Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutKenny's Rd. Residents - DeniedWHEREAS, a petition was heretofore filed with the Town Board of the Tcwn of Southold by ......... ~,~.?$g!9~%~:~...q~..~.t~9...9~'.~9...q.~..59.n..9~I.'.s Road, Southold, L.I.,N.Y. requesting a change, modification and amendment of the Building Zone Ordinance including the Building Zone Maps made a port thereof by chang- ing from .... '.'.B.'.'.?.~.~ ........... District to ..... '.'.~'.'.'...~Z...~..~'.~' District the property described in said petition, and WHEREAS said petition was duly referred to the P'lanning Board for its investigation, recommendotion and report, and its report having been filed with the Town Board, and thereafter, a public hearing in relation to said petition having been duly held by the Town Board on the ....... ;~:]:~...day of ........ q'}~. ............................, 19..~.~., and due deliberation having been had thereon NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the relief demanded in said petition be, and it hereby is denied. By Order of the Southold Tow~ Board. Dated: July 22, 1968 'Albe~t W. Ric~nd, Town Clerk 305 North Sea Drive Southold, New York July 3, 1968 TO TH~ M~BERS OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD I am shocked, chagrlned and sorely disillusioned by the failure of the Town Board to take action on Zhe Kennys Road - ~orth Sea Drive upzoning application. I cannot understand the reason for the delay. Taking into consideration the nature of the neighborliood, could there be a clearer case for residential zoning? Has not neighborhood open.on been uncquiv- ocally and convincingly expressed? What is iZ tkat gives you and your fellow Board members pause about the propr~eZy of upzoning? We are mystified that what seems so clear a need to us remains an apparently insurmountable problem for the Board. The entire situation has, of course, been horribly aggravated by the pending State Liquor Authority proceedlngs. Can you not see that delay makes it almost inevitable that Mr. Oliveri will obtain his l~cense7 Are we thus to believe that the Town Board of Southold thinks this site, in a residential area and close to a public beach, is appropriate for a bar? Is this the proper environment for Zhe many children in this area? Is the Town Board indifferent Zo the location of bars? How then does this town differ from the often derided situaZion in the Hamptons? We thought that present disclosure of the liquor application (which,though known to N~. Oliveri aZ the June 21 hearing, was not then disclosed to the Board) would make clear to the Board the urgency of the situation. Our worst fear, a bar on this property, is now almost a realty. But rather than dispatch and concern on the part of the Board, we are faced with delay. Perhaps we are missing an economic point, i.e., let's encourage business in Southold. But what business and in what locale7 Surely, there is plenty of room on Route 25 or North Road for a bar where it will be visible to traffic. What economic benefit to the co~mn~unity to have a bar hidden in the midst of a residen[ial area7 And how can you weigh that against the detriment to the co;r~unity and tile affected residents' clear feelings? And what economic benefit is there to SouZhold to depre- ciate residential property by having a bar in the area? Surely, this will serve to reduce the tax base in time. I am an idealist. I am grateful to live in a country where people have the right to petition for redress. I was thrilled Zhat more than 160 neighbors Joined in the upzon~ng petition. We also thought our petition was practical. The members of the Town Board are politicians (the highest calling, in my judgment) and surely, we reasoned, they will respond to overwhel~ming community sentiment particularly when it ~s correct. (Some of the people who signed the petition do vote in Southold) . But I feel tile fool tonight - our practical idealism moved none of you. I almost am losing hope. BuT a number of us care enough about what we have created for our families through hard work nog ~o see it jeopardized by a cheap bar. The irony is excruciating - we come to this area for peace, quiet, beauty and safety for our children, wives and selves- But our government seems indifferent on soiaething so vital to us. So, we shall fight on. Sincerely, Rober~ J. ~avitz RJR: ts t Z z I'-- rtl r-,I ~ .--I ~ z Frl C) -~ ~ Z Z '-~ GO 0 CJ'J ~ i-il II i"I-i 0 z II Z II MRS. JAMES GUDMUNDSEN KENNEY'S ROAD $OUTHOLD, L. I., NEW YORK 1197! MINUTES SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD June 21, 1968 PRESENT: SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON COUNC/J.A~.N HOWARD VALENTINE COUNCILMA~ LOUIS DEMAREST TOWN JUSTICE HENRY CLARK TOWN JUSTICE MART/_N S~TW-R TOWN CLERK ALBERT Wo RICHMOND SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: I think it is now 7:30, so I will open the hearing at this time. "Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law and Article /2f of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, public hearings will be held by the Southold Town Board in the Office of the Supervisor, 16 South Street, Greenport, New York, in said Town, on the 21st day of June, 1968 at 7:30P.M. (EDST) of said day on the follow- ing proposals to amend the Building Zone Ordinance (including the Building Zone Maps) of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York. 1. By changing from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "B" Business District the following described property: Beginning at a point on the northerly line of the Main Road where it is intersected by the easterly line of Alvah's Lane; running thence along the easterly line of Alvah~s Lane N. 31° 15' 10" W. 154.82 feet to land of Verderese; running thence along ~nd of Verderese N. 61° 56' 48" E. 137.54 feet to other land of Verderese; running thence along said other land of Verderese N. 30° 30' 00" W. 172.80 feet to the northerly line of the Main Road; running thence along the said northerly line of Main Road S. 69° 30' 00" W. 137.45 feet to the easterly line of Alvah's Lane, the place of beginning. Any person desiring to be heard on the above proposed amendments should appear at the time and place specified. Dated May 23, 1968, By Order of the Southold Town Board, Albert W. Richmond, Town Clerk. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: There is an affidavit of publication in the file indicating publication was actually made of this notice. I will now read the recommendation of the Planning Board: "Report to: Southold Town Board, 16 South Street, Greenport, -2-- N.Y. 11944, May 22, 1968. Gentlemen: This is to certify that the following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board at a regular meeting held on May 22, 1968: · n the matter of the mriginal petition of Henry Horton~ Cutchogue, N.Y. for a change of zone on property located on the northeasterly corner of Main Road and Alvah~s Lane, Cutchogue, N.Y., and more particularly bounded and described as follows: (legal description was not read again) It was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approves the change of zone from "A" Residential-Agricultural to "B" Business. Respectfully submitted, /s/ John Wickham, Chairman, Southold Town Planning Board." SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the relief sought in this petition? (There was no response.) SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Anyone wish to speak in opposition to this change? DR. LOUIS T. VERDERESE: I am the owner of property on the north side of the parcel in question and also on the east side of the parcel in question and we are opposed to having it changed to Business. The property was bought in a residential area; a considerable investment has been made in a residence home and we see no purpose to be gained by changing it to Business. I think it's time the Planning Board should have a general idea of what they are going to do with their planning laws. