HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-05/07/1992 HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
REGULAR MEETING OF
THURSDAY, MAY 7~ 1992
Board Members Present: Chairman Gerard P. Goehringer
Members: Doyen, Dinizio, Villa
Absent due to illness: Grigonls
Linda Kowalski, Secretary for ZBA and 35 persons in audience.
Informal Discussion - Pindar Vineyards (no application pending as yet):
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Dr. Damianos and his associate from Pindar
Vineyards. We do welcome Dr. Damianos here. It is a pleasure to see
doctor. Who would like to speak?
DR. DAMIANOS: Gentlemen, thank you for your support in the past and
hopefully in the future. What we did is to apply, according to Town Code
and Ordinance, to the construction of a gazebo. Actually, it began with
the idea, the Geneses was one of having a deck, and that is behind the
winery itself. The idea then expanded To having it covered and what we
would call a gazebo-like structure. And so we applied for all the
permits, etc., that are necessary. And this is primarily where we are
at. The question that was raised is the following: What would the gazebo
be used for? Unfortunately, we are probably the only winery on Long
Island that does not have a deck. And one of the wonderful things about
going to a winery is to be able to stand on a deck and overlook a
vineyard. Well, we don't have that ability, not with the present
construction and the present positioning of the winery. We have a area in
back of the winery, that we have used for the past seven or eight (7 or 8)
years as a kind of a picnic area. We have allowed our guest to picnic
back there, we have allowed our guests to roam there, overlooking the
vineyard, etc. And we felt especially after a torrential rainfall, that
the area could not be used due to mud, etc. and that a deck ultimately a
gazebo would be of use there.
We do host quite a few things at Pindar Vineyards, in addition to
charitable events, the American Cancer Society, the Cardiac groups, etc.,
in addition to having some local, not for profit art shows, etc.~ which we
have done. We felt that the gazebo there would serve as excellent
purpose. No. l, it would be a staging ground for tours, we kind of feel
we give the best tours in America, in Pindar, we think we do at any rate.
And
Page 2
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
DR. DAMIANOS (eon't): it is an educational tour. It is a wonderful area
to stage the tour in which one can overlook the vineyard, look at the
vineyard, actually go down in through the vineyard, ultimately through the
winery and then into the tasting room, giving us a flow pattern, which is
the pattern that we are looking for. Bringing our people in to the gazebo
like area, through the vineyard, out into the tasting room and ultimately
out. This is a very good flow pattern for us. In addition to that, we
host every year, the Masters Progam by the Wine Institute of America. In
which we take about five or six (5 or 6), last year we had about ten or
eleven (10 or 11) students, these students go for a masters degree in wine
and analogy and we have some very good wine writers, etc. It is a
wonderful place to have your note and your pad and your book, etc., away
from the activities of the vineyard and the winery, especially in the
summertime. In the years past, I have sponsored the, several events in
the wineries--some art shows, not for profit, multiple sclerosis, we also
did one for the Suffolk County, and I am a member, of the Cardiac
Association there. We've done also cancer, and various other events. We
felt that the gazebo would be an excellent area, especially in our very
short season, where we could host some of these events there and kind of
get them out of the main stream of what we are doing in the winery during
our busy season. And this was the intent and this is intent. The gazebo
is a simple structure. The actual cost of the gazebo would run about
seventy-five thousand dollars ($75,000.00), of which the materials are all
bought here on the North Fork, from local merchants. The construction
will be done by the local construction people, which I thought would bring
a little income into the Town as well. There will be no electricity
there, we don't need electricity. The gazebo is only good probably for
about four or five (4 or 5) months of the year. We certainly couldn'~ use
it in the winter time, and you can't use it well beyond November,
December. The time that it can be used is probably beginning in around
June, when the temperature and the weather does predis-
pose to us using the gazebo for these various events that we have planned
at Pindar. There is no provision there for enclosure, there is no
provision there for audio systems, there is no provision there, it is just
simple gazebo as a staging area in which we could have, staging area for
our tourists and various events that we like to promote on the North Fork
of Long Island. I welcome any questions you gentlemen and ladies might
have.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Doctor, the basic issue that initiated, I assume
your coming down heres and the letter of course received from your
associate and so on and so forth, is basically one that was of concern to
us and as you know, and as I had explained to you, and if you remember
back to the original special permit that was granted for your vineyard, to
create a winery. And I can remember that that night, sitting in the Town
Board room, because that is when we were all cramped in there
Page 3
Public Hearin~
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't): at that particular time, and I think that
on the record I said thai, this Town has absolutely no objection to
special permits, and definately invite special permits for people of the
wine character so to speak. There is no two ways about it. Our concern
is where does the old special exception, or the old special permit, leave
off and where does the new special permit, or what I refer To as, the
layering of the special permit go on. And that is the issue that we're
investigating at this particular time. And we are doing it from this
moment on, based upon what you have told us. And [ think the best thing
that we can do at this point, is to take your letter, take the information
you have given us, and discuss it briefly with the Town Board. Possibly,
we may have to discuss with the Legislative Committee and we ~ get back
to you. Certainly, in the, I see no specific reason to hold up the
construction of the gazebo. In here, we are discussing the use of the
gazebo, not necessarily the use that as germane to the vineyard as it
stands, and I could not agree with you more, and I should point out to
you, on the record, I teach a class au the State University of Stony
Brook, Fundamentals of Town Zoning, and you probably don't know it, but I
have four (4) slides of your vineyard, of which I do. And when I get to
Gristina, airight, I do mention the difference between Gristina and some
of the other vineyards, I don't mention your vineyard, is the fact that
they do have a deck which overlooks the entire vineyard. And Mattituck
Hills also has a deck which overlooks. I haven't taken any pictures of
that at this particular time, but it is done under the special permit
aspects of Town Zoning in particular. So, again, we are concerned mainly
with the use and how that use is conducive to the application, the special
exception, so. As I said to you, we don't have a specific concern with
your building the gazebo as is stands or for its use in the vineyard.
is the future use and those issues that you have raised such as, the
not-for-profit issues and the issues of future festivals and so on and so
forth. We don'~ know if that is within our power or if it is within the
Town Board to legislate that issue. That is all 1 can tell you at this
point, but we do appreciate your coming down. We appreciate your letter
and it may require an additional special exception as the time goes on.
DR. DR. DAMIANOS: I would like to thank you for your explanation.
Perhaps I can understand a bit of your concern here. Because frankly ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Again, this has nothing to do with you.
DR. DAMIANOS: I know, I was just a bit perplexed. If, you know I own
four (4) homes here in the Town of Southold. I do have one with an
enormous amount of property and in a sense, you know, I entertain a lot.
Where I live, I live presently in Head of the Harbor, on fifteen (15)
acres, wkich I entertain all the
DR. DAMIANOS (CCh't): time. It is, the sense here was a sense of being
an extension of the winery itself. In actuality, all that we are
requesting is to be able to have an area, in which we are doing this
Page 4
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
anyway, we are doing tours, we are doing all these wonderful things we
believe, as all of the wineries in America and the World are doing. And
if, it is primarily designed to give us better traffic flow. I have a
major problem
with traffic in front of my winery.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No question about it.
DR. DAMIANOS: And that problem is not Pindar's problem. We are the
recipient, we are recipient and I think that the Town should give us
accommondation for this by housing parking or providing parking and toilet
facilities for areas that are perhaps in front of us that don't have those
facilities. That fifty percent (50%) of our parking, twenty-five to fifty
percent (25-50%) of our parking on the weekend are not Pindar people. We
know, we have to clean up after them. Our toilets gets flushed and backed
up because of the volume of traffic we are taking off the road. So by
having an area back there, we can best control, people who are coming to
visit our vineyard or people who are going to go across the street perhaps
to do their shopping and just decide to wonder around and leave their cars
in our parking lot. And the Town was wise enough at the time when we went
for our special exception, to require us to have an enormous amount of
parking. And I complement you gentlemen and ladies because you were
correct. We did need that kind of parking, we are happy that we did
that. As far as parking is concerned we have acres, and acres, and acres
of land that we can use. I would also like to thank all of you once
again, but ! would say that time is of the essence here, if I am going to
start construction, everything is ready. MY contracts are ready, and I
would like to kick the season off very nicely.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I understand.
DR. DAMIANOS: I thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Your welcome. Thank you.
Page 5
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Appeal ~ 4102
Applicant(s): Robert and Eleonore Cahill
Location of Property: 515 East Gillette Drive, East Marion, NY
County Tax Map No.: 1000-38-4-12
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:40 p.m. and read the Notice of
Hearing and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a map dated August 11, 1976
indicating a split level frame home, approximately centrally located on
the property, which is one hundred and ten by one hundred and three point
nine (110 x 103.9). And I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map
indicating this and-surrounding properties in the area. Are the Cahill's
here. How do you do? So nice of you to come, I understand that speak-
ing to the gentleman last Friday, you had to drive all the way out here
for this hearing? Is there anything that you would like state for the
record.
MR. ROBERT CAHILL: Well, this is our first appeal. We just purehased
the home. The back door of the deck that we want to build already has
the sliding doors. They are already installed. My wife's mother lives
with us. She is eighty-six (86) years old and we have a slew
~randehlldren, whieh none of them come higher than the chair. And we felt
that the deck right now, with that door would be a hazard. Anybody could
fall out or jump out and we wanted the deck facing that private road which
is all shrub and cornfields.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any p~rtieular reason why you selected
fourteen (14) feet in depth as opposed to any other, meaning the width of
the deek,! shouid say. It is a fourteen (14) foot deck.
MR. CAHILL: You would have to talk to my architect.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, we will go to Mrs. Cahill.
MRS. ELEONORE CAHILL: It makes it a decent size, you know really.
don't want a stair case, I want a deck. I want to sit out there.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any intention of having this roofed
any time.
MRS. CAHILL: No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't have any particular reason, for the record
I should mention that this particular subdivision, the lots tend to be
shallow in the rear yard area, particularly
Page 6
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GoEHRINGER (eon't): along the area that Mr. Cahill was
mentioning, which is the east side of that particular sub-
division. And thereby constructing a house in the center leaves the rear
yard area quite insufficient in reference to depth, and that is the nature
of the fact that this is the reason why they are here. Because they have
an insufficient rear yard. Is there anybody else who would like to speak
for the record either pro or con? Seeing no hands, Mr. Villa.
MEMBER VILLA: I have a question. There is a fence in the rear of the
house, is that on your property line?
MRS. CAHILL: Yes, it is on our property.
MEMBER VILLA: It is on your property, but is it on the property line,
because I paced off from the rear of your house to the fence and it only
paces like twenty-four (24) feet.
MRS. CAHILL: I know it is showing th{rty-five (35) right?
MEMBER VILLA: Yes, there is a discrepancy in here someplace.
MR. CAHILL: Well, my wife went to Van Tuyl, who did the drawing and he
marked it to the property line. He says it is thirty-five (35) feet.
MRS. CAHILL: I don't know if the fence is on the property line or not
really.
MR. CAHILL: AccQrding to this here picture, this drawing here, it would
appear the fence line is inside the property line.
MEMBER VILLA: It shows the property, it shows the brick patio being
right out to the property line. And that just comes to the fence. And
yet from the fence.
MR. CAHILL: Well, actually the brick patio, I mean the brick patio is
about three (3) foot inside the fence line. There's trees facing the
fence. I had nothing to do with the brick patio.
MEMBER VILLA: I realize that, but it just doesn't seem to add up.
know I was back there and paced it off and everthing and ali...
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, it looks shallow, there is no question about
it.
MEMBER VILLA: Well it is only twenty-four (24) feet from the back of
the house to the fence. And the survey is showing thirty-four (34) feet.
So there is ten (10) feet in question. Where is it? I mean it makes a
,/ ;. big difference because you are
Page 7
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MEMBER VILLA (eon't): saying the deck is going to be twenty (20) feet
off your property line. Yet from the way it lays out in the field, it is
only going to be ten (10) feet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Excuse me just one second. You said you went to
VanTuyl and they readdressed this rear yard area?
MR. CAHILL: Yes, we had new pictures taken and he ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Exeuse me Bob, do you have any idea if he went out
and actually did another field survey?
MR. & MRS. CAHILL: No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: He did not. Okay.
MRS. CAHILL: While I was there, I asked him to please tell me how many
footage do I have from the rear of the house to my property line.
MEMBER VILLA: See, actually I paced off the house. And your house is
quite deep, from the overhang to the house. And I paced it off at like
forty-five (45) feet. And it shows a thirty (30) foot setback. So that
is seventy-five (75) feet, which only leaves you twenty-five or twenty-six
(25 or 26) feet for a back yard. And they are showing thirty-five (35)
feet, so there is ten (10) feet in question here. You know, it is a
question whether your deck is going to be ten (10) feet off the property
line or twenty (20).
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can we ask you a favor. Is there a possibility
that you eould ask Mr. VanTuyl to just go out and readdress this. We
don't want to hold you up. As soon as he can do it and as soon as we can
get this done. The point in question is if we are dealing with ten (10).
feet less, we are dealing with ten (10) feet less and we will address that
issue, but at least we will know exactly what the amount is. Or do you
want to physically measure it.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I can go out and measure it. I got the tape measure.
Stop by there Sunday.
MEMBER VILLA: Well the numbers add up, if you look at thirty (30) foot,
forty-five (45), seventy-five (75).
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that a possibility, do you think you can do
that for us. This way we can know exactly where the property line is.
~RS. CAHILL: I guess I can do it tomorrow. I am here.
MR. CAHILL: We are only here today and tomorrow.
Page 8
Public Hearing
Southotd ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Oh, he will do it, he will just contact you. He
can send it to us, or he can call us. It is the best way to deal with it,
if we don't know exactly. It appears that it is on the other side of the
fence. I mean, you want as much property as you can get back there~
eonceivably, because you want a fourteen (14) foot deck, so it would be to
everybody's benefit to have the surveyor do it, I think. If that is
airight with you. Just have Mr. VanTuyl call us and tell us exactly what
is in the rear yard and what is left after the fourteen (]4) foot deck is
superimposed on print. That is all. We will make a decision as soon as
we get the information we get from him. So we know we have the most exact
situation.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: In the next two (9~) weeks probably, is our next
meeting.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that alright with you?
MEMBER VILLA: I am sorry, but I just put. the numbers together and it
just didn't add up.
MRS. CAHILL: I can see where it wrong added because when I was in the
office ....
MR. CAHILL: Did you put tape on the back.
MRS. CAHILL: From the house to the fence you put a tape.
MEMBER VILLA: Yea, and it is like twenty-four (24) feet and you got
fourteen (14) feet for the deck and then you show another twenty (9.0)
feet, so that is thirty-four (34) feet. And there is not thirty-four (34)
feet back there, unless you go ten (10) feet over the fence. .That is why
I want to know where the property line is.
MRS. CAHILL: That is why I asked him to do it. And he said thirty-five
(35) and I thought well I guess I go over the fence.
MEMBER VILLA: Well, that I would like to know.
MRS. CAHILL: Okay.
MR. CAHILL: I would like to know, who that debris on your side of the
fence belongs to.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We do thank you for coming out. And just have Mr.
V~anTuyl call us.
MRS. CAHILL: I will call him tomorrow and he can call right here.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, he will call Linda, he knows Linda
Page 9
PubHc Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: very well. Linda Kowalski.
MRS. CAHILL: Okay, you are Linda. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Hearing no further comments, I make a motion
closing the hearing, pending the receipt of the actual square footage
based upon the surveyor's determination. I need a second, Charlie is not
here tonight.
