HomeMy WebLinkAboutZoning Ord. Amend. (Signs) WHEREAS, a petition was heretofore filed with the '1'own Board of the
Town of $outhold by MOTI'ON OF -~O(~T}~OLD ?OWN I~OARD
requesting a change, modification and amendment of the Building Zone
Ordinance including the Building Zone Maps rlrt.a_de_a par~,t~le_re~of, by Art. Iv-$eco~u~
~ng ¢~,~....~.~.,..Z.;[.?-~.e..e..,~.0.f),.. ~....~,e~ealJ,~g..ar~,,..~X, Sec.
Sllb. 11 ''
~described in said petition, and
WHEREAS said petition was du~y referred to the Planning Board for its
investigation, recommendation 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 ......... .9...t.~....day
of ............ ..A?~. ....................... , 19...6...3.., and due deliberation having been
had thereon
1002
NOW, THEREFORE, BE iT RESOLVED that the relief demanded in said
petition be, and it hereby is claD, led.
Dated= May 7, 1963
By (~rder of the Southold Town Bo~rd
Albert W. Richmond
Town clerk
Town of Southold, New York.
PUBLIC HEARING
TOWN BOARD
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
April 9, 1963
P r e s e n t :
LESTER M. ALBERTSON, Supervisor
LOUIS M. DEMAREST, Councilman
CORWIN C. GRATHWOHL, Councilman
RALPH W. TUTHILL, Justice of the Peace
ROBERT W. TASKER, Town Attorney
ALBERT W. RICHMOND, Town Clerk
PROPOSAL TO AMEND THE BUILDING ZONE ORDINANCE - SIGNS
(Supervisor Albertson made several remarks relative to the
proposed amendments before opening the public hearing.)
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: I will open the hearing by reading
the legal notice and affidavit from the publisher.
"LEGAL NOTICE, NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSAL TO AMEND ZONING
ORDINANCE. Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law and Article
IX of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold,
Suffolk County, New York, public hearings will be held by the
Southold Town Board at the office of the Supervisor, 16 South
Street, Greenport,New York, in said town on the 9th day of April,
1963 at 7:30 o'clock in the evening of said day, on the following
proposals to amend the Building Zone Ordinance (including the
Building Zone Maps) of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New
York.
"I. By amending Article III, Section 300, Subdivision 11
of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of $outhold to read
as follows:
"11. When authorized as a special exception by the Board
of Appeals as hereinafter provided, one (1) sign, single or
double-faced, not more than four (4) feet in height and eight
(8) feet in width, the lower edge of which shall be not less than
two (2) feet above the ground and the upper edge of which shall
not extend more than six (6) feet above the ground, provided,
however, that such sign shall be set back not less than thirty-
five (35) feet from all street lines except that where a set-back
line has been established in the vicinity with permanent buildings
3
of more or less than thirty-five (35) feet, such sign shall not
project beyond the set-back line so established, and provided
further that such sign shall be set back not less than fifteen
(15) feet from all property lines.
"II. By amending Article IV, Section 408, Subdivision (b)
of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold to read
as follows:
"(b) WALL SIGNS-- One (1) sign attached to or incorporated
in each building wall and advertising only the business conducted
in such building, provided such sign
"1. Exceed two (2) square feet
horizontal foot of such wall, and
"2. Exceed in width one hundred
horizontal measurement of such wall, and
does not:
in total area for each
(100) percent of the
"DATED: March 26, 1963, BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD,
ALBERT W. RICHMOND, TOWN~RK."
"STATE OF NEW YORK)
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)ss:
"F. Langton Corwin, being duly Sworn,
says that he is
level to the upper edge of sign, and
"5. Project more than one (1) foot from such~ll.
"I~I. By repealing Article X, Section 1002~ of the Building
Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold.
"Any person desiring to be heard on the proposed amendments
should appear at the time and place above specified.
"3. Exceed ten (10) feet in height, and
"4. Exceed fifteen (15) feet six (6) inches from ground
Printer and Publisher of the SUFFOLK TIMES, a newspaper published
at Greenport, in said county; and that the notice, of which the
annexed is a printed copy, has been published in the said Suffolk
Times once in each week for one week successively commencing on
the twenty ninth day of March 1963. /s/ F. Langton Corwin.
"Sworn to before me
C. Keogh, Notary Public,
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
Planning Board.
this 29th day of March 1963. /s/ Cornelia
State of New York."
I will now read the report of the
"SOUTHOLD TO~NPLANNING BOARD,
Southold Town Board , 16 South Street, Greenport,
25, 1963, Gentlemen:
"This is to certify that
Southold, N.Y., Report to:
New York, March
the following action was taken by
the Southold Town Planning Board at their meeting March 19, 1963:
"In the matter of the proposal of the Southold Town Board to
amend the Building Zone Ordinance as follows:
"I. By amending Article III, Section 300, Subdivision 11
of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold to read
as follows:
"11. ~hen authorized as a special exception by the Board
of Appeals as hereinafter provided, one (1) sign, single or
double-faced, not more than four (4) feet in height and eight (8)
two
feet in width, the lower edge of which shall be not less than/e)
feet above the ground and the upper edge of which shall not extend
more than six (6) feet above the ground, provided, however, that
such sign shall be set back not less than thirty-five (35~ feet
5
from all street lines except that where a set-back line has been
established in the vicinity with permanent buildings of more or
less than thirty-five (35) feet, such sign shall not project
beyond the set-back line so established, and provided further
that such sign shall be set back not less than fifteen (15) feet
from all property lines.
"II. By amending Article IV, Section 408, Subdivisbn (b) of
the building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold to read as
follows:
"(b) WALL SIGNS -- One (1) sign attached to or incorporated
in each building wall and advertising only the business conducted
in such building, provided such sign does not:
"1. Exceed two (2) square feet in ~tal area for each
horizontal foot of such wall, and
'~2. Exceed in width one hundred (100)
horizontal measurement of such wall, and
percent of the
level to the upper edge of sign,
"5. Project more than one
"III. By repealing Article X, Section 1002,
Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold.
"It is hereby RESOLVED that the Planning Board recommend to
the Town Board the proposed amendments to the Building Zone
Ordinance as setforth heretofore.
"The Planning Board is of the opinion this is the only
and
(1) foot from such wall.
of the Building
"3. Exceed twn (10) feet in height, and
"4. Exceed fifteen (15) feet six (6) inches from ground
solution to the sign problem which presently exists.
"Respectfully submitted, /s/ John Wickham, Chairman, Southold
Ton Planning Board."
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Is there anyone present who wishes
to speak in favor?
