HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-03/25/1992 HEARING TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING OF
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 25, 1992
Board Members Present: Chairman Gerard P. Goehringer
Members: Doyen, Grigonis, Dinizio, villa
Linda Kowalski, ZBA Secretary and approximately 50 persons in the
audience.
Appeal #3975
Applicant (s): Arthur G. Carlson
Location of Property: 15q5 Lower Road, Southold, NY
County Tax Map No.: 1000-69-04-23
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9:00 p.m. and read the
Notice of Hearing and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of the parcel, somewhere within
the confines of this particular, and I won't direct that right now.
We all know where it zs. I have a copy of the site plan indicating
the approximate placement of the two-story frame home. The area
which concerns the seafood business and a copy of the Suffolk County
Tax map indicating this and surrounding properties in the area.
Mr. Goggins would like to be heard?
MR. GOGGINS: Yes I would. Bill Goggzns, associate of the law firm
McNulty, Speiss, located at 633 East Main Street, Riverhead, NY.
I am the attorney for the petitioner. The petitioner, as you know,
is engaged in the business of packaging and distribution of locally
produced aquatic products. Just as some of our local persons are
engaged in the business of packaging and distributions of locally
produced potatoes, cauliflower, corn and what have you. It is our
position that the farmers of the water should be treated like
farmers of the land in that they both create a product and market
same. And we ask that the Board treat them both equally. Just
as our local farmers reap their harvest and they bring their har-
vest to a distributor, so must the fisherman. Farmers do not have
the time or ability or resources to package, distribute or market
their products, so they have a distributor and they use distribu-
tors to get their products To market. A distributor in turn,
distributes the product and mhe result is that the farmer gets
paid a fair price for his harvest. There are storage facilities
for farm products throughout the town, everywhere you look, you
see a barn that stores potatoes or some guys who distribute the
f~rm products out of town. And I believe all those facilities are
in the A-C Districts. We ask that, just as our local fishermen
farm the waters for ccn~ scallops, and lobsters. They have to bring
their harvest someplace too. And a lot of them bring their harvest
to the petitioner!s place of business in trying to get a fair
price. The farmers of the water, much like the farmers of the land,
do not have the time, abilities, or resources to package and
Page 2
Souhtold ZBA
Public Hearing--Carlson
MR. GOGGINS (con't.): distribute their product. Mr. Carlson's
operation is a necessary means by which by farmers of the water
can maintain their livelihood. Just as the packaging and dis-
tribution operations of the land farm products are a necessary
means by which the farmers of the land can maintain their liveli-
hood. It became apparant to me upon reviewing all the papers,
that a main objection to residents of town in the local residence
is the fact that there are offensive odors in the area or a poss-
ibility of offensive odors. On the issue of offensive odors ,I
have three (3) points to make. One (1) is that when any perish-
able product is improperly handled or maintained, odors will re-
sult. Growing up and even today, during the late fall you drive
by a over ripe cauliflower field, by God, it stinks. It is the
worst possible stench you can imagine and'I am sure we are all
familiar with that type of smell. And the same thing with stored
potatoes. Stored potatoes that are exposed to water for a long
period of time have a bad odor to them. However, no offensive
odors eminate from properly stored potatoes. No offensive odors
eminate from mishandled cabbage or cauliflower. And no offensive
odors eminate from properly processed seafood. And. I would like
to point out that Mr. Carlson's operation is properly run and
handled properly and it is a clean operation. I know members of
the Board have been to the operation and have seen it and can
attest to the fact that it is a properly run operation and a
clean operation. The second (2) point I would like to make, is
that the New York Department of Agriculture and Markets issued
Mr. Carlson a food processing license. The Department makes
periodic inspections, the subject of these inspections are pri-
marily sanitary in nature. Also the New York State Deapartment
of Environmental Conservation, the infamous DEC, issued a permit
to Mr. Carlson to operate his business. Mr. Carlson runs a clean
business, a sanitary business, an odorless business. And the
third (3) point I would like to make is that the Suffolk County
Legislature in 1988 passed a local law which the purpose of which,
and I have copies here, the purpose of which was to reduce the
laws to the County of its fishing operations, by limiting the
circumstances under which fishing and fish processing may be deem-
ed a nuisance. And the Legislature's intent of this resolution
was to and I quote "of primarily used to keep commercial fish
processing operations which are sometimes forced to cease to
operate to continue to operate." And what it does, it makes it
so that a fish operation shall not be subject to a public nuisance
action. And I have copies of the law here that I will hand out
to the members of the Board right now.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Goggins, I apologize, I didn't swear you
in in the beginning of this hearing and I hope that everything
you are telling us is the truth to the best of your knowledge.
MR. GOGGINS: To the best of my knowledge. Any misquotes I made
in relation to the Local Law # 30 of 1988 can be corrected, sir.
The copy that I have submitted to the Board right now. That
is all I have as far as the offensive odors are concerned.
don't think there is any credible evidence that has been pre-
sented that there are odors eminating from this processing
Page 3
Southold ZBA
Publick Hearing--Carlson
MR. GOGGINS (con't.); operation and in fact I believe there are
no offensive odors eminating from it. As far as the treatment
of the people in the fishing industry to be treated equally as
farmers, I have a letter, I believe you have it in your file,
guess you can make it part of the record, is a November 23, 1990
correspondence from the Board of the Town Trustees. In it, I
guess it is a letter from John M Bredemeyer to Scott Harris, and
I couldn't put it better then he did. And in the letter he states
the Trustees are of the conscience consensus that mariculture and
agriculture operation should be given similar status as agricul-
ture in Southold Town. Specifically the culture of beneficial
aquatic and marine organisms in upland areas should be afforded
a similar code of protection as agriculture currently enjoys.
With respect to the sale or distribution of any locally produced
marine or aquatic products, the Trustees believe that historically run
operations which are completely enclosed in a building should be grand-
fathered and permitted to continue in all zoning districts. With
respect to new operations to sale and distribution of marine or
aquatic products, the Trustees believe that the tenor of the
Zoning Code should be liberal towards their existehce with require-
ment that operations be covered, have proper parking and abate
nuisances properly. As I said, I couldn't have put it more
sincintly. There is a need to treat the fisherman and people in
the fishing industry as liberly as the farmers are treated in this
Town. Mariculture and aquatic culture should be afforded the same
status and agriculture in that they should be interprited to mean
the same. This application is made in logic commen sense and in
spirit of the proper treatment by the Town by residents of the
community that farm the water. The County has taken steps to
help seafood processing and I believe the Town should take steps
helping it. And I don't see a great difference between farming
the water and farming the land, as a big difference in distribu-
ting and processing seafood, as distributing and processing farm
products. That is all I have to say tonight. I believe there
are other people who will talk for this application.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My only question to you is I have a question
to ask and I don't know if you can answer it and I would like you
to come back before the completion of this hearing tonight.
would like you to compare the Carlson operation to that of a
person harvesting and storing potatoes and possibly to a person
who is taking those potatoes and doing something with them. Okay
that is the cleaning, scrubbing, and bagging of those potatoes,
which is.about the greatest degree that a farmer deals with. I
can tell you for a fact that, that the Romanowski farm, when it
was in operation in Laurel, that is exactly what they did do.
And the Romanowski's not only a fellow Lions member of mine and
~ friend of mine and that is what he did in that barn. And I
would like you to prepare that either through one of the Carlsons
who are here or yourself, prior to the completion of this hearing.
MR. GOGGINS: Okay, if I can. Any other questions, I would like
to reserve to the end of all the peoples in this court room have
spoken. Thank you.
Page 4
Southold ZBA
Public Hearing--Carlson
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ladies and gentlemen of the audience, we
have, as you know it is really up to me as Chair person of
this organization of this Board and I have been so empowered
by the Town Board to do stuff, to swear people in from time to
time. There has been hearsay concerning this operation throughout
the And I have all intentions of doing that to-
night and I have all intentions of telling people when I feel they
have over stepped their bounds and records to statements that
are being made. So in no way, I am completely impartial tonight
on this particular application and I just wanted you to be aware
of that. So now I ask anybody to speak in favor of this appli-
cation to kindly raise your hand and step to the mike and state
and your name and be prepared to be sworn in. Mr. Carlson do
you solemly swear, raise you right hand sir, solemly swear that
the information you are about to give us is the truth to the best
of you knowledge.
MR. CARLSOn: Yes.
CHARIMAN GOEHRINGER: For the record this is Arthu~ J. Carlson.
Go ahead.
MR. A. CARLSON: Is this thing working?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: TO my knowledge it is.
MR. A. CAPdLSON: Mr. Goehringer, Board members and interested
ladies and gentlemen. My name is Arthur Carlson and I would like
to take a few mintues of your time to speak about the purpose of
this hearing. I have lived in Town, Southold Township for 54 years
and there are currently four (4) generations of my family living
in the Township. My son and I run a small family wholesale sea-
food business on my property for almost 20 years. We keep the
property clean, there are no run down buildings, no rusted cars
or machinery or useless pieces of equipment lying around. People
have been misinformed and here say that my intentions arento expand
are unfounded and completely false. The pending hearing is taking
place because ode of my neighbors filed an official complaint
stating persistent loud noise, heavy traffic and odors. Several
members of your own Board, the Town Board and other officials
have visited the property both during working and non-working
hours. All visits are on this violation to be non,existing.
We own only a small pick-up truck and one van. These two vehicles
and an occasional bayman constitute all of our traffic. This is
very little compared to the busy medical offices only one block
away. The odor has never been a serious problem. We have in-
stalled a large exhaust fan at the peak of the large barn to
exhaust steam out of the high point, therefore, eliminating any
possible odor problems. The barns and surrounding work areas
are scrubbed and disinfected after every work day. We are duly
licensed and regularly inspected by both New York State Dept. of Env
onmental Conservation and the Department of Agriculture. We have
never been sited for violation by either deparment. Our well
water samples tested every year, as per the request of the above
Page 5
Southold ZBA
Public Hearing--Carl~on ~' ·
MR. A. CARLSON (CON'T.): mentioned departments. The seafood
we process and package is produced locally by Southold Town Bay-
men. It is then sold and delivered to markets outside the South-
old Town area. This subject quantity brings in new money to
cmrculate within the economy of Southold. We feel that we provide
a great service to the Baymen which has mean~ so much to this Town
and to the Town itself. I consider this to be a nuisance complaint.
because both the initial and follow up complaints were submitted
by a person who has an ongomng verbal confrontation with a member
of my family. This is his way of annempting to get even. I have
drafted a letter having signatures of 14 (fourteen) occupants
constituting 5 (five) of the 7 (seven) nezghboring homes, presiding
within one block of my property on both Ackerly Pond Lane and
Lower Road. The signatures testify that they see absolutely no
basis of the alledged violations. Copies are available. It was
cause great hardship on both myself and my family as well as the
baymen who bring their catches to me and that this petition
being denied. Thank you for your time..
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Before you leave tonight. We~are going ~o
brick out everything tonight. My understanding that one of the
natures or the nature of this application was not necessarily your
business, it was your son playing in a band or a band playing
in your house, or loud music eminating from your house. Is there
any truth to that?
MR. A. CARLSON: That happened but one time back a while, yes.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Could that have been the same that
this ...
MR. CARLSON: Very possible.
CHAIRMAN ~OEHRINGER: That is the only question I have sir. Thank
you sir°
MR. A. CARLSON: That is different They practice
in Riverhead now. They chased them out of Southold.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Mr. Carlson. I belived the gentle-
men over on my left hand side there with the blue sweater. Again
sir, would you state your name and raise your hand.
MR. FLAT: My name is Charles Flat.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Raise your hand. It is getting late and I
apologize. Do you solemnly that the information you are about to
g~ve us is the truth to the best of your knowledge.
MR. FLAT: Yes sir.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank
you.
Page 6
Southold ZBA
Public Hearing--Carlson
MR. FLAT: My name is Charles Flat. And I live on the corner
of Lower Road and Ackerly Pond in an antique house similar to
Sandy's. I know Sandy, I have been to his house. Oh I also
make wine for a living. I feel that Sandy and I are in similar
businesses that we farm. and process. I have a very good feeling
about what Sandy does at his house. I have been there~ both
during working hours and during non-working hours. I have never
smelt anything. I have never seen anything, this is from the
heart. I have never smelt anything, never. I did get the best
scallops in my life for lunch one day. I hear no noise what-so-
ever and I see no more traffic than any of us have here on
Eastern Long Island. And I think what Sandy does is a good thing,
a wholesome thing and I am proud to have him as a neighbor.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. Mrs. Latson. Again do you
solemnly swear that the information you are about to give us is
the truth to the best of your knowledge.
MRS. LATSON: I do.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
MRS. LATSON: Members of the Board, I am hear to speak both on a
personal basis as having known Sandy Carlson for approximately
15 (fifteen) years. Also as a wife of a bayman and also as a
prior member of Southotd Town government. When I first moved
to Southold about 15 (fifteen) years ago, Sandy Carlson's name was
really sinomenous with shell fishing. He has employed my brother-
in-law. He has provided a service to the bayman, which i was
aware of many years ago before I became a wife of a bayman, and
in that time, I have had the opportunity to go to Sandy Carlson's
operation on many ocassions. I have always seen in very well run,
things are always unloaded immediately. They are opened properly
they are washed down every night, they are refrigerated. The
baymen are paid for what they drop off at a set price. And the
product is sh£pped out and it is shipped out immediately. Sandy
provides a service both for scalloping, for conching, and for
lobsters. And it is a small family run operation. And it would
be an incrediable hardship if suddenly there was no place for
local bayman~ who do lobster, to bring their !obster or to bring
their conch. There is no where around here other than Sandy's
place that you can bring conch especially. I was on the Town
Board when the zoning code was approved and prior to my tenure
on the Town Board there was a lot of discussion about it for many
years. Many people, who had[ what would be considered a non-
conforming use, came before the Town Board, pleaded their case and
were granted zone changes to allow the use of their property.
