Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
3581
'', ° Southold �®wn B0 ard ®f Appeals MAIN LOAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 3581 Application Dated November 13 , 1986 mn. _ Mr . ueory.e u . Li moici Appellant (�11 Jackson , Main and Fifth Streets New .Suffolk , NY ',119-56. At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on August 20 . 1987 the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken , on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property New York Town Law, Section 280-a [ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance Article , Section [ X] Request for Variance to the Zoninq' Ordinance Article III Sectionl00-315 Bulk Schedule . . . . . .[ ] . Request for Application of GEORGE D . DAMIEN for. Variances to the Zoning Ordinance ,- Article III , Section 100-31 , and Bulk Schedule , for approval of insufficient area , width and depth of two parcels in - this pending set--off division of land located at the Corners of Jackson , Fifth and Main Streets , New Suffolk , NY ; County Tax Map District 10.00 , Section 17 , Block 9 , Lot 12 ; containing a total _._ .area .of .28 , 919± sq .. ft ., _ WHEREAS , a public hearing was held and concluded on July 16 , 1987 in the Matter of the Application of GEORGE D . DAMIEN under Appeal No. 3581 ; and WHEREAS-,-- at said hearing all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded ; and WHEREAS , the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application ; and WHEREAS , the Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question , its present zoning , and the surrounding areas ; and WHEREAS , the Board made the following findings of fact : 1 . By this application , -appellant requests area variances for approval of : (a ) insufficient lot area of 12 , 663 sq . ft . and 16 , 256 sq . ft . , Lots A- and B respectively; (b ) insufficient lot width (frontage ) of 101 . 22 feet along Main Street and 125 . 0 feet along Fifth Street , Lot A; and insufficient lot width [front- age] of 90 . 11 feet along Jackson Street , Lot B ; (c ) insufTicient lot depth of 101 . 41 feet , Lots A and B , all as more particularly depicted on Map amended September 3 , 1986 , pr^pared by Roderick VanTuyl & Son . 2 . The .property in question contains a total area of 28, 919 sq ,, ft . with frontage . along the south side of -Main .Street .of 101. . 22 feet, along the east. side of Fifth Street of 301 . 67 feet , - an.d (CONTINUED ON. PAGE TWO ) DATED: August_ 20 , 1987 .. CHAIRMAN.., SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Form -ZB4 (rev. 12/.81) C , 1 Page 2 - Appeal No . 3581 Matter of GEORGE D . DAMIEN Decision Rendered August 20 , 1987 along the north side of Jackson Street of 90 . 11 feet . The entire premises was conveyed as more particularly shown by deed at Liber 5911 page 167 , dated January 22 , 1966 from Margaret W. Roache . 3 . The subject premises is improved with the following structures : (a ) one single-family dwelling , and (b) one acces- sory garage , both constructed under Building Perm its #3475Z and #3646Z . A final Certificate of Occupancy #Z3412 was issued for the dwelling on . January 28 , 1969 . The dwelling is shown on survey prepared by VanTuyl & Son dated J1111y lti , 196R to he set back 40± feet from Fifth Street., 28 feet from Jackson Street , and 25 feet from the easterly property line . The setback from the existing dwelling to the.-.Proposed di.vision - line scales.. out to 115± feet. 4. On September 1 , 19.66, Board of Appeals action was taken concerning an- application for a variance . for three lots having insufficient are a under Appe,al. No . 949 'dPnying " . . ..permiss_ion_ to divide into three separate_..buildi'ng 1o.ts - 5 . On May . 5 , 1967 , Building Permits #3475Z .and' #3474Z were . issued for the .construct. on of.- two. single-family dwellings , one on the northerly portion of the. premises and the"' other . on . the southerly portion of .the premises . A -_si'ngl e-fam.i ly dwe I 1 i'ng was constructed under .Permit' #3475Z .and a final Certificate of Occupancy #Z3412 .wa.s issued J.a,nUa'ry 2.8;, 1969 . : The second Building- Permit #34.74Z .expired and no constructi.on . took place thereunder. _ 6 . It is noted that 'by, letter dated. November. 5 , 1975 , the Town Building Inspector a.dvised the applicant that . " . : . the action of the Board of Appeals #949 , Sept -__ 1 , 1966, dividing your . property on EJS. Fift_h St. -New Suffolk, into two building lots , one with frontage,- on Jackson St. and* the other with frontage on Main Street, has not been changed or rescinded . . . . You still have two. building lots on EJs Fifth Street as the Board set them off in 1966.- . . . " 7 . During November 1971' and up until May. 1983 , the minimum lot area requirements of the_.Zo.nin.g Code.- was increased from 12 ,500 .sq . ft . to 40 ,000 .sq . ft — After investigation and extensive research , no documentation... was found in the Town records substantiating the prior Building Inspector 's position . On October 27 ; 1980,; Mr . Dami.en was advised by letter signed by a Town Building - Inspector that the zoning requirements were increased-_, in, 1971 ,._.:" . ... That you cannot subdivide property into. lots with less than 40 ,000 .sq . ft . in area . . . Therefore you cannot get_ a permit to build- another dwelling on your lot . . . . " Again by, letter dated August 6 , 1982 , Mr . Damien w`a's advi-sed by the. Building Department that the. Board of Appeals denied his application- in 1966 for the insufficient area of three lots a_nd that approval could have been obtained if .he_.reapplied for the two. -hots d_uri'ng that period of time since the.. req-uire.ments at that time we.re . a mini-mum lot area of. .12.;500 .sq . ft .. and subject to appro-v-al by the Planning Board under the- subdivision regulations in effect at that time . 8 . Before , during and subsequent to 19.66 , the Southold Town Planning- Board was„ the ' proper.,, autho.rity to approve or otherwise act on subdivisions . :_ _The Board of. ,Appeals did not have authority during 1966 to subdivide , except... to. consider 1 Page 3 - Appeal No . 3581 Matter of GEORGE D - DAM IEN Decision Rendered August 20 , 1987 applications in varying the zoning regulations as to lot size , etc . It is understood that the applicant was told that he had the right to have two lots , and- that he would have to apply again . No record was found for approval of the two- lot subdivision , by any Town or County agency , except that in 1975 the prior Building Inspector believed that Mr . Damien had approval for two lots by the denial of the three applied for in 1966 . 9 . ToHay ' s minimum lot size requirements under Article I T T Sect ion C0 ?1 D� 1 !, c,hnA-I o � F fhe Inn; ng rode requires ayminimum lot area.,of '.80,000 .sq . . ft. , ,minimum lot width of 175 teet , and minimum lot depth. ot 250 feet. 10 . Town records show :.. (a ) the appellants-oi•.ners have always received one tax bill for the entire-,parcel , (b) there is one deed of record dated- January 22 , 1966 at Liber 5911. nage 167 conveying the entire parcel of 28 , 919± sq . ft. to the owner-appellants , (c ) an _ application is presently , pending with,.-the Suffolk County Health Department for - -. Article VI Develonment/Subdivi_sion approval and to date no final action,. has been rendered , (d ) an application is presently pending (filed during May 1987 ) with the South- old Town Planning Board for a set-off division of land and to date no action has been rendered. - 11 . The percentage of ,reli.ef ,requested from the lot area requirements are (a ) for the northerly proposed parcel [Lot A] _ 84% , (b ) for the southerly proposed parcel [Lot B] . 80% . The percentages as to. lot width and lot depth varies from 60% to 29%. _ 12 . In viewing the immediate area within Section 117 , Distri-ct 1000 .of .the Suffolk County Tax Maps, the Board _finds the following lots existing :. Lot 11 , ;Block 9 , containing . 2 . 6±. acres and situate opposite_ the. appellant ' s. premises across Fifth Street ; Lot 1 , .Block 8, to the. north of appellant ' s. premises opposite Main Street., containing_, a total , area of 30 ,.000± s'q . ft. ; Lot 13, ,B1ock. 10 ,. to the south opposite Jackson Street .containi.ng 30 ,000+ sq . ft. - and Lots abutting the subject .premises along the east side presently of. Fudjinski and Acker of 15 ,250±_ sq . ft. and 13 ,000± _sq . ft : respectively-. _ 13 . It has been held by the Courts (VanDusen v . Jackson , 35 AD2d 58 ) that a Board_ of ,Appeals cannot under the semblance of a variance exercise legslative 'powers . It is apparent that the variances requested are substantial in respect to lot area , lot width , lot depth , and would in effect establish a zone- district completely at odds with.,, all, other zone dis- tricts provided fo`r. in the Zoning Code and-Zoning Map . `14 . Additional'ly,, 'the Board finds and determines : (a) that the difficulties claimed are self-imposed ,.. particularly due to the inaction of th_e property. owner over the period of .time, from. 1975 .to the present -time, to obtain map approval or other documentation ( su.ch as a vacant Land Certificate of Occupancy , 'separate tax bills, separate_. deeds , etc . ) . _ (b ) the percentage of__ .relief .requested is substan- tial in relation to the zoning requirements , being a variance from 80% to 29%- of ,the requiremen.t_s as to area, .width , and` depth ; (c ) there is no other method feasible for appellant Page 4 - Appeal No . 3581 Matter of GEORGE D . DAMIEN Decision . Rendered August 20 , 1987 to pursue other than a variance ; (d ) it is the burden of the landowner to pr'ove that the area restrictions as applied to his land imposes signifi - cant economic injury LFulling v . Palumbo , 21 NY2d 30] ; (e ) the effect , if the variance is allowed , is minimal of the increased population density thus produced available governmental facilities ; _ (f) a- substantial change will be produced in the character of the neighborhood since there are. lots existing of a size larger than that .proposed herein; (g ) in view .of the manner. in which the difficulty arose and in consideration of all , the above factors ,.. the jnterest of justice will be served by...denying the var_il.ances as applied . Accordi ngly', bn motion 'by Mr. �Gri goni s , seconded 'by Mr . "Goehri nger ,: i t was RESOLVED, that the relief requested . under..- Appeal. No . - 3581 in the Matter of the. Ap.pl i..cati"on .of .GEOR.GE De ':D.AMI.EN.,' 'BE 'AND' . HEREBY IS DENIED . Vote of ,the Board. 'Ayes :_ Messrs . Goehringer , Doyen, Grigonis , Douglass and Sawtcki . .: T.h.is resolution wa.s duly adopted . _ 1k -GERARD P.. G.OEHR NG.ER, AIRMAN r August 20 s 1987 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 , New York , on THURSDAY , JULY 16 , 1987 at the following times : 7 : 35 p .m. Appl . No . 3581 - GEORGE D. DAMIEN . Variances to [olf e Zoning •Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-31 , and Bulk hedule , for approval of insufficient area , width and depth two parcels in this pending set-off division of land located the Corners of Jackson , Fifth and Main Streets , New Suffolk ,; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 17 , Block 9 , Lot 12 ,ntaining a total area of 28 , 919± sq . ft. 7 : 40 p .m. Appl . No . 3639 - WILHELM FRANKEN . Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-32 , and Article XI , Section . 100-119. 2.;;•for . per. mission . to locate 25 ' by 25 ' accessory building in sideyard area and with insufficient setback from existing bulkhead along Gull Pond Inlet : Location of Property : West Side of Osprey Nest Road , . Greenport , NY ; Cleaves Point Subdivision Section I , Map 2752 , Subdivision Lots' 14 and 15 ; County Tax Map District lobo , Section 35 , Block 6 , Lots 22 , 23 and 24 (now 24 . 1 ) . 7 : 45 p .m. Appl . No . 3635 - ARTHUR V . JUNGE . Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-30 (A) for permission to establish electrical shop use in this "A-40" Residential and Agricultural Zoning District . Location of . Property : North Side of C . R . 48 , Cutchogue , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 96 , Block 1 , Lot 19 , containing 45 ,589± sq . ft . in lot area . 7 : 50 p .m. Appl . No . 3631 - PUDGE CORP. Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-30 (A) for permission to establish and construct 7500 sq . ft . building for industrial , use in this "A" Residential and Agricultural Zoning District . Location of Property : North Side of C . R. 48 , Cutchogue , NY; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 96 , Block 1 , Lot 20 , containing 39 ,524± sq . ft . in lot area . Page 2 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting - July 16 , 1987 7 : 55 p .m. Appl . No . 3638 JAMES AND MARY TYLER (continued from June 18 , 1987 ) . Special Exception modifying Appl . No . 3400 to permit vehicle doors to face street side as constructed . Location of Property : 6795 Main Road , Laurel , NY ; Mattituck Holding Co . Minor Subdivision Lot #3 ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 125 , Block 1 , Lot 19 . 6 . 8 : 00 p . m . ' Appl . No . 3642 - DINA MASSO . Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article XI , Section 100-119 . 2 to construct accessory boathouse structure with deck at the foot of the bluff , and deck and new stairs along and at top of bluff areas , all landward of existing wood bulkhead along Peconic Bay , premises known as 5705 Nassau Point Road , Cutchogue , NY ; Lot 39 , Amended Map A of Nassau Point Filed August 16 , 1922 ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 111 , Block 13 , Lot 04 . 8 :05 p . m. Appl . No . 3644 - FREDERICK WIGHTMAN/DAVID FREY/ r JOS.EPH REINHART . Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article III , Section 100-30 (A) , Article XI , Section 100- 118 ( E ) for establishment of business uses , and/or interpretation , to permit the following activities : retail sales and storage , business office ; professional office , governmental office , contractor office , personal -service store or shop , as described for the " B-Light Business " Zoning District , Section 100-60 (A) [2] , [4] J81 inclusively , in conjunction with existing single-family dwelling unit on second- floor having a livable floor area of 900 sq . ft. Zone District : "A-40 . " Location of Property : North Side of Main Road , Peconic , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 75 , Block 1 , Lot 16 , con- taining 1 . 0194 acres . 8 : 20 p .m. Appl . No . 3645 - PAUL AND CHARLOTTE GALGAN . Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article . XI , Section 100- 119 . 2 for permission to construct additions to dwelling landward of existing construction and within 75 feet of existing bulkhead along Eugene ' s Creek , 4605 Stillwater Avenue , Cutchogue , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 137 , Block 03 , Lot 05 . 8 : 35 p .m. Appl . No. 3496 - FREDERICK KOEHLER , JR . Variance to the Zoning Ordinance , Article XI , Section 100- 119 . 2 for permission to construct 38 '. by 16 ' beach pavillon and attached deck areas extending a length of 124± feet and width of 28 feet (exclusive of stairs ) , accessory and incidental to Page 3 - Notice of Hearings Southold Town Board of Appeals Regular Meeting - July 16 , 1987 the establi. shed single-family residential use of the premises ,..not to be operated for sleeping or habitable purposes and not operated for gain , within 75 feet of ordinary highwater mark and/or landward edge of tidal wetland , along Peconic Bay , 575 Old Harbor Road , New Suffolk , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 117 , Block . 03 , Lot 06 . 8 : 40 p .m. Appl . No . 3592 - BENTE SNELLENBURG (Continued from April 20 , 1987��As requested) . Variances to the Zoning Ordinance , .Articles : (1 ) XI , . Section 100-119 . 1 (B ) for approval of eight-foot height of fencing along the easterly property line a length of 72± feet ; (2 ) XII , Section 100-141 , Appealing the November 6 , 1986 Order to Remedy Violation which mandates a building permit for new fencing along the easterly property line . Location of Property : Private right-of-way extending off the east side of South Harbor Road (known as Private Road No . 10 , 'or Old Woods Path ) , Southold , NY ; County Tax Map District 1000 , Section 87 , Block 2 ; Lot 21 . The Board of Appeals will hear at said time and place all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each of the above matters . Each hearing will not start before the time allotted . Written comments may be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. For more information , please call 765-1809 . Dated : June 30 , 1987 . BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P . GOEHRINGER , CHAIRMAN Linda Kowalski , Board Secretary ------------------------------------------------------------------x Notice to Newspapers : Please publish once , to wit : JULY 9TH , 1987 and forward two affidavits of publication to : Board of Appeals , Main Road , Southold , NY 11971 , (on or before July 14th ) . Thank you . 765-1809 . ------------------------------------------------------------------x FORM NO.3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD,N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19 To G AXAq . . . . . !.�'. . . . . . . . . . . 1 .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . . . . . for permit to 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . at Location of Property . . . . ��. . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . House NO. Street qq P Hamlet County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . . . . . . . . . . Block . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . Lot 4 . ./ Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Filed Map No. . . . . . . . . Lot No. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . is returned herewith and disapproved on the following ounds . . .�. .'�— c,C-�-+� . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -14 IE-q . . . . . a . . . . . . . . . . .' r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Building Inspector RV 1/80 NOV 1319M TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK ? i 9&4k WkM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL NO. DATE .Jl2v.l3 J?M TO.THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 1 We .......George D. Pamien.........:.........:......of .:Ja.ckson Fifth Stre'ets,,. ..... .. . .. ..... .. .... ........ ... Name of Appellant' Street and Number New Suffolk,,,, N.Y. 11956 (Southold_Town) .. . HE P ..... HEREBY APPEAL TO Municipality State ° THE,ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS;F,ROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON °July 16 198$ APPLICATION FOR PERMIT NO. ................................ DATEb.:........... .......a....................;...;......... WHEREBY. THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO.. George D. Damien- Name of Applicant for permit of, Jackson-& Fifth'St. in New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 ............................................. .. .. ................. ..0............... ............ . .............. Street and Number Municipality State (X ). PERMIT TO USE: ( .)a PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY Fifth& main St. in New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 L. PROPERTY ..........................................................,................................. .. LOCATION OF THE Street /Hamlet / Use District on Zoning Map District 1000 Section o p/ 117 B1 qck 9 Lot.......° rrent Owner George D. Damien Mop No. Tax map �Io 1000 Lot No. Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article I Section 106-20 Sub-divisions by Authority of the Planning Board, Art. III, Section 100-31 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) ( x) 'A VARIANCE ,to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning:Map ( ) A VARIANCE due to lackr6f access (State of New,York Town Law Chap. 62 Cons. Lows A rt. .16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 ( ) A .prevlous appeal was made-No 949.Sept.l,'1966 & Appeal N03503 .of 10.2..1986 4. PREVIOUS APPEALal�d previous .appeal (has) (X&P `iWbeen made with respect to this decision of,the Building Inspector mVwiih respect to this property. Such appeal was ( ,-) request for a special permit ° z ( x).request for a variance and was made in Appeal No NA..949..&3SQ3...:.....,.Dated t. 2,1986.............. REASON FOR APPEAL C A Variance, to Section 280A_,Subsection 3. r ( x) 'A Variance to the Zoning 'Ordinance is requested for the 'reason that I found myself gravely penalized by the fact that the previous Building Inspector, TIr. Howard Terry, provided me with official letters certifying that my property was divided h into two buildinh lots after my hearing of Sept. 1,1966.Although in the course of the hearing of 1966--tHe Chairman of the Board of'Appeals did say that the Board will not deny me two lots, provided I apply, the then Building Inspector told me that I do not have to apply for anything since I have enough land,28,919 sq.ft. and "was within thelaw." Now, after the second hea- Form ZB1 (Continue on other side) ring of Oct. 2,1986, the resolution of the Board of Appeals stipulates that the former Building Inspector "was in error" and that the official letters he gave me, certifying that I have two building lots,have no legal value whatsoever. REASON FOR APPEAL Continued } y tF,3 .1. ,. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practical difficulties or unneces- sary-HARDSHIP because I am denied to have two lots by the present Building Inspector, Victor Lessard, for insufficient acreage, while in 1966, when I had the hearing, the acreage of my property, 28,919 sq.ft. was more than necessary to have two lots, the size of :the 'lot wa:s 12,500 sq•.ft, according to .the Zoning Ordinance if 1966, There will be no practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship for anybody if the Board of Appeals considers my appeal, as an .application -for formalizing. the division or my property into two lots, as requested byEhe Cfiairmari of the Board of Appeals in 1966. For after all, I have not done anything illegal nd should not Im suffer this utterly unjustified hardship by being denied to hav lots because the former Building Inspector was "in error" when he officially confirmed by his last letter of Nov. 5;1975 that ". . . the action of the Board of Appeals #E949,Sept.l,1966, dividing your property on F/S Fifth St., New Suffolk, into two building lots,one with frontage on Jackson St and the other with frontage on Main Street has not been changed or rescinded . . . You still have two building, lots on F/S Fift Street, as the Board set them off in 1966 ..' ; Point 6 , of the Action of the Zoning Board of Appeals of Oct. 2,1986 emphasizes °that by this letter dated November 5,19750 "the Town Build jhg Inspector advised Mr. Damien (erroneously). ." If such is the case why should endure this: hardship created byy an, off cia of the Town of Southold, namely the former Building Inspector, when he made a wrong interpretation of the 1966 hearing and mishandled my case by telling me that I do not have to make any ap- plication, when the Chairman of tthe Board said that I had to apply, in order to for- malia thed division of U lV l Dree d ys no shared olgts? 2. TRe har ship created isy all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because This Point 2 is true and applicable to my case. There; are four buildings in the back of my property and they.. belong to Mrs.Ackerrand Mr. Fudjinski.TIith my second lot, my- property will have only two houses. 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because bWff=5 it will simply restore the validity of a decision taken by the Board of Appeals in 1966 not to grant me three lots but;..to ,advise. me that it will ,gt4nt me, t= two lots, provided I apply. And again, I 'did riot make' any application to°the Board of Appeals or to the Planning Board, because the then Building Inspector most categorically emphasized to me that I do not have to do anything else but to apply to him by asking him to issue two dif- ferent building permits for my two lots, which, in his'�judgment, were granted to me by the Board of Appeals in 1966. Therefore, if he made an error and the letter he gave me on November 5, 1975 is said-to be "incorrect," as letter (f) of Point 11 of the Action of the Zoning Board of Appeals of November 3 1986 stipulatessI cannot be penalized ,for, something I have not done and no responsibility is imputable to me for the hardship created`by a formal official of Southold Town. In light of these explicative remarks and hxFdqpmmxd factual background, I respectifully request the Chairman and the Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider this appeal as an APPLICATION, if necessary,- in accordance with the I statement made by the Chairman of the Board in 1966 that, the Board will grant me two lots, if I apply, so that the present Zoning Board of Appeals may eliminate the severe hardship imposed STATE OF NEW YORK ) upon me by the former Building Inspec r.% who o sly" ss and,thereby,to my.detriment. wh acte "err n-ou OF,�Su FFnUC.) 61g. nature% '.. ... ........COUNTY Sworn to this ... ! ... day- of.... . .... . .0..P- ?. 19 (p ,.Notary. P lic �.. MARY ANN CYBULSKi NOTARY PUBLIC.State of New Yogi Residing in Suffolk County No 52.5895900 COMM1684on Expires.April'iU s co / 7 TOWN OF SOYTHOLD PROPERTY RECORD CARD �-'�.z OWNER STREET VILLAGE DISTRICT SUB. LOT = a FORMER OWNER..._ N , E ACREAGE 14 k S :�, W �- TYPE OF BUILDING J 3 G- �` i✓ �a�n K RES.Q SEAS. VL FARM comm. I IND. ( CB. I MISC. Est. Mkt. Value LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS i �' ' 1 r _ f v �cf e / o oo (9 0 3 ® ca '/- Gam' ` AGE BUILDING CONDITION .NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FRONTAGE ON WATER Farm Acre. Value Per Acre Value FRONTAGE ON ROAD3o Tillable 1 BULKHEAD o `o Tillable 2 DOCK Tillable 3 Woodland EI - Swampland Brushland as House Plot i Total T l S •�- � •� � . � - _` mot,_ � _— undation ` ('�f Bath M. Bldg. r ;. ' - %�)'3 �. J ! --� Basement i f .t Floors L Extension Ext. Walls ��'�'` "✓ Interior Finish F Extension ! ! Fire Place 15 Heat Extension - / Porch 1 Roof Type Porch Rooms 1st Floor I Patio iRooms 2nd Floor Breezeway Garage i Driveway ; Dormer O. B. S. 85'40'30"E. -- 1O1.2.2 lzei- FELICS IL U1 L1: Y ca I , x 1 L16- N..85'42'30"W. I ■ LL 0 ! 2 t I ! © Su'I2VEYrao i=Qt;� GE02G E D. •& A R I E D.-DA I -E G ( AT t Dp NEB, ,ugly o� 1 ro LiC,aes4uttSri C24 aiYrrsti©n or nd?'st^,era fir' �w u ZS C S 2' 1 tq t5is curer y is o i�ioxtien a6 SCALE �y= F�LAND SJ ,aec:ucal�2C^c s tP1,'S Pd.".t°J Z"^:�'R i':»'!:"r:� M C �U�y JS�W_f � _l /� Q s;ay*a_ lad Yi' S and -[YiC� dt 4�l��ffi.'J`ib4o �' L:.8 55'27'00 W.' . 90.#t- emb=,va,d 0 {ic l nv;l bo comic'MO j� �" y 6 ,. q ` t �^ r� '"`� t £t E,:3 t:4PStld YYG�CLjI. 7 4J P Y."t.:1.a 4f: :. �Y.� V.1 s 3 lr.� "� Pi N ! i, .G.:y I. S7 6' ' fst,grt:rstc� Er•' Y ^+i�rcera eS�ufiE sis,�__.-________- _ — cra y n uh;.r r o a?or c.ahern eh, rw � YaiPr ,nm;��s;iS,po,��.�r•mortY�l a;�^i5e�iis;:,� .—....�. -- . . J A C V S 4/� 5�K.���.' lardir.,in twtir,n li icy horcan"end; to h*j .n,a- igm3scfthei6ndirtrgins-,?JGUQt2ANTS-20 "TO THTv SaCE1alTY TIT{.F.- AhlL�- j 'Y, ao i LucrUn2o=ss ar�no'trans;2rai l d A'r!A-N TY CO M iPA N YY !`y 1�I© T H Ye t 4�icr?Ri inszitaation�or uk3. ua f} S0Z&4.•'�a:�Y-�.ate,.AND'72--UST`CotwlP. 'jy C00, i'•( 34 `i SF � E.r :i 3 a:0" 1.f'.� -.�' Lt GEORGE D.DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. and Jackson Street Tampa, Florida 33616 New'Suffolk N.Y. 11956 /�,'�(�q• m Tel. 516-734-66$ (813) 837-9994 August 18,1987 P `� 19r.Gerard Goe&inger Chairman Board of Appeals Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Goehringer: d u ust I am now in possession of copies of the two let�sen y !1r&h s d/jinski to the Zonirg Board of Appeals. The first letter is dated Au as signed by Mr. Joseph Fadjinski and his wife Joan. In response eto�these1987 at ond �let- ters may I bring for your attention and consideration the following facts and three exhibits as evidence corroborating these facts.; Fact No I.- In his letter of August 10,1987, Mr. Fadjinski denies the fact that e had received the Notice of Intent requesting a second hearing for the subdi- vision of my property. This 'Notice was sentG _to him on Novenber 13,1987 by certi- fied mail sub No-Pl07379180. I submit Exhibit l as conclusive evidence, that is, the original Return Receipt of' the- certified mail under the same No P107379180. As you will see, the Return Receipt was signed by his wife, Mrs- Joan Fadjinski. If you compare the signature on the Return-Receipt with the one on the-letter sent to the Board of Appeals and dated August 7,1987, you will have the conclusive evi- dence that they are identical, Mrs„ Fadjinski also signed the letter of August 7,19871 albeit in fine,she or'her husband wrote ". . I have no record of receiving the certified-letter ,", By-denying the reception of the Notice o Intent, not- WIthstanding the irrefutable fact"that Mrs. Fadjinski did sign the Return Recipt, there is no doubt that Mr.and Mrs. Fadjinski have made a statement that they know is false and obviouslyiey-ma a it sai e n ent o deceive t o me ers o t e Board o Appea s, so at esP a ter may accept their PosIt seems to me that a false statement, ma a wit tie intentttoeaeceiveois amp �form of criminal offense.Consequently, Yx.and Mrs. Fadjinski have no legal ground what- soever to ask for the re-opening of my file post-hearing. Pact No 2,_ In his letter of August 10,1987, Mr. Fadjinski is asking Iffor a more reaso e adjustment of the-lot lines." He is trying to justify his claim, which is not receivable in light of Exhibit 11 with the following statement: "I have noticed from the official survey of the subject propert/that the fence that sepa- rates the- property from my property is 11311 to 116►1 over the line on my side.,, ' Therefore, Mr. Fadjinski clearly implies_that'I "owri" lt3" to Zt6n of his land. I submit Exhibits 2 and 3 as evidence that Mr. Fadjinski is wron g.to the Map of Land Surveyed for Joseph`Hnd Joan M, Fu inski of Octoberc cording . .a 20,965 (Exhibit 2), and a letter of August 17,1987 signed by thejLand Surveyor,Roderick Pan Tuyl PC, Exhibit 3, which I also submit as evidence, first it is clear that "the subject fence lies approximately (only) one foot easter�f the common boundary- -line shown on the respec lvve survey maps an no t3►1 and 116"' as Mr. Fadjinski claims, Second,as clearly stated in .Exhibit 3, "t a subject fence lies approximately one foot eas erly of the common boundarI'lly-line, shown on the respective surveymaps onsequen y, s per nen y conc usive a t e - one °O o an , . at .F11 inski claims that I have allegedly taken from his property, is legallyand in fact in- cluded in his own property.Albeit the fence, which was bm-M more than 30 years ago, ./. 2 - is one foot easterly of the common boundary-line, this latter starts behind the fence. Therefore, according'to Exhibit 2, the common-boundary lin oes art one oo e n the chain-link fence. It follows that the 100 feet propertf sline of Mr. Fudjinski on Main Street are intact and,thereby, are not diminished to 99 feet, as he seems to be- lieveet ostensibly.,`~Mr` Fudjinski does not seem to be aware of this very-important fact, which legally nullifies his claim for the so-called «reasonable adjustment of the lot lines." -Furthermore, it is rather obvious that Mr.FudjiYski is also not aware of another very important fact, namely,that his property line on 4th Street has also a chain-link fence, which is also 11211 east of the boundary-line- which divides his property from the side- walk property belonging to the Town of Southold; .This is irrefutably demonstrated by'" his own survey, that is Exhibit 2. Consequently., -does this mean that the Town of Southold has the legal right to raise this question and to ask him-to`change the position of his fence, in conformity with his own survey, whose legal structure he does not seem to un- derstand? Fact No 3.- After consultation with my Attorney, it appears that-Mr. Fudjinski is not aware ofher very important- fact, namely, that in the State of New York -there is a law which stipulates that after 10 (ten) years.no fence, serving as a boundary-line, can-be moved with the purpose of changing the statusquo. This important fact also nul- lifies Mr. Fudjinskits claim for the so-called "reasonable adjustment of the lot lihes.11 Consequently,it is very clear that Mr, Fudjinskits floppositiont, to the subdivision of MY property into two `:.lots has no legal foundation whatsoever. Fact No 4.- At the first hearing, on September 1,1966, Mr, Fudjinski was present. However, Fie never raised any question. At the second hearing of October 2,1986, albeit duly no- tified by certified mail and an official legal notice in the newspaper "Suffolk Tid,11 he never appeared, nor was he represented by anyone, At the third hearing of July 16, 1987, he did not appear eiither, nor was he represented by anyone. However now, all of -.a sudden he wants anotheri',-hearing; he wants to re-open my case under the deceitful pretext that allegedly he was not notified by certified mail and,thereby, did not re- ceive the Notice of'Intent, while in fact his wife Joan did receive and did sign the Postal Return Receipt. Can one accept the preposterous hypothesibptha.t she never told him? Even if such an absurd assumption is accepted as a "truth," why did Mrs, Fudjinski sign the letter of August 7,1987, which specifies in fine: "I have no re- cord of receiving the certified letter?" Is not this a--clear case of collusion, i.e., a secret agreement for fraudulent purpose to deceive the members, of the' Board of-Ap- peals,? And is not collusion another form of criminal offense and,indeed, an offense against the members of the Board of Appeal? It is',indeed, strange if not bizarre, that after 21 years,since my first hearing in, 1966,� I continue to be penalized by being unable to use part of my own land.'and 'now, this penalization is taking another form of harassment. when my neighbors,Mr& Mrs. Fudjinski .are trying to deceive the members of the Board of Appeals, by falsely claiming that they did not receive the Notice of Intent0ft? Is not this not only strange but also most deplorable that Mr, & Mrs. Fudjinski have decidEd to indulge in these kindsof base and disgraceful machinations in trying to deceive the members of the Board of Appeals, so that they may re-open my file and allow them to oppose my request-for confirmation of'the decision to subdivide my property into two lots and by resorting to all kinds of fallacious pretexts and arguments to justify their request? And for`) 21 years, I lived with'the illusion that Mr®and Mrs, Fudjinski were good neighbors and civilized friends. Lhcl. .3 Exhibits Sincerely, 45;42 CZ(/ '` Za George D. Damien 0.. and Jackson St.. New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 November 13,1986 Mr. Joseph Fad jinaki. 564 First Street Brooklyn, N.Y. 11215 Dear Mr. Fudjinskis Pursuant to Point 3, letter (b) of the Instructions of the Zoning Board of Appeals, Special &ceptions and Variance Forms, please be advised that I am filing an'application�.-for another appeal of the following resolution taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals it was resolveds 'to confirm the prior action of the Board of Appeals rendered under Appeal No- 949 September 1,1966, for the'denial: of three lots having insufficient area, as applied,' rather than, approval of two lots of.. sufficient area." Icy appeal is motivated'by the Pact :that the present Board of Appeals -con- sides the official letter .of November 5,1975, -sent, -to me by the former.: Building Inspectors Howard Terry, to be "incorrect." :I am enelosing. the requested notice �d,n accordance with the above,eapti'oned Instructions. , Sincerely, GDD amd Qeirge D., Damien Eael. Notice Form �6 I i M A.I N t _ l r 0 1 t �. MQi�.- 0.1 S(:U!H MAP UC LAND i �.85 4O 3�'E. UO.O _ Ot_CORNER SURVEYED FOR g >: , , - E 5'iOF{t 1 f Nl W i 0Lh FRNME"HOTEL" TO+ ' i 1 LO ILL wI Ll1 f SCA 15 T'O R.Y I �` i Co!! .—"-tlii�eKSG:l.rxf alicrraiien er lG"ifiJOTI Tto this survey is a violation of v1 :*.t 7205 cf thn Now York SVIOE4txwjai Law. i ( � + Ca_ses eh'>thin$ur res-��y €a ry'2 Fn.suitri I> t SHO�>JER`� � the nFS Wl^r�jPr'a inky ze;:l a emt-z4eao wl shril wit be conaridomd to be a valid truo Copy. Quwanm-i lne£: novel hereon ehr_il rem O } erely to thm"- On for Vkwn the"mac) 3' s Iz psa w9d,and on No b4half to fteo I tMo company,govarmon al kiss and 1�2 570Z. 'I 1 ier4;%insdu ion Mated hereon srrJ to the#9w�tqnam of the lartdib7 ineti- FRAME �� nation.Otwenum we not tron arubty } ' "ANNEX" xo , 1, 9c,atffionefuisroswsube"uont o! o i =� 1aUkr' � �EEU } z 1 01 l° ---— --- ----— - - _- 0 t CA RAG E j FENCE INTlE_",.k�`�C,'�UN'T WlrE_Ft HEDGE i'�.85°'� "1rd: --- -x --�—s' ,(� j `'► i OF NF_� .t�lS. .`�'1-RVE 1PE` VAN l- CIC AC , cr M �. a1 � ' LA; 0 V C.d/1 RODERICK VAN TUYL (L.S.) OTTO W.VAN TUYL COLIN VAN TUYL RODERICK VAN TUYL, R. C. Professional Engineer(Retired) Licensed Land Surveyors FRONT STREET AT MAIN GREENPORT, NEW YORK 11944 X (516)477-0170 August 17, 1987 To Whom It May Concern: This is to certify the location of a certain fence near the boundary-line between land of George Damien on the west and Joseph Fudjinski on the e ,st, lying southerly of Main Street and between Fourth and Fifth Streets in New b1.1.ffolk. As shown on the guaranteed surveys prepared for Mr. Fudjinski in October 1965 and for Mr. Damien in August 1966, the subject fenc lies a2proximatel e o0 easterly of the common boundary-line shown—on the re- spec ive survey maps, ap _ runs southerly from Main Street about 152 feet to land of Acker. Roderick Van Tuyl, PC To George Damien Y APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS3, ;�'{ ` ' s 9 SCOTT L. RABBIS Supervisor Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Charles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. q Town Hall, 53095 Main Road 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: Matthew J. Kiernan, Assistant Town Attorney FROM: Zoning Board of Appeals DATE: September 19, 1990 SUBJECT: Your Requested Concerning Premises of George Damien Property ID: Corners of Jackson, Fifth & Main Sts, N.S. CTM #1000-17-9-12 ZBA Appl. #3581 rendered August 20, 1987 ZBA Appl. #3503 rendered November 3, 1986 ZBA Appl. #949 rendered September 1, 1966 Please find attached copies of our August 20, 1987 determination which includes references to history of the prior decisions of this Board. You will note that in all three applications, the relief for the creation of lots of 12,663 sq. ft. and 16,266 sq. ft. were denied. Although the circumstances .did not change .fol+ the property owner, the Board did reconsider the request a second' and a third time. The members were sympathetic with the circumstances resulting in 1966 and 1967 when the previous building inspector granted building permits for a dwelling (on each lot) . The permits were not effectuated since no construction commenced and the permits expired. (In 1966 and 1967, the minimum lot area requirement was 12,500 sq. ft. in Southold Town, and the zoning was changed in 1971 to a minimum requirement of 40,000 sq. ft. From during the 1960s through September 6, 1979, the Zoning Board of Appeals considered applications on set-offs when there were less than four lots involved. ) The County Tax Map and general note which were in the file are also attached and may be helpful. Please let us know if you need additional documentation from the (three) files. lk ti ' �o��FFOL���G HARVEY A. ARNOFF Q ` SCOTT L. HARRIS Town Attorney = = Supervisor v n+ MATTHEW G. KIERNAN Town Hall, 53095 Main Road Assistant Town Attorney P.O. Box 1179 ®,[ l Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD INTER-OFFICE MEMO FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Matthew G. Kiernan, Assistant Town Attorney %�w DATE: September 19, 1990 RE: George Damien At the request of Supervisor Harris I am in the process of reviewing Dr. Damien's applications to subdivide his property in New Suffolk. At your earliest convenience, please provide me with a summary of Dr. Damien's applications and the results thereof. Thank you. cc: Supervisor Harris r. _.... .CO.U.NTY.Q,F.S U FFOLK...:., 1 Michael A. LoGrande SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING LEE E.KOPPELMAN DIRECTOR OF PLANNIN August 26, 1987 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Applicant: George D. Damien Mun. File No. : #3581 S.C.P.D. File No. : SD-87-20 Gentlemen: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for local determination. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval. The Board of appeals should cautiously exercise its discretionary power in granting such substandard lot area variances which only serve to undermine the effectiveness of the zoning ordinance, alter the character of the area and establish a precedent for the continuance of such a practice. Very truly yours, Lee E. Koppelman Director of Planning S/sGerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:mb VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE.L.1..NEW YORK 1 1788 (516)360-5192 cj� 30atholdown Board ���� MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765.1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Pursuant to Article XIII of the Suffolk County Charter , the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold , New York , hereby refers the following to the Suffolk County Planning Commission : _ Variance from the Zoning Code , Article III, Section100-31 ,Bulk Schedule Variance from Determination of Southold Town Building Inspector Special Exception , Article Section Special Permit Appeal No . : 3581 Applicant : Mr. George D. Damien Location of Affected Land : Jackson, Fifth and Main Streets, New Suffolk,NY County Tax Map Item No . : 1000- 17-9-12 Within 500 feet of : Town or Village- Boundary Line _ V Body of Water (Bay , Sound or Estuary ) State or County Road , Parkway , Highway , Thruway Boundary of Existing or Proposed County , State or Federally Owned Lan Boundary of Existing or Proposed County , State or Federal Park or Other Recreation Area Existing or Proposed Right-of Way of Any Stream or Drainage Channel Owned by the County or for Which The County Has Established Channel Lines , or Within One Mile of a Nuclear Power Plant Within One Mile of An Airport . approval of COMMENTS : Applicant is requesting RRRMkR5[:i_QR :kR I,nsuff:icient area, vlidt alar�-r�epth-nf twn r� �rr-P1 ;n fhisTpc_ndjs1g S Q� _..�.]�V sion of _ -Land. -- - — Copies of Town file and related documents enclosed for your review . Dated : August- 25, 1987 _ Notice of Hearings - July 16 , 1987 Southold . Town Board of Appeals Copies on or about July 2 , 1987 to the following : Suffolk Times L . I . Traveler-Watchman Mr. George D. Damien , 4015 West Fairview Heights Avenue , Tampa , FL 33616 Mr . George D. Damien , Box 626 , New Suffolk , NY 11956 Mr . John H. Geideman , as Agent for Mr. Wilhelm Franken , Box 416 , East Marion , NY 11939 Mr . Wilhelm Franken ; Osprey Nest Road , Greenport , NY 11944 Mr . Arthur-V . Junge , 6880 Nassau Point Road , Cutchogue , NY 11935 Mr. James. L . Gray , Sr . , Pudge Corp . , Box 1465 , Southold 11971 Richard F. Lark , Esq . , Box 973 , Main Road , Cutchogue , NY 11935 asAttorney for Mr . and Mrs . James Tyler Mr . Garrett A. Strang , R. A. , as Agent for Dina Masso, and Fred Wightman Main Road , Box 1412 , Southold , NY 11971 Mr . William Jacobs , Builder , as Agent for Mr . and Mrs . Paul Galgan Depot Lane , Cutchogue , NY 11935 Mr . and Mrs . Paul Galgan , 4605 Stillwater Ave , Cutchogue , NY 11935 Mr. Henry E . Raynor ,' Jr . as Agent for Mr. Frederick Koehler P .O . Drawer A , Jamesport , NY 11947 Philip J . Cardinale , Esq . as Attorney for Mrs . D . Dean P . O . Drawer W , Main Road , Jamesport , NY 11947] Mrs . Donald E. Dean , 9 Yorke Road , Mountain Lakes , NJ 07046 Mr . and. Mrs . Socrates Spirakis , 139 Stratford Ave , Garden City ,NY 11530 Justice and Mrs . J . Snellenburg , .Private Road , Southold , NY 11971 Individual Board members with maps for on-site inspections/reviews . Town Clerk Bulletin Board 7/1 /87 ZBA Office Bulletin Board 7/1. /87 Building Department (Vic ) Planning Board Office. �oc��FFOt�`Oli ' Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 728 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 November 13, 1986 To: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals From: JUdith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 3581 application of George Damien for a variance. Also included is Notice to Adjacent Property Owners; tax map; Short Environmental Assessment Form; letter relative to NYS Tidal . Wetlands Land-Use; surveys; Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department; and CO. • Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk IM7 0/0 - ' � 49 1 A 0 AR 15 A, le5F A—/C /G Gl/�t � S Gl d4 lek 4-s 1-Z a I/e cy/ C-Zze- . /�, - / Old _5ql -i to o q ICtl 4 tl--e e &U -C a r c -e fll-41. cil 2 746 Q l/o � I I vt J1614 ✓ a -At le a -f 6 y C, 5 f 6e e / G/C r v __col e? C7G k r-f /Zl?_C__ /LO � 7-46 /C 6 te . le- c xe .5 ---, A ---------- L Is ev C Z-e eq 7Z-Z'-I--7-1 L--C/ a 7ZIC, - lye w iizc _/ o co -_ O--_ i� i `J/U1-e4 /- - G` -,�` (.cl-.cJ v 7 - / . �p�r,�l d e c✓ ref 7Z'1` Pc✓ 5�__- � _vc - if S'. _CZ GCJ G c� io yl d '/ lc /2( P(/I i?/O dJ _7/q/_ 0 ` /mil P�GU1 ,/Jl�-'e . 11 t - 7`l IE' 7Z1e_eI_, z -�'!-e « 1Ph� p /� ,� � y may - � ��s< �o _ l� //0110S.-q 4. z ' ,eL a--v-_ Az_� 7ZI cy Coe ?/-'y . orb _ Awl li��o 11•e f-- y. TRANSCRIPT, OF HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD 'OF APPEALS REGULAR MEETING OF THURSDA-Y , JULY 16 , 1987 Appl . - No . : 3581 Applicant (s ) : GEORGE D . DAMIEN Location of Property Jackson , Fifth and Main Streets,. New Suffolk County Tax_ Map ID No . 1000- 17 = . .9 - 12 . Board Members present were : Chairman Goehringer .P . Goehringer , Members Serge Doyen , Jr . , Charles Grigonis , Jr . , Robert J . Douglass and Joseph H . .Sawicki . Absent was : (none ) Also present were : Mr . Lessard ( Building Dept) , Linda Kowalski ; Board Secretary , and approximately 20 .person.s in the audience .. The Chairman opened the hearing at 7 : 35 ' o ' clock p .m. and read the notice of hearing and application for the record . CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey done by Roderick VanTuyl , P . C . -dated July 15 , 1968 indicating the house lot , which is approximately 90 . 11 ' by 150 ' variable . SECRETARY : There are two surveys there cut and taped together to show both lots and the division line . CHAIRMAN::.. Ok . There ' s Lot #2 which is 12 ,663 sq . ft . (proposed ) . � And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map .indicat_ing this and surrounding properties in the area . Mr . ' Damien , would you like -to be heard? G-EORGE DAMIEN : Mr . Chairman and Members of the Board . Thank you for giving me this .opportunity to emphasize some facts of my case . As you read` in my petition , after I bought it , my lot . I went to the Building Inspector at that time and asked him because he was the only one in authority ,. asked him to determine whether I would have -..the right to have two lots . And he said , "Yes . He said the law , effectively , I mean the Iaw at that time was 125 ' by 100 ' and I have more land than than . liowever , in- view of the fact there are four houses behind my property and in view of the fact that I have three children , I decided to ask for a variance in order to be able to have this opportunity to present for me to have three houses . So . I applied for a hearing which took -place in 1966 and. during the hearing-- before that the Building Inspector told me you don ' t even have to apply to have .a hearing -because you are within- the Taw and you have the right to -have two lots . And I said ; "Well m-aybe . they will give me a variance . And so I applied and during the hearing--copies of this on page 11 --the Chairman of the ..--the Chairman at that time--said clearly and I -wi ll simply read this , The Chairman- said we would no-t deny two lots , and then -he added we would have to apply again to divide this property into two lots . f Page 2 - Public Hearing Z . B . A. Appl . No ._. 3581 - GEORGE D. DAMIEN July 16 , 1 987_ Regular.. Meeting MR-. DAMIEN. (continued ) : The whole thing comes clear . I , after the hearing , went back -to the Building Inspector and asked him , because I was a Professor teaching at Columbia University . I said, "Well , what am I supposed to do to ,have this into two lots ?" And he said there ' s nothing to do , you are within the law and consequently addressing yoursel_f. to me , is the procedure to follow . So I said fine , and he issued as' you have in the files , the permits for two. houses. * Howe.ver , 'I couldn '-t, build two houses because I didn ' t. have the need at that time , and he issued in writing i.n 1975 -when I 'went to a.sk him again , because I knew the_. zoni_ng -.the variance-- not the variance , the size of .lo'ts had been changed--,and he wrote me a letter of which you have , and said and.. it r.says hear and I will read it again , 'clearly ,. Novembe5 , 19753 an official document issued by the Building Inspe_ctor . . . . . Mr . George Damien New Suffolk , NY Dear S-i_r : In reply to your inquiry, please be advised : The action of the Board o_f .Ap.pe,als #949, Sept . 1 , 1966 dividin_,g your proposed... on the E/s Fifth Street , New Suffolk into. two * bui.lding.. lots , one- with frontage on Jackson St . and -,the other with frontage on Main Street, -has not been changed or rescinded_. You still have two bu.ilding. lots on E/s. Fifth Street as the Board set them off in 1966 . ' Yours truly, 1S/ HOWARD_ TERRY Building Inspector. . . . Now I have been penalized . In the meantime , of course , the administration changed , from a Republican Administration , and I went to the new., who to my knowledge was not a Building Inspector and is Director of the Building Department , Mr. Lessard ._. And I explained my case to him and he told me , "No . The Building Inspector. .made, an error"and consequently I don ' t have two lots . " I talked to him , . explained to him that .I want to fight it '. Nobody told me what to do except just to apply , and Page 3 - Public Hearing Z . B . A. Appl . No. 3581 - GEORGE D . DAMIEN July 16 , 1987 Regular Meeting MR . DAMIEN (continued ) : when I applied ,to an official , and when he issued the official letter , this letter is not (inaudible ) . I happen to be- a Doctor of Law although I don ' t practice , but I teach law and this is to me absolutely incredible that an official document issued by the same BuildingInspector is considered to be in error . That is something that I cannot be penalized . It ' s like the previous President of the United States signs an order. and Mr . Reagan says , "No, he was in error. " That is legally speaki-ng something that never happens .and Ham - puzzled , so. I applied for having a hearing to confirm this de-cision that I had in 1966, 'I was within the 1 aw .and I had -the right to have two bui-lding lots . The decisi.on. t.aken 'by the Zoning Board on October 2 last year , - I applied in. April ,__ finally on October the 2nd I have a hearing , 'and I was again puzzled- by a decision that was taken at that time .. I did not ask --and this is again something which I cannot understand-- I did not ask the Board to confirm the decision of 1966 , that I don ' t have a right to three lots. ' I wouldn '-t app'"iy for. nothing to have-- it doesn ' t make sense . I applied to have _ a hea.r.ing.__.and to have a decision to confirm the fact that in 1966 .when I applied first I have the right to h-a.ve two lots because the at that time the -zoning ordinance . required 125 ` :by 100 ' ... . Then since I could not get . what I have been trying to -have for 21 years now , I applied for a second heari n_g today which_--i s taking place . I have said in detail , I had written a petition which I explained all the facts and so -forth . First of all , it was denied to me . I applied in November--w_e are now in July--without going through details I was asked that I -cannot have the hearing before obtaining an (inaudible ) from the-_ Department of Health Services in Riverhead concerning my lot. And .. I explained and wrote letters that if I have a second. lot , then I -will first of all go forth complying with whatever require- ments are in force by the Health Department . But what is interesting to some extent to me is when I had the hearing in October 1986 , the Chairman of the Board did not require' that I have to have this application of the Article VI of the Department of Health Services . And I said and I explained and wrote many letters. My file is quite voluminous . - That this Article VI. contains a_ special paragraph that says , " . . . cases which are determined by the Zoning Board prior- to January 1 , 1981 , Article VI does not apply . . . . " Well , finally I was very pleased to be called by the Secretary when I was in Florida that 'I will have today ' s hearing scheduled . Because on August_ 4 , 1986 , the Department of Health Services, Page 4 - Public Hearing Z . B .A. Appl . No . 3581 - GEORGE D. DAMIEN July 16 , 1987 -Regular _ Meet'ing MR. DAMIEN (continued ) : Mr . Royal Reynolds , Public Health Engineer , wrote a letter here addressed to Judith Terry, Town Clerk , indicated a copy to the Zoning Board , and it said , " . . . in order to determine whether the property is exempt from- Article VI of the Sanitary Code , it is necessary to know whether the Town of Southold has issued Planning or Zoning Board approval for this property . . . . " In order words , that I have a lot . If I don ' t have a lot , of course all these Health requirements which meets the cesspools and the wells does not apply . : And for the .(inaudible ) again I do not have after so many years - any satisfaction , and I am penalized because the interpretation-:. was the previous Inspector made a mistake . If he made the mistake ; I am not the guilty one . I don ' t. see why I .have to continue to be penalized to be able to use my property the way I had the right in 1966 when I bought the property.. So,. I will ,simply say that in th-e present situation , again , .with the second_.,-appeal.,,-- second hearing , I am appealing to the Chairman of the Board and the Members of the Board. to confirm the fact that _I do have as in. 1966 - two lots because the objection made by Mr . Lessard , who is Executive Director of the Department of Buildings.,-I did not apply. I 'di'd apply . I went to the Building Inspector and asked.. him what am ._I supposed to so , and he said there is nothing to. do . You are asking me , I ' ll give you the permits . You are within the law. And . that is - the decision of the Board-- from the Zoning Board . So , what I have done is simply ask him and 'as in my file , I sent you the original of the Building Permits which he gave me for the second lot , and after that of course , I am not a wealthy man-- I didn ' t have the money . This is the original for the second lot which you have . So I do not understand why after so much procedure it cost me money . In 1966 it was $5 . 00 . Today it is_,$75 . 00 plus $50 . 00 for the Planning Board , plus I - don ' t. know what. I also have to pay for Department of Health Services, and in • the final analysis I haven ' t got anything and I am penalized for some- thing which is simply-- I 'm not--invoIved . _ I haven ' t done anything wrong . And I would appreciate definitely a decision taken by this Board ,, and I appeal it to the Chairman and Members of this - - Board to simply restore my rights and grant me a second lot-- and I ' m glad also- to emphasize the fact that as you well know , according to the United States Supreme Court on June 9th of this year , -- of the Constitution--this is an application from the .-Jaw of the decision . "Landowners are - entitled to compensation when their land is--made usele.ss by zoning , planning and environmental and other. land-use .restrictions . " Page 5 - Public Hearing Appl . No . 3581 - GEORGE D..- DAMIEN July 16 , 1987 ZBA Regular Meeting MR. DAMIEN (continued ) : Well I have been exactly in the same situation and the Supreme Court of the United States is granting here to the landowners which includes myself, the right to compensation which I am not going to do. I would like simply to have my second lot as it can be determined and for which decision. I will be grateful to the Chairman and all the Members for. . Thank you. CHAIRMAN : Can I .just ask you one question, Mr . Damien . MR. DAMIEN: Yes , 'by all means . CHAIRMAN : Would you just step ' up here one second please . I have both applications . This to my left over here. .and to your right is the application of last year ' s and this is the application of this year ' s . If you ' ll notice the maps are pieced. SECRETARY : One had. the house and the other did not . CHAIRMAN : But- they are virtually the same thing . .-,', ' MR. DAMIEN : Yes . CHAIRMAN : The house was not plotted on the other one , ok . I see . There is one other thing. '-.I just wanted to clearly state for the people in the audience that the application of 1966 says , and I ' ll read. it , "George D . Damien , Appeal No . 3503 , Variance Requesting Confirmation . of Building Inspe,Gtor ' s Actions Prior Z . B . A. Decision Rendered Appeal. #949 , 9/l /66 , recognizing two separate building lots having insufficient area , width and depth , required by Article III , Section 100-31 , Bulk Schedule of the Zoni-ng Code . Location of Property. . . . " I just wanted to say for the record is what you asked us to do in that application was to reaffirm that Decision of 1966 , and that was the reason why we did not require Article VI Approval because you :were asking us to confirm it differently from the application that we have before us now: _ As you know we denied the application in 1986 , and that ' s where we are- today . We are here with a new fresh application of whic-h we did ask you to get_. Article VI. Approval , which you didn ' t , but we did grant you a hearing. Is .that correct?-- MR. DAMIEN : Yes _ That is correct . That ' s besides the fact that when I applied last year my request was simply to confirm Page 6 - Public Hearing Appl . No . ,.358.1 - GEORGE D . DAMIEN July 16 ,, 1987 ZBA Regular Meeting MR . DAMIEN (continued ) : not that I have no right to have three lots . CHAIRMAN : No , it says two lots in the public hearing . MR. DAMIEN: But it says insufficient area , which is not the case . I had sufficient area at that time in 1966 . CHAIRMAN : Right . MR. DAMIEN : And as to this Article. VI , since this is a decision taken in 1966 , 'paragraph (c: ) i. f .I am correct does not apply for any decision taken before January 1 , 1981 . Now if I have the lot--if I build I will comply with the requirements of the Department of Health , no doubt . If .I sell the property , whoever will buy it has to comply with 'it-' that goes without saying . Ok? CHAIRMAN : Thank you . MR . DAMIEN : _I-_ thank you very much. CHAIRMAN : Is there anybody else to speak in behalf of this application ? Anybody like to speak against the application? Questions from Board Members ? _.