MR. FRED YOUNG, Southold: I would like to ask the Board's
indulgence since I might be out of order. I would like to make
some comments so that everyone knows where I stand on the situation
and what the Businessmen's views are. ~many ways I am sympathetic
of the ideas and plans of the Civic Association. We
with some
recognize there
signs. However,
is some need for restrictions and controls on
there are a few of their standards that infuriate.
me. I have here a letter from the Southold-Peeonic Civic Assoc-
iation under the title of "The Board of Directors. They want
restrictions as to the type of sign and wording. That is one
place I would like to make myself clear . The Civic Association
has high ideals as to how the highways should appear, however
when they start placing restrictions I am opposed. They are
going against our constitutional rights. There is no place
where I will let our freedom be eroded under any condition. I
have two boys at home and they can claim their forefathers fought
from the Revolutionary War up until the police action in Korea.
I intend to protect their birth-right. TO me it is basic and I
will not compromise.it in any way.
In some of these letters they had in the paper there was
mention made as to why the Town Board hadst enforced the ordinance.
It was also mentioned about the other towns where the same condition
had existed along the roads. If anyone had taken the time to
read the sign ordinances of these other towns they will find that
they are quite restrictive as far as the ordinance but have not
been able to enforce it. I think instead of blaming the Town
Board for non-enforcement they should look deeper into the
Ordinance.
The Civic Association has sent to the Town Board a sign
policy. I think it was last June or July I attended the Planning
Board and it came forth, and as a businessman our association
could find nothing in the policy we could agree with. The word
"reasonable" was used quite extensively. When we tried to define
"reasonable" it broke down. After the Planning Board sent their
recommendation to the Town Board these representatives from the
Civic Association cut down the sign to 1 ft. by 3 ft. We can't
be satisfied with Burma Shave signs as Burma Shave had a number
of their signs and it served a purpose. We would only be permitted
one sign. The Businessmen's Association has also come forth with
recommendations. I think possibly the smartest thing to do is
go back to early last spring. The Civic Association and the
Board of Appeals met on a committee level. We never met with
them. If we could get together on this and come before the Board
our problems would be solved.
Most people want to keep this area as a resort area. If
we do that we will have to depend on transient trade, and we
have to have signs and we can't have both. Some control may be
necessary, we understand that and go along with it. We cannot
We would not have
wish to do that.
it will be done.
agree to having our signs restricted or
of a 15 mile area that will not be able
come up with a realistic sign ordinance you wilt solve your
problems. Any ordinance written, there is a way out of it. In
many cases these dodges are more objectionable than a neat sign.
to be very smart about it either. We do not
If we are forced in order to survive I am sure
cut down to any place out
to be read. If we can
being for that amendment.
speak about it later.
MRS.
On the first section I would like to
TENOPYR, Cutchogue: How many members of the Businessmen'~
In repealing Article X, Section 1002 I feel and most of the
business people do that this ordinance as it stands, and with
the opinion of quite a number of legal people, this section as
it stands will be as difficult if not impossible to enforce. The
Supervisor has pointed out that many of these signs will be lost
so that in another few years unless these signs are replaced
they will be gone if not completely. On the wall signs, here
again we hear a lot of almost rabble-rousing where all four walls
may be co vered by signs. There are reasons where signs are
necessary where they do not face a street. In the new beauty
salon in Southold the side wall is adjacent to a gas station.
Yet, as this sign stands it is illegal, yet I feel signs in this
place and this type should be provided for. Signs of this type
are necessary and not improper in any manner. For that reason
the Businessmen's Association would like to go on record as
9
Association does he represent?
I spoke for myself and the Businessmen's
Mit. YOUNG:
Association.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
How many members are there?
MR. YOUNG: We have not signed anyone through dues. We
have close to 200 people - 350 are on the mailing list.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Is there anyone else in favor?
MIt. ERNEST RADFORD, East Marion: I would like to speak in
favor of these signs. I am in favor of the proposed amendments
to the ordinance. I am in favor of the proposal to drop 1002
because I do not think it can be enforced and is just something
in the ordinance records which stands out as a sore thumb. It
is a matter of trying to take away rights of the people who have
signs.
As far as the wall signs, I think that the proposal to
make the amendment seems to be fair enough. However, I do think
you are proposing to take away from the people who have signs. I
do not know if it is necessary to reduce it, signs in general.
It is all up to the Board on hearings for permits to be issued
and it seems to me it isn't too difficult to deny signs. In
any event it seems that people in favor of doing away with signs
are wrong. Maybe these people are in the types of businesses
that eliminate the necessity of having these things. They should
think of the other fellow.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Anyone else in favor?
MR. JOHI~ BENNETT, Laurel:
Business~en's Association.
remarks,
can be
I am Secretary of the Southold Town
As I understand from your preliminary
Mr. Albertson, there are three different courses which
followed. One, Repeal what is on the books; Two, Enforce
the present law on the books as they stand without amendment; or
Three, Extend the time until our master plan is completed with
the appropriate amendments and ramifications that will be used
with it. The Town Board has been put into a very unenviable
position. There is no way they can win. They have attempted
to come up with a compromise, and it is one which will not leave
a Civic Association view-point completely satisfied. The Town
Board on the basis of a long study has come up with the changes
that have been gone over in a general way. I do not know what
could have been done. No one is going to be happy unless it is
the Town Board. I certainly feel that when the setback ~ reduced
from 5 ft. to 35 ft. and the sign size is reduced from 6 ft. 6 in.
by 12 ft. 6 in. to 4 ft. by 8 ft. you are losing visibility and
and distance so th~ affect of this sign is lost rather largely.
I don't know how we are going to resolve this question eventually.
I think the current law on the books is unenforcable. I think
it is a fact it has been in existence for a year past its
moratorium and it is unenforcable.
I would like to thank the Town Board as an individual and
I am asking for an understanding from the Civic Association
for the problem we are dealing with. We have large groups who
are working and living in the area all the time. Most of the
gross sales of the businessmen in this area are from June to October 1
11
MR. ROBERT KETCPIAM~ East Marion: One facet of the sign
business in Southold Town I would like to mention. The one
connected with the motels and ones that deal directly with
transient trade in the summer time. These people have a great
deal to offer and the ideal type of sign is the Sage Travel
Bureau Sign. It is larger than recommended now by the Town Board
but it is very easy to read and very attractive. This is what
I would like to see motels, hotels and restaurants have. The
transients do not have an opportunity to read local newspapers.
I think it is very irresponsible to
have identification on their signs.
Orient Point Inn should be allowed to have "buffet"
sign which he specializes in.