Sandy Carlson never received a notice that his property was non-
cQnforming. The Building Department had issued permits for him
to put the various sheds that he has there, and in the past~ he
has done everything legally to the best. of his ability and to the
best of his knowledge as a common, as a working person in the
Town of Southold. So unfortunately, when the Zoning Code was
passed, Sandy became a non-conforming use. Had he been informed
or come into the Town Board ahead of time and explained the cir-
cumstances perhaps the zoning could have been set to allow him to
Page 7
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
Public Hearing--Carlson
MRS. LATSON (con't.): be in buszness today. But we can look
throughout the Town, we can see many cases such,
and
of
what
is
called spot zoning, to allow an existing business to s~ay in
business. And that is my third point. The economy is rough out
there. I have been looking for a job. You know I never so called
built a nest while I was in political office. And it is tough.
A lot of people are not working. And a lot of people are complaining
about taxes, complaining about the school taxes, complaining about
the Town taxes and these are people, all of these men, who have
families and children who own their own homes, who are working
and contributing to the ~ax base in Southold Town. And you can'T
take away a man's rights to his livelihood. You can't take away
20 (twenty) years of investment that someone has put in, in a
small business. Sandy Carlson isn't a millionaire, the people
that come to his business and sell their produce there, they are
no~ millionaires, they are no~ wealthy people, they are not powerful
people. They are looking to live in Southold Town and work in
Southold Town and what is thought to be a traditional industry.
An industry that we, you as government officials, should be pro-
moting, should be insuring that the integrity of these types of
business are able to exist in the future. And you hold a lot of
power in your hands. You can make or break peoples lives. So I
am asking that this Board in its compassion and its wisdom to
look on the operation of a small scale, shell fish packager, who
is providing livelihood, not only for his family, but for, I'm
sure Sandy can give you the numbers better than I can, but at
least 20 (twenty) families who rely on him. And if he was to be
shut down, there would be no other place to go. WE cannot legally
open scallops in our house, we have to have Health Deparment
permits, we have to have agriculture permits. We are not allowed
under the home occupation law to sell any type of products out
of our home. And this is our bread and butter, this is our live-
lihood, this is the livelihood that feeds the children of these
men. So I ask you to do what you can, you are the experts here
and to grant this variance. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRtNGER: Thank you Ellen. I believe there is a
gentlemen on the east side of the room. Again do you solemnly
swear, raisingzour right hand.
MR. TOLLEFSEN: I am Roger TQllefsen and I live in Hampton Bays.
CHAIRMANGOEHRINGER:' Do you solemnly swear the information you
are about to give us is the most correct to the best of your
knowledge. Thank you sir. How do you spell you last name.
MR. TOLLEFS~: T-o-l-l-e-f-s-e-n. I am here as a personal friend
for Sandy an~ also for a variety of reasons to help protect the
seafood indu$-~ry. I have known Sandy personally for at least
2~ (twenty-one) years. He has been a provider of the seafood pro-
ducts to myself and my published restaurants--The Lobster Inn,
The Cove Seafood Market and other entities in Hampton Bays and
k,_ Southampton areas. We buy quality product. Quaility product does
not have a We look at everyone and the result
Page 8
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
Public Hearing--Carlson
MR. TOLLEFSON (con't.); is that Sandy goes back and puts his
processing facilities in and really scrutinizes
them. And we consider Sandy to be one of the best suppliers. On
that respect alone, I have to go back and attest that the quality
of his product is unsurpassed. I am also here for another reason,
I am president of the New York Seafood Council. It is a council
which an industry or organizaion which goes back and tries to
promote and educate people about the seafood parks in New York
State. I would like to give to you right now some of the copies
of a recent publications. But there are some examples of some
of the things that few people know about the seafood industry
in New York State. It is a big organization. It is a big
economic driving port entity for this end of Eastern Long Island.
The Department of Agriculture and Markets recognizes this. In
fact, there was only 11 (eleven) years ago that the Deparment
of Agriculture and Markets became the lead organization for marketing
and promotional seafood products. In algae agriculture,
aquaculture is clearly defined as explicitly spelled out by some
of the guide lines in the Department of Agriculture and Markets.
Just three (3) months ago, the Lieutenant Governor of New York
Stated Lieutenant Stan Lundine, was commissioned by the Governor
to go back and put together an vision. It is called a vision for
the future and recommendations of the governor's task force for
coastal resources. The application, the recommendations that were
made in this task force applies specifically to this particular
question in point back here concerning his use of his business.
I would like to read a couple of points about this, I am not going
to be long. It goes back, it starts with going back and making
recommendations about the working coast. You have to realize that
these recommendations were not made by one manm They were made
by several people and I'msure you would probably recognize the
na~eS~ They are made up of all the people that represent the industry
of New York Seafood. One of the key recommendations is that the
working coast is vitale to the economic health to New York State.
While protecting the enviror~ent from the State, the State must
also focus on creating a supportive business climate to ensure
the survival of success, and success of water dependant businesses.
Key recommendation--create comprehensive, economic development
stratergy to reflect the busy needs of the maritime industries,
the commerical fishing industry, etc. We need to go back and define
these goals. The economic development stratorgy would focus
existing financial programatic resources of government and the
private sector to foster appropriate growth. Create a positive
buisness environment for water dependant industries. Again we
emphasize this~ I can't give it in clearer terms. It goes back
and says many factors reverse the effect of business time
on water dependent businesses. New York State should create a
supportive business environment by providing protection against
n~isance suits. I am not going to define what nuisances suits
is here. It is pretty clear on the defination of the language
here, that is going back and charging the individual communities
to go back and be supportive and creative. Recommendation No.1--
amend the water revitalization and coastal resources act to provide
protection against nuisance suits to water dependant business.
Legislation is needed to specifically protect pre-existing water
Page 9
Sou~hold ZBA 3/5/~Z ~
Public Hearing--carlson ~i ~ s~'.~ ~
MR. TOLLEFSEN (con't.): dependant businesses from nuisance suits
under the States Torfe~ Law. I don't know what a 'forte Law is
and you do, but thms ms what I am reading directly ou5 of hhis.
This Legislation will protect pre-existing water dependent industry
when being sued by adjacent property owners in much the same way
the right to farm law protects agriculture usages. They cite
in this particular reference to the Village of Greenport, who
is involved with such law following suit by owners of new homes
against traditional commercial fishermen. I bring this up for
several reasons, it is important once again to emphasize the
vivarancy of New York State seafood. This is an example of which
is under challenge, you have clear guide lines by Lieutenant
Governor of New York State conditions of which you have at your
discretion to act in a way that is going to be beneficial, that
you consider all the facets of the New York Seafood Industry,
which in some cases, is not even clear. This brochure that was
presented today, is really the first publication that consolidates
all the efforts of the seafood industry under one publication.
If we don't do a really good job ourselves of promoting the
undercurrents of what is out there, that the }ndustry is
immense in size, and it is under tremendous attack by issues that
go by environmental issues to cases such like this. If you have
descretion, I can't think of a business person or a personal
point of view or a professional point of view that deserves more
consideration than Sandy Carlson. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. Yes sir. Again raising your
right hand do you solemny swear that the information you are about
to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge. State
your name for the record.
MR. WENZEL: My name is Peter Wenzel, I am a commercial fisherman,
I have done business with Mr. Carlson for almost 20 (twenty) years
now. I am also President of the Southold Town Baymens Association.
I think that it is very important that at some point and maybe
this is a good place to start that the people of Southold Town and
the government of Southold Town stop paying lip service to com-
mercial fishing industry and to do something to keep it here.
We are really struggling and have been struggling for a number of
years now for a variety of reasons. But one thing that keeps
coming back at us, is that the we keep getting shoved out of
where we have traditionally been, where we have traditionally
worked on the water and on the land. There seems to be a constant
parade of complaints against the operations that have been a
traditional part of this Town. And what's happened to Mr. Carlson
here is a classic example of what goes on, you know, I think on a
fairly regular basis, as I said on the water and on the land.
This operation obviously had a personal interest in this, because
P have done business with Mr. Carlson and I still do now. But
I am also speaking for the baymen of Southold Town in general.
His operation is very important. You can't just shut him down.
There is no way at this time, that I am pretty sure the man could
move the operation. The money just isn't in the business. We are
not making it and I am sure he isn't. I think this kind of
business deserves to be treated as an agricultural business is
and that it is time to start supporting this part of Southold's
Page 10
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR- WENZEL (con't.): history and industry. Thank you.
CHAIRPLAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. Is there anybody else?
In the center? Yes sir. Again raising your right hand, the
information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of
your knowledge.
Yes it is.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And you name sir.
Mr. CLAUDE CARLSON: My name is Claude Carlson. I would like to
answer your question first that you asked...
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I just want you to know, that if I
am not happy with your answer that I want you to go back. I don't
want this hearing to be completed. If you can't answer the
question tonight Claude~ sit down and figure it out and do it
to the best of your knowledge. Because I do not want to complete
this hearing unless I have all the answers in my m~nd, okay,
for the best of my ability, because I was not a farmer, I only
observed this operation that Henry had at the time and he was
only one (1) of several people that bagged their own produce.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: I will try to answer ~our question as best I
and you can let me know if it is satisfactory. I can give you
the best of my ability and explain to you. Our business concerns
three (3) products. It concerns lobsters, scallops, and conches.
That is the only products we've handled, we did handled also
clams at one time, but there just wasn't enough need for it
to bother with it and that was quite a few years back. We'll
start with the lobsters. What we do with lobsters is we have
a walk-in cooler, we have lobstermen who bring them in, they
weigh in their own lobsters, put them in the cooler and come
in and write up a ticket in the kitchen. Leave them in the
cooler, after, later after, late in the afternoon, I will go out
there with my son and we will sort out the lobsters, whatever
we need big, we will sort out pound lobster, from pound and a
quarter lobsters, put them into different tubs and reweigh them
and check them for quality. Maybe reject some that we pull out
that we don't like, like their shells are not hard enough or
whatever. Kind of a quality control sorting operation. They
stay in the cooler over night and get sent out the next morning
on our van locally around Long Island, mostly in Suffolk County,
some up towards New York. Basically that is the only thing we
do with the lobsters. We take them in, sort them, pack them,
and send them out. Scallops was our main stay of our business,
up until we had the brown tide problem. As far as scallops went,
we, I scalloped myself and some people, my family and father also
scalloped. I started with him. At the time we were scalloping,
we needed scallop shop to open them, we had to get permits from
the right agencies to have our scallop shop. We would hire my
mother-in~law, and a few other friends that would come over and
open for us on a piece meal basis in our shop. As we started
Page 11
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON (con't.) : doing it for ourselves, we had
a couple of other people that said well, could you help us,
could we get our scallops opened over there also. We know
somebody else would come over, we'll opened some of ours and
my aunt would come over and give us a hand. So we put in four (4j
benches in our scallop shop, so we could handle a few more boats.
We were helping ourselves and helping other people at the same
time. Not only for the necessity of getting the scallops opened
and packaged properly and refrigerated properly, but also as the
aspect of marketing was a necessity where the scallop prices
were so depressed at the time, Braun's operation couldn't handle,
they had more than they wanted to handle at the time, as did
places on the South Fork. And we took our products and move them
up into New England, off of Long Island to try to help the whole
situation. You know, we tried to get them ou~ of this market
when it was depressed to get them into a difference market. And
that is how we started working with other baymen basically.
That was where that came into play, about fifteen (15) years ago.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Before you go any farther, the lobsters,
okay, any physical change in characteristics of the lobster?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: None, they are alive.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: They are alive. They were shipped alive
to their specific spot. They were not boiled, their meat was
not taken out, whatever the case may be.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Nothing but sorting and sizing.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Scallops, they were shucked. They were
put into plastic bags, half a pound, one pound. That's it.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No. They were pus into one gallon bags
with labels on them according to what the DEC and the Department
of Agriculture tells us they wanted labels on. They were coded
properly.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Then they were put into the refrigerator.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Then they were put into a fish carson. Like
you pack fish in. So many gallons, six or eight (6 or 8) gallons
in a carton, depending on where they were going. And they are
iced, we heavily ice them, then they are put into the walk-in
cooler.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. I'm sorry. Go ahead.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: The third part of our operation is the
conch operation. This was an off shoot of the scallops. This
started because the guys that were scalloping were catching
conches. The law states that it is illegal to throw them back
over. They are shell fish preditors. They eat scallops and
they eat clams. The DEC laws or the conservation law, I am
not sure exactly which law it is, I'm certain it is illegal to
throw them back overboard. They have to be brought /~ if you
Page 12
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON (con't.): bring them in, and they start
bringing them in, what can we do with them. We started to shipping
them out in bushels to New York. We could only get $3.00 to
$4.00 a bushel for them. For the cost of the shipping, it was
spinning our wheels doing nothing. We tried to find a way to
market them. We started breaking them out of the shell, which
is a time consuming, and miserable operation, because they told
us in Fulton Market they would gladly buy the meats, but they
didn't want them in the shell. That went on for about one (1)
season, and we said this wasn't going to work. We will have to
try something different. And we tried a few different things
and we found out. We have a steam machine we use for cleaning
up stuff and we found out if we hit them with steam long enough
they fall out of the shell. So all we did was start putting
them into some stainless steel container and steaming them long
enough so that we could pull them out of the shell with a fork.
And that is what we do. We steam them, pull them out of the
shell, we have a stainless steel bench and sink there, and we
put them on the bench and pull them out, then we wash them off
and then we pack them like in a shrimp box, what a shrimp box
would be if you bought a whole box of shrimp, plastic bag and
then into a wax coated white carton that holds seven (7) pounds.
And then we put them into the freezer and freeze them. Then
after they are frozen, the next morning we package them up into
master cartons and save them up until we get 25~ 50~ or 100
cases~ and then we sell them to different brokers and fish
markets around Long Island.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Let me ask you a question about the conches.
Is the meat itself cut or manicured in anyway after they are
steamed.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No there is a gut that is on there along
with ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Exclusive of the gut. The meat itself.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is it breaded?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No.
C~AIRFiAN GOEHRINGER: Is it fried?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any other preparation other than
~teaming it, for the sole purpose of taking it out of the shell.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: On occassion, we sort them.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: okay, that is in reference to size.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Size. That is the only thing we do. WE have
had customers request sorted sizes and sometimes we did that. We
Page 13
Public Hearing--Carlson]
Southold ZBA 3/25f92
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON tcon't.): haven't done that in a couple of
years, but we have done that in the past.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What happens tO the water, the steam water?