(None ) . Hearing no further questions ; I ' ll make - a motion closing the hearing and reserving decision until later . MEMBER DOUGLASS : Second . CHAIRMAN : Thank you very much for coming in . Vote of the- Board -- Ayes : Messrs . Goehringer , Grigonis , 'Doyen , Douglass and Sawicki Respectfully submitted, .Linda F .. Kowalski. Z_.. B..A, Clerk and Stenographer 71 _d �Nv®T/M S�i L r yr a i-6�1 s_r < �✓ ._._- --- ---- -- 6 0 Nk E 7 \ `� 4 I i S. 85'40'30"F. -- 101.22 - Tt F6UC6 5. OF l..il4B t i 1 i " LL !- O LL u z 0 Z 0 i O , J -' PcoPo.SED D}Vt3f04,! .� N,as�- S.F. S.5- 4c'SCs' - 0 3. t. 1I.t6 I! � ticcal d I M A p 0 V= =� ► s '� VF��:7 4011: o L ... 4 �. -a r'» i - N i C�� k�C.i�•'L! v r L-u o�o��FFo�r�oG ; z y� Southold 7own .Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD July 16, 1987 MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. S.E.Q.R.A. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION JOSEPH H.SAWICKI Notice of Determination of Non-Significance APPEAL NO. : 3581 PROJECT NAME: GEOR'G'E 'D'. DAMIEN - This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental Quality Review Act of -the Environmental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. This board determines the within project not to have a signifi- cant adverse effect on the environment for the reasons indicated below. Please take further notice that this declaration should not be considered a determination made for . any other department or agency which may also have an application pending for the same or similar. project. TYPE OF ACTION: [X) Type II [ ] Unlisted [ DESCRIPTION OF ACTION• Approval. of insufficient area, width and depth of two parcels in this pending set-off division of land LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, more particularly known as: Corners of Jackson, Fifth and Main Streets, New Suffolk, NY 1000-17-9•-12 REASON (S) SUPPORTING THIS DETERMINATION: (1) An Environmental .Assessment in the short form has been submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple- mented as planned; (2) The relief requested is not directly related- to new construction as regulated by Section 617. 13 for a lot-line or area variance. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowalski, Secretary, Southold Town Board of Appeals,. Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. 516- 765-1809 or 1802. Copies of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board. me TEL. 765-1802 ��FF01� ® ® TOWN OF SOUTHOLD C OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN HALL ® SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 October 27, 1980 ., Mr. George Damien New Suffolk, New York Re: Property of George D. Damien & wf Main Street, Fifth Street and Jackson Street Dean Mr. Damien: New Suffolk, New York 11956 I reviewed our files and information about your property and buildings. Before 1971 a lot could not be less than 12,500 sq.ft. Your property was large enough at that time for two ( 2) lots .each with a dwelling. You were given a building permit No. 3475Z to build a dwelling. A temporary Certificate of Occupancy Z3401 and final Certificate of Occupancy Z3412 was issued for this dwelling. A permit 3474Z was issL;ied for a 2nd dwelling which has since expired as the renewal fee was not continued. A permit 3646Z was issued for a detached garage and that permit also has expired for the same reason. In 1971 zoning was changed. You cannot subdivide property into lots with less than 40,000 sq.ft. o:f area. Your lot has a dwelling and only a one family dwelling is permitted to a lot. Therefore, you cannot get a permit to build another dwelling on your lot . You may apply for an accessory building. Very truly yours, GEORGE H. FISHER Sr. Building Inspector } . ._.-�//.7_/.1.0..1?._. ....�...�...._(.�!'"..................r._�._...�41.......G"1,' - �A.�.Ni'� �'1'� "V a1,1-I .� r�. /`•�'1.�.1-a / 11 5YQ <.CMI r - U F o d ,v S p 1 /��.�n.t., ! r���s f • � 3 Y 7 J 1� B CrgY G�! ju �� ��-t 170 . r(t�ti,(n C-- - �i� /Lt^`t 1 V W �1 ��L��-t P t4 OWNER STREET VILLAGE DISTRICT SUB. LOT e Q y-C+ a ost _ g . G n FORMER OWNER N E ACREAGEfd�U S -�- W ;-0 TYPE OF BUILDING ��p' 3�Y � - 71 SEAS. VL. ' FARM comm. I IND. ` CB. I MISC. Est.-Mkt. Value _ e' LAND IMP. TOTAL DATE REMARKS 4a V s! (J f• V✓/'lV .�a �\e�� 1c �v^ �C4� fr �I ^` f;' 'r 1 ✓^/� �� ,�1 d�•P P�I . V �? ` • /F/ /•Q J:C E C, l L �• if ( G fi� /' v 1 ^��1 � j i�7 iq�, •�r. 3j?r� IJ'v �.7! �7i /I7/: Z5 �C �iU� - J r-l:V- � v —do t�� t3/1.21 yf16��7 ���'� 7 i_ J AGE BUILDING CONDITION -NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE FRONTAGE ON WATER Farm Acre Value Per Acre Value i FRONTAGE ON ROAD3C —. _ate_ Tillable 1 I BULKHEAD Tillable 2 I DOCK Tillable 3 � - -- — Woodland i I Swampland i Brushland House Plot - - --------- —� - - -- -- - Toto I - t. o yJ, u� hold Town Board ®f Appeals s� � MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI June 1 2 , 1987 Mr . . G,eorge D. Damien 4015. West Fairview Heights Ave . Tampa , FL 33616 Re : Appeal No . 3581 (Variances ) Dear Mr . Damien : This letter will confirm our telephone call to your Florida home today advising that the Town Attorney and the Board of Appeals have agreed to schedule your appli - cation , tentatively for our July 16 , 1987 Regular Meeting , as you requ-ested . Please let us know as soon as possible whether or not you . are available to appear on July l6th (in the evening ) . Yours very truly , GERARD P . GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN lk cc : Planning Board Building Department } GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. B us 01, tpp,803 Tampa, Florida 33616 c�z s jag (813)837-9994 � � "'� `° May 23 1987 l y a 4- Mr. Gerard Goehringer Chairman Board of Appeals Southold, N.Yo 11971 Dear Mr. Goehringers In responde to your letter of May 11 and in reference to my letter-'of April 30, please be advised and please do not continue ignoring the following irrefutable facts: le- As I have already clearly explained to you in rA.y letter of March 13, 198% page 2 Point 3; the deoision taken by the Board of AZpeals after my healing of October 2,1986, which was communicated to me a month later, on November 10; was a paradigm of a functional evasion and subterfuge, since you did something, which-had nothing to do with my appeal, naively, you con- firmed the denial of three lots, which action was taken by the Board of Ap- peals in 1966. The reason why Mro Lessard refused to recognize the official document issued to me by Mr. Howard Terry, the previous Building Inspector, and which clearly states that I have two building lots on my property, was that I allegedly did not apply, after the hearing of 1966, to obtain, a con- firmation of Board of Appeals t decision confirming my right--to have two lots on my property, in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance in effect in 19660 My first appeal of October 2,1986 was to make you understand that I did, execute the formality consisting in applying for the division of my property into two lots, as suggested by the Chairman, in the course of the 1966 hearing. On page 11 of the 1966 hearing, the Chairman said; e would not deny two lots." In his letter- rebuttal of August '6,1982, Mr. Lessard stated; You iee., I never did apply 't Mr. Lessardts statement :is utterly false. After the 1966 hearing, I went to see Mr. Howard Terry, the Building Inspector at that time,and asked him what I was supposed to do and whom shall apply to, in order to get an official confirmation of the Board--'of Appeals_' decision that I have the right to have two building lots. Mr. Howard Terry eXplgned to me that addressing myself to him was the only oral application I needed to formalize the division of my property into two lots, since I was within the 3.966 lawn Therefore, he said, you have two lots and he added-You have by law tyro lots and Itll give you two building permits, as soon as you want them." And,indeed, I did get two building permits. 2.- In light of this explicative absolutely factual background, which I explained in the Petition accompanying my Appeal of October 2,1986, I NEVER ASKED YOU TO CONFIRM THE 1966 DECISION THAT I HAVE BEEN DENIED TO ELM THREE LOTS. I would have indulged myself in s."-flagrant form of-'functional in.sipience, if I had asked you to confirm that--I have rio right to have three lots. And yet,tha.t is exactly what you did most deliberately. Your action clearly illustrates that you have indulged in the most disgraceful,if fiot' ignoble form of subterfuge, in order to evade taking a decision in my case and confirming •the fact that I did--and do have the-, right to have two lots, as confirmed by the official letters sent to me by the former Building; Inspector. e 2 Therefore,- -Point 1 or pa.ragrdphe 3 of your letter dated May 11, does not make-any sense. FYI please read Point 8, in fines of my Petition of April 19, 1986, accompanying my Appeal to you and in which I clearly-stated that I - request--the Board of Appeals to confirm the decision of the 1966 hearing, as specified in the official documents issui.ed to me by the previous Building Inspector, Howard Terry,, that I do have trio building lots, since in the course of the 1966 hearing the Chairman emphasized that I do have the right to have two lots o 3.- In my sec 4 Appeal, I am asking you the same thin.g,ieeo, to confirm that I do have two building lots and to stop being penalized by not recognizing a decision taken by a previous Administration and which decision is contained in documents issued by a. former Official of the T.ow.n. of Southold@ 4�9- Now, you refuse to schedule the second hearing, under the fallacious pre- text that I have to have, an exemption under- Article 6 of the Sanitary--Code and you are referring to Mr. Reynolddf letter of March 27,1987o However, you did schedule the--first hearing of October 2,1986, without asking Reynolds ' approval for an exemption under Article 6 and you do-continue ignoring Reynolds , letter of August 12,1986 and in which he clarly stated that; 11-In--order to determine whether-the property (my property) is exempt from oiir"standards under Article 6 of the Sanitary Code, it-is necessary to know whether the Town of Southold has issued Plarm.ing or Zoning Board approval for this project.11 Mr. Goehringer, I thought that'as Chairman of Board of A peals, which is a form of a High Tribunal, you will perform your functionsy showing a paradigm of integrity, which moans the quality of sound moral prMciple,uprightness, honesty and sincerity. However, by using subterfuges and tergiversations in evading to take a decision in my case, the concept of integrity-becomes a metaphysical abstract i.on,.-I do not know what you have against me and I do not want to believe that there is some form of connivance between -you and Mr: Rey- nolds. I regret,I did not take you to Court after the first hearing, after which you rendered a decision totally irrelevant and-"immaterial to my request® And,indeed, you did this on purpose. Why? You are the-only one who knows how to answer this question. incerely, Ic . George Do Damien o Board Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H.SAWICKI December 2 , 1986 Mr . George D . Damien 4015 West Fairview . Heights Avenue Tampa , Florida 33616 Re : Appeal No . 3581 - Area Variances Dear Mr . Damien : This letter will acknowledge receipt of your recent appli - cation . The members of the Board of .Appeals w.i.11 be conducting field inspections and _envi.ronmental reviews as m:ay be required by State _and local laws pi,i or to s.chedul i ng your .application for a, public hearing.,., _.. It is requested in the interim that you proceed with the [ ] Planning Board [ ] N . Y'. S. D., E. C_ [X]. Co. Health, (Arte 6) in order that they may _submit their w,ri tten ..comme-nts or recom- mendations as early as possible . : Upon. receipt of their input , your application will be scheduled for the next ..available hear- ing date. If the above document (s ) are submitted by January 8th , it is expected that the public hearing would be held about the latter part of January . - A copy of the notice of hearings as published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman and the _Suffolk Times will be sent to you as confirmation . Please feel free to call at any time if you have any questions . Yours very.. trul GERARD P . GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski cc : Planning Boar-d LA-coG� Southold Town Board of Appeals o MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P.GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H.SAWICKI December 2 , 1986 Mr. George D . Damien 4015 West Fairview Heights Avenue Tampa , Florida 33616 Re : A p�ea�l wNo�3581 - Area Vari ances Dear Mr . Damien : This letter will acknowledge receipt of your recent appli - cation . The members of the Board of ,Appeals wi.11 be conducting field inspections and .environmental reviews as may be require-d by State and local laws prior to s._cheduling your .application for a- public hearing. It is requested in the interim that you proceed with the [ ] Planning Board [ ] N. Y'. S. D.. E.. C. [X] Co. Health, (Art. 6) in order that they may -submit their written ..comments or recom- mendations as early as possible . . Upon receipt of their input , your application will be scheduled .for the next .ava-ilable hear- ing date . If the above document (s ) are submitted by January 8th , it is expected that the public hearing would be held about the latter part of January. .._ A copy of the notice of hearings as published in the Long Island _Traveler-Watchman and the Suffolk Times will be sent to you as confirmation . Please fee', free to call at anytime if you have any questions . Yours very t,ruI GERARD P .. GOEHRINGERI CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski cc: Planning Board Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI May 11 , 1 987 Mr . George D. Damien 4015 West Fair.view .Heights Ave . Tampa , Florida 33616 Re : Appeal No . 3581 (Variances ) Dear Mr . Damien : In response to your recent letters , please be advised that -you request to schedule a public hearing without the required Suffolk County Health.. Department Article VI approval for .this division was considered by all the Board Members and your request was denied . To help to clarify the difference between the prior and .present. applications , please note the .following :_ 1 . The prior application (#3503 ) requested a review and clarification of Appeal #949 , .and the Board ' s Acti.on was rendered November 3 , 1986 and forwarded to you . This application was not a direct request under. #3503 for area variances (as is the present application ) . 2 . The present application requests area variances in a proposed division .o•f land , and it is our understand- ing that. this project fora division of„land is subject to all rules and regulations , including .Article VI ., approval of the Suffolk County Health Department . (The p.rior applications .#3503 and #949 did not approve two lots . ) . The March 27 , 1987 letter from the Suffolk County Health Department confirms its position that your proposed division is not exempt , and therefore .you must proceed with their agency for their current .approvals . We are enclosing a copy of Mr . Reynolds March 27 , 1987 correspondence and ask that you proceed with their v Page 2 - May .1 1 ,. 1987 Mr . George D ._.._Dami.en Re : Appeal No . 3581 (Variances ) agency. We are sorry that you feel negatively about proceeding with the Article VI County Application , however , we are not permitted by law to act without same , and your variances on this two-lot proposal without the County ' s approval under Article VI would become fruitless and 100% ineffective . Yours very truly , GERARD P . GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN lk Enclosure GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tampa, Florida 33616 (813)837-9994 A�_ April 30,1987 Mro Gerard Goehringer Chairman Board of Appeals Southold, N.Yo 11971 Dear Mr© Goehringer: Enclosed please find a copy of a letter I am sending this day to Yir. Reynolds, as well as a copy of s. letter which-he sent you on August 12,1986® Per® Reynolds':p request is the correct and legal approach to solve my case. Please answer me the following two questions : l.- Why did you schedule my hearing on October 2,1986, without waiting for Mr. Reynolds!- decision,concer- ning the application or not of Article 6 of the- Sanitary Code, and why do you refuse to schedule my second appeal without waiting for MroReynoldts decision! Does your own negative attitude toward me make sense to you, when the case is the same? The first time .you did not need Mr. 'Reynoldstap- proval or disapproval and now you need it? On what legal ground? 2.- Why do you continue ignoring the letter Reynolds sent you on August 12,1986 and in which he stated cleanly and precisely the correct legal procedure to follow for the solution of my case, namely: "In order to determine whether the property (Damients property) is exempt-'from our standards under Article 6 of the Sanitary Code,IT IS NECESSARY TO IMOW WHETHER THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD HA3 MSTJED PLANNING OR 20NINTG BOARD APPROVAL FOR THIS TROTECT011 I would appreciate an answer to these tm3questions and expect that intel" ligence will prevail and not unjustified emotional negativel oward--me and, thereby, you will schedule a hearing for my case without any further delai. Sincerely, Encl.2 George D. Damien GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tampa, Florida 33616 (813)837-9994 April 30,1987 idre Royal Reynolds cc: Mro Berard Goehringer Department of Health Services Chairman -- County Center Board of Appeal Riverhead, N.Y. 11901 Main Road Southold,N.Y. 11971 Dear Mire Reynolds; In reference to your letter of March 27, which I did answer on April 7,. in which you stated that "discussion with the County Attorney's Office has confirmed that your development does not appear to be exempt from Artcle 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code, please be advised that I have consulted my Attorney, who made the f'olloTrring suggestions: "In view of the fact that his statement, (does not appear' is Pro-eminently problematic and,thereby, has no legal value, ask Mro Reynolds to provide us with a letter from the County's Attorney in which he will explain to you,on what legal ground he claims that your case is riot exempt from Article 6, of the Sanitary Code, when your case, dividing the property into two lots, dates from 19'66. If Mr. Reynolds ignores Letter (c) of Pa.ragraphe 2 of the newly amended on March 4,1987, Article 6, the Goitatyls 'Attorney should give, us his legal opinion, so that we may study it and eventually challenge it in Court." Please answer Point 3 of my letter dated April 7 and in which I did refer to your letter of August 1201986, sent to Judith Terry, Town Clerk of Southold, and in which y&Q.zbated: "In order to determine whether the property (Damien's property) is exempt from our standards under article 6 of the Sanitary Code, it is necessary to know whether the Town of Southold has issued Planning or Zoning Board approval for this 'Project.11 Why did you change your mind, when you do know that your request was correct, since I am now appealing to the Zoning Board to take a deci- sion-either to confirm or to-invalidate the 1966 decision dividing my property into two lots Mls'is the correct legal approach to solve my case since the Zoning Board may or may not confirm the'"division of my property into tiro lots. For after'all,if I do not have a second lot,your request for applying -Article -6s- whether iri'my favor or against my case has no raison dletre whatsoever and , 0 ,therefore.. becomes an exercise in futility. Sincerely, 6�4 �. George D: Damien COUNTY OF SUFFOLK suaay ayY�C.U�yNJ. •.1 a •';�1t�FJ;t� rr� t PETER F.COHALAN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES \ DAVID HARRIS,M.D.,M.P.H. COMMISSIONER August 12, 1986 I Judith T. Terry Town Clerk 53095 Main Road w Southold, N.Y. 11971 RE: Damien Development New Suffolk (T) Southold SCTM# 1000-117-9-12 Board of Appeals # 949 Dear Ms. Terry: This Department is in receipt.of a subdivision application on the above referenced property. In order to determine whether the property is exempt from our standards under Article 6 of the Sanitary Code, it is necessary to know whether the Town of Southold has issued Planning or Zoning Board approval or t is project. would you please inform this Department whether such approvals have been issued and if so, when. Very truly yours, Royal R. Reynolds, P.E. Sr. Public Health Engineer Wastewater Management Section RRR:ljr cc: Damien COUNTY CENTER 548-3312 RIVERHEAD.N.Y. 1 1901 L . GEORGE D. DAMIEN Y 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. uG �� j "+,, i•;Q Tampa, Florida 33616 (813) 837-9994 a . . April 7,1987 Mr. Gerard P.Goehringer Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Goehringer: I would like to believe that you have read and comprehended the content of my letter, dated March 13,1987, which contains a clear legal explana- tion of my case. Consequently will you answer my letter of the said date without any further delay? Next week, April 13,1987, it will be exactly SIX MONTHS or more than 180 days since�on November 13,1986?I did apply for a second appeal of my case, which case was decided already in 1966. I want to know, when are you going to schedule my case for hearing, so that I may know whether or not you will divide my property into two lots in accor- dance with the 1966 decision of the Board of Appeals.You told me,, in the course of our last telephone conversation, that you will call me and let me know your decision. You did not. .WhyT Your claim that allegedly my application is not complete because I have to have "either a waiver or approval, or other action under Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code,11 simply does not make any legal sense for the following two reasons% 1.