MEMBER DOYEN: Second.
All in favor - AYE.
End of hearing.
Lorraine A. Miller
(Transcribed by tapes recorded 5/7/92.)
Page 10
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Appeal # 4098
Applicant(s): Tony and Maria Kostoulas
Location of Property: 1035 Aquaview Avenue, East Marion, NY
County Tax Map No.: 1000-21-2-13
The Chairman opened the hearing at 7:55 p.m. and read the Notice of
Hearing and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey dated November 15, 1990,
updated December 19, 1991 indicating an existing, partially ground level
deck, thereby enclosing most of the rear yard area, landward, lip of the
bluff, a wood deck, which is a landing, and then steps leading down to
Long Island Sound. The nature of this application is the existing
partially ground level deck and, I believe the elevated wood deck. And I
have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding
properties in the area. Is there any representa-
tives for the Kostoulas's.
MRS. MARIA KOSTOULAS: We are here and I also have pictures for you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I forgot where your house was, I went to the wrong:
house.
MRS. KOSTOULAS: Quite honestly, we were not aware we needed a variance
for this. It is at ground level, we simply connected the two existing
decks. It is probably about a total of two hundred and fifty (250) square
feet. It is exists r~ght now, as you can see from the pictures. We have
two (2) very young children. We have a three (3) year old and a one (1)
year old, so the main purpose of this was to keep them in the back yard.
It is 40 mph zone in front of our house and it is very dangerous with the
kids running out. I also have another picture to show you. Last year, we
were here for a variance, there is a eement slab in the baek of the house
that we were not allowed to remove because it is on the back of the
Sound. So it posed a danger for the children as well, so that was another
reason that we chose to cover it with the wood planks.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, I think that at the time you came before us,
you were expecting with that second et~ild.
MRS. KOSTOULAS: You are right, a year-old now.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There has been some discussion before the Town
Trustees concerning this deck and its position in the new Coastal Zone
Management Law. What has been going on with the Trustees over this deck,
anything to your knowledge?
MRS. KOSTOULAS: Nothing.
Page 11
Public Hearing ·
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Nothing.
MRS. KOSTOULAS: I did speak myself to Mr. Bredmeyer and he said it was,
no decision has been made.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It is undecided.
MRS. KOSTOULAS: At the time I spoke to him and that was, I would say a
month ago, so nobody has told me anything otherwise. The only change was,
that it was about ninety-five percent (95%) completed, with the exception
of the cement slab and the Building Inspector told us to just finish it
and make it safe because it was a libility at that point. The children
could just fall on it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You have gotten a C.O. for the house?
MRS. KOSTOULAS: Correct.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You just don't have the C.O. for this deck and
that is basically ....
MRS. KOSTOULAS: Right, but when I got the original C.O. it included the
deck that went down to the water and that was part of the original C.O.
The only thing we don't have is that middle piece between the existing
deck and the h0user
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, let us see what develops. Thank you. Is
there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application?
Anybody like to speak against this application? Bob?
MEMBER VILLA: Well, the only thing that you can say about this, is that
you would, if you were looking at it before it was done, it could be a
disturbance to the bluff or to the land area. It is accomplished, it is
done, so if you are going to dismantle it, you create another situation
where you might be disturbing the bluff. It is aimost better leaving it
be.
MRS~ KOSTOULAS: If I could say something with my husband, we have done
everything in our power, to obviously make it as safe for us as possible~
We intend on living there for a long time. We planted two hundred (200)
rose bushes to preserve the bluff. We've done, literally, everything we
possibly could. We didn't make it an elevated deck for that reason, we
just put it right on the ground. We tried to do as little as possible,
just to cover it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I want to be honest with you. I was completely
floored when I Went there. I didn't realize that. There is no doubt in
my mind, I'm sure that you probably didn't realize that you couldn't do
· what you did also. As I said, I
Page 12
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (eon't): went two (2) houses down and I said I
think I am at the wrong house, and that is 'when I came two (2) houses back
up again. Two (2) houses to the east I was. I really don't know how to
answer this thing, except that we really should address the issue again
with Mr. Bredmeyer and see if there is any change and that is what we will
do. We will close the hearing tonight and if there is any reason that he
wants to readdress any particular issue, or any member of the Town
Trustees, we will reopen it, if not, we will do the best we can for you,
that is all we can do.
MRS. KOSTOULAS: We appreciate that.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We thank you very much for coming in. Again, is
there anybody else who would like to speak either pro or against this?
Seeing no hands, I will make a motion closing the hearing, reserving the
decision until later.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Second.
All in favor - AYE.
End of hearing. ,~
Lorraine A. Miller
(Transcribed by tapes recorded 5/7/92)
Page 13
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Appeal # 4103
Applicant(s): Warren and Ellen Hufe (Future Screw Machine
Products, Inc. )
Location of Property: 41155 County Road 48, Southold, NY
County Tax Map No.: 1000-59-7-33
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:00 p.m. and read the Notice
of Hearing and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of a survey dated February 5, 1992.
The nature of this application is a 342 sq.ft, addition, one-story frame
construction to the existing machine shop on the northeasterly side. And
I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and
surrounding properties in the area. Mr. Bayley I understa~ld you are
presenting? Any time you are ready.
MR. ROBERT T. BAYLEY: I got some pictures with me to help show the
situation. Right now, this is a panel of existing photos of the machine
shop. And the picture in the lower left hand corner, shows the machine
shop as here from Kenneys Road with the trailer parked on the site. As
you know, and most of the people in the neighborhood know, the trailer is
rather unslightly. It has been parked there for quite a while. The
primary reason for this applicant making an appeal to add on to the
building, is to remove the trailer. The trailer is roughly forty (40)
feet long by eight (8) feet wide and the area that the owners would like
to add to the building is roughly comparable to the area that would be
lost when the trailer is removed from the site. The first thing I would
say is, is well, if you are going to add onto the building, why not add in
such a way that it isn't, that is conforming. The owners would like to do
that, however, the storage facilities right now, in the building are all
along the property line, which is ten '(10) feet from existing building
line, which is presently used for storage. And there is an access road on
that side as well. So the deliveries are all made from Kenneys Road along
the back, as you view it from the North Road of the property. So, in
order to continue to service the property away from the busy North Road
and using the existing service drive. This is the logical place to put
the addition. So, that is why it is located in that corner. I also feel,
as an architect, that by putting an addition in that corner, I will just
let this drop, it actually improves the building as well as improve the
site. Improving the site is obvious, because the trailer will no longer
be there, that is a big improvement. But I think in addition, it is
better for the building because the addition will wrap around the corner.
And let us see, here is another view, there is a very unsHghtiy storage
building on that corner at the rear anyway, the 'addition will penetrate no
/ ~ further towards the property line than this existing storage facility
already does.
Page 14
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. BAYLEY (con't): It merely, shall we say, engages the existing
nonconformance. We think thai this a modest approach and a modest, a
sensible way to make up for the loss of the trailer. As I said, the space
involved is roughly the same as the trailer and we also realize that this
is an undersized lot, that is to say that the map of addition to the
building, now puts the building at the limit, as far as site coverage, so
I sincerely doubt that the owners will be contemplating adding, because
they would be in excess of the twenty percent (20%) coverage limit on this
site. But, as I say, this does not go beyond the twenty percent (20%) but
it is close to it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you so much sir. Thank you for this
presentation. Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of
this application? Anybody like to speak against this application?
Specific questions from any of the Board members. Hearing no further
comment, I make a motion closhlg the hearing, reserving decision until
later.
MEMBER DOYEN: Second.
All in favor - AYE.
by ~/~z~ ~
Lorraine A. Miller
(Transcribed by tapes recorded 5/7/92
Page 15
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Appeal # 4100
Applicant(s): Thomas J. McCarthy (Contract Vendee)
Location of Property: 1270 Fourth Street and 305 King Street
New Suffolk, NY
County Tax Map No.: 1000-117-7-8
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:05 p.m. and read the Notice
of Hearing and Application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have before us, three (3) plans, three (3)
specific site plans from a licensed surveyor and we have a copy of the
Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the
area. Is there somebody who would like to represent Mr. McCarthy or is he
here. Oh, this is the Mr. McCarthy. How are you?
MR. THOMAS J. McCARTHY: Good evening. I would like to present some
pictures of the buildings as they exist. They were taken today. These
are the four (4) pre-existing buildings and the second group is the
buildings that are in the area that are similar and they are quoted on the
letter that I submitted for the Board members. I would just like to make
the Board aware of is that the all four (4) structures on the property are
pre-existing, operating independently, not dependent upon each other. And
they are very similar to the other properties that are in the area, and
New Suffolk has very small lot areas. And on sheets three and four (3 and
4) you will be able to see the entire section of the Town, Section 117 ,
Block 7, I did an analysis of the total square footage of the existing
lots in the area, along with the square footage foot print of the
structures that are on' tilose buildings, and the density, the
percentages. And if you were to look at the next page, Page 4, Plan 1,
Plan 2, and Plan 3, the way they are subdivided, do not exceed either the
lower l/mits of the total square footage of the lots there, that are
involved in that section of New Suffolk. And the total building square
footages are not the lowest in the area either and the densities conform
within the parameters, the lot density for creating these lots, would not
be anything higher than what already exists down the neighborhood. When I
first saw this piece of property, I rode by and it was my impression that
they were four (4) independent pieces, and not until I took a lookat the
tax map, did I find out .they were on one (1) piece of property. And at
that point I becam~ involved in the property. I feel that maybe a similar
condition with anyone else driving by, would see them operating separately
and independently, and not seeing them working together. So I think that
there is one thing that is left, is to create legally a separation between
the four (4) of them. They are legally operating independently right
now. And what I would like to do is to improve the, each one of the
structures, because they are in rather poor condition right now. To
improve them, put some money into the project
MR. McCARTHY (eon't): and I believe it will increase the character of
Page 16
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
the neighborhood. Because they are currently rental units right now and
the present owner doesn't wish to put any money into them and they are
falling into a state of disrepair. So I feel that by having a positive
motion on this application and it will help the neighborhood because we
will be able to put some money into the structures. The neighborhood will
look better and it will also provide some housing in the area, that
already exists, that will be affordable for some of the younger people in
the area. I don't see these structures just by their own existence. The
size of them, and the size of the lots garnering a great deal of money. I
think that they afford the opportunity to some of the residents of getting
a place they can call their own, building up equity in it and perhaps
using it as a stepping stone to move onto another house as they move on
with their lives and have children and what not. I think it already
exists, it is operating legaiiy right now and if we could separate them it
might provide opportunity for four (4) people within the Town to have a
chance to get a stepping stone move further.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: For the record, we have three (3') C.O.'s on all
four (4) buildings.
MR. McCARTHY: That is correct.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do we have any idea when these dwellings were
constructed to the best of your knowledge?
MR. McCARTHY: Not really.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, let us go on the Number 1, 2, 3 situation.
Number 1--do we have a, I should point out to you that these are all
rented as of to date?
MR. McCARTHY: Yes they are.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And that is part of one of the reasons why I
didn't walk on the property, other then, I know one of the members had a
nice discussion with one of the people there and so on and so forth. Lot
# 1 has a one-story frame house, do we have a basement in this house, is
there any type of ....
MR. McCARTHY: Which plan are you looking at?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, actuaily they all prodder the same plan,
right? They are all Lot 1, 2, 3, and 4, aren't they, yes. Okay, it would
be the house closest to King Street actually, Lot #1.
MR. McCARTHY: That is a two bedroom ranch and yes, it does have a
basement. ~'~
Page 17
Public Hearin~
Southold ZBA 5/7/9~
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is that the one? That is the one, you have house
1, so will we assume house 1 is lot #17
MR. McCARTHY: Yes it is.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So Lot #1 has a full basement, or a partial
basement it in. Now Lot # 2 is what?
MR. McCARTHY: Two (2) story frame house, looks like a farm house, it
also has a partial basement.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Brick foundation it appears.
MR. McCARTHY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. So then we would say that the other two (2)
are less stately than the ones we just mentioned.
Preferably Lot # 3, which we assume would be this one, is a Httle wider,
it sits in the back. This appears to have a partial block foundation or
crawl space.
MR. McCARTHY: It is a crawl space.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. That construction on the side is the
carport/garage effect I assume. Right, that we are referring to, that is
fairly close to the property line.
MR. McCARTHY: Yes it is. It is about a foot off the property line as
it exists.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the last one, is the very narrow house on Lot
# 4, and that appears to have pretty much, not much of a foundation
probably.
MR. McCARTHY: It's a similar condition to Lot #3 without the garage and
shed.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Now, each one of these have their own separate
electric meters, they have their own electric, service is separate to
eachhouse?
MR.McCARTH¥: I believe Lot # 3 and Lot # 4, electric service comes
across Lot #4 to Lot # 3.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: On Lot #3, it may come across, but that is only a
utility easement, that is not necessarily, it has its own separate meter
though right.
MR. McCARTHY: I'm not certain about that.
Page 18
Public Hearing
Southotd ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are not certain about that. I should
point out to you that what I would be interested in looking at
Page 19
PubHc Hea~ng
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (eon't): is going back and looking at house 3 and
4, so whatever you can do, within the next two (2) weeks to set up an
appointment, preferably on a Saturday morning alright, and it will be
greatly appreciated. Maybe even the sixteenth (16th) or so, which is, as
long as it is 9:30 or 9:45 (a quarter to ten), something of that nature,
because I have an appointment at 12:00.
MR. McCARTHY: Is there any information I can get in the mean time so I
am prepared for the sixteenth (16th)?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, let us talk about the square footage on Lot
#4 for a second. The house is how large in reference to total square
footage? I probably have it.
MR. McCARTHY: Construction # 4 is, measures out to four hundred
sixty-two square feet (462 sq.ft.).
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, so certainly we would want to make that lot
as large as possible, since it is approximately almost fifty percent (50%)
under what the normal eight hundred fifty square feet (850 sq.ft.) of
what .....
MR. McCARTHY: For today's standards.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And conceivably a house that narrow is, would
only service probably one or two (1 or 2) people, so it would behoove us
to deal with that aspect, which would mean that we would be more
interested, I would be more interested in either one of these plans,
excuse me Serge, either one of these plans, preferably Plan #3, which
gives us much lot area to house ~ 4 as possible. And maybe even trying to
get a little bit more out of it, without creating anything, any situation
that may even be worse for Lot #3, but we can discuss that when we do a
field inspection when we get down there, alright?
MR. McCARTHY: Fine.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You don't have any problems with either one these
tenants that they wouldn't show us the dwelling, do you?
MR. McCARTHY: No, I need permission from the landlord, but I can set
that up.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRiNGER: Okay, great, is the .sixteenth (16th) alright with
you guys.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I probably won't be here.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: (Speaking to Member Dinizio) You won't be here?
Page 20
Public Hearing
Southotd ZBA 5/7/92
MEMBER DINIZIO: No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay. Did you use your charm to get into any of
these dwellings when you went there.
MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I didn't get inside, no.
MR. McCARTHY: One of them has dogs, he had to be careful.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, I think that it about it as it stands, Mr.
McCarthy and we will see you on the sixteenth (16th).
MEMBER VILLA: Jerry, can I say something?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Surely. I was just finishing mine.
MEMBER VILLA: Have you been to the County Health Department on this,
because you are going to be looking for a four (4) lot subdivision which
falls under the Health Code.
MR. McCARTHY: Yes.
MEMBER VILLA: Have you been there yet. Because these are all, you are
talking wells and cesspools and you are going to have a real problem
laying out wells and cesspools to meet the one hundred (100) foot
separation.