COMMANDER KENNETH, New Suffolk: I would like to tell the
story of a new businessman coming into Town.
half years ago my associate and I purchased a
these peop~ to not let them
Arnold Mitchell at the
on his
A~out two and one-
restaurant with the
idea
the business
identify the
of going further into the shipyard business. We went into
down in New Suffolk. Our first thought was to
yard by signs on the road. The law was that we
could not get signs. We want to have a medium of advertising
to bring people from the City. 9~ of my gross sales are transient
trade. We advertised in the New York papers, we went to the boat
show, sent postcards and direct mail and about 50% of our
customers were brought to the area and ended up
yard because he had nice signs on the highway.
right because he had signs prior to the cut-off
in our competitors
This was his
date. Now we
12
have a restaurant on the shipyard area and now we qualify because
we have a restaurant. We feel if it is good for one
all. Either they all come down or all are allowed.
signs being curtailed is excellent. Size and what they have on
them is paramont importance to the community. This curtailment
on where they should put them and what is on them should be left
to the Town Board. I do not think there needs to be a law. We
all need signs, all businessmen, to exist. At the last New York
Boat Show I dare say we put out 5,000 postcards advertising this
area. People have called from New York City saying they are
coming out and call me from Mattituck asking how to find the
place and then end up in the competitor~ yard. I think this
is the problem of all businessmen in the area.
MR. HERMAN LIEBLEIN, Southold: W e have been spending
$3,000 to $5,000 advertising in the area for the past 17 years
and we have a sign I am sure everyone has seen and it is non-
conforming. I do not want to see that sign come down. I am in
favor of the Businessmen's Association and I am a member of the
Association.
MR. JOSEPH PONTINO, Peconic: Signs are a necessary evil to
our free enterprise. Signs should be permitted.
MR. HOWARD SCHWARTING, Southold: I was appointed.to
represent the Civic Association in this matter and I really got
into a hassel. The speeches these businessmen made sounded good
to these people who are not familiar with what has gone on here.
it is good for
The idea of
13
On September 19, 1962, October 3, and October 17 meetings were
called by our Supervisor to discuss this matter we are here
to discuss tonight. Practically begging Supervisor Albertson to
come up with an answer but the result was our Supervisor had to
call an adjournment and no further meetings were held that I
know of. However, I am sure the Supervisor and the Board discussed
this matter.
Going back to the Ordinance, it costs 25¢ and can be
bought in the Town Clerk's Office. In a residential and
agricultural district one of the amendments they are asking you
to vote on tonight is Section 300, Paragraph 11, which reads as
~llows: "Signs as provided in Section 408 of this Ordinance when
authorized as a special exception by the Board of Appeals as herein-
after provided." Digest that a moment. Section 408, that is
what the whole trouble is. The Civic Association has been trying
to keep signs out of the residential areas. In Sections 9 and 10
of Article III it defines that a farmer that is in a residential
section can erect a 4 ft. by 6 ft. sign to advertise on his
premises. A real estate agent can put up a 3 ft. by 4 ft. sign
in a residential area. The 4 ft. by 6 ft. advertising sign is
for the sale or lease of agricultural
and motels we have maintained that we
those businessmen from advertising. He
and signs. But why have monstr~ities?
acreage. AS far as marinas
do not want to restrict
is entitled to advertising
I can point out there
are two great billboards advertising Mitchell's Restaurant
and they are only 400 to 500 feet apart. If you do not restrict
this tonight you will have signs all over the c~ntryside. There
14
is a State Penal Law that says you or any taxpayer can go along
and take down signs in the highway and I have done it in Southwood.
The Businessman has been given five years to come up with a
recommendation and when they have been asked for their recommenda-
tions they say they will go back and talk it over. Then they
want a sign 10 ft. by 8 ft., 10 ft. by 12 ft. and 10 ft. by 15 ft.
and way over that. You people are the judge as to whether you want
it or not. A bill was put up in Albany by the people on the New
York State Thruway. They had notified all the people on the
Thruway that something had to be done about the signs. ~he bill
was defeated and the signs must come down. I have fought this
thing with the Businessmen and I have discussed it with the Board
of Appeals and Town Board and nothing has been done. Thank you
Mr. Supervisor.
MR. GEORGE PENNY, Mattituck: A while ago a question was
asked of Mr. Young by the Civic Association as to how many members
he represents. How many members are in the Civic Association?
MR. SCHWARTING: There are I believe 601 paid members of the
Southold-Peconic Civic Association, and we represent the people
of the Southold-Peconic Area. However we are for all the people
in the Town of Southold.
MRS. GRACE LEWIS, Southold: How many of the 600 members
are also members of the Businessmen's Association?
MR. SCHWARTING: That I cannot
people, businessmen and others.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
answer. We represent all
Is there anyone here in opposition?
15
MR. ROBERT H. TRUBENBACH, Southold: In listening to all
the comments it seems that we are losing sight of the fact whether
this is good for the community or not, or is it good for a certain
group. As a resident of Southold I am reminded of a trip to
Atlantic City. I asked myself, "I hope Atlantic City is not as
trashy as the road is." Then last Sunday I took a good look at
the sign s~uation along the Island during a ride to Selden and
you know how trashy that is. These business people forget that
we of the Civic Association are residents also. We are the ones
they should try and reach. I wonder how many of them have bought
anything as a result of reading a billboard? I don't believe
signs are as important as they want us to believe. I do not thin~
it is as important to them. As far as signs that were up before
this started, they should be allowed to die off. I think we
should keep in mind the community and not the appeasement of
small groups.
MR. HAYWOOD COOK, Southold: Every week I read in the local
paper about people who want a variance. I think by giving
variances it loses its effect.
how it effects them adversely.
and still be heard?
down the zoning act.
I want to know from the Businessmen
Is it possible they can not advertis,
I don't believe we should continually break
Everyone appreciates our section here, it
is residential and beautiful. Just going down the main highway
it is spoiled. I don't think the people want that here. The reason
people come out here is because we are different.
16
MRS. NELSON CHAPMAN, Orient: I belong to neither group.
I'm not a new-comer but an old-comer. Many years ago I used to
tell people in Jersey and Rhode Island that I visited on Long
Island and the people were envious. Now when I say I am from
Long Island people either look indifferent or sorry for me
and you know that as well as I. Be honest, Southold has always
been a gem and Orient with its very few signs has been the gemiest.
Across the beach between East Marion and Orient there ~ nothing
that can equal it. You can see why I love Vermont. I am torn
between Orient and Vermont. Vermont has just about no billboards.
At one time there was a campaign by the women in Vermont and they
introduced a mailing system saying "Come to Vermont and see our
billboards." We could have a sign as you come into Mattituck
saying, "Come to Southold Town and see our huge, gigantic,
stupendous billboards."
I like all the business people. How many people here tonight
are business people? I bet three-fourths of them are. Of course
you want signs as they do a great deal of good. There are places
where there is a sign as you come into a town telling who is who
and where they are. Possibly Southold Could do that. Maybe the
Chamber of Commerce. Perhaps you feel that is not the Yankee thing
to do and you want a sign bigger than your neighbor. I sympathize
with the people who think that they cannot get along without bilt~
boards. I do not think anyone can think that we want to restrict.
No one wants to put anything contaminating and dirty on a
billboard. The question is taste. Mr. Radford spoke about
rights.
I took a poll in Orient among my friends and most said "I wouldn't
buy a thing I saw on a billboard." Maybe they are my kind of
people and other kind of people feel differently. I am discouraged.