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: I might also mention at this time that have a letter from the North Fork Country Club indicating their objection to this change. SUPERVISOR ~?.mERTSON: Anyone wish to speak one way or the other? (There was no response.) SUPERVISOR A?.RERTSON: If not, we will close this hearing for further deliberation of the Board. SUPERVISOR A?.mERTSON: We will open the next hearing at this time. "2. By changing from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "B-2" Business District the following described property: Beginning at a point on the southeasterly line of the Main Road at the westerly corner of land of Cappa and the northerly corner of land of Terry; from said point of beginning running northeasterly along said south- easterly line~ 1100 feet, more or less~ to land of Surozenski; thence sout~ erly along boundary line between said land of Surozenski and land of Nierodzik, 424 feet, more or less, to a point 400.0 feet southeasterly from said southeasterly line of the Main Road; thence southwesterly parallel to said southeasterly line and 400.0 feet southeasterly therefrom, 1008 feet, more or less, thence northwesterly An the direct extension southeasterly of the boundary line between said lands of Cappa and Terry, 403 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning. Containing 9.68 acres, more or ~ess. Any person desiring to be heard on the above proposed amendments should appear at the time and place specified. Dated May 28, 1968, By Order of the Southold Town Board, Albert We Ricb_mond, Town Clerk." SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: There is an affidavit of publication in the file indicating publication was actuRlly made of this notice. The Planning Board in this instance approved the change of aone from "A" Residential and Agricultural to "B-2" Business. SUPERVISOR A?.~ERT$ON: Is there anyone here who would like to speak in favor of the relief sought in this petition? (There was no response.) SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON~ Anyone like to speak in opposition to this change? [There was no response.) SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: If not, we will close this hearing for the further deliberation of the Board. SUPERVISOR A/=BERTSON: We will now go on to the next hearing. "3. By changing from "B" Business District to "A" Residential and Agricultural District the following described property: Beginning at the intersection of the easterly line of Kenny's Road with the southerly line of North Sea Drive; from said point of beginning running easterly along said southerly line of No=~h Sea Drive, 183 feet, more or less; thence southerly 550 feet, more or less, to the northerly line of Dogwood Lane; thence westerly along said northerly line of Dogwood Lane, 285 feet~ more or less, to said easterly line of Kenny's Road; thence northerly along said easterly line 580 feet, more or less~ to the point of beginning. Any person desiring to be heard on the above proposed amendments should appear at the time and place specified. Dated May 28, 1968, By Order of the Southold Town Board, Albert W. Richmond, Town Clerk." SUPERVISOR A?.~ERT$ON: There is an affidavit of publication in the file indicating publication was actually made of this notice. I will now read the recommendation of the Planning Board: "Report to: $outhold Town Board, 16 South Street, Greenport, N.Y. 11944, May 22, 1968. Gentlemen: This is to certify that the following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board at a regular meeting held on May 22, 1968. In the matter of the petition of the residents in the area of Kenny~s Road, Southold, N.Y., relative to change of zone from "B" Business to "A" Residential and Agricultural District ~ certain property on the corner of Kenny~s Road and North Sea Drive, Southold, N.Y., It was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommends that the entire parcel to be re-zoned from B2 and M to A, with special emphasis on getting the vacant lot re-zoned A. Respectfully submitted, /s/ John Wickham~ Chairman, Southold Town Planning Board." SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Is there anyone who wishes to speak in favor of the relief sought in this petition? RICHARD J. CRON: I appear on behalf of the petitioners who comprise approximately 160 residents in the area of the property which is subject to this application. (M_r. Cron showed three plans of the area to the Board.) -6- The shaded area presently is the "B" zoned area on the Zoning Map. I am not unaware that often times on zoning applications and/or zoning changes a great deal of emotion is existentw but I wish to assure this Board that as far as the petitioners are concerned we rely on no such emotion. We believe that the good, hRrd facts pretty much speak for themselves. This is not the first occasion on which this subject parcel has come before this Board. To my knowledge this is the third application involving this' particular parcel and, as the Board is aware, this parcel runs on Kenny~s Road between North Sea Drive and Dogwood Lane, a portion of which is presently zoned "M" and a portion "B2". We submit that the zoning of this parcel is completely improper and against the facts as to what the zoning should hew based upon the surrounding residential area. This is absolutely no place in the middle of a highly residential area to leave this little Business and Multiple area remain. We ask this Board not to compound this thing any further. If there is no reasonable and legal basis under sound zoning procedures to permit this property to remain as is~ then the change should be effectuated at the earliest possible time. Let me bring to the Board's attention certain other relevant factors here. On each occasion that this application came before the Board~ the Planning Board has~ in each case~ recommended that this parcel be zoned "A" Residential and Agricultural. On the first occasion the Board moved to re-zone the area. The Board failed to act on it~ thus leaving the subject parcel as a "B" Business and "M" Multiple Residence area. Subsequently, a new application was brought before the Board and again this time action was taken and the parcel known as "B" was rezoned to "B2". We consider this nothing more than a compromise and --7-- certainly of no beneficial value to the residents in this "A" Residentail surrounding. We would ask that the Board take the necessary steps to correc an error and make the subject parcel an "A" Residential-Agricultural area. If there is anyone conducting anything on the business property now, he woul have the right to continue as a non-conforming use. For the time being, I will defer, because I am sure there are others here who would apeak in favor of this application. SUPERVISOR AT.RERTSON: Just to clarify things, this piece originally was all "B". The last change changed it to "b2" and the balance to "M"o This has been full "B" for a number of years and the change just took place recently. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Who else would like to speak in favor of this relief? GERA?~ D. CREWS, Lake Drive: urge the Board to take favorable action on the petition it now has before it. This is an area of pred- ominantly residential use and we feel that it will be detrimental to all of the single-family residence users in this area if we see a "B" use come in here. I understand that the Planning Board has recommended that this area be zoned "A" and I think it would be improper for the Board not to act on this petition. ROBERT RAVITZ, North Sea Drive: First, with respect to the editorial that appeared in the newspaper two weeks ago, I think that the editorial was rather unfair to the residents who had signed the petition, because it seemed to give the impression that our objective was to put the businessmen out of business. That is not our objective. These people who are currently conducting their businesses cannot be thrown off this property if this property is zoned "A". Unfortunately, this is the point that was made in the editorial. The point that was not mad~so long as this property is zoned "B2" and "M" any number of inappropriate uses could come about in the future. I know form personal knowledge that there are plans to expand this property beyond the current business- es and I think that the real issue here is, should this property remain zoned so that tomorrow or next year or two years from now, we wouldn't be faced with a small motle and a small bar, but a bar and grill, a large motel, a miniature golf course, and so on, that would be perfectly legal and would be inappropriate for this particular seenic, residential area. SAM MARKEL, Leeton Drive: I~m merely speaking as a reporter. · personally went around