MR. McCARTHY: As I was to understand, the Suffolk County Code
currently, this is a pre-existing situation, I might as well ....
MEMBER VILLA: If they are going to be putting a stamp on a subdivision,
they are going to want you to relocate systems. And if you relocate
systems, you are going to need to be pretty, much, you know they are going
to try to get you to comply with the code. And therefore, they might want
you to reconfigure some of these lots, so that you. They will want a well
and cesspool system for each house on the lot.
MR. McCARTHY: Yes.
MEMBER VILLA: You if you get maximum distances, you might be having to
have small little fingers coming out someplace at least large enough to
put a well on, which would be contiguous with that lot. So, you better do
some homework with the Health Department I think at this point. Because
they might present problems for you that you can't work around.
MR. McCARTHY: I see, as far as a zoning matter, with a preliminary
approval pending, would that be the course of action, preliminary approval
from your Board pending approval from the Health Dept. /f~
Page 21
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, we would probably make it subject to Health
Department approval, conceivably to what degree you might have to conform,
I am not questioning in anyway, my fellow members here, his expertise not
his experience in the Suffolk County Department of Health Services, but
you may have to deal with it on a future basis.
MR. McCARTHY: I understand.
MEMBER VILLA: You see what I am saying, is that they may come back to
you and say look, we will live with three (3) lots on here, but we are not
going to live on four (4). And that would change your entire application
to this Board.
MR. McCARTHY: I understand. It is kind of like the chicken and the
egg, as far as I'm concerned, so I figured that I would find out what the
Town wanted first and work in cooperation with your Board and then propose
it to the Health Department.
MEMBER VILLA: I think~ that in this case, it might be the best the
other way around, because I think that they are probably going to give you
more problems than anybody.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What is your timeliness on the contract?
MR. McCARTHY: I have a few months left, I have to double check that and
get back to you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So you still have time to play around.
MR. McCARTHY: I don't know about play, I would say time is of the
essence because in order for me to perform under the contract, the
approvals would be necessary from the Health Dept. and I guess, the
blessing of the Planning Board as well.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, as long as in my particular opinion for the
record, as long as we can get enough on that Lot ~4 to, in my opinion, I
don't have a particular problem, but that's, as it looks right now,
without going for, we will see what develops after the sixteenth (16th)o
MR. McCARTHY: Fine. Do you have the pictures that were in addition
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. Do you want these back?
MR. McCARTHY: I just, I don't know if the rest of the members have seen
them. I just wanted to point out ....
MEMBER VILLA: I was there today, so. I didn't run into the dog.
MR. McCARTHY: The photos are similar sized structures of
Page 22
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. McCARTHY (con't.): on similar size lots, with similar size density
that are located right in the neighborhood.
MEMBER VILLA: The only thing that makes this different is you are trying
to split it up and that is where you are going to run into a problem.
Pre-existing, you know, if you don't have the one hundred (100) foot, you
are replacing your well, well you get the maximum you can. Because that
is all you got. But here you are physically trying to split a piece of
property and I think that they are going to look at it differently.
MR. McCARTHY: I understand.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good luck. We will see you on the sixteenth
(16th), just give us an idea on time alright.
MR. McCARTHY: Thank you very much.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Your welcome. I make a motion ~ecessing the
hearing, I don't know if we will get it on the next calendar but we will
try. We will recess it without a date, but we will readvertise it
anyway. Okay. Second.
MEMBER VILLA: Second.
All in favor - AYE.
End of hearing.
' Lorraine A. Miller
(Transcribed by tapes recorded 5/7/92)
Page 23
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Appeal ~ 4037
Applicant(s): Metro/808 Realty Corp.
Location of Property: Corner of the northery side of Main Road
(Route 25) and the westerly side of
Depot Lane, Cutchogue, NY
County Tax Map No. : 1000-102-5-26
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:27 p.m. and read the Notice of
Hearing and Application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I had before this Board at the last regulary
scheduled meeting and we are very simply completing the hearing tonight
and we would ask if Mr. Allen Smith would like to add any further
information to the record.
MR. ALLEN SMITH: Mr. Goehringer and members of the Board, I sent to Mr.
Goehringer by mail a copy of the stipulation that you requested from our
last hearing and made a few comments in repsonse To the invitation of the
Board, relative to the gasoline/service station aspect. Other than that,
I have nothing more to add. Just simply, if Mr. Goehringer would include
those comments from the letter of May 1, I would appreciate it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I shall, I thank you. Thank you for coming down.
MR. SMITH: Yes sir.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in
favor or against this hearing? I should mention the number of the
hearing, based upon the thickness of the file it is Appeal # 4037 in
behalf of Metro/808 Realty. Hearing no further comments, seeing no
further hands, I make a motion closing the hearing, reserving decision
until later.
All in favor - AYE.
End of hearing.
by c . ~ ~ -
Lorraine A. Miller
(Transcribed by tapes .recorded 5/7/92.)
Page 24
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Appeal #4080
ApPlicant(s): George and Sue Tsavaris
Location of Property: 2170 The Strand, East Marion, NY{
County Tax Map No.: 1000-30-2-53
The Chairman opened the hearing at 8:30 p.m. and read the Notice of
Hearing and Application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: ........ Indicating the placement of spected
structures over and above the house, dwelling, house and/or dwelling. And
I have copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding
properties in the area. You are on.
MR. GEORGE TSAVARIS: I am George Tsavaris and this is mY wife Sue.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do.
MRS. SUE TSAVARIS: These are just some, I just figured that I bad them
typed up and you could look at them afterward.
MR. TSAVARIS: We also have pictures here, that we would like you to
refer to. There is only one (1) comment that I would to make on what you
have read is that the structure is really placed (difficult to
understand)
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We are going to have to ask you to use the
microphone, if you don't mind. It is right over here on my left, your
right, either side.
MR. TSAVARIS: The structure is actually placed sixty (60) feet behind
the average bluff line, that is the measurment that we used for the
setback in the Pebble Beach Farm development.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, so you have really two (2) bluff lines I
assume.
MR. TSAVARIS: Right, exactly.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We did run i~to that on the opposite side.
MR. TSAVARIS: It always comes up, it is a confusing point.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, what else would you tike to say.
MR. TSAVARIS: I would like to say that when we we first build our home
in t984, we, there was no cable in that particular development and there
was no plans on the part of cable to bring
Page 25
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. TSAVARIS (eon't): cable into Pebble Beach Farm, probably because of
the low density of the population at that particular time. The only
reception that was available then were Channels 20 and 61. And the others
were available, but the reception was very poor. Now, we had at that
particular time, children age 3, 2, I and of course, we felt that is was
very important to us to receive certain stations such as PBS and Disney,
that were otherwise unavailable. So, since the satellite, there were two
(2) satellite antennas already present in Pebble Beach Farms, we thought
that that was an alternative, but a rather expensive alternative. Now, m
chosing the location for the satellite antenna, you need an unobstructive
view of the western sky. The tall trees in the golf course made it very,
made it impossible to place that satellite antenna in the front of house.
The other alternatives were either putting it on the roof of the house or
in the back yard. Now, if you are familiar at all with Pebble Beach
Farms, you have the hundred foot setback from the average bluff line, you
have to build your home a certain number of feet from the road, which
means you have a very small amount of room to actually build your home.
So, practically the entire backyard of our home was in that one hundred
(100) foot setback area. Now, as you get the location of that antenn~
being placed on the roof was ruled out because of safety considerations
considering the strong winds that come off the Sound. So that left us
with the back yard. And as you, the trees on the golf course actually
were shorter as you approach the bluff, so that was the only logical
location for the satellite antenna. When we erected it in 1985, there
were no objections from any of the neighbors from the Lot Number
Association, from the DEC and who actually inspected our property twice,
and even the Southold Town Building Department, whose inspectors had been
in the immediate vacinity several times during that period of time. That
is all I would like to say right now. I would like to save further
comments so that I can address any other comments that might be made in or
against the antenna.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just ask you, do you have cablevision now?
MR. TSAVARIS: Cable is now been recently available in Pebble Beach
Farms, that is correct,
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you subscribe to it?
MR. TSAVARIS: No because I have a satellite. ] subscribe to the
package deals that satellite distributors offer us.
CHAIRMAN GOEHR[NGER: Do you have any obstruction where the satellite
dish is placed now, is there a blackout area.
MR. TSAVARIS: No, I have clear reception.
Page 26
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You have clear reception. Just for the record, I
just want to mention that, I knew that somewhere along the line, in my
]present tenere on this Board, and this has no reflection on the present
applicants, that we were going to address these issues, okay, because
there are certain people that like these dishes and of course, there are
certain people who do not like them. Some people consider them to be
extremely unsightly and we will deal with it to the best of our ability.
That is all I can tell you.
MR. TSAVARIS: The only thing that I can say that, most of the Towns on
Long Island have excepted satellite dish technology and have written codes
to address that particular issue. The only Town that I believe that who
have ever refused a permit, on the basis of a neighbor's opposition, was
Hempstead. And I believe these were overturned on an appeal. So that is
the only comment I have to make. It seems, it doesn't seem quite right~
when other neighbors, other people here in Southold Town can enjoy
satellite antenna because their neighbors listened to what mine did and
yet those neighbors who seem to want that type of technology can block any
motion to grant a permit to a homeowner who wishes to take advantage of
that type of technology.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: While I have you up there Mr. Tsavaris, there is ~
no drone from the antenna itself, when you move the antenna it is an
electrical motion, which probably is very quiet is that correct?
MR. TSAVARIS: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Does it cause any particular problem to any
surrounding neighbors in reference to their disruption of either their TV,
their FM stations or anything of that nature.
MR. TSAVARIS: None at all, because we also, our children sometimes do
tune into Channels 61 and 20, without any problem.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: So, therefore, the placement is the only issue
that we are particularly concerned with here. The reason why I ask you
this question is because as you know we do, I shouldn't say that, as you
know, I am not assuming you know, we do all types of tower activity and
this happens to be something that is placed on the ground, alright. And
there are certain things that we have before us, do make noise, do affect
people's transmission of their free enjoyment of their property and that
is reason why I had to ask you that question, just so that you are aware
of that. Okay, are there any questions of the Board at this particular
time?
MEMBER DINIZIO: I Would like to make a statement I suppose.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Go ahead. ~-~'
Page 27
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MEMBER DINIZIO: Although I do not work now, I did work for cablevision.
MR. TSAVARIS: We used to subscribe to cablevision when we lived in East
Meadow.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I did design this particular system in this
development, however, I do not work for them now. I want to make that
perfectly clear. If you could please, I don't know who you got the
antenna from, give me a direction in which, the furthest direction in
which you would be able to pick up any recept}on from that antenna. In
other words what angle would be pointing, due west, relative to the way it
is in the yard. The situation .....
MR. TSAVARIS: I don't quite follow you.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, in order to pick up the satellites, you have to
move this dish at a certain angle, okay, to be facing in a certain
direction.
MR. TSAVARIS: That, that is in order To focus in on a particular
satellite.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Correct. Can you or whoever did the dish for you, draw
-me a line or draw us a line where your reception begins
and where it ends. In other words, if you are looking at a certain
satellite, the furthest one, okay, probably now would be to the south or
the southwest, draw us a line as To, on here, it would more like a "V"
shape, where you begin and where you end. I would like to see, because I
can't tell from this particular map the positioning of your dish, okay.
If it is necessary to have it so close, or if the trees, in other words
could it be moved to the middle of the yard, could it be moved to the
other side of the yard, and still get the same type reception.
MR. TSAVARIS: The properties on Pebble Beach on the water are only
one-half (1/2) acre lots. Now one-third (1/3) of that property is lost to
the beach, there is not much room to play with.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I would say, that you wouldn't be moving them. towards
the back,, for the back, you would be moving, if you could move that
antenna, you would be more laterally on the eighty-five (85) feet or so
that you have east and west. Is that a possibility?
MR. TSAVARIS: There are pictures there that we show you the height of
the trees and you need that setback just to be able to clear those trees.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I would like to see that. I would like to
Page 28
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MEMBER DINIZlO (eon't): see if the furthest point south that you would
point, how would that look with a line drawn on this particular survey
that I have, as opposed to your house, as opposed to those trees that
timber a retaining wall. Seems to be that is where the large trees stop
and they get very small after that. If you drew a line from where your
dish is right now to that retaining wall, would your reception be enhanced
or decreased.
MR. TSAVARIS: It definately will not be enhanced. If I am receiving
excellent reception then let us say the trees weren't there, then the
level movement would not decrease my reception, it would still remain
good. However, you have that antenna, depending upon, you see, ! don't
know if you are familiar with the dishes at ail, but where the dish is at
its lowest, it is direeted towards the area where the trees end. Now as
it focuses in on some of the other satellites, then it rises up and clears
the top of the trees. Now we have neighbor, who is right a~eross the road
from us, who has the satellite dish antenna who can only focus in on one
or two (1 or 2) satellites because of the problem of the trees on the golf
course. Considering that you can take advantage of seven (7) satellites
or more, limiting yourself to just two (2) satellites with that expensive
of an investment, is not really worth the money then.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Yea, just knowing from the positioning of the
satellites, I am very familiar with, I would like to know relative to your
property, if you would lose. Do you lose any line of sight to any
satellite dish by moving that laterally on your property or not.
MR. TSAVARIS: The only thing I can say to that is that I didn't choose
the location. It was chosen by the people who installed it as being the
best possible spot for that satellite antenna. The people who installed
it are now no longer, they were located in East Meadow and they are no
longer there. However, we can probably get that information from the
person who serves the antenna now,
MEMBER DINIZIO: I don't want it to be a big deal, just a question of...
It is very difficult to tell from this map, and certainly is difficult
just to tell from standing there.
MR. TSAVARIS: I will ask the person who services it and he can provide
that information.
CHAIRHAM GOEHRINGER: Thank you, we will see what else develops.
Anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this application?
Anybody like to speak against this application? Would you like to use the
mike and state your name for the record.
Page 29
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
What I would like to do is to refer to the letter ] submitted and
photos I submitted.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, could you just state your name for the
record.
MR. EDWARD KONDAK: Ed Kondak.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to speak in
behalf of this application either pro or against?
MR. TSAVARIS: Are they just referring to their letter?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes. They are just referring to their letter.
MR. TSAVARIS:Then I would like to comment.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Certainly, Mr. Tsavaris.
MR. TSAVARIS: Okay, now is seems to me that the basic problem here is
that the opposition from our neighbors is the present location of the
satellite antenna, otherwise in the seven (7) years that this antenna
stood there, there hadn't been any complaints from anyone else. Now, I
would like to make a few points, that during this time, during the time
that we erected the antenna, three or four (3 or 4) years after that our
neighbors had a lot on the water in Pebble Beach several lots further east
from ours. Now in the lot exchange deal, they traded their lot for the
one next to ours, which makes it kind of strange that they would buy a
piece of property next To a structure that they found so offensive. Now,
one (1) year ago, we invited our neighbors into our home and asked them if
they had any objections to our planting a row of trees along our side of
the property line. And we hoped that this wou-ld improve relations by
creating a greater degree of privacy for both us and themselves and they
readily agreed. And as a matter of fact, when Hurricane Bob hit Long
Island, it blew a couple of mesh panels from the original dish and instead
of just repairing those two (2) panels at minimal cost, we replaced the
whole mesh work, which is a more transparent mesh to see whether or not
that might appease them. Of course, that didn't do anything either. They
stated in their letter that they were waiting patiently for cable to come
into our development before lodging their complaint. But, in their letter
they take an issue with everything in our back yard, including the trees
that they agreed to anc~ the well they we use for irrigation. We feel that
the complaints are motivated by personal animosity towards us and nothing
more. They also mention in their letter of a limited natural resource.