Maybe most of my kind of people move out and most of your kind of
people move in. I can still go back to Vermont.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Mrs. Chapman said we have too many
signs. If we have one we have to allow everyone. Mr. Trubenbach
said we need directional signs but if we allow directional signs
we must allow other types of signs.
Is there anyone else in opposition ?
MR. NELSON AXIEN, Peconic: I might start by saying that I
have quite a number of contacts. I come in contact with a great
number of New York people. There is a unanimity of people against
this proposal that is being considered. With its adoption it
would throw Southold wide open to signs. I do not know what people
would want signs on all four sides of a building. I do not think
even the business people want this. Also, signs in the residential
area. Even the outdoor advertising people are against this. So
we are throwing open areas which these professional people are
against. There has been such a drastic change on the part of
the Town Board and others that I would like to know what facts
have changed that would produce this change of heart? I am going
to read some of the facts from the Townrecords. There was a
recommendation one year ago, May 10, 1962 by the Planning Board.
The Planning Board is supposed to see into the future. They
can deal in fundamental things and project ideas. The recommendation
18
of the Planning Board is required before the Town Board can
advertise a public hearing such as this evening. They made a
complete switch from a year ago. "The Planning Board feels that
it would be a serious mistake to repeal Section 1002, Article X,
of the Building Zone Ordinance. This would allow all non-conforming
signs to obtain a permit, without any regulation. In other words
any non-conforming sign might be sold, rented to any person or
agency or used for any purpose."
The Town Board, Planning Board and Board of Appeals have met
several times in joint sessions to go over this problem and they
decided they would appoint a committee of five to study this
problem. I read from that report: "The sign provisions of all
sections of the Ordinance are satisfactory. Every section has
ample provision for relief in cases where an applicant seeks a
variation by means of a special exception. As an example in
nearly five years only one request was made b/; a billboard firm.
Marina, restaurant and motel directional signs have been granted
and guides set forth in the Ordinance have
where the standards
been complied with.
Shopping center signs have been granted, as
well as directional signs for churches and temporary civic or
amusement enterprises. * * * As a top priority this Committee
recommends that whatever sections of the Ordinance are applicable
at that time be enforced without any exceptions and that the
public be notified in a manner to be decided, of the intent to
enforce."
On February 16, 1962 the sign committee met at a joint
19
meeting having completed its studies and submitted the recommendation
that the sign provision of the Ordinance is satisfactory. At this
meeting an informal vote was taken by the members of the Town
Board, Planning Board and Board of Appeals and 12 were in favor
of enforcing the Ordinance and three were against.
MR. MARTIN SUTER, Mattituck:
information? You say that vote is
informal vote.
was
Where do you get that
a Town record but it was an
MR. AXIEN: Ido not say that was in the records. I say it
an informal vote. The feeling of the Planning Board is a
complete reversal. I can understand if a lot of time elapsed
and things changed, but I cannot see how. On July 2, 1962 it was
decided at one point and a letter was printed in the local news-
paper office to be sent out and all of a sudden there was a hold
complete change in the thinking here. Some
direction and then reverse themselves completely
on it. There was a
people think in one
80 degrees.
MR. ROBERT W.
GILLISPIE,
of the Board of Appeals. As
has not changed its decision as far as signs.
apparently has.
MR. ARCHIBALD N. YOUNG, Southold:
JR., East Marion: I am the Chairman
far as I know the Board of Appeals
The Planning Board
I am a member of the
I was concerned personally
12 who voted to enforce
is enforcable and we would have
meeting and other meetings. As far as
when we voted 12 to 3 I was one of the
the Ordinance. I think this
Planning Board. We have attended pretty nearly every joint
2O
been a good deal better off if this was enforced before this time.
We only make recommendations. The Town Board is in the driver's
seat. I am pretty nearly pooped as far as fighting Town Hall and
that is why there was a reversal as to the vote.we took at a
joint meeting.
MR. ARNOLD LARSEN, Peconic: W~en the Zoning act was passed
it was with a very broad base. W/aere the property would be either
residential or farming it was "A". There are busines~Swhich now
exist and should continue to exist and no one should confuse the
understanding of the total zoning law. I did not assume that all
signs in Southold should be taken down and removed after five
years. The lady said there are no signs in Orient. There are
no traffic lights at the end of a dead-end street either. We
are business and residential and there will be more residences
than business people because we have to serve a great number of
residences rather than business. Signs are put up on someone
elses property because they have something to sell. I came here
to listen and I am confused.
MR. SCHWARTING: This gentleman is in the real estate
business. He is covered in the Ordinance and the other business
people are also covered. I concur with the Planning Board.
MR. C. L. BECKER, Southold: Couldn't there be some sort
of sign made for the businesspeople that are on the North Fork
area and keep all these other signs out of the area that are not
doing business? Coke signs and so forth? I don't think they
are against real estate and motel signs but they are againstbig
21
billboards such as Dodge cars and so
signs
that.
forth. They can have their
on their buildings. I don't think the people are against
I think there should be some sort of set thing for the
people on the North Fork area. Ail my business went to the people
on the North Fork area and not outside.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: I don't think it is constitutional
to tell a person what they can put on a sign.
5~R. DAVID DRISCOLL, Southold: I don't think people read
signs anyway. There are several'ho smoking" signs in this room
and I see quite a few people..smoking.
DR. C. ROHBOM, Southold: A long time ago the voice of the
people spoke in a democratic fashion. When this ordinance was
passed it was done in a democratic way and it was passed two to one.
If any change is to be made it should be done by referendum. Let
the voice of the people be heard.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: That would be illegal. This ordinance
was not passed by vote of the people. The Town Board passed it
on their own. However there were meetings with the people to see
how they would feel about it.
DR. ROHBOM: Your predecessor took a vote in each school
district at the time it was passed.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: It was a hearing of this nature.
MRS. CHAPMAN: How many people wrote to you about this
issue tonight?
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: I have about 55 letters.
MRS. CHAPMAN: How many pro and con?
22
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Most of them were in favor of the
continuance of Section 1002. At the end of their letters they say
"We realize people need signs but we think 1002
I have telegrams and letters.
MR. EDWIN PRELLWITZ, Peconic: I think that I was one of the
residents that needled zoning into existence. I was a member of
the Board of Appeals in Warwick for six years prior to coming here.
I W55 a chairman of a committee for the Civic Association that
Planning
looked into and worked on a sign report for the Town/Board. Mr.
Young's comment ~ agree with. As far as the word "reasonable",
that produced difficulty, but we left reasonabtness to the Town Board.
The committee was not a group of idealists by any means. I had
experience as a land planner. Other members were Stephen Campbell,
of Camel Cigarettes, Mr. Bittner an operator of a restaurant in
Cold Sprin~s.
We know signs are part of the individual success of any area.