Is that dissipated into the ground through the drains in the
floor?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Yes, we have a drain pipe that goes straight
down into our cesspool. We use very hot steam. We have very
littled waste water.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRtNGER: What about the shells, they are taken to the
landfill.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: We have one pick-up that I put on about
seven or eight (7 or 8) years ago, we built a little dump body
on it with a hydraulic lift and put them right on the dump truck,
and they are taken every day to the dump and dumped and brought
back the truck is washed and cleaned.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay Go ahead, continue, I am sorry.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: And that is it. That is the extent of our
business. We have abont, when we have scallops, we have a lot
of people who like to deal with us, we can't always handle all
the people who would like to deal with us, and we are hoping that
that will come back some day, we saw a little bit of that the
last couple of years. Basically, right now we're mostly down
to lobstermen that we deal with, about twelve or fifteen (12 or 15)
different ones, that some of them we have been dealing with
twenty (20) years in the Town. We just did the same thing, as
when we came out of the scallop thing, when we started to
try and market products and other people said can you help me,
you know, can you help move some of mine. That is how it pro-
gressed. We didn't try to sneak anything in through the back
door, we just went along doing what we were always doing and
what we tried to do was go along with anybody that came, the
DEC, or the Department of Agriculture whoever who had any juris-
diction over us and conform to what they wanted. YOu know, we
had to have a freezer that was a certain temperature, so we
could freeze the stuff properly, we had to code the boxes pro-
perly, you know, so that they are coded and dated, so forth,
for whatever purposes they see fit on that end.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I know we discussed briefly, at the last
hearing, the nature of the hours of the operation. But could
you just give us some idea about the hour of the operation again.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: As far as the lobsters go, I would say 90%
of the lobsters come in from the fishermen, come in the middle
of the afternoon between 3 and 6 o'clock. Usually between
~3 and 5, we have occassional guys who will come in at noon time
because they put a half a day in and occassionaly somebody will
come at 6:30 or 7:00 p.m. Between 3 and 6 is the majority of it
most all the time. There is exception on occassion, because of
weather and so forth, but that is normal. The scallop operation
Page 14
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON (con't.): this past year, was usually, the
scallopers wouldn't get in till afternoon, so we would have a
few people o~er there, shucking scallops in the afternoon from
4:00 to 8:00 at night, usually by 8:30 we would have the shop
cleaned up, 8:30, 9:00 o'clock we would the have the shop cleaned
up and out of there.
CHAIR~LAN GOEHRINGER: But the scallops would be delivered at a
reasonable time after the baymen came in with...
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: They would come direct, when they come in
they come directly to us, but because how hard the scalloping is,
in years past, they would be in early in the morning, mid-morning
but now in. this past couple of years with the little bit there
has been, they stay out till 3:00 4:00 o'clock~ before they would
come in. Now on the conch operation, they come in any time
during the day, usually not before noon and up till 4~ 5, maybe
6:00 o'clock at night. Very seldom any comes or goes after
6 o'clock at night. It is a rare occassion. As far as processing
the conches goes~ we try to work around that, try to keep
everybody happy around us, so we wouldn't have any complaints.
WE have started, when we work very early in the morning, start
at 6 o'clock, so we have to steam them for an hour, so they
are done at 7:00 a.m. Usually you would be done by 11 o'clock
12 o'clock in the morning. One time, years back when scalloping
was heavy and we had some guys who were also potting conches at
the time when they were scalloping, we were handling five (5)
times the amount we have been in the past couple of years. I
mean, we are just hanging on, it's almost hardly viable now
to the amount of stuff that we can handle to make it worthwhile.
I mean, we are just hanging on to try to get through these hard
times and hoping that things will get better. And I think that
should answer everything you would need to know as far as what
we do there, there is nothing else that goes on, we don't handle
any fish, persay it's all just the three (3) shellfish items
and three (3) years ago for a two-week period in the spring
when squid were heavy, we tried freezing up some squid just to
see if we could put some in the freezer and take it out later
and it might be worth something, but that is it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It din't work out. We thank you very much
sir.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: I would like to say a few other things, I
have a few notes here, I don't want to be redundant over some
of the things that have already been said, but I would like to
go over this quick, in case somebody missed something that ....
GHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No problem. You are welcomed to sit down
and come back up again if you like.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No. I think I am ready. Since I am here.
I would just like you to know that I have lived out here my
whole life and I worked on the water for thirty (30) years.
I started when I was cla]mming, when I was in junior high school
Page 15
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON (con't.) : and our family business supports
our two families. My father, myself, my brother and my son.
That is our only employees excep~ when we have the part-time
shucker come over.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You live in the immediate area right?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: I abut the property.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You abut the property. That is the one
to the north, northeast. It is a ranch I think.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Yes. Right exactly. My backyard abuts
the same as his backyard and the barns are touching both of
our properties actually. What I would like you to know, if we
are forced out of business, if we have to try to relocate,
economically, it is impossible, even if there was something
available. But there isn't anything available. According to
the zoning codes they way they are now, we should be in a
marine one or two (M-i, M-2) district. There is nothing avail-
able out there, if we could afford to spend a half-a-million
dollars and buy it, it is not even available. So there is no
other place for us to go. As Mr. Goggins stated, we always
felt that we should be equal as farmers. The Federal and the
State Government treats us the same as farmers. We have a
Tax I.D. number, the same as farmers do, and we fall under the
jurisdiction of the Department of Agriculture. And my personal
feeling is that we should be allowed our products from the seas
the same as farmers are allowed to handle their products and
package them and so for from off the land. The Town Code pro-
tects the interest of farmers. I have noticed under the purpose
of the A-C District, that it states right in there'that they
would want to protect the legitimate interest.of farmers and
I think it should as well protect those interests of fishermen.
There are many accessory uses in the A-C Zone. Uses that are
committed, that I can see a lot more complaints coming out of
than anything that we are doing. It has been mentioned, and I
know some of you Board members have visisted, and I am not sure
if you have been there while we've been operating or not, but
I know most you Board members have dropped by at some point
or other over the proceedings of this. But also, we have had
Town Board members while we have been in operation, we have had
DEC personnel over while we have been in operation, Department
of Agriculture personnel, and also Board of Health, Mr. Klos
called the Board of Health on us at one point before he came
down to the Town here, to have him come over to us and he said
what's the problem, what am I here for. He didn't cite us for
anything. He looked around, I don't see any problem, there
should be no reason for me to having to anything to say about
what you are doing. Of all our twenty (20) years in business
where we have been here, we never had any problems with anybody.
And we have been strictly watched over the years.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I ask you a question at that point.
meant to ask your father.
Page 16
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Sure.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER. There was some hearsay concerning a cesspool
that was connected to the house that was giving off some odor.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: That was a true story.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That was one of the areas that was of
concern, I think, with one of the neighbors who had complained
at one time.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Right. I think Mr. Grigonis was there one
day and I showed him on the east side of my father's housed there
was an old cesspool. The house is a couple of hundred years old,
I'm not sure how old it is, it is very old. There were more
cesspools there than we knew. There was an old clay line, running
from one cesspool to another, which is on the east end of his
house which abuts up to Mr. Klos's property and the other property
next to him, right back where his garden is in the back there.
What was happening is that the tree roots had gotten into the
clay pipe and clogged it up and it was seeping ou~ of the ground
over there, right on the side of his But that had
nothing to do with our business. That was the house cesspool.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I~ did give off an odor though.
CLAUDE CARLSON: Oh yea. We to al~ dug up. In
MR.
had
have
it
fact, you can still see it. This has been about two years ago,
now when that ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: But there is no more odor.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No. It's gone now.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Excuse me, I didn't mean to. That was a
question I was going to ask your father to get back up, but
since you were up there.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: That was a problem at one point, one summer
there and we didn't even know. My father was the only one living
at the house at the time and he has an air-conditioner in his
bedroom, with his window closed all the time on that end of the
house and we didn't even know it. It just happened to be, one
day walking around over by the trees there, we smelled something
and walked over and looked. It was seeping out of the ground
over there. We had to dig it up and we found out what a problem
we had. But that was a house problem, it has nothing to do
with our business what so ever. You asked before, at one point,
pp here about van noises and you wanted to bring everything out
in the open. Since we are bringing everything out in the open,
I can tell you exactly what happened. Mr. Klos threatened me
and called the police on me a couple of times because of my
letting my son's band practice over there. I never let him
practice after dark. After 8:30 9 o'clock at night, at the
very latest.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: This is at your father's house.
Page 17
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
~. CLAUDE CARLSON: No this is in my house and also in the scallop
shop, when we weren't using it, when there was no scallops a
couple of years back. I let them set up their equipment in there
and practice Sometimes. I had to get them out of my cellar.
Because I had too much stuff to be moving around. He made a couple
of threats to me about how I am going to have the cops over there
and I am going to do this and going to do that and I talked to
the Police about it and I said we plan on having a party once a
summer, we let them have a party on my property and set their
band up and play. It is like their big thing for the summer.
Once a year, they see how they improving. So I asked the Police
about it ahead of time. I informed them that I was planning on
having a party and the band would be playing. Because I knew he
was going to complaining. And they said they went over and
talked to him and told him why don't you go somewhere for the
night instead calling us up ten (10) times and complaining about
it. And even still, the very next day this happened, approximately
two (2) years ago, not quite two (2) years ago now, it will be
two (2) summers ago coming up. I stopped at Ted's Auto Body
on the way on my deliveries the next morning, his son Bob is a
good friend of mine. I don't even remember what I'stopped for,
I don't know if I dropped him a few lobsters he asked for or
if I had to see something about the boat, and I don't even re-
member but, he threatened me right there. You know, I had a
friend with me that was going with me on deliveries for a ride,
he just came right out and threatened me that I am going to be
choking you and this and that, you know, you can't get away with
this, you'll see, I will show you. And this is where everything
blew up at that point. But I just wanted to make that point
to you since you asked about it. I wouldn't have brought it up
if you haven't asked, ~o I wanted to let you know what the true
story was. As far as anything else, I have got to say, as I
explained to you) we started our business, actually from me
working on the water and a few friends and it became a necessity
to try to market our products. And it kind of just filled in
that way. We feel, we greatly contribute to the economy of the
Town of Southold. We help a lot of people and we contribute a
lot to the economy through what we are doing.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And you have been there approximately twenty
(20) years?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Approximately twenty (20) years. I don't
know exact date, it is very close to that. And the only thing I
meant to say in conclusion is that our Country was founded on
the idea of Liberty, you know for us to be able to support our-
selves, walk the land and seize-as we saw fit as we so choose,
and I would like to quote somebody that I read here, aback awhile
and I'm not even sure who said it, but I'm taking it from
~omebody's quote that I am greatful that I live in a Country that
not only has a Constitution, but a conscience to which an appeal
can be made. Thank you.
CHAIPdV~N GOEHRINGER: Before you sit down, the conch operations,
starts about when?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Usually 8 o'clock in the morning.
Page 18
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, I mean is it in operation now?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: No it is seasonal. All of our business is
completely seasonal.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: When will that operation start.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Normally conch operation runs from mid-May
until August and then again from October until mid-December.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Thank you sir. Anybody else in the
center? yes Steve. How are you tonight~ Again do you solemnly
swear the information you are about to give us is the truth
to the best of your knowledge?
I Swear.
MR. LATSON: I am Steve Latson. I am a local bayman and everything
everybody said is true is far as I am concerned. I have dealt
with Sandy for a considerable number of years and the place has
always seemed real clean and very unbusy typicattyf you go there
you are one of the few people there~ You have to go and find
somebody if you want to get some money or something. And it is
just a real quite, laid back operation. And the points that Roger
and Pete made about fishing and fishing industry are very importantp.
also because as we know, M-I and M-Il really is the only
provided areas in the Town. And fact is even peopl~ that, and
basically that provides for Marinas. And even marinas now, if
you talk to Bill Lieb!ein~ or somebody will tell you somebody
couldn't start a marina now a dav~ , you just wouldn't make
the money for the amount of money for the residential values of
the properties. So I think in the Town we really do have a
major problem that needs to be addressed long term as far as
zoning on the water to try to provide some places for fishing
access and things like that, if we got rid of the brown tide.
That is another aspect. That is about it. I think everybody said
what needs to be said. Thanks.
Tape turned over.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Flynn. Again raising your right hand,
sir, do you solemnly swear the information you. are about to give
us is the truth to the best of your knowledge.
MR. FLYNN: I certainly do.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir.
MR. FLYNN: My nsme is F.M. Flynn. I am a resident of Southold
and I have been engaged in matters similar to this over an extended
period of time and I have rarely encountered a specious and cyn-
ical application. Nowt in the course of the evening, we have
heard many extraneous comments about the state of the seafood
industry, which may very well be true, particularly the shellfish
industry~ the fact that it is water dependent, which implies
Page 19
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. FLYNN (con't.): of course, water frontage, we have heard
rousing endorsemenns of the applicant's character. But we
haven't discussed the essential question here. This is an illegal,
nonconforming operation and I hear that it has been conducted
for twenty (20) years. Now my research of the Town's records
indicates that this property was acquired in 1980 and the initial
stage of what is shown on the assessment records, as a garage
was built in 1980 and expanded twice since then. So really what
you gentlemen are faced with ms a questzon of an illegal operation
which has flouted the law for at least twelve (12) years for
which complaints were filed and on those complaints the Town took
no action what-so-ever. These complaints are a matter of record
at various Town agencies and on the Police blotter of the Town
of Southold. Now, the essential confusion that seems to be,
seem to attempt to be in here, is confusion between agriculture
and aquaculture. So if you willindulge me, I wilt read from the
Southold Town Code. In which it defines agriculture as the~3
production, keeping, or maintenance for sale, lease or personal
use of plants and animals useful to man including, but not
limited to forages and sod crops, grains and seed crops, dairy
animals and dairy products, poultry and poultry products, live
stock including beef cattle, sheep, swine, horses, ponys, mules
or goats, or any mutation of hybrids thereof. Including the
breeding and grazing of any and all such animals, bees and aviary
products~ fur_ animals, fruits of all kinds, including, grapes,
nuts and berries, vegetables, floral, ornamental and greenhouse
products or lands devoted to a soil conservation or forestry
management program. That is lQ.0-13 of the Town Code. Now there
is no question that this defi~ition has no relationship what-
so-ever to aquaculture. As a'matter of fact, were Latin is
widely taught today, as when I was a boy, we could all go home
early. Agriculture comes from Ata and cultura, which means
cultivation of the field. Aquaculture obviously is the cultivation
of the water and incidently aqua generaly refers to fresh water,
rather than salt water. Now, there is no defination in the
Town Code of aquaculture. However, the State of New York defines
aquaculture as shall mean the cultivation and harvesting of
products that are naturally are produced in the marine environment
including shellfish, crustaseans, and seaweed and in the install-
ation of cribs, racks, and in water structures for cultivating
such products. But shall not mean the construction of any
building or fill or dredging or the construction of any water
regulated structures. Now it means that cultivation and har-
vesting and not the processing, which is the important issue here.