We don't know exactly what they mean by that, however, we assume they are
referring to the view. They have an unobstructed view, as you can see
from the pictures
Page 30
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. TSAVARIS (con't.): that we submitted to you, an unobstructed view of
Connecticut from their home, something few people can claim.
MR. KONDAK: That is not true.
MR. TSAVARIS: It is not true?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Just hold on. Okay, just hold on, go ahead sir.
MR. TSAVARIS: In our opinion, the limited natural resource at Pebble
Beach is privacy. They feel that with the availabilty of cable, we should
dismantle our antenna and subscribe to cable, however, we feel that they
are not only infringing on privacy, but als0 on our freedom of choice.
When they exchanged their property for the lot next to ours, when other
lots were available, they exercised their freedom of choice. When they
angled their house and their deck so that they overlooked our backyard,
they exercised their freedom of choice. They demand that we dismantle our
antenna and hook-up to cable, it denies us the same freedom of choice. At
the same time, they feel they have the authority to dictate their will
upon us. In closing, we ask the Board to recognize our right to continue
to using the satellite antenna by granting us this variance, just as it
has granted variances to other homeowners for such things decks, swimming
pools, and gazebos. That is basically it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Just before you sit down, one thing I just want to
say Mr. Tsavaris, you will be coming back before this Board for other
issues that are encompassed within this letter that we have received from
your neighbors, and that is, I think the deck and the fireplace or the
harbeque issue and so on and so forth. So those issues we will address
later at a different ..... Okay, thank you. Sir, would like to address
anytking that he has said? Let us try to keep it as productive as
possible and the least amount of counterproductivity as possible.
MR. KONDAK: All I would like to say is that, in the letter I stated
that we were very patient. I objected to the position of the satellite
dish from the very beginning.
MRS. KONDAK: But we were patient to wait until cable came to ask them to
either get rid of it or move it. I said I think it was pretty nice of me
to wait until cable came into the community could you please move it. Oh
no, we are not going to move it. I said, come into my living room, look
out my living room, everybody says to me gee, how does your satellite dish
work. I said I wouldn't know, it is not mine, you mean you have to look
at that on Sound front property, and you can't even use it. And I said at
some point in time, you are going to have to move it.
Page 31
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MRS. KONDAK (eon't.): So they waited until I, they knew I worked on a
Thursday morning, they got somebody in and changed it after the storm,
with a bigger, more obnoxious one, but my father-in-law happened to be out
to show that they were changing it and I went out and ask the men are you
moving the base of this satellite dish. And they said no. I said I spoke
to them twice about please moving this satellite dish. It is, it was
illegal, I told her it was illegal, she knew I knew it was illegal, I was
patient enough to wait until cable came. I watched the programs that he
said his kids couldn't watch, it wasn't enough. My kids, who were two and
four (2 and 4) could watch them. I watched Connecticut, it was more than
two stations too. I watched it, it was all I was watching until two (2)
weeks ago when I got cablevision. And when I was building my house, he
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Don't do any pointing, everything is addressed up
here.
MRS. KONDAK: [ am sorry. They erected the fireplace while I was
building my house. They had a truck on my yard pounding in the well when
my property was cleared and my house was framed. No permission from me,
they didn't ask me, nothing. I just said I don't want to be obnoxious, I
wanted to just be neighborly, ! want ~o get along with people. I have
asked them twice nicely to move it, isn't there another alternative, can't
you get one on your roof.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I can't comment on anything you are saying, you
have the perfect right to make the statement you are making and I could
not agree with you more, as I started this hearing and told you, okay, we
would have this problem down the line with these. I have been told by my
colleague to my left and your right, that my next year these satellite
dishes will be placed in a cone approximately eighteen inches in diameter,
okay. If people choose to change them, that will be up to their own
discretion. As I sit here before you, on this Board, I canno~ agree with
you that they are unsHghtly, because they are. I concur with you one
hundred and ten percent (110%). At this particular time, I have no idea
how my other colleagues will feel, that does not necessarily mean that we
are taking these peoples right away, okay. That does not necessarity mean
that I am voting in favor of asking them to get rid of the dish, okay.
will go back to my own coined comments that I have made all the way back,
to the beginning tenere on this Board, which was in 1980 and that is, it
is extremely difficult to live in a community some sixty (60) feet from
your neighbor and not be able to agree. I would completely ask you if
there is any other way, okay that we can have you, in some way agree in
concept, okay, that everybody would be happy, that the Board could deal
with on so on and so forth. As you have just mentioned to me, it does not
appear to be any type of give or take on this
Page 32
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: situation, so therefore, we are going to have to
rule on it and that is basically the situation. I want to be honest with
you, I said this before, I have addressed this issue before with the press
here, without the press, we have asked people to go out in the hall, we
have asked them to come back in, until 1986 when we almost had a
fist-fight out in the hall. We don't do that anymore. Because
conceivably, I couln't live with myself if somebody came back in here with
a bloody nose, airight. I don't know what to tell you at this point,
alright. It is an approach, approach conflict, but that may be one of the
questions that Mr. Dinizio ....
MRS. KONDAK: Also, I would like to comment too, he said we faced our
decktowards his front yard, the whole bluff line it goes in an angle like
this. We faced our house exactly perpendicular to the bluff Hne,
regardless of which way he angled his house. If it was a regular
backyard, I wouldn't have that much of a gripe about it. But it is a
sound front piece of property, that is the problem. I wouldn't care if he
put it in his front yard, I wouldn't care, just I shouldn't have to look
at it. And believe it or not, I have been in their house and from their
house I didn't see it from their house. I only see it from mine. And, of
course, no other neighbor is going to complain because it is only in my
view.
CHAIRMAN GOERHINGER. Are you okay.
MRS. KONDAK: Yes.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, we appreciate your comments and...
MR. KONDAK: I would just Hke to add one other thing.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Certainly Mr. Kondak.
MR. KONDAK: When they replaced the damaged dish with the newer one, the
newer one was larger and higher. I objected to that, why was that done?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no idea, I have no idea why the Building
Department didn't address a building permit with this in the beginning.
MRS. KONDAK: They never had one.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, that is basically the situation
MR. KONDAK: Well, you know the fact that this one is larger, higher
dish the other dish wasn't as ....
MRS. KONDAK: When I spoke to him twice previous about either
Page 33
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MRS. KONDAK (eon't): moving it or get rid of it. It was broken, they
could have done something else.
MR. KONKAK:They had the opportunity at that time to compromise.
MRS. KONDAK: To change it, to move it on the roof, something, put it up
their pressure treated wood area over there.
MR. KONDAK: There was no compromise.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We thank you again and we will see. I just want
to stop the, I don't want to stop the hearing, I just want to stop the
situation. It is not .... The problem we have is that we continually,
continually have problems with view easements and accessory structures in
rear yard areas on the water. There is no two (2) ways about it, okay.
It has been a problem all the way along and you will see the next
situation at the next group of hearings where the person wa~ting to put in
an accessory building in their rear yard area and so on and so forth. And
this is, this will be, this will culimate to be the fourth (4th) hearing
for a storage building at the next regularly scheduled meeting. So, I
mean, this has been going on, I mean, I don't know what to tell you, but
needless to say, I understand your situation, I understand your
frustration and we will try and deal with it to the best of our ability.
Thank you.
MR. & MRS. KONDAK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Tsavaris, is there anything you would like to
add to the record without causing another ....
MR. TSAVARIS: The only thing I can say is that it seems to me very
strange why you can't see it from my house, from my rear window and you
can only see it from their rear window, unless the angles of the homes are
cockeyed.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you understand what Mr. Dinizio is asking you
to do.
MR. TSAVARIS: I understand that.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And you are going to furnish us with that
information. Okay. Hearing no further comment, I make a motion closing
the hearing pending the receipt of the information.
MR. TSAVARIS: How much time do I have for that .....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Two (2) weeks, three (3) weeks.
MRS. TSAVARIS: Excuse me. We have one problem, the gentleman
Page 34
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/?/92
MRS. TSAVARIS (con't.)~: that services the satellite dish right now is
in Germany, and he is going to be gone for two (2) weeks.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, well, just get it to us by the, next meeting
is when.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: June 4th.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: June 4th, the Friday before June 4th, if you will.
MEMBER DINIZIO: He can call me if he needs any .... Just call in and I
~ll contact him.
MRS. TSAVARIS: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Again, making a motion closing the hearing pending
the receipt of the information that Mr. Dinizio has requested of the
applicant.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Second.
All in favor - AYE.
End of hearing.
Lorraine A. Miller
Transcribed by tapes recorded 5/?/93)
Page 35
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Appeal ~ 4091
Applicant(s): Eugene M. LaColla
Location of Property: North Side of Main [{oad, Arshamomoque
County Tax Map No.: 1000-56-4-24 & 19
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 several, actually not copies,
original surveys, the most recent one we have is received April 16, 1992
indicating the entire parcel which is thirty plus (30+) acres and the
respected zoning and some elevations within the area or the building area
that make part of these twenty-eight (28) acres. And I have a copy of the
Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding properties in the
area. Is Mr. Cuddy present? How are you sir.
Would you like to be heard?
MR. CHARLES R. CUDDY: Yes sir. Good evening, I am Charles Cuddy, [
represent really the LaColla family. This is a product of an estate.
There were seven (7) children of Joseph LaColla who are now living. And
four (4) of them are here this evening. They have had this property, which
consists of what you said, twenty-eight (28) acres plus there is an
additional two (2), one (1) of which is an island called "Paine Island"
and there is a small piece, which is right on the edge of Mill Creek.
They had this property essentially for the last thirty (30) years. They
haven't been able to use it for any particular purpose during that time,
and that is within purview of the zoning code. It is zoned at this time,
mostly 1~-80. There is about two (2) acres of land along the Main Road
that is zoned M-II. The M-II land, though included on the maps, is really
not the subject of our application. The subjec~ of our application is
approximately four and one-half (4 1/2) acres that surround the M-II land
and goes somewhat to the east of the existing M-II zoning. This property
that we are talking about then, is essentially that property which is
behind "Hollistere" both to the east and west of Hollisters and also
behind Greenport Pottery and to the east of Greenport Pottery. And we are
asking that a commercial use be applied to that particular locale.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRKNGER: Just before you continue, Mr. Cuddy, you are
referring to the shaded area on map that I received of April 16, 1992.
MR. CUDDY: Tha~ is correct. The shaded area,, but in that shaded area is
also some M-It Zone and the M-II Zone is marked by the surveyor, by
ManTuyl, those three or four (3 or 4) pieces, if you would like me to show
them, just bring it up here.
Page 36
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The portion is excluded toward the road..
MR. CUDDY: The M-II Zone is the small zone here and here, it is marked
that way, it goes right across here.
MEMBER VILLA: It is on both sides of the Oliver Property?
MR. CUDDY: That is right.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: In other words we are talking M-II this, this, and
this. (Pointing to map)
MR. CUDDY: That is right. We put that on there because it was all
contiguous as one unit.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I should point out for those persgns in the
audience who want to see this, we will take a break in the, after Mr.
Cuddy's presentation. I will let you look at the map and decipher a
little bit and you will be in a better position to make your specific
comments.
MR. CUDDY: It maybe helpful also, we have the aerial photograph, which
shows precisely the area. This is a 1990 aerial photograph.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right, thank you Mr. Cuddy.
MR. CUDDY: Eugene LaColla, who is here tonight, came to me
approximately a year ago and discussed with me the plight of his brothers
and sisters with this property. At that time, I went to the Town Open
Space Committee, which I guess is now the Town Land Preservation Committee
and I met with Mr. Ross who was the Chairman of it. And he greeted
enthusiastically the idea that this become Town property. I met with him
on a couple of occasions, had a great deal of correspondence with him and
came to naught, because apparently for two (2) reasons, and I will put the
correspondence in as part of the record. He indicated to me that Fort
Corchaug was going to take most of the Town money, and there was probably
a very little left. And also, it would be very difficult for us to
negotiate with the Town because we had to go through a survey process that
would cost us ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). And the Town at that
point didn't want to indicate whether it was interested or not. And the
Open Space committee wrote and told us that they just discontinued their
interest in the property. But I have that correspondence and ! am going
to make that part of the record and I will hand up a group of things
together. I also, point out to the Board that this property has been
zoned pretty much the way it is for the past twenty-five to thirty (25 to
30) years, that is, the business part of this property, what is now M-II
was business in the 1970's and the 1980's. And I have the map, done by
VanTuyl, which shows from '72 to '87~ just prior
Page 37
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. CUDDY (eon't): to the new code that this property had business use
on it, that is the part that is Holtister's, the part that is Greenport
Pottery, and so on, going back west was business and has continued to be
business.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Wait a m/nute, this was part of the property and
it was sold off at the time?
MR. CUDD¥: Some part of it was that had been, some of it was sold
earlier, some it was sold after Mr. LaColla died. But what I am saying is
that ail of this property that is adjoining our parcel was business and
continues to be business. Now it is M-II, so that wasn't done recently,
that was done a long time ago. In 1985, Mrs. Richards obtained a use
variance from this Board for her parcel. Her parcel is the one that is
the most westerly and is in fact in the M-II Zone. She has a use variance
to permit her to use as a storage barn or a shed. That large red
structure, which certainly looks like a barn and that continues to the
estate. I would also point out to the Board that when the LaCollas'
obtained this property from their father, it was appraised, and I have an
affidavit of appraisal in 1960. The appraiser at that time said that
eighteen (18) acres more or less, and he missed by quite a bit but,
indicated that it was worth thirty thousand dollard ($30,000.00).
Interpellating that into a twenty-eight (28) acre or thirty (30) acre
parcel, ii worth approximately forty-five thousand dollars ($45,000.00).
Since that time, the LaColla's have spent approximately forty thousand
dollars ($40,000.00) in taxes on this property. I have reviewed in the
office of the Treasurer, the Suffolk County Treasurer, the tax records.
And for the last ten (10) years alone, they spent over twenty-thousand
dollars ($20,000.00), for the previous twenty (20) years they spent over
twenty thousand dollars ($20,000.00). So in fact, there is an expenditure
by them of over forty thousand dollars ($40,000.00) on the property. I
would also point out that there is no income produced by this property.
There is nothing on it, it is vacant land. Approximately, twenty-one to
twenty-two (21 to 22) acres of wetlands, it is our intention to preserve
those wetland. We are only asking for approximately an extension of the
existing business type zone for four and one-half (4 1/2) acres of the
property. Below that is right along the Main Road. ] would like to hand
those things up to you. And I would also tike to say at this time, that
ail of the statements I make I affirm under the penalties of perjury and I
would hope that everybody who testifies both for and against is sworn in
so that there is a complete record of this.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir.
MR. CUDDY: If I may, I would just like to point out two (2) other
things. To the best of my knowledge, this is an absolutely a unique
parcel. I don't think that there is any
Page 38
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. CUDDY (con't.): other parcel I can find that has zoning, there is
no transitional zoning whatsoever. It is either heaving zoning, which is
M-II, or it is R-80, and it is also three-quarters (3/4) wetlands and is
on the Main Road. In fact, is between railroad tracks on the north and
the Main Road on the south. I don't think there is anything right now
that has that type of zoning and hasn't been used by the LaColtas' because
they haven't found a use for it, but that will be the subject of further
testimony. I don't believe by what we are doing, that we are going to
change the character of the area because you can see from the photograph,
and Mr. Rumph will later testify as planner, that essentially the small
incursion and extension of business into that area is not going to change
what is already is. I would like at this time though to have Mary Ann
Feavel, who is a broker, testify on our behalf.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mrs. Feavel, would you raise your right hand. The
information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your
ability.