Directional, service and display or big billboards. The first
two should have a place in the economic development of a town
but the later class do not belong in this area at all. As for,
the dilemmathe Town Board is in now, perhaps this can be placed
on the master planners and held in abeyance until that phase is
carried out. Our zoning ordinance has grown through trial and
error.
to go
signs
signs on
should be continued."
It was a very good way to start.
into the final stages df
is the signs on the sides
the back
Now I think we are ready
it. The only comment on the building
of the buildings. Very few want
of their buildings. Signs are very often
23
legitimate provided it is a legal location.
to that is extending the extent from 75% to
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
many signs?
MR. PRELLWITZ:
The only objection
100%.
You suggest 75% of the extent? How
That depends on the logic of the situation.
There are so many signs that are objectionable to our towns further
to the west beyond Riverhead that we want to plan as well as we
canto avoid it happening here. As Mrs. Chapman said an attractive
community is definitely good business. They want to live here and
if they come and live here they will spend here. They could also
in the long run harm the prosperity of a community.
MRS FRED YOUNG: On the restrictions of signs. Perhaps I was
wrong when I came out so strong without know,W~oackground. If
not
there had/been an attempt to restrict signs I would not be here
tonight. It happened to me when I made an application to the
Board of Appeals. I was told what I may and may not put on my
sign. This I will fi~htas long as I can. This I will not compromis
on. As I said before the Businessmen believe in keeping the Town
nice. There should be control but not complete control, we need
freedom.
I have all the Ordinances in the other townships. They
all have sign ordinances. You could look at them and see how
they are enforced. Some have broken down. If we fight the
community it is going to suffer. It was said businessmen refused
to put in a recommendation on the size of signs and other items
that we feel should be included in the sign ordinance. Mention
24
was made about the Thruway. At 65 miles per hour a sign on the
Thruway is distracting. You will find that the land they were
taking signs from was under easement by the State of New York.
That is an entirely different situation.
As things are progressing in this country you can expect
tax increases in this township. Business bears a strong portion
of taxes.
(Mr. Young was asked to tell those present what the
recommendation of the Businessmen's Association to the Town
Board was.)
MR. YOUNG: 1. Incorporate the following points in the
ordinance: No sign or billboard shall be erected at a point
where it would obstruct or interfere with the clear view of a
train upon an intersecting railway or of another vehicle on the
same or intersecting highway or at a point where it will interfere
with safety; or within 5 feet of the outside edge of the right of
way of any public road; within 100 feet adjacentto a cemetery,
public park, school, playground, church, railway station, or a place
of historical interest. No sign or billboard shall be erected
exceeding 25 feet in length or 12 feet 6 inches in height, or
within a reasonable distance of any other billboard.
(Many seemed to be suprised at the size, 25 ft. by 12 ft. 6 in.)
MR. YOUNG: That is only 25% of the size that is allowed
in Riverhead.
(Those present said this is not Riverhead but Southold.)
MR. YOUNG: We favor consolidated signs on principal
25
intersections where more than one business requires a sign for
directional purposes such signs should be consolidated on a co-
operative basis.
I am not a lawyer but I have been ~bsorbing quite an amount
about these ordinances. These ordinances are actually based on
police powers. The safety, welfare and morals and health is
the basis. If you comply with that you can make it stick. A
great many here have gone beyond that and if they do there is
I would like you to consider that regardless of what the ~wn
Board does unless these two groups get together.
trouble
MR. HERBERT ROSENBERG, Southold: I have been close to this
sign matter since the first day of the Ordinance. I was
a member
time.
Everyone was granted one or two or three signs. The only
restriction was that Mr. Young asked for a sign and it was
granted and he was told he could put on his sign exactly what
everyone else was permitted. The name of the organization was
allowed and he was also allowdd other things that others were not.
W~en this question came up with the combined Boards, the
of every committee of the Board of Appeals for six years
The reports Mr. Axien read and other people read I think that
Mr. Albertson will agree that these reports were completely
unbiased. I would like to correct just one or two misstatements.
The Goubeaud sign is a legal sign, an exception was given by the
Board because they had no place to put up a standing siqn and
a second wall sign was allowed. We made no attempt to restrict.
Every marina and shipyard was granted a reasonable number of signs.
26
Businessmen's Association
meetings Mr. Schwarting
agreed that no business
representative attented the three
spoke about. Nothing was done but it was
signs would be erected within 300 feet
of a residence, and if a residence came within 300 feet the
sign would be removed within one year. That was one of the
compromises that was effected at that time. Any business house that
wanted one business qign off premises or two they would be allowed
a sign. There was never a question of surpressing any business
si~n on his property. He is allowed a sign completely across
the front of his building 81 sq. ft. and a detached sign from the
building on his property, any part of the property, five feet
back. from the front property line. He can also put up a sign
provided it does not reach higher than the peak of the building.
Since the ordinance was enacted in April 1957 any businessman
has been granted a sign provided he meets the standards of the
Ordinance. Up to December 31, 1962 when ~ left the Board,
between i10 and 119 signs have been granted for signs off their
premises because there was a good reason for them. I will not
argue any of these things.
in the record.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
work you have put in.
Those are the facts and they are
of time
I want to thank you for the hours/and
MR. BECKER:
but he does not bring up these big signs.
on them?
MR.
These signs have been mentioned by Mr. Rosenberg
What about the wording
ROSENBERG: The man who rents the billboards may rent
to anyone they want to.
MR. BECKER: It has been said this is unenforcable. Can you
give an instance and history of why this is true?
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: We have been in the process of study
and that is the reason why. When the date came along to enforce
there was so much question on this an~the businessmen and Planning
Board wanted time to study this and we have not been able to
enforce because we are in a process of study.
STANLEY CORWIN, ESQ., Greenport: I live in the village
an
of Greenport where the Ordinance is not effective. I am/attorney
and I can't advertise and I don't advertise anyone but myself.
You yourself have indicated that even those people who seem to
be against signs in general have acknowledged that the economy
nBeds signs. We are talking about what is the reason. What is
a fair compromise and what signs can be allowed. It seems to me
that the resolution you advertised in the paper is the compromise.
You have the businessmen on one side and the civic group on the
other. You have met with the Planning Board, Board of Appeals
and Town Board and representatives of these groups and it is my
understanding this was behind closed doors.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: I will take exception there , however
it wasn't an open meeting and not advertised.
MR. CORWIN: I think you should tell people that this
not
Ordinance is/enforcable insofar as
conforming signs.
ROBERT TASKER, Town Attorney:
it concerns areas with non-
I will take exception to that.
The Ordinance
MR.
en for~ e
is enforcable.
CORWIN: As you have all taken oaths of office to
the Ordinance why don't you do it? There have been a
number of cases before the justices for a long time but none
have decisions. I think you should go on what the
can do and what reasonable people say you can do.
right to this police action as to safety and welfare.
you will think about it a little more.
