant Land C.O. issued for Lot '36 to the Spanos' by Victor Lessard. 02/02/89 Suffolk County. Health Department Site Approval stamped on the 1972 Spanos' Survey with a sketch. of a new structure shown; issued to Corinne Lessard Garcia for Lot 36. 06/26/89 The Spanos' sell Lot. 35 and house by separate deed to Richard Garcia and Corinne Lessard Garcia. 06/26/89 The Spanos' sell Lot 36 by separate deed to Richard Garcia. ??/??/?? Sale of Lot 36 from Richard Garcia to Inland Homes. ??/??/?? A survey was completed, however what the survey meant was unknown. Orange stakes and/or paint markers were placed around Lot 36 and approximately through the middle of a blacktop driveway on Lot 35. 08/08/89 Building Permit #18355 for a One Family Dwelling, cost $75,000,' Lot 36 issued to Inland homes by Curtis Horton. This permit was not prominently displayed on Lot 36 as required by Town rules. 08/30/89 Excavation started at Lot 36. 08/31/89 Foundation forms, etc. started at Lot 36. ' EXHIBIT J DATE HISTORY -- DEVELOPMENT -- EVENT 10/17/89 After inquiry by neighbors Ochsenreiter and Lenceski, Daniel Ross writes a letter to Southold Town Attorney, James Schondebare, raising the question whether Lot 36 is a legal building lot (copy attached). 10/26/89 Local " newspaper articles, copies attached, publicly open this question of the legality of Lot 36. These articles indicate that the Town Building Inspector was then aware that the actions to date were being questioned. The article in the 10/26/89 Suffolk Times states that the Lot was reinspected on 09/13/89 and that the permit was still valid. 12/11/89 Mr. Schondebare writes to Mr. Ross, stating that he received the material presented and it is of his opinion that Lot 36 is a legal lot, however the .final interpretation of Zoning Code, under both Town Code and Law, rests with The Board of Appeals. A copy this letter went to the Building Department (copy attached). 01/08/90 Foundation at Lot 36 is backfilled. The neighbors, Ochsenreiter and Lenceski, upon direct.ion of Mr. Ross, call his office to notify him that activity had restarted at Lot 36, at which time the present ZBA petition was prepared and signed. 01/09/90 Petition notice mailed at Post Office. 01/10/90 Petition notice received by ?Mr. Towhill/? Inland Homes? 01/15/90 Deck framing started. 01/26/90 .Note dated 01/26/90 in file from Building Inspector which says he has no knowledge of either Mr. Ochsenreiter or Mr. Lenceski. 02/01/90 Initial ZBA Hearing. Timing of petition and jurisdiction questioned by Mr. Towhill. 03/29/90 Second ZBA Hearing. Counsel for Inland Homes changes to Mr. Moore. He needs adjournment to study zoning and other instances of non-conforming lots. Mrs. Armbrust, a neighbor, states her objection, relating the history of Lot 36 dating back to the 1930's. All of the above dates and events are in chronological order. Many of the dates were ascertained from transcript of the 02/01/90 ZBA Hearing, and from events which have transpired to date. These are presented to help clear some of the questions as to timeliness and jurisdiction. Additionally, .the Building Permit for Lot 36 was never displayed to date. -- 2 -- L4N I L, ND� Tl�AVEl. ,YVAT H ' AN T Pt1GE TWO THUP*SDAV, OCTOBER 26, 1989, " f icals �Quetiond On Dad „htOr's Permit SOUTHOI,D A Mattituck " In August,'Ross said,'a building lawyer:'wrote to.,.TowA=Attorney-,'permit was issued to Inland Homes James Schondebare this week ques to construct,a single-family house;. tioning the,legality of,a building `, qn the- vacant lot permit issued for one'of two lots m- °' �'A'.founation went in and some', _volving 1'ripcipal Building Inspec-.•,.of the neighbors made noise and for Victor LeSSard'S daugher,Cor asked us to investigate,''said Ross,', mne,Garcia:< = adding: "In our•opinion the two Attorney Ran Ross said he'had lots were merged and Lot 36 does been.retained.py neighbors to,find not exist as a legal building lot! ' out why a building permit had been Lessard,who was visibly upset by ti issued forponstruction of a`single-, -the'suggestion of any wrong doing, family. house :on 8 Sb-foot by said that his son-in-law had•sold the 15Q-fo0 t lot'on Bayer:Road in Mat vacant lot in July to Robert l3itz, ;' tituck .According; to :county". owner;'of, Inland;Homes, shortly - records,, he said, :a' subdivision after he purchased it from Spanos.•; known as Mattituck Heights was in Jung: filed in 1938, indicating two:lots, -' _."I am not surprised at this,look each of 7-.500 square feet.' where it.is coming from;'he said, A house was built on one4ot,;and : .noting that Ross works in the same the'other'remained vacant until this':•.•law firm as Eric-Bressler,,whose summer When, foundation':work . client,'Charles Zahra,and Lessard began for ai.house on Lot 36,'he. have been involved in numerous bit-. said:;The lots, he maintains,' were,, ter legal disputes for several years. ; legally merged;because through the' '!Now they are trying to get at my` years they were'not hel&.in single .,family but they won't,say who fil- and. separate' ownership, and ed.a.complaint;' Lessard said. "I therefore: not-x exempt from: the want,to know who all the players towns'subsequent're onmgs:; Ross-said the lots were owned by Lessardsaid the subdivision was Leonard':Spanos frorrf 1972;'Until *"exempted:in the town's building June,'1989;'when he,sold'the lot ;:.zone ordinance in;:;19b6;':,and the -with the,"house to Lessard's -:.lots'are listed,as separate on the:. daughter and'her husband,Richard Suffolk County;Tdx map ;.Garcia:On the.same day,Ross said'-, That may be, Moss replied, but Spans sold the' vacant lot.:.to = the lots were.not exeript from the, Richard Garcia only.Ross alsosaid ;.tpW.n's,'new, zoning': ordinance that jwNovember1-,.1988,Spanos ob cnagted.in.4989,,"`and we.believe' 'twined a, vacant"lan'd-certificate.,"they are merged:' he said.. from-',the;town's building:depart 74dla Tortore . meat,-,ive4 by yictol Lessard A22 The Suffolk Times • October 26, 1989 _ B_ g of asses Questions By"Bill Fallon z ` .neighborhood zoning ;(The-zone:is R- Inland Homes could not be reached for Mr.Ross,"'the'two parcels became one MA here is a house`,'�40,or one acre;at 7,500 square.feet,the. comment:and Mr:'.Garcia's.aelephone ::between 1972 and 1989, when it was r going up in;Mattituclk:on"less than IA._ Garcia lot.is less:than 1/4 of that.)Mr: numbers not listed. occupied by Mr. Spano under a single acre in a neighborhood zoned one acne:'Tt Garcia bought the.property on Tune 26.:,Seek>!ng a CtarlftCahon Th previous:owners,:identified r MrLessard said,he.old it in Jul to. `:Nett hbors`of_the.:. ro ert have:... :onl as the Bittners, bo lit the unde is being withtwo.valid Building - Tnlan Y 8 p.. p y Y Depait<nent pen"its,but neighbors"have d Homes.of:Mattituck. Curt Hor- protested.to the town attoiney's:office.-` veloped';parcel in 1965,effectively.dou- asked-the town attorney to c ton-of the Building Department.issued:, Technically,they are askiing fora clan ." bhng their:�ard. y lanf}►:the the building permit Aug.8 The lot was cation:of the"nilin that allowed the :.Ross mts to`three elements of ..reason.the.permits were issued in the g Po l rstplace:'—I`he of yvas ownedbneflyiiy�,reinspected Sept .'13_and_the;building; constructiop,to begiw,:. py are.not sa the Town Code that;appear:to buttrm 4 rmrt-remamed-valid as of TUesda :the principal building inspector s son Y ang the town:According to them lawyer, =.the neighbors'opinion that the building in-law between.the_time the'first and :'is.illegal:One bf_them.says-single'and own of a l had to be second permits were issued. •f' separate'owner parce According to Danny"Ross, lawyerfor ra c c 1 of o o e e as :remonstrated before April 9, 1957, o- subdivide a lot within an: exem the neighbors,the lot in question Is.'-,-ad- Continued.firom page A3 jacent'to a similar_sized_lot..which.in=:w.. - " selves i,ong Island developer N><ck nbdivision.. "=F parries engaged.in:the_construction jn ~Rah ells is menrioned in this connec' .-Town;attomey7ames -Schondeliare eludes the residence:of Richard Garcia _ : ., dually on Long Island. It further alleges;r::,lion several times in"trousers is of taped _ aid Monday that he :has'_;be a n- :iVir��+Garcia'is roa ied o .#he former « Cor`iine Lessard, daughter:; f Vrctor that the:Lucchese.Crime Family, act R 'conversauops included'in.tthe"Sept. 7 `::"swamped" with work.siince assistant : Lessard,a town building inspector ing through the:":defendant_Nano letter:Mr;Racanelli,who has not been fawn attorbeyRob Bemtsson moved and The>two lots were. separate until dominated the affairs of Local 66, ac accused'of:any :illegal :activity.,'also =he had not lead the lettIt in question. 1972;when a single.Certificate of.occu- cording to a letter•dated Sept.:7,1989, contributed$1;000 to Mr.Caracciolo Thus he would not comment on the sit- pancy=was`issued-io`=the then-owner, from she Criminal Division of.the U$ Asked:why Local 66:contributed to :nation. f K Leonard:Spann. In d973,'.the.;Town Department of Justice to Judge Mishler Mr'Caracciolo's campaign, union at `_=Another Case PEndiing Board exempted 52 subdivisions from Tli'e same-letter refers to_$`select oorney Jeffrey Dubin,said,'qt would be ".Meanwhile,"the Building Department the law that could have:let Mr S` club. pf concrete contractors,organized -hard to say,because theirPAC(political . in part;by.Peter"Vario, which`met_to.�,, :action.-committee)-.has :.contributed = issued a CO to Charles Zahra for fits :get around the law an. make;two..lots, - Pike Strcet,:Mattituck, sw-muning pool but Mattituck Heights _=3he site of.the share information on upcoming bidsin money to many. candidates — as do ::last Friday-after the town attorney with: uted lot=was not included.-:Mr. order to.allocate:Jobs_among them many corporations and unions" drew the charges that the pool was Me- t_said 'Iresda that Mattituck Y, gal " Heights is an exempted subdivision _ Judge Frederick Tedesc>bi agreed with =When a.reporter told him ahe"Town ea��et ._ �tClletl :town attorney James Schandebare when 'Code specifies the exempted su xhv1-. Mr.Schondebaresaid the pool warranted sinus in-Southold Town and Mattituck Date - Hlgh Low 1Prodp. " J- ..:llt arks CO.One hour later,the Building De-. Heights is not among them,Mr Lessard Tues October"17 ti5 .38 T Sun,lair to warm to a.m.showers . Wed.�Z•tober 18 b7. .'46 0.54 :. Rain on through to clear colder partment was on the scene and issued a said it was"an oversight" "= Thurs.,October 19 . 48_ `�42 0.22 . Cloudy.windy 8 ram CO. It is too late to.swum, but it is a .Mr.Iesserd issued a vacant certtfiCate -" Fri.;October 20 57 _44 0.52 :, .Rain B wind on through' vict ory tory for Mr.Zatira,who still.has an- of occupancy(CO)for the property last sat,October 21 70 40 1.85 Rain,heavy at times to clearing other Case in state."Supreme:-Court November,when it was still owned by =Suri..October 22 53 43 0.00 Sun;breezy,fair coder against the Building Department can- Mr.`Spout.A vacant CO means a lot is Mon.,October 23 55 39 ".. 0.00 ' 'Sun,breery,cool to mild p.rn. (courtesyc+re•nport uttt>itt•s) .testing the stop work"order on his Cof- big_enough to build an,even though the (Reading* fee Pot Restaurant on Pflce street iri'` - -of.-m question_is too small for the taken N a.en.for previous 24hour period) -MattituCk, . LAW OFFICES WICKHAM, WICKHAM 81 BRESSLER, P.C. MAIN ROAD,P.O.BOX 1424 ' WILLIAM WICKHAM MATTITUCK,LONG ISLAND• MORTGAGE OFFICE ERIC J.BRESSLER NEW YORK 11952 ABIGAILA.WICKHAM 516-298.5300 516.298.8353 TELEFAX NO.516-298.2012 KANIEL C.ROSS TELEFAX NO.516.298.8565 HU ERTF.SULL October 17 1989 HUBERT F.SULLIVAN / Town of Southold Town Attorney's Office Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Attention: James A. Schondebare, Esq. Re: Construction on Bayer Road, Mattituck Suffolk County Tax Map #1000/139/3/13 Suffolk County Tax Map #1000/139/3/14 Dear Mr. Schondebare: We have been retained by certain individuals residing on Bayer Road in Mattituck with respect to the current construction on property designated on the Suffolk County Tax Map as 1000/139/3/14 ("vacant property") which encompasses an area of 7,500 square feet. Specifically, a question has been raised as to whether the vacant property is a valid building lot due to its contiguity to the -property to the west designated as 1000/139/3/13 on the Tax Map and upon which there presently exists a house ("residential property") . We are contacting you prior to making an application to the ZBA for reversal of the. Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy No. Z-17543 dated November 28, 1988 ("C.O. ") and the Building Permit No. 18355Z dated August 8, 1989, ("Building Permit") in an attempt to avoid needless _litigation. It is our position that the vacant property merged with the residential property, thus rendering the vacant property unbuildable at the present time. I have enclosed to aid in your review the following: 1) Certificate of Occupancy No. Z4575, dated 3/2/72 covering both the vacant and residential property; M4b 2) Application for Building Permit No. 18355Z dated 8/8/89; 3) Correspondence from:SCTIC Inc. dated 9/13/89; 4) Vacant Land C.O. No. Z-17543 dated 11/28/88; . 5� Building Permit No. 18355Z dated 8/8/89; 6) Town of Southold Property Record Card re' ' 1000/139/3/14 and 1000/139/3/13 ; 7) Survey of properties dated 3/30/72; Turning first to the facts, it appears that both the referenced properties were owned by .Leonard Spano and his wife from 1972 to 1989. It appears that the residential property was deeded by Andrew to Bittner in 1945 (L. 2485 p. 49) and the vacant property was deeded by Amburst to Bittner by deed dated 11-19-65 (L. 5867 p. 188) . Both properties were deeded to the Spanos by one deed dated 4-11-72 (L. 7140 p. 32) . The vacant property (1000/139/3/14) upon which the C.O. and Building Permit were issued is shown as lot 36 on the "Amended Map of Mattituck Heights, Property of Gustav Bayer, at Mattituck, Suffolk County, New York". filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office July 24, 1935 as Map No. 1184 . The residential property to the West (1000/139/3/13) is shown as lot 35 on the Mattituck Heights Map. Both . properties were held by Leonard F. Spano. and his wife under the deed dated April .11, 1972. The residential property was transferred to Richard Garcia and Carmine Lessard Garcia by deed dated June 26, 1989 and recorded on July 7, 1989 at Liber 10891, page 166'. The vacant property was conveyed by the Spanos by deed to Richard Garcia dated June 26, 1989 and recorded on July 7, 1989 at Liber 10891, page 170. Turning next to the Southold Town Code sections, I would first note that both properties are presently in an R- 40 (one acre) zoning district. As noted, the property upon which the building permit was granted -is approximately 7,500 square feet. Consequently, the property upon which the . building permit was granted does not have sufficient area to satisfy the requirements of a buildable lot under Article IIIA section 100-30A.3 of the Town Code. Neither does the property satisfy the requirements of Article XXIV section 100-244 of the Code which pertains to nonconforming lots. To be a buildable lot section 100-244 requires in part that the lot was held separately and did not adjoin another lot or land in the same ownership at the effective date of Article XXIV. The effective date of Article XXIV appears to have been January 10, 1989 by L.L. No. 1-1989. You are also 2 referred to Southold Town Code Sections 100-32, 100-12, 100- 281(A) (7) and section 265(a) of New York State's Town Law for additional statutory law relevant to this issue. Based upon the facts set forth previously and the applicable law referred to above, it appears that the vacant property upon which the building permit and C.O. was issued is not a buildable lot. Would you please review the foregoing at your earliest convenience and advise. y truly ours, o tatt-75 3 - v Southold Town hoard 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. JOSEPH H. SAWICKI JAMES DINIZIO,JR. NOTICE OF HEARINGS ivOTICE 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, a the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, 'Southold', NY 11971, on THURSDAY, MARCH 29, 1990, at the following times: 7 :30 p.m. Appl. No. 3770 - PORT OF EGYPT. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XII, Section 100-121C - 122, Section 100-239d, as disapproved for permission to construct Boat Storage Building with insufficient setbacks and excessive lot coverage in this Marine II (M-II) Zoning District. Property 'Location: ' Main Road, Southold, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 056, Block 04, 06, Lot 10.1, 11, 12.2, 3 .2, 3 .3 , 4, 6..1. Page 2 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting of March 29, 1990 7: 35 p.m. Appl. No. 3908 - ROBERT OCHSENRETER AND EDWARD LENCESKI. Variance for reversal of building permit to construct a one family dwelling. Property Location: 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 139, Block 3, Lot 14. 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 March 26, 1990 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Doreen Ferwerda M MAILING LIST FOR MARCH 29, 1990 Suffolk Times Traveler-Watchman Clerks Bulletin Board Z.B.A. Bulletin Board Mr. Merlon Wiggin Peconic Associates P.O. Box 672 Greenport, NY 11944 Anthony Tohill, Esq. 12 First Street Riverhead, NY 11901 Mr. Robert Ochsenreiter 600 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 r Mr. Edward Lenceski 500 Bayer Road Mattituck, NY 11952 I ' o��FFOL�fC�G o Town Hall, 53095 Main Road y® �. P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 JUDITH T.TERRY FAX(516)765-1823 TOWN CLERK TELEPHONE(516)765-1801 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CORRECTED TRANSMITTAL OF ZONING APPEAL TO: SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: JUDITH T. TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK RE: ZONING APPEAL NO. 3908 INLAND HOMES, INC. DATE: FEBRUARY 1, 1990 The following is a corrected listing of the attachments that were transmitted to Southold Town Zoning. Board of Appeals Office on January 19, 1990 together with Zoning Appeal No. 3908 application of Inland Homes, Inc. : Notification to Adjacent Property Owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form; Zoning Board of Appeals Questionnaire Form; Survey of Property; Deeds; Property Record Cards: Schedule A; Certificate of Occupancy dated 11/28/88; Application for Building Permit dated 8/2/89: Building Permit dated 8/8/89; together with any other attachments relative to this application. A Notice of Disapproval from the Buidling Inspector was not received with this application. Judith T. Terry��i��%� Southold Town Clerk c�G 170 o T Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 JUDITH T.TERRY FAX(516)765-1823 TOWN CLERK TELEPHONE(516)765-1801 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD �O L CORRECTED TRANSMITTAL OF ZONING APPEAL TO..: SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM: JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK RE: ZONING APPEAL NO. 3908, INLAND HOMES, INC. DATED: FEBRUARY 1, 1990 The following is a corrected listing of the attachments that were transmitted to Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Office on January 19, 1990, together with Zoning Appeal No. 3908, application of Inland Homes, Inc. on behalf of Robert J. Ochsenreiter and Edward Lenceski: Notification to Adjacent Property Owners; Short Environmental Assessment, Form; Letter Relative to NYS Tidal Wetlands Land Use; Survey of Property; Deeds; Property Record Cards; Schedule A; Certificate of:Occupancy dated 3/2/72; Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy dated 11 /28/88; Application for Building Permit dated 8/2/89; Building Permit dated 8/8/89; together with any other attachments relative to this application. A Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector was not received with, this application. 