The other related definations which I will submit to, again
from the Town Code and I won't read them at length, but refers
to agricultural production and there again there is no relation
what-so-ever to aquaculture and crop is also defined amoung
t/aese definitions. So, the Webster's Unabridged Dictionary refers
to aquaculture as a variant of aquaculture and that is to act
the act of cultivating the natural produce of water, the raising
or fattening of fish in enclosed parcels or hydroponics. Again
it is the act of cultivating, the act of tilling, it is the act
raising products, not processing them. And hydroponics which is
distinct phase of aquaculture is the art or science of growing
plants in water containing all the nutrient elements. This may
Page 20
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. FLYNN (con'%.) : be the area from which the confusion,or
the ~urported confusion between aquaculture and agriculture arises.
Now, if ~nere is none, if there is no relationship, but provable
relationship between aquaculture and agriculture, obviously there
is no basis to this application what-so-ever. But let us go on.
from that point. I have some notes here to which I will refer
and try to cut it a little bit shorter. Now, as I understand
this application as it is submitted here, the applicant wants
a shellfish distribution business. Now this is the same application,
3975 which has been pending, to my knowledge, for at least a
year and a half. I think we had hearings back in June of 1990,
if I remember correctly about this. And that application called
for the processing, storage, retail, sale of fish products~ the
freezing of fish products, etc, etc. Now~ each time this appli-
cation comes up, it is altered and amended to appear more
innocous, but the fact of the matter is, what I am saying is
easily check, that is the what is intended in this application
3975. Now what is really sought here and is such a common
occurrence in this Town, is a zoning change in the guise of a
variance. Now, as you gentlemen know, a variance is granted based
on practical difficulties or financial hardship. You can hardly
complain that there are practical difficulties here, there are
none for the purpose for which the property is zoned and were
there any, it would be self-created. Now with respect to hard-
ship, the burden of proof is on the applicant. And if you ~
recallf in the case of Greenport Commons, I stood here and insisted
that for you to grant a variance based on hardship, there has to
be dollars and cents proof that the property is vLrtually
worthless as zoned. Now were you to research the background of
this property, it was purchased in 1980, I believe, for an
approximate price, as indicated on the deed, of $40,000.00
(forty thousand dollars). And at that time, in the mortgage,
it was stated that the property was only improved by a residence.
So all this business activity has taken place since 1980. Now
to prove that property is worthless as zoned, I defy anybody
to submit any evidence to that effect. One (1) acre of vacant
land is obviously worth more than $40,000.00f even in todays
market and improved by a substantial residence, any appraiser
is certainly going to come up with a substantial figure. Now
variances are granted in the spirit of the chapter, at least
according to the Town Code. And the spirit of zoning of which
variances would be based, an alteration of the zoning, is reflected
in the comprehensive plan, which the Town Board has produced.
And zoning is actually the effectuation of that plan. Now, the
uses proposed in the original application are only permitted
in M-II zoning
Page 21 ~
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
~4R. FLYNN (CON'T.): for are we respected to warehouse opera-
tions and incidently, we are not talking about a warehouse
operation, we are talking about processing. If you do anything
other than take in a finished product and redistribute it, it is
not a warehousing operation, it's a business operation and you
are processing something. And beyond that, if I recall, and I
think the reference was made to 100-31 A (2) in the applica-
tion, my interpretation of that is that you can only process
materials generated on the property. Not bringing in products
from Outside, processing them, and reshipping them. This is an
entirely different question. Now the question is the expansion
of this business. I calculated from the assessment record, that
this original so-called garage was built in 1980 and it was added
to twice subsequent to that and it currently, apparently some-
Where around 2330 square feet of ground area and from my obser-
vations it is two [2) stories high. Now in the course of
developing this property, and I think reference was to this, the
Building InSpector was there three (3) times. Now initially, he
may have taken it as a garage, the first stage of it,'but the
second and third stages obviously there was a business being
conducted on the property. The same may be said of the Assessor
initially he took it as a garage, tf he did his job, and I was
an Assessor in the long diStance past, you come back and you
check and if there is anything wrong with the operation
according to ~he code, you report it to the relevant depart-
ments of the Town or the municipality. Now, apparently none of
this was done. So my advice to the owners of adjouning prop-
erties is that this is properly a matter for the Attorney
General. This Town has refused to enforce its code, there have
been complaint after complaints submitted about this property,
there have been Policemen whom I understand have signed the
blotter to the effect that there were noctious odors eminating
from this proPerty, and for the Town to permit this operation to
continue in my opinion constitues mal, mis and nonfeasances on
the part of Town officials and should be reported to the District
Attorney for his attention. Further, I would recommend to the
owners of the abutting, incidently Qe have had extranious com-
ments here about attempting to turn us aside from the main issue
here, which is a questions whether this is legal business or
whether it can be made a legal business, about noise eminating
from the property. This is an attempt to gain some sort of sym-
Pathy, I don't know what is the point, but nothing could be more
extranious to the basic issue here. Now, my advice for what it
is worth to the owners of the property who have been patiently
waiting for the Town to do what it should do under the law, would
be to consider retaining an attorney to investigate the question
of harassment. You folks are or should be familiar with the
bun~le of rights that a property owner has and among them, is the
peaceful and quite enjoyment of his property. If this is dis-
t~rbed, he is essentially being harassed. And finally, I would
say that were this Board to permit this operation to continue by
reason of granting a variance. I would recommend to the abutting
owners or an~od~ else involved in this thing, tha~ they file an
Page 22
PUBLIC HEARING--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. FLYNN (con't.): action for consequential damage against ,,
the Town for having created damage and the evaluation of their
property by reason of the action taken by the Town. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Claude I have to ask you a question
anyway
Claude, would you come up and use the mike.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Can I say a couple of things before I
forget. Well, he said so many things, I would like to refute
a few of them.
CHAiP~L~N GOEHRINGER: Before you say that. I just want to
mention one thing to Mr. Flynn~ Mr. Flynn this is not a variance,
this is an interpretation, okay. We are not 'here dealing with a
variance. This is an interpretation.
MR. FLYI~N: If you have two (2) phases to this thing, they are
asking for a right to conduct a business on the property. First
you have the definition, then you have the questions of whether
they conduct a business under the specified section of the Code.
To conduct that business they require a variance, a use variance.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is the second phase, but i Will get
back to you on that. Go ahead.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: First of all, he said so much, I couldn't
keep up with it and there are a few things I wanted to get back /-
to. But one of them he mentioned something about retail that we
applied for retail. For retail sales. We have never
use
as
done any retail sales, and we don't intend to and we never asked
for it. He is standing up there saying stuff that is untrue and
I just want to make sure we get the record clear. I think if
you look-back through our applications whatever papers we have on file,
you will find nothing to do with any retail of any kind in
the past or the future. Another point brought up is he is
standing there under oath telling you that the Police have some-
thing on their Police blotter, claiming that they were over
there and there were noxious' odors there. I was there when the
Police came~ and there was no problem at all. I_n fact, two (2)
police cars came at the same time I arrived back from the dump
and we had steamer going there, with the steam coming out and
they were standing ten (10) feet away from the barn and so no
problem what-so-ever, and we got a copy of their police report
because we wanted to know for ourselves what was said afterwards
and there was nothing like that. He is telling your he is claim-
ing he is under oath, but he doesn't have any proof of what-so-
ever. And I think that this was brought up at our earlier hear-
ing, but I would like to go on record as bringing it up again, I
was informed in the beginning of this procedure way back, that
my understanding of this, and correct me if I am wrong, but ou
Town Code was adopted out of Town Code from upstate New York
town, it was drawn up for a Town in upstate New York. And of
course there were no provisions put in for salt water businesses,
and fishing, and anything related to it because they had nothing
up there. I think the only way something would have been put into
the code, if something else would have come up over the years before
now that would have brought to somebody's attention to do something
about it. Am I right about that.
Page 23 ....
Public Hearing--Carlson
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. I just wanted to. The consulting firm of
Raymond Parrish Pine are from (upstate) NY, that is the only thing,
if there was some absence mn the new Code, it would have been not
addressed during the production of the Code, it wasn't necessarily
because mt was an upstate firm. Okay.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Okay, i understaned but I just wanted to bring
the pomnt up that it was, one way or another, it could have been.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I just want to mention two (2) things for both
yourself and for Mr. Flynn and I understand Mr. Flynn is a little
agitated that what you said concerning this I am not, I find these
statements to be counter productive to this specific hearing, okay,
and not the emulation of smell or noise, whatever the case may be,
because we will go down again and check this out prior to the conclu-
sion of this hearing and that is the reason why I asked you when ~he
conch operation started. Okay. It doesn't necessarily mean also
that we are continueing this hearing until May until you get in full
fledged operation of that. My question to you is this, you are talking
about being mn business for twenty (20) years, how long has your
father rented the property from the Terry Estate prior to the purchase
of the property from the Terry Estate.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Approx. eight (8) years. So we have been there
twenty (20) years, but he only bought it twelve (12) years ago.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Eight (8) years before that he rented the prop-
erty for a permod of eight or ten (8 or 10) years from the Terry
Estate.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: About eight (8) years. What we told you was
correct. We didn't own it for the whole time.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER; I have a gentleman sitting on this Board that
ms telling me that at the inception of the either purchase or the
lease of this property, that there was a scallop shop on that prop-
erty. Is that true?
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: I'm not certain, I couldn'T answer that honestly.
We pu~ new benches in there.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: My mother used to go down there and buy scallops.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: Yea, well the shop wasn't used as a garage, mt
was the scallop shop now to my knowledge, it wasn't used as a garage.
It was built as a garage originally, but anytime since we have been
in the twenty (20) years it was never sued as a garage. We used it as a
scallop shop as soon as my father rented the place.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Yea, but the shop had been there long before tha~.
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: I'm not sure about that because when my father
started there, I wan't li~ing ther with him at the time.
Page 24
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAI~4AN GOEHRINGER: Okay, we will ask your father that
question° But we thank you Claude. Mr. Flynn.
MR. FLi~fN: As to the question of retail sales on the property,
I relied on my recollection of the orginal application which does
mention sales from the property° I am not quite sure as to
whether it specifically mentioned retail or not. However, there
were sales mentioned. The more recent statement with respect to
the existance of a improvement, some sort of shop on the
property, I think I have even submitted, but if I haven't sub-
mitted to the Board, I will submit a copy of the mortgage which
says that the property was only improved by a residence. Now
there was one other question here, actually it escapes my mind,
but, oh yes, my integrity was challenged here. Now if I am re-
citing something but I was told directly by Mr. Klos that he has
copies of the reports submitted by the Police, or the reports
filed by the Police Department after visiting his property, but
during the period of fish processing and at that time there were
noxious odors permeating, the area, eminating from this
property and I scarcely think that this Board at this late date
is out to find any credible evidence at to whether such odors
exist or not when the applicant prepared to cover up any such
type of emission. Thank you.
CHAI~4AN GOEHRINGER: Just before you sit down, I want to
mention something to you sir. I have a copy of the application
in front of me and the reason for the appeal as an amended app-
lication to Appeal ~ 3975 for an interpretation, We can copy
this for you and give this to you, this is an interpretation,
this is not necessarily a variance, just so you are aware of it.
MR. FLYNN: May I ask you a interpretation of what of definition
of agriculture and aquaculture?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I can't read it in front of you at this, I
would be very happy to give you a copy of it and you can digest
it.
MR. FLYI~N: But may I ask you a direct question. Based upon
this interpretation, is not a variance sought here.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I would say in the near, you want to
answer it.
MR. GOGGINS: It is simply an interpretation. I didn't ask for
a variance, I asked for a interpretation. If he had read the
papers correctly, he wouldn't have gone on for so long. And if
Mr. Flynn wants to represent people, he should do it a~curately
and if they want to testify, they should testify, he shouldn't
testify for them. If they smelled obnoxious odors or offensive
odors, then they should testify~ not Mr. Flynn.
MR. FLYNN: I am not representing anybody other than myself as
a citizen and resident of the Town of Southold. As far as my
Page 25
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
[nterpretation of what I received in the mail, I think I read
resonably well, although my eyeszght isn't as good as it was,
it says for approval of a wholesale shellfish distribution
business, that is the primary point of the application, but the
caring that aquaculture use falls within the purview of
agricultural use.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Again, the first line, and please I am
no~ discrediting your reading ability, I assure you, this appeal
is an interpretation resulting from the Notice of Disapproval,
okay,so he is asking for any establishment, any construction, any
further variances that would be required would not necessarily
be the nature of this hearing. Just so you are aware of that.
MR. FLYNN: Just let me ask one further question, if I may.
Can you decide the question of the variance on this property
without holding future public hearings.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Absolutely not. Let us see, where does
that leave us. I would say, the o~ly question I have is the same
question that goes back throughout the evening and that is the
issue of comparing this operation to that of the operation of the
farmer and that is basically what I am asking Mr. Goggins to come
with. And I would sincerely appreciate, although I know that
· this is going to upset you Mr. Flynn, I would sincerely like to
see that, okay in a presentation, not a lengthly presentation,
one that can be done in 15 minutes and out, completed so that we
can then finally put to rest that particular issue, okay. And
before you discuss this, I do not feel it necessary, and if you
people are incorrect, I would be very happy to stand corrected
at this point that Mr. Grigonis',s statement that he felt that
the Terry property which is the nature of this hearing tonight
for an interpretation, was a scallop shop prior to Mr. Carlson
taking title or in fact being a tenant on the property. And if
you want me to swear him in, I would be very happy to, then he
can't vot~ on it. But I have no problems with that. In this
particular case he has told us that. Mr. Grigonis has in the
past, as in the case of Mr. Doyen who has been on this Board as
you know as of January of this year, some thirty-five (35) years.
And have been involved in the inception of zoning of this town,
and have far more wisdom than I will ever have and any of us
sitting up here, and I am not discrediting my two (2) colleagues
to the right of me, to the left of you. It is just my opinion.