and saw the residents on Leeton Drive. The consensus of opinion was as M_r. Ravitz has said, but more than that, most of these people are looking for possible retirement in this area and therefor are looking for a residential area and are concerned with it wholeheartedly. MR. HARIER, Dogwood Lane: I am fully in favor of the upzoning. TOM PEPE:~ Sound View Avenue and Kenny~s Road: I would like to see this property zoned "A" Residential. HENRY POHL, North Sea Drive: I am in favor of the upzoning. One of the reasons the people reside in that area is because it is a resident- ial area and the objection to this is to prevent it from becoming some sort of a commercial carnival. MR. McGOWAN, Dogwood Lane: MRS. LOWELL, Leeton Drive: We are in favor of the residential area. Many people are out here for the sake -9- of children. We already have too much traffic down there. I am in favor of upping it to Residential for that rtason. MRS. HULSE, Dogwood Lane: I am in favor of upzoning. BOB WARNER, Jennings Road: I am in favor of upzoning. GEORGE POLIK, Kenny's Road; I am in favor of "A" zoning the entire area. WALTER HARRIS, Kenny's Road: I am in favor of the "A" Residential. DICK GRIGONIS:, Kenny's Road: I am in favor of the "A" Residentail. MR. MC MAHON, North Sea Drive: I am in favor of "A" zoning. I have been down there for quite some time. We don't want any slum area down there. JOH~ FOGOSICH, Kenny's Road: I am in favor of "A" Residential. CHARLES HICKEY: I am in favor of "A" zoning. MARY MARKEL: I am in favor of "A" zoning for practically all the reasons that have been given. HELEN JAZW-A, North Sea Drive: I am in favor of "A" zoning. I would also like to add that at the time that I purchased my property I was never told by any real estate agent or representative that this peice of property along Kenny's Road from North Sea Drive to Dogwood Lane was a bysiness peice of property. The only thing on that corner was a small bar. That I didn't object to, but I certainly was not notified that any of this was "B" and I am sure there are many people in this room here now who bought property here and were not advised that this was "B". We asked to be shown a residential area and I think the Town Board should realize that this is what the people are faced with. -10- HAZEL PEPE: JOHN JAZWAm North Sea Drive: If this property along North I am in favor of "A" zoning. I am in favor of upzoning to Residential Sea Drive remains business it can become a huge motel complex. I am against this for the following reasons: Anybody who wants to build a motel should have bought waterfront property. The fact that the public beach is so close to this property - - the Town is actually subsidizing a private business. This public beach was bought by taxpayers' money and is being maintained by taxpayers' money and if you allow a motel to be built on this property this will exclude the local people from using the beach. I have noticed that within the past few years the beach has become so crowded that if a motel is put up there there will be a deficiency in beach rights. Business is detrimental to the area, because this is a highly residential area and has been built up by people who have bought the property and now that the place has been built up and ~eautified, business interests are being encouraged to expend their inter- e~ts and take advantage ~f an error im zoning. At a hearing on January 23rd it was admitted that this was zoned in error in April 1957 and I commend the Town Board for bringing this up, because it was on their own motion in January that this upgrading was brought about. I also commend them from bringing it up again in April, which upzoned it partially. I want to straighten out another fact: This editorial that was written in the paper two weeks ago mentioned that businessmen have bought property here and after the sale was completed the Board decided to upzone this. This is not true, because on the property in question the deal was actually closed on January 3rd and the notice appeared in the paper January 4th. The Town Board ha~ decided -11- well in advance what course called "spot zoning" and we here are definitely not zoning in a residential area. Businesses should be fares and the Town Planning Board I believe should, it would take. This is what is generally in favor of spot along main thorough- in the future, design- ate certain areas within the Town of Southold where these businesses should be zoned in other places other than residential areas. A few businessmen have an investment in property, but the total investment in homes and residential areas involves a few hundred homes with many children possibly well over a thousand. The Town Board should take into consideratior the welfare of a thousand people, not the welfare of a couple of families. I think the Town Board should decide what is best for the majority of the people. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: bought the beach. That was ALICE FEATHERSTONAUGH, You mentioned the fact that tax money had a gift to the Town. Dogwood Lane: I am in favor of rezoning. FRED COBET: Of course~ I am in favor of "A" zoning. I am not anti- Business. I think Southold needs business to increase, but I don't think ;$ the area we are here for tonight4 it. You will find many places f~r something 1/ke the Apple Tree in Mattituck. Would the Board 1/ke to own a home near a place like the Apple Tree in Mattituck? MR, MARKEL: I am surprised not to see more of the real estate people in favor of our petition, because we spend thousands of dollars in this area. I think it is very important to the business p~ople of the community to have people such as ourselves living in this area, I am sure that we would spend a lot more money than a motel or a SHEPARD SCHE/_NBERG: I represent M_r. and Mrs. -12- small bar. Potecki. Mr. and Mrs. Potecki own the property which is presently zoned "M", which is a multiple residence and which permits mot~1So I have ~eard something tonight along the lines that a mistake was made here back in 1957 when zoning was first brought to the Town Of Southold. Who was it that determined that this was a mistake. I don't know. Possibly the Board sitting in 1957 did not feel "B" for Business. that it was a mistake to zone that particular area In 1960 M_r. and Mrs. Potecki came to this area and purchased the property which was then zoned "B", knowing that it was zoned "B", and purchased 1.74 acres° This is one and three-quarter acres pf property zoned "B" and they paid $10,000 for this piece of property° This was zoned Business property° This was not zoned Residential property. Two years passed and they built the present structure there which is a motel. It's a multiple residence - a three ~amily multiple residence. This was not a mistake - they knew what they were doing. You say nobody told you that this was a Business zone. The Zoning Map is on file - it's a public document and everyone has a right to look at it° If you came in after this, you bought with your eyes wide open. On the corner is now a food stand. Some people failed in the business, but that doesn't mean that this particular area was bad for business. It might have been a bad businessman. Zoning remained "Status Quo" until January 1968. That meant it was "B" property from the beginning of zoning right up to the time of 1968, January. At that time a public hearing was held and a change of zone was sought - I believe by the Town Board on your motion - from "B" to "A"o At that time it was not changed from "B" to "A" Residential. Public hearings -13- as their property is zoned "B". The Board must take into consideration the whole area. To the south of the Potecki property is more vacant property all the w~y down to Dogwood Lane. Tonight is the first time that I saw this property. I took a left onto Kenny's Road and I was very pleasantly surprised to see the area as I moved down to the Sound~ Then we came to a large open area. The Town owns it on the left and on the right before the Potecki property. Why isn't this property left the way it is? People like to go in and change the zoning on other people's property. Waterfront is the greatest natural asset that the Town of Southold has. Waterfront means recreational-residential areas. IZm afraid that agriculture~ which has been the backbone of our east-end community, is on the way out as the basis for economy and more and more