1 r •n� e I J �, SCOTT L. HARRIS APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS -v=_ Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. =>�l "3� 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 TO: Victor, .Lessard, Principal Building Inspector FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals DATE: April 13, 1990 RE': Z.B.A. Hearing of April 19, 1990 In regarding Inland Homes Appl. No. 3908, it would be greatly appreciated if you could attend our next Regular Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals- on Thursday, April 19, 1990. Attached is a copy of the Notice of Hearings for your information. We have found it very helpful having you attend our previous meetings. - -- -NOTICE OF HEAItIN4 �='--•__ _ _"__-.__��____ permitted lot coverage,and will -_ ! Section 100-30 A.3, Article NOTICE IS HEREBY have insufficient side yard set- i XXIV, Section 100-244, Bulk GIVEN, pursuant to Section backs. Property Location: 310 and Parking Area, rArticIe 267 of the Town Law and the Linda Road, Mattituck, Coun- XXIII Section 100-239.4,build- Code of the Town of Southold, ty Tax Map No. 1000, Section ing setbacks from water or wet� r the following hearings will be 106, Block 1, Lot 14. _ lands for permission to con- held by the SOUTHOLD ! 7:50' rn. A 1: No..3921= ' Pp. struct a one family dwelling. TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS p' EILEEN VILLANI.Variance to Property Location: 55 'Glen at a Regular Meeting, at the the Zoning Ordinance, Article Court, Cutchogue,County Tax Southold Town Hall, Main XXIII, Section 100-239 B, for. Map No. 1000, Section 083,' Road,Southold,N.Y. 11971,on permission to construct deck ad- Block 01, Lot 01. THURSDAY,APRIL 19, 1990, dition to existing one family 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3922- at the following times: dwelling,proposed construction ROBERT AND THERESA• 7:30 p.m. Appl. No: 3926- will be within 75 ft.of water or TURNER.Variance to the Zon-. MURRAY JACOBS. Variance wetlands. Property Location: ing Ordinance;'Article III, Sec- to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- Private Road 925 Wood Lane, tion 100-30 AA,Bulk and Park-' cle III, Section 10043,`as dis- Peconic, County Tax.Map No., ing area,for permission to con- approved for permission to con- 1000,Section 086,Block 06,Lot. struct an' attached swimming struct an accessory shed in side 10. a . pool to house. Property Loca- yard,accessory buildings may be 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 3919- tion: 1525 Albo Drive, Laurel, located in.the required rear yard: I THOMAS COLLINS.Variance County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- Property Location: 1180 Sage to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- tion 126, Block 03,•Lot 17. Boulevard, Greenport, County cle XXIII,Section 100-239 4.B, 8:15 p.m. Appl.'No. 3925- Tax Map No. 1000, Section 53, for permission to construct a ELSIE PARKIN. Variance to Block 5, Lot 9. deck addition to a one-family ' the Zoning.,Ordinance, Article 7:35 p.m..Appl. No. 3927- dwelling,proposed construction III A,Section 100-30 A.3,Bulk MARK AND ELLIE GOR- will be less than 75 ft. from the and Parking Regulations in this DON. Variance to the Zoning bulkhead. Property Location: Division of Land.. Property Ordinance, Article III, Section i 305 Dawn Drive, East Marion, Location: .7575 Skunk Lane, 100=33,as disapproved,for per- County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec- Cutchogue, County Tax Map mission to construct an acces- tion 35, Block 5, Lot 20. No. 10W,Section 104,Block 04, sory building to tennis court 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 3930- 27. located in front yard,accessories JOHN C. PERRONE. Special 8:20 p.m. Appl. No. 3908 permitted in the rear yard area Exception to the Zoning Ordi- ROBERT OCHENREITE only.Property Location:Private nance,- Article X; Section AND EDWARD LENCESKI. Road#7,Fords Road,Southold, 100-101B, for permission to oc- Variance for reversal of a build- County Tax Map No. 1000,,Sec- cupy and use as a billiard par- ing permit to construct a one tion 087, Block 01, Lot 18.4. 1 for for commercial recreation. family dwelling.Property Loca- 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3928- Property Location:Main Road, tion: 565 Bayer Road, Matti- SAMUEL AND RACHEL State Road 25, Mattituck, tuck, County Tax Map No. SALZMAN. Variance to the County Tax Map No. 1000,Sec 000,Section 139,Block°3,Lot Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, tion 122, Block 6, Lot 31. 1 Section 100-30 A.3, as disap- 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 3914- The Board of Appeals will at proved, for permission to con- EVA HALLA. Variance to the said time and place hear any and struct addition to an existing Zoning Ordinance,Article III A, all persons or representatives de- dwelling,proposed construction _ _- __ _ ___ siring to.be heard in each of the will have insufficient front yard above matters. Written com- setbacks,.Property Location:65 menu may also be submitted Old Salt Road and 400 Rochelle prior to the conclusion submitted the Place, o. 1000, County Tax subject hearing. Each hearing Map No. 1000, Section 144, will not start before time allof- Block 5, Lot 22. ted. Additional time for your 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3920- presentation will be available,if A. LIOS. Variance to the Zon- needed. For more information, ing Ordinance, Article XXIV, please call 765-1809. Section 100-244,as disapproved, Dated: April 9, 1990 ' for permission to construct a BY ORDER OF deck addition to existing pool, THE SOUTHOLD TOWN proposed construction exceeds BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Doreen Ferwerda „� 1X, 4/12/90 (80) .00 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STATE OF NEW YORK ss: Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /. . . . . . weeks successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . da . . . . ., 19 . .��. Sworn to before me this . . . . . . . . . . . �1-1 day of . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . � Notary Public BARBARA A. SCHNEIDER NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York No. 4806846 . Qualified in Suffolk Coun y / Cornmission Expires o a s 90 NOTICL OF HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,pur- pr vcd,Iforpermission to construct 1000, Section 083, Block 01, Lot suant to Section 267 of the Town an�accessory building to tennis 01. Law and the Code of the Town of court located in front yard, acccs- 8:10 p.m. Appl. No. 3922 - Southold, the following hearings sorics permitted in the rear yard ROBERT AND 7TfERESATURNER. will be held by the SOUTIIOLD area only. .Property Location: Variance to the Zoning.Ordinance, TOWN BOARD OF-APPEALS at a Private. Road N7, Fords Road, Article III, Section 100-30 A.4, Regular Meeting, at the Southold Southold, County Tax Map No. Bulk and Parking area,for pernis- Town hall, Main Road, Southold, 1000, Section 087, Block 01, Lot sion to construct an attached NY 11971,on THURSDAY,APRIL 18.4. swimming pool to house. Property 19, 1990, at the following tunes: 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3928 - Location: 1525 Albo Drive,Laurel, 7:30 p.m. Appl. No., 3926 - SAMUEL AND RACIIEL SALZ- County Tax Map No. 1000.Section MURRAY JACOBS.Variance to the MAN.Variance to the Zoning Ordi- 126, Block 03, Lot 17. Zoning Ordinance,Article III,Sec- nancc, Article III A, Section 100- 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. 3925 - tion 100-33, as disapproved for 1 30 A.3, as disapproved, for ELSIE PARKIN. Variance to the permission to construct an acccs- permission to construct addition to Zoning Ordinance, Article III A, sory shed in side yard, accessory an existing dwelling, proposed Section 100-30 A.3,Bulk and Park- buildings may be located in the rc- construction will have insufficient ing Regulations in this Division of quircd rear yard.Property Location: i front yard setbacks. Property Land. Property Location 7575 1180 Sage Boulevard, Greenport, Location:65 Old Salt Road and 400 Skunk Lane, Cutchoguc, County County Tax Map No. 1000,Section Rochelle Place, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000, Section 104, 53, Block 5, Lot 9. Tax Map No. 1000, Section 144, Block 04, Lot 27. 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3927 - Block 5,Lot 22. El-n m. Appl. No. 3908 MARK AND L'LLIE GORDON.Vari- 7:45 p.m.Appl.No. 3920-A. OCHSENREITER ANDancc to the Coning Ordinance,Arti- LIDS.Variance to the Zoning Ordi- LENCESKI.Variance forcle 11I, Section 100-33. as disap- nancc, Article XXIV,Section 100- f a building permit to244, as disapproved, for permis- a one family dwelling.sion to}construct a deck addition to ocation 565 Bayer Road,existing pool, proposed construe- County Tax Map No. Lion exceeds permitted lot cover- tion 139, Block 3, Lo age,and will have insufficient side yard setbacks. Property Location: The Board of Appeals will at said 310 Linda Road,Mattituck,County time and place hear any and all per- Tax map No. 1000, Section 106, sons or representatives desiring to Block 1,Lot 14. be heard in each of the above mat- 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 3921 - ters. Written comments may also EILEEN VILLANI.Variance to the be submitted prior to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XXIII, conclusion of the subject hearing. Section 100-239 B, for permission Each hearing will not start before to construct deck addition to exist- time allotted. Additional time for ing one family dwelling, proposed your presentation will be available, construction will be within 75 ft. if needed. For more information, of water or wetlands. Property please call 765-1809. Location: Private Road 925 Wood Datcd April 9, 1990 Lane, Peconic, County Tax Map BY ORDER OF No. 1000, Section 086,Block 06, THESOUTHOLD TOWN Lot 10. BOARDOFAPPEALS 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 3919 - GERARD P.GOEHRINGER THOMAS COLLINS. Variance to CI-IAHZMAN the Zoning Ordinance, Article By Doreen Ferwerda XXIII,.Scction 100-239 4.13, for 6644-1TA12 permission to construct a deck addition to a one family dwelling, proposed construction will be less than 75 ft. from the bulkhead. Property Location: 305 Dawn Drivc, East Marion, County Tax Map No. 1000. Section 35, Block 5,Lot 20. 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 3930 - JOIiN C.PERRONE.Special Excep- tion to the Zoning Ordinance, Ar- ticle X, Section 100-1018, for permission to occupy and use as a billiard parlor for commercial recre- ation. Property Location: Main Road, State Road 25, Mattituck, County Tax Map No. 1000.Section 122, Block 6, Lot 31. 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 3914 - EVA IIALLA.Variance to the Zon- ing Ordinance, Article III A, Sec- tion 100-30 A.3, Article XXIV, Section 100-244, Bulk and Parking Area, Article XXIII, Section 100- 239.4, building setbacks from wa- ter or•wctlands, for permission to constrict a one family dwelling. Property Location. 55 Glen Court, Cutchoguc, County Tax Map No. COUNTY OF SUFFOLK -- STATE OF NEW YORK ss: NOTICE.OF,HEARINGS NOTICE"., ' IS . H-EREBY GIVEN,,pursuapt: to Section Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the 267_4 dib,Town'fYaSout.h he hold,- Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, .Code of'the;Tpwq;of Southold; the followfngrtieatings will be,_ a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; held .:by ''the, SO F APPEALS'UTHOLD' TOWN'BOARD O and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, at -Meeting, at the _ has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman ` Southold:..Town Hall ,Main once each week for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . weeks Road,Southold,NY,:11971. on �. •THURSDAY,''MARCH :29, 11990, at,ttie.followin9 times; successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . . .aa. . . . . . . 7:30 p:m. Appl. No: 3 �`l PORT..OF EGYPT.Variancee to to. the Zoning Ordinance; Article day . . . . , 19 XII,Section 100-121C-122,Sec- tion 100-239d;was.disapproved - for permission to construct-Boat I ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' . . . Stoia&e..Buf lding,:with insuffi- cient setback's and excessive lot z.. covera'ge,'in this MN ne II (M- 11),°Z6nin_g''.Disiiict.' Property .Location:•. 'Main Road, Sworn to before me this . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . day of Southold;,County Tax Map No. 1006,,)Section 06,Block 04,06,. CX 19 �U Lot'10.f:11, 2'.1,3.2,•3.3,4;-611. , /. 7:35••p:m. Appl. No...,3908- ROZE' .00HSENRETER AND EDWARD LENCESKI. Variance,for'reversal of.building permit to construct.a one;fami- a � . ly dwellin',,Properly cation: 565.'Bayer.'; oad ;-MAttituck, Notary Public QARBAfiA A. SCI-li1NE@Et2 CountyT,xiMaS-Nb.,1000,1Sec-' NOTMY PUBLIC, State of New York tion 139, Block'3 Lot 14:`. Nc. 4$U68?fi Tfie Board of Appeals will at Quali!ori in " ffc k Coup y said time and'pl'aee hear any and Expires all persons or.representatives desiring to be heard.m each of 1 the above matters.Written com- ments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing::Each hearing will not start before'time'allo't- ted. Additional time for your presentationiv it be available,if needed.'For more ififormatioh; Please call 765-1809: <- I Dated: March 26, IWO . BY ORDER`dF THE: SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ., OF APPEALS MRARI3 P. GOEHRINGER. CHAIRMAN;:.'•', By: Doreen Ferwerda 1X-3/22/90(8) i `_NOTICE OF HEARINGS ,t NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, t i Pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and th&%f- To Southold, the foll wn of owing hearings:will be held by the SOUTHOLD STATE OF NEW YORK) TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at,. )SS' Regular Meeting,at the Southold Town Hall,Main Road,Southold, COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) NY 11971, on THURSDAY, MARCH29, 1990,at the following _ Patricia Heaney of Mattituck, in 7:30 p.m. APPi•`No. 3770— said County, being duly sworn,says that he/she is Principal PORT OF EGYPT. Variance to the Zoning OrdinanCe,Article Xg,Ste, Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly Newspaper, •tion 100-121C- 122,Section 100- Z39d,as disapproved for published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of >to Construct Boat Storage permission B With"sufficient setbacks � Suffolk and State of New York,and that the Notice of,which exces- sive lot coverage in this and ]I the annexed is a printed copy,has been regularly published in "efM- ?onro9 District, Property'.. said Newspaper once each week for 1 weeks Location:Main Road,Southold, �Countr Tax Map No. 1000, successively, commencing on the 22nd day of 056,Block 04, 06, Section' 10.1,. �M ;,__^::::,:.:,. . 7.35 p.m. Appl No. 3908 — _-EROBERT NHS EIZER AND DWARD LENCESKL Variance for 'reversal of building Permit to con- 2_ izza /atruct a one family dwelling.-PMP l �.: erty Location:565 Bayer Road, ^� /' Pnneipal Clerk Mattituck,County Tax Ma •' 1000.Section 139,Bl P No. The Board of ° 3•LCt14. f;L /LLL /j _time and PP�Is will at said Place hear.any and all heard desiring to` Sworn t:777 Pre this ut each of the above W°fin comments may matters. r 'y � P,�1RRY K. °o:{�gW York Mated prior to y O be Sub- day of 19LS-PIOTARY PU(? V' ;a49860� subject rearm the conclusion of the $ufty,U-s,• `�C not scan g Each hearing will Term UP LL;ebr.3ar l before tune allotted.Addi- / ticnal time for yourpresentation will ,be available, if needed. For more information.please call 765-1809. Dated March 26.1990 ORDER OF THE sor�THOI p 7�OWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARDP GOEHRINGER AN 6614 _ By Dore Ferrwia �hn er4;,I � . d r\ t SCHEDULE A TO APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR OF ROBERT J. OCHSENREITER & EDWARD LENCESKI 1. This is an application to reverse two determinations of the Building Inspector as follows: (1) issuance of Building Permit dated August 8, 1989, .granted to Inland Homes, Inc. , No. 18355Z (Exhibit E) and; (2) issuance of Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy dated November 28, 1988 issued to Leonard F. and Ave Maria Spano, No. Z17543 (Exhibit D) . Both determinations relate to a parcel of real property located at 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York, Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000/139/3/14 . The basis for this application for reversal is that the property is not a legal building lot. 2 . The property in issue (1000/139/3/14) was owned by Leonard Spano and Ave Maria Spano, his wife from 1972 to 1989 (Exhibit C) . The same parties also owned the property immediately adjacent to the west under the same deed during the same period (Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000/139/3/13) . Each of the properties consist of an area of approximately 7, 500 square feet (Exhibit G) . As a result, the two properties merged, and became one parcel. There is a house existing on the property to the west of the property in issue. 3 . The property in issue (1000/139/3/14) was conveyed by the Spanos to Richard Garcia by deed dated June 26, 1989 and recorded on July 7, 1989 (Exhibit C) . . The adjoining property to the west (1000/139/3/13) was also conveyed by deed dated June 26, 1989 and recorded July 7, 1989 by the Spanos to Richard Garcia and Corrine Lessard Garcia. Upon information and belief Corrine Lessard Garcia is the daughter of Building Department Inspector Victor Lessard. 