I am making a general statement.
MR. FLYNN: I just wanted to submit this and again there seems
to be a little bit of a contretemps, the mortgage on this prop-
perty would in my opinion, constitute a fraudulent document, if
what Mr. Grigonis, depending upon his recollection is correct,
then the mortgage is fraudulent because
it ~tates that the property is improved by a one-family house.
Page 26
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
~HA~IAIq GOEHRINGER: Mr. Carlson is there something either one
of you would like to answer back there. Sandy.
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: Yes. There was a lean-to there that I
ripped apart that had some kind of bench in it, it might had been
a scallop shop, as Charlie says. I don't know if it was a
scallop shop, I am not familar with the property back then. But
it very well could have been. There were many of them~ there
were hundreds of them in Southold, New Suffolk, and Greenport at
that time.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mr. Flynn.
MR. FLYNN: Again, as these things come up they have to be
countered while they are fresh. If this was a nonconforming
use, eliminating that shed~ eliminated the non conforming use.
CHAI~Z~AN GOEHR!NGER: Charlie indicated to us that is was in
the garage, Mr. Flynn.
MR. FLYNN: Which garage?
CHAIPA~AN GOEHRINGER: The orginal garage that has been added
on to three times~ or whatever that structure is now.
I~R. FLYNN: Sir, the Building Department records indicate that
an initial garage was built in 1980.
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: No that is incorrect.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Would you allow him to speak before you
Mr. Flynn. Go ahead Mr. Carlson°
MR.ARTHUR CARLSON: The original barn that you see by the
site plan which you all have copies of shows the old barn with
two doors, low overhead, that is where the scallop shed is. And
that is probably where is was before, just like it was twelve
years back. And there was another structure next to that that
we added on to in about five, six (5, 6) years ago.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: While I have you up, again I am not
trying to belabor this topic, I am only trying to understand
this process here. Was that garage on the property twenty (20)
years ago when you started using this property, living on this
property. That garage was there, that is the nature of the
scallop shop as it exists today and that garage has only been
altered or added on to, once. I have one other question, I
can'~ remember at this time, I will get back to you in just a
second.
Page 27
PUBLIC HEARING ~ ~ ~
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. CLAUDE CARLSON: I want to clarity the evidence, tn it was
the big building, he called it two stories, but it is one story
it is high, we did that for a purpose. That has never been
added to. It is an orginal building for the building with a
building permit and since then in addition to the existing
garage, that we call it, is the scallop shop.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mrs. Flynn, again Mrs. Flynn, with your
right hand please that the information yo~ are about to give us
is the most honest to the best of your ability.
MRS. FLY~: I am most certainly not a fisherman and I
most certainly not a farmer, although I do come from the North
Sea Coast, I was born there and grew up on the North Sea Coast
and I was many years at sea and I come from a family, at least
from one side of the family, from the side of long seafaring
people. Also the country I am coming from or the part of the
Country that I am coming from have the most richest farm land in
my Country. And there is something which came up here about the
difference between farm products
and fish products and processing it. Well storing potatoes and
storing fish or processing fish is certainly more different. I
can, even the smell from if you would cook potatoes or cook fish
or clam, there is more certainly a different and it can smell
and it does smell, and I think there is no one in this room who
could say any different. And I think it is almost ridiculous
to say there is no smell from cooking fish or clams or steaming
them. Anybody who cooks can smell that in the kitchen.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is not necessarily, I
understand your
position there, but that is not necessarily what I am looking
for. I am looking for ....
MRS. FLYNN: Yea, you are looking for a difference, if the
farmers are selling their products to the wholesaler, or if he is
only a wholesaler. Now he is processing, he is processing and
steaming and then selling. He is not taking the fish from the
sea and selling the fish, he is taking the fish or from the
baymen, he is processing it and steaming it, it is processing
it, it is one part of one step of processing and taking it out
of the shell is the second step. And then he is passing it on
to a wholesaler or a restaurant or a fish store. So he is
processing. The farmer is not processing and even if he is he
is cutting up some of the leaf of his cauliflower or if he is
washing his potatoes and he is packing it. That is his own
product.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And it is not that I don't believe you,
okay, it is just that I haven't established that in my own mind
at this point and I haven't done that because there are other
processes that the farmer goes through prior to actual taking of
that potato and placing it in a bag and putting it on the open
market when it is not sold in bulk. And that is what I want Mr.
Goggins to present here so I can keep that in.my mind as being
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (CON'T): Operation A and Operation B. You
understand that? In no way am I discrediting your statement
Page 28
?UBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
I am just telling you there is a form of processing that the
farmer does. Okay. There is certainly a form of processing
that these gentlemen have told us that they do. And I don~t
want you to .....
MRS. FLYNN: But we are talking about processing the product
itself.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: But I don't want you to limit it only to
the conches. Okay, because they have another operation, which
two other fish related activities are dealt with there.
MRS. FLYNN: Besides which they are doing it in a residential
zoning and while I am under oath, as you know, I am a real
estate broker and I am a graduate of the real estate institute
and I am in my business for twenty-two (22) years and I am asso-
ciated with but I can tell you
Miss Larson made a statement if you would close him up, you will
break him. Well if you leave him in business, you will break
the surrounding people. Because it will devaluate their prop-
erty tremendously. There are many, many homes for sale and it
is a hard time for everybody, but just, just, if you get preci-
dent with this case, and you give him the permit, I as a broker
would have to tell the next person coming in here, look I can
sell your house here, but I don't know if maybe in two (2) years
somebody is going to buy the house next door to you and start to
process some clams. Because he can say he can do it
because you have given a variance to somebody else, owning pre-
viously.
CHAItlMAN GOEHRINGER: But remember, we are not doing that. We
are just trying to establish a long term interpretation that has
been hanging around for a long time and this goes way back,
even before the home occupations law. But I thank you for your
time, but after the presentation, assuming I get the presentation
I am looking for, then we are going to draw a parallel between
the two and see, if we can understand exactly what the two (2)
of them do. If you just bear with us. It is not going to be
done tonight, okay, it is not going to be done tonight. Is
that alright with you.
MRS. FLYNN: Very good. I will here the next time.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: OkaY, Mr. Carlson. We are wrapping ~his
up here
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: It is hard for me to remember everything
Mr. Goehringer, but when I first moved there, early 1970's, we
from Mrs. Terry. There was a bench in that old barn,
we qail it a garage, you can call it whatever you want to
Page .29
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3./25/92
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON (CON't):you want to call it. And we
did use that opening scallops, as I remember that. ! had
forgotten that. We did use that for opening scallops, I found
it to be too small and nonconforming with what the DEC wanted so
I had to make it'larger and put fiberglass on it and fix the
floors.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I ask you a question, What was the
nature of not purchasing the property in the beginning. Was it
financially the reason, or was the estate not settled, or was
the property not subdivided. What was the reason?
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: The estate wasn't settled.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Or else you would have purchased it.
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: It was not for sale.
CHAIP1MAN GOEHRINGER: It was not for sale. You were very
simply a tenant of the Terry Estate until such time that the
property became available for sale. Is that correct?
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: Yes.
CMAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So. I am going to ask Mr. Goggins, if
he can to draw me a parallel between the two. I ask you to
bring a'farmer in here. Okay. That is what you are going to
do. Okay, we will tell you when we will reconvence this hearing
and it will be in a timely fashion and I will get back to you
and I offer that gentlemen as a resolution to recess this
without a date, the date will be within thirty (30) days of this
particular date or thereabouts. And we thank everybody for
their courtesy and we will make a determination. In the
interim, we will make some visits over at the site, but I am not
guaranteeing that because the operation is not running at full
force at this point that we are going to be able to see exactly
what we want to see. Yes.. I offer as a resolution~ We will
readvertise so everybody is aware of it. I need a second.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: Second.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: All in favor. Aye. Questions.
Somebody over here. Nancy you have a question.
MS. NANCY SCHWASTIWICZ: Well I just know the farmers use
chemicals, because my family is farming.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well that was what I said, in the
processing of, when a potato is put in the barn, the potato is
gassed, or else the potato grows in its entity. So there is a
-form of processing and that is what I am trying to understand.
through this process. I don't want anybody to leave here with
the idea you have not presented the information that we are try-
ing to understand. Yes.
Page 30
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. FLYNN: I have one final comment.
CHAIRM~N GOEHRINGER: You can't, we closed the hearing.
MR. FLYA~N: This may be the key to the whole thing. You talk
about ~he ~farmer and this operation as being really collateral
operations. A farmer in accordance with the Town Code,
processes products grown on his own property. This process
is produced on the property. Everything is
brought in and processed and shipped out again. So there is a
distinct difference between the two operations.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Interestingly enough this is off, this
is past the record, this is not where we are talking, we are
brainstorming at this point. That is absolutely true, Mr. Flynn
if are talking that one single farmer that owns his property
that does that operation on it. But most of the farmers today
rent the property, the barns are off-site of the property and it
is impossible to ever ali~r that situation.
~,~. FLY~: Then I submit that very many of these people to
whom you refer are operating illegally and it's damn near
timethat this situation is straightened out in Town.
MR. ARTHUR CARLSON: Did you ever try to catch a dlam or
lobster on the ground. Most of us have to go into the water to
find them.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sir, remember this is, we are not
taking testimony here. [tape changed).
MR. TED KLOS: I iive right next to Carlson's property there.
In the summer, I got to keep all the windows closed all summer
long, I can't keep them windows open. My wife can't hang
clothes out there on account of the odor. When they say they
make no stink there, that is a whole different story.
CHAIrmAN GOEHRINGE: Thank you. We thank you all for coming
in and we will readvertise this hearing, we will convene it and
we will make a decision and thank you all again for your
courtesy. Have a good evening, safe trip home.
b ~..~-~_.
(Transcribed by tapes recorded 3/25/92)
(
Page 31
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
appeal 9 4090
Applicant (s): Mr. & Mrs. H. Lloyd Kanev
Location of Property: 355 Rosenburgh Road (Private Rd. ~3)
East Marion, NY
County Tax Map~: 1000-21-01-27.1 (Inclusive of Lot ~s 11,
13.3, 27, 29 & 30)
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:38 p.m. and read the
Notice of Hearing and the application for the record.
OHAIP/~3LN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a floor plan and a copy
of a sketch of a site plan indicating the approximate dis-
tance from the irregular lip of this particular bluff and its
closest point is approx, fifty-eight (58) feet, even thouah the
house, a~ its closest point as it exists is approx, twenty-six
(26) feet and I have a copy oi the Suffolk County Tax Map
indicating this and surrounding properties in the area. Mr.
Bailey would you like to be heard?
MR. ROBERT BAYLEY: Yes, well I think the evidence speaks
pretty clearly for itself. The thing that is peculiar about
this situation, is that the house does not have any bedrooms and
when the owners bought the house, they bought it knowing that it
didn't have any bedrooms and clearly they would like ~o have bed-
rooms, but they don't want ~o put the bedrooms in the existing
house, because the interior is very special. And it really is
very much like a barn inside or a log cabin. And it has one big
open space, such as a mezzanine, and the me anine isn't big
enough ~or a bedroom. The ground floor is the living space,
kitchen and two small bathrooms, so with that fact facing us,
thatmeans the architect and the owner, thought the only way to
go was to put the bedrooms in an addition outside the original so
that is why the house has an addition Qutside the footprint of
the house and that is why it is much a separate building and it
is back as far as reasonable and still make it an efficient
house.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: May I ask the approximate size of the
square footage of the addition.
FIR. ROBERT BAYLEY: I think that the addition is about,
including the length, that is the connection to the house, about
sixteen hundred (1600) square feet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Will there be a full basement placed
underneath there.
MR. ROBERT BAYLEY: There will be a full basement and it would
be two (2) stories, as you can see from the plan. The first floor
would be one (1) bedroom, bathroom, and service closet area~.
And then the second floor would be a second bedroom. So that
there would be two (2) bedroom addition.
Page 32
PUBLIC HEARING
Soutnold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAItlMAN GOEHRINGER: Are there any other governmental
agencies that are involved in this thing. Has the DEC given you
a waiver?
MR. BAYLEY: The DEC is involved inasmuch as they could have
jurisdiction, but they don't have jurisdiction, they don't have
jurisidiction in this case I am told by Victor Lessard because
we're fifty (50) feet above sea level or mean sea level, so we
don't have, we don't fall within their area. The Town Trustees,
I have sent a letter to them, I haven't heard from yet. I did
speak to John Bredemeyer and he did indicate that, in his
opinion, they would not take jurisdiction, but I haven't had a
written response yet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And how does this lie on that new
Coastal Zone Management Act?
Mit. BAYLEY: I checked to see if that was affected, and it was
not~ In fact~ John Bredemeyer checked that out with me.
CHAIRMAN GOER-RINGER: Okay, so that basically the buck stops
here, more than likely with this Board with reference to the
particular area of the Code 239 ....
MR. BAYLEY: I would say so, as far as I know there isn't any
other governmental body that would review this°
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The reason why I asked that question, is
because if there is any imposition by this Board of haybales
oranything during construction, we would want to impose that, if
no other agencies are going to be involved in this thing°
MR~ BAYLEY: I understand, that is reasonable.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, so we will deal with that aspect
of it and we will see what develops through the hearing. We
thank you for your completeness of the file, and we will see what
develops. And I know you are looking for a decision as quickly
as possible. And we will do the best we possibly can for you~
Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this
application? Anybody who would like to speak against this appli-
cation? Any questions from Board Members? Bob?
MEMBER VILLA: Well yes, I have one (1) question. It is
possible to skew that building around a little bit so that you
get a little further back from the bluff° So no matter how you
situate it, you are still going to have your beautiful views.
MR. BAYLEY: Well, frankly, technically it is possible sure.
We ~ould take the new addition and we could turn it. But I
don't think it is good architecture. I can't really say that
there is any technical reason for not doing that. I just don't
think it would look good. In fact, I brought a model with ~e
Page 33
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/95
if I may, I'll ....
CHAIRMAN GOEPIRINGER: Sure, we would love to see it.