- You simply disregard the. content_ = of Section 609, Point 2, Letter (c) of this same Article 6, which stipulates: "The requirements of this article shall not apply to developments and other construction projects approved by a Town, or . . . Zoning Board of Appeals PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,1981, and which met the requirements of the Department at that time." 2.- The truth of the matter is,Mr.Goehringer, that you scheduled my first hearing on October 2,1986, WITHOUT ASKING ME TO HAVE as a conditio sine qua non, as you do now, a waiver or approval or other action under Article 6." I would like to believe,Mr. Goehringer, that you are an honest man and you will stop playing, this utterly dishonest game of insipient tergiversations and,thereby, you will schedule my case without indulging in further varieties of subterfuges and procrastinations, incere ly, Georgb D. Damien COUNTY OF SUFFOLK au Michael A'.LoGrande SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES DAVID HARRIS, M.D.,M.P.H. COMMISSIONER March 27, 1987 George D. Damien 4015 .West Fairview Heights Ave. Tampa, Florida 33616 RE: Damien Development New Suffolk. (T) Southold Southold Appeal #350,3 Dear Mr. Damien: I am in receipt of your letter(s) concerning the above referenced development. I have recently met with Mr. Goehringer of the Southold Town Board of Appeals and supplied him with my most recent cor- respondence to you (January 6, 1987) . Furthermore, discussion with the County Attorney's Office has confirmed that your development does not appear to be exempt . from Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. I am also enclosing guidelines for processing a realty development map with this Department for your edification. Sincerely, Royal R. Reynolds, .P.E. Sr. Public Health Engineer , Bureau of Wastewater Management RRR:1jr . enclosure COUNTY CENTER 548-3312 RIVERHEAD.N.Y. 1 1901 a GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. /��Af ayTampa, Florida 33616 C /a (813) 837-9994 ' March 13,1987 ""`: .; ♦' s�}' p`�' @iJ j�i3( 3yi Mr. Gerard P. Goehringer d �J Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, N.Yo 11971 Dear Mr. Goerhringer: in refer,,sxice to our conversation of last night and to your letter of March 9, please be advised of the following facts : le- We are dealing here, i.e., in my case,with a strictly legal situation, which you-'continue to ignore for reasons difficult to understand.. Please read my letter of January 7 1987 and my letter of March 9$1987 in which I have amply and clearly explained the legal problem we are dealing with. 20-'-The truth of the matter is that ONLY the Board of Appeals can legally determine the division of my property into two lots, particularly in a case related to confirming a decision taken in 1966 by a previous Board of Appeals. Such being the fact,established by the Southold Town's law, your legal com- petence stops:.hereo .Then, the Department of Health Services in Riverhead takes over., so to say, since after the decision taken by the Board of Appeals, its jurisdiction becomes functional. Here again, we have two very different legal cases. First, if the Zoning Board of Appeals confirms the division of my pro- perty into-two lots, then 'and only then the Department of Health Services, upon my request,will decide whether or not Article 6 of Suffolk County Sanitary Code is applicable to my case. And indeed, in my application I shall refer to Section 609, Poixt 2,Letter (c) of this same article, which stipulates: "The requirements of this article SHALL NOT APPLY TO DEVELOPMEWTS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS APPROVED BY A TOWN OR . . ZONING BOARDS: OF APPk;ALS PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,1981,AND 'WHICH MLT THk; RE® QUIRL'MENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT AT THAT TM.11 Consequently,it is crystal clear that even after the decision taken by the Southold Board of ,Appeals to-divide my property into two lots article 6 IS NOT APPLICABLE, since my case IS PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,1981. Second,if the Board of Appeals does not confirm the 1966 decision for two lots, THERE IS NO LEGAL CASE AND,THEREBY, NO REASON WHJUSOMR TO REFER TO ARTICLE 6. That is why, to claim, as you do, in: paragraph 2 of your letter, dated Mareh-9,1987,that Article 6 approval is required as a conditio:,. sine qua non, i.eos, as a peremptory condition:, PRIOR TO scheduling and above all as a legal cause FOR NOT SCHEDULING the hearing of my second appeal is an arrant nonsense, for it does not aveany legal ground wha soever& I have a Bachelor Degree of Law, a Master Degree of Law and I am a Doctor of Law and in light of this explicative background kindly , stop indulging'in further tergiversations, in order to schedule my case without any further delay. a�A 2 - Please consult your Attorney and submit for his attention and consideration this letterjoas well as copies of the letter I sent you on January 7,1987 and the minutes of"the 1966 hearing, page 10 where the Chairman stated:"You could build two houses there,"and page 11 where he reiterated and said.-We would NOT deny two lots" and added:°You would have t apply again to divide this pro- perty unto two lots." And I did ask the then Building Inspector,Howard Terry, what to do and how to apply* His answer was that I was within the law to have two lots and,therefore, I had'nothing else to apply for,but simply to ask him to issue two building permits, which he did. Later on, in 1975, he confirmed by an officialetter that I do have two lots and that this decision of the Board of Appeals was not rescinded. 3.-The decision taken by the Board of Appeals after my hearing of October 2, 1987, whicAnommunicated to me a month later on November 10,198% was a pa- radigm of a functional evasion and subterfuge, since you did something which had nothing to do with my appeal, namely, you confirmed the denial of three lots, which action was taken by the Board of Appeals in 1966. My first appeal was to make you understand that I did execute'the formality consisting in applying for the division-"of my property into two lots, as suggested by the Chairman, in the course of the 1966 hearing, by contacting the then Building Inspector, who explained to me that addressing myself to him was the only oral application I needed to formalize the division of my property into two lots and,thereby, to-' obtain two building permits, which I did get' I never asked you to confirm the 1966 deeision 'that I was denied to have-'three lotso Hence, the reason for my second appeal. No*,after more than three months, since I applied for a second"- appeal., you-refuse to schedule a new-hearing andto take a decision on my case under the legally fallacious pretext-that article 6 approval is required prior to the hearing. 4.- Enclosed please find a copy of a ltter Mr. Reynolds sent me on August 12, 1986 and which clearly explains that: A "In order to determine whether the property is-exempt from our standards under Article 6 of the Sanitary Code, it is necessary to know whether the Town of Southold has issued Planning or Zoning Board approval for this project. This letter was sent to you, but it seems that you have carefully avoided to even mention it and the more so to take into consideration the clearly stated fact that., in order to see whether or not article 6 is applicable to my ease,the Health Department must first know-WHETHER OR NOT I WE TWO LOTS;,, Is not this crystal clear and confirm9 without any doubt whatso- ever,the legal explanation I am providing you with,here iri'this letter,that Article 6 approval comes ONLY AFTER the Zoning Board decides whether or not 1 have two lots? And again,--one would indulge in a paradigmatic case of an exercise in futaity and other varieties of arrant nonsenses, if one continues to claim that scheduling the hearing of my case is conditioned by a prior approval of Article 6. CtSijnc0rely<j,, � Encle 1 GeorgL Do Damien ` COUNTY OF SUFFOLK PETER F.COHALAN SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES _f DAVID HARRIS.M.D.,M.P.H. COMMISSIONER August 12, 1986 Judith T. Terry Town Clerk 53095 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 RE: Damien Development New Suffolk (T) Southold SCTM# 1000-117-9-12 Board of Appeals # 949 Dear Ms. Terry: This Department is in receipt of a subdivision application on the above referenced property. a In order to determine whether the property is exempt from our standards under Article 6 of the Sanitary 'Code, it is necessary to know whether the Town of Southold has issued Planning or Zoning Board approval or is project) Would you please inform this Department whether such approvals have been issued and if so, when. Very truly yours, IC Royal R. Reynolds, P.E. Sr. Public Health Engineer Wastewater Management Section RRR:ljr cc: Damien COUNTY CENTER 548-3312 RIVERHEAD.N.Y. 11901 GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 Wept Fairview Heights Ave. Tampa, Florida 33616 (813)837-9994 1 March 9,1987 Mr. Gerard Pe Goehringer Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Goehringer: In reference to our telephone conversation of yesterday, pleaae"be advised of the sad fact that,by the time you will receive this letter, on Marcfl 13, it will be exactly 120 days since November 13,1986, the day when I did apply for a second appeal of my cases Is this not another form of penalization against me? For after all, the truth of the matter is that from 1966 to 1975, I did receive official documents certifying that I do have two building lots on my property. Then came another building inspector who opinionated that the decision of the previous Administration to issue these very documents was 'lincorreot, 't'"1 and by virtue of his own decision, which he considers "correct," in the style of the Roman sayings Magister dixit, he deprived%$ my right to' have two building lots on my property. Now,in the course of -the conversation I had with you; you told me that you did not schedule my base for hearing because you did not receive an approval, of article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code, on behalf of the Department of Health Services iri Riverhead. On January 19,1987, I did 'send you a copy of the letter I sent to this very Depart- meet. Please read it and you will understand very clearly that .article 6 DOES NOT APPLY-TO MY CASE, for Section 609, Point 2, Letter c of this same article stipulates: "The requirements of this article SHALL NOT APPLY TO DEVELOFMENTS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS APPROVED BY .A, TOWN OR ZONING BOARDS OF APPEALS PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,1981,A,ND WHICH MET TIC REQlUIRaOXTS OF THE DEPARTMENT AT THAT TM.11 Therefore, you DO NOT NEED ANY APPROVAL OF ARTICLE 6, SINCE THIS ,ARTICLE DOES NOT APPLY TO MY CASE OF 19669 Is this not crystal clear? Your argument--that environmental groups are after you" simply does not make any sense since you are acting legally and since confirming my two lots.—Will not change in any way whatsoever the environment of my propertye Please help me and schedule the hearing without any further dela",. for which I do thank you. Sincerely, `L George D. Damien o� Gy z Southold Town Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTH❑LD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI March 9 , 1987 . I . Mr . Royal R. Reynolds-, P . E . Wastewater Management Section Suffolk County Health Department County Center Riverhead , NY 11901 Re : Appeal No . 3581 - George D. Damien Dear Mr . Reynolds : As you may know, we have an application pending . for a variance. from our town zoning regulations in the proposed division of land ,by Mr . George D. Damien along Jackson Street , Fifth Street and Main Street , New Suffolk , Town of Southold; 1000-17-9-12 . We wodld like to request that copies of determinations concerning the status of Mr . Damien ' s application pending before you under Article. 6 be forward directly to us for our file . Thank you for your assistance . Yours very truly , GERARD P. . GOEHR'INGER CHAIRMAN lk Southold Town B 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. ROBERTJ. DOUGLASS March 9 , 1987 JOSEPH H. SAWICKI Mr . George D. Damien . 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave . Tampa. , Florida 33616 Re : Appeal No . 3581 (Area Variances ) Dear Mr . Damien : Please let this confirm the Board ' s position at our March 5 , 1987 Regular Meeting , in response to your letter received February 19 , 1987 . As you know , Article 6 approval is required for this project as confirmed by letter dated September 9 , 1986 from Mr. Royal R. Reynolds , Sr . Public Health Engineer of the Suffolk County Health Department . We received a copy of that letter from Mr. Reynolds following our transmittal to his office of our November 3 , 1986 determination on your Request for Confirmation under Application No . 3503. On December 2 , 1986 , we sent you` a letter requesting that you proceed with Article 6 pursuant to the position of the Health Department . In our December 29 , 1986 letter we tried to clarify our reasons for requesting that you proceed with Article 6 . We also asked that you keep us advised regarding developments under the Article 6 appli - cation with the County . On January 12 , 1987 we received communications from you together with copies of your application to the County Health, Department Board of Review requesting a waiver and signed December 29 , 1986 . Page 2 - Appeal No . 3581 To : Mr . George D. Damien March 9 , 1987 We will contact the Suffolk County Health Department to inquire as to the status of your Application for a Waiver under Article 6 (which we .understand was sent by you to their agency mid-January 1987 ) . Please be -aware that in the event a Waiver is denied by the County Health Department , it would appear that your next step would be' to continue with a formal application and variances from the County under Article 6 for this proposed division . Please check with their office when applicable . Your application for a variance under the town regulations is still incomplete , pending receipt of either a waiver or approval , or other action , under Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code . Please keep us advised regarding developments . Thank you for transmitting copies of your applications before the County Health Department for our file . Yours very truly , GERARD P . GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN lk Enclosure GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4016 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tampa, Florida 33616 (813) 837-9994 February 1391987 Mr. Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Southold Town of Appeals Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Goehringer: May I bring for your attention and consideration the fact that some THREE (3) months ago, on November 1301986, I did apply for a second appeal, in order to confirm the division of my property in New Suffolk into two lots® I have been penalized most unjustly by the Town's mishandling my case and after twenty years I still have not gotten my property divided into two lots, since in the opinion of the new Building inspector, Victor Lessard, the decision of the previous Building Inspector was said to be "incorrect." Please spare me any further distress and torment of waiting to enjoy the right of having two lots on my property, right which was confirmed to me by official documents issued by the previous administration of Southold, a right which I had from 1966 until 1975. I would greatly appreciate it, if you could schedule the hearing without any further delay for, and I must say it once more, I have been penalized and victimized for too many years-and I begin to believe that there is something personal against me. So, please help me, for which I do thank you in advance. S' cerely, GDD:md George Do Damien VN � GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tampa, Florida 33616 (813) 837-9994 January 19,1987 Mrs Gerard Po Goehringer Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mrs Goehringert As a follow up of my letter of January 7 and in order to continue clarifying our communication process, enclosed please find a copy of the letter, dated January 13, which I sent to Mr. Royal R. Reynolds of the Department of Health Services. I would like to believe that the legal explanation of Section 609, Point 2, Letter (c) of Article 6 of Suffolk County Sanitary Code 'concerning Realty Subdivisions, Developments, and other Construction Projects, -will contribute to clarify my case, so that the Board of Appeals may schedule a date. for my second hearing as soon as possible. May I take this opportunity to thank you for your kifidziess and cooperation in solving a 21-year case, for which I have been severely penalized for a decision taken-"in 1966,and which up to 1975 was considered to be legal-and correct and:-then"a new Building Inspector came up with his own"interpreta:. tion and declared in 1982 that the decision,taken by his former colleague was 1Pincorrect." GDDtmd in erely, Encl. 1 George D, Damien 1•` GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tel.:813-837-9994 Tampa, Florida 33616 January 13,1987 Mr. Royal R. Reynolds, Per. Department of Health Services County Center Riverhead, N.Y. 11901 Dear Mr. Reynoldsli I am in receipt of your letter dated January 6. ,after reading its content, I derived a clear impression that you did not read my letter of Lecember 2901986 or,perhaps, you did not want to understand its content. For after all, the truth of the matter is that there is some malfunction in your office because I never received any 'guidelines outlining what information should be shown on the map, I sent youo Please read my letter of November 30,1986,as well as my letter of Necember 29, Point 1, letters a/,b/ and c/.,and be advised of the irrefutable fact that the updated and amended maps of the two lots, as well as of the land and the house, which I have already built, were signed by the Sur- veyor Van Tuyl & Son and the seals of this Company were apposed, as required y law. May I bring for your attention and consideration the fact that Article 6 con- cerning Realty Subdivisions, DeveloPmeuts and other Constructions Projects stipulates in Section 609, Point 2, Letter (c) as follows "The requirements of this Article SHALL NOT APPLY TO DEVELOPMENTS AND OTHx:R CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS APPROVED BY A TOWN OR . . . ZO- NING BOARDS OF APPEALS PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,1981, AND WHICH MET THE REQUIR;ZTENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT AT THAT TINY:. Therefore, since the Zoning Board of appeals of Southold is going to deal with a decision related to a development of my property into two lots, PRIOR to January 1,1981, and which decision, taken at the hearing of 1966s clearly specified that I can have two lots because the minimum requirement to have a building lot was, in 1966, 128500 sq.ft., you have no legal cause for action against me and for compelling me to follow your bureaucratic pro- cedure by peremptorily invoking Section 606, Paragraphs l.ec and 3.a. You are an engineer and I happened to be a Doctor of Laws and these are strictly and pre-eminently legal matters, So, if I may suggest, please consult the County Attorney. Kindly keep in mind that the requirements of the Health Department in 1966 did not determine the size of a building lot to be 40,000 or 800000 sgoft. That is why, Article 6 is not applicable to my case. I tried to oblige you by signing applications and sending you maps or my property because I thought you will understand my case, when I gave you personally all the offi- cial documents and papers confirming my right to have two lots and which were issued by a former Official, the Building Inspector of Southold.Furthermore, if the Zoning Board does not confirm the 1966 decision for two lots, or if it does, and then I sell the lot, it will be an exercise in futility to follow and imple- ment your complex procedure. Why? Simply because in the first case I shall not have a second lot. In the second case, the new owner of my lot will have to im- plement your procedure, which will be simplified, since Section 609,Point 20, We George De Damien to Royal Ro Reynolds, Contd. 2 Letter o will render abrogative paragraphs toe. and 3ea., related to the 400000 sgsfte, which commands the requirements of your procedure. The legal truth of the matter is that ONLY the Zoning Board of Southold can confirm the division of my property into two lots, as established in the course of the Hearing I had in 1966e Then and only then, I or the new owner of the lot, if I sell it, shall apply for well and sewerage system to the Department of Health. And then, in accordance with the legal requirements, established by the Health Department, the well and the sewerage system will be built on the lot, provided that there is a minimum of 100 linear feet between theme When the Zo- ning Board decides and confirms the 1966 decision that I do have a second lot, whose area will be 120500, as determined by the Zoning Law of 1966, the 40,000 sgsfte requirement of paragraphs lees and 3.a. of Section 609, i.eo, the buil- ding lot must have 40,000 sq.fte is simply not applicablee conclusive evidence of a However, and in view of the fact that there is no/!uncti�onal coordination and correct interpretation of Section 609, Point 2,Letter c between the Health Department and the Zoning Board of Appeals, I asked you in my letter of November 30,1986 to be kind enough and to send a conditional answer to the Board of Appeals, in order to establish some form of coordination in the interpretation of this Section 6090 Point 2,Letter ce Unfortunately, you ignorelmy request and indulged in applying to me the alleged legal requirements of your procedure, when no one knows whether or not the Board of Appeals will confirm the 1966 decision, di- viding my property into two lots .P ass keep in mind this very important fact. I would like to believe that you will read this letter and ponder over the legal meaning of its content, for which attention and consideration I do thank you in advance. cerely, GDDemd Prof.: George Ds Damien LL.B., LL. i.,LL.D. ----- - zew GEORGE D. DAMIEN J 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tel.:813-837-9994 Tampa, Florida 33616 January 7,1987 Mr. Gerard P. Goehringer Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Goehringer; Thank you for your letter of December 29,1986 and for your cooperation to clarify our communication process. To this effect please be advised of the following factso 1.- I am fully aware of the fact that the Town is not permitted to waive the Article 6 Requirements of the Countye However, I believe you should be also aware of the fact that: a/ I am being penalized and victimized for the so-called "incorrect de- cision" taken by the Building Inspector of the previous Republican Admi- n.istration in Southold. Hence the reason for my second Appeal to the Zoning Board, since my first Appeal, which I initiated in April and finally took place six months later on October 2,1986, was "resolved to confirm the prior action of the Board of Appeals under Appeal No 949,September 1,1966, for the denial of three lots having insufficient are kas applied, rather than approval of two lots of sufficient area." Men I had the privilege of talking to you, I did not know the text of the Resolution.The only thing I knew from Mrso Kowalski, the Secretary to the Zoning Board, was that the Board of Appeals did not confirm the decision of the 1966 hearing that I have the right to have two lots provided I apply, which I did orally to the Building Inspector of that time, Mrm Howard Terry. His answer, which I have clearly explained to the Z ing Board and supported with the letters he wrote me, was that I was "within �w which required 12,500 sq.ft.," which I had for a second lot and,therefore, I had nothing else to do but to simply ask him to issue two building permits, which he did. Now, your "Resolution" con- firmed the Prior Action of the Board of Appeals (1966) for the denial of three lots having insufficient area. This is a very peculiar Resolution, since I never asked in my 1986 .appeal to have three lots and I never applied f o anything of this sort. I did apply to have three lots in 1966 but I wa 10 enied the right to have TWO LOTS, as clearly stated in the 1966 hearing,and which was confirmed by the official documents issued to me and signed by the former Building Inspector, which documents you con- sider now to have been "incorrect." b/ I followed yoursuggestion and on November 13'01986 I filed another appli- cation for a second Appeal. I would like to believe that you are fully aware of the fact that if the Zoning Board confirms the 1966 decision, dividing my property into two lots, its decision will be in conformity with Section 609, Point 2, Letter c, which stipulates that the "Requirements of this o�. Y George D. Damien to Mro Gerard Ps Goehringer, Contd. 2 article (ioe., Article 6 concerning Realty Subdivisions, Developments and othe Construction Projects) SHALL NOT APPLY TO DEVELOPMENTS AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS APPROVED BY A TOWN or s ZONING BOARDS OF APPEALS PRIOR TO JANUARY 1,1981, AND WHICH MET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THS DEPARTMENT AT THAT TME.11 The requirements of Article 6. specify that parcels to be served by private wells and individual sewerage systems must have minimum lot areas of 40,000 sgoft.,, Section 606, paragraphs 1.e and 3.as" Therefore, since the Zoning Board of Appeals is going to deal with a decision related to a development of my property into two lots,prior to January 1,1981 and which decision specified that in 1966 I had to have a minimum of 12,500 sgofts, which I did have, there is no legal cause for the Zoning Board of Appeals not to schedule a date for hearing my second Appeal without waiting for the Health Department's decision concerning Article 6, Section 609, Point 2. Letter c. am 2s- The truth of the matter is that I dealing with two bureaucratic procedures established by two different Institutions namely,the Southold Town Board of Appeals and the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Consequently, and number one, only the Zoning Board of Southold can legally determine the division of my property into two lots, particularly in a case related to con- firming a decision taken in 1966 by a previous Board of Appeals; second, assu- ming that the Zoning Board will confirm the division of my property into two lots, then and only then I shall ask the Health Department to grant me a va- riance or a waiver from regulations and specifications of article 6 require- ments for 40,000 sgoft. lots However, instead of asking for a variance or a waiver, I shall request and refer to Section 609, Point 2, Letter c of article 6 which stipulates that the requirements of Article 6 shall not apply for projects (decisions) approved by a Zoning Board of Appeals. Third, assuming that the Zoning Board divides my property into two lots and assuming that I decide to sell the second lot, then the duty of the new owner will be to ask the Health Department for the authorization to build a sewer and a well and to make "test holes" and "test well on his lot®" Fourth, a-ssuming the Zoning Board refuses once more to confirm the 1966 decision,dividing my property in- to two lots, we shall have conclusive evidence that,complying and following the bureaucratic procedure established by the Health Department, we have a paradigmatic case of an exercise in futility and bureaucratic insipienceb Fifth and finally, the truth of the matter is that the Department of Health's legal requirement is that any lot, whether its area is 12,500, 40,000 or 80,000 sgaft the well must be located at a minimum distance of 100 linear feet from the location of the sewerage system. And the map (survey), which I sent Mrs Reynolds, shows clearly that there is more than 100 fts between the well and the cesspool. 3.- Enclosed please find; a/ a copy of a letter I sent Mrs Reynolds on Dec.29, 1986;b/ an Application for variance or Waiver from Regulations and Specifica- tions, dated Deco29,1986,c/ Notice of Incomplete Application-Subdivision;d/ Notice of Non-Conformance Realty Subdivision. I would like to believe that the preceding explicative background and the enclosed papers will contribute to clarify the communication process between us and you will schedule the hearing as soon as possible, for which I do thank you in advance. Encl. 4 incerely,�. George D© Damien GEQRGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tel.:813-837-9994 Tampa, Florida 33616 December 29,1986 Mr. Royal Reynolds, P.F. Department of Health Services County Center Riverhead, N.Y. 11901 Dear Mr. Reynolds : In response to the printed papers you sent me, please be advised of the f ollo wing facts . 1.- Please read and refer to paragraph 5 of my letter dated November 30, which specifies that I did send you the following paperst a/an updated and amended map of the two lots, with indications of the locations of the existing and the future wells and cesspools; ban updated and amended map of the land and the house, which I have already built with location of the well and the two cesspools which secure the techni- cal functionality of my house; e/an amended and updated application for approval of Realty Subdivisions. All the surveys (maps ) were updated and amendelby Van Tuyl & Son on August 12, 1986, September 3,1986 and November 12,1986. If you have not received these maps, please let me know. Perhaps, they are misplaced in your Office. All of these maps were prepared and signed by Van Tuyl.That is why, I do not understand the reason for your .request. 2.- As I told you, when I had the pleasure of meeting you personally, I am a University Professor -lecturing in Tampa and I am profoundly puzzled by your request to make "test holes" and "test well on property, " when I do not know whether or not the Zoning Board of Southold will confirm the 1966 Zoning Board's decision dividing my.property in New Suffolk into two to s. Furthermore, as- suming that it will confirm this decision and will recognize my second lot,and assuming that I decide to sell this second lot, it will be the duty of the new owner to provide you with ::test holes and test well, if he wants to build a house. For after all, if the Zoning Board again refuses to recognize the 1966 de cision of two lots, all of your procedural requests have no reason d1kre and become a paradigmatic form of a bureaucratic exercise in futility. The legal requirements of the Health Department demand a 100 feet distance between the well and the .cesspools. .in the second lot,in regard to the well and the sesspools of my house already built T, as well as to those of my neighbors . And the appro- ximate location of the future well and cesspools have been clearly indicated on the updated and amended two lots survey (map) I have already sent you. The Health Department does have detailed map about the exact location of each well and cess- pool im my area. So,kindly compare the locations o1i the future well and cesspool on my second lot and you will see that there is more than 100 ft. distance bet- ween them and Wo_se of my neighbors. 3.- As you well know from the official letters I gave you,written by the former Building Inspector of Southold and which clearly confirmed the fact that I have two lots, my case is very special. The new democratic Administration in Southold does not recognize the validity of the letters issued to me by a former Official of the previous Republican administration. Resultt I am the innocent victim o�. George D. Damien to Royal Reynolds, Contd. 2 _ and I am being penalized for the so-called "incorrect decisions" of the previous Administration in Southold. That is why,if the Zoning Board confirms the 1966 decision, dividing my property into two lots,it will in conformity with Section 093 Pointe 2, Letter (e), which stipulates that the "Requirements of this article (i.e. Article 6 concerning Realty Subdivisions, Developments and Other Construction Projects ) shall not apply to developments or other constructions projects which have been approved by a Tom or . . . Zoning Boards of Appeals prior to January 1, 1981, and which met the requirements of the Department in effect at that time. " -- That is why your emphasis on having a lot of 40,000 sq.ft.,in order to be allowed to build a well and a cesspool will not apply in accordance to Section 609, Point 2, Letter (c). 4.- In light of this clarificatory background and in order to allow you to imple- ment the bureaucratic procedure established by the Health Department, I am sub- mitting for the attention and consideration of the Board of Review my Applica- tion for Variance or Waiver from Regulations or Specifications, as you requestedp and notwithstanding the fact that the Zoning Board of Southold may or may not confirm a decision taken prior to January 1,1981. 5.- Finally, in order to extricate myself from the bureaucratic labyrinth of the Southold Zoning Board, Planning Board and the Riverhead Department of Health Services, I conveyed to you the suggestion made to me by the Chairman of the Board of Appeals, the Honorable Mro Gerard P. Goehringer, that you send him a conditional answer, as formulated in paragraph 4 of my letter, dated November 30,1986.Ostensibly, you have refused to send him this conditional answer even though you do know that there are more than 100 feet between the well and the cesspool to be built, if need be in the future in Lot B of my property,along Fifth Street, as clearly indicated on the updated and amended survey (map) by Van Tuyl. My? I do not know. Please help me instead of creating more problems and difficulties for me�for which✓I+ do thank you in advance. GDDsmd rinerely, t Encl. 3 . George D. Damien � . T SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION SUFFOLK COUNTY CENTER RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 NOTICE OF INCOMPLETE APPLICATION - SUBDIVISION Your-preliminary/final plan submission for the below referenced subdivision or development has been reviewed by this office. This office will re uire the following for further review: TO: C v/l C-i:�F- �),9/�//57-i✓ DATE: .S. REF. : A d _ D u-c (, 2_G /oZ-i S- ZONE NO. : TOWN:) Preliminary Submission Signed Applications (enclosed) Y S Ll 0 ✓ �� �' �-- WWM-023 (Application) ❑WWM-024 (EAF) Ngf Z Paper Prints ❑Topographic Survey Test Holes Located and Witnessed By: ❑SCDHS inspector. Call 548-3312 for appt. .`fg�-E./L.S. as per location instructions. [] Other ATest Well aocated & sampled by representative of this office. Call 348-2895 for appointment. (Test well does not indicate a waiver of requirement for connection to public water) . Mther 7 rs n'/ /'02 `J ❑ Public water availability and cost letter from local water district. ❑ Public water contract or covenant for extension of public water. ❑ Public sewer availability letter from local sewer district. Final Submission Locations are clearly indicated on Survey (map). The test hole and test well locations are the same. ❑ Show on Final Maps: z1 @ �Test hole locations/details Al ewage disposal locations/details for `Test well locations/details typical lot Locations arg on Survey []Sewer line locations/details, stamped ❑Water main locations/details and approved by local sewer district '54�.E. 's/L.S. 's signature and seal The following is required prior to continuing revieyr: hoard of Review determination letter. L/o' em-o k� �'9 on-compliance notice enclosed. ❑Wetlands permit or determination letter from NYSDEC. ❑ SEQRA determination letter from Town/State. []Filing fee check of $4.50 per lot at time of submission. ❑ Covenants: For Approval Recorded Copy Instructions enclosed ""*ther S'<-c/s h?17.n 9 13 < L ,C�-e-SX7, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO FINAL APPROVAL. �6 PLEASE RETURN A COPY OF THIS FORM WITH ANY RESUBMISSION. cc: V/1 n1 L -� S ^j Reviewer *WWM-02'6 SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT SECTION COUNTY CENTER, ROOM N-204 RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 NOTICE OF NON-CONFORMANCE REALTY SUBDIVISION OR DEVELOPMENT DATE: - - 1-2- i S- C7 p p FILE REF.: / A-F� /V•t' .S'clf�u r . This application is not being processed for approval because it does not conform with the requirements of Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. This Code requires that a realty subdivision or development comply with the following as marked: aparcels to be served by public water and individual sewerage systems must have minimum lot areas of 20,000 square feet or equivalent yield, Section 05, Paragraphs l.c. and 2.a. pa els to be served by private wells and individual sewerage systems must h e minimum lot areas of 40,000 square feet, Section 606, Paragraphs l.e. and 3.a. parcels to be served by individual sewerage systems must have minimum lot areas of 40,000 square feet or equivalent yield, Section 605, Paragraphs l.d. and 2.b. Qa community sewerage system method of sewage disposal is required when sub- soil or groundwater conditions are not conducive to the proper functioning of individual sewage systems, Section 605, Paragraph l.b. Da community water system method of water supply is required when the realty subdivision or development is located within, or is reasonably accessible to, an existing water district or service area, Section 606, Paragraphs l.a. and l.b. a community water system method of water supply is required when the ground- waters in the area are non-potable, or potentially hazardous, Section 606, Paragraph l.d. Other/Comments: For reconsideration, proof should be submitted that this project conforms with, or is exempt from, these requirements of Article 6 of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code. If this matter cannot be resolved, you may request a variance from these standards by applying to the Department's Board of Review (forms and instructions enclosed) . Prior to apply�ng�o the Board of Review, the subdivision/development application must be completed. 