MRS. FEAVEL: Yes it is.
MARY ANN FEAVEL: First of all, I would like to state that I am a ~
licensed New York State real estate broker. That I have been actively
engaged in real estate in the Town of Southold for approximately, it is
either fifteen or sixteen (15 or 16) years, I didn't look up the date on
my first license. 'I am currently the owner of A.W. Albertson Real Estate
of Southold. And I have spoken to the LaColla family and to Mr. Cuddy,
and I have informed them in that in my professional opinion, the current
zoning of R-S0 on this property and the use allowed for R-80 in the Town
of Southold absolutely will not fit this land. Aside from the fact that I
personally feel, professionally feel that housing would not fit, a nursery
school, a cementary, a riding academy, a golf course will not fit on that
particular section of land there, and the way it is zoned and the uses
slated for is worth very, very little monetary value to the LaColla
family. Thank you.
MR. CUDDY: I would also ask Andrew Stype, who is a broker to come
forward and testify.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Again Mr. Stype, raising your right hand. The
information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your
knowledge.
MR. ANDREW STYPE: I will. I am Andy Stype from Stype Realty.
I am an SEA appraiser, I had inspected the LaColla property back in the
end of March of this year. i had found that it had consisted of about
twenty-eight (28) acres total property. I would have to say, there is
about twenty-two (22) acres that is ~'
under marsh land and also pie land. There is about five (5)
Page 39
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. STYPE (con't.): acres of upland and it is, almost all of the upland
is just to the north of Route 25. In the area it is almost all
commercial. They are some restaurants in the area, there is also boat
marinas, hardly any residential at all. The only residential on Route 25,
is there are two buildings there that each have a retail store front and
also an apartment. The current actual makeup of the area would have to
support the highest and best use, as a commerial use. And I would also
like to point out that if it were any other kind of use, if it had the
residential use, there is obviously a hardship involved and a big loss in
value. It is in my opinion that if I placed s value only on that five (5)
acres of upland, that it would have the value, commercial wise of almost
two hundred and eighty thousand dollars ($280,000.00). If that five (5)
acres is actually zoned only, just only residential it easily has a value
of only sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00), so there is a big difference
of value there definately. So, I would have to say that your highest
value is definately going to be business use. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
MEMBER VILLA: Could I have a question of Andy?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, sure, Andy, Mr. Villa has a question if you
don't mind.
MEMBER VILLA: You have got five point four (5.4) acres, well
approximately five point four (5.4) acres of that shaded area, that will
an R-80 you could get two building plots. And you just said it would be
worth sixty thousand dollars ($60,000.00), only thirty thousand dollars
($30,000.00) for a building plot of two acres with a pond view.
MR. STYPE: Yes. The biggest reason why is because of the area
buildings are all heavy commercial. It is, you would obviously lose a lot
of value, if you have a residence in any area that has a lot of heavy
commercial. Also back there, you have a lot of wetlands. There are two
smaller cottages in the, back in the rear area, but they haven't been
occupied in who knows how many years and in they're in awfully poor
condition. Any type of residential area that is in a heavy commerical,
easily is going to loose a lot of value.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
TAPE CHANGED
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGEI{: Do you have anybody else of expert testimony that
is going to speak, other than the family, because we could take a quick
break right now. Is the planner right here?
Page 40
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. CUDDY: He can wait, that is okay.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: He can wait, okay. In promising people in the
audience, I will furnish them with my copy of my survey, they are welcomed
to look at the map. We will take approximately
a five (5) minute recess ladies and gentlemen. I offer that as a
resolution.
MR. CUDDY: I have extra copies.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Good, could you just lay them down right here, if
you would Mr. Cuddy. Would'you second that Mr. Doyen.
MEMBER VILLA: i did that already.
All in favor -AYE.
RECESS
MR. CUDDY: If we may, we would like to have Eugene LaColla address the
Board.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you do sir? Anything you would like to
say? Do you solomniy swear that the information you are about to tell us
is the truth to the best of your ability.
MR. EUGENE LaCOLLA: I do, I will. Since my father's death in 1960, we
have paid taxes on this property for approximately thrity-two (32) years.
We cannot sell it, we Cannot do anything with it. We offered it several
times to real estate brokers in the Town of Southold, and we have never
had an offer, no one ever came. About two (2) years ago, I also went to a
real estate here and they told me, they couldn't do anything with it.
And, we feel, my brothers and sisters and I, feel that since there is
business property all around us, that it would not change the character of
the existing.land if it were reasonable to have a variance for business.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: When was the last time the two houses were
utilized, or the trailer and the house?
MR. E. LaCOLLA: Over thirty (30) years~ about thirty (30) years ago,
since my father's death. It is not a house, it is a little cottage,
summer cottage really and the other, really was just a conversion of a
barn, and it hasn't been used in even before that. I would say, more than
thirty (30) years ago. It was family occupied basically.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: And the piece of the property that the family did
own was the pottery place there?
MR. E. LaCOLLA: Right, my father owned a whole entire plot,
Page 41
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. E. LaCOLLA (con't.): including Hollisters and the pottery place.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you recollect when he sold those?
MR. LaCOLLA: He deeded, which is now the pottery place, he deeded that
residence to my sister, who au that time there was no zoning in the Town
of Southold, had a business there, a braided rug business. And we she
sold it, the pottery people took it over. So, it has always been
business, since she first occupied that place. She not only had a
business there, she lived there too.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: When Hollisters was the original tavern.
MR. LACOLLA: My father had the tavern.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Your father had the tavern.
MR. LaCOLLA: Yes, my father started that tavern, in the 50's.
He rented a, he was to have an assisting building, was renovated
and he smrted the tavern there.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, when the present owners bought it, okay, did
they buy it from the estate or from...
MR. LaCOLLA: They bought it from my brother. After my father's death,
my father intestate and the remaining brothers and sisters gave him a deed
to that property because he had worked with my dad, and my brother in
turn, sold it to Hollisters, to Tuminello, I don't know who he is, but I
think that is his name.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. Is there anything else you
would like to add for the record?
MR. LaCOLLA: I just feel like, as I said, this variance will not change
the character of the existing property or the land around there. And we
are getting older, you know. Brother and sisters, my oldest sister is
seventy-six (76) years of age. And my youngest brother is sixty (60).
And we would like benefit from having this land all these year. You know,
you inherit something, and we were paying taxes on it, that is not a very
good inheritance.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What is the presen~ tax bill on the property. I
could ask you the assessment.
MR. LaCOLLA: It is approximately twenty-eight hundred dollars
($2,800.00). Is that the price Mr. Cuddy?
MR. CUDDY: Three thousand ($3,000.00).
Page 42
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, three thousand (3,000). And what do you do,
you just pool that between the four (4) of you and that is how you pay the
taxes?
MR. LaCOLLA: Well~ we have had discussions about that, some times we
pay as a group, and some times, not as many has chipped in as others, but
we have been chipping in for a long, long time.
CHAIRIVL~N GOEHRINGER: I thank you for your comments, if you have any
ethers, please don't hesitate.
MEMBER VILLA: Jerry, could I ask a question? Having been a member of
the Open Space Committee and the Farmland Committee, I would like to
pursue that a little bit. Would the family still be open to acquisition
by the Town, through that avenue if possible? I mean, were there ever
numbers thrown around or put forth? There was never an appraisal done?
MR. CUDD¥: ! don't know the answer to the question, whether they are
still interested, but there was never an appraisal done because the
correspondence I put into evidence, I think will show, that we got to a
point where we wanted to deal with the Town. We, in fact, put out an
offer to the Town and asked us if they would come back and tell us, but
they didn't tell us nothing. They would not give us an offer. They would
not tell us when, what we could negotiate about. Absolutely nothing,
MEMBER VILL: Well, you mentioned something about a survey...
MR. CUDDY: We had, we were asked to get a survey. The reason that we
didn't get a survey, because the Town wouldn't indicate if they were even
interested in the property. The survey was by VanTuyl, who is a
conservative surveyor~ was ten thousand dollars ($10,000.00). VanTuyl
suggested that we not get it until we at least got some indication from
the Town that they were interested. We got none. And the letters that I
put in evidence will show that.
MEMBER VILLA: I can understand the committee asking for a survey,
because they wanted to know what they are looking at too.
I mean, I heard numbers here from eighteen (18) acres to twenty-
eight (28) acres, so there is ....
MR. CUDDY: There is no q~estion as to the size of it. I don't think
that anybody now, since the fact that twenty-eight (28) acres in unit,
that you can see see here, there is about a half (1/2) acre to
three-quarters (3/4) of an acre on Paine Island and on the very easterly
end, there is another half an acre (1/2 acre), the total would be thirty
(30). But, no one was questioning whether it was twenty-eight or thirty
(28 or 30)
Page 43
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
acres, what they were questioning, or we were questioning would they even
be interested, there was no indication they were
MR. CUDDY (eon't): interested, even though they suggested at first they
were very interested. No one came forward, I'm talking about Mr. Ross
because he is the one I dealt with, and indicated To us that they were
interested enough to oven discuss numbers with us. And they, the Land
Preservation Committee, camo back to us and said they were discontinuing
this discussion because they didn't have any money anyway. And that is in
the writings that I put in.
MEMBER VILLA: Well, there is monies now, so that is why I was just
wondering if ....
MR. CUDDY: I don't know that , you would have
to discuss it again
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I should point out for everybody here, we are not
going to conclude this hearing tonight. This hearing will be concluded in
the latter part of June, or the early part of July. And, we hope that at
that time maybe Mr. Villa will independantiy go and speak to either Mr.
Ross or members of the Town to see if there is any possibility of a
revival. And this is not as an agent or anything else, this is a blind
situation here, just to see if anything develops, if there is any
interest, if he wants to conceivably, alright, and if it is alright with
you. If that is a possibility. My main reason for stating that is that
if anyone is not going to be around the latter part of June or the early
part of July and would like to make a statement tenight prior to the
completion to this hearing tonight, please do so, so that we don't lose
your input. Mr. LaColla we thank you very much and where do we go from
here Mr. Cuddy.
MR. CUDDY: I would Hke Mr. Rumph to testify.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Raising your right hand, the information you are
about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge.
MR. RUMPH: It is. For the record, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Board, my name is Tim Rumph, and also, members of the audience.who are
interested in this application. My name is Tim Rumph, I am a landscape
architect/land planner in principal and design for Design Properties
Northeast out of Ronkonkoma. We prepare the visuals that you see in front
of you, or you will see in front of you. In taking a look, at the request
of the LaColla family at the zoning, and have done a sort of methodical
approach to looking at how the parcel could be developed and come up with
a~ conceptual suggestion for how that might be. Charles could you put that
up there. What this first plan shows, is kind of a property that appears
to be sort of a hodgepodge of information. BuS what we did is looked at
the present zoning of the site, which was earlier indicated as the
Page 44
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MI{. RUMPH (eon't): M-II portionalso the R-80 portion. You will notice
that crossed hatched area is the area that is the representated area on
the VanTuyl survey. We also looked at the ponds and the wetland area and
decided to draw a hundred foot setback line from those wetlands. We have
assumed now, that we are not going to go any closer than the one hundred
(100) feet to the wetlands which is in conformance with DEC, Health Dept.
and Town wetland regulations, okay. And this is where we are coming up
with that crossed hatched area, or what I am going to call "buildable
area". You will notice that there is a stream that is located on the
westerly, or the easterly portion of the site, that we have located as
well. You will see in the conceptional plan that we have done, is we have
stayed fifty (50) feet either side of that stream, so we are being
conservative in our approach to the planning or the development of the
site. And in looking at the site and walking the site and looking at it,
it is a very unique piece of property, because of the environmental
concerns, the existing marine business industry on the site,, the location
of the restaurant, the craft shop or the pottery shop that is there, and
those, those buildings are all shown on that plan. You will notice that
there is a sort of squiggly line that runs through from the easterly to
the westerly portion. What we did was look at the FEMA maps, or the flood
zone maps and it was shown that the portion to the north of the site is in
an A-4 flood which if residential structures or any structures were
zone,
built in that area, those first floor elevations would have to be at
elevation eight (8). And approximately that line is conforming to a five
(5) foot contour line. And, so, what we have done is just sort-at just
looked at it very quickly in terms of the different criteria for building
and planning. And I think we can go to the next conceptual plano Again,
what we, in determining and taking a look at the conditions, we saw three
(3) basic areas that could be realistically planned or approached or
developed. We will start with the western most portion of it. We looked
at a structure, the structures there or a possible business use there that
were relate directly to that Marine II business, because they are marine
businesses very close associated to it next door, at this point. So we
felt that that area could be used for boat storage, boat sales, that sort
of thing. As you move east, you see Hollisters down on the road and then
you see the cluster of the three (3) buildings, which is the pottery
site. Because there is no real access to the main road and no site
distance, we felt that a possible professional or some sort of a low.key
commerical type of business could happen there, again, on a residential
scale. I think, in the ordinance the limited business zoning that the
Town of Southold has would be very condusive to this~ because of their
criteria within that is very similar to the residential criteria. And as
you move further east, you will see that little green space that goes all
the way down to the Main I{oad, that is, the center of that is the stream,
so that we have allowed the protection of that stream because it is a
watershed
Page 45
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. RUMPH (con't.):because it is a watershed that goes across
the road and goes into the south and also as well, I believe, it goes
north, just watching. It depends whether the head rises on one side or
the other, but I think it flows back and forth pretty easily. And then
there is a knoll that is shown on the eastern corner, thai we have shown a
cluster of buildings, a very tight cluster of buildings in sort of a, I am
going To call it a village green type of setting, and these would be
retail, commericai, profession office in nature. Again, this is a
conceptual idea of jus~ looking at it, looking at maybe showing the
parking and just how in relation of how things would flow together. If
the Board has any questions, or anybody has any questions, I would be ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The green that you are indicating on this map is
basically the keeping of the existing foliage as it stays, as it presently
exists.
MR. RUMPF: Exactly right.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The conceptual approach as we have it here does
no~ necessarily mean that you are looking a~ all three (3) of these sites,
is that correct? Or you are offering as an approach ....
MR. RUMPF: This is an approach to thai entire, what we are calling a
"buildable area". We are seeing basically three (3) areas that can
actually be developed ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Exclusive of the zoning.
MR RUMPF: Right.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Anybody else have any questions on the Board? Bob?
MEMBER VILLA: Well, my only thought is that you are asking for an
extension of the M-II, how will that impact on the properties across the
street, which are ali residential? You are saying there is no buffer, but
now you are creating a situation where there is no buffer across the road
for the residential properties on the south side.
MR. RUMPF: I don't believe we are asking for the extension of M-II, I
think we are asking for an extension of a commerical or a limited business
use. If I may just go back to that, the, in terms of planning and how we
look at it or how I look at pieces of property, you have in case of this
piece of property, you have an M-II zone, which to me is more of a heavy
marine business use. To be adjacent to a residential use, just doesn't
seem quite right to me. In other planning and zoning ordinances that I
have see, there is a transitional use or zoning between
Page 46
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. RUMPF (con't.): residential and heavy or heavy commercial use. And
we are saying and thinking that maybe that limited commerical zoning
characteristic that this the Town of Southold has might be appropriate in
this condition. And that is what we looked at and that is sort of what we
focused our energies on.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. I don't have any further
questions. I would ask you, we are not deeply in need of the aerial, but
if we could borrow the other two (2) maps, we will keep them in a well
presented spot. We are not going to stick them down a basement somewhere
and, we may ask you at the culmination of this hearing, to copy them for
us. We are not asking for highlight and the different colors, but, we
might ask you to copy them, but we would like to study them.