4 . The property in issue is located in an R-40 zoning district (Exhibit H) . Thus, the property contains insufficient area to satisfy the requirements for a buildable lot under Article IIIA Section 100-30A(3) (Exhibit I) of the Town Code. Neither does the property satisfy the requirements of Article XXIV Section 100-244 (Exhibit J) of the Town Code with respect to non-conforming lots since the property has not been held in single and separate ownership. The Building Permit was also issued in violation of Article XXIV Section 100-281 (A) (7) . I am advised the Building Department file failed to contain a single and separate search, as required. It is submitted, based on the title search of the property by SCTIC Incorporated dated September 13 , 1989 (Exhibit C) that the property was not held in single and separate ownership. As a result of the foregoing, the property in issue is not a buildable lot and the determinations complained of must be reversed. In response to our attorneys' correspondence dated September 13 , 1989, to the Southold Town Board of Appeals, they were informed that a variance had not been granted with respect to this property. 5. I am aggrieved by the determinations of the Building Inspector in that I reside on Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York and own the real property across the street from the property in issue. Construction of a residence on the property 1 1 t 1 in issue will have an adverse effect on the value on my property and the quality of life in the neighborhood. 6. In support of this application the following is submitted and incorporated herewith: A. Certificate of Occupancy No. Z4575, dated 3/2/72 covering both the vacant (1000/139/3/14) and the residential property (1000/139/3/13) ; B. Application for Building Permit No. 18355Z dated August 8, 1989; C. Correspondence from SCTIC Inc. , dated September 13 , 1989 with deeds referred to therein; D. Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy No. Z-17543 dated November 28, 1988; E. Building Permit No. 18355Z dated August 8, 1989 ; F. Town of Southold Property Record Cards for 1000/139/3/14 and 1000/139/3/13 ; G. Survey of Properties dated March 30, 1972 ; H. Copy of portion of the present Southold Town Zoning Map with property at issue circled; I. Southold Town Code Sections 100-30A. 1 through 100- 30A-4; Density and Minimum Lot Size for Residential Districts; Section 100-244 ; Section 100-12 ; SEction 100-281 (a) (7) , and Section 100- 32 . FORM NO. S TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Clerk's Office Southold, N. Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No. Date . . . . . . . .NA3zCh. . .2 . . . . . . . . . ., 19.7?. THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at .F4ygr.11n4d. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Street Map No.Ma H�dck No. . . . . . . . . . .Lot No. .3?�. 36 riattituck . . l... .s . . . requirements for one family di-re 1.lir_g & housing code conforms substantially to the $ �# .�4$�r3 � C built prior to amd • • • • • • • • • •epril• 1957, 19. . . . pursuant to which C/a .z4575 dated . . . . . . . March .2. . . . . . ., 19.72 ., 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 . . .Private. one. family. •dwel.•ling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... The certificate is issued to . . Mr .&. Mrs. Paul. flittner . ... . . . .0i nests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. Suffolk County Department of Health Approval . . ?�1 e_existing. House # 505 Inspected Feb 29 1972 Building Inspector . BOARD OF HEALT,%. - , D l5 0J] 3 SETS OF P'414S � I q FORM NO.7 SURVEY :�.,.••�, q��_C TOWN OF SOUTHOLD CHECK •5• BUILDING DEPARTMENT SEPTIC FORM .. TOWN HALL NOTIFY SLOG.DEPT.' i SOUTHOLD,N.Y. 11971 •-•-•••-- ••••TOt�/WOFSOu7HOL0 TEL.:765.1802 CALL ................ aa MAIL T0: fie,✓ .:amincd .z 19Uc� /. p 2 �j Droved G!... , 199 Permit No..k l/ ;approved af� ...... ..... (Building Inspector) . APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT Date .k4gl"S.t.2...... . 1989. INSTRUCTIONS a. This application must be completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector,with 3 s 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 areas,and giving a detailed description of layout of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of this appli- ion. 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 II 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 ill 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 ilding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold,Suffolk County,New York,and other applicable Laws,Ordinances or gulations, for the construction of buildings,additions or alterations,or for removal or demolition,as herein described. e applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws,ordinances, building code,housing code,and regulations,and to nit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. IN7�AND,HOMES .�TL'a................... (Signature of applicant,or name,if a corporation) ..BcX.1�7.�.Matt.�.ti?ck,..N..X..la•952....... (Mailing address of applicant) ate whether applicant is_owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder. ..............General, Contractor.......................................................... :me of owner of premises ...INF,AN•D-HOMES; -IM ••as on•. t....tax ' ( he x r rolI or latest deed) ,applicant is a corporation,signature of duly authorized officer. .........Raber.t X..fUltz.,...Pres........... (Name and title of corporate officer) \LL CONTRACTOR'S MUST BE SUFFOLK COUNTY LICENSED Builder's License No. ......................... Plumber's License No. ....2451-P.............. Electrician's License No. ..3635A.............. Other Trade's License No. ...................... . Location of land on which proposed work will be done. .......... s Gs— S�a.$aye�c.Rd...1�attztuck,. ...X................................................... Ilouse Number Sheet Hanilet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section ...13.9........... Block ...3.............. Lot....14.,,.,,,,..... Subdivision...Matt iturk.Heights.............. Filed Map No. ...1.92....... Lot ....?�6.,...... (Name) State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy ..........V.... .. ....... ... ......... .................. b.Intended use and occupancy ......1..Eamilg.Dwzlling........ ................................ 3. Nature of work pheck which applicable):New Building --X. ..,. Addition .......... Alteration Repair .... Removal .............. Demolition . Other Work............. j (Det"ription; i d.' L•stiniated Cost .... ...................... Fee .P .l.f�... .... .......,.. ` (to be paid on filing this application) 5. If dwelling,number of dwelling units ............... Number of dwelling units on each floor............. Ifgarage,number of cars .................................................................... 6. If business,commercial or mixed occupancy,specify nature and extent of each type of use .................. 7. Dimensions of existing structures,if any: Front............... Rear .............. Depth ............ Height ...............Number of Stories ...................................................... Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions:Front ................. Rear ............... Depth ......................Height ......................Number of Stories......... ...... 3. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front ... ........ Rear ....... Depth ...Y..9 .... Height ...1.T:........Number of Stories . 9. Size of let: Front ....5 .4.............. Rear..... .......... Depth ....1.............. 10. Date of Purchase ....Name of Former Owner ........................... 1 1. Zone or use district in which premises are situated..........................a....................... 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law,ordinance or regulation: ............................. 13. Will lot be regraded ............................Will excess fill be removed from premises: Yes 1.1. Name of Owner of premises ....................Address ...................Phone No. ............ Name of Architect ...........................Address ...................Phone No. ..:.. ...... Name of Contractor ..........................Address ...................Phone No. ............ l5. Is this property located within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? *Yes ..... . No ..... *If yes, Southold Town Trustees Permit ma be required. PLO DIAGRAM Locate clearly and distinctly all buildings, whether existing or proposed, and,indicate all set-back dimensions fr property fines.Give street and block number or description according to deed,and show street names and indicate whet interior or corner lot. Ste'. ��LtiL�;! l/ �/�'LP • .. .l T �.��4� ems' Aso. �o 41 sm � S"fATE OF NEW YORK, S.S COUNTY OF.,9UFFQ:EZ....... ............Robert.Y4..1 i tz..............:.... being duly sworn,deposes and says that he is the applics (Name of individual signing contract) above named. Ilcis the .........COAt7mct=..: ................................ ........................... (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 t- application;that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and belief;and that t work will be performed in the manner set forth in the application.filed therewith. Sworn to before me this ...............a........day,00ff...... ..... 19�� Notary Public, ....✓ ��r�a�..,�LCv r......C.oun.. ,ty ;— K Robert E. Hiltz (Signet a of applicai NOTARY Bll S#O Hew Yak No.470787 Suftplh cantt�� Tenn Expires Much 30.19_1{ SCTIC Incorporated "FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY TITLE INSURANCE" BOX 1269 • RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 • (516) 727-4270 iyz 4/ ADroo /0y 00 M 6TO D/?ova 03 60 /dDv /0 y 12 --72- �6°&& F J- I/�10 c0 3v �on�.d F Cana � k chid Gat di a -, - -� L,4s ' (al-9!d Lam` �e�' SCT1C Incorporated "FOR SUFFOLK COUNTY TITLE INSURANCE" BOX 1269 • RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 • (516) 727-4270 Ab t,4s,T J, 44-,� 7'0 a C2cj . A) 34..f i • •,' I1,P•MF:^' L. m+b.. n w�wr.,��.N.�a.rfrl.7.�.Y ' "" •, ttetretti r�wm taarra oweas AMM"era W"wwis ninwi►.rteY a a.a w.. THUMDLNttMfG rev 1 lltr. nq [ Apr11 Ar•at7— '� - )f(TWEjp A7L B. J. .r:.,, re...t5, :::T Xut, ula.Ylfe,�teta ran ittat t. kr paper-coat :n. .eriet of t,ettltuck. Town of Southold, Coral) a.:..,`+:^ of 'rev York, , t P-.+od LEONARD F. aFA110 and AYE M. SPAV0 his rdfs. residing at. 176 Priscilla Arenui, Riverhead, Suffoik Casty. 00 I'orx, , ,a_ t o k w lt' ,par"�itM.taml,{Yn.. - "4 ` tM(fMJ`fiL,[hu'M.rym•d the firM pp��aRti. •^^d Tee DalYrr ad shu AA { Irtd y-thr perry d dy.e 1 p^,_du �Y{rear Old"kW were the Pm od rY d Let¢ ear.ar�oaar..ad.4r.of,he pun d the tem.d pn{ve.er, , . ALL rh..—Pot� Pk—,-P• d d WA aid tti ke'Yap a.d W"—aaa rem o�L ,f. • jr%_dnj.Cjom at Mattltuck. Southold Tesa.�ifrslk�s 1s. r''t known and designated as Lou 35 md 36 as AstrtlaA 4-� -• —; E.>Rnc.,.rroy.rtT of oa,tMv Byer, at rAttitonk. 3mffa3= er Tork'. filed in the Suffolk County ClarkrirOffleert� fil �7 ` ,Y'• 1935 an Map No. 1194. To,$.TEO with the use of s.right of Ky aigbi'foot tdda M.ta�t Wickham A.vemne to Long Creak a branch of Mmttltadk Sfys•M repass on root only, said right of ray aM ,MLtS at the •:t �'=P. tam or Middlo koad and diekhaan Ateaas as.1M running is s westerly direction eight foot. tY�aa> �' northerly direction one hmdred thirty real Parolu a".line of Hubert Y. Itlein Mad Orbtax D11791.to now Mirk of Long..Ciaok. thanes rmnimg to'"dlttiatarly ` Long Croak to land'of Wart Y. plain. thus erstai m• . LAM ion along the western boundary of Hmbmrtll. �la 1009 d o! d thirty feat to a concreto monument.the nor_ 1.7 ' Rodti and 'dlekham AvanUe, the point or plat:• of ��• �' - �^- �[ r - +• k j ' [ TfY.GTlIkR•ul'aA ndht taL .d henear..if PI-^tad•P-M'Qb-fu.pprrtt q wed e•P t wl•a§oin'z t s'a.,s,k.eriled{+m.i.e to tk cer.rr 4m d.—J;TOC.,ETHQ rb sad all'S,r...w .!'tea drhr pa^Y d thl arm p^b�aed m.Lp� HA\ .AS[D'd x - - 1101.11 nr.iw-a...fa I.m.trse,e l unto the patty a1.de and put,dr hs.a�m.rft ad ul d read P.%torerer. . ice,•;, 'k' % •� . .d,hr fir,t prt co h•di.t dw p Ty d t&P."be.am A.- . rµ+ Pt b'w`alY sa+'1 emir,Ra tRm ee'.narr.d a.q a1 1\ly,Ix ye N hi firY pn.rn cpRWne rids Swtiw li d f—'R h. 1 W e.n�r. r t • ' fir lir•i{or ep�e.r[fr^ .utrnrnn(a,Iti.aoe•efe•,'r and 7!bid t!r ridr u ten...d aid- . trituac m a t t t r.4 y4..a1 free fnr the}.t/p.r of p.n.K,N co,td tN ra tai.�elr f1r p m k n ti r a i.Jv w f l r,.prv.�.•+n br:•,rr u.'C—p^4 d. d tar. •f� .4 ,!a." drunk s., ,r.+t'jw., MM•r�4,.rc.,t thee tn'rWun a ra� J,;'F ISI VffrmfSi WHiJlf00r he lany.r tr+c fi.,Pr h-dui.meta 1'hu.deed ttr y,Mad:ev fir'..> 3 ' i:1' _ :SATE'-`f • :eu. nar i - ,g1cn '+S rnar __ f t r' Y tee h >� i�r��s F� iNlrllt;flM tM!?RttflMta�.*IHf 11g1MYlMT IMI0l1l M liN tiY Lf.Mt�I MRt J��Ij/�i� d Y— M�� ,'I7�i�p�liURi4 made the �-` Air of June ,nineteen hued and eighty—nine g LEONARD F. SPANO and AVE M. SPANO, his wife. both residing at 505 sayer Road, Mattituck, New York 11952 aai w'sy 39%s " party'of the first part,and i' RICHARD GARCIA AND CORINNE LESSARD GARCIA, his wife, both residing at 1800 Westphalia Road, Mattituck, New York 11952 �9 s: pail:of the second?art. i WiTIV64.1.5L that the party of the fiat part,in consideration of i 1 ; .t ? dollars, — t i;' lar:rqI rnuney of the United States, pa:d , y patty pa hereby gran party • of the second rt,doer. t a�release unto the of the trccond part,;4 heirs or 1Cit q rases_ suceessms and assigns of the party of ;he second part forever, ALL that certain plot,piece or parcel of land,with the buildings and improvementsttrrcoet erected,situate, h+and being in the an �;',�;�t,1 tt. SEE SCHEDULE "A" ATTACHED HERETO j r.{1Q 399� _�— �sa r I F1',"7""'--" u'kt � i s✓hi c d , S ; y a, MV 7 I yy S ipl A� ' y t K r Ij r , 1(1Ss1PGlr;'7 •' SCHEDULE "A• All that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings there on erected, situate, lying and being at _ ,..-4..• �� Mattituck, town of Scrxthold, Suffolk County, New York, known _ x r i and designdtM as lot #35 on "amended map of Mattituck Heights, property of Gustav Bayer at Mattituck, Suffolk �. County, New Yurk• and filed in the Suffolk County Clerks office on Jules 24, 1935 as map 11184, which said lot is more particularly hounded and described as follows.e BEGINNING at a point on the r,vrthwestarly aide of Bayer 1 f Road, where same is intersected by the division l:ne between ,� E ! lots #35 and i 36 on the above map which said point of beginning is located on the northerly Bide of Beyer Road distant 150.00 feet west, of the intersection of the southerly side of Grant Blvd. with the westerly side of " Bayer Road. _ r RUNNING THENCE south 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds west, of the northwesterly side of Bayer Road, a distance of 50.00 feet to point marking the division line of the herein described lot and lot #34. THENCE North 58 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds west along said division line a distance of 150.00 feet to a point; THENCE north 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds east a � distance of 50.00 feet to a point marking th�q division line of lots 135 and 136. , J4 -n•. THENCE south 5[ degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds east, along the division l.ir.e of lots 435 and t 36 a distance of 150.00 f : feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. — ' BEING AND INTENDED to '.-e part of the same premises conveyed to parties of the fir..• part by deed dated April 11, 1972, and recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk on April 12, 1972, in Libor 7140 Page 32. iA 71 Y _i q r 4h•Vf}A.t h.` �, ly I: 4J, • - �y k� r - l y 't.f c��:: ��, j •�� .�� }wtt �•.' '��, { � 1a`C �� `+'}• .v�J ' s��` r�� ;�"'��..f�, '� v� bra.��'�'� . � . L;F �. Y"' ., r t ;�i• 'k'ia� { J C },�.J F^ IybP. �_ i t'yr+ N J �. r��'{ �k� ] $ •{ � K 1��:f'i'a']`1gW •E r.P .1P 1�'�}I��f(p�S fn b ` -�' � `1 n, a'� � �ki�' rb.�i� ' Ya1� „��b•.f I' 4 .,4 �v p .s f } Y ,t tom,lOrIQT norm a SUFFOLK ggb g►A"OM MttM TM ttMCli17 ep SUFFOLK t6o w do of i June 19 89,before me On the 1 re day of June 19 89,before me •4 �INt1aa11�Olmt PenrnaIIT came ;'i Leonard F. Spano Ave M. Spano air tmliwe'to be the indhddual describe! In and wito to me (mown to be the hairidual. described In and'Jae -Met Ind PI and acknowledged dlat peeuted the foregoing indruawnt,and admowtedged Alai ttsaatsdsnne executed the same. 1 1 ELU z` DOMINt . IdNwrTo* DOMINI 1. of Nan York 4 fit PUB LIC." NpTASIY Na •3109E66 - No.52.3109t1� 199 M�St'�!"Cn199-ly ualNtaO in Sulftiik Canb Fab.23. 0 Q �a,N Feb.29.1990 a ai,r;• :; ":,Tom Esther+ Term _RYilg Ol•WW Tong,e"W"OP aft STATt OP MttW YOB,CogMTY OP ff1 C!n ihe? day of 10 ,before me An the day of 19 ,before toe M'WT.ionally cat ie personally exi. 1';to tnf known.who,beit%by me duly sw•or• did depose and the subscribing witness to the foregoing instrument, with he resides at No. 44wo n I am personally acquainted, who, being by we duty sworn,did depose and sae that he resides at No.. G tllal t:�tie is the that fie knows _ the corporation described " kl'a4iRhieb executed the foregoi er instrument;that he to be the indieldml a:knows.the sal of said mporation; that the seat affixed described in and who executed the foregoing instnnnent; said,inanirmut is such corporate seal; that it was so that he, said subscribing witness, aas present and saw allruted by'order of the board of directors of said corptva- execute the same;and that be,sa;d witness, — — ?Aki',And Aar r"be signed Is now thereto by hike order. at the same time subscribed h name as Witness thereto. 7t t c.•S f ` irga n Bale With •5'##nf GOYvmw?AcAmm GaArc oa•.Am S[CTION - ;riri lu ova moor COUNTY OR { ` To TOWN : 1 Rem dsd at Request at r� CHIGCO TfTL[INSURANCZ COMPANY titlwrtu,Mgti•on 11M1 M tmi nowt l Rrtdea by Marl 10 i, Dirbibslted by Richar.i F. Lark Esq. Main Road — Box 913 101•KC�O'!'!'f7.1• Cutchogue, New York 11935 tiTif>NANC! COM P1AltiTi { E S.R l W W ; r r f�i at, 3 rt jr6ryigFf•4�C1 3 t N O s - i; q MIGS � g with all tight,tick and interest.if any.of the party cf the fins part is and to am strxer asd sy a abtating the shove dcsenbed prernises to the center Imes thereof. s ->•y,_ TOG&THU with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of ti c party of the first part in sr+d Do 5 i TD HAVE AND TO HOD the pre, ser herein granted unto the parry of the semnd part.the heirs Or SMooeawea and aaig"of the party of the seeord part forever. r. r t a ,tr <, q '.�j3 t1•'.�t t YM. Ttl .