MR. PAUL MURPHY,
As for repealing, that means
against it for the record.
law says you
You have a
I hope
President, Brower's woods Civic Association:
indiscriminate signs and we are
MR. TRUBENBACH: From the
the Board of Appeals, they are
discussions we have had before
in an awful tight spot. There
of Appeals: The Board of Appeals is in a tight spot on signs.
Restrictions arose out of the fact that we restrict information
as to public interest. We found one or two cases that supported
us. On the question of advertising signs in general, they,
according to the way the Ordinance is written cannot be off
business premises. A"special exception"is a misnomer. It should
be'~pecial permit," if you meet certain conditions. I would be
the first to defend the right of anyone to speak freely. We
were acting within what we thought were the limits we could act.
Sc~eone here has suggested that all of this be turned over to the
makes exceptions for one it would have to have it for all.
ROBERT W. GILLISPIE, JR., Chairman, Southold Town Board
is a law that is definitly on certain books that if the Board
29
Town Board a~d I would like to secondGe motion.
MR. DAVID DRISCOLL: Looking at that flag behind you I hope
that the word "censorship" is not being ~t into the record if
I hope the word "restrictions" can be used
there is a record.
instead.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
I agree with you. The word "restriction"
should be used hereafter and the record shall be corrected.
MRS. MURIEL TAIT, Southold: I started my business four
years ago and a sign was prepared and Mr. Pemberton made it.
I have a number on it and apparently it conforms. I am happy
with the sign and the business and it seems to me other business
firms would be satisfied with a sign of that type. It says
everything that I have to sell. I think the boat yards in the
Town could have equally pretty signs. I feel this type of sign
is an asset to the Town in general. I do not believe we should
have signs 25 ft. long. I am on the North Road. I am perfectly
willing to conform to the restrictions. My sign has produced
enough business to support me and my employees and is an asset
to the Town in general.
MR. GIL~ISPIE: The sign is on a business property and she
herself restricted what is on the sign.
DR. DOROTHY BAUER: How many business signs off your
premises, ~o you have, Mrs. Tait?
MRS. TAIT: I do not have any.
MR. CARL VAIL, Southold: Doesn't
Haven't you a very specific business or
has?
it~flect the business.
franchise that no one else
3O
MRS. TAIT: I have a very ordinary type of business
a boat yard or dress shop, I sell tableware.
MR. VAIL: But don't you have a Wedgewood franchise,
only one around?
MRS. TAIT: There
DR. CLAUS ROBOF~4:
on the North Fork?
MR. VAIL: Yes,
Huntington.
COMMANDER KENNETH:
such as
the
is also one in Stoney Brook.
Are there any other Cadillac dealers
Southampton. There is also one in
I am referring to directional signs.
I have one general advertising sign. I was at the Town Clerk's
Office and they said there was no need to put in for a sign as
it would be turned down. I could have been wrong. I am not a
member of the Businessmen's Association or Civic Association, I
speak on my own. I agree with the business people and the civic
people. We need to curtail signs in the area because we do not
want to spoil the residential area. Agriculture is a source of
our income but in the last ten years we are not in the same position
I am 2~ miles in one direction and 3½ in another from the highway
and I noticed a sign for my competition that was on a piece of
property that was not theirs. I have only sold two boats to
people in the area in the last year and the remainder were to
outside people. Four of these people bought homes in the area.
Business has to live and people have to live. I own a home
in the area. I do feel business has a right to advertise what
they sell and where they sell it and have some method of putting
31
it across to the public. I have spent a great deal of money
advertising in the area.
MRS. RUTH ROSENBERG, Southold: In this proposal in
changing the Zoning Ordinance, why are signs to be permitted
in the "A" zone without any limit as to nearness to houses?
This is a drastic change in the ordinance. As a resident I would
like to know the reason.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: This does
sign in the residential area from 6
We are dealing with the use of land.
not reduce the size of a
ft. 6 in. to 12 ft. 6. ino
We don't feel it is our
prerogative to be able to
have.
tell business how many signs they can
MRS. ROSENBERG: I thought/the ordinance as it stands
there is a limit as to how far from a residence a sign can be.
MR. HERBERT ROSENBERG: I think what my wife means, isn't
there some way in the Ordinance whereby these business signs
can not be placed too close to a residence. Theoretically you
can put as manysigns on each lot in the Town.
MRS. ROSENBERG: W~ny was this put in?
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Because we were
land rather than the sign as a base.
trying to use the
MRS. ROSENBERG: Does the Town Board think it
to have signs in the residential area?
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Only by special
Board of Appeals.
MRS. ROSENBERG: W~y do we need signs
is advantageous
exception of the
in the residential area?
in residential°
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
is 95%.
MR. BECKER: couldn't
residential?
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
RADFORD: Because we have 95% of the area in the Town
That is the reason why, kecause it
you separate agriculture from
That is something for the master plan.
MR. VAIL:
professional planners in laying
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Yes.
MR. VAIL: Why couldn't we wait
will it take?
I understand the Town has sought the services of
out our town.
for their report~
I asked the same question.
How long
or altered to accomodate or make provisions for more than twenty
(20) families on one (1) acre of ground or more than a proportional
number of families on a fractional part of any acre of land,
based on the requirements as outlined above." That is the density
I would like to read Section 407: "In the
no building shall hereafter be erected
less dead-locked°
in the meantime
and see what happens?
MR. SCHWARTING:
"B" Business District,
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: I was
told between 18 and 24 months.
MRS. BERYL EPSTEIN: ~ne meeting is more or
Might we continue for another couple of years and
permit only directional signs to be put up?
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: We could not do that I am afraid.
MRS. EPSTEIN: Then could we try enforcing it for one year
of population section,
amendment to the
density of signs
in the business district. Could an
Ordinance be considered for the same reason -
per acre or mile? The setback feature is very
good. I think in listening to these people talk about this,
they are afraid of an amendment of Section 11 of the residential
sign section. They are afraid there is going to be some abuses.
We have a very fair Board of Appeals. As the gentlemen from the
shipyard stated, if he presented his case as a hardship case they
would probably go along with it.
MR. TRUBENBACH: The thing most are afraid of is the changes
from "A" to "B". In time there will be business areas established.
The people who are farmers, there is a tight squeeze. There
is competition from other states. They are dividing their land
up and requesting new business areas establ~ hed. The thing
most are afraid of is this. In time most of the North Road and
Main Road will be a business area. The only thing we are afraid
of is having a private property owner in a position where signs
spill over onto our areas and we will be confronted with signs
in front yards. That seems to be the main thing here° I would
suggest that Mr. Albertson get with the Planning Board and see if
they can't move a little faster on the master plan.
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: Is there anyone else?
MR. ALBERT SILKWORTH, Matt±tuck: I have been inbusiness in
Southold Town for 50 years and during that time my signs have
been more than 2/3 of my income. When you come to signs setting
back 35 feet, a farmer will not allow you to set back 35 ft. He
34
can't plow around it.