MR. RUMPF: That would be fine. Again these were done, I just want to
impress that these were done on a conceptual basis and we made some
assumptions based on a walk-through, we really didn't study the actual
location of wetlands, those kinds of things. But, we made assumptions, we
took, I think we were very conservative in the approach that we took.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mr. Cuddy.
MR. CUDDY: If I can point out two (2) other things to the Board. The
property that is wetlands which is approximately twenty-one to twenty-two
(21 to 22) acres, it is our intention to preserve as open space. In other
words, we will covenant that that will remain that way. Secondly, t would
point out that the LaColla family has indicated to me a willingness to
cede to the Town a ten (10) foot strip that is on the easternly end of
this property, so that the curve there could be softened or at least the
lane could be widened. Because there has been some concern as to the
traffic pattern in that area, because they have been having accidents
there. And in order to avoid that situation, of course if somebody on the
other side of the road would offer ten (10), it would give you twenty (20)
feet, you could practically put a median in there, but they are willing to
offer ten (10) feet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Was there any discussion with the Highway
Superintendant concerning this?
MR. CUDD¥: I have not done that. I have discussed it with the family as
to whether or not that would be .....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Alright, I thank you so much. We come now to the
portion of the hearing where we ask if there are any other family members
or any other people that are in favor of this application, they would like
to speak? Seeing no hands...
I am in favor of it as a family member
Page 47 -
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I just need your names, if I could please.
MR. JOHN LaCOLLA: My name is John LaColla.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sir, next to you.
MR. JOSEPH A. LaCOLLA: I am also in favor of this, my name is Joseph A.
LaColla.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you, and the lady in the rear.
GENNIEVE RICHARDS: Gennieve Richards.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Is there anybody in the audience that
would Hke to speak against the application. If you don't mind, Mr.
Flynn, I will let this gentleman go first. Could you state, could you
raise your hand please. The information you are about to give us is the
most appropriate, the word I am looking for, the most germane to this
particular hearing and it is to the best of your ability. Thank you.
MR. DONALD BALLIS: My name is Donald Ballis. I Hve in a house in
Southold Shores, which is on the south side of the highway opposite of
this property. And ] did want to correct one (1) statement that was made
two or three (2 or 3) times, it was stated that there was no residential
homes in this area and Southold Shores has a least twenty-five (25) homes,
so I think that should be recognized, the fact that there are residential
homes in the area. The other thing, I would like to ask the people
involved here, I guess they said they talked to the Town at one (1) time
in the past, but have they ever approached a nature conservancy. The
nature conservancy, I think, as you know, are very much interested in
preserving all types of property. They have a couple of a thousand acres
over on Shelter Island. And I don't think they have too much in this
area, the North Fork, and it seems to me that they might interested in a
piece of property Hke this, and I don't know if they have been approached
or not.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, we will ask them. We thank you sir. Mr.
Cuddy.
MR. CUDDY: The answer is no, after the experience with the Land
Preservation Committee, we cowered. But we spent literally four and
one-half, five ( 4 1/2, 5) months back and forth, so we did not
instigate ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Did you get that answer.
MR. BALLIS: Yes. I just wanted to reply that the grant for the
natureconservancy, they are very, very interested in preserving tracts of
land from small, not only two thousand
Page 48
Public Hearing
$outhold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. BALLIS (een't.):(2,000), but as smail as five er ten (5 or
acres. They have very much interest for.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRING-ER: Thank you, Mr. Flynn. Oh, pardon me, go ahead.
MR. LaCOLLA: I would like to say in answer to Mr. Ballis, that if the
nature conservative made a reasonable offer to us, we would be willing to
preserve the land. But we have to have a reasonable offer. We have been
paying taxes on this land for over thirty (30) years.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: But, I think the issue here is, you are welcome to
come up Mr. Flynn. I just want to react to this. You are welcome to up,
you are welcome to come up. I don't think there was an offer made because
at this particular time I am not answering a question for anybody, but
correct me if I am wrong. I don't think there was an offer made, is that
correct.
MR. LaCOLLA: I said if.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: There wasn't a offer made..
MR. LaCOLLA: I said if the nature conservancy made an offer reasonable,
we would be willing to sell the land.
MR. BALLIS: Apparently, there has been no approach made to the nature
conservatory.
MR. LaCOLLA: Our experience is with the Town of Southold.
MR. BALLIS: Well, it would seem to me, it would be really worthwhile
looking into, because of the fact that they are interested. And they do
have special arrangements. I have gotten literature where they would be,
take over property and give the person some sort of an income. They would
get title to the property and in return, the person would get some sort of
income, maybe for life. There are various kinds of arrangements and I
really think it would be worth looking into.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We can't force an applicant to do that. All we
can do is suggest it. Okay. Mr. Flynn. Do you solemly swear that the
information you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your
knowledge sir.
I do.
MR. F. M. FLYNN: My name is F.M. Flynn and I am resident of Southold
Shores. As you and the Board realizes, this is quite a complicated
matter. I have done considerable research on it, and I would like to
refer to my notes. But the first question I would like to raise is the
apparent conflict between ~he legal notice, the application, I should say
among, the legal notice,
Page 49
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. FLYNN (eon't): the application and the map that has been submitted
here. The legal notice says parts of Lots 19, and 24. The application
includes the entire lots 19 and 24 and the map excludes Lot 19 and
indicates part of Lot 24. I think that is an issue that should be
clarified.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: The legal notice that I have Mr. Flynn, says
1000-56-4-24 & 19.
MR. FLYNN: I think it says part of it in somewhere in my copy.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: This is the one I have, we can show you the
original. Why don't you take my agenda, and we will show you. My
question for the attorney representing, are 24 and 19 the entire thirty
(30) arcres including the island?
MR. CUDDY: Yes.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay.
MR. FLYNN: Yes, it says to change use of a portion of subject propery.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes, but it mentions the entire property on the
bottom of the leg'al notice.
MR. FLYNN: Yes, that is correct, and I am saying that there is a comity
here among the two (2) descriptions, among the lot, on the plan, the
application and the [egal notice. The application says the entire.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: It is all one (1) lot Mr. Flynn, that is why.
MR. FLYNN: No, there are two lots, there is 19 and 24.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Under zoning, it is one (1) lot though. That is
why we advertise it that way.
MR. FLYNN: I don't understand but I reserve comment on that and I
would like to get to more substance of the issue, if I may. Now, the
reason for the appeal, as I understand it, on the part of the applicant
that it can't be used as zoned. Historically, it has been used as zoned.
And, if then request a variance, my experience with variances is, is that
variances are for specific uses. Now, the application actually presents
the Board with a variable grab bag, or Chinese menu of uses. It offers
you the option of extending the zoning or it offers you to use the
property, not for light business in the application, but for General
Business "B" uses. It is obvious that what is sought here is a zoning
/ .... change. You really can't expend the existing uses, because the existing
uses are in the ownership of
Page 50
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. FLYNN (eon't):others than the applicant. The question here in my
mind, is that, this is not the variances I said, but a request for a
change of zone. And as such, in my opinion, it is a subterfuge by
requesting a variance and it is a common ploy used by owners of marginal
properties to increase that value of that property, mahifold by reason of
securing a change of zoning in the guise of a variance. Now, you, Members
of the Board may well be familar with the respected legal publishing house
of the West Publishing Company. And they have a text now called "Land
Use" and I would like to quote from it, not at great length, but I think
it is very germane, so the situation that we have here at hand. The text
discusses at some length that the objections to use variances are
sometimes considered spot zoning and they mention that many venues do not
permit use variances because of abuse and they finally say, in this
regard, that the burden of proof is on the applicant. Now, the exact
quote to which I refer is, "if every Board of Adjustment and every Court
were more aware of these factors and applied them more vigorously, excuse
me, rigorously in place of bending them to meet the economic aims of
developers and land owners, use variances would no longer constitute the
synonym for evasion of zoning restrictions." As the matter stands today,
zoning is as much characterized by the variances from it as by adherence
to it. Even were this a legitimate application for a variance, as you
gentlemen well know, but the members of the audience may not, the Board's
powers are limited and delineated by Section 100, I believe it is 270B of
the Town Code. In which the Board is limited to varying the strict letter
of the Ordinance~ provided the spirit of the Ordinance is preserved and
the safety and welfare of the public considered. Now, it is hardly
varying the strict letter of the law, or the regulation, to rezone
approximately five (5) acres and as a result of this variance to provide
contiguous nine plus (9+) acres of business zoning in this area. Now the
spirit of the Ordinance, spirit obviously is a synonym for intent, and it
is implicit in the ordinance itself, in the comprehensive plan, and in
policy statements by members of the Zoning authorities in the Town. And
among these policy statements that have been brooded about, is that the
Town is opposed to strip zoning and that business uses should, future
business uses, should be corzfined to hamlet areas. Now, with respect to
strip zoning, were you to extend this zoning, approximately six hundred
(600) feet to the east, as this application provides for, you would then
have strip zoning virtually contiguous from Budd's Pond to Village of
Greenport line. Now, as to public safety, I would like to reserve my
comments to somewhat later. With respect to granting a variance, where is
my opinion, this application is not only in the wrong church, but the
wrong pew, were you to grant a variance, you would be avoiding the
requirement that a change of zone would dictate,, namely site review of
this site. Now, zoning is obviously a legislative enactment. I don't
wish to appear to be lecturing the Board, but this is generally for
Page 5:1
Public Hearing:
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. FLYNN (con't.): the benefit of the audience. And as such, it is the
prerogative of the Town Board. Now, it was more or less admitted here
that this property has been zoned as it is currently for some thirty-seven
(37) years, through the submission or formulation of two (2) Master Plans
and during the teneres of numerous Town Boards. The very diverse nature
of the uses cited in the application and the sheer size of the property
involved dictates an application for a change of zone. Now, even were,
and I don't conceive this in my opinion, this proper~y a suitable~ subject
for a variance, you cannot avoid the requirements of the law of truth or
for proof. Now, the applicant states that the ordinance creates practical
difficulties or hardships. He maintains that it cannot be used
residentially. We have heard a contradiction of that already this
evening. Also, we are aware, that in the pas~ it has been used
residentially, and with respect to the taxes that are being paid on the
property it might behoove someone that if it isn't still being used
residentially, that they remove the assessment for residential, improve-
ments that are still on the proper~y. Now, if it were used, it can be
sold. It is not a question and it is not the municipal- ity's concern at
what price it can be sold. It is necessary for the applicant to produce
dollars and cents proof that the property has no utility and hence no
value as zoned. Now, it is necessary to fully understand this problem, to
know something of the historical background of the property. You have had
indications of portions of it. This property was acquired by Mr. Joseph
A. LaColla in 1946. The purchase price, at that time, was fifty-five
hundred dollars ($5,500.00). Now, I had estimated the property to be
thirty-three (33) acres of overall area at the time of the purchase. It
appears now that might even had been larger, but calculated at
thirty-three (33) acres that indicates a purchase price of one hundred and
sixty-five dollars ($165.00) per acre. The historical division of the
property started subsequent to the purchase obviously,, and there was no
zoning in the Town until 1957, the interim of eleven (11) years. In the
interim period, in that interim period, the property was utilized by
various members of the family. It has been carved up into these small
haphazard, irregular parcels, by the family. So, if there are practical
difficulties, they had the option of using the entire prope~y. They
never did, they carved it up. So they created the practical
difficulties. I, also, might mention, and this is a key issue with
respee~ to the acquisition cost of the property. As you may know, I have
been involved with real estate for over forty (40) years, and I have
appraised numerous parcels in the interim. And a purchase price of a
parcel is generally dictated by its utility. And when you pay a low
price, or a relatively low price for a property, in this instance, it's
indicative of the fact that there are practical difficulties on the
property at the time of purchase. When you remove these areas, as it is
contemplated in this plan, from consideration and confine it to a smaller
area, then the practical difficulties and utilization of the property are
Page 52
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. FLYNN (con't.): obviously self-created. Now, I have with me a copy,
and I shall present it to the Board, of an agreement among the members of
the LaColla family in 1960, in was in September of 1960, and subsequent to
............ that I believe in January of 1960. And in that agreement,
they apportioned this property, mention was made at the tavern property
being conveyed to one of the sons I believe, but the property was
apportioned generally among the others, including indications that
portions of it were intended for residential use. Now, the claim is also
made, that the parcel is unique because of configuration and location. I
submit, that all real estate is unique in the sense of location and
configuration and that in this instance, the location and configuration
was discounted by the purchase price. Statement is also made that the
property is unique and cannot earn a return and has no value, and that it
is equivalent of confiscation. Well, as I said, we have had evidence to
the contrary to the contrary by the applicant's own expert this evening.
Where the rough value, and certainly not the dollars and een~ts value that
is required by law. It was indicated, that the residential portion of this
property had a value of approximately sixty thousand dollars
($60,000.00). Applicant also claims, that the variance is in the spirit
of the ordinance and does not change the district. Or were the
application is being made is in an R-80 district. And obviously, what is
intended here changes the use of an R-80 district. Now, the northeasterly
portion of the property, and there has been mention of this, is a heavily
wooded parcel fronting on a pond and in a critical environmental area.
Raymond, Parrish, Pine, Weaber, when they prepared the Master Plan~ put
this property, classified this property as being best utilized as open
space. Now, obviously, you can't ask a man to dedicate his property to
open space without confiscation, but based upon the characteristics of the
property, they zoned it R-80 and that R-80 has stood to date. It may also
be of interest to the Board, and I don't know whether they are aware of
this, that the Long Island Regional Planning Board in its comprehensive
plan for the Town of Southold, for the period of 1990 to 2010 also
classified that easterly wooded pie area of the property as open space
with the intention of ultimate acquisition by the County of Suffolk. Now,
as I mentioned, to extend this property six hundred ($00) feet more or
less easterly, or north easterly, would constitute an extention of strip
zoning, which is against the stated intensions of the Planning authorities
of this Town. Now, finally, the Beard's primary function and primary
interest should be in the public safety. Now, this property is located on
the arc of a curve and constitutes an obvious traffic safety hazard. By
reason of the arc of the curve, the line of sight for drivers is reduced.
There is only a two (2) lane State Highway. The Town Highway Department
obvioUsly, would have nothing to do wiih this highway, ii is only a two
(2) lane highway. When you attempt, and I am saying this from personal
experience, when you attempt to make a turn across that highway
Page 53
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. FLYNN (con't.): in the face of oncoming traffic and have to come to
a halt, or to a relatively slow speed To attempt to make that turn, you
are in imminent danger of being rear-ended. And that has happened to me
on several occasions. The existing businesses there have nine (9)
driveways intersecting the northerly side of Route 25. Opposite them...