� i a: } L`R ANI)the party of the first part covenants that the 1>6.ty of the first pa t has not done or suffcml anything [1 rj whereby the said premises have been incurnbered in any way whatever,except as aforesaid_ f� AND the party of the first part,in compliance with Sect;tm 13 of the Lien Law,covenants that the party of the first part will receive the comideration for::,is rymaeranre.and will hold the tight to receive such ta:sid- oration as a trust fund to:x applinl first for the purpns as r of payinR the st of the impmvrnrent and will apply r �(� the same first to the pay7nrnt of the cost of the improvement before wing any part of the total of the same for „ -7 other purl— '' The word"patty"shall be amsteutd as if it:vat"parties"wherever the smte nf this indenture so requires. _ W IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the party of the first part has duiy executed this deed the day and rear first above a+ h�r;;�5~!t`'" I>f intsastres or• - LEONARDF' -SPANW ' l JU� s AVE IM. SPAN'E 'fir i � r i �� 4�?* � � r..^ '��I��,y�r.�i v. ±,,�, r '�a��W16r.Mti y,�.y��o�ndw• !';r:a� -"?+s ''r� SJ�•.p t�.'} _ �r 1, ,u t r."r) snit atNat��i.?ttrr,atat.Ms4_�.'��r avr arr ��IIIfT� N Mh(�Vwi�!�1i 1"3�•. �" :ran ;t � N 11M!IMI7flMN11�• �� 5 I nndethe dayo[ June ,nindeenhtmdrrdand eig..., nine z Z1U!1tm>l�fM�. :LEONARD F. SPANO and AVE M. SPANO, his wife, both residing at *t 505 Beyer Road MattituCk, New York 11952 t t> r r 3 99 ' "4 f 5�P 9, i Yi f3 i . r Partin of the find part.and u u RICHARD GAkCIA, residing at ;x 18D0 w^stphalia Road, Mattituck, New York 11952 — z- � ♦! of the accaod port. EiK that the part: of the first part,in consideration ofWffNM s _ • 4. f doUar% �.. i�IIp t`r} Paid lawful money of the Untied States. �. of the second part,does hereby(Grant and release unto the Party o[the second part,the heirs Or f x :by the P!rtY succe"M and aniRns of the secondrrve party of the send part{or, i•�11t ides or reel o{land,with the buildings and imps:cements thereat erected,tcitwte, ��._ A 4 ALL that certain plot•p Pa � lying and bent in the — d �a tin ti, fix SF.E SCHEDULE "A" ATTACHED HERETO .39949 .-- C •y ��yFF{,rt• _ alit— f tt .... k}X a a tii 41, 4,•�, sa � l; a. i��a,y a� t •, r i, - s , wr' �i It i+ - x t}' k t 4 i� t V; xf. 108 iPC1 1 - y SCHEDULE A E ,q i ,l �4 All that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings `.hereon erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, known #* and designated as Lot 436 on -Amendrad Map of Mattituck r, +z Heights, Property of Gustav Bayer; at Mattituck, Suffolk i County, New York' and filed in the Suffolk County Clark s 4 ,. Office on July 24, 1935, as Ma i1184, which said lot is ` more particularly bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the northwesterly aide of Bayer { Road, where same is intersected by the division line between �J ` I Lots #16 and f37 on the above map, which said point of beginning is located on the northwesterly side of Bayer a fiF Road, distant of 100.00 feet west of the intersection of the r; southerly ride of Grant Blvd., with the westerly side of Bayer Road; !.UNNING THENCE South 31 degrees 04 minutes 30 seconds hest, _¢ along the northwesterly side-of Bayer Road, a distance of 50.00 feet to a point marking the division line of the s F ( herein described lot and Lot #35• - THENCE North 58 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds West, along the division line of Lots #35 and f36 a distance of 150.00 feet to a point; M� sfr�C ¢ <j THENCE North 31 d!3 gees 04 minutes 30 seconds East, 50.00 - feet to a point marking the division line of Lots f36 and - ' •37; r - 'st' �; THENCE South 58 degrees 55 minutes 30 seconds East, along ur 1 the division line of Lots i36 and #37, a distance of 150.00 ,s{ feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. BEING AND INTENDED to be part of the same premises conveyed to parties of the first part by deed dated April 11, 1972, and recorded in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk on April 12, 1972, in Libe= 7140 Page 32. Zjo gv+K'Y51r 1 Mtl1 k a, '.1 3 F 710�,7H8R with all right,title and Merest.if aay,of the party of the first part in and to any streets and mile Arttiet do above described premises to the center lines thereof. �- 1c 7+OCUHM with the appartenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the fifat part in and to Res�5 red premises, i xcY7 t 70 HAVE AND 71)HOW the premises herein granted-into `r party of the second part,the heirs of t szt iueeesors and assigns of the routy of the second part forever. - r { t i ta pk r _ t �k�•r 1,, (1' t l .air : AND the party of the first hart cuvenanls that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been incumber'd in any way whatever,except as aforesaid. ' AND the party of the first part,in compliance with Section 13 of the Lien Lew,covenants that the party of "the first part will receive the consideration for this conveyance and will hold the right to receive such consid- „ _ etalion as a trust fund to be applied first for the purpose of paying the cost of the improvement and wi':apply ,�� stye`r 1Fif acme first to the payment of the mt of the improvement before using an part of the total of th-same for la)' P g Y my other purvw- ' `The word"party"shill he construed as if it read"parlieM"whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. 1N WrMF1!WHEREOF,the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first of 7" ~ ' t wiittea . ' T.S .(•il�trasasrfes�: LEONARD F. SPAN AVE M. SPAN0r �►t�irt{IM 1MIi►11!*110 N1►a Sf Rlt, STATE OP taw�OelttnY OP SUF s h. daF 0 • ' . June 19 89,before me On the t�G day of June 1989,befadsie y` r gy`Leonard F. Spano P"tion sly ane Ave. M. Spano w A r hlntowe to bt the individual described in and who to me known to be the individual described in am ww •X6CO ed the f instrument. and acknowledged that executed the foregoing nwts�, and adnowledged dot ` �t ehleented W she executed the same. . , ftu D0 t f t1aw1 YOA� " z Ater SZ c'3109ti6b 001�1 of NaM stme 1n 5utici.caur+hr NOTARY PU , YtaM T ;es feD.28.1990 No.52.3109,66 cntV eb 22 1920 *�1fAft OM tatty TOOL C0141"Oi' alit STATE Oa NEW TORR,COUNTY OP ISI �t)n!ha day of 19 .before me On the day of 19 ,before the - 'ptTaot�.tiy tame persortily came { „€to de known,vrlttl,bei No.by me duly swam,did depose and the subscribing witness to the foregoing instrument, with say that •rhe resides at whom I am personally acquainted, who, being by we duly y ; sworn,did depose and say that be resides at No., Poi that he maws the corporation described }�Ia arid ihieh'eiteented the foregoing instnnnent;that he to be the individual - kisowtt.t'.0 snl.of said corporation; that the seal affixed described in and who •-ecuted the foregoing fnstrtment; to Said in+ttvtnr�! is otch corporate snl; that it was so that he, said subsen;,.ng witness, was present and saw affusedb►onler of the board of directors of said corpo'a- execute the same;and that he,said witness ',titxl li that '•he signed It is thereto by like order. at the same time subscr[ •-' h name as witness thereto s !%l igafa aad bale Web , ttft',Q6V2NANV AcAtmT GG%ANtoa't Acm SECTION � A�� 1- sr 16;'NO. BLOCK LOT Far} COUNTY OR TOWN s 1 t TO - r s�u Reee�dud at Reyuet of' CHICAGO TiTLE INSURANCE COWANY !'M M�/Iles f1111 O IIRt 0ttt�1ltta Return by MO to '+ Oist►i`ttte!by Richard F. Lark, Esq. _ bli�ft>�AO Main Road - Dox 973 s i>rAb�HO! QonrAwt Cut:hoque, New York 11935 yr e. � t R ,0 4"1 �, •+Y� t�i L� ? a r as i t t �;^i ..w,b .�,. r- - Aka r � xr e i , �r P .:.I,. 765-1802 • � TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR P.O. BOX 1179 TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N.Y. 11971 VACANT LAND CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NO. Z-17543 DATE NOVEMBER 28, 1988 Location of Property 505 BAYER RD. MATTITUCK, NEW YORK NUMBER STREET HAMLET COUNTY TAX MAP # Section 139 Block 3 Lot 14 SUBDIVISION M/O Mattituck Heights Filed Map # Lot 36 conforms substantially to the applicable provisions of the Zoning Code of the Town of Southold. The Premises are located in the'A'RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL Zoned District. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that the above referenced lot may be built upon' only after the issuance of a building permit and compliance with the following requirements of the Town and the rules and regulations of such additional State and County agencies or regulations thereof that may be applicable. 1. That the lot is held in single and separate ow rship and has been so held prior to the adoption of any amendment to our Town Zoning Ordinance which may have increased th requir ents for lot width or area, or have amended front, side, or ear y 'd set back requirements. 2. That if this lot is si t d within an ppro ed subdivision that all necessary road, drain e, nd other re 're improvements have been completed in accord w h e rules and r ations of the Planning Board and those of th H' hway Department the Town of Southold. 3. Th6ain lot receiv Health Department proval as to water and seystems. 4. ThDepartment of Environmental Co servation approval has been ob . 5. That the Board of Trustees approval h s been obtained. 6. That the Board of Zoning Appeals app oval has been obtained. YOU ARE FURTHER NOTIFIED that this Bui ding Department has made no independent determination as to the appl' ability of any one or all of the ' above in issuing this Vacant Lot Certificate of Occupancy. The Certificate is issued to: LEONARD F. & AVE MARIA SPANO (owner, XXXXXX X:- ) of the aforesaid lot. 62-4 G BU INSPECTOR Rev. 12/29/87 FORM NO. 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_ 18355 Date ... Permission is hereby granted to: Q� ...... . .. j/ . .... rw .... , . . .�. ...� . .. . ..... to ....... .. .. ... ..;... .P�,. �O:?: ... ... . .. ...... ... .. . ... .......... ... . .......... .... ............. .......................... . . . .�-^ ... .. .... .... .. atpremises locate a ......... ��.........� . ..... . ... .......1.1 .. ... .................................... ............................................ . . . ... . . .... ..... ..... �.... ............................. ............................................................ .�-.................................................................... County Tax Map No. 1000 Section ... ..,3...�f.... Block .... ............ Lot No. ......I..x....... pursuant to application dated ..........at.. o �................... 19.f.,.f�and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee C .... . .... .... . .... .. ... ... . Building I for Rev. 6/30/80 �3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD 77 %? OWNER STREET. VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT CA re,- f. T3�y�' ROAD �� fUG�C o A&C lir Ile/� �s FORMER OWNER 'SPAno 1�7�- N E CR. / ^ S W . TYPE OF BUILDING RES. SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value - ID IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS' tad o o to —L O -S no- C �5 c7 as "� neA z;%e//;,i g Tq. onlo AGE BUILDING CONDITION NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE t FARM , Acre. 'Value Per '- Value Acre Till TillaDie ' 2 Tillable 3 Woodland Swompjond FRONTAGE ON WATER Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD C) House Plot DEPTH � BULKHEAD Total DOCK ,o oa 13 _ a _, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY- RECORD CARD OWNER STREET VILLAGE DISH SUB. LOT 'G C' w� %dam 'BA ER /PoA-D / I T Ti To r✓ FORMER OWNER N E AC. C 55 r10 ` S W TYPE OF BUILDING u ZES. SEAS. VL FARM COMM. CB. MISC. Mkt. Value L� �D IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS D D s -e 3,2 o o v -�.. 3f'd j V111174 ✓ 17 - 8! 17 3 o d o-o a-o Z 310 95, w - L p I - Gt' -0, oa AGE BUILDING CONDITION NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per. Value Acre Villa e 1 ilia 2 'i Ilable 3 Joodland :,vam��and FRONTAGE ON WATER :rushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD do ;Ouse Plot DEPTH BULKHEAD otal DOCK OEM l ■ENE■■ EMMONS . . ,. .. , ■OE■E■ �iiiii■■■■■■■ �1..... NEON ■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ i= _ ..__ ■■■■■■A ■EE■IE■■■N■■■■EN■■■■ ■E■EEEN=■■ ■I�r■■■■■■■■■■■■■ EEEE■■■■■�E■■■■ENO■EEE■■■■■ NEE■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■NEE■■■■■ EEO■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ : .. oun alion :. iasement Interior Finish _�Fire Place .• `f ZONING MAP ADOPTE JANUARY 10, 1989 NEW YC SUFFOL K COUNTY WN PREPARED BY PARISH a WEINER, INC.- PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONSUL 4STER PLAN UPDATE �&NTS - TARRYTO d � . IIIINI�;a boom t •,i � Men pme LON • / ,,i� • _ 90 19 it Kv ese �r alp IR �ilill�ll:� e_��- ' _.. �■ Not dams 0-0 IN • ./ _'':fir ' ' i►��1�!��':',� � � �.� I� ��► was mr— f�I �� i t •�''�� i / '� § 100-32 SOUTHOLD CODE § 100-33 (3) All lots shown on minor subdivision maps that have been granted sketch plan approval by the Planning Board prior to May 20, 1983. (4) All lots set off or created by approval of the Planning Board subsequent to November 23, 1971, and prior to May 20, 1983. C. The bulk and parking requirements for single-family dwellings set forth in Columns i and iii of the Bulk Schedule and Parking Schedule incorporated into this chapter shall apply to the following lots: t (1) All lots shown on minor subdivision maps which have been granted sketch plan approval by the Planning I Board on or after May 20, 1983. (2) All lots shown on major subdivision maps upon which the Planning Board has held a hearing for preliminary map approval on or after May 20, 1983. J (3) All lots set off or created by approval of the Planning Board on or after May 20, 1983. D. The bulk and parkin g g requirements for two-family dwellings �~ ; set forth in Column xii of the Bulk Schedule and Parking Schedule incorporated into this chapter shall apply to the following lots: + (1) All lots shown on minor subdivision maps which have been granted sketch plan approval by the Planning Board on or after May 20, 1983. (2) All lots shown on major subdivision maps upon which the Planning Board has held a hearing for preliminary approval on or after May 20, 1983. (3) All lots set off or created by approval of the Planning Board on or after May 20, 1983. § 10043.3. Accessory buildings. _ In the Agricultural-Conservation District and Low-Density Residential R-80, R-120, R-200 and R-400 Districts, accessory 10050 2-25-89 :� Y .. � k.. ; C �' � .- -.-.��-.._. -_.. - -.�.-... ...-._.�._-...._�--ter....__.w.• .)) -- j•,� t t . § 100-31 ZONING § 100-32 t. (b) Adequate supervised parking facilities shall be ? . provided. i l (c) No signs,except one(1)one-premises sign not larger than six(6)square feet in size displayed for a period of not longer than one(1)week immediately prior to the day of such sale, shall be permitted. (d) A permit is obtained therefor from the Building Inspector upon the payment of a fee of fifteen dollars ,. ($15.). { z t C ' t § 100-32. Bulk, area and parking regulations. No building or premises shall be used and no building or part thereof shall be erected or altered in the Agricultural-Conservation District and in the Low-Density Residential R-80 District unless the same conforms to the Bulk Schedule and Parking Schedule7 incorporated into this chapter with the same force and effect as if such t regulations were set forth herein in full, as well as to the following bulk and parking requirements: A. In the case of a lot held in single and separate ownership prior to November 23, 1971,and thereafter,with an area of less than forty thousand (40,000) square feet, a single-family dwelling may be constructed thereon,provided that the requirements of E. Column vii of the Bulk Schedule and the Parking Schedule 1 incorporated in this chapter are complied with. B. The bulk and parking requirements for single-family 1 dwellings as set forth in Column ii of the Bulk Schedule and the Parking Schedule incorporated into this chapter shall apply to the following lots: (1) All lots shown on major and minor subdivision maps which were granted final approval by the Planning Board prior to May 20, 1983. (2) All lots shown on major subdivision maps upon which the Planning Board has held a hearing for preliminary map ` approval prior to May 20, 1983. 7 Editor.s Note: The Bulk Schedule is included at the end of this chapter,and the Parking Schedule is in§ 100-191t. r i 10049 2-2.-89 § 100-33 ZONING § 100-30A.2 buildings and structures or other accessory uses may be located in the required rear yard, subject to the following requirements: A. Such buildings shall not exceed eighteen (18) feet in height. B. Such buildings shall be set back no less than three (3) feet from any lot line. C. All such buildings in the aggregate shall occupy not more than forty percent (400/6) of the area of the required rear yard. ARTICLE IIIA Low Density Residential R-40 District [Added 1-10-89 by L.L. No. 1-1989] § 100-30A.1. Purpose. The purpose of the Low-Density Residential R40 District is to provide areas for residential development where existing neighbor- hood characteristics, water supply and environmental conditions permit full development densities of approximately one (1) dwelling per acre and where open space and agricultural preservation are not predominate objectives. § 100-30A.2. Use regulations. In an R-40 District, no building or premises shall be used and no building or part of a building shall be erected or altered which is arranged, intended or designed to be used, in whole or in part,for any uses except the following: A. Permitted uses: (1) Same as § 100-31A of the Agricultural-Conservation District. B. Uses permitted by special exception of the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as a special exception by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided, and subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: (1) Same as § 100-31B of the Agricultural-Conservation District, except that a children's recreation camp. farm 10051 -89 § 100-30A.2 SOUTHOLD CODE § 10040 labor camp and veterinarian's office and animal hospital are not permitted and bed-and-breakfast uses do not require site plan approval. (2) Libraries, museums or art galleries. C. Accessory uses, limited to the following. (1) Same as § 100-31C of the Agricultural-Conservation District. § 100-30A.3. Bulk, area and parking regulations. No building or premises shall be used and no building or part thereof shall be erected or altered in the Low-Density Residential R- 40 District unless the same conforms to the requirements of the Bulk Schedule and of the Parking Schedule, a with the same force and effect as if such regulations were set forth herein in full. § 100-30A.4. Accessory buildings. Accessory buildings shall be subject to the same requirements as § 100-33 of the Agricultural-Conservation District. ARTICLE IV Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District [Added 1-10-89 by L.L. No. 1-198991 § 100-40. Purpose. The purpose of the Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District is to permit a mix of housing types and level of residential density appropriate to the areas in and around the major hamlet centers, particularly Mattituck, Cutchogue, Southold, Orient and the Village of Greenlxwrt. 