MR. BAYLEY: I use this over to help show some light. I did
this to investigate the merits of. Let me see if I can. So
what we are looking at. This is the existing house, this is the
existing garage and one drives in from where you are seeing, and
the front door is here. This is the addition, so the cliff is
here where I am standing. I am in the water. The addition is
here and I just don't think it is good to take this, it is nou
right, it just doesn't work as well architecturally. These are
very strong, simple elements architecturally, and I just think
it is better. I think it will look more like it belongs as one
entity. And I think if there are any neighbors there, I don't
know if there are any neighbors in the audience, but I think if
anybody else viewed this, they would say it looks more like it
was built au one time perhaps, or it was built with good
harmony. $o this shape is an echo of the other shapes and they
are on the same axis really for a, mainly for the purpose of
having this look like it was one entity and it was designed at
one time with one thought in mind.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRiNGER: Thank you sir. Any other questions in
the audience? Board Member? Having no further quesuions, i
make a motion closing the hearing, reserving decision until
later.
End of hearing.
(Transcribed by tapes recorded on
March 25, 1992)
Page 34
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
Appeal ~ 4086
Applicant(s): Anthony and Helen Coutsouros
Location of Property: 1125 Tucker Lane (westerly side of)
Southold, NY
County Tax Map No.: 1000-59-10-12
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:45 p.m. and read the
Notice of Hearing and the application for the record.
CHAIrmAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey produced by
Robert VanTuyl and is just that, a copy, dated October 21, 1991
indicating an exactly half-acre lot of 100 x 200° And I have a
copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and
surrounding properties and your are welcomed to use the mike~
sir, just state your name for the record.
DEMETRIOS HALIKIAS: I'm the attorney for Mr. & Mrs.
Coutsouros who are purchasing the property. Basically what we
want to do is make sure that after we purchase the property that
sometime in the future, that they will have no trouble being
able to build a small house there for their retirement. Of
courser as the the application says based upon using any of th~,
obtaining all the permits that are necessary at that time.
CHAIRPLAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Was this piece at any %ime
to your knowledge, contiguous to any piece that is in that area?
MR. HALIKIAS: No. We, be a single and separate search show
that it had been held in single and separate ownership for about
twenty-five (25) years by the current owner, Mrs. Swawalik, with
her husband. She is a widow, she lives in New Jersey and she
has no use of the property at this time and she is in favor of
selling~it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER~ I thank you sir. Is there anybody else
who like to speak in favor of this application? Anybody like to
speak against this application? Seeing no hands, this is a
proformer act gentlemen , I will make a motion granting it as
applied for.
MESIBER DINIZIO: Second.
End of hearing.
(Transcribed by tapes recorded on March 25, 1992.)
Page 35
PUBLIC HEAI~ING
gouthold ZBA 3/25/92
Appeal a4092
Applicant[s): William C. Goodale [Owner) and Richard Goodale
(Tenant)
Location of Property: 7655 Main Road, Laurel, NY
County Tax Map No.: 1000-122-06-30.1
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:50 pm. and read the
Notice of Hearing and appplication for the record.
CHAIrmAN GOEHRINGER: I have a survey prepared by Garrett
Strang, Architect indicating this particular parcel, for the
people in the audience it is the parcel just west of the Suffolk
Times/News Review building in Mattituck. And I have a copy of
the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding prop-
erties in the area. Mr. McLaughlin or Mr. Strang.
MR. MC LAUGHLIN: Good evening. I am Kevin McLaughlin and I
am appearing on behalf of the applicants, the Goodales.
Basically, this property is located on the the northerly side of
Route 25 in Laurel. It is in the "B" General Business Zone and
its size is approx. 36,000 sq.ft. On the property are two (2)
nonconforming residential uses. And the area variance we are
seeking before the Board this evening basically we are looking
hopefully phase out one of those single family residences. The
rear building, and have the front building used on the first
floor for office, for the used car sales in conjunction with new
car sales and the second floor of that building to be used as a
residence, at least initially for Richard Goodale, who would be
the opearuor of the car sales or rental business. As I
indicated, you presently have two (2) nonconforming uses on the
property on the "B" Zone. What we would be requesting is to
substitute one of the nonconforming uses for a conforming use in
conjunction with our application for the Special Exception. So,
in fact, what we would end up with, is exactly the same number
of uses on the property that being two (2). One of which would
now be conforming and the other one would be a prior nonconform-
ing use. As we went through on the last time when we were here,
the neighborhood certainly is not going to be affected. You are
going to have the same structures on the parcel that are
presently existing. That general area is basically commercial
in nature. It has offices, it has retail space, and it has
several, in fact, automotive type uses out there, body shops,
car washes and things like that, We also, at the last hearing,
handed up a petition to the Board and I think you can find that
in the file on that, signed by a great number of the neighboring
owners of parcels, and people that are using the neighbor
parcels. And I don't believe that there is any objection to the
proposed use of the property as a new and used vehicle sales.
So as far as the area variance is concerned, we're basically
seeking to continue to use the front building in a manner that I
indicated and the back building, we have a tenant, who is an
Page 36
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. McLAUGHLIN (CON'T): elderly gentlemen, who spends renting
that baCk building as his residence for twenty-five, thirty (25,
30) years and what our request or suggestion to this Board is
that perhaps if that use could continue until such time as that
tenant no longer rents those premises. That might be an
effective way to phase out that nonconforming use and still
allow us to have two (2) uses on the property.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The two (2) uses being the automobile
sales and the rental or the nonconforming or the office and the
mixed use of the office and the residence.
MR. McLAUGHL!N: In the same front building.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In the same front building.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: Correct.
CHAIRFLIN GOEHRINGER: Alright. We will see if anything
develops throughout this aspect of the hearing and I will open
the hearing for the Special Exception and we will deal with
those particular issues, if that is alright with you as not to
muddle the two (2) of them. Thank you sir. Is there anybody
else who would like to speak in favor of this application? This
is again William C. Goodale, owner, Richard Goodale as tenant.
We are dealing with the variance aspect of this particular
application. Seeing no hands either pro or con I will ask the
Board if they have any specific questions of either the
architect or of the attorney. I will then...We will hold the
closing of this one in abeyance until we go into the Special
Exception aspect of the second portion of_it.
Appeal ~ 4093SE
Applicant(s): William C. Goodale (Owner)
Location of Property: 7655 Main Road, Laurel
County Tax Map No.: 1000-122-06-30.1
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:58 pm. and read the
Notice of Hearing and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a site plan that I had in the'
other, except that we are now dealing with a special permit
aspect as different than the variance aspect. And I have the
same Suffolk County Tax Map, we are talking about the same
parcel but a different situation. Mr. McLaughlin I will ask you
if you have anything to add to the nature of this hearing.
MR.~McLAUGHLIN: Yes. Basically, this Special Exception appli-
cation is pursuant to Section 100-101 B 12 of the Code. And we
are asking for a special use permit to allow the sale and lease
Page 37
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. McLAUGHLIN ~con't.): of used cars in conjunction with the
sale and/or lease of new vehicles. We have submitted to the
Board, and there should be a copy in your file, at least the
front page of an electric vehicle dealership agreement that my
client has gone through the preliminary negotiations and will be
able to obtain, assuming that we get the Special Exception. So
that there would be the sale of new electric vehicles and the
sale of used vehicles in connection with that. Basically, if we
go down through the provisions of that section of the Code it
does specifically talk about new and used motor vehicle lots,
vehicle sales and rentals as being a Special Exception use. And
then it goes on and lists several factors that must be complied
with. The first talks about entrance and exit driveways and I
%hink by viewing the revised site plan it shows that we are in
compliance with that. Subdivision B talks about any used
vehicles sales must in con3unction with new vehicle sales and we
will be doing that. Subdivision or subsection C talks about
vehicle lifts and dismantled automobiles and things like that.
the only thing that is really applicable to our particular use
would be supplies perhaps, which would be stored within the
building. We would no~ have lifts, we would not be w~rking on
the cars, they would solely be there for sale. No servicing
would take place on the lot, which also takes care of "D". It
is really not going to apply to our siuuation, because we won't
be doing that there. We also won't be storing, flammable
gasoline or oil, so subdivision "E" won't apply or "F". "G"
talks about outdoor lighting and we will certainly comply with
the provisions of subdivision "G" and subdivision "H" doesn't
apply to our particular use. So, I believe at this point, we
are, we will comply with all of the applicable provisions of
Section 101- B- 12. We do have that dealership lined up. Mr.
Goodale has also applied to the Department of Motor Vehicles to
have his current used car sales license changed into a, to add a
new car sales and he has spoken with them and the application is
now pending before them and he has been assured that it should
be no problem for them to transform that into new cars sales as
well as used cars. So it is our position, we believe that we
now can comply with all of the requirements of the special
exception use and we would ask the Board to look favorably on
our application.
cHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't seem to have that agreement with
the organization that you are purchasing the new car, the new
electric car,
MR.McLAUGHLIN: It is not, I don't, I only have the front part
of that, the first page of it. It is not a signed agreement.
That, I believe it is the only other part of that agreement
really the reverse side of that page. It is rather a short
agreement, but we have not entered into it because it is rather
costly to enter into and obviously, unless we know we are going
to be able to use the property for these purposest we would.never
enter into this agreement.
Page 38
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you also supply us with a copy of
this gentleman's license as it exists now.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: Yes, but no I can't, you dont' have that
with you now.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It doesn't have to be tonight.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: I can supply you with a copy of his
application for the amendment. And t will supply you with a
copy of his existing license.
CHAIRM3~N GOEPfRINGER: The only thing that I have, there was a
specific issue that i was jus5 thinking of Kevin and I apologize
when I, in the interim. I know what I was going to ask. Have
you approached anybody in the Town, particularly in the Planning
aspecu on... The issue here of course, that the facu that the
Code does basically involve the issuance or the right of
granting a special exception based upon the fact, okay, that
there is a new car dealership involved here. We certainly do
not have a new car dealership because, it is an unsigned
agreement, because you do not want ~o enuer into it unless the
Board actually wants to grant you this application. My problem
ms that, I certainly didn't write the Code in the Town of
Southold, I didn't write the Special Exception aspect of that,
nor do I know if anybody else did here. And I was just wonder-
lng if connac~ed anybody in the Town and asked them how that you
specific situation became ~o be.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: ~ have made inqumry about it and frankly I
got no clear cu~ answer from anyone. I don't know why it came
into being, i will venture to say that it may some problems as
far as enforceability~ it may be under restraint of trade among
other things, and obviously what it does is, if one was going to
literally comply with this with the ~raditional car dealership,
in the economy particularily, I mean mt is virtually impossible
to do~ unless one has a tremendous amount of financial backing.
I did have some discussions with members of the Town Board
regarding the possibility of amending this particular section
and there didn't seem to be any strong inclinations to do so.
But no one really gave me a good reason why this was done.
mean i~ the, to me, if the concerns were the operation of a used
car dealership, that could be taken care of in other ways, so
why one would have to have a new cai dealership in conjunction
in order to sell used cars, what other rational reason there was
for that, I really don't know. Basically we have been left with
that and 5hat is what we are dealing. Unfortunately, that is
what this Board has to deal with at this poins.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you have any questions on that Bob
o~ Kevin.
Page 39
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MEMBER VILLA: No. Whoever wrote the Code probably felt that
that was the easiest way of eliminating used car lots, as to tie
it in with a new car agency.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: The issue that was raised about not having a
signed agreement, I certainly don't see any reason why the
Board, if it so chose~ couldn't make any, grant him a Special
Exception specifically contingent upon the entering into a new
car sales agreement of some type. That is what we are here for
the Board indicating that we will do, and if the Board wanted to
indicate that that dearlership agreement or similar dealership
agreement had to be executed before the Special Exception would
take effect. I certainly have no problem with that, because
that is what we intend to do.
MEMBER VILLA: The only problem with that would be that if you
then go back to the company that you are trying to get the
franchise from and they put all kind of stipulations in it, you
need a service room, and all the other kind of facilities, then
you are coming back here and saying now I got the franchise, but
now I need thus and thus. It is a a back and forth kind of a
situation. I can see...
CHAIP~AN GOEERINGER: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to cut you
off. %~e wouldn't do that Kevin, what we would do, if the Board
was so inclined.to grant the variance, okay. in some modification
or form, we would very simply hold up on the Special Exception
until such time that the specific car dealership was in place
and then you would continue with the pro~ess.
MB. McLAUGHLIN: To a certain degree, that leaves us in the
same position of having to enter into a fairly costly agreement
without assurance at that point that we would be granted a
Special Exception. Although, I would believe at that point, we
would have fulfilled all of the Special Exception requirements
and believe that we would be entitled to it. We are still left
in the position of having to lay out all that money without any
assurance that we are going to obtain the Special Exception
permit.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: i did discuss with Mr. Goodale and I
should go on the record, on Saturday of last week, (Richard
Goodale), it is my understand that the initial cost of this
first automobile is approximately $25,000.00 (twenty-five
thousand dollars). Is the franchise then free if you purchase
the first car, or it there a cost above that on the franchise.
I didn't ask him a direct question on that Rich, that is the
reason why°
MR. GOODALE: The first car sets up the deal.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: If you purchase that first car, they will
execute the dealership agreement with you. Twenty-five thousand
dollars ($25,000.00 to buy an electric vehicle and not have
Page 40
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. McLAUGHLIN (con't.): a place to sell it is obviously very
difficult.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, well we will kick it around. We
will do the best we can. As I told the Goodales. Is there any-
body who would like to voice an opinion either pro or con
concerning this portion of the application, which is the Special
Exception. Seeing no hands, I will make a motion closing both
the variance and the. Special exception to a later date.
All in favor --- AYE.
End of hearing.
/
(Tran~scribed by tapes recorded on
March 25, 1992) '
Page 41
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
Appeal 9 4070
Name of Applicant(s): Dalche~ Corp., William and
Lorraine Orlowski
Location of Property: Harbor Lane (westerly side), Cutchogue,
New York
County Tax Map No.: 1000-97-6-17 and 1000-103-1-20.5
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:10 pm. and read the
Notice of Hearing and the application for the record.
CHAIP3LAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey indicating the
parcels in question. If there is anyone in the audience who
would like to see this survey, either before or during this
hearing, kindly let us know and we would be very happy to take a
short recess and allow you to study it. It was produced by
Roderick VanTuyl on June 20, 1991 and it contains the five (5)
parcels in questions that we are mentioning. And I haveof the
Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding
properties in the area. I think we are ready for you Mr. Lark.