we will look to recreational-residential areas and the use of our natural resources. The only way to save waterfront property is to maintain zoning. I ask the Board to maintain the zoning as it is~ or~ in the alternative~ to place this property back in the "B" zone in which it was originally. STANLEY CORW3_N: I am here individually, on my own behalf, and also on behalf of the ~wners of part of the property~ Mr. and Mrs. Oliveri. In view of Mr. Cron's statement about his 160 clients and where all the emotion was coming from, he apparently was incorrect. I think that the purpose of a public hearing is to afford the Board an opportunity to get a sense of what the public thinks, but I feel that it all ought to be relettered and conform within the fr~unework of those provisions of the Town Law which enable the Board its legal ~atitude in this area. We are talking principally about the health, safety, morals and welfare of the pDople of the community. When we look at this change in the light of thRt, we donZt see much valid reason for it as I see it. For $25.00 they can force this Board into this kind of a hearing. I think it is important that we look at the history of the change and use that as some kind of a guide to determine whether or not the present application should be granted. The first two applications were made on the Board's own motion. The Board first moved to upzone it to "A"o Then there was a public hearing that was not widely attended and there was very little support in favor of the change at that time. The Board itself found that its own thinking apparently on hew this should be zoned was incorrect and it modified its own action; it denied the application actually by a resolution and on the same n~ght that that was done, made a new motion to change it as it presently is. Board that when an application be referred to the Planning Board. in favor of this change to A. The It is, of course, a requirement of this is made for a change of zone, it has to The Planning Board said yes, we are first time that the Board referred this zoning to the Planning Board it went along with the Board's feeling, but the reason given was that the parcel was zoned "B" in error. That is an opinion of the Planning Board --- it was not a mistake, and I talked with many members of the Board at the time that it was done and the member who was in charge of that particular area of the Town, F~r. Van Duzer. The second time the Planning Board proposed to rezone, the Board told you that now it was a question of a serious water supply. If these replies to the Board are the thinking of objective people who are con- -16- cerned with long-range planning .... certainly no one can tell me that there is any consolation about this resolution of the Planning Board, so I hope that the Board is not of a mind to agree that this was a zoning error. The reasons given were as follows: the property is surr- ounded by "A" zoning; it is an invitation to expand a to all business uses; it would increase the noise; and that there are other available sites for business uses. The Board is aware that there are many areas zoned other than for residential in this Town that are completely sur- rounded by "A" zoning and certainly that is not any reason for anything to be changed. So far as leaving it as it is being an invitation to expand, or changing this because there might be another Apple Tree there in an "A" district, we can have many things. This is not an invitation-- zoning is not an invitation to make any substantial changes nor to bring in the worst in any business area. So far as increasing the noise and traffic --- we already have everything that goes with a beach, but the fact that ~ noise is already there doesn't mean that it is going to be worsened. Now, also in the petition they said that this would be detrimental to the area residents. That's no reason to c~ange zoning. · submit that in taking into consideration the welfare of the people of the Town, not just summer residents, but also year-round residents---this isn't going to make any difference. The welfare of the Town would be better off ~ if it is left the way it is, So far as transients being invited, the Town facility already brings them in. I know that this Board reads the official paper, but I submit that a lot of significant remarks were made in it. In one -17- breadth the people say they have a small bar and that they can continue to maintain it, and I have a copy of a letter from a M_r. Hauch dated June 18th in which he pointed out to the Board that operation of that small bar has failed over the past under the ownership of three different people. So, apparently as a non-conforming use it isn't going to be of very much use. In your zoning appeal where you have to deal with special exceptions, one of the tests that you set up is that property values must be concerned. Mr. Oliveri bought this property before the first public notice of this action and paid $13,000 for it and he had been told that if it were to be rezoned that the property would be valued at about $6,000. I submit that, taking this as a practical zoning matter, the Board should decide this application and leave the zoning as it is. ROBERT HYATT: ~ am a businessman in Southold and the reason I am here is because I read an editorial in the paper and read some letters, and I find that the best way to get to the point of a subject is to attend that meeting and learn. Now, I did listen and I think I learned quite a lot, but I got a little bit perturbed at three things that were done. I happen to have been a transient at one time and yet I hope I am considered a member of this Town. I would like a show of hands of all the people in this room who came here who were at one time transients in this area. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: We do not take a vote at any hearing and do not ask questions of the audience. If you want to ask a question as a rhetorical question, thatJs fine. MR. HYATT: I will take back my question, but I will assume that a ~ood many of us here were transients. Therefore, I think that we should -18- pass from our minds any feeling that transients are not possibly good future citizens of Southold. I think we should just disregard that. What town are you from? We are all from this country and we are dis- cussing a human being's rights as an individual and therefore I think we should cast aside emotion and just listen. MR. COBET: I believe M_r. Hyatt has an ulterior motive with mr. Oliveri being in the building market. He mentioned that we are all transients that we all emigrated from Europe, but I wo~ld like to still point out that many transients, praci~cally the whole of New York, have only about an hour's d~ive to this area, and these are the kind of transients that we are interested in~ We came out here with very good reasons and have invested huge sums-- we didn't come for an hour or two. Somebody ment- ioned that this might have been an error, and it might not have been. I don't dispute this and I am aware of the facts, but how the Board will agree that good zoning should be fluctual. I am not anti-business and I know these people bought these properties in good faith I am sure. We don't mind the luncheonette, but X as I said before, we would mind an Apple Tree. Mr. Potecki has no objection--its a very nice place and I am sure there is no objection for him to continue. But this is on three parcels from North Sea Drive to Dogwood Lane and Mr. Potecki might not own his parcel two or five years from now. And, the vacant parcel on Dogwood Lane and Kenny's Road may change hands and we've got to think about the future. I think this is the Board's responsibility. Someone mentioned, I believe it was Mr. Cron, that other residen~l areas in Southold are surrounded by business areas and this may be true. But, this maybe occurred before zoning- but, we are going to compound this felony? There was no control over this 30 years ago. -19- But here's something that is in its infancy - here's a possible cancer grow- ing right here. You, as the Board, can be surgeons and cut it out right now. We have Town agents and police H cars on the beach area, but if you are talking about private property, the police canJt go on private property. Somebody mentioned the four questions in the Long Island Traveler - I think those questions are very reasonably and intelligently