MR. ALVAH GOLDSMITH, Southold: There are several things
that impressed me very much. We are all agreed no one wants to
do anything rash. The thing is as I see here we are never going
to get to first base unless the people are behind what we do.
No laws or regulakions are going to work unless the people are
behind them. Great restrainment and refinement and care and
judgment should be used in location of signs in this town from
n~ on. I think you can leaqe this to public opinion if we do
not work too fast. Don't put on any restrictions too~st. I
don't think we need the blatant signs we have in the town. Mrs.
Tait's sign is in good taste. Possibly have a contest by the
school children to design a sign for Southold Town that business men
could use. I think in Southold Town the large sign is going
out by public opinion.
MR. GILLISPIE: There are over 2500 signs in the town and
at least 2000 of them are non-conforming. Suppose we held
hearings for these 2000 signs. It would take at least a year
to hear them all and all of the business of the Board of Appeals
would have to wait. If Section 1002 is repealed that in effect
freezes 2000 signs. AT the blinker light I found a sign ~ did not
know existed, a big sign hidden behind two billboards. The way
it is going now it is still left in doubt, it seems to me you
can do nothing but lead to a reaction.
the State Highway to come in and take
highway area.
In one town they asked
down the signs in the
We have had occasions where we denied a sign and
35
it was erected at the same location on Town property.
MRS. HELEN BERGEN; Mattituck: What percentage of the non-
conforming signs were in existence and how many have been put
up since without anyone asking permission?
MR. HOWARD TERRY, Building Inspector, Town of Southold: The
biggest amount were up before Zoning.
MR. PRELWITZ: From what I have heard both the Planning
Board and Board of Appeals are not in favor of repealing 1002.
for
MR. FRED YOUNG: I would like to go on record/the Businessmen's
Association as being opposed to the first sectic~ that would
provide signs in the residential area.
MR. EDWIN KING, Orient: What property of Sou thold Town is
classified as residential area?
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON: The undeveloped area as we have now
which is about 95%. We have 113 acres of commercial area that
presently isn't developed. We have 13,000 acres of farm land in
Southold Town and this is residential. If you don't want signs
erected in residential areas
with no signs.
MRS. PRELWITZ: Don't you think
repeal Section 10027
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
against?
(There was no response.)
SUPERVISOR ALBERTSON:
at this time for the further
there will be an awful lot of area
it would be a mistake to
Is there anyone else
either for or
Hearing none we will close the hearing
deliberation of the Town Board.
* * * 10:15 P.M.
36
THE FOLLOWING LETTERS WERE RECEIVED IN OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSAL:
A~ Edward Conover, Secretary,
Lillian Redden
Mrs. Helen Madden
Stephen E. Campbell
Alfred E. Dart
Lillian & Arthur Jacobson
Willard K. Vanderbeck
George Merrick Tisdate
Ernest L. Sauer
Harold G. Wilkins
Joseph C. Heppa
Clara S. Long
Mr. & Mrs. John Feldis
Herb. J. Adler, Jr.
NelSon Axien
Edith V. Webb
Jerome Polatnick
Selma Polatnick
A. H. Dardiri
Lucille Dardiri
F. F. Cobet
Ann Davis
Arch Davis
Estelle Adams (Mrs. Edward Adams)
August A. Fink
Robert W. Thompson
Hugh J. Stern
Ruth ~. Lipman
Clement W. Booth
Samuel Epstein
W. G. Albertson, President,
Armand M. Rose
Philip F. Betz
Ethel ~.Betz
Harold E. Tuthill
Almet R. Latson
Ann Waltz
Agnes B. Van Nostrand
Hamilton Cochran
Mr. & Mrs. R. C. Nelson, Jr.
Grace V. N. Van Kleeck
F. N. Taylor
P. E. Dunham
Margaret Baumgartner
Lillian Brac
Louise Overton day
Winthrop H. Kellogg
Matthew J. Lyons
Lawrence T. Waitz
Southwood Property Owners Assoc., Inc.
Southold-Peconic Civic Association
37
William J. Bayha
Mrs. JohnDo Cook
Margaret Conover
William J. Miller
Julia Overton Bell
Mrs. Dorothy Ball
Jacques Weber
Ann Hallock Currie-Bell
Leo Roon
Peg Katzenberg
Kay Salmon
Josephine M. Flack
Arthur W. Jones
Mrs. John A. Lennon
Gilbert H. Schuster
Vincent J. Cunningham
Joanne Jo Brooks
Harold G. Sabin & wife
Dr. Alfred J. Marston
Arend H. Sievers
Mrs. John R. Alden
Anthony Cassar
THE FOLLOWING LETTERS ASK FOR FURTHER STUDY OF THE
Mrs. Armand MD Rose
Bill &lbertson
Mrs. Walter Kluge
Bob Rothman
PROPOSAL:
THE FOLLOWING LETTERS ARE IN FAVOR OF SIGNS:
Fred Fredricksen
Indian Neck Lane
Peconic, L.I., N.Y.
Mr. Lester Albertson
Town Supervisor
Southold, L.I., N.Y.
Dear Sir:
According to the posted notices there will be on Tuesday,
April 9th a hearing regarding the signs in our tow~. I would like to let
you know, first my opposition to any extension allowing all non-complying
signs to remain until January 31, 1963 and second, to express my belief
that the zoning ordinance as enacted five years ago should be enforced,
and not changed.
As you know, tourism and recreation as a unit is a major re-
source of the area. In view of the fact that additional signs will only
spoil the attractiveness of the quiet township, the purpose of allowing
signs will be to diminish the biggest income-producing industry. In
addition, the inherent damage to life and properties of signs so on the
highways as in towns was clearly demonstrated in recent studies by New York
State and the Federal Government, which show that vehicular accidents
are many rims due to the signs on the highways.
Until the comprehensive master plan for the ares is prepared
and submitted for approval, I would urge you to enforce the zoning
ordinance which prohibits the erection of any additional signs.
AJM: rk
'COMe TO SHELTER ISLAND ~Or A REAL vACATION"
~.
CARD
Tel. SO 8-B770 Es~bIished 1918 DAVID A. RO~THMAN, Prop.
ROBEP, T H. ROTHMAN, C~eM. Mgr.
ROTHI IAN S D£PARTI IE:NT STORE:
SnUTHOLD, L, I,, hi, Y,
April 9, 196~
C~ener*l Electric
Major App!iances
iTeJevision -- Radios
M~ytag W~shers
Speed Que~n Washers
Singer Sewing Machines
Roy~/I Portable Typewrffers
Bo+Is Luggage
S~mmons Beaufy Res+
Bedding
~ngbnder Bedding
Arms+rang ,Flooring
Delf~ Power Tools
Furnffure
D~ysfrom Bkkf Sefs
Lloyd Bkfsf Sefs
Olympic Stero Phonos
A. G. Speulding A+h. Goods
~ish[ng T~ckJe
Dear Supervisor Alberteon,
! regret that because of the Passover
am unable to attend t~ie hearing. However
take a minute to express my sentiments.