8 Editors Note: The Bulk Schedule is included at the end of this chapter,and the Parking Schedule is in§ 100.191A. 9 Editor's Note: This local law also repealed former Art. IV, M Light Multiple-Residence District.w amended. 10052 2-25-89 Town of Southold Density and Minimum Lot Size Schedule for Residential Districts' [Added 1-10-89 by L.L.No.1-1989] R-40 R-80 R-120 R-200 R-400 HD A-C Residential Residential Residential Residential Residential Hamlet RR RO Agricultural- Low-Density Low-Density Low-Density Low-Density Low-Density Density Resort Residential Districts Conservation (One-Acre) (Two-Acre) (Three-Acre) (Five-Acre) (Ten-Acre) Residential Residential Office ' MINIMUM I.OT SIZE.(square feet): 7 I-family detached dwelling Residential unit without utilities 80,000 40,000 80,000 120,000 200,000 400,000 20,000(vii) 20.000(vii) 40,000 Residential unit with community water NA NA NA NA NA NA 20,000(vii) 20,000(vii) NA Residential unit with community water NA NA NA NA NA NA 10,000(xi) 12,000(xi) NA and sewer 2-family detached dwelling 2-family dwelling without utilities 160,000(xii) 80,000(iii) 160,000(xii) 240,000(v) 400,000(vi) 800,0()0(vi) 40,000(ii) 40,000(ii) 80.000(iii) 2-family dwelling with community water NA NA NA NA NA NA 40,000(ii) 40,000(ii) NA 2-family dwelling with community water NA NA NA NA NA NA 20,000(vii) 20.000(vii) NA and sewer t Multiple dwelling unit or townhouse' Multiple dwelling or townhouse without NA NA NA NA NA NA 20,000 NA' NA a utilities Multiple dwelling or townhouse with NA NA NA NA NA NA 20,000 NA' NA community water Multiple dwelling or townhouse with NA NA NA NA NA NA 10,000 NAI NA community water and sewer Motel,hotel or conference center guest unit' 1 Guest unit without utilities NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6,000 NA Guest unit with community water NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 6,000 NA j Guest unit with community water and NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 4,000 NA sewer Nonresidential use(as permitted) j Use with or without utilities 80,000 40,000 80,000 120,000 $00,000 400,000 NA 40,000 40,000 1 KEY: NA=Not applicable. NOTES: Roman numerals refer to applicable column in the Residential Bulk Schedule.Where no Roman numeral is indicated,refer to the district column in the Residential Bulk Schedule. 2 For multiple dwelling,hotel,motel and/or conference uses(where permitted),this table refers to minimum lot area per unit.Refer to the Residential Bulk Schedule for total lot size,yard and setback dimensions for the applicable district,unless more-restrictive requirements are indicated in the text of the chapter. '[Amended 8-1-89 by I.L.No.14-1989] 10-2b-89 t § 100-243 SOUTHOLD CODE § 100-244 § 100-244 ZONING § 100-250 § 100-243. Nonconforming buildings with nonconforming uses. I.ot Yard Area Width Depth Front Side Both Sides Rear A. A nonconforming building containing a nonconforming use (square feet) coverage (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) (feet) shall not be enlarged, reconstructed or structurally altered or 20,000 20% 120 140 40 15 35 50 moved unless the use of such building is changed to a to 40.000 conforming use. Less than 20V 80 100 35 15 25 35 20.000 B. A nonconforming building containing a nonconforming use C. In the case of single and separate ownership of a nonconform- 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 ing lot located in a subdivision plat, approved after April 9, repaired or rebuilt unless the use of such building is changed 1957, by the Planning Board of the Town of Southold and filed with the County Clerk of Suffolk County, relief for all front, to a conforming use. side and rear yard and area dimensions shall be granted to the extent that such front, side and rear yard and area dimensions were required at the time the map was originally filed with § 100-244. Nonconforming lots. the County Clerk of Suffolk County. A. This subsection is intended to provide minimum standards for granting of a building permit for lots made nonconforming or § 100-245. Repairs and maintenance. continued in a state of nonconformance by the adoption of this Notwithstanding any of the foregoing regulations, nothing in this Article and that were singly and separately owned as of the Article shall be deemed to prevent normal maintenance and repair of effective date of this Article. any building or the carrying out up on the issuance of a building B. A nonconforming lot separately owned and not adjoining any permit of major structural alterations or demolitions necessary in the lot or land in the same ownership at the effective date of this interest of public safety. Article and not adjoining any lot or land in the same ownership at any time subsequent to such date may be used, or a building or structure may be erected on such lot for use, § 100-246. Involuntary moves. in accordance with all the other applicable provisions of this Sections 100-241A and B and§ 100-243A herein are not intended to chapter, provided that proof of such separate ownership is apply to involuntary movements of uses or structures as a result of submitted in the form of an abstract of title showing the condemnation actions or other litigation. changes of title to said lot, which abstract shall be in the usual form, shall be certified by an attorney or a company regularly doing such work in Suffolk County or by a corporation duly ARTICLE XXV licensed to examine and ensure title to real property in Suffolk Site Plan A County and shall contain a certification that no contiguous Approval property was owned by an owner of the property involved [Added 1-10-89 by L.L. No. 1-1989; amended since the date of any previously applicable Zoning Law. Such 5-23-89 by L.L. No. 9-1989] lot shall be granted relief for front side and rear yard § 100-250. Applicability. dimensions as follows: This Article shall apply to every land use that is permitted in the Town of Southold except the single-family home use on a single and 10144 2-25-89 10145 ;-25-89 l § 100-11 SOUTHOLD CODE § 100-12 C. In their interpretation and application, the provisions of this chapter shall be held to be the minimum requirements adopted for the promotion of the public health, safety and welfare. Except where specifically provided to the contrary, it is not intended by this chapter to repeal, abrogate, annul or in any way to impair or interfere with any rules, regulations or permits previously adopted or issued or which shall be adopted or issued pursuant to law relating to the use of buildings, structures, shelters or premises; nor is it intended by this chapter to interfere with or abrogate or annul any easements, covenants or other agreements between parties. [Added 1-10- 89 by L.L. No. 1-1989] § 100-12. Exceptions. [Amended 10-30-73 by L.L. No. 5-1973] All of the lots on the following subdivision maps shall be excepted from the lot area and lot width requirements of this chapter, and the lot areas and lot widths applicable to said lots shall be as shown and designated on said subdivision maps:Green Acres;.Stratmors; Marion Manor; Cleaves Point, Section II; Fordham Acres, Section I; Fordham Acres, Section II; Sterling Homes; Eastern Shores, Section I; Eastern Shores, Section II; Eastern Shores, Section III; Eastern Shores, Section IV; Eastern Shores, Section V; Southold Shores; Sunny Shores; Moose Cove; Nassau Point; Deer Park; Village Manor; G.I. Tuthill; Edgemere Park; Willow Terrace; Soundcrest Woods; Gardiners Bay Estates, Section III; Harvest Homes, Section I; Bayview Woods Estates;Willow Point;Harbor Lights Estates, Section I; Terry Waters; Bay Haven; Corey Creek Estates; West Creek Estates; Northwoods; Vista Bluff, Jackson Landing, Bennett's Pond; Rosewood Estates; Sunset Knolls, Section II; Smithfield Park; Paradise Point; Harbor Lights Estates, Section III; Highwood; Nunnakoma Waters; Yennecott Park; Downsview; South Harbor Homes; Peconic Shores, Section I; Peconic Homes, Section I; Peconic Homes, Section II;Peconic Bay Oaks;Laurel Country Estates; Orient- by-The-Sea, Section II; Cleaves Point, Section III. 10012 2-25.89 § 100-280 ZONING § 100-281 j 100-281 SOUTHOLD CODE § 100-281 F. At the request of the Planning Board, the Building Inspector existing building and of other existing buildings on the shall review site plan applications for compliance with this same lot. chapter and requirements established in the presubmission ' conference. (4) The dimensions of all yards in relation to the subject building, and the distances between such building and any other existing buildings on the same lot and adjacent § .100-281. Building permits. lots. No building in any district shall be erected,reconstructed,restored, (5) The existing and intended use of all buildings,existing or moved or structurally altered without a building permit duly issued proposed, the use of land and the number of dwelling upon application to the Building Inspector. No building permit shall units the building is designed to accommodate; and the be issued unless the proposed construction or use is in full conformity necessary computations to establish conformity to the with all the provisions of this chapter and the provisions of all other bulk and density regulations. ,pplicable laws, ordinances, rules and regulations. Any building (6) Such topographic or other information with regard to the ,dermit issued in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be null building, the lot or neighboring lots as may be necessary and void and of no effect without the necessity for any proceedings, to determine that the proposed construction will conform revocations or nullification thereof; and any work undertaken or use to the provisions of this chapter. established pursuant to the issuance of a permit in violation of the provisions of this chapter shall be invalid. (7) An application for a building permit for construction on a vacant lot which is not on an approved subdivision map A. Applications. Every application for a building permit shall shall be accompanied by a certified abstract of title contain the following information and be accompanied by the issued by a title company which shall show single and required fee and a plot plan drawn to scale and signed by the separate ownership of the entire lot prior to April 9, 1957. person responsible for each drawing. If no such plot plan is [Added 3-14-89 by L.L. No. 3-1989] available, a survey is required, prepared by a licensed engineer or land surveyor. If the Building Inspector deems it B. No building permit shall be issued for the construction or necessary that plans and specifications be examined to alteration of any building upon a lot without access to a street ascertain if the proposed building will comply with applicable or highway as provided by § 280-a of the Town Law. building construction, housing and fire codes, he may require C. No building permit shall be issued for any building where the that plans and specifications be filed with the building permit site plan of such building is subject to approval by the application. Planning Board,except in conformity with the plans approved (1) The actual shape, dimensions, radii, angles and area of by the said Board. the lot on which the building is proposed to be erected,or D. No building permit shall be issued for a building in any of the lot on which it is situated if an existing building, district where such use is permitted by special exception except in the case of the alterations of a building which do unless and until such approval has been duly granted by the not affect the exterior thereof. board haAng jurisdiction thereof. (2) The section,block and lot numbers, if any,as they-appear E. No building permit shall be issued for any building until • on the latest tax records. approval has been received from the Suffolk County Depart- (3) The exact size and locations on the lot of the propcncd ment of Health Services for the proposed water supply and - building or buildings or structural alteration of an sewage disposal system. 10167 5.25-89 10168 5-25-89 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 516-298-8353 TELEFAX NO.516-298-2012 DANIELC.ROSS TELEFAX NO.516-298-8565 KAREN J.HAGEN HUBERT F.SULLIVAN January 9, 1990 Zoning Board of Appeals, Town of Southold Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: In the Matter of the Petition of Robert J. Ochsenreiter and Edward Lenceski Dear Sirs: Enclosed herewith please find Petitioner' s Application to the Southold Town Board of Appeals which seeks a determination reversing the decisions of the Building Inspector with respect to granting Vacant Land C.O. No. Z- 17543, dated November 28, 1988 and Building Permit No. 18355Z, dated August 8, 1989. Also enclosed is the Short Environmental Assessment Form, ZBA Questionnaire and Notice to Adjacent Property Owners with certified mailing slips annexed thereto. We request this be put on for the earliest possible date. I ry ,ruly rs a 1 oss DCR:vm Encl. - µ zbaencl76 .i Ln �b xi,�'� '� Town Ha11, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 JUDITH T. TERRY TELEPHONE TOWN CLERK (516)765-1801 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals From: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk Dated: Janualry 19, 1989 Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 3908 application of Inland Homes, Inc. for a variance. Also included is: Notification to Adjacent Property Owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form letter relative to NYS Tidal Wetlands Land Use; Notice of Disapproval 'from the Building Department; survey of property; and any other attachments relative to this application. • Judith T. Terry QUESTIONNAIRE TO 3E CO:IPLETED AND SUM11TTED IETH `LUUf2 UO:ti•15 TO THE GU:_[ZD OU t",PPEALS Please complete, sign and return to the Office of the Board of Appeals with your completed application forms. If "Yes" is answered to anv 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? Ye Ilk 2.a)Are there any areas which dontain wetland grasses? (Attached is a list of the wetland grasses defined by Town Code, Ch. 97 for your reference. ) Yes Ue' b) Are there any areas open to a waterway without bulkhead? Yes 10 3. Are there existing structures at or below ground level, such as patios, foundations, etc? 1 4. Are there any existing or proposed fences, concrete barriers , decks, etc? ye 5. If project is proposed for an accessory building or structure, is total height at more than 18 feet above tlWcc�, ?v average ground level? State total: ft. Yes 6. If project is proposed for principal building or structure, is total height at more than 35 feet above tar_J�11WW_ average ground level? State total:. . . ft. Yes 7. Are there other premises underwnership abutting this parcel? If yes, please submit..copy of deed. Yes .� 8. Are there any building permits pending on this parcel UNeL 'n (or abutting land under your ownership, if any) ? Yes State Permit # and Nature: 9. Do state whether or not applications are pending concerning these premises before any other department �. or agency (State, Town, County, Village, etc. ) : (AJAh"a1V Planning Board Yes o � Town Board Yes o Town Trustees Yes o lr County Health Department Yes o ` Village of Greenport Yes o N.Y.S.D.E.C. Yes . o Other Yes o _ 10. Is premises pending a sale or conveyance? �pper� 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? u �"4 Yes 12. If new construction is proposed in an area within �� 75 feet of wetland grasses, or land area at an eleva- tion of five feet or less above mean sea level, have . you made application to the Town Trustees for an 'inspection for possible waiver or permit under the tij .h• requirements of Ch. 97 of the Town Code? Yes 13. Please list present use or operations conducted upon the subject property at this time and proposed Please submit photograpns for tiie recora. I certifyJbyhe t the above statements are true and are being submitted for reliance � Board of Appeals in consdering my application. WI W AM & BR S LER,n .C. fo Pet' Toners oil Signature e1ut:zorizeci agent) 1/88 WETLANDS (Amended 8-26-71; by L.L. No. '2.1!)^,O: .Z '`(;- - 85 by L.L. No. A. TIDAL WETLANDS: (1) All lands Kenerally coverecl or intermittently c•ov- cred with,(jr-Which border on, ti(jal waters, or lands lyinK beneath tidal waters, which at mean low tide are covered by tidal watery to a maximum depth of five (5) feet, including but not limited to banks. bogs, salt marsh, swamps. meaclowv, flats or other IOW lying lands subject to tidal action: (2) All banks, bogs, nuadows, flats and tidal marsh subject to such tides anci upon which grows or may, grow some or any of the following: salt hay, black grass, saltworts, sea lavender, tall cordgrass, high bush. cattails, groundsel. marshmallow and low march cordgrass;and/or (3) All land immediately adjacent to a tidal wetland as defined in Subsection A('.'.) and lying within seven- ty-five (75) feet landward of the most landward edge of such a tidal wetland. E. FRESIiWATER WETLANIS: (1) "Freshwater wetlands"as defined in Article;2.1. Ti- tle 1. § 24-0107, Subdivisions 1(a) to I(d) inclusive, of the Environmental Conservation Law of the State of New York:and - (2) All land immediately adjacent to a"freshwater wet- land,"as defined in Subsection BQ)and 1}•ing with- in seventy-five (75) feet landward of the most land- ward edge of a"freshwfiter wetland." ( 9705 z•�s•Hs , ,14.16.4(2/871—Text 12 _ d PROJECT I.D.NUMBER 617.21 L SEQR Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I—PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR . 2. PROJECT NAME Robert J. Ochsenreiter' & Edward Lenceski Application to ZBA 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality Matti tuck county Suffolk 77PRECISE LOCATION(Street address and road intersections,prominent landmarks,etc.,or provide map) 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York SCTM 1000/139/3/14 S. IS PROPOSED ACTION: ❑New ❑Expansion ❑Modificationlalteration Reversal 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY. To reverse Building Department decisions 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially acres Ultimately acres 15,000 sq. feet 8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? Yes ❑No If No,describe briefly r \ 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? t_PResldentlal ❑Industrial Q Commercial ❑Agriculture ❑Park/Forest/Open space ❑Other Describe: 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL,OR FUNDING.NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY(FEDERAL. STATE OR LOCAL)? ❑Yes BNo It yes,list agency(s)and permit/approvalsT 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? ❑Yes UNo If yes, list agency name and permitlapproval • 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? IN Yes ❑No I CER IFY T AT E INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE C Applicant/sponsor name: Date; /• ,WICKHAM, WFIC AM & BRESSLER, or i lone Signature: If the action is in the Coastal Area. and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 (Continued on reverse side) The N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act requires submission of this form, and an environmental review will be atade Ly this Board before any action is taken. SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM INSTRUCTIONS: (a) In order to answer the questions in this short EAF it is- assumed ' that the preparer will use currently available information concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action. It is not expected that additional studies, research or other investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any question has been answered Yes the project may be sig- nificant and completed Environmental Assessment Form is necessary. (c) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that the project is not 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 X NO 2. Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual land form on the site? •• Yes X No 3. Will project alter or have a large effect on an existing body of water? _Yes X No 4. Will project have a potentially large- impact on groundwater quality? Yes 4_-No/d 5. Will project significantly effect drainage flow on adjacent sites? '� Yes �No Po55Yg�.E 6. Will project affect any threatened or endangered plant or animal species? _Yes X No 7. Will project result in a major adverse effect on air quality? _Yes X No 8. Will project have a major effect on visual char- acter of the community or scenic views or vista known to be important to the community? Yes ' 0 Pa 9. Will project adversely impact any site or struct- ure of historic, pre-historic, or paleontological' importance or any site designated as a critical envircnmental area by a local agency? _Yes XNo 10. Will project have a major effect on existing or 40 future recreational opportunities? _Yes XNo 11. Will project result in major traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing transportation systems? Yes XNo 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable odors, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturb- ance as a result of the project's operation? _yes )° No 13. Will project have any impact on public health or safety? ^�ffC Yes ffNo 14. Will project affect the existing community by directly causing a growth in permanent popula- tion of more than 5 percent over a one-year Yes period or have a major negative effect on the X No character of the community or neighborhood? 15. Is there pub is controver project? Y concerning t Yes oltro L Preparer's Signature: 6�Ak r Representing: �e 1L1�dner r, P.C. ZBA y/75 Date: r ♦ ♦ ♦ �I 1 I� ♦ ♦I • ...�/ j. ��• � � O-• a Aye Oro ICI�� •. �1•`. III AMrs ro li �s>t� • ■ -_ r y�► �.�► �i�,, , . _,.- .�.�>I wo dill 9T • ' _•�' 11®/ill : :1��r :�' ORR •:a,.'- . " C� _�,�. 111 me m NOR MON.", 0-1 OR :IIs 1 .01 . . y � , ■jai ,�' , u � Nil lot � II 8 a s v yo♦ \ r �1 e a ♦ E \ / 9 9y0 ``6./\�� tip\/.re\ _ /e•/,�`�,• ` fU,A \ °M1! .,•ab e.fe,/ ��` YY 'MY`�\ �\` b /// y1 .d\ ! t � I• / —_ �Y/ y / ooaa SAC \ \ `°�\� .b //// d � ud •S .s tv l w do 44 Mt a C.'10" ffA,DD P.wNB, Legend KEY MAP © COUNTY OF SUFFOLK TOWN OF SOUTF 0..amryw R.Y Lim Ceinh Ll°. �_� Fe.Df,n;,.LW __.f___ Nrd.ml D�,YkI Li•,_—.N.—_ Subdi•i,im L,r N,. JIA IC1 EL BARER,]R. D BooVILLAGE OF ,,,E•,,,,, ....E._,o �— T. Lw ___— Yww ., _..___ LI. __.R.__ DUD;.w,lu ,] `° Real Property Tax Service gencyCw ___L___e1wL Ne. 3 X,IM D�•wYiw ], SCALE UIfEET CoUnly Centef DISTRICTNO. I00 v.il,..1 I1 L:.B _ Pwi ObY:n LI°, _.P--- Pwol Xa. D o..d A.w Idl Riverhead,L.L,New YDrk ]AI.1 Dw.,f C,mDl,lien � sa�'! •?�i•''� � l '�1111111 ':Sf�: :=p ■ oil ilia �I ME will? �i Ail pt Sm IF sell _ ♦ - Jr OWN !':� _==:min�.•�r. tl �o�• �� i I�� C ws p, air 1988 1989 RES PRP R H AC ------- 0 C CL S SS N Y CK --PARCEL- R D N A M E LAND- TbcfAL �i'N D TOTAL —34 ------ 400 400 400 400 311 1 139. -3-15 —gZ5 INLAND �STWA�LT6R� 800 5#,300 800 5,,300 210 1 I --139 -3-18. 1 C U-0 0 C H S.E-NR-E I.TER ROBERT J-- -'l 0 0 0-------------- 6 bo 1 ,000 5 0-6 r,0 -210 1 139 -3-20 C 00 LENCESKI EDWARD F & WF 900 5,P200 900 5,1900 210 1 139 -3-21 C PH CLANC-Y.-.PATRICIA M & - 500 4,- 500 - 210 1 139 -3-22 C GA ZAHRA SALVINA 400 3,,300 . 400 3, 300 210 1 13-93-2 3 c 4 T TYR--LE -GREG A-4 Rl'rK-- ------------ 600-- ---3 5 00 500- 210 1 139.-3-24 C RM DEVERNA RAYMOND J & WF 800 3,300- 800 --- 3,.30.0.. 210 1 4 3--2 5 C SF HARVEY CARROLL J & WF 800 4,400 800 4,400 210 1 139.-3-25 N SF HARVEYr CARROLL J WF 800 4,400 800 4,400 210 1 29------ C VD KOLBE E R W I N A 750 3,350 750 3, 350 210 1 139.-3-29 N VD KOLBE ERWIN A 750 3,350 3,350 210 1 is —13 .-- - k -1210 1 3 3*0----l'------- 5 5 0 450 1 ,550 450 139.-3-31 .1 C QV ORLOWSKI BRUNO 450 4,550' 450 4, 550 210 1 3-9 3 3 2 .--1 C RO LENAHAN J DR 5 5 -8 5 0 2 10 1 139.-3-33.1 C SH SKIREL EDWARD J & WF 650 4,250 650 4,250 210 1 ---------- --T-3 9.-3-3 4 U F FOLK COUNTY 3-00- -300------- ----300-- ---73 0 0 821 8 139.-3-35 C SX DRAKE RICHARD E 3 WF 700 51000 70,0 5,000 210 1 ---1 4---T-0-0 210 f- WF I 139.-3-37 C UJ HARRIS KEITH 600 5,.-000 600 51000 210 1 -1- 6-0 OF--- 0 0 0 210 1 0 ---1 39 3-�-38 rm MA 8 139.-3-39 C VV MCMAHON JAMES C & WF 600 3,700 600 3,700 210 1 --3---kO-- C-pyz- 139.-3-41 C QR ZAZESKI DAVID J & WF 700 5P000 700 51000 210 1 1 1 fli 100------ 210 139.-3-43 C SD KUKIS JOANNA & ORS 600 50900 600 5,900 210 1 131 3-----44 C-S-W--RH.0.DE-S H-ARRY- .-C 3,00 -8 0 8 13 8 0 0 311 1 139.-3-45 C TP MYERS RUTH M 11000 4,400 11000 4,400 210 1 9-'-�`�6--- C-01-MY E-R-5---RU TH---M 5 Cf---3-5 3 3 5 311 139.-3-47 C VB WADELTON PETER & WF 500 3,600 500 3,600 210 1 - 1 210 1 139.9 --3---48— C VU BIELEWICZ -5 011-- 139.-3-49 C WN COLES JOHN & WF 300 300 300 300 311 1 I- w- - . - 700 5,700 210 1 30 3�5 0--- C QQ GOURLIDES PETER & ANDR 139.-4-1 C ON MUNCH MARGARET A 700 700 700 700 311 1 --- 0 0 -70 0----- -210- 1 - C QC MUNCH RICHARD 1 139.-4-3 C PZ SUFFOLK COUNTY 100 100 100 100 8 -139— C QS RICHERT 210 1 139.-4-5 C RL LEVESQUE ALBERT D & JU 600 4,600 ----__.._.._.._..700 6 0 0 4,600 210 1 7 13 9 4--6 -'-C -SE F-- L---0 W---E-I S- J-0-H---N- R 700- -1-1-8 00- 00 -8 210 11 139.-4-7 C SX MARCUS PETER 600 5,300 600 5, 300 210 1 600----- 5-r 40 0 210 1 139.-4-12.1 C QU SIDOR EDWARD 600 2,900 600 21900 210 1 --- ---- -39 2*'.- S-1 D 0-0'--E D WA-R-b---'&-----W F ------------ 7 0 G - 8 l' -7CO -81-90 0 210 1 139.-4-13 C QR CAIN HOWARD F 600 4,400 -6(0 4,.400 210 1 139.-'4-14' ------ 600 00 4 -1-000 6('0- -4,000' - 210 1 140.-1 -1 C JW GULLATT STEPHANIE 2 ,200 51500 2e?-co 51500 210 1 r VO (A r7V I T r r:0 F P ny I R, 14F no 5 on Cl 5 0 q 210 1 [ OH HUGMES ELwuu � u � �, ' - 1OU /ou 38 Z �D - - '--------------r--pA'- r A�- � BUr�� -� cH ARQ--& -WF--'--- ---1OO- -'-- -' OO � OO 100 323 1 13 -�1 � PT ST8UTEN8URGH PAUL � BA 1OO ---� OO - - '--'�OO -- 3OO - 911 1 13 13 - �2 ' ---'-'- - 3OD------- �DO 14 _�� - --�--- - r 'Q� '�iOV�R-�'E�N�ER J� � �OO �2��OO 3*900 1 �,2OO �1D � __ _ -- '-- 14 - - - C MR MOISA J0SEpH B & WF � -------'2-DOC| ---- 710013 - �1O 1 -1 ------------- C -NK 3TRUNG-�EF'�ER� � � `�F----- ---' 2~OOO ------' ��OOO 2�OOO 83OO Z18 � 14 � 8 �OO ' _ - ^ '`~ - ' ' -' - - � OOO r ��""" - -- - --- - - � 4 - - ^ � 0D �RIK3EN EU�T��E C � W� * " �"~ ------'�-OOO ---'-' '� 3 OOO - ��1- � - -3 -'------- C-p3-pQAE�O�tU� 'RI�HARU J ------�- �� ^OOO --------2�DOO ~ Z° OOO �1 � 1 � � 1 � � - - - - Z ODO � ODD ^ ' - ~ ' - � ''- 2 ODO ' � - -- - -- - 1 � ' -~ ` RAET�R%U3 ROGER WF � � "~� - -- - ' 7 8DO 21O 1 �� Q0 P - --- - - - -- -1 -�OO ' ' 1-4 � ^ "= ' "" ^"^ ^`~^- - � ' -- - � 4OO'----- - 7�8OO ° ' *ovu ^ . ~ . 14 1 5~ -- ---- - �-�p MURPHY-pAUL V & ANO � 6 �OO ' � -- 61200 �1O 1 - MC�0ORT GEORGE F Q WF �OO ~ o""------'- 6 1OU-- Z1O � -- -- ' - 14 1 -6 � QI - � � ��--'--------�OO--------��DO---------�O� , 1 � �o`~ � 7 - --------------------�-�A- -�1][�AAFL & � E � �OO 5OO ��OQ 210 1 - [ RU H�A� FREDERlCK E Q WF 5OO * �---'-'-'----4�O --'- --'� ��OO- - 31 � 1-- - '- - -- 14 199~-1-8__ -- -'-----'----' -'---C--�N-��MA}�N-NEIL ALAN-- '-- -- --' - -- �OO -----------4DO �OO �v �OO 210 1 14 E pD & 7OO 4p�O0 ° - -- �� O 1-- --' - - 14 0139 -1 -1O C MQ HAMANN_GE0�� --- ----------' --' �6OU --------4�O�0 ------ '---6OU---- - 'l^'-ODD 14 ~ ' - --------------'-�--�j-��(j�� EL8%SE 8OO � OO� 21O � SE 600 4rOOO ` -'--2� O- �------ - --- 14 ^ \]Y -1 -� 1 N �� 80WDEN E�O% ____.-----'-'--'------'7OO--------��4OO-----------�yOO----- '��4GOr 14 � ~ -------- )��[OM�[-ROY E. 5 500 �1O 1 ��2- --------- C oc mUENSCH SNEILA & hOD 5r5OO 8DO-^- -- �° 7OO --�Z� O '1 --- - - 14 Uy~-l -13 ___--- C-OV -W��A.��r� m%CH�R�-�- �-]�p-'----'-- --'6OO----------��'�OO------ ---i�OO 8^O�O �� O � 14 14 - ------'-'-'- C p� p �� 6OO 8��OO �OD ^ � � , D9 _1 _15 C QH WITHU3 THEDD0RE H OOO---'------8� ---------'-�OO------ ��ZO�- ---'�1O' 1 � 4 ' ��1 _1�` --- - '--------'---'-l�-�7\- � J8SEpH F & SOO 8�ZOO 800 6~200 210 1 __--' - -- 14 ' - ',^_1 _16 N RA DOHERTY JOSEpH E Q -__---�------- '7O[/--'------��OO\l'--------�y�7OO-'---- 7,UO[/ - '-210' Y' � � w "`~ 1�1 -------------'--�-�1,-rA��t�-��TANLEY 5 �OO 5*�D8 ��3OO 5"�OO 311_1_____ .� - � � - ' �M M[NULTY E�N� V v '------`7 -OOO- Z� D � 89 -1-1O C ----'------�-�� '��OO�---------��>�OO � ' ' ~ - - M ��ou" � �OD 3 6DO g� � � , ° 1 �Y��1 -1� � &�ARA8I �LI �»6OO 3r600 � ---'--' 11��0OC[--- � O-� ----- - - 14 ' 1�V -1-�O 3 � 0E ------------'� �[Y�--------��OO[>--------'��6O� ^ � �4 ~ ~ --- ----------------�' pA AGAAA\9I ALI � � DO� 5 7OD 210 1-139 �1 -2O~2 � 88 �GARA8I ALI 1 °8OO 5,700 ~ OO-------'5�y�O--'--�1O-�------' ' --- ---14-' - - � 159~-1-21 ___----_-_-------------�� \/ 'tASS�TA MAR &-W�--------��8� 5'~9OO l ^uDO 7~ZOO 21O � 14 Y3V��1� 2Z-- � DOO � °* " - - ` -- - 1 8O� * "" ' --- --- ' --'- --1 �'� ' ^� C pN �ELLARS pAMEL� J " ' `~~ OO---'------�- @DD----21O -� 1�4~-1 -Z� ---- ------[- QG -MC�INT� GERAL0 P � W� -----'--� ��D 7° 5OO 2� O � 14 'Y3�--��- �� -----'--------- � �O� � DDO ^ � - - ` -- � O�O � ^ ' - - - - -- ' 14 '''~ ' ^- C QZ &�AR�B1 AL� � ' ~~~ ---�� --- - -2� O � ' 1�4 1 25 - ---------� '---- DO� " - - ^ ~^ �'-�'�� - ------------- 'OOO ��OU - ^~- - - 14 '''~ ' --- -- ---------- -- ---- C- 0T S�AULT� �AV[ D p - q�O Z°2OO Z6O �-Y3q��2-3 C PM MATT-A-MAR INC �OO ��OD---------4�l�O[)--------1-Z-5O�'--- � O-�------ --' - 14 - � 134~-2-4 ------------- t-�p-'8A��Q-yINA � A�O' -'-----�--'�---4��8OO---------1��7]O ` �^OOO 2� O � 14 Y3g��Z��-�--'------- � OOO 8OO " - - 8OO ° ' -- ' - ----- ' ' -- � 4 '~'~ � - � Qp J 0HNSDN RUUOLpH � ~~` '---- --- 5OO ----3� 1 � 1J9 3 � � ----------- --- ----��O-----------�7]O � � - - ~ - ' -- bOO 14 ''' ~ ~ ~-'-------------'-----�- Q�-�HANFF [HARLES O ~�- � � DO � ' 1 1 OO 311 1 ' T3q� 3�4~ 1 0N RUD0LpH & WF 1 �1 OO 11100 � " --'--�� ---'- - '- 14 ' 139.-3-6. 1 � S� J 0HN� R [ ARL J R � � F ---' ----Y°��Dn--------�g�� ------f�� lO----- -- ��U� 21 O � 14 -Y39-�1 7 -'-- ----- ---'- C SH RE IrE � OO- 8r�OO � �OOD 8*3OO __--____ _____ __ 14_ _ 1�9^ 3 8 [ 7A NDWAK FRANK K & WF " » -------��-OD[)' DO--'-----6�OOO'-----�� D '� / ~- - ------ - -- [ TT TAN�� RI CHARD � - -----------��OO- � / �* 3, 8OO �1 O � 14 -l3V-�3- 9 ----' ------ � 0DO 6OO - - J J M4R7 8�O ~ --- � -- - 1 � ' - ' -' ~ - ' [ NW �ATTO EUW� D u ~ ~~- - -- - �� OO --- �1O 1 139 � 1O ~ ^ ''-`` ' - ----- 4- �OO '- ---'- 8U[/ " ' � ~- - ^ � ' - ARS J�MES 3 &- J0SE'-- ----��OO - ^ - ' ~- Z | C � � � - - - ' � OP SELL - - � 000 �lu � -------- »=» �""`^ ^ ~ ~~~^ - � � �~DOO 4OO " ^ - - - ' | 139 _�_�� C p l J EAVONS HOW4RO � & GER _- __-� _ +«u_-___'---5°�OO-- - -------'�OO---'-' ' 300 -- �� D � - � w ~ - �~~�. �P �ARC� A 8ICHAqD � +uu -�3p.-�^�� - - _ -------___-__---'---- Z3'3 200-J-988T0TA�'--'- ---- - ------- TOTALS 51 PARCELS KACT%VE� 233,600 1989 TOTAL " ---'------ ------pA�E - U . ------� BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter or the Petition of ROBERT J. OCHSENREITER & NOTICE EDWARD I ENCUKT ? - -{ rfi TO to the Board of Appeal.s...of:the-.Tdwn;tif.Southold ADJACENT TO:Board of Appeals, Town of Southold PROPERTY OWNER YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold to requei�128188 a (Variance) (Special Exception) (Special Permit) (0 hey) [circle choice] revers of the BuildiTt Insoectgrs determination o issue vacant land C.O. No.Z17543 dated an Bui i ng Permit No_ 23557 riatP RjR jR9 )• 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: SCTM No. 1000/139/3/14 Property at 565 Bayer Road, Matti tuck, New York 3. That the property which is the subject of such Petition is located in the following zoning district: R-40 4 That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: Reverse the Vacant land C.O. and Building Permit referred to above 5. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the relief sought by the under- signed are Article XXIV section 100-244,100-281,100-30A.1 through 100-30A.4,100-12 [ ] 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) 7�5-1809. 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. January 9, 1990 41 CK CKHAM BR SSLER P.C� Dated: or G etitionerS Rot7ert J. Ochsenrei ter & Owners ' Names : Edward Lenceski _ Post Office Address Bayer Road Mattituck, New York 1195 Te 1 . Nn [Copy of sketch or plan showing proposal to be attached for convenience purposes . ] i PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS NAME ADDRESS Mr. Rudolph Johnson Grand Avenue, Mattituck, N.Y. 11952 Mr. Rudolph Johnson and Wife Wickham Avenue, Mattituck, N.Y. 11952 Mr. Howard and Gertrude Jeavons Bayer Road P.O. Box 1122, Mattituck, N.Y. 11952 Mr. Walter Armbrust 595 Bayer Road, Mattituck, N.Y. 11952 Mr. Richard Garcia and Corinne Lessard Garcia 1800 Westphalia Rd. , Mattituck, NY 11952 Mr. Richard Garcia ;end Corinne Lessard Garcia Bayer Road, Flattituck, N.Y. 11952 Inland Homes, Inc. 315 Westphalia Road, Mattituck, NY 11952 William Moore, Esq. P.O. Box 23, Mattituck, N':Y. 11952 Atto. beg; forInland Homes, :Inc. Yi z - STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) ss.: Virginia Maginn residingat 850 Bungalow Lane, Mattituck,NY being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 9 day of Jantiary , 19 90 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 Matti tuck, New' York ; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by (certified) (tkfgNWt)gd) mail.' i v Virginia Magi Sworn to before me this 9,th day of January 19 90 `w Notary Pub JEAN T.ZANRA Notary Public.State of New York No.405120 Cuallmw In Suffolk County p,, Commission Expires Dom 22,fS IQ (This side does not1have to be completed on form transmitted to adjoining property owners . ) ,t r i; _ t �``�1�: _ � .fir-"i• ' ��4'F�� i rir _ = y, 1, � •'` ,� - SCHEDULE A TO APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR OF ROBERT J. OCHSENREITER & EDWARD LENCESKI 1. This is an application to reverse two determinations of the Building Inspector as follows: (1) issuance of Building Permit dated August 8, 1989, granted to Inland Homes, Inc. , No. 18355Z (Exhibit E) and; (2) issuance of Vacant. Land Certificate of Occupancy dated November 28, 1988 issued to Leonard F. and Ave Maria Spano, No. Z17543 (Exhibit D) . Both determinations relate to.--a parcel of real property located at 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York, Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000/139/3/14. The basis for this application for reversal is that the property is not a legal building lot. 2 . The property in issue (1000/139/3/14) was owned by Leonard Spano and Ave Maria Spano, his wife from 1972 to71989 (Exhibit C) . The same parties also owned the property immediately adjacent to the west under the same deed during the same period (Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000/139/3/13) . Each of the properties consist of an area of approximately 7, 500 square feet (Exhibit G) . As a result, the two properties merged and became one parcel. There is a house existing on the property to the west of the property in issue. 3 . The property in issue (1000/139/3/14) was conveyed by the Spanos to Richard Garcia by deed dated June 26, 1989 and recorded on July 7, 1989 (Exhibit C) . The adjoining property to the west (1000/139/3/13) was also conveyed by deed dated June 26, 1989 and recorded July 7, 1989 by the Spanos to Richard Garcia and Corrine Lessard Garcia. Upon information and belief Corrine Lessard Garcia is the daughter of Building Department Inspector Victor Lessard. 4. The property in issue is located in an R-40 zoning district (Exhibit H) . Thus, the property contains insufficient area to satisfy the requirements for a buildable lot under Article IIIA Section 100-30A(3) (Exhibit I) of the Town Code. Neither does the property satisfy the requirements of Article XXIV Section 100-244 (Exhibit J) of the Town Code with respect to non-conforming lots since the--property has not been held in single and separate ownership. The Building Permit was also issued in violation of Article XXIV Section 100-281(A) (7) . I am advised the Building Department file failed to contain a single and separate search, as required. It is submitted, based on the title search of the property by SCTIC Incorporated dated' September 13, 1989 (Exhibit C) that the property was not held in single and separate ownership. As a result of the foregoing, the property in issue is not a buildable lot and the determinations complained of must be reversed. In response to our attorneys' correspondence dated September 13, 1989, to the Southold Town Board of Appeals, they were informed that a variance had not been granted with respect to this property. 5. I am aggrieved by the determinations of the Building Inspector in that I reside on Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York and own the real property across the street from the property in issue. Construction of a residence on the property in issue will have an adverse effect on the value on my property and the quality of life in the neighborhood. 