answered. I think the Board has a responsibility. I think the investment Mr. Oliveri has is small compared to the total investments by the people that are here and many others that are not here Board sees fit to fulfill their responsibility. DR. VERDERESE: I hope that the Board will tonight. I hope the take into consideration and realize the damages that are imminent in any changes in similar areas. You have had a spot-zoning here and look at the commotion it has raised. MRS. FRED COBET: In listening to the lawyer for the Poteckies, he mentioned the adjacent property and also property that was owned by the Town. We are not concerned with that. There is vacant property adjacent to this property that is in discussion now. If we are not up ~ on our toes, where is it going to end? MR. CRON: I have listened with a great deal of interest to my colleagues in the legal profession. I was particularly interested in the history concerning their clients property. I was also happy to hear Mr. Corwin raise really what is the issue here. I wonder if this property in question, if it were zoned Residential "A" at this time and an applic- ation came before this Board to zone that property "B2" and "M"~ then this would be a wonderful example of spot-zoning. What ~ we are doing here is the reverse of the situation. We already have the area up-zoned -20- we are now trying to redtidy the situation. I have seen in other areas where business property has been rezoned to "A" where the factors that exist in this question were very close. We ask the Board to do that which is right. It takes courage to do that which is right. It doesn't take any courage to ignore or to compromise it. We want the property to be rezoned under sound zoning principles. The issue is today as the conditions exist in that area - is the property properly zoned under sound we zoning procedures and practice? We say that it is not --~would ask this Board to move with the utmost speed so that neither side is left hanging for any degree of time. I wish to remind the Board of the fact that some two or three years ago there was a mot~ proposed to be built right off Kenny's Road and at that time p~ople absolutely were against any such type of business and I thought that the Board at that time would have acted in behalf of the residents in this area. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: We have many letters and telegrams concerning this which are prrt of the record. MR. CRON: I wonder if, as a part of this hearing, the Board would be willing to incorporate the files on the two previous hearings2 SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: deliberation. (Someone in the audience) Certainly they will be considered in our : I was mislead by someone into not appear- lng at the January 23rd hearing. No reference from the first two hearings should be brought into this hearing. MR. TOM PEPE: Dan Siith owned the land that my home is on now and I was the one who was turned down by the Board because I was told it -21- would be a public nuisance. (Someone in the audience) : We people are not against the Poteckies and not against the small bar continuing in its present capacity, and if he can better himself within the confines of his property . (Someone in the audience) : We are acting a little bit belatedly about this matter. It is evident that most of us are summer residents and not here in January. Mr. COBET: We may not be here in the winter, but we vote here. Some of us own two homes - we can c.hoose our legal voting residence and many of us do vote here. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON" The word "summer resident" is not a dirty word. We are very happy with the summer residents in the Town of Southold, and hope that you continue to come here. MRS. COBET: I remember quite well walking down and looking at the area and seeing the samll bar closed and this was in 1954 or '55. thought it would be a very nice place if it were open. And the other building, it looked to me like a huge colonial and I know that he rented out apartments. I never thought until a few months ago that this property could become a night-mare. We hope to retire here and live here and to think what might happen in this entire situation. MR. HYATT: I was here as the result of an editorial I had read and letters in response to it. Since that time I investigated who the party involved was, found out and discussed the situation and told him that I would attend the meeting with an open ear and an open mind and I never will have an ulterior motive to exist in this area. If we don't part _ icipate in these meetings when we have questions in our minds - let's -22- always remember that we have the privelege of having a hearing like this. SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: The Meeting will close at this time for further deliberations of the Board. -23- r-ri O Z ~ O E::::: ~ z Fr'l II L.~ '--,4 ZE O F'"" Z il N O O '"13 .,~ O r-r'i Z ---'1 Z -,,-- I OJ II r'r'i ,6") 60 ~ ..~ Fr'l ---I "'-- Z ~ Z ~ ITl -- g -'ID II ~ 0 r'rl C) O0 '--t "~ r'rl C) i-ri t'~ 0 Z II ~ '-,- Iq-i II g z 0 Z]Z CZ) z z z ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ..--I 0 0 ~ ~ 3::) Z '--" --.I ~' ~ '"'o I'-- r-- I'-- I z ~ ~ "< co -- 0 I lll ITl ZE ::~ ~ ~ 0 ~ --I m ~ 0 0 _ 0 0 -- 0 '..-.4 z ~ O0 ~ 0 ~ -< I 09 ~ m 0 z z m I z 0 ~ ~.=.,. t.~ 2 II ~ ~ z Z I -- 0 0 rr'i O9 I :::U "-'1 Z ~ ~ :::U :::::D O9 CD 0 t~ C_ rtl 0 t'~ "Ti '-- --I z --I ~ L~ N 0 II 0 Z O~ ~< ~ Z ..~ Z Z Z ~-q Z .6") Fr"l ~1-1 390 North Sea Drive Southold, New York June Mr. Albertson Town Supervisor 1.3 South Street Greenport, New York Dear Sir: We would like to have the zoning changed on the property under question at North Sea Drive, Kenny's Road and Dogwood Lane to "A residential and agricultural district." The area is entirely residential except for the Snack Bar now there, and should be kept as such. Motels, pools, restaurants with barE, or bars as such, should not be brought into this residential area. The operating of the Snack Bar has failed under three different ownerships. It did nothing to enhance the area, but rather detracted from it; drawing only transients, not the residents. One ~ummer, while in operation, it drew g~ngs of noisy teenagers who on several occasions went down North Sea Drive knocking over mail boxes and hurling stones at name posts. We have not had this since the Snack Bar closed. If beer or liquor should be served in that area things could get out of hand. We have been permanent summer residents since 1950, and like all residents in the area contribute much more to the town o£ Southold via taxes, purchases, hiring of local labor etc than the town could ever hope to gain through transients who may never return ~ the area after a vacation of a week or two. A bar where liquor and beer is ~rved may draw undesirables into this area. We hope you will act in favor of the majority of ~rament residents rather than for a handful of interested parties. Respectfully yo~rs, . .,)'I?l.I/~ ., Donald P. Rauck, Regina S. Hauck SoUTHOLD - P~'C°NIC I"~IVIC A-~SoCIATION' INC. Jume 17, 1968. 8outhold Town Board, 16 8curb Street, Greenport, New York. Gentlemen: On Monday, May 8th, the Board of Directors of the Southold- Peconio Oivic Association, Inc. gave carefful consideration to the request the Kenmy~s Beach Property Owners a~e making to the Town Board for rezoning a part of the Kerm~'s Beach area - hearing to be held, Jume 21st and listed No. 5. Motion was regularly made that we request the Town Board to rezone to "As residential the area in question (parts of Eenmy's Road, North Sea Drive and Dogwood Lane). We understand, of c~Arse, that any such chamge would not effect the right of amy owmer to continue a prior non- conforming use. Thank you for y~ar serious consideration. Very truly yours, SOUTHOLD-PEOCNIC OIV~O ASSOOIATION, INO. Carl Petroweki, President For The BOARD OF D~REOTORM mpl GOOD FOR ,SOUTHOLD AND PECONIC [$ GOOD FOR EACH AND EVER\' ONE" 77 Park Avenue 5 Dartmouth Street New York, N-Y. 10016 Forest Hills Gardens. N. Y. 11375 889-6886 DR. J. JOHN V.~.CCARO BO 3-2004 d~ne 17, 1968 :~Ir. Lester ~lbertson ,?uper vi s or Town ['o<~d I.r~:.nForL, ?~Te;,.~ ynz'k Upzoning to A residential o£ Sea Zri~e-Ke::ay .L~ul--DL',~V.' ~d L~-ne De~r LL~. Llhertson: Since we have mzintained oulI subduer r~sidence on North Cea Dr~ve have incre~singly enjoyed the quiet res~ful atmos:h~re .,~' li~.li~ Lone Isl~n,~ Sound - ~:.m:inL full well that our children cai: tak~ b~cycle riflez up and dO,~T, ~he streets ;d.ere t.l~e n3i[h'.nrc ute ~ nth co.