The ox~y of tear down the eigne is far from new.
81gne and bill~oarde spell commercialism over the
oou~2y side to be sure but let us face it. Oommerolal-
ism is a vital part of our economy and appears here to
stay. It ia with us in our printed matter, our radio,
cum television and on ou~ highways. To try and turn
the countryside back to a pximative virgin state would
be somewhat difficult to say the least. Furthmore,
if you tear down the obJeotionnble signs today, will
you not get ~equeete to tear down the objectionable
houses or stores or business dwellings tomorrow?
I believe that reasonableness shoul~ prevail.
Rather than disorimate against anyone let ua regulate
rather than abolish. I should like to suggest that
a committee representing ~oth business and home owners
be appointed to appraise each disputed case. The findings
could than be presented to the individuals in question
for action. ! can't conceive of a responsible business-
~an ignoring the combined opinions of such a group when
suggestions or requests for improvement arise.
would gladA~yvolunteer my time to help with such
Divln9 & W.ter Sports equlpt, a comtttee.
C~uns -- AmmunTt~on ?h~n~. yOtle
Perfection Space He~ters
Columbia Bicycles
Bob Ro thman
Old Harbor Road
New ~uffolk, N.Y.
A~ril 8, 19~3
~outhold Towm ?oard
Oouthold To~mship
~outhold, New York
I wish to urge you strongly to defeat any relaxing
of the town's ordinances concerning signs.
It seen to me that we sre surrounded by examples
of what can happen in a tourist area when barriers
are let down on out-door advertising.
Our North Fork in most places still has a beauty
and charm that we ~houl~ try to maintain. It is
difficult to th~nk of anyt?ling that would destroy
that beauty and charm more quickly than a
multiplicity of sigr~.
VJC/h
Post Office Box
Southold, L.I., New York
April 8, 1963
Mr. ~ster Albertson, Supervisor
Town of Southold
Greenport, L.I., New York
Dear Mr. Albertson:
This is in relation to the proposal of the Southeld
Town Board to allow erection of signs on any lot~ vacant or
improved,anywhere in the residential zone° As property owners
and people w~m would like to maintain the residential diatricts
of Southold in their original appeal to local townspeople and
newcomers, we are strongly opposed to repealing and/or amending
Section lO02.
The liberalization and the freedom to erect signs
should not at all be allowed in residential districts° It
should also at all times be regulated in other areas.
Yours very truly
A. H. Dardiri
Lucille Dardir~
KAY TERRY SAL~ON SOUTHOLD, LONG ISLAND, N. Y,
DR. LAWRENCE T. WALTZ
MAIN ROAD
5OUTHOLD, I~EW YORK
April 7,1963
Supervisor ~es~er Albertson
Office of the Supervisor
Greenport,N.Y.~
Dear ~uper~isor Albertson:
It has come to my attention that there
will be a hearing on changing the
zoning ordinance concerning signs.
We.all love Bouthold because it is
beautiful and simole. It is like a bit
or'New England transported to Long Island.
This lovely appearance should not be changed.
Not only do we who live here enjoy this
beauty but each year many tourists and
bummer residents do also. For those who
are worried about business and the need
for more and larger signs to bring them
more business; I believe that in so doing
they would destroy the very thing that now
brings Summer trade here.
To see for yoursel~ what I am trying to
state you simply have to drive East from
our village towards Greenport past the
fishing statior~where one can hardly see
our lovely bay for all the billboards.
If each business has one sign in front of
its establishment it will be on an equal
basis with all other such businesses in
the area.
Therefor, I hone that you will vote against
this change or amendment. ~. 71~
Sincerely,
PHILIP F. BETZ, D.D.
YOUNGS AVENUE EXT.
6acJ~ to u--J on JJ~e proceea52n4.~ b~ Z/',e me'e~SO%~ ~ Oe ,,~d on
more .~z~o~ ~t~ ~,~C ~ ?:z~ c~ ~]~
o~d~z i~d ~ a /~d:,.e~d~ze o~ 5~ao~ <~
~cr~rce ~]~e ~,, ~ ~ ~ w~. Keep So~
' I --f 11
ANTHONY T. C~,$SAR
THEATRE AND AMUSEMENT SERVICE EMPLOYEES
LOCAL ~la No. 54
z · r.~ ~ _4 · ~' · .n c I o
AVeNU~ ~ ~ w Y 0 ~ K ~ *, N. Y.
COlumbus 5-6556
TH[ODORE BURTON HOWARD CHAIKEN
Vice P~esldenl Sec. TPeas.
C HARL~S PRICE
April 5, 1963
The Southold Town Board
Office of the Supervisor
Greenport, Long Island, N. Y.
Gentlemen:
Since 7our organization will meet on April 9th
to endeavor a repeal of the law, Section 1002, which requires
the removal of all mno~thorized billboards end signs which
were erected before 1957, and were to be removed five years
later, or on April 1st. 1962. They still remain, and your
Board proposes to have them remain indefinitely.
As a member of the Community and one who is very
much interested not only in its progress but in maintaining
the natural beauty of the countryside, I wish to let it be
known that I am emphatically against any obstruction of our
natural scenery and the spoiling of same by commercial signs
which may, redound in commercial advantage, but fail the
surroundings ecstatically, and ultimately ruin its suburban
advantages from a living standpoint.
Trusting that you will take into consideration my
plea for the maintenance of our community so that it will
be a Joy to all who visit 8nd live there, I remain
AC/K
Very truly yours,
Southold, N.
Ts
AREND H. SILVERS
Old North Road
Southold, N. Y.
' W $TERN :ION
~ ~'~ SYMBOLS
""/' C£ASS o* SERVICE
This is a fast message DL=DayLetter
unless its deferred char- NL=Night Letter
..... is indi .... d by the TELEGRAM ,,o, c4_60, ,T
ional
proper symbol. ,~ = Letter Tetegra
'~ ~' W.P. MARSHALL .......... , mf
The filing time shown in the date line on domestic telegrams is LOCAL TIME at point of origin. Time of receipt is LOCAL TIME at point o~ desti
This is a fast message
unless its deferred char-
acter is indicated by the
proper symbol.
THE COMPANY WILL APPRECIATE SUGGESTIONS FROM ITS PATRONS CONCERNING ITS SERVICE
NL=Night Letter
TELEGRAM .0, ,,_.,.LT=[ ....... ional
W. P. MARSHAL~. PR~e~D~N~ ~ Letter Telegram~
The filing time shown in the date line on domestic telegrms is LOCAL TIME at point of origin. Time of receipt is LOCAL TIME at point of destination
I
..!,. ....................... V! ,D ! i.t ,! ·
THE COMPANY WILL APPRECIATE SUGGESTIONS FROM