MR. RICHAI~D LARK: How are you going to handle this, as far as
the petition is concerned? You are going to deem that as an
petition?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sure.
MR. LARK:Okay. I have a couple of other exhibits. Also, I -
would like to, for the record, what correspondence are you going
to put in. You usually read what kind of correspondence you are
going to put into the file.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No. It is all made part of the file.
MR. LARK: I just to make a record here.
CHAIP~AN GOEHRINGER: You can read it anytime.
MR. LARK: I do.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I should point out to you that we
haven't seen you as often as we did before and we do not read
the complete application anymore. We are familiar with what is
in there.
MR. LARK: Well, I want to mark it as an exhibit then.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Fine.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Which letter, the one we just got?
MR. LARK: No. The original petition. Because that is a
verified petition and that way we can save the record by re~ding
it into it, but it will-be part of the record.
Page 42
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Fine.
MR. LARK: So if you want to use letters for what you have al-
ready in the record, that will be fine. Because I have four (4)
exhibits to give you here tonight. It will be exhibit "A" and
that would be the petition, exhibit "B". I believe you have
some correspondence from the Planning Board, you might as well
get that right into the record.
CHAIRM3%N GOEHRINGER: Are you talking about the letter we just
gave you?
MR. LARK: No, no. That one will go in also, prior to that
you had some prior correspondence.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, let us go down the line here. We
have a letter from March 6 from the Planning Board.
MR. LARK: Don't you have one from December 20, 1991.
C~{AI~AN GOEHRINGER: Well, we didn't get back that far. I
have one from February 24, (that is from us to the Planning
Board); I have one from December 20, 1991. Is that the one you
want?
MR. LARK: Yes. That should probably be Exhibit "B". And
then you have a response to your letter of March 6, I believe it
is.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. That is one I just. March 6th, so
you want that "C"?
MR. LARK: Yes. And the one you just handed me this evening
dated March 25th, I guess, could go as "D" then. There is no
other correspondence is there?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Just hold on for one second. We will be
right with you. I think we are ready.
MR. LARK: Okay, and then I want to introduce and I might as
well do at this time, as the petitioners exhibit "1" an aerial
survey certified by Roderick VanTuyl on March 25, 1992. This is
an aerial of the area and the land in question, specifically the
Main Road, State Road 25A and Harbor Lane where the property
fronts on and that was prepared by Aerial Graphics, Inc.
Curiously enough it was done on 2/25/88 and it is the same map
that the Town Planning Board uses and Tax Assessors use. It is
part, you have it in the Town record. It is a copy of the same
map.. That would be Exhibit "1".
CHAIP/KAN GOEHRINGER: Are you referring to map that they use
in reference to planning.
Page 43
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. LARK: (Nodded yes.)
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Or is it the same firm that the use.
MR. LARK: Same firm and the same map. I am going to mark
that as Exhibit "1" if you would. And then Exhibit "2" will be
a mylar of the ~rginal proposed subdivision map that was
presented to you with this application.
CHAI~WlAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just ask a questions. If we are
up to Exhibit "D", why aren't you making that Exhibit.
MR. LARK: Because those are the Exhibits you already have in
the record. These are the exhibits I am presenting at the
hearing. So it would be differentiated, when you write your
decision. I am just trying uo make it easier. That is a mylar
of the one that was orginally submitted.
MEMBER VILLA: Which was is that, that show the ....
FiR. LARK: That shows four (4) 80,000 sq. ft. lots and one for
~nich tile original variance request was made of 73904. It bears
a date originally of October 23, 1991, but it has been amended
because of the way che surveyor does it everytime he does
another one, it has a date on it now of March 20, 1992. That
will be Exhibit "2". Exhibit "3", rather then introduce it with
all testimony, I'll just put it in now and refer ~o it, is the
map that was prepared after the Planning Board wrote you the
December 20th letter requesting some type of a cluster. That
there is also five (5) lots and it's got an original date was
February 5, 1992 and I think you have the_copy, that will be
Exhibit "3". Exhibit "4" is the map done on a hundred foot to
an inch that was done in the planning, which was taken from the
sketch prepared in the December 20, 1991 letter and sent uo you
from the Planning Board, which I guess you have marked Exhibit
"2", that's now so it will fit on the aerial. That is a mylar
o~ that. They just present a sketch, no dimensions and this is
a full blown affair of that. If I could set. That would be the
last exhibit I have. If I could set these up where the Board
and anybody else that would want uo see it, you don't have an
easel. I don't know if that is too far from you. Because I
want Eo lay the overlay on it.
CHAIRFLAN GOEHRINGER: Why don't put one of those chairs up on
there.
MR. LAP,K: Up on here, would that be alright.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You might have to put something in front
of ~ick uo hold it up.
MR. LARK: Okay I think that will work, okay. To save some
time the petition fairly well speaks for itself. Exhibit "i"
Page 44
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. LARK /con't): can you all see that? Kind of before you on
the left side here is the Main Road and just to orient you there
is the King Kullen shopping center which you are familiar with
and there is the intersection of Harbor Lane with the Main Road
with the Coster Funeral Home on the corner. The Board is
generally familiar with the property, the Board as a Board, not
just the individual members~ because you did grant a Special
Exception a number of years ago to grant the funeral home
there. As you probably know from the history of the property,
originally was all one farm. I am kind of outlining with my
fingers running down and then, they have owned it since 60's,
meaning Dalchet or the Orlowski brothers, who are here tonight
to answer any questions you might have. Under the early zoning
they were able to in effect do a day facto subdivision, just
about every one of the houses that you see on the west side of
Harbor Lane came out of that piece and were all granted building
permits and there was one up on the Main Road that was granted a
varience, which is the Fogarty house next to the Coster Funeral
Home, back in 1973. The remaining piece of prop-
erty, if I can use Exhibit "2", if i could have that back, and
as I indicated when I introduced this Exhibit "1" as a hundred
foot to an inch, so these survey that I have got here should
work out pretty much as an overtay. And I can just put them
on. This is all the property that Dalchet and Mr. Orlowski, the
son of Chester Orlowski owns, and that is the balance of the
property they own, which consists of that 9.04 acres. That is
what they have left. They are getting along in age and they
decided What they wanted to do was to get it subdivided and sold
because the way the property sits, as you can see here, it's got
some frontage here of some 420 (four hundred and twenty) feet
and then it runs into a parcel owned by Lademann, John Lademann
and there is a break of fifty (50) feet and then it runs for a
bunch of small parcels until you end up with the frontage
opposite Pierce Drive and then you can see a lot of it is
interior frontage. So, after meeting with VanTuyt and talking
to him and trying to figure out a layout, he came up with this
proposal as the most utilization of the property. The problem
with it was, is that we had to have a varience for the one (1)
lot, which was the origianl application. That is the history of
it at that point. So we were advised by both Boards to apply
simultaneously for the subdivision and for the varience. That
was done in November~ your petition. I then appeared before the
Planning Board on December 9th advised them of the applica%ion
before you and reviewed this application, which you have right
here in the overlay in Exhibit "2". There was much discussion,
you have my letter of March (tape turned over) March 12. I
want to refer that, I will introduce that later as an Exhibit.
That pretty much states the history. I met with them on that
night, reviewed it and curiously enough during the conversation,
the-Chairman recused himself. Because of some distant rela-
tionship that he had with the applicant, which was fine. As it
turned out he was the only one that ever been to the proper~y
because they used to have the adjoining farm over here and he
Page 45
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. LARK ~con't.): farmed it, so he was very familiar with
it, that is Mr. Orlowski. And then, Mr. MacDonald indicated, he
says okay, we can't really consider this subdivision because
you have a substandard lot. They recognized the irony of it,
that portions of the property were R-40, which is the portion
indicated in the map that you have before you, opposite Pierce
Drive. And he said until the Yield is decided only the Board of
Appeals could decide the yield. So I said that was fair
enough. I said let them decide whether there will be four (4)
or five (5) lots here. That was on December 9, 1991. Then for
some unexplained reason they wrote to you that December 20, 1991
letter which went on a tirade. The letter speaks for itself, so
I won't address it here at the hearing, which makes it really,
ft really didn't make any sense. Since they told me on December
9, 1991, let's make the Board of Appeals decide. After getting
the December 20, 1991, I then confered with both the Planning
Dept. and with your clerk and it was decided okay see what you
can do with some type of a cluster concept. So I went back to
VanTuyl and I said to him, here is what they want. The want a
gib road, a little road where we are proposing the varience on
Lot ~ 3. They want that as a road. Obviously, if you put a
fifty (50) foot road running to land of Pung, which is now
owned, % understand by Cichanowicz, and you can see in the
aerial, it is in the nursery stock and' next to that is the
vineyard. I said it doesn't make any sense to me but that is
what they want, let us see how it lays ou~. So VanTuyl did that
and this is Exhibit "3". I said they also want to cluster it.
And he was the one that first put me wise to it, he says it
doesn't comply with the cluster regulation that is in the zoning
ordinance And he says I don't think it is appropriate to Ery
and work our some type of cluster. But when VanTuyl came up,
which is the second part of this hearing tonight, he came up
with a lot layout of five (5) lot layouts, three (3) of which
were substandard. So now I said ! have three (3) varience
requests to ask instead of one I1), if you are going to put in
that spare road. And he said yes, I can't do anything else
because of the geography of this, of the way the lot line is set
out. So he then proposed which I have and you have it because I
sent it on to your clerk and it is part of the record, whick
will now, you have it and I will make it also here as Exhibit
"3". That lot layout of five (5) lots showing how that will
layout. Now, when put that up on the aerial. I then discussed
with the clients, Mr. Orlowski, Chester and Al, which are here
and they said okay. So we have to pun a road in. It doesn't
have any purpose, but I guess we can live with it because
VanTuyl after consulting with the Planning Board, it was decided
that they would leave this lot as the building area, which is in
the R-40, which matches the rest of the neighborhood there and
the~ would configure it that way. Well then the Planning Board,
as I said on that December 20, 1991 letter, sent a sketch plan
along which said that they wanted open space and only four (4)
lots. They didn't give
Page 46
PUBLIC HE3~RING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. LARK (con't.): any reason, they just said they want to
cluster this. So i had VanTuyl prepare this Exhibit "4" which
shows, okay you can see what is a separate part of the
application putting the spur roadf that is the only difference,
but what it does is create three (3) variences instead of the
one (1) Okay, because these three (3) lots are in R-80 and so
therefore one (1) is a fifty-four thousand (54000) and one (!)
is a forty-six thousand (46,000) and one is a seventy thousand
(70,000). Instead of just the one (1) lot varience, which was
the initial application. That is if you put a spur road in.
MEMBER VILLA: The only question in my mind at this point is
that if you are going for a cluster and you can show a yield of
five (5) then you don't need variences to change the lot size,
if you are going to have open space.
MR. LARK: That is what I thought the impression was when the
Planning Board originally said get the Board of Appeals because
of the 9.04 acres and the problem with R-40 being part of it to
determine the yield. I didn't think they would take a position
on anything, until this Board came back and said okay'we will go
for a yield of five (5) or so on an so forth. That was my
understanding with them. When they wrote that December 20, 1991
letter, and I conferred with them that was still my under-
standing that they wanted this Board, which has the power under
the Zoning Ordinance~ to determine the yield because it would be
a variance for the one (1) lot~ Because you have that high bred
situation where you have got portions of the property is R-40
and the, virtually the entire neighborhood when you leave this
exhbit and you can study it, I know you are personally familiar
with it Mr. Villa living in the area, that they are all small
lots by the R-80 or the R-40 standard. There are some lots in
there that are twelve thousand (12,000) sq.ft. But that is
neither here nor there. VanTuyl when he did the original setup
which is Exhibit "2", tried to keep it in conformity with the
neighborhood° Okay, with what he had to work with without
coming in with too many variances. When they then, I took the
Planning Board's idea, which they submitted to you, and put it
to scale, which is the open space requirement that they set up.
It left, depending on whether you are going to treat it as
cluster, and I will talk about cluster in a moment. But if you
leave it just this way alone, it would still require three (3)
variances, but what they did as they created by their own hand
work fifty-four thousand (54~000) sq.ft, lot, a forty-six
thousand (46,000) sq.ft, lot, a seventy (70,000) sq.ft, lot,
still an "L" shape around Lademann's. Then they created for
reasons best known to themselves a two hundred and seven
thousand (207,000) sq.ft, lot, which made absolutely no sense.
Now then they referred to well we want it clustered, but when
you ~ead Article 18 as I referred to in the letter that is not
appropriate to a property like this. Because the whole
Page 47
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. LARK (con't.): purpose of the cluster development section
in the Zoning Ordinance was maximum reasonable conservation of
land in protection of ground water supply. Well. how are you
going to argue four or five (4 or 5) lots, and what are you
going to do with the two hundred and seven thousand (207,000)
square foot lot, when they wanted the building envelop up on the
road. What are they going to do with it back there? The second
one is preservation of agricultural activity. Well, when you
look at what you are faced with here, with Holly Hollow Nursery,
the Cichanowicz nursery and the vineyard right next to it, this
has no agricultural activity, this particular property, and it
hasn't seen A10rlowski retired from farming. And he can tell
you the year on that, at least uen (10) years or better, it
hasn't been farmed. Okay, so, it would have no purpose now.
What bothered me about this originally was, this concept of the
Planning Board is that, firsu of all it doesn't comply with the
Ordinance because when you read 100-181 because you have to have
ten (10) acres or more in order uo get into a homeowners
association or property owners association. But even if the
Town Board, which might have the power under the Ordinance, to
waive that, we are going to end up with a situation like we
ended up with in Mattituck and some areas of the Town, where who
is going to pay taxes, who is going to do anything with it. And
curiously enough, they created one lot. They didn't creaue open
space in the sense that the cluster developmenu was, you know,
we used to have it under the old Planning regulations of Park
and Recreation. They didn't say that in the map that they
drew. That's what became ludicrous and that is why when VanTuyl
talked to them he didn't know what to do either with it. He
said that they want one (1) big lot, makes no sense. And so,
what happens, all you do regardless of what C & R's you puu on
it, because when you had C & R's in the major subdivisions for
park and recreation, what do we have. We have affordable
housing on a couple of them, don'T we in Town. Fortunately, for
the Town, no one challenged it. But that is what you are going
to end up with here. Because unless you create some type of a
horse farm, mini horse farm, or paddock or something back there,
that lot doesn't conform to anything in that neighborhood. And
that is what is so ludicrous about it. So when I talk with your
clerk, she said okay, see what you can do with putting the spur
road in. We will see what we have here, what we can deal with.