~.~:~la! .:%r.Jlal.. Ti:a f~'dlies take a gr~a'L nf ~ri.ie in ti;eLf p:'"F~'.'t~'. ard'' 'Lz ir~sure ?urse!ve~ aLa=n~t any %uldesira~!~ chang.~s ~,'~ou!~J like to sea the area up~oned to a Class "A" rosidential ~.ategcry. b::u v:~!l ~riVe thi~ metter your serious c >nsiaerati~ and wil~ srectly a~Urecicto ~]! .7,,'-r efforts ~n our Since .'~e cannct be ~ the Tov,'n [Joard open m~:etin~ on June 2!st :Id !Jke to 2:' ,;r, record as faw,rzns upzoning to '~A" l'esi,Jent~al thc ~ortL ~s. ~ri;% ,~.',y [[o~uq end Dob~'.,ood Lane l~roperties. Very'truly yom.rs, John anti L~rian Vaccarc 35 Tib|)tqts Road. Yonkers. N. ¥. 10705 June 13~ 1968 Dear Mr. Albertson: I was most disturbed by Mr. Booth's editorial in the June 6th Traveller regarding the Kenny's Road - North Sea Drive zoning sit- uation. The regrettable aspect of this is not so much the position he takes, but that the factual picture he gave was so terribly incom- plete. To my knowledge~ he did not speak to any of the residents in the area to ascertain their point of view. Accordingly, I am taking the liberty of enclosing a copy of a letter I have sent to Mr. Booth. Sincerely, Robert J. Ravitz 305 North Sea Drive Southold, N. Y. RJR: LRG Mr. Lester Albertson, Supervisor Town Hall 16 South Street Gresnport, N. ¥. Kenny' s Ro~d Southold, L. I. June 12, 1968 Honorable Lester M. Albertsou, Supervisor Town of Southold Greenport, Long Island On the assumption that you and other Board m~mbers may hav~ read the "Traveler" editorial I am forwarding herewith a copy of ~y letter to Mr. Booth which I sincerely believe is a fair presentation of the problem. Very truly yours, Kenny' s Road Southold, Long Island June /2, 1968 Mr. C. Whitney Booth Editor and Publisher Long Isl-~d Traveler $outhold, Long Island Dear Sir: I am sure that your editorial "A Zoning Problem", which appeared in the June 6th issue of the "Traveler", was read with great interest. It is unfortunate, however, that it did not contain aL1 the facts ~nd was completely slanted to the businessman's view. For the record it should be noted that there is more lnvolved than the property located at the corner of Kenny's Road and North Sea Drive. Actual3~% there are two additional contiguous parcels (one containing a multiple dwelling and the other vacant) to be considered for rezoning to "A" Residential. Therefore, the properties in question actually run z~rom North Sea Drive along Kenny's Road to Dogwood Lane. I believe the attached map gives an accurate picture of the properties in question. It also graphically and dr-~tically shows how ridiculous "spot" zoning can be. The business parcels in question are nestled in the heart of a residential co~,~.nity containing only one-family private dwellings. Fortunately, the P]-~uing Board, recognizing the undesira- bility of business properties in a strictly residential area, has alw~ays reco~ended these parcels be up-zoned to "A" Residential. F~rly this year the Town Board also recommended up-zoning to "A". Unfortu- nately, most of the residents of the area were not aw-are of the public he,ring and as a result only a comparatively few attended. As is too often true the poor tax payer and home owner is at best misinformed or uninformsd. As a result, the Town Board chose to take no action. H~wever, a subsequent public hsaring resulted in the properties being rezoned to "B-~'and "M". As you know, the "B-2" classification would permit operation of a bar & grill and the '~" classification the erection of a motel complex. What has been viewed by many as a small boarded up luncheonette at the corner of Kenny's Road and North Sea Drive could, overnight, develop into a real "swinging joint". Further- more, under present zoning and building ordinances, a huge motel complex could be erected on the contiguous properties in question. Certainly you Mill agree that this would be highly undesirable in the heart of a residential ar~a. The businessman who purchased the non-operating luncheonette about six months ago had every right to do so. Should his property be up-zoned to "A" he would hav~ every right to operate the luncheonette. He would not, however, be permitted to expand the existing dwelling into somsthing that could become a nightmare to som~ 200 surrounding residents. Likewise, the mnltiple dwe/-ling located on property which is contiguous to the luncheonette could continue to operate as such. However, it could not be expanded to include a motel complex. In closing I should like to answer the four questions you posed in the editorial: 1. If this business property is such a threat to the area why has there been no effort to up-zone it before no~? Unfortunately, most of the residents were not a%rare that the properties in question were zoned business and did not realize the potential danger to their peace and welfare. Fortunately, the Planning and T~n Boards have recognized that danger and should be cOu~ended for their rec~-mendations. 2. How many times does a businessu~n have to hire a lawyer and fight such an issue before he knows where he stands? This question might better be answered with a question. How m~y times do the residents, who are unfortunate vict~m~ of "spot" zoning and one person's desire for profit, have to retain an attorney to iusure their right to peace and quiet in a high~ly residential area? 3. How can one purchase a business property in good faith with some assurance of being left in peace? As stated previously, the businessman who purchased the luncheonette has every right to continue operating should the property be up-zoned to "A'~, 4. Will this precedent mean any group of neighbors can cause any isolated businessman expense ~nd worry when they see fit, no matter how long he has been operating? Although the luncheonette in question has recently been re-opened it had not b%en in operation for many years. Again, the residents of the area have no objection to the luncheonette as such. It is the enlarging of it to the point of a public nuisance that causes them concern. Likewise, the maltiple dwelling in its present fo~-~ is not objectionable, although expansion into a motel complex would be. Upzoniug these two properties, as well as the contiguous v~cant parcel~to the "A" classification would preserve the residential character of the neighborhood and insure continued orderly growth of the area. After a]_l, is this not what we w~nt for our Town? Very truly yours, ~ ~mmm ~ edAtmflml *& ~omAmW Problem' Am I~t~ef emm~ ~md,, fq~fmtmbXy, lm~mmplete mm to (1) wAth thru mzceptAmm of tho propmft~ in tho ~tize ~ oemiteta of ~mo-fattly reot- dmmiZim~m. A xooh mt tho ~Ln~ map rand mn immpmmf~mm of the srom GXemrXy mbomu tho abmuz~tty of ~) 11am PZ&mmim~ Bo~d btam f,a_ =ad tltrme tAmme wit&Lit {dim pmmt max mmmtbm tbmt the property lie mmmld ~A# S~midemtiAZ. ~ fei. f~Ll~4~, ymi ZaLi to conold,8~: to mpmfsto tho eEtottmJ m bmr tn perpetuity. you mbom~d hive Limo m~tmd thmt ~e rMbtm Joi~ h m~ ~ ptltt~ ~tl~tl~ r~t to ~tttAm f~ 8emtlaold, N, $outhold Town Planning Board SFIUTHOLD, L. I., N. Y. 11971 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS John Wlckham, Chairman Henry Molsa Alfred Grebe WlIHam Unkelbach Frank Ceyle Report to: Southold Town Board 16 South Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944 May 22, 1968 Gentlemen: This is to certify that the following action was taken by the Southold Town Planning Board at a regular meeting held on May 22, 1968: In the matter of the petition of the residents in the area of Kenney's Road, Southold, N.Y., relative to change of zone from "B" Business to "A" Residential and Agricultural District on certain property on the corner of Kenney's Road and North Sea Drive, Southold, N.Y., Zt was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board reco- mmends that the entire parcel be re-zoned from B2 and M to A, with special emphasis on getting the vacant lot re-zoned A. mkw Respectfully submitted, ickham, Chairmah Southold Town Planning Board OFF .ERK: SOUTHOLD, L, I., N. Y. May 16, 1968 FL~. John Wickham Chairman Planning Board Cutchogue, L.I. Dear Mr. Wickham; The original petition of the residents in the area of Kenney's Road, $outhold, N.Y., relative to change of zone from "B" Business to "A" Residential and Agricultural District on cert&in property on the corner of Kenney's Road and North Sea Drive, Southold, N.Y. is in the files in the office of the Planning Board at Southold, N.Y. You are instructed to pre- pare an official report defining the condit- ions described in the petition and determine the area so effected with the recommendation of your Board. AWR/mr Very truly yours, Albert W. Richmond Town Clerk May 16~ 1968 Mr. Hichard Cron~ l(ain Road Cu.tchogue~ ]~.Y. Attorney Dear Sir~ Enclosed please find recei?.t ['or fee - $ 25.O0 for your a-'31ication of change of zone # 17~ petition by residents of the ~ioad d P, orth Sea Drive area. This armllcation was accepted by tl e 'i'o":. ~oard an,~ re~ ferred to t::e ?l~r~r_ir~ board for a report. This %~ill be ~out on the agenda for the Flarz;inf: ko.