TAPED TURNED OVER
MR. FLYNN (con't.): .... coming out from Southold Shores, and were you to
expend this property easterly, you would then have the further
complication and hazard of additional traffic emanating from rarpen
Drive. Another complication to the traffic situation there, is the fact
that to the easT, you have the highway overpass over the Long Island
Railroad, with a relatively steep change of grade~ which also reduces the
line of site, particularly hazardous in the summertime, with the
additional traffic that is generated on Route 25, and you have moving the
additiona~ traffic which will emanate from Sage Blvd. from the marina,
located on Sage Blvd. Overall, you have to figure the cummaltive effect
of this proposition, and it would mean, at this hazardous and sensitive
environmentally sensitive location, you would be creating nine (9) acres
or more of business zoning, which has grown up in a haphazard, unplanned
fashion, and were a variance granted, would not be subject to review by
the Planning Board. There is, this constitutes in my mind, a very
serious question of jurisdiction and support for the fact, were it needed,
that this constitutes an application for a change of zoning.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just ask a question?
MR. FLYNN: Yes, surely. I am coming to the end, by the way.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: How do you come to the realization that they
wouldn't get site plan approval?
MR. FLYNN: Well, I made inquiries of the Planning Board. And they say
a variance is not their prerogative. Therefore, they don't review it, if
it is granted as a variance. If I am wrong, I was misinformed.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, go ahead.
MR. FLYNN: The other question has been raised preferably here to, is
the effect on the residents who do exist by the way, are fifty (50)
somewhat lots in the map of Southold Shores, the effect on their health,
safety, welfare, the value of their properties. And also, the fact that
as the zoning procedures go, it is a situation that grows like topsy. If
you grant it on one side of the road, the next application is on the other
side of the road. So for all these reasons, I am opposed to this
Page 54
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. FLYNN (con't.): even being considered as subject to a variance.
Now, with respect to some of the remarks that were made here this evening,
I believe I heard oorreetly, that the residential portion of this
property, estimated, would have a value of, in the neighborhood of sixty
thousand dollars ($60,000.00) give or take. Now, I would point out, that
it is not the municipality's position to weigh the relative costs, or the
relative value of property, if they rezone it, or variance were granted.
And as zoned, they are not the partners of the applicant and to meet the
criteria for a variance you have to prove that the property has no value.
I, again submit that there are numerous standards of proof that have to be
met for a variance, and germane to this type of situation, you have to
submit dollars and cents proof that the property is in all intense
purposes has been confiscated and has no value. Now, we have proof to the
contrary tonight. I would suggest that you reject this application and
suggest that the applicant go where he belongs, namely before the Town
Board and apply for a change of zoning. Thank you. I have some written
material here that I would like to present to the Board. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: At the request of one of the Board members, we
would like to again take a three (3) minute break, so to speak. I will
offer it as a resolution.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Second.
All in favor - AYE.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: .... And I do apologize. I offer a motion to
MEMBER DINIZIO: Second.
All in favor - AYE.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Mr. Cuddy, where do we go from here?
MR. CUDDY: Maybe not everyone is through testifying. I don't know if
ther~ is opposition .... I would certainly like to make a short rebuttal
statement.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Certainly. I think you should at this point, that
is the reason why I asked the question.
MR. CUDDY: The members of the LaColla family have asked me to say
factually that virtually everything that Mr. Flynn has indicated that they
would state contrary to. From one end of his talk to the other. But, I
as a lawyer, am much more concerned about the law that he announced to the
Board that I have already got it and would suggest to him that he do one
or two (1 or 2) things. The law set forth at least three (3)
Page 55
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. CUDDY (con't.): available volumes in the local library--one is
called Rapcoff, another is called Anderson on zoh/ng, another is New York
Jurisprudence. Land use law and land use variances are not practical
difficulties. Land use variances are basically
from Otto vs. Steinhibler, which this Board knows about. And you have
three criteria--one has to do with no reasonable return,
one has to do with uniqueness, and the other has to do with changing the
essential character of the area. And if Mr. Flynn is going to come and
tslk for a half an hour, I think, that he should talk to what the law
really is~ and I don't think it is appropriate, in these circumstances, to
talk about the law. I think you are interested in the facts. The facts,
as my clients have testified to and what the various witnesses have
testified to. Mr. Flynn, it is not a personal question, but, it seems to
me that if you are going to talk about this property, you should address
ourselves to what we are really discussing, and we are discussing four and
one-hail (4 1/2) acres, we are discussing an extension of an existing type
of zone, it is a business zone. It has been there for years, that was the
whole point of pointing it out that is has been there for twenty-five to
thirty (25 to 30) years. And we are asking simply, that it be extended on
a four and one-half (4 1/2) acre piece. I don't want to go in, as I said
in depth~ to an apologia from my clients, but I believe we have an
appropriate application. I would ask this Board to grant this
application, and I understand that there is serious considerations that
the Board has as far as possible offers to the Land Preservation
Committee, somebody brought up a Nature Conservacy, but we will explore
those things. But I would ask the Board, if it is going to adjourn it, to
adjourn it to its very next meeting in June, not at the end, but in the
beginning hopefully, and ask the Board to reconsider at that time. We
will be available, all of my clients for any questiens that you have, and
we will be happy to explore any other considerations that you would like
us to do.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well, this is what I need from you. The only
reason why I had suggested the last portion of the month of June, was
because we have some serious problems that we are dealing with .... What l
need from you Mr. Cuddy is, and appears to me, from looking at the
property, that this five (5) foot contour line, which you are referring to
as the stream, is really a deviation between the two (2) parcels, it
really is. What I need from you is either the center line of the stream
or beginning at the five (5) foot contour line, alright, assuming that
this is an area that you wouldn't be touching anyway, as mentioned by the
Planner, all the way up in to this particular portion right here. I need
a caieulation of acreage, based upon the shaded area to the west. And
then I need a calucation again from the outside of the five (5) contour
area, back up to again approximately this portion, alright, in
calculations in this area. And that is what I need to continue with the
hearing. As for the actual time, that we wilI reconvene the hearing, we
will
Page 56
Public Hearing
$outhold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't): discuss it, I will recess it, without a
date, and we will discuss it after the hearing here, and we will
discussing it when we set up the next hearing, exactly. If we can fit it
on, we will fit it on, if we can't fit it on, I assure you I will try not
to make it go into July, okay. The problem is that we have some people
writing letters to the newspaper. You have heard of the Arthur Carlson
hearing, we must finish that hearing, on or about the first week of June,
and that is the problem. Also, I want to be perfectly honest with
everybody, including the LaColla family, once we go beyond eleven o'clock
(11:00 p.m.) at night, there is a great degree of .... It is like the Lord
diminishing returns, right. And it is not a consciencesituation, it is
not anything that has to do with the public, alright. As I told the
people in the beginning, I teach a three (3) hour at State University and
really it becomes a reel problem and then you sit here for more then four
(4) hours. And, I just want you to be aware of that, I am not, there is
no other way to tell you. And so, even if we stuffed it on and there may
be elements that we might loose in dealing with that aspect of it. I just
want you to be aware of that. It is nothing personal to anyone here or
anything of that nature. But, actually, it is a benefit to have it start
about the time it started tonight, to be honest. And we also apologize
for putting it as the last hearing, but as you can see, the other
hearings, apart from the satelite dish, were not terribly difficult,
hearings. Okay, thank you. Mr. Flynn.
MR. FLYNN:I would like to respond to what I consider a personal Taft.
My, I am quite familar with Hardon Rapcoff's text , as a matter of fact, I
worked rather closely with Mr. Rapcoff on several zoning cases. I'm also
familar with Anderson on zoning and had that text plus many other text,
extensive texts in my office. The question of practical difficulties is
recited in the application. It was not x-ed out, it said unique and
practical difficulties. And finally, having been involved in this area
for some forty (40) years on and off and testifying, I know that the
crUcial thing in justifying a variance, is that there is no adequate
return to the property, and in effect, the property is valueless. We have
had testimony this evening to the contrary. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, yes, Mr. LaColla:
MR. LaCOLLA: Do I have to swear in?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: No, you just have to state your name.
MR. JOHN LaCOLLA: My name is John LaColla. I just want to say Mr.'
Ftynn, t didn't intend to speak tonight. But you brought up several
things that, I don't think that our attorney did say anything to you
personally~ I think he is just speaking
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MR. LaCOLLA (eon't): about the law. You seem to know, what our
innermost thoughts were. In 1960, as far as I know, there was no
agreement between my brothers and my sisters and myself, and you may have
something there, that maybe somebody said something off the top of their
head, but no way. Also, the fact that, you referred to the fact that my
father bought this for five thousand dollars ($5,000.00). Whatever it
was, I didn't even know that myself. That was 1946, [ don't know how long
you have been in your home, but I am sure it is worth a lot more right
now, then when you bought it. And I would say, that what we are looking
for here is not a conflict, and not, we are looking to ameliorate this
thing from a point of view, from a reasonable point of view and we are
asking for relief. That is ali we are asking for. If you had, had
somewhere there that was agressive and didn't care about the environment,
my father kept that thing in a pristine state. We have to, and I think it
has been to the benefit of the Town of Southold, I think that what our
attorney stated about us signing a covenant of leaving a majo_r, major
portion of that twenty-one or twenty-two (21 or 22) acres in perpetually
in wetlands, it is open space, I think it is a sign of good faith. Other
than that, we have made no attempt to develop that, and ail's we're
looking at, as we get older, is a reasonable solution to have some way of
getting out of this thing graciously, and with some return to us for the
investments we have made over the past thirty-two (32) years. Thank you.
CHAIRIVLAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir.
MR. FLYNN: I have just a quick rejoinment, because it was addressed to
me. You have in your possession, the agreement, a copy of the agreement
that was made in 1960, so I don't have to testify to that again. It is
self-explanatory.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Wet], that is basically the reason for reconvening
the hearing, because of what I asked for and allowing these people to look
over these documents, rather than running out and reading them, coming
back in, and reacting to them, that doesn't work, okay. We have seen that
in the past, and that is the purpose of it. ' The only other question I
have before closing, we would Hke to thank you all for being here, I just
wanted to ask Mr. Cuddy. Mr. Cuddy ....
There are a few more people here who would wanted to object to, you
didn't ask anybody else.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I said, we would reconvene the hearing, you
haven't given me a chance to say that, okay. Because what happens is I
forget to say these things. I am getting older, okay. As the moments
pass. I hope the Town Board reads that, when they read this transcript.
Mr. Cuddy, was there ever an application for any change of zone after the
1989 Master Plan
Page 58
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't): update on this parcel?
MR. CUDDY: Not to the best of my knowledge.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Okay, and you have always been the attorney, or you
have recently been the attorney for the LaColla family.
MR. CUDDY: In recent time, yes.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Can I ask a question?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Yes.
MEMBER DINIZIO: My main concern is, in front of me on the application
is a copy of "Planning News" which states Otto vs. Steinhibler decision
and the first question that, you know that for use variances, you know, is
the land in question can it not yield a reasonable return. And in aH
fairness, I haven't heard anybody tell me what a reasonable return on this
piece of property is. You know, I have heard of value of sixty thousand
dollars ($60,000.00) okay, I don't know how you relate that to a
reasonable return. Are you considering the properties surrounding it and
what they would yield, or are you considering, I don't know how you base
that as being reasonable or unreasonable. It is very unclear to me and it
is important for me because that first question that you have to, you
can't get by, you can't get a use variance without answering that question
first. How that brings you to before this Board as opposed to before the
Town Board. Okay, I think you need to, the answer to that question has to
be answered, in my mind some what before you even go any further, as I see
it. It is not clear to me, okay, and in all fairness to you Mr. Cuddy, I
would like to give you the opportunity to make that clear to me. What is
a reasonable return on this piece of property, I have absolutely no idea.
There is a tot of wet lands on there, but I can't place a value on that.
MR. CUDDY: Do you want me to address it now or later.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Well, that is up to you~ I mean, it is going to go on
again, but it is something to keep in your mind.
MR. CUDD¥: Fine, I yes.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Okay, thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It is my understanding that there are other people
here that would like to address us concerning this particular application
either pro or con. Yes maam. Would you state your name for the record,
after i ask you to raise your right hand. Do you solemnly swear that the
information you are
Page 59
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (eon't): about to tell us is the truth to the best
of your knowledge. Thank you.
MS. LINDA LEVY: My name is Linde Levy and ~ am the Southold eoordirmtor
for the North Fork Environmental Council.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I didn't get your name, could you...
MS. LEVY: Linde Levy. Most of the points that Mr. Flynn raised are
points that we would agree with and I do have a written statement here, in
the interest of time, I am not going to go over all of the points that we
would like to make because there are some of those that Mr. Flynn made,
and I will give you a copy of my written remarks. One thing that I would
like to reiterate, however, is that from the NFEC's point of view, this
issue of whether or not this is a use variance or in feet a change of
zone, is a major factor. Because, we believe that you can't get away from
the philosophy of what is planning all about and what is purpose of the
zoning codes and why do we have the different agencies and the different
bodies of government here that we do have. And, unfortunately, if you
look back over the last few deeades in New York State, you read frequently
that the ZBA's all over the State of New York and the use of the land u~e
varianee are frequently accused of being tools for spot zoning, gimmicks
to give out favors, that kind of language. I think that from the point of
view of the NFEC, we believe that the Southold ZBA should be able to say,
we are not involved in that kind of interaction. And this type of request
for a land use variance, when in fact, it is a change of zone, there is no
specific use being requested here. In the application that I have seen a
copy of, it says, that the applicant requests thai business use as in the
General Business district be permitted on the upland acreage, limited to
wholesale businesses, warehouses, contractors' business, office buildings,
repair shops and retail sales. That is not asking for use variance, that
is a change in zone. And, I also find it odd, that I am looking at this
document that we got from the Town here, it says right here General
Business "B" and tonight I come here and sit here and hear them talking
about that they are askirtg for limited business well, that is not what
this says and it is not clear to me how we are suppose to be responding to
an application for a land use variance. When we get here, they are not
even talking about the same request that I see written here. But,. beyond
that, our concern really is that we don't believe that this should be
before ZBA. We really believe that this is something that should be
coming before the Town Board as a request for a zone change and you will
see in my written remarks that we do also feel that if you were going to
look at it as a land use variance that the three (3) tests are not, have
not been met, the three (3) proofs have not been m~t at this point, but as
I~said, I am not going to go into that in detail, because I think Mr.
Flynn covered that pretty completely already. So I am just going
tO ....
Page 60
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you Ms. Levy. Alright, is there anybody
else? You want to say something? Hold on Mrs. Flynn, go ahead Mr. Cuddy.
MR. CUDDY: I must respond to what people are representing is the law.
I am troubled, really troubled, by people saying to you this is how you go
about doing the land use variance. I have never done a land use variance
where there has not been an objection raised by both Ms. Levy and Mr.
Flynn that it is a change of zone. That is simply a ploy to use one of
his words. Obviously, you are transferring a zoning use to another
district, there is no question about that. But, land use variances are a
type of variance that is permitted under certain conditions, they are not
changes of zone. And I think that it is wrong to talk about it in those
terms. The land use variance that we are here tonight for, I think,
emphatically stated what it is. I would have to disagree that we have to
say, and I think a reading of any of the texts will tell these people the
same thing, you do not have to say exactly what you are going to do with
the land that is being changed. The big question is the question that was
raised by the Board member. Once you get past the question of whether you
have reasonable or no reasonable return from the land, then it is really
up to the Board. It is not necessarily up to the applicant to say what is
going to be done with that land. You might find, for instance, that it
should be industrial land, but that is the Board's determination. We made
a projec-
tion and Mr. Rumpf testified. That's all he was doing, was making a
projected use, that's the use we think is appropriate. But, that is not
part of land use variances. The land use variance can be dictated
ultimately by the Zoning Board. It is not dictated by the applicant, and
I think it is wrong to go on and on about that, because it is just a
misuse of the law.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mrs. Flynn. You are going to be
relatively quick, right. Again raising your right hand, the information
you are about to give us is the truth to the best of your knowledge.