That is Exhibits "2 & 3", and then we will determine if we wanu
the lot yield. And then for some reason, they kept writing
letters back saying, and you have them now in the record, we
don't want five (5) lots there. They don't give you a reason
for it. They say cluster. Now, if you are going to cluster and
follow their regulations, then withouu public water and sewer,
you could end up with thrity thousand (30,000) square foot
lots. How many? These applicants aren't asking for that. They
are-not trying to come in with a maximum density, to be honesE
with you, they are making the best out of a bad
Page48
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. L~K (con't): situation with what they have left of the
property. That is why I believe and I spent some time with it.
Exhibit "2" makes the most intelligent sense of the property.
But..
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are referring to the one that
requires one (1) varience.
MR. LARK: One (1) varience, but if the Board feels that okay,
we will give five (5) lot yield but for reasons for future
planning, because we don't know if the vineyard's is going to be
there in ten (10) years from now, we don't know if the nursery
is going to be there ten (10) years from now, we want you to
make provisions for a paper road there. Fine, it's still
doesn't make it a bad situation. Because then lots 4 and 5 on
Exhibit "2", no it would be Exhibit "3", which contains the spur
road, aren't really that bad. Because ~nat could happen, as you
see on Exhibit "3" here, you could create the house back over
here~ and you could either put the house envelope here or back,
you wouldn't be bothered with somebody coming back ten (10)
years from now trying to subdivide that back end of that
property. Trying to claim some hardship, I got two hundred and
four thousand (204,000) square feet back there and nothing going
on. See that was the problem. It was also considered, just so
you know by the Orlowski boys, they went and discussed things
with Januick, Bob White~ all the owners there, would they like
to buy a piece running it back to Cichanowicz's land. All of
them said no, we are very happy with our back yard and our
home. That was discussed. The thing that just defies my
imagination, the Planning Board with-
out going to the property, without looking at the conditions in
this particular neighborhood, says cluster it. I should have
gone to the Orlowski's, who have been life long residents, okay
let us go in and see how many maximum lots we can get in the
cluster. You understand what I mean. They said no no, that is
going to ruin the neighborhood there, let us try to keep it
limited and try to use all the property wisely and not have a
lot of open space that is unnecessary. Because the Town will
get no benefit from an open space back here, bordered on the way
Exhibit "2" is there. Bordered on what is presently a nursery
and a vineyard right next to it. There is not going to be any
benefit from it. And we are talking about a yield of one (1)
because there is just no way you can create or could even try to
market for any kind of reasonable value the lots that the
Planning Board wanted, the two hundred and four thousand
(204,000) square foot lot~ which is there as in Exhibit "4". I
mean that just makes no sense. Because they don't even want to
put the house in the back, they want to put the house up on the
road and it made no sense. So, and in trying to talk to them,
finally, as I said, Mr. MacDonald said, yea, I see the point of
what is happening here, why don't we just determine what the
Board of Appeals feels it would be need for the yield. So,.
Page 49
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92 ~
MR. LARK (con't.]:hence the petition to you. It outlines the
practical difficulties, plus when you go there and look at ~he
property, there is not a drainage problem or anything, and I
think Mr. Richter said it is all level land, there is just not a
problem there. And there is no big trees, there is no
significant envolvement o~, you know, of anything. So I think
that, which I have now as you have as Exhibit "A'~ in the
petition, I think you've got all the reasons why there is
practical difficulties with what you have. Be honest with you,
it is the configuration of what is left over there. Now, don't
forget, you can't say well that was self-imposed, don't forget
when this thing was first, homes were put first put up there,
zoning was twelve thousand five hundred (12,500) square feet,
that is what it was. And it stood that way from 57, 58 all the
way up to 71 or something like that. Well, until the Board of
Health, the Department of Health said you had to have twenty
thousand I20,000) in 1967, 60 some odd, 68 was it, 58. Yes 195S
you had to have twenty thousand (20,000) square feet because oi
the water° It is all wells and cesspools there., as you are all
well aware of. So, if you have any questions, I have both the
Orlowski brothers who are here, who are Dalchet. They can
answer anything about the history o~ the proper~y that you
want. It has been most frustrating because a lot of time was
spent on the application before it was ever presented to you,
talking to the neighbors, seeing if they wanted to buy
additional property at a reasonable cos~, just to square i~
off. No one wanted to do anything, everybody was very very
happy with what they had, so I end up with some of those back
pieces. And I thought VanTuyl's initial layout, which you have
as the initial proposal made the most intelligent use of the
land.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are referring to the one (1)
varience application.
MR. LARK: Yes, exhibit "2".
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The seventy-three thousand nine-o-four
(73,904).
MR. LARK: That is right, that made the most sense. Because
when you go through each and every item of the cluster, you have
to really, really stretch it to.iustify it to be for this
particular property. It just doesn't fit.
CHAI~4AN GOEHRINGER: Your clients have no problem committing
over lot $ 3 of that proposal of the five (5) lot minor, Lot $ 3
seventy-three thousand, nine-o-four (73,904). The commitment
over that parcel of a road if sometime in the future if it was
to do so if required.
MR, LAt~K: Yea, they can put that on the record. Did you
understand that Chester?
Page 50
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHESTER:No problem.
MR. LARK: That was discussed, because after the Planning
Board wrote their December 20th letter, thinking that they might
want some type of a spur road, and that is why it was done the
way it was, which is on Exhibit "3", which is the other part of
the application. And you see what he did there, Lot 4 then
only becomes eighty-three thousand (83,000) square feet, if you
exclude that road. If you include it, make it an "L" shaped
lot, it is ninety-eight thousand (98,000) square feet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: But, remember the first one I'm talking
about. The one that only deals with the one (1). I understand
what you are pointing out to me. But in this particular one,
the seventy-three thousand (73~000) would be decreased a
significant amount assuming the road was put it over the top of
that particular...
MR. LARK: YES. That is an alternative. I discussed that
with VanTuyt and he said, well okay, but I would rather show it
without~ you know what I mean. And that is what he did for
Exhibit ~'3". But, if the Planning Board, I mean the Beard of
Appeals decided granting a varience and using, which would be
Exhibit ~'2" subject to that that would be fine. That would be
fine, that would not be a problem.
CHAIRSIAN GOEHRINGER: That is the easiest one I can see, to be
honest with you.
MR. LARK: That is not a problem, we can, because they had
agreed to put a paper, provide for future, if it was ever to be
used ....
CHAIR_MAN GOEHRINGER: We are also only six thousand (6,000)
square feet from the total ordinance on that particular one (1)
parcel.
MR. LARK: In any event, that's correct. That was the thing.
Page 51
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't have any particular objection to
that.
MEMBER VILLA: Jerry, the one you are talking about has got
the two (2) eighty thousand (80,000) square feet off on the left
side?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. Eighty thousand, (80,000); eighty
thousand (80,000); seventy-three nine-o-four, 73,904); eighty
thousand (80,000); eightly thousand (80,000). I mean Bob that
is the most area.
MEMBER VILLA: But do we have, we can grant a varience for the
yield, but do we have the say on which map is going to be
approved? Is that a problem.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, if you grant, okay a varience, for
that particular lot, the other ones fall into line.
~. LARK: There is nothing you can do elsewhere.
ME~BER VILLA: I thought that was still a prerogative of the
Planning Board.
5~. LARK: Well it isn't in lay out in planning, but when you
look at eighteen (18) corners, you have on this property, what
are you going to do with it. It just didn't lend itsel~ to open
space.
MEMBER VILLA: Oh, alright. I knew we were addressing the
area, but I didn't know whether we could...
MR. LARK: Because if anybody is in favor of open space, I am
if you can propery utilize it in a place. But there was just no
place to put it here.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: On lots 4 & 5 of that plan, Mr. Lark,
those dog legs are included in that eighty thousand (80,000)
square feet.
MR. LARK: That is correct and what would happen, the homes,
the building envelope would go in the back then. So and that
was done deliberately to prevent a future subdivision
application for a varience in the future. There would be just
no way around that, because the home would have to be put in
the back then. And those would be in essence would become
driveways.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Not causing you a tremendous problem
her~, because I understand your frustrations in this particular
thing and your applicants. Could you just ask VanTuyl to super-
impose, for us, a foot print for a house on Lot ~ 3 of tha~
Page 52
PUBLIC HEAI~ING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRMAN GOEPIRINGER (con't): plan, fifty (50) feet south of
the proposed road~ if it ever existed.
MR. LARK: Yea, that can be done. T1~at is not. If it ever
went in.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Meeting all appropriate setbacks as the
code allows.
MR. LARK: He attempted to .... This isn't what you want, but
he attempted to do that over here and I can have that put on, on
that one. That is not a problem.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay that is great.
MR. LARK: Because it would be moved back, so therefore even
though the property would be sort of bifurcated as you can see
there~ that is where your set back would be.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Is that the one we are dealing with now.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, no. This is the one Jim.
MR. LARK: This one here basically.
CHAI~4AN GOEHRINGER: The one that requires the least varience.
MR.LARK: The least varience. Only the one (1) varience.
CHAIP~LAN GOEHRINGER: It is not a lot.
ME5~ER VILLA: The lot would still
be two hundred and seventy (270) feet deep.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Yes, it would still be very deep.
MEMBER VILLA: It would be 270 by
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Assuming if that ever happen. All we
are doing is saying that that is a sterile area that you
couldn't build on.
MI~. LARK: You couldn't build on that. That would be, the
Board of Appeals would put a condition but your'e just going to
have to leave x amount of space.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Well we are talking from this point to this
point. From this point to here. Not this point here, not 270
MR. LARK: That is right. In essence the road, I don't want to
draw on that one, but the road would go. This would be the
Page 53
PUBLIC FEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
MR. LARK (con't.): reservation, right through here. That por-
tion, that portion there and this portion here couldn't be built
on.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Where it is truncated or where it would
actually be truncated, a person could still build an accessory
building, if they wanted to.
MR. LARK: A garage if you wanted or something like that.' Big
deal. It is not going to affect your density.
MEMBER DINIZIO: It will still be all included in the lot
area, it just a question of
ME. LARK: That is exactly right. You would have a varience,
what he is suggesting and Mr. Orlowski agreed to it. You would
have a varience for the seventy-three thousand nine hundred and
four (73,904), less than the eighty thousand (80,000), however
it would conditioned on that this meets and bounds area could
not be built on in any way, shape, or form. And the set back of
any structure would be "X~' number of feet to the south o~ that
line. i understood that; yea. That makes perfect sense. You
are setting where it would be and if it is never, what his point
is, if it is never built on, it never changes anything, you own
it. But if it is, somebody has the right to go through there.
It is going to be reserved for future use. There has to be a
deed restriction and they would have to dedicate that.
MEMBER VILLA: Who might in the future have to approve that.
MR. LARK: The person who would use it, would burden it.
Being in this case, Cichanowicz. In this particular case, just
to use a name.
CHAIRI,SAN GOEHRINGER: Or a subsequent owner.
ME. LARK: Or a subsequent owner. They would have to .....
MEMBER VILLA: It wouldn't fall back on the owner of Lot ~ 3.
MR. LARK: No, no, he is just saying that when that lot was
sold, whoever bought it, would have noticed the fact that some
day in the future, it could happen. It would effect the market-
ability slightly of the lot.
CHAIP~IAN GOEHRINGER: So, you will do that for us and we will
hopefully put this thing to bed.
MR. LARK: And keep the record open until I get you that and
tha~ will be fine.
Page 54
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRM~ GOEHRINGER: Great, we thank you for your presen-
tation. And you will give us. We've got all the mylars, what
we wanted is to request the picture.
MR. LARK: And that was primarily to show you just how every-
thing fit, and what the relationship of the neighborhood was.
And I tried to get it all in a hundred foot of what it is now.
So now you can read itt you know what the beck you got there.
Is this yours?
CHAIRMAN GOEPIRINGER: That is mine. Is there anybody else
that would like to speak in favor of this application. Could
you come up sir and use the mike and state your name, if you
wouldn't mind sir.
MR. BELL: My names is Herbert Bell, at 22440 Harbor Lane. Is
this number 2, I beiive he called it, is this the same plot that
was sent to the various neighborhood~ neighbors in that ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I can't answer that question, sir.
MR. BELL: It seems that he introduced about five (5) Tevels.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. I am going to take this one out of
the file for you and let you study it. And you can study it for
a little while if you !ike~ we would be very happy to go on to
the next hearing and close this one later if you like. Here is
a copy of it. This is the one that we
that the one that requires the least amount of variences.
MR. BELL: Well, the one we got it only has one (1), one
lot that needed a varience.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That is the one we are dealing with.
MR. BELL: 'So this is the same one. And did he indicate what
roads where going in on that property.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There are no roads going in other than
dirveways at this particular point to my knowledge. In other
words the road is only for future dedication.
MEMBER VILLA: Possible future road.
CHAIP/Z3~N GOEHRINGER: Future road if any road is ever
required if the, is it Holly Hills Nursery.
MR. LARK: Holly Hollow.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Holly Hollow nursery was ever subdivided,
MR. BELL: In other words there would be no roads going in
from Harbor Lane.
Page 55
PUBLIC HEARING
Southold ZBA 3/25/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Not to my knowledge.
ME~ER VILLA: Not at this time.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Not at this time.
MR. BELL: Thank you, you want this back.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, eventually.
FK~. BELL: Okay, what do you mean eventually.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Tomorrow is fine. Tomorrow if you want
to send it back to us.
MR. BELL: Yes, okay, thank you.
CHAI~4AN GOEPfRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to
speak either pro or Con concerning this hearing? Seeing no
hand, I will make a motion closing the hearing reserving
decision, pending the receipt of the specific foot print that
Mr. Lark is going to get us from VanTuyl on Lot ~ 3.
All in favor -AYE
End of hearing.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: With the audience's indulgence, I must
get some water before the next hearing so we will take
approximately a three (3) minute recess. We realize that you
have been sitting here for about forty-five (45) minutes waiting
for us and we do apologize, however, I will ask the Board for
that motion please.
MEMBER GRIGONIS: So moved.
All in favor-- AYE
(Transcribed by tapes recorded on 3/25/92'