~rd z¥,oting [.[ay 2~d - probably' after 8 PM as t}ey hav~ alr~-aay scheduled a ,,u;lic h,a:c-i:<' for 7:30 on a subdivision. ?~ ',;ol~l~ ~z'~abi~'' ~10 a g od idea for y¢:u or sOmone oi' the 'yr:~ur tc be present to, d!scus~ t' is .'itb ~ ~ ~_~ ,.n, ~I 2:o~ I'd.. Yours truly : ~uJ_'_;,;:~ [,' I;.:sl r. ctor LEGAL ,NOTICE NOTICE OF 1-17-a~RING ON PROPOSAL TO AMEND ~ONI~IG OiR~INAATCE Pursuant to Secuon 2i]§ of the Town Law and Article IX of the Balding Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold, ~nik County, New York, public l~arings will be held by the Southold Town Board in the ofice Qf t~e Supervisor, 16 South S~ree~ Greanpo~, New Y~rk, in sa/d TOWn on the 21st day of June, 1968, at 7:30 P.M. (E.D,S.T.) of sai~l ,date on the following proposals I to amend lhe Building Zone Oz~iin- ance (including the Building Zone Maps) of the Town of Soutbold, Suf- folk Count),, NOW York. 1. By cb:a,nging fpe~n "A" Resi- dential ~nd Agricultural District to '%B" Business Dialect the following described property: i~eginning ~t a point on the northerly line of the Main Road where it is intersected by the east- erly line of Alva'h's Lmne; Run- ning thence along the easterly line of Alvah's Lane AT. 31°-15'-10'' W. 154.82 feet to land of VePderase; l%unning thence along lend of Vet- dm'ese AT. 61°-5§'-40,, F.. 137.54 ~cot to other land of Yerdepese; R%mning thence al(rog said other land of Verderese N. 30°-30'-00'' W- 172.80 feet to tale northerly line of the Main Roadi Rurming thence along the said northerly line of Main Road S. 69°-30'00', W. 137.45 feet tothe easterly line of Alvah's L~ne, the place of be- ginning. 2. l~y ~h~zl~ing from "A" .Resi- dential at, aT A~ricullurai District to "B-2" Business District the tollow- lng described property: ,Beginning at a point on the southeasterly line of the Main', Road al the westerly corner ~i land of Cappa and the no~heriyI corner of land of Tenry; from said ~oint of beginning running nort'h- easterl), along said southeasterly, line, 1100 feet, mope or less land of Suroz~_nski; thence south-I erly along boundary line between~ said land of Su,,~)~e~ki and laod. of Niecodzik, 424 feet, more or less, to a point 400.0 feet south- easterly frem said southeasterly l~e vf the Main iR~ad; lhenes southwesterly parallel to said sout~heesterly Ii.ne and 400.0 feet southeasterly ~herefrorn, 1008 feet, more or less; thence northwesterly in the direct exter~aion southeast- erly el the boandary line between said lz, nds of Cai>pa and T~'ry, 403 feet, more or less, to t'he point of ~egin~ing. ,Containing 9.6S acres, more or less. 3.. By changing from "B' Bttsi- lless District to "A" Residential and Agricultt~rai District the following described property: Beginning at the intersectian of the easterly line of Kenny's Road, with the southerly line of Norfh Sea 13rive; from said point of be- ginning ~dnning easterly al(~ng said ~outherly line of North Sea ilrive, 183 feet marc or less; thence southerly 550 feet mc,re or leas, to t'he northerly line of Dogwood ,T.ane; thence westerly along said~ ,northerly line of Dc~wood Lane, 285 feet more or less to ~aid east- erly line of Kenny's R~ad; thence northerly along said easterly line 580 feet more ~r less, to the point of beginning. ~ny persan desiring to be on the a,bove prop~od amondm~nts' should appear at lche time and place above specified. DATED: iVEAY 28, 1968, BY OI~DER OF TH.I~ ~OLTTHOLD TOWN B C,,MID ALBERT W. IRICHMOATD, ltJ~ TOWI%T CLERK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ] STATE OF NEW YORK, } ss: .... .73,....a:~:Cr~.~..-T~.., .... bem~ duly Sworn, sci!rs that . .~.,-~,~. ~ is Printer and Publisher of the SUFFOLK WEEKLY TIMES, n newspape~ published at Greenport, in said county; and that the notice, ,of which the annexed is ~ p~inted copy, h~s been published in the said Sutielk Weekly Times once in eoch week, tot ...... £~.-I ~ ............... week~ successively commencing on the . ~: .~.~-3.9.~: ~ 9.~..k-.. ........ Sworn of ~,id clay on ~he follow, lng proposalsI proper ry: I coUNTY OF SUFFOLK I STATE OF NEW YORKI ss: C. Whitney Booth, Jr., being duly sworn, soys that he is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER - MATFITUCK WATCHMAN, o public news- paper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; and that the notice of which the annexed is o printed copy, has been published in said Long Island Troveler-Mottitack Watch- man once each week for ..... .4~, ..... week.s./ Sworn to before me this ........ ~.~.... ......... day of rio. 52.]041000 1~ thenc~we~terly a~ong said uortherly~ ~ ~'0 ~ i. J~*-%3'-%0~ ~. ~.82 ~ ~ ~ of *, ','lk,Alil ~ ~ ~ ~ Of · ~ _fl 30'-30'-~' W. 172.00 ~ M ~ ~y ~ of ~ (8) PETITION TO T"": TOWN BOARD, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YO~ We, the undersigned property owners in the Town of Southold, hereby petition the T~n Board, Towm of Southold, Suffolk County, New York to amend the Building Zone Ordinance (including the Building Zone Maps) of the Town of Southold, by c~nging from "B" Business District to "A" Residential and Agricultural District the following described properties: BEGINNTNG at the intersection of the easterly line of Kenny's Road, with the southerly line of North Sea Drive; from said point of beginning running easterly along said southerly line of North Sea I~ive, 183 feet more or less; thence southerly 550 feet mere or less, to the northerly line of Dogwood r~e; thence westerly along said northerly line of Dogwood Lane, 285 feet more or less to said easterly line of Kenny's Road; thence northerly along said easterly line 580 feet more or less, to the point of beginning. We, the undersigned property owners residing in the t-~diate area of the properties described in the preceding paragraph, believe that said am-uding of the Building Zone Ordinance is necessary and correct for the fo]lowing reasons: 1. With the exception of the above described properties the entire surrounding area is zoned "A" Residential and Agri- cultural and a]l existing structures in the area are one (1) family dwellings. Accordingly, any business use, real or contemplated, of the above described properties do not, and would not, conform with the residential character of the neighborhood. 2. Unless the entire area is zoned "A" Residential, the very existence of these business zoned properties serves as an invitation to expand the present uses to any permitted under the "B" Business classification. This would Further tend to destroy the residential character of the neighborhood with resultant damage to surrounding property v~lues. The foregoing would be true even under a B-2 or M classification. B. If the abov~ described properties are not re-zoned to "A" the surrounding residential cow~m:nity will be subject to increasing amounts of noise, traffic and littering, all of which would be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the area's residents. Furthermore, the establish- ment of a motel or a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages would invite a large numher of transients into the area at all hoturs of the day (and night). -2- 4. The Planning Board has always reco~m~uded that this particular area be restricted to those uses defined under the "A" Residential and Agricultural District category. 5. There a~e many available sites in the Town of Southold for business ventua~s and expansions. Therefore, the need to locate or expand business ventures in the heart of a residential area is unnecessary and unwarranted. We strongly urge that the Tow~ Bomrd act promptly in this matter for the good of th~ c~.