MRS. FLYNN: Of course, yes. I am Inga Flynn, I am resident of Southold
Shores and a local real estate broker. I am broker for twenty-two (22)
years and for the past ten (10) years, I am actively involved in real
estate around here. Before I main-
tained my own office in commercial and industrial real estate, I also was
very active in assisting in appraisal work and successfully passed my SRA
courses in residential and commercial real estate. And in my
qualifications I can say that I was the vice-president of the Long Island
Real Estate Board, I served as director for the Mew York State Association
of I graduated from the real estate institute and my
life is real estate, really. Last year, I attended the Planning
conference and also listened to our director, regional director of
planning for Suffolk County and also was then a member of the Sub
Page 61
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
MRS. FLYNN (eon't): Committee of Planning commercial real estate here in
the Town of Southotd, which was a sub committee in the High School. And
the results of the eommittee was that commercial rea] estate and retail
real estate should be in hamlet and we should not have any more strip
zoning along 25 nor 48. And that was the all over consent [ think of at
least ninety-five percent (95%) of the attendance of this sub committee
and I guess the head of this sub committee, which was Mr. Gaggiano, then
reported that to, I think, to the Town Planning. As to the need of strip
zoning or more shopping centers, I would like to advise the committee here
and the Board that we have quite a lot of vacancies of retail space in the
Village of Greenport, as you know. We just recently have foreclosures on
Route 48, where the retail space could not be filled and we have vacancies
on Route 48. And, as to the value of the property, and I, again, Mr.
Cuddy, I have to disagree with you, I think a continuation of something,
when you create something new, I would think it is a rezoning and an
extension.
You are looking for extension or a continuation of a zoning which exists.
So, in my opinion, you are creating a new zoning.
I would like to go to the map and point something out. I have
and assisted an appraisers like on Grumman and
and very large appraisers on Long Island.
And, as an appraiser, if you do go to an area and you look for values, you
don't look only to the subject property, you most eertainly look onto the
all over effect. This property here, which is now zoned 1{-80, is opposite
property which is zoned 1{-40 because
and R-S0. So, this property conforms now with this and surrounding zoning
and there should be no shopping center here. And, if you want my opinion,
he is looking for a continuation of the zoning, one cannot grant one man
profit on this property and evaluate the property of ali these people.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I must ask the remaining people who
are in the audience, this is an unbelieveable situation tonight, but I do
have a gentleman who wants to address the Board again, outside, so I am
going to ask everybody if we could complete the hearing for the evening at
this point, we will be back to see you, hopefully, you will be back to see
us, sometime in the middle to the latter portion of June. We wish you
safe home and, we thank you for your courtesy tonight. And this is both
pro and con, and we thank Mr. Cuddy for his presentation. Is there
anything Mr. Cuddy that you would like to say? No. Hearing no further
comments I make a motion recessing the hearing without a date.
MEMBER VILLA: Second.
All in favor -AYE.
End of hearing.
(Transe~befi by rapes recorded 5/7/92. )
Page 62
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
Informal discussion - Pindar Vineyards - Dr. Damianos
DR. DAMIANOS: ... But, I thought after I left, I frankly did not
understand and was perplexed. And rather than traveling back to my home
and having a sleepless night, I decided to return and I am glad that I
did. I spent the most of the entire evening listening to you people and I
really do not, I can sympathize with what you must go through. I would
never want your job. That is absolutely and unequivocally correct. Let
me restate the issue, because frankly I came down this evening, really
just to sit down and kind of like say hello. I did not know I had to make
a presentation. Perhaps, I should give you a little background as to what
has transpired. It came time to, as we said, to place a deck or a small
gazebo in the back of our property, which we are presently using on
grass. I sent Reed down, you can come up here, because I didn't think it
was a complicated issue. The Town has been very cooperative with
everything that we have done, and I have appreciate that they have done
for the industry, and it is a viable industry. Reed came down and
presented the plans, and was instructed to go to the Planning Board. We
engaged an architect, in order that everything be letter perfect, because
we wanted it to be letter perfect. The Planning Board looked at the
plans, loved the plans, they heartily approved of the plans. They said
that is fine, all you have to do now is to bring it to, we will have a
thirty (30) day wait period, or whatever the rules are. There was one (1)
minor objection, and that is~ we did not follow, unbeknownst to us, the
Code about the height of the building. We immediately adjusted that, the
architect came in, we redid the plans, and everything was fine. The
thirty (30) days then had passed and it went to the Building Department,
which had already reviewed the plans, gave the rubber stamp on it. Last
Friday or Monday or Thursday, Reed was to go down and pick up our building
permit. We have contracted the wood from North Fork Lumber agencies that
were ready to go, the season is upon us, and we thought that this is an
opportune time. When we went down to pick up the building permit, we were
told that we had to appear here, or at least make a statement as to the
use of the building, and is was like an ampersand, truly ampersand, and
that is well, just write something down. Well, we said okay, that is
fine, we have nothing to hide regarding what we want to do with this
gazebo. So, instead we typed up a letter and we sent the letter to the
appropriate area. I was told today, when I was out at the winery that '
evening, this particular Board would be looking at the plan and would
undoubtly approve it, etc. It would be nice gesture of you to come down
and thank the Board for their cooperation, which I thought I would do, and
I was asked to give a presentation, which I was unpre-
pared to do, as I had not known all of the facts.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: We don't really have a plan before us, we just have
your letter.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It wasn't presentation Doctor, conceivably
a
Page 63
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I said it was supposed to be informal, and that was
my mistake.
DR, DAMIANOS: I feel strongly about what we are doing here on the North
Fork and our motto is "Serve Pindar Wines and Keep the North Fork Green".
That is what we fee], we feel very strongly environmentally about this
area, etc. Now, I leave and I don't know what 1 am doing. I actually do
not know what I am doing. I am now told that I believe that I have to go
back to some Board to get some sort of approval. My understanding is and
that we have a special exemption and that was back in 1982, which the
State says to us, yes you can do a winery, the Town says fine, we are
going to let you do a winery there, because it is a natural evolution of
an agricultural product, and therefore we will give you a special
exemption. And so, we have the special exemption. When we went into the
special exemption, the Board told us these are the things that you must do
to get the special exemption, and we complied with every rule and
regualtion that was necessary. We have now been operating.as winery.
Last year, thank goodness, Pindar has been doing relatively well, we
haven't broken even yet, but we will, and we needed more storage space,
and we came dowll to the Planning Board and we said we needed more storage
space, environmental impact study would be zero, it is dry storage. We
- would do it here, this is the construction, etc. Very well gentlemen,
you may do that. We did that, it is not an ugly structure, we are making
-- it very beautiful, etc. and we went and did it. Now, we say, okay, we
wanted a little deck kind of thing, a little gazebo to stage our tours, to
do various things, that we are already doing inside of the winery. Well,
I don't want it inside of the winery, I would like to have it outc~oors,
where we have a little bit more room and space. So, this is the function,
this is the purpose of putting the gazebo there. From what I understand
and it has me confused, is that now, I thought, that my special exemption
or that the special exemption in a sense is winery and winery related.
Now I am told I have
DR. DAMIANOS (con't.): to have a layering like effect of-zoning, which
opens up an entire new legal issue, which means that perhaps I should have
council down here. I don't want counci] down here because it is simple
sticks and stones and few little things .... I will put it on wheels, ii~
I have to wheel the stuff around, if that is what it takes. I thought it
was a temporary structure, just like a gazebo. What is a gazebo.. Is it
going to be enclosed? The answer is absolutely not. When are we going to
use it? From June to October, after that you can't use it anymore. Are
we going to put lights in it? Of course not. What are we going to do
with it? We are going to use it during the day, during the same hours
that we have our winery operation, and that is all we want to do. We have
also included in our plans, because we realize the diary of talking, in as
much as I would like you to make a motion, perhaps Mr. Chairman, to give
us accommodation for taking care of all of the parking on Main Road, where
people come in and use o~r facilities. We added another twenty-nine (29)
parking areas, to be absolutely certain that there would be no
conjestion. And that would give us an adequate amount of space, etc. All
Page 64
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
I want to do please, please, I just want to put a little gazebo up. And I
don't want to wait until going through all kinds of a hassle and it is now
suddenly Merry Christmas, ladies and gentlemen and my season is over.
mean, if I have to, I will get a special permit to put a tent up there if
I have to. But to go through this, I can't believe it.
The Town told us what to do, we did it.
Someone speaking, referring to set of plans--It is eighty-six (86) feet
long, it is forty-five (45)feet wide, sixteen (16) feet tall.
MEMBER VILLA: And that was for your storage?
SPEAKER: That was our storage. We had absolutely no problem, I filed
exactly what they told me to do.
DR. DAMIANOS: The Town told us what to do, we did it.
SPEAKER: Again, this year we are going to try to do this, 'we went, we
got beautiful plans drawn up, we tried to stay with it, traditional
looking. Things that would be aesthetically pleasing to the winery and
good for Southold Town. Traditional, it is not a crazy thing, we are not
trying to hide anything.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We never said you didn't.
SPEAKER: I know, I am just on a roll. We added twenty-nine (29)
parking spaces, we put drainage in. We are going to landscape it.
Page 65
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You made it twenty-nine (29) more parking spaces?
SPEAKER: Yea, additional parking spaces because, they said that people
might stay in here instead of leaving right of way.
DR. DAMIANOS: You know why we did that. One of the reasons too, is I
alluded to at the last time, is that much of our parking is unfortunately
being taken by across the street farming operations, that don't have
adequate parking. I have a major problem there, in the summer time.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: They are not customers to you.
DR. DAMIANOS: They are not our customers, they are using our bathrooms,
I mean baby diapers in the bathrooms, come on now. This guy has got to go
down, clean out toilets, we have major problems, you know. And I would
say twenty-five ~o fifty percent (25 to 50%) during the heat of the
season, or during the four (4) weeks of harvesting, not the Krupski's,
they have plenty of parking. It is terrible, they sit there and they
throw garbage all over the property. So I said look, let us make sure we
have enough parking, let us start bringing out tours. We are
doing ............. give me a break, they just don't even thank us.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I think the problem comes in when yeu talk about
festivals, concerts, and that type of thing, because that is where the
Town Board gets involved and you have to go.
DR. DAMIANOS: As far as concerts go, we are just doing charitable
events and we ....
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Even charitable events have to get special
permission from the Town Board.
DR. DAMIANOS: Great, we will come down and do those things when we do.
We will get a license, Hke we do from New York State
Hard to understand, a lot of people talking a once.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I guess, I said to the doctor I said outside, I
didn't mean to cut you off, that he should just tell us that if there is
any particular problem that arises that is going to need either this
approval or Town Board approval, that he will do it and that is it, after
the construction of that. I don't think you have a problem with that is
there.
DR. DAMIANOS: I have no problem with that. The only problem I have
TAPE TURNED OVER
Page 66
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
DR. DAMIANOS: ... I can't be dishonest with you. It is not only
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I didn't say that. I said if there is any
problems in the future, okay, that may require, I said I don't mean the
future, I mean that if there is any specific need to address a layered
special exception, as I mentioned here for you...
DR. DAMIANOS: Well, suppose I am going to have the American Cardiology
Society come out. 'What do I do there? I am going to have it, let us say,
in the gazebo in the summertime. I am going to do it non for profit, for
the American ..... I belong to that Society, I want to support that
Society.
CHAIRMAN GOERHINER: Doctor, I have no problems with that.
DR. DAMIANOS: Do I have to come to the Town Board and say I am going to
have this?
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: You are going to have to at least check with the
Town Board, yes. It us under Chapter 27, which we don't have ~-.
jurisidiction for.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: You are going to have to call the Town Clerk and
ask her.
DR. DAMIANOS: Yes, and just write out an application for it.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Send a letter, put it in a letter...
A lot of people talking ......
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Just so you know, though. You didn't know before
tonight.
DR. DAMIANOS: No, I think we came down for a couple events, the L.I.
Barbeque event, and I know we have gone down for special permits on that...
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I explained to the doctor the problem that we had
that time, three, four (3, 4) years ago, when he was denied that and then
the situation came in where they had event in Glover's barn. Which the
building inspector went down and cited Mr. Glover then, okay, and so on
and so forth.
DR. DAMIANOS: Well, there is an exception to that, because it really is
not apples and oranges. What I objected to, at that time ....
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't really even want to know. I
Page 67
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA 5/7/92
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER (con't): mean, I didn't even know you were involved
i~ that.
DR. DAMIANOS: Very quickly, first of all it is just a barn. We have
approved by the Town, we had Mr. Lessard come in and tell us this is the
exit lights, this is the ingress, this is the egress. We had fire
extinguishers, we have an alarm system, and we have a sign up there that
says "Occupancy Not to Exceed 185". And it was entirely different, it is
not as if I am putting people, andI would be fearful of putting people in
a barn and having some disaster happen, whereas, we had all of the
mechanisms including handicap ramps ....
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: Is that Pindar's or is that where .....
DR. DAMIAI~-OS: Pindar.
MEMBER VILLA: Well, that is built around basically the concept of what
your business is. Now, you are talking about special events. Special
events fall under a separate section of the Code and require a permit.
That is what we are saying.
This is fine along with your normal trend of your business, but if you go
with a special event, you are going to have to get approval.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We are referring to the extension again of the
residential issue and how it effects the special permit. Okay, alright.
If this was Splish Splash in Riverhead, okay, and they are permitted to
have so many wading pools and so on and so forth, just think of it. It is
commercially zoned, alright, then, you would be permitted to have that
once it was approved, based upon the occupancy, based upon the .... This
as I mentioned to the good doctor is still a residential district, okay.
We are not curtailing you from doing anything, we are just putting you on
notice that you are going to have to get the proper permits.
DR. DAMIANOS: This is perfectly fine and I totally agree with that, but
let me just say, what is standard in the industry, not only in the
Country, but the World. The world, the universe and all of the planets in
the galaxy. In upstate New York, they do have these events, they do have
these charitable. California, the whole industry is done that way. I
have no objection to that. I intend to have, I like to have this year,
three (3) major events. By major, I mean fifty (50) people, sixty (60)
people, etc., fundraisers. I am planning a Physer Company fundraising
event, in which we are bringing out a physician that is going to talk
about cholesterol, etc., etc., etc., kind of thing, you know. We are
going to have physicians out there. The proceeds of this little event
goes into hypocythemia foundation, okay. We are not making anything on
it. We are not charging anybody, and if we do charge them, it is always a
contribution. Okay, fine, contribute it there, if you want
Page 68
Public Hearing
Southold ZBA
DR. DAMIANOS (eonft,): pay for someth/ng, is fine.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: That is also under the Town Board~s catagox'y and
you should be able to get it.
A lot of people talking
DE. DAMIANOS: ..... There is a beautiful symbol of the University of
Stony Brook called me and said you know, we are in dire straights. Our
poetry and english department is now ..... we are try/ng ....... Pindar is a
poet. Would you sponsor a poetry event to raise monies. It is ten
doltars ($10.00) a head ........
A lot of talking.
SECRETARY KOWALSKI: I will show you, while you are he~e, that seetion
that we are talking about. We don't even, the Zoning Board doesn't even
have jurisdiction on it, the Town Board, the Town Attorney ....... This is
the page, you have to provide a certificate of insurance from the Town and
they talk about public entertainment and then they talk about charitable
events. They do authorize it. It is not the zoning code.
Tape off.