6. In support of this application the following is submitted and incorporated herewith: A. Certificate of .Occupancy No. Z4575, dated 3/2/72 covering both the vacant (1000/139/3/14) and the residential property (1000/139/3/13) ; B. Application for Building Permit No. 18355Z dated August 8, 1989; C. Correspondence from SCTIC Inc. , dated September 13 , 1989 with deeds referred to therein; D. Vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy No. Z-17543 dated November 28, 1988; E. Building Permit No. 18355Z dated August 8, 1989; F. Town of Southold Property Record Cards for 1000/139/3/14 and 1000/139/3/13 ; G. Survey of Properties. dated March 30, 1972 ; H. Copy of portion of the present Southold Town Zoning Map with property at issue circled; I. Southold Town Code Sections 100-30A. 1 through 100- 30A-4; Density and Minimum Lot Size for Residential Districts; Section 100-244 ; Section 100-12 ; SEction 100-281(a) (7) , and Section 100- 32. i BUILDING ZONE ORDINANCE I TOWS! OF ',' b SOUTHOLD ' SUFFOLK COUNTY � F 5 MAY 24, 1966 ,I.., ' '. ...:.• ' : .. . 25c 4 vful use of.a building or Health of the County of Suffolk, luld (3) Sub-division Map of Founders sting on the effective date not in conflict with any of the pro- Estates, dated March 18, •1027. and dinance, or authorized by a visions of this Ordinance; P:2OVIDED, 'amendments thereto; ;larmit issued prior thcrcLO, however, Lh:It wliere Lhis OrdIna;lco (4) Nanp of Sub-division known ac u continued alLhoul;ll such use nnpo:;es n rrcater restricLlon upon tl.o 1cennewood, dated January 0,1054,filed not conform with the provisions use of buildings or premises or upon ar; Map No. 21110; his Ordinance and such use may the hei ht ofi the building, or requires (5) Map of Southwood, Map f1Io No. cxtencicd throughout Lila bullciing larger open sp:u:es th.n are impo:;ed 2141; .iully acquired prior to said elate• or required by such Ordinance, rules (G) flan of Lots owned by George (b) A non-conforming use of a build- and regulations, Lilo provisions of this !I. Wells, Southold, N. Y., Map file No. ing or promises may be changed to a Ordinance shall control. im: use of the same or higher classification (7) Bayside Terrace, Bny View,. :;ccoldi:lg Lo the provisions of this SUCTION loll — R.EMEOIES — In Southold, N. Y. File No. 2034; Ordinance. case any building or structure is erect- (3) West Creek Development, South- (c) Whenever a district shall here-• ed, constructed, reconstruacci, altered, old, N. Y. Map of April 20, 1937. File t after be changed, any then existing repaired, converted or maintained, or No. 1236; noii-conforming use of a building or any building,!structure or land is used (9) Sub-division Map of Cedar Bach premises in such changed district may in violation of this Ordinance, or of Park situate at Bay View, Southold, be continued or changed to a use of a any regulations made pursuant thereto, N. Y. dated September 26, 1926. File similar or higliar classification, pro- in addition to other remedies provided No. DO;- vided all other regulations governing by Iaw, any appropriate action or pro- (10) Map of Goose Neck, Southold, the new use are complied with, cecding whether by legal procesk or N. Y. Map dated 1048, File No. 1GG3; (d) Whenever a non-conforming use otherwise, may be instituted, or taken (11) Peconic Shores, Peconic. N. Y. of a building or promises has been dis- to prevent such unlawful erection, con- Map of Jesse Wells, dated Deceulucr continued for a period of more than struction, reconstruction, alteration, 27, 1922, No. 1 and No. 2; two (2) years, or changed to a lligllcr repair, conversion, maintenance or use, (12) Nassau Farms, Peconic. 21. Y. classification, or to a conforming use, to restrain, correct or abato such viola- Yap'by O. W.Van Tuyl, No. 1179; ailyLlliilg in this Section to the con- tioil, to prevent the occupancy of said (13) Alonzo Jersey, Peconic. X. Y. trary notwithstanding, the non-con- building, structure or land or to pre- Map of O. W. Van Tuyl, April 2L 1030, forming use of such building or prom- • vent any illegal act, conduct, business mile No. 763• iscs shall no longer be permitted unless :'or use in er dbout such premises. (14) Nassau Point Club Properties, a variance therefor shall. have been ! Section D, Map by O. W. Van-Tuyl, -granted by the Board of Appeals as SECTION N T012—P% ALTIES — For March 24, 1926; and Amended Map-- hercinbefore provided. any and every, violation of the provi- Section A No. 156; (a) A non-conforming building may sions of this ordinance, the owner, the (15) Captain Kidd Estates,MaLtituck, not be reconstructed or structurally general agent,!or contractor of a build- N. Y., Map by O. W. Van Tuy1, Jan- altered during its life to an extent ex- illg or premises, where such violations uary 21, 19.17, No. IG72: cceding in aggregato cost fifty (50) havo been committed or shall exist,and (1G) Amended Map of N.attituck percent of the fair value of the build- the general agent, architect, builder, Heights, Mnttituck, N. Y. ill[,,, unless Il1e use of such building is contractor on any other person who (17) Point Pleasant:—Matti tuck,N.Y. chant,,cd to a conforming use. knowingly commits, takes part or as- Survey by Franklin F. Overton,,April (1) A non-conforming building which sists in any j such violation or who 8, 1016; has been damaged by fire or other maintains any buildings or premises (It;) Salt Lake Village, MaLtituc%, causes to the extent of more than fifty in which any such violations shall exist, N. Y., Map by O. W. Van Tuyl. July (50) percent of its fair value shall not shall be guilty of an offense. Each 10, 1939; be repaired or rebuilt unless the use week's continued violation shall con- (10) Shore Acres, Mattituck, 312. Y. of such building is changed to 6, con- stituto a separate additional violation. File No. 41. forniing use. Stich fines or penalties shall be collect- SECTION 1008—Notwithstnndina any,SECTION 1008 — TIDAL LANDS — ad as like fines are now collected by other provisions of this Ordinance, no When the tidal lands are not shown as law. zoned on the Zoning Map, they shall multiple dwelling shall be erected, be colt::idciocl to lie within tale "A" altered, or used which does not pro- 3•" I; cnsid l and Agricultural District . SECTION 1613 — EXCEPTIONS AS vide a lot area of at least twalve but;-no structure erected therein shall TOCEIiTATNSUTDIVISIO\LOTS— thousand five hundred (12,500) square be arre'ad upon such lands owned by (a) All of the lots on a certain map feet,for each family or dwelling unit. the Town of Southold except upon the entitled Map lof Marion Manor, situ. nlijlioval of the Board of Town ated at East Marion, Toter. of South- old, Suffolk County, New York, filed Trnstces• in Suffolk County Clerk's Office on SECTION 1009—VALIDITY—Should March 18, 1953, as Map No. 2038, shall nay section or provision of this Or- be excepted from the provisions 0f r dinanco be declared by a court of com-: Section 303 herein; As to Lots num- pctenL juvixcliction to be invalid, such bared one (1) through five (5) on said / deci::ions shall not ofIcct the validity map, the sideyard requirements shall of the Ordinance, as a whole or any be reduced to tan (10) feet on each ' other part thereof, side; and as to lots numbered thirty- 53CTION 1010—INTERPIMTATION, three (33) through forty-seven (47) 1117 itPOSE AND CONFLICT — In on said !nap,; the setback lines and iutcrprotin�, and applying the pro- rear yard requirements shall each be visions of this Ordinance, they shall reduced to twenty (20) feet. be held to be the minimum require- (b) All of the Lots on the following inenis for the promotion of the health, described maps shall be excepted from . saioty, morals or the general welfare the provisions' of Section 303 herein: of the Town. It is not intended by this (1) Sub-division i12ap o: Section 2, Ordinance to interfere with or abrogate Gardiner's Bay Estates, East Marion, or annul any Town Building Code, or New York, .Y,ap by O. W. Van.Tuyl, any rules and regulations adopted or dated July 21,!1957; is::ucd thereunder, or the rules and (2) Map of�Bcixaclon Br,LaCcs, Filed ��'6uLil.iuun u( l.liq L)nptit'i.ulanL of Muruh 111, 1ti•1'! nn Mri.i) /Yu, 1•l'!:', �+. ` xo a 201 — The boundaries of square feet and a frontage of not less than three (3) feet above tho � fats are hereby established not less than two hundred ground and the upper edge of the „ upon the Building Zone Maps (200) feet. sign shall not extend more than ' o Accompany and which, with all (c) Clubs, fraternity houses and fifteen (15) feot'six (G) inches above a e rn „done, references and other matter golf courses. the ground. If the premises has a i `^ ,own thereon Are, hereby, declared (d) Stables and riding academies. frontage of less than five hundred c. A. to be Part of this Ordinance, as it the (e) T`uncrnl homes and undertak- (500) feet, the sign shall have an area P matters and things set forth by said ing establishments. of not more.than twelve (12) square map were all fully described herein. (f) Railway passenger stations. feet and the. same restrictions shall SECTION 202—No building shall be (g) Public utility buildings, strut- apply. erected, altered or used, and no prem- tures or facilities. 10—Signs as provided in Secl.lon 408 ises shall be used for any other than a (h) Cemeteries and the necessary of this Ordinance when authorized as i purpose permitted in the zone in which incidental structures. a special exception by the Board of such building or premises is located, (t) Marinas for the docking, Appeals as•hereinafter provided. yll:(:'1'f(�N 203 — The boundaries , mooring; or accommodation of SECTION 301—"A" IiTSIGIIT — In 1)(q,wcrn dlstrioLs are, unlenn ol.herwlno not uutru tlu►il nix (6) non- the "A" ltenidrntlal ruin Arcrlruitural hullcal•ed, either ntreeG lhies, railroad commercial boats. D1141,laL, no I»IIIIIII11c, hereafter auctrd • rights-of-WAY or such lines extended 6—Accessory buildings, including ono or Altered, shall exceed thirty-five (35) or lines parallel thereto or boundaries (1) private garage,when such accessory feet or three (3) stories. of subdivisions. Where figures are buildings are located in the rear yard, Except public or semi-public build- shown on the zoning maps between a or a private garage within or attached ings may be erected to a height not street and a district boundary line,they to the dwelling. exceeding fifty (50) feet when set back indicate that the district boundary lino 7 — Uses customarily incidental to an additional six (6) inches on all runs parallel to the street lino at a any of the above uses when. located sides,for each foot such builditirs ex- distance as so indicated. When the on the same lot and not involving teed the height of thirty-five (35) feet. location of a district boundary line the conduct of a separate business. SECTION 302 — "A" BUILDING is not ottherwiso determined, it shall This shall be understood to include AREA—In the "A" Residential and. be determined by the scale of the map the professional office or studio of a Agricultural District, the total building measured from a given line. Where the doctor, dentist, teacher, artist, archi- area shall not exceed twenty-five (25) street layout, actually on the ground, test, engineer, musician, lawyer, mag- percent of the total lot area. { varies from the street layout as shown • istrate or practitioner of a similar • SECTION 303---PA" SIZE OF LOT I oii tho zoning ma s, the designation character or rooms used for home AREA—In the "A" Residential and sbottm on the mapped streets shall occulr►Llons including 4re::::makinl(, Algricuil.ural DinLrlet, no Uulldlnl; shall apply in such a way as to carry out millinery or sinillar liandlcrnfty, PRO- be erected or altered on n, lot havinir the real intent and purposes of this VIDED that the office, studio or an area of less than twelve thousand Ordinance for the particular area in occupational rooms are located in'a five hundred (12,500) square.feet and question. dwelling in which the practitioner re- a frontage of less than one hundred SECTION 204 — Where a district sides and in a building accessory there- (100) feet. "boundary line divides a lot in a single to, and PROVIDED further, no goods SECTION 304—"A" FRONT YARD— owuarshlp at the time 'of pnssat(o of are publicly displayed oil the Premises In tho "A" Residential and Agricul- Llydr (w4mintrno, (ho lioard of Apponlw, nitd no Owl or I►rlvorl,innnu•11L In nirnwrt total Dinta'Ir,t, the rrgnh•rld frrrrtt yurri an Ilollel till rMle pr•"viriod, i oy porntl, ol.hor thm' n. I'll(" MOI, 111•Wir 1,1110► Lwo ttllnll hn ILL 141IIIIL 1.hirLy-flva (all) fr.•L the loss restricted use to oxtond.to the (2) square tout in total arda, bearing from Lllo atrect Ilno, whole or any part of such lot. only the name and occupation (words SECTION 305—Where property in only) of the practitioner, the vicinity is partly built up with ARTICLE 111 8—The sale at retail of farm, garden permanent buildings and an average "A" Residential and Agricultural or nursery products produced or grown setback line of more or less than District on the promises or of animals raised thirty-five (35) feet has been estab- SECTION 300-In the •"A" Residen. on the premises.. One (1) advertising lished, no buildings, hereafter erected tial and Agricultural District, no build- sign, either single or double faced, not or altered, shall project beyond the ing or premises shall be used and no larger than four (4) feet by six (6) line of the average setback .so, estab- building shall be hereafter erected or feet in size, advertising the sale of lished. altered unless otherwise provided in farm, garden or nursery products pro SEOTION 306—In case of •a corner this Ordinance, except for one (1) or duced or grown on the premises or lot of record at the time of the pas- more of the following uses: of animals raised on the premises. saga of this Ordinance, a front yard 1—Ono (1) family dwellings. 9—Ono (1) real estate sign, either shall be required; same to be on-a line 2—Churches, schools and libraries. single or double faced, not larger than with the average setback lines on both ; r three (3) feet by four (4) feet in size streets produced to a point of inter- , 3—Non-cornrnerclal parks, play- on any one (1) or more lots,advertising section and if no average setback hats grounds, athletic fields, bathing beach- the sale or lease of only the premises been established then a front yard, es,'bathhouses or boathouses. on which it is maintained and set back thirty-five (35) feet deep, shall be re- 4—Agricultural farms, poultry farms, not less than the required front yard quired on each street front, or may be nurscries,'greenhouses and truck gar- distance and not. less than ten (10) decreased as a special exception by the dening (does not include farina for feet from each side line. Board of Appeals as hereinafter the breeding or raising of ducks). When the advertising sign is for the provided. 5—The following uses when author- purpose of the sale or lease of acreage, SECTION 307—"A" SIDE YARDS-- lzed as a special exception by the or the sale of lots in a subdivision, In the "A" Residential and Agricul- Board of Appeals as hereinafter pro one (1) real estate sign, either single tural District, there shall be two (2) vided: or double faced, not exceeding twenty- side yards, one (1) on each side of (a) The 'conversion of any build- four (24) square feet will be permitted . the buildings, the total aggregate of , ing 1n existence at the effective on each five hundred (500) feet to ono both aides aliall be twenty-flvo (211) date hereof to a two family thousand (1000) feet of frontage on feet and no one (1) side yard shall be dwelling. the highway or highways on which the less than ten (10) feet. (b) The erection or construction '.property fronts, PROVIDED said sign PROVIDED that, in the .case of u i. of a two family dwelling pro- is set back not,less than the front lot held'in single and separate owner- v1ded that the lot shall have yard restrictions required and not.less ship at the effective date •of this. an area of not less than than ten (10) feet from each side line. Ordinance, of a width less than one twenty-five thousand (25,000) The lower edge of the sign shall be hundred (100) feet and of an area less UL ;.. . than twelve thousand five hundred exception by the Board of Appeals as mum provision for oil-s b ' 'kR• (12,500) feet, a single family dwelling hereinafter provided.) may be built thereon with side yards shall be made as follows: a v' Y 4—Tourist camps, when authorized (a) Dwellings — One U ° -F reduced fifty (50) percent and may be as a special exception b the Board ` f;:rther ;educed when authorized as a Y o.f space for each family unit, f Appeals as hereinafter provided. (b) Hotels, boarding and special exception by the Board of 5—Marinas for the docking, mooring houses — One (1) parking space Appeals as hereinafter provided. f or accommodation of non-commercial each.two (2) guest rooms. SECTION 30 —"A' REAR I ARD— boats when authorized as a special ex-. (c) Motels and Tourist Cottages III 1-he 1-he "A" Residential and Agricul- ception by the Board of Appeals as One (1) parking space for each guest tural District, there shall be a rear hereinafter provided. yard having a minimum depth of G—Accessory uses of the same lot room or dwelling unit. ;, r twenty-five (25) feet. SECTION 3G0—SIGNS—In the "M" with and customarily incidental to any Multiple Residence District the follow F:^tiGVIDED that, in case of a lot held in sin le and se arate ownershi permitted use and not involving the ing signs are permitted. g p p conduct of a separate business. at the effective date of this Ordinance, 1=Signs permitted in an "A" Resi- having a total depth of less than one " SECTION 351 wide ca is In the dential and Agricultural District. hundred (100) feet, a single family M" Multiple Residenc¢ District, no 2—On premises used for hotel, motel, dwelling may be built thereon with a building hereinafter erected or altered boarding and tourist house purposes, rear yard of less than twenty-five (25) shall exceed thirty-five (35) feet or unless otherwise"Xrovlded as a special feet, when authorized-as a special ex- three (3) stories in height. exception by the Board of Appeals as ception by the Board of A SECTION 352—BUILDING AREA— hereinafter Appeals as provided, one (1) adverbs- hereinafter provided and PROVIDED In the "M"Multiple Residence District, ing sign, either single or double faced, further that in no case shall the rear the total building area shall not exceed not exceeding fifty (50) square feet In yard be less than fifteen (15) feet. fifty (50) percent of the lot area. area, the lower edge of which shall be SECTION 309 — "A" ACCESSORY SECTION 353 — SIZE Or LOT not less than four (4) feet above the . BUILDINGS—In the "A"Residential AREA—In the "M" Multiple Rest- ground, and the upper edge of which and Agricultural District, accessory -deuce District, no Building shall be shall not exceed more than thirty-five buildings