-,,~nity as well as the entire Township. SIGNATURE ADDRESS ,© ,C April 30, 1968 , '.?/. 7:// .fF' .,), ? ~,.'f£TION ~0 'l'~ ~ BOARD, TOWN OF SO~l'aOID, SO~'~'OLK COUNTY, N~W YORK We, the undersigned proper~y owners in the Town of Southold, hereby petition the T~*n Board, To~n of Southold, Suffolk County, New York to amend the Bulld~n~ Zone Ordinance (including the Building Zone Maps) or'the To~n of Southold, by changing from "B" Business District to "A" Residential and Agricultural District the following ~escribed properties: BEGIiINING at the intersection of the easterly line of Kenny's Road, with the southerly line of North Sea I~iv~; from said point of beginning running easterly along said southerly line of North Sea Drive, 183 feet more or less; thence southerly 550 feet more or less, to the northerly line of Dogwood T~ne; thence westerly along said northerly line of Dogwood T~ne, 285 feet more or less to said easterly line of Kenny's Road; thence northerly along said easterly line 580 feet more or less, to the point of beginning. We, the undersigned property owners residing in the ~mm"diate ~rea of the properties described in the preceding paragraph, believe that said amending of the Building Zone Ord~suce is necessary and correct for the following reasons: 1. With the exception of the above described properties the entire surrounding area is zoned '~" Residential and Agri- cultural and all existing structures in the area are one (1) family dwellings. Accordingly, any business use, real or contemplated, of the above described properties do not, and would not, conform with the residential character of the neighborhood. 2. Unless the entire area is zoned "A" Residential, the very existence of these business zoned properties serves as an invitation to expand thm present uses to any permitted under the "B" Business classification. This would further tend to destroy the residential character of the neighborhood with resultant damage to surrounding propertyvalues. The foregoing woald be true even under a B-2 or M classification. 3- If the above described properties are not re-zoned to "A" the surrounding residential co~,uity will be subject to increasing amounts of noise, traffic and littering, all of which would be detrimsntal to the health, safety and general welfare of the area's residents. Furthermore, the establish- m~nt of a motel or a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages would invite a large m,mber of transients into the area at hours of the day (and night). -2- 4. The Planning Board has always recommended that this particular area be restricted to those uses defined under the "A" Besidential and Agricultural District category. 5. There are many available sites in the Town of Southold for business ventures and expansions. Therefore, the need to locate or expand business ventures in the heart of a residential area is unnecessary a~d unwarranted. We strongly urge +.h-t the Town Bosa~l act promptly in this matter for the gOo~ of the cv,,--,mity as well ms the entire Township. ' - OI ~ £~._ /~ ~ ,'~y-~ ' April 30, 1968 AEORESS ,I 3. Such request is made for the following reasons: STATE OF NEW YORK, ) ) SS:- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK, ) he is,~the petitioner in the within action; that he has read the foregoing Petition and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to his (her) own knowledge, except as to the mat- ters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and that as to those matters he believes it to be true. ~',TION TO '~.':-',.: TOWN BOARD, TOWN OF SOUTNOID, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NEW YORK We, the undersigned proper~y Owners in the Town of Southold, hereby petition the Town Board, Tcr~ of Southold, Suffolk County, New York to ~m-ud the Building Zone Ordinance (including the Building Zone Maps) of the Town of Southold, by changing from "B" Business District to "A" Residential and A~ricultur~l District the fo]lowing described properties: BE~]RIN]21G at the intersection of the easterly line of Kenny's Road, with the southerly line o£ North Sea Drive; from said point of beginning running easterly along said southerly line of North Sea Drive, 183 feet more or less; thence southerly 550 feet more or less, to the northerly line of Dogwood r~ue; thence westerly along said northerly line of Dogwood r~ne, 285 feet more or less to said easterly line of Kemuy's Road; thence northerly along said easterly line 580 feet more or less, to the point of beginning. We, the undersigned property OWners residing in the ~m.~diate area of the properties described in the preceding paragraph, believe that said amending of the Building Zone (~-nce is necessary and correct for the follow-Lug reasons: 1. With the exception of the above described properties the entire surrounding area is zoned "A" Residential a~d Agri- cultural and all existing structures in the zrea are one (1) f~ly dwellings. Accordingly, any business use, real or contemplated, of the above described properties do not, and would not, conform with the residential character of the neiEbborhood. 2. Unless the entire area is zoned "A" Residential, the very existence of these business zoned properties serves as an invitation to expand the present uses to any permitted under the "B" Business classification. This would Further tend to destroy the residential character of the neighborhood with resultant dam~e to surrounding property values. The foregoing would be true even under a B-2 or M classification. 3. If the above described properties are not re-zoned to "A" the surrounding residential co-~m,~itywill be subject to increasing Amounts of noise, traffic and littering, all of which would be detrimental to the health, safety and generul welfare of the area's residents. Furthermore, the establish- ment of a motel or a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages would invite a large ri%umber of transients into the ~rea at ~ hours of the day (and night). ~,.'l'lTlON TO 'ms TO~N BOARD, TOWN OF SOUTROLD, SUFFOLK COUNTY, NI~ YORK We, the undersigned property o~mers in the Town of Southold, hereby petition the Tow~ Board, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York to amend the Building Zone Ordinance (including the Building Zone Maps) of the Town of Southold, by changing from "B" Business District to "A" Residential and Agricultural District the fo]lowing dascribed properties: BEGINNING at the intersection of the easterly line of Kenny's Road, with the southerly line of North Sea Drive; from said point of beginning running easterly along said southerly line of North Sea Drive, 183 feet more or less; thence southerly 550 feet more or less, to the northerly line of Dogwood Lane; thence westerly along said northerly line of Dogwood T~ne, 285 feet more or less to said easterly line of Kenny's Road; thence northerly along said easterly line 580 feet more or less, to the point of Beginning. We, the undersigned property owners residing in the ~-~diate ~rea of the properties described in the preceding paragraph, believe that said ~nding of the Building Zone Ordinnnce is necessary and correct for the following reasons: 1. With the exception of the above described properties the entLre surrounding area is zoned '~" Residential and Agri- cultural and a]l existing structures in the area are one (1) f~m~y dwellings. Accordingly, any business use, real or contemplated, of the above described properties do not, and would not, conform with the residential character of the neighborhood. 2. Unless the entire area is zoned "A" Residential, the very existence of these business zoned properties serves as an invitation to expand the present uses to any perzzitted under the "B" Business classification. This would further tend to destroy the residential character of the neighborhood with resultant damage to sttrrounding property values. The foregoing would he true even under a B-2 or M classification. 3. If the above described properties are not re-zoned to "A" the surrounding residential co~nunitywill be subject to increasing -m~unts of noise, traffic and littering, all of which would be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the area's residents. F~rthermore, the establish- msnt of a motel or a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages would invite a large number of transients into the area at all hours of the day (and night).