18-1274:7/85 SUFFOLK, COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES BOARD OF REVIEW COUNTY CENTER RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK 11901 APPLICATION FOR VARIANCE OR WAIVER FROM REGULATIONS OR SPECIFICATIONS TO: Chairman of the Review Board George D. Damien , residing at/doing business at (mailing address) P.Q. Box 626, Ta.ckson S-h _ New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 request a variance (x ) or waiver (x ) from (indicate Article and Section Number) Article 6,SPct;on 609, Point 2.,Letter e. of the Suffolk County Sanitary Code (cross one out), and is in reference to (indicate Health Department reference number, name of realty subdivision/de- velopment and property location)Hog.RFF.: Damien Dev.,TowniT Southold, my property is locab ted in New Suffolk, Main and Fifth St. This request is based on the following (brief explanation why variance/waiver should be granted): In 1966, the Zoning Board of Southold divided my property into two lots . This was con- firmed of'ficially by letters given to me by the former Building Inspector of Southold, which letters I gave to Mr. Royal Reynolds. The present democratic Administration of the Town of Southold refused to recognize the legality of these letters issued by the previoib Republican Administration and found that the previous Building Inspector's decision,con- firming the fact that I have two lots, was incorrect. The decision of the Zoning Board reads as follows :" it was resolved to confirm the prior action of the Board of Appeals ren- dered under Appeal No 949,SPPt-i,l966,for the denial of 3 lots having insufficient area, as applied, rather than a ro 1 o two lots of sufficient area." Hence, my second appeal, Date _- i�naures) _ - - - - - - ---- ----- - _________________________ - --- - ------------ 1. Type or print legibly. 2. Submit completed form to the address at top of application. 3. Regardless of any prior submission to the Wastewater Management Section, you must enclose with this application a. copy of survey for residential construction,site plan for commercial construction,or map of realty subdivision/development; and A copy of the survey was sent to Mr. Reynolds on November 30,1986. b. copies of all pertinent paperwork (i.e., letter of rejection, estimate of cost to extend public water, etc.). Copies of letters issued by previous Building Inspector were given to Mr. Reynolds . 4. DO NOT CALL THIS OFFICE.You will be notified in writing of the date,time and place for the hearing. 5. The hearing will be scheduled as soon as possible; however, all hearing schedules will be based on a first come - first served basis. veten r.co.na.. •vi wn C E..<u.. WWM-061 T® u �a�d ®f Appeals Ln Southold MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI December 29, 1986 Mr . George D . Damien 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave . Tampa , Florida 33616 Re : Appeal No . 3581 (Area Variances ) Dear Mr . Damien : This letter should help to clarify our communications to you dated December 2 , 1986. The December 2nd letter is our form letter used to keep you advised of the status of your newly filed application. The letter indicated that Article 6 action is necessary from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services (in accordance with their letter addressed to you 9/9/86 which was forwarded to our office November 24 , 1986 by the County ) . The Board of Appeals has not authorized or directed any advertisement of your new application for a public hearing at this time . It is our understanding of the 9/9/86 County Health letter that you may proceed with an Article 6 application on the division of your property , particularly since the 1966 status of your property has been clarified. Our file includes correspondence from the Planning Board and the County Health Department . We do not feel you need any additional application to the Planning Board as misunder- stood . It is only by resolution of the Board of Appeals to set the calendar of hearings , and the Town is not permitted to waive the Article 6 Requirement of the County . Please send all future communications addressed to the Board directly and keep us advised as to the status of the County Article 6 application for our file . Yours very ,G"ERARD P . GC �NGER CHAIRMAN / GEORGE D. DAMIEN 4015 West Fairview Heights Ave. Tel.:813-837-9994 Tampa, Florida 33616 December 9, 1986 Mrs . Linda Kowalski Re. Appeal No. 3581 Secretary Area Variances Southold Town Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 Dear Mrs . Kowalski : In response to your letter of December 2 please be advised that on November 30, witness the herewith enclosed copy of a letter, I did send to Mr. Royal Reynolds , P.E. another amended and updated Ap- plication for Approval of Realty Subdivisions and Developments to- gether with an updated and amended map of the two lots , with in- dications of the existing and future wells and cesspools , the exact square footage of each lot, an .updated and amended map of the land and the house, which I have already built with the location of the well and the cesspools . I asked him to provide you with a con- ditional answer, as explained in paragraph 4 of the letter I sent him. As you well know, you have received a letter dated October 7 from the Planning Board informing the Board of Appeals that "l. This propasal is not in conformance with the 2 acre zoning, therefore,. the Planning Board cannot endorse it." This letter provides you with "written comments" made by the Plan- ning Board consequently there is no need for me to fill. out an- other Application and to spend another $50.00 in order to receive the same answer. Please spare me these bureaucratic formalities , since only the Board of Appeals is legally competent to decide my case, concerning the two lots . I have been penalized enough and deeply and endured pro- blems and miseries for the last 20 years created by 'allegedly "incorrect interpretations and .' -correct misinterpretations" on behalf of two Building Inspectors , the first one- belonging to the former Republican Administration and the second to the present Democratic Administration of the Town of Southold. Please help me instead of creating more problems for me. Before my departure from New Suffolk, I talked to you and it was clearly understood between us that my file was complete for this third appeal and that you will schedule the hearing either before Christmas or at the end of the first week of January 1987 . 2 - The Zoning Board of Appeals is the only instance capable of taking a decision confirming my right to have two lots,as it was decided already in 1966, provided I apply again for this confirmation. And this is my second and final appeal to correct the alleged misinterpretations of the 1966 Hearing by the previous Building Inspector. Sincerely, 4 GDD:md George D. Damien Encl. 1 A ! �J f T 2-2 ET 5. 85'40'30"F_. - 101.22 FSWCG i IO w j!2 IL 3 O 1" k a w 3 LL _ m , U) u v ;p Z 2 ,O iti LL '1n i 40 01 Ui - I - s -x --- ' N.85'42'30"W. O . z k i �--- 40 t1. 14 LL 16 4; l J N4�, P OF Q : r surzvsYsD & A' O � g \ r AT i UnmuthofbmA elteration or addition N E W YC to this survey is a violation of Y S ulion 720^e rf the New Ycr'a StMe Education Lava. J Co clan of thi^ounrcy met n7Q tarring `a nmbGwW rani rt Sil not be coneWMd to b:3 valid true+copy. �-� Guaranmce in im.-wd hareon shall run SCALE cV only to the person for whom that aurvey is preparec:,and on his is half to the = M 0 N U title comPnny,Fovernmentai agancy and �T�� R lanc;irp institution listed hereon and to31+:r ass'griases o`iFc, insti- N. 8 5-27'00'W. - 90.i i tu>i01 GLV;rantsas are not tran._.01PNq TO Y_.,:•ihl•;!ir,SiitlltiGnr or suhONuM ���- °E NEry�- GUAR EF- ANTD TO - JACkS4N ST���T y�Q�GKV-44, � GUA2ANTY COMP' BAN4 AND cc C% tip ti ti� BAN T�. v. Y� �a� •2� _ .._ sF0 LAND 5U5;-- �c7s..K COr_ wTY ir,,+X PA2+-EL.• i40b - 1i'1 `3 ' •Z �- •�' ,• ICI i � �'. ��,°' •.;� `'.�•;::: � I I! I,I II II� 1 11 I� '} d ,.'• j j'�S .fir�,i. laS,• �in� � i. 1 �.� J �... �, �' � ,l `.i'�'I'i' 1.1 i � l'1 6 �1 1../�uJ f'� .��..I I� 1 � � � •,��,. , .. � ���i;: �:'�,1. �ri� . J i;1. �, �,,I I��I' I il•.II Illi t,!,�;'..4A: �.��111'll".�;,:,A'n ,Ih"'U'�II ��0.n l.. .�..�i. � q� ;i• ( i' '�I' f.i,. I S.S 5"4 z'O := 90.5 1. I � r sHed 011 —"J^•elf 1, • I i)t r'j - i its r r ► , �:.,.,.,��L ti7•..... �� i�'•i r-'1��:..� �:., 1..��;_�, �'� I j ......E, , I U AT LL { L!- 1 . in • � z � Scale - �O - 1 N l-F'CUI-'Lf hF1 l I r.i,�•�"-�.-r emu• vv. moo. i i L�'( ? i`,i cJ�• 1 — '� GLIC�YGYYiZ'r_G:IS ire �ii ( ►tFtzY rvv+tlli Mov+„IVc; Juill it., Lett ,„ r SoutholdTown Board of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 11971 "�l P TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS,JR. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI December 2 , 1986 Mr . George D . Damien 4015 West Fairview Heights Avenue. Tampa , Florida 33616 Re : Appeal No . 3581 - Area Variances Dear Mr . Damien : This letter will acknowledge receipt of your recent appli - cation . The members of the Board of Appeals -will be conducting field inspections and environmental re.vi.ews as may be required by State _and local laws p"rior to scheduling your .application for a_ public hearing... _.. It is requested in the interim that you proceed with the [ ] Planning Board [ ] N . Y`, S'. D. E. C . [X] Co. Health,,(Art. 6) In order that they may .submit .thei.r written -comments or recom- mendations as early as possible. . Upon receipt of their input , your application will be scheduled :_for the next available hear- ing date . If the above document (s ) are submitted by January 8th , it is expected that the public hearing would be held about the latter part of January. _ A copy of the notice of hearings as ..____published in the Long Island Traveler-Watchman and the Suffolk Times will be sent to you as Confirmation . Please feel free to call at any time if you have any questions . Yours very t�rul�r , GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski cc : Planning Board mission to estai-l"l- electrical 8:05 p.m. Appl. No. 3644 - tial use of the premises, not to shop use in this' "Residen- FREDERICK WIGHTMAN be operated for sleeping or habit- ,Legal Notices tial and Agricl i1 Zoning DA.VID FREY/JOSEPE able purposes and not operated District. Location of Property: REINHART. Variance to the for gain, within 75 feet of ordi- North Side of C.R. 48, Cutch- Zoning Ordinance, Article III, nary highwater mark and/or NOTICE OF HEARINGS ogue,NY;County Tax Map Dis- Section 100-30(A), Article XI, landward edge of tidal wetland, NOTICE IS HEREBY trict 1000, Section 96, Block 1, Section 100-118(E)for establish- along Peconic Bay,575 Old Har- GIVEN,pursuant to Section 267 Lot 19, containing 45,589-± sq. ment of business uses,and/or in- her Road, New Suffolk, NY; of the Town Law and the Code of ft.in lot area. terpretation, to permit the fol- County Tax Map District 1000, the Town of Southold,the follow- lowing activities: retail sales Seaction 117,Block 03,Lot 06. ing hearings will be held by the 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 3631 - and storage,business office,pro- p.m. No. - SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD PUDGE CORP. Variance to fessional office, governmental BENTE SNENELLENBURG OF APPEALS at a Regular the Zoning Ordinance, Article office, contractor office, per- (Continued from April 20, 1987 n Meeting at the Southold Town III, Section 100-30(A) for per- sonal-service store or shop, as as requested). Variances to the. is Hall,Main Road,Southold,New mission to establish and con- described for the"B-Light Busi- Zoning Ordinance, Articles: (1) York, on THURSDAY, DULY struct 7500 sq.ft.building for in- ness" Zoning District, Section XI, Section 100-119.1(B) for ap- y 16,1987 at the following times: dustrial use in this"A"Residen- 100-60(A)[21,[41,[8)inclusively, proval of eight-foot height of n :35 p.m. Appl. No. 3.1 - tial and Agricultural Zoning in conjunction with existing fencing along the easterly prop- GEO5 i D. DAMIEN. Vari- District. Location of Property: single-family dwelling unit on erty line a length of 72± feet; �y antes to the Zoning Ordinance, North Side of C.R. 48, Cutch- second-floor having a livable a (2)XII,Section 100-141,Appeal- jg Article III, Section 100-31, and ogue,NY;County Tax Map Dis- ' floor area of 900 sq.ft.Zone Dis-,� ing the November 6,1986 Order Bulk Schedule, for approval of trict 1000, Section 96, Block 1, trict:-"A-40." Location of Prop- to Remedy Violation which man- n insufficient area, width and Lot 20, containing 39,524± sq. erty: North Side of Main Road, dates a building permit for new depth of two parcels in this pend- ft.in lot area. Peconic, NY; County Tax Map fencing along the easterly prop- in set-off division of land lo- 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 3638 - District 1000, Section 75, Block erty line. Location of Property: ^ cated at the Corners of Jackson, JAMES AND MARY TYLER 1, Lot 16, containing 1.0194 Private right-of-way extending Fifth and Main Streets, New (continued from June 18, 1987). acres. y off the east side of South Harbor Special Exception modifying 8:20 m. Appl.` �To. 3645 - Road (known as Private Road Suffolk, NY; County Tax Map p p g p' No.,-10, or Old Woods Path), District 1000, Section 17, Block Appl.No.3400 to permit vehicle PAUL AN& CHARLOTTE 9,Lot 12,containing a total area doors to face street side as con- GALGAN.Variance to the Zon- � Southold, NY; County Tax Map of 28,919±sq.ft. strutted. Location of Property: ing Ordinance, Article XI, Sec- District 1000, Section 87, Block 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 3639 - 6795 Main Road, Laurel, NY; tion 100-119.2 for permission to 2,Lot 21. WILHELM FRANKEN:Vari- Mattituck Holding Co. Minor construct additions to dwelling. The Board of Appeals will ante to the Zoning Ordinance, Subdivision Lot#3;County Tax landward of existing construe- hear at said time and place all Article III, Section 100-32, and Map District 1000, Section 125, tion and within 75 feet of exist- persons or representatives desir- Article XI,Section 100-119.2,for Block 1,Lot 19.6. ing bulkhead along Eugene's ing to be heard in.'each of the permission to locate 25' by 25' 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 3642 - Creek, 4605 Stillwater Avenue, above matters. Each hearing accessory building in sideyard DINA MASSO.Variance to the Cutchogue, NY; County Tax will not start before the time al- area and with.insufficient set- Zoning Ordinance,.Article XI, Map District 1000, Section 137; lo�ted. Written comments may ew York back from existing bulkhead Section 100-119.2 to construct Block 03,Lot 05. be submitted prior to the conclu- )860 along Gull Pond Inlet. Location accessory boathouse structure sion of the subject hearing. For jl of Property:West Side of Osprey with deck at the foot of the bluff, 8:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3496 - more information, please call I� Nest Road, Greenport, NY; and deck and new stairs along FREDERICK KOEHLER,JR. 765-1809. Cleaves Point Subdivision Sec- and at top of bluff areas, all Variance to the Zoning Ordi- Dated:June 30,1987. tion I, Map' 2752, Subdivisiorl."1 landward of existing wood bul- nance, Article XI, Section 100- BY ORDER OF .Lots 14 and 15;County Tax Map khead along Peconic Bay,prem- 119.2 for permission to construct THE SOUTHOLD TOWN District 1000, Section 35, Block ises known as 5705 Nassau 38'by 16'beach pavillon and at- BOARD OF APPEALS . 6,Lots 22,23 and 24(now 24.1). Point Road,Cutchogue,NY;Lot tached deck areas extending a GERARD P.GOEHRINGER, 7:45 p.m.Appl.No 3635-AR- 39, Amended Map A of Nassau length of 124± feet-and width of CHAIRMAN THUR V.JUNGE.Variance to Point Filed August 16, 1922; 28 feet (exclusive of stairs), ac- Linda Kowalski, the Zoning Ordinance, Article County Tax Map District 1000, cessory and incidental to the es- Board Secretary III, Section 100-30(A) for per- Section 111,Block 13,Lot 04. tablished single-family residen- 1TJy9-5658 NOTICE OF HEARINGS• 'NOTICE IS HEREBY GIV- EN,pursuant to Section 267 of ss: i the Town Law and the Code of STATE OF NEW YORK the Town of Southold, the following hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at •a Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Regular Meeting at the Southold Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN Town . Hall, Main Road; > Southold, New York, on a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; THURSDAY,JULY 16, 1987,at and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, the following times: 7:35 p.m. Appl. No. 3581- has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman GEORGE D. DAMIEN. once each week for . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . weeks Variances to the Zoning Or,- , dinance, Article III, Section i 100-31, and Bulk Schedule, for successively, commencing on the . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . approval of insufficient area, width and depth of two parcels in this pending set-off division day . . . . ., 19 of land located at the Corners of Jackson, Fifth and Main r• Streets, New Suffolk, NY; • • • • • • • • • • ±, t' • • • • • • County Tax Map District 1000, Section 17,Block 9,Lot 12 con taining a total area of 28,919± sq. ft. 7:40 p.m. Appl. No. 363 Sworn to before me this . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . day of WILHELM FRAN N. Variance to the Zoning Or- 7 dinance, Article III, Section • • • • • • . , 19 . . . . . 100-32,and Article Xl,,Section 100-119.2, for permission to locate 25 ' by 25' accessory building in sent setback e sett area and ffi ` with insufficient back,from existing bulkhead along .Gull Pond Inlet.Location of Proper- , Notary Public ty: West Side of Osprey Nest! Road, Greenport, NY; Cleaves Point Subdivision Section: I, BARBARA FORI-j— Map 2752,Subdivision Lots.14 Notary Public, State of t e., 'iork and 15;. County Tax Map No. 4806846 District 1000,Section 35,Block Qualified in Suffolk County 6, Lots 22,' 23, and 24 (now Commission Expires'4�.,73'/ 19 24.1). 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 3635- ARTHUR V.JUNGE.Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti- cle III, Section 100-30 (A) for permission to establish electrical shop use in this"A-40"Residen- tial and Agricultural Zoning j District. Location of Property: North Side of CR 48, Cut- chogue, NY; County Tax Map District 1000,Section 96,Block �b 1, Lot 19,.containing 45,589+, sq. ft. in lot-area: 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. PUDGE CORP.Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article•II1, .Section 100-30(A) for permis- sion to establish and construct 7500 sq. ft. building for in- dustrial use in this"A"Residen- tial and Agricultural Zoning District. Location of'Property: North Side of CR-48, Cut- chogue, NY, County Tax Map District 1000,Section 96,Block 1, Lot 20, containing 39,524-+ sq. ft. in lot area. •' �d 1- 7:55 ,p.m. Apple No. 3638- JAMES AND MARY TYLER L trnnt;n 1,&4 f- . ,e 11? 1Q9'7\ r 3outhold T® ® rd of Appeals MAIN ROAD - STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.. SERGE DOYEN, JR. ROBERT J. DOUGLASS JOSEPH H. SAWICKI TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN : Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time and date of the public hearing concerning your recent application is .a copy of the Legal Notice as published in the L . I . Traveler- Watchman , Inc . and Suffolk Weekly Times , Inc . Someone should appear in your behalf during the public hearing in the event there are questions from board members or persons in the audience . Please be assured that your public. hearing will not start before the time allotted in the Legal Notice . If you have any questions , please feel fr;�'e to call our office , 765- 1809 . . Yours very trly,,,.,,, � G RARD P . GOEHRrNGER CHAIRMAN Linda Kowalski Secretary and Board Clerk Enclosure f 11OV 13 11926 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK TMPE&U ERON, DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL NO. ...Nov.13............ .............. ,1986 DATE TO.THE ZONING BOARD OF,APPEALS,.TOWN,OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 1 (We) ...........................................................George D. Damien ...:•:...•Of :Jackson Fifth Streets: . Name of Appellant" `� Street �and Number � r 1jew, Suffolk.,• N.7. 11956 (Southold_Toim) .............................. .... . • ............ ......................... ........ . ............HEREBY APPEAL TO Municipality • ,..: �..... State , ? ,THE-ZONING BOARD OF.APPEALS-FROM THE DECISION OF THE. BUILDING INSPECTOR ON `,APPLICATION FOR`PERMIT NO. } . ..... . ...,.�.... DATEb;:..;Jury 16.9198. ....... '�' .•• ••t - : :WHEREBY.THE BUILDING INSPECTOR QENIED TO.. F George.1 Damien .................... Name of Applicgnt for permit t.. 1(),:.- -, , of! : , ,; Jackson & Fifth'St`.'in' New Suffolk,'•N.Y.' 11956 .............. ................'........'..,.....,..r..Ir. ...r,............Y....:.:.................i......i.•.......i .• .... '- Street and�Number Municipality State �r� "(X ) PERMII''`)•0 t ( )i PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY r 1.. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY Fifth & Main St. in New Suffolk, N.Y. .11956 �' " Street /Hamlet..�....Use.Distr4ct on. Zoning Map I.District 1000 Sectionll7 Blcck'.9 L p/o_2� - ........................... ...�t........ rent Owner- George J) Damien Mop N°' Tax map -No 1000 Lot No. Prior Owner 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article I Section 106-20 Sub-divisions by Authority of the Planning Board., Art. III, Section 100-31 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) ( x) 'A VARIANCE .to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A VARIANCE due',to lackrdf access (State,of New,,York Town Low Chap. 62 Cons. Laws Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection-3 .4 .preuious .appeal was made,No 949.Sept,1,r1966 r8c A.npeal N03503 ~of 10;2.,1986 PREVIOUS APPEALaj�d previous ,appeal (has') (RXA 'r been' made,with respect to this decision of the Building`Inspector �wiih respect'to this property. " "f.'' F,a r r Such appeal was (. -) request for a spQcial Permit ' ( x)_request for a variance e'!u' and wad mode in Appeal NoNA.,9.�t9:.Rc303. .... Dated- 'Sept.1,1966 .and Oct. 2,1986 .. :�: r 'REASON FOR APPEAL ( ) A Variance, to Section 280A ,Subsection 3. r 'f,F r ( x) A Variance to the Zoning -Ordinance is requested for the "reason that I found myself gravely penalized by the fact that the previous Building Inspector, 11r, Howard Terry, provided me with official letters certifying that my property was divided ]a into two huildin� lots after my hearing Of Sept. 1,1966,Although in the course of the he ring. of 1966the Chairman of the Board of Appeals did say that the Board will not deny me two lots, provided I apply, the then Building Inspector told me that I ffo not have to apply for anything since I have enough land,28,919 sq.ft. and "was wit n thelaw.,' Now, after the second hea- Form ZB1 (Continue on other side) ring of Oct. 2,1986, the resolution of the Board of Appeals stipulates that the former Building Inspector "was in error" and that the official letters he gave me, certifying that I have two building lots,have no legal value whatsoever. REASON FOR APPEAL Continued 1. . rSTRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practical difficulties or unneces- sary HARDSHIP because I am denied to have two lots by the present Building Inspector, Victor Lessard, for insufficient acreage, while in 1966, when I had the hearing, the acreage of my property, 28,919 sq.ft. was more than necessary to have two lots, the size of 'the 'lot iaas 12,500 sq.ft, according to the Zoning Ordinance if 1966. There will be no practical difficulties or unnecessary hardship for anybody if the Board of Appeals considers my appeal as an application for formalizing the division or my property into two ots, as requested y he C airman of the Board of Appeals in 1966. For 'after all, I have not done anything illegal nd should not Jm suffer this utterly unjustified hardship by being denied to hav ots because the former Building Inspector was "in error" when he officially confirmed by-his last letter of. Nov. 5;1975 that, ! . . . the action of the Board of Appeals #,E949,Sept.1,1966, dividing your !prope.rty on F/S Fifth St., New Suffolk, into two building lots,one with frontage on Jackson St and the other with frontage on Main Street has not been changed or rescinded . . . You still have two building lots on E/S Fift teat, as the Board set them off in 1966 . 1T. Point,.6, of the Action of the Zoning Board of Appeals of Oct. 2,1986 emphasizes "that by this letter dated November 5,1975, "the Town Builghg Inspector advised Mr. Damien (erroneously). ." If such is the case why shouldAdridure this hardship created by'an offs ii of the Town of Southold, namely the former Building Inspector, when he made a wrong interpretation of_ the 1966 hearing and mishandled my case by telling me that I do not have to make any ap- plication, when the Chairman of the Board said that I had to apply, in order to for- mal a the division 9f perjy, into two 1 ts? 2. �ie hardship created is U�I �� on is not s hared gy all properties alike in the immediate _._.vicinity of this property and in this use district because rr This Point 2 is true and applicable to my case. There are four buildings in the back of my property and they, !belong to Mrs.Acker rand Mr. Fudjinski.'rlith my second lot, my!-property will have only two houses. 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because b9ga= it will simply restore the validity of a decision taken by the Board of Appeals in 1966 not to grant me three lots b,}t,.to ,advise.me that it will. Cant me tm two lots, provided I apply. And again, I did not make any'application to 'the Roard' of Appeals or to the Planning Board, because the then Building Inspector,.most categorically emphasized to me that I do not have to do anything else but to apply to him by asking him to issue two dif- ferent building permits for my two lots, which, in his judgment, were granted to me by the Board of Appeals in 1966. Therefore, if he made an error and the letter he gave me on November 5, 1975 is said to be "incorrect,rt as letter (f) of Point 11 of the Action of the Zoning- Board of Appeals of November 3 1986 stipulatessI cannot be penalized .for something I. have not done and no responsibility is imputable to me for the hardship created`by a formal official of Southold Tovm. In light of these explicative remarks and factual background, I respectifully request the Chairman and the Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals to consider this appeal as an APPLICATION, if necessary, in accordance with the rhmzximx statement made by the Chairman of the Board in 1966 that, the Board will grant me two lots, if I apply, so that the present Zoning Board of Appeals may eliminate the severe hardship imposed STATE OF NEW YORK upon me by the former Building Inspec r.% who acte I�terroneoously�r Ss and,.t1}PTpby,to my:detriment , C su F� ..� ey ". COUNTY OF: ) ,- ignatur Sworn to this .. ! .... ............... ... day of............ . .Q�� �? .....!....... 19 NO Notary. P lic ' MARY ANN CYBULSKI t NOTARY PUBLIC.State of New Yof, Residing in Suffolk Count No 52-5895900 © COMMISSlon Expire=Apnt iU •/0d BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In the Matter or the Petition of George D. Damien NOTICE TO to the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold ADJACENT TO: Mrs. Irwin Acker AND Mr. Joseph Fudjinski PROPERTY OWNER 1200 Flagles Drive 564 First St. West Palm Beach, F1. 33401 Brooklyn, N.Y. 11215 YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: r. 1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold to request a (Variance) � �/�k�i/or�/e���/ in line and spirit of the state tents made by the Chairman of the Board of Appeals ) n the course of the 1966 hearing. 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your pproperty and is des- cribed as follows: County Tax �iap No 1000 Section 17, Block 9, Lot p,�o 12 3. That the property which is the subject of such Petition is located in the following zoning district: New Suffolk, 14ain, Fifth and Jackson Streets 4. That by such Petition, the undersigned will request the following relief: Elimination of the severe hardship created by erroneous actions and letters of former Milding inspector., so that a second lot may be granted. 5. That the provisions of the Southold Toy8dor g6 Code applicable to the relief sought by the under- signed are Article XX Section uv [ ] Section 280-A, New York Town Law for approval of access over rights)-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) 7E 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. Dated November 13,1986 Petitioner C,eor mien e D.Da Owners Names : g Post Office Address P.O.Box _ New Suffolk, N.Y. 11956 (Tel . ) PROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICE ATTACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS NAME ADDRESS P 107 379 178 P 107 379 180 RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPT FOR CERTIFIED MAIL NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NO INSURANCE COVERAGE PROVIDED NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL NOT FOR INTERNATIONAL MAIL � (See Reverse) , (See Reverse) c Sen' t I � w re a JKo. �7- S, ee an O L �i CC) P . ate d7P/� P h�����S��ate an�ri zl��o e p Q skd d�G L/U�s//"fLL co Postage ci $ Postage Z � � - • rri I 7 Certified Fee Certified Fee 7 S Special Delivery Fee Special Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Restricted Delivery Fee Return Receipt Showing � Return Receipt Showing I to whom and Date Delivered v to whom and Date Delivered a Return receipt showing to whom; c*A Return receipt showing to whom, opi Date,and Address of Deiive7T 1_, w Date,and Address of Delivery I r 4 a TOTAL Posta, aQi A TOTAL Postage � $ �� )L. � cP u_ �� o Postrnar Postmark CD co a �'6L] - e — -- — STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) ss.: 77PC" D. . residing at � 1 being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the day of D J e cA b , 19 , 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 N EA.0 S ; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by ertifie (registered) mail. Sworn to before me this day of 14 0Of-" k e,r , 19 Notary Public MARY ANN CYBULSttI NOTARY PUBLIC.State of New Yof. Residing in Suffolk Count No.52-5895900 COMMIftion Expires April 'iu i e ag (This side does not have to be completed on form transmitted to adjoining property owners . ) 1_ 1 FORM NO. 6 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Building Department Town Hall .. Southold, N.Y. 11971' APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Instructions A. This application must be filled in typewriter OR ink, and submitted im dmpdb= to the Building Inspec- tor with the following; for new buildings or new use: 1. Final survey of property with accurate location of all buildings, property lines, streets, and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. Final approval of Health Dept. of water supply and sewerage disposal—(S-9 form or equal). 3. Approval of electrical installation from Board of Fire Underwriters. 4. Commercial buildings, Industrial buildings, Multiple Residences and similar buildings and installa- tions, a certificate of Code compliance from the Architect or Engineer responsible for the building. 5. Submit Planning Board approval of completed site plan requirements where applicable. B. For existing buildings (prior to April 1957), Non-conforming uses, or buildings and "pre-existing" land uses: 1. Accurate survey of property showing all property lines, streets, buildings and unusual natural or topographic features. 2. Sworn statement of owner or previous owner as to use, occupancy and condition of buildings. 3. Date of any housing code or safety inspection of buildings or premises, or other pertinent informa- tion required to prepare a certificate. C. Fees: 1. Certificate of occupancy $5.00 2. Certificate of occupancy on pre-existing dwelling $15.. 00 3. Copy of certificate of occupancy $1.00 (,-� 4 .Vacant Land C.O. $5 . 00 . . Date . . . � . . . . . . . . . . . .� c f New Building . . . . . . . . . . . . . Old or Pre-existing Building Vacant Land . . V . . . . . . Location of Property .- - _�.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. House No. Street Hamlet Owner or Owners of Property . . . . . . . .`.�. . . .. . . . . .n M�. . .!. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . . . .I. 1.�. . . . . . . Block . . . . • •I. . . . . Lot . . ... .I. . . . . . . Subdivision . . . . . . . . . . . . 1\. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Filed Map No. . . . (. . . . .Lot No.. . . . X. . . . . . . Permit No. . . . . . . . . . . Date of Permit . . . . . . . . . .Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . Health Dept. Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Labor Dept. Approval . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Underwriters Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .Planning Board Approval . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . Request for Temporary Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .Final Certificate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fee Submitted $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Construction on above described building an ermit meets all app icable codes and regulations. �Z Applicant . . . . . . . . . . . i. . . . . : .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Rev.10-10-78 APPENDIX B " SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM INSTRUCTIONS: (a) In order to answer the questions in this short EAF is 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 significant and a completed Environmental Assessment Form is necessary. (c) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that this 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 X. unusual land form found on the site? . . • • . Yes No e� 3• Will pro ect alter or have a large effect on X an existing body of water? • • Yes No 4. Will project have a potentially large impacts on groundwater quality? Yes X No 5. Will project significantly effect drainage 'flow X on adjacent sites? : ., Yes No 6. Will project affect any threatened or endangered X i plant or animal species? Yes No 7• Will project result in a major adverse effect on X air quality? • • • • • • • • e • . Yes No 8• Will project have a major effect on visual char- acter of the community or scenic views or vistas X known to be important to the community? o . . Yes No t' 9• Will project adversely impact any site or struct- ure of historic, pre-historic, or paleontological importance'or any site designated as a critical X environmental area by a local j agency? . Yes No_o 10. Will project have a major effect on existing or X future recreational opportunities? . . . Yes No 11. Will project.result- in major -traffic problems or j cause a major effect to existing transportation systems? Yes X No 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable odors, noise, glare, vibration, or electrical disturb- I ance as a result of the projects. operation? Yes x No.'. 13. Will project have any impact on public health or safety'? Yes X No 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 period or have a major negative effect on the r character of the community or neighborhood? . Yes X No 15• Is there pub;arpcontrover`1s)y' qQpcerning the project? Yes No PREPARER'S SIGNATURE: �c TITLE: Owner REPRESENTING: George D. Damien DATE: NbV. 13-21986' 9/1/78 FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BI3ILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTHOLD. N. Y. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY No.G J?F12. . . . . Date . . . . . . . . . . . ..� .�. . .L`. . . ., 19.69. THIS CERTIFIES that the building located at �. .5�. .r�. . J • •S • • • • • Street Map No. . . . . . . Block No. . . . . .Lot No. via.. . . . New. u&' .. . . . ' conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated . . . . . . . . . . . .Tc,.;�V. . . .c3'. . . ., 19.(,cl. pursuant to which Building Permit No. dated . . . . . . . . . .. . .y.u . . . . �. . ., 19. .E f, 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 . .Pt•�Sr :.�.r ,��� 'b' E1:`' y i�Y,r A� rl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The certificate is issued to . . ti 1 ,ye�z. . . . . . . .0-.,',�c . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (owner, lessee or tenant) of the aforesaid building. .Suffolk County Department of Health Approval Urci;�r.:��.��c:�,°ti C�-:�•t �; �r7U�� �,�� � Q� � Building Inspector i u . i i . (TCC1al ' 3 Date) To: Sou%-hold Token Board of Appeals Main Road Southold, VY 11971 Rc: Appeal Application of George D. Damien Location of Property: Main nfth and Jackson ree s - Dczr Sir.: In reference to the New York State Tidal Weti`ndz I,ajld-Us Rt:,ufations, 6 NYCIRR, Part 661, and Article 25 of the Ilew 'lore State- Environmental Conservation Law, pleas` be advised that t: vubject property in the within appeal applica,io:l: (ploa-cu- chick one box) r . ( D K .r be located %within 300 feet; of tidal however, const--uctcd along the water-lying edcn-2 of this property iS a bulkh-aad ill very goc,d conditicn and at loast l0U feet in :1er.r, t:;. C ) Nla_v be 'located within hin 300 feet of tidal 'rIe`?anc; , holdo-Ver, coinotruct.cd along the waterlyi ec7e of this property is a bulkhead in necld of: (minor) (major) repairs , and appro%imately feet to length. ( D May be located within 300 feat of tidal wetland, • however, constructed along the %iatC-:-lying e'dga of this property i:; a buiF;1, -1c1 less than 100 Beet 6 • in length. ( D May be located within 300 feet of tidal wetlanc.; ; and there is no bul.Mlead or ca:lcrCtU Wall exis-_n 'on the prcmise2. ( x ) IS not located Within 300 feet of tidal t�et;lands to the beet of my knowledge . k [:; tarred it•cros (+ ) indic arc your proaert,/ rocs; [lot ap7Car to Call within the jurisaic,,:i0l, OL' the' 14 .Y •S , O . C.C. rely you! C;" L I:OTE: Id proposed project f.-111S klitll,in O. E. C. jurisdiction , approval must be received and sut:mitted to oLr office betoze your applic:- - ' on can be L;clledaled Cor a public 11caring.