may occupy forty (40) per- erected or altered on a lot having an (35) feet above the ground. Such sign cent of the required rear yard up to area of less than twelve thousand five shall advertise only the business con- an average height of eighteen (18) feet, hundred (12,500) square feet and a ducted on the premises,and shall be set The yard area allowed by such ac- . frontage of less than one hundred back not less than five (5) feet from cessory buildings shall be included in (100) feet.' all street and property lines. computing the percentage of lot area SECTION 354 — R, ONTi YARD — ARTICLE III II t o be built. upon 'and PROVIDED In the 'iM" Multiple Residence District,further that no building of any kind the required front yard shall be not 1-1" D1111lil)le Residence District or nature shall be built within three less than thirty (30) feet. SECTION 370—In the "M-l"1lfultfple (3) feet of any lot line. SECTION 355—Where the property Residence District, no building or SECTION 316 - Orr^-STREET in the vicinity is partly built up with premises shall be used, and no build- PARKING AREA—In "A" Residen- permanent buildings and an average in-shall be hereafter erected or altered tint And Agricultural Districts, no setback line has been established, no unless otherwise provided in this Or- building shall be hereafter erected or building hereinafter erected or altered dinance except for one (1) or more of altered or added to in excess of fifty i shall project beyond the line of the tine following uses: (50) percent of its area prior to the average setback so established. I—All permitted uses in "A" Rest- adoption of this Ordinance, unless not SECTION 356 — In the case of a dential and Agricultural Districts. less than one (1) parldng space for corner lot of record at the time of the 2—Dwellings designed for and oc- each family unit therein shall be pro- adoption of this Ordinance, a front cupied by not more than four (4) vided for. ror all places of public as- yard shall be required.Where an aver- families. �*nibly including auditoriums, churches age setback line has been established 3-13oarding and tourist houses. and similiar public gathering places on each street, the yard depth shall4—Accessory uses on the same lot erected there shall be'provided not be established on a line with said with and customarily incidental to any less than one (1) parking space for average setback lines projected to a permitted uses .and not Involving a each seven (7) * permanent seats in' point of intersection. If no average separate business. such buildings or for each part of the setback lines have been established, the SECTION 371—All premises in the total area within such building or required front yard shall not be less "M-l"Multiple Residence District shall structure as is or may be made avail-. than thirty-five (35) feet from each comply with the provisions of Article able for seven (7) permanent or street line unless decreased as a special IIIA with respect to building height, temporary seats. The formula for pro- exception by the Board of Appeals as building area, size of lot area, front viding an adequate parking area Is hereinafter provided. yard, side yards, rear yard, off-street an area of three hundred thirty-four SECTION 357—SIDE YARDS — In parking area and signs. (334) square feet.per required motor the "M" Multiple Residence District, vehicle uniE, there shall be two (2) side yards, one ARTICLE IV ARTICLE 11FA (1) on each side of the buildings, the "ID" Business District " "AT" ,l."ultiple Residence District total aggregate of both side yards shall SECTION 400—In the "B" Business be twenty-five (25) feet and no one District, no building or premises shall SECTION 350—In the "M" Multiple (1) side yard shall be less than ten be used, and no building shall be. here- Residence District, no building or prem- (10) feet. after erected or altered unless other- ises shall be used, and no building shall SECTION 358—REAR YARD In wise provided in this Ordinance, except be hereafter erected or altered unless the "M" Multiple Residence DIstrict for one (1) or more of the following otherwise provided in this ordinance there shall be a rear yard having a uses: except for one (1) or more of the fol- minimum depth of twenty-five (25) 1—All permitted uses in the "A" lowing uses: feet. 1—Ali permitted uses in "A" Resi- Residential and .Agricultural, "M" dential and Agricultural and "M-1" SECTION 359 Orr-STREET :4ultiple Residence, '.\2-,1" Multiple ,.. PARKING AREA — In the "M" Residence, "B-l" Business and "B-2" Multiple Residence Districts. Multiple Residence District, no build- Business Districts. 2—Hotels and motels. ing.shall be hereafter erected or altered 2—Storage houses 3—Tourist cottages. (More than one or added to in excess of fifty (50) ''•3—Ice manufacturers. (1) Tourist Cottal;c may be permitted percent of its area prior to the adop- 4=Express carting or haulinb offices on a lot when authorized as a special tion of this Ordinance, unless a mini- or. stations. HARVE4. A[2NO ` SCOTT L. HARRIS Town Attorney = Supervisor G T MATTHEW G. KIERNAIl Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Assistant Town Attorney �O,r • �0� P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Matthew G. Kiernan, Assistant Town Attorney M G DATE: March 21, 1991 RE: Inland Homes v. Goehringer, et al. As I have previous advised Linda Kowalski, we have received a Memorandum Decision from Judge Baisley with regard to the above-referenced Article 78. A copy of Judge' Baisley's Decision is annexed hereto for your review. The crux of the Court's Decision is , found on page 5, which states that the Petition is granted, the ZBA's resolution is annulled and the proceeding is remitted to the Zoning Board for purposes of directing the Building Inspector to reinstate the building permit. Judge Baisley's Decision is based on his -finding that. the appeal to the Zoning Board by the aggrieved property owner was untimely. Specifically, the Judge found that the delay of over 3 months, from October .17, 1989 the date when the aggrieved parties had notice of the issuance of the building permit, to February 1, 1990 the date when the aggrieved parties filed their notice of appeal, during which time Inland Homes erected the foundation and commenced the framing of the building— is,is, standing alone, unreasonable. Judge Baisley also correctly pointed out that the Zoning Board has failed to establish a time period within which an aggrieved party must appeal a determination by the Building Inspector as required by Town Law Section 267 (3) . Since receiving the decision I have been assisting Linda Kowalski on drafting a rule which would satisfy the requirements of Town Law. Petitioner has advised that a proposed Judgment will be submitted for Judge Baisley's signature on March 25, 1991 . Until we are served with a signed copy of the Judgment with Notice of Entry, technically, this decision is not in effect. We will advise you upon being so served. Should you have any questions with regard to Judge Baisley's Decision, or its impacts, please feel free to contact me. cc: Town Board FORM 918 MEMORANDUM MAR 2 1 1991 f SUPREME COURT, SUFFOLK COUNTY SPECIAL TERM INLAND HOMES, INC., Petitioner, 6Y BAISLEY J. S ---- ,"_— . For a Judgment pursuant to Article 78 of the CPLR, -against- DATED FEBRUARY 211 1991 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman, CHARLES INDEX #90/1 19 4214 GRIGONIS, JR., SERGE DOYEN, JR., JOSEPH Ref. Date 14214 H. SAWICKI, JAMES DINIZIO, JR., Con- CDISPSJ 1/2/90 stituting the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOAPI OF APPEALS, Respondents. PACHMAN & OSHRIN, ESQS. 1 HARVEY A. ARNOFF, ESQ. Attorneys for Petitioner Attorney for Respondents 366 Veterans Memorial Highway 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 273 Southold, New York 11971 Commack, New York 11725 In this proceeding pursuant to CPLR Article 78, the petitioner seeks review of a decision of the respondent zoning board of appeals (the "Board") which reversed the determination of the Building Inspector of the Town of Southold (the "Building Inspector") to issue a building permit to the petitioner. The Board's decision, dated• May 15, 1990, granted an appeal by certain aggrieved property owners, reversed the Building Inspector's determination to issue a building permit to the petitioner, and invalidated the building permit issued to the petitioner. The petitioner challenges the Board's decision on two grounds. First, the petitioner contends that the Board's decision is based upon -an untimely appeal of the Building Inspector's determination to issue the building permit by the aggrieved property owners. Second, the petitioner asserts that the Board's decision is arbitrary and capricious, since it is not supported by findings or by the evidence in the record. The decision of the Board is annulled and this proceeding is remitted to the Board for the purpose of directing the Building Inspector to reinstate the petitioner's building permit. The facts underlying. this proceeding are as follows. On August 8, 1989, the Building Inspector issued a building permit to the petitioner for the construction of a single family dwelling at 565 Bayer Road, Mattituck, New York. on August 30 and August 31, 1989, the petitioner excavated the property and prepared the footings for the building's foundation. By letter dated October 17, 1989, an attorney retained by certain residents in the area of the petitioner's property wrote a letter to the Southold Town Attorney questioning whether the petitioner's parcel was a valid building lot. The residents did not submit any objections to the Building Inspector or to' the Board. By letter dated December 11, 1989, the Southold Town Attorney stated that the building permit issued to the petitioner appeared to be valid, but noted that the final interpretation of the zoning code was within the province of the Board. Early in January, 1990, the petitioner erected the foundation for the structure. On January 15, 1990, the petitioner commenced the framing for the building. on January 19, 1990, the above mentioned residents filed a notice appealing the Building Inspector's decision with the Board and the town clerk, On February 1, 1990, the aggrieved residents served the Building Inspector with the notice of appeal. On February 1, 1990, the Board commenced a series of hearings on the appeal. After the first hearing, the Board concluded that the residents filed their appeal in a timely manner pursuant to the past practices of the Board, since they filed their notice of appeal with the Board within twenty days after the petitioner erected the foundation and commenced framing the building and while the building permit was still valid. The Board failed to establish a time period within which- an aggrieved party must appeal a determination by the Building Inspector as required by Town Law §267 (3) . By failing to prescribe such a period for appeals, the Board deprived both the petitioner and the aggrieved property owners of the knowledge of when the Building Inspector's decision to issue a building permit to the petitioner became final. See, Maroney v. Friere, 74 Misc. 2d 339, 343 N.Y.S. 2d 183 (Sup. Ct., Westchester Co. 1973) . Furthermore, by failing to specify a general time period for appeals as required by statute, and by deciding the timeliness of appeals on a case-to-case basis, the Board acted arbitrarily and capriciously and in excess of the authority granted to it by Town Law §267 (3) . See, Id. ; Ehrenberg v. Persons, 8 A.D. 18, 185 N.Y.S. 2d 369 (4th Dept. 1959) . In failing to prescribe a time period for appeals pursuant to the statute, the Board divested itself of the power to determine the timeliness of appeals from determinations of the Building Inspector. See, Ehrenberg v. Persons. - 2 - Accordingly, the determination of the Board that the aggrieved residents' appeal of the Building Inspector's decision to issue a building permit to the petitioner was timely is arbitrary and capricious and in excess of the authority granted to the Board by statute. The Court must now determine, without reference to the determination of the Board, whether the appeal to the Board of the Building Inspector's determination to issue a building permit to the petitioner was timely. See, Ehrenberg v. Persons; Cave v. Zoning Board of Appeals of Village of Fredonia, 49 A.D. 2d 228, 373 N.Y.S. 2d 932 (4th Dept. 1975) , appeal denied 382 N.Y.S. 2d 1030. The determination of whether the appeal was timely is governed by a standard of reasonableness. In deciding whether the appeal to the Board was timely, the Court must consider the date upon which the appealing parties were chargeable with notice of the issuance of the building permit to the petitioner, the time within which the appealing parties made their appeal, and whether any action by the petitioner or the respondents caused or contributed to any delay in taking the appeal. Id. In the instant proceeding, the aggrieved residents who appealed to the Board clearly had notice of the issuance of the petitioner's building permit on October 17, 1989, the date upon which their attorney wrote a letter to the town attorney regarding the petitioner's building permit (in fact, it would be reasonable to charge the aggrieved residents with notice of the issuance of the petitioner's building permit on August 31, 1989, the date that the footings were prepared after the excavation of the property) . However, the aggrieved owners did not appeal the Building Inspector's decision to issue the petitioner's building permit until February 1, 1990 (the date on which they filed their notice of appeal with both the Board and the Building Inspector) . See, Town Law §267 (3) . The delay of over three months, from October 17, 1989 to February 1, 1990, during which time the petitioner erected the foundation and commenced the framing of the building, is, standing alone, unreasonable. The respondents contend that the aggrieved residents' delay in appealing to the Board was justified by and was the result of the fact that the Town Attorney did not respond to their letter dated October 17, 1989 until December 11, 1989. In support of this proposition, the respondents cite Matter of Pansa v. Damiano, 14 N.Y. 2d 356, 251 N.Y.S. 2d 665 (1964) . In Pansa, the petitioner challenged the issuance of a building permit to a neighboring property owner. 3 After learning of the issuance of the permit, the petitioner met with a number of city officials, including representatives of the building department, which issued the permit, and demanded. that the city revoke the permit. Thereafter, at least one city official told the petitioner that he would be informed of the board's decision on his demand that the city revoke the permit and that he could appeal the decision to the board of appeals. On the day the petitioner received notice that the city would not revoke the permit, he appealed to the board of appeals. The Court of Appeals held that, on the facts presented, the petitioner was not required to appeal to the board of appeals until the city rejected his demand for revocation of the permit with some formality. The Court's holding in Pansa does not control the outcome of this proceeding for a number of reasons. First, the aggrieved residents in this proceeding, unlike the petitioner in Pansa, never requested that the town revoke the petitioner's permit before they appealed to the Board. Instead, on October 17, 1989, the aggrieved residents wrote a letter to the town attorney in which they questioned whether the petitioner's property was a buildable lot. Even if the Court were to consider the letter as a request or demand for revocation of the petitioner's building permit, the aggrieved residents did not address the demand to the Building Inspector, the offical who issued and who could therefore revoke the permit. The town attorney does not possess -the power to revoke a building permit or to reverse a, decision of the Building Inspector. Furthermore, unlike the petitioner in Pansa, neither the respondents nor any town official induced the aggrieved residents -to delay an appeal to the Board until after the town attorney answered their letter. As a result, the fact that the town attorney,_ in his response to the aggrieved residents' letter, noted that the final interpretation of the zoning code was within the province of the Board does not provide any excuse or justification for the residents' delay in appealing to the Board. Finally, in contrast to the petitioner in Pansa, the aggrieved residents herein *did not file their notice of appeal pursuant to Town Law §267 (3) until February 1, 1990, over a month after the town attorney's response to their letter. This delay, in inself, is unreasonable. Accordingly, the aggrieved residents were not justified in waiting until, after the town attorney answered their letter before appealing to the Board. - 4 - In view of the foregoing, the petition is granted, to the sole extent that the decision of the Board reversing the Building Inspector's detrmination to issue a building permit to the petitioner and invalidating the building permit is annulled and this proceeding is remitted to the Board for the purpose of directing the Building Inspector to reinstate the petitioner's building permit. Settle judgment. J. S. C. - 5 - o o _ _ 3 _�� TOWS! OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD � /( _ OWNER STRcET VILLAGE DIST. SUB. LOT. 'G_.. [/�� 1 `� v\ •`"t 1 B (, fl\ A of [J r T, 70 Ci Ili' Ci r°% +• '� ', !/ r� f,, ✓I'+•• c r + 1 FORMER OWNER . N E ACR. - 20 rc. pa►,o ,O, Lt. ,4 S W TYPE OF BUILDING RES. +} SEAS. VL. FARM COMM. CB. MISC. _Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS 8I " ' ! c e c r' �.��_ 'f, (1 �f od A%n 0 j e, CS 3 ` a� 1� - �0 1to - ` )nno�t�-� �c� Gere-ict 4(.4>� AGE BUILDING CONDITION NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FARM Acre Value Per Value Acre Tillable 1 Tillable 2 m Tillable 3 Woodland Swampland FRONTAGE ON WATER Brushland FRONTAGE ON ROAD t� _ House Plot DEPTH BULKHEAD Total DOCK NOON■ NOON OMEN■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■NOON ENO N■■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ k Y< • � ' i NOON WMENIM■■ ■O■■O■■■■■N ■■N■■ ■■■■I1■■ ■■■■■■■■■■■ { - } ■■■N■N ■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ w NNNNN1 ■■■■I■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ' J. No MINNOWNONE ■■■■I1■■■■■■■■■■■N■■ ■■■■■■■ ■■■NI■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■■■■■■N ■■ONINN■O■■■■O■■■N■■ ■N■O■NNNNF�■■■NON■■■■■■NN■■■ �`MMMIMMMMIMMMNOON ■ Foundation Extension Extension :Interior Finish Extension Fire Place Type Roof Rooms Ist Floor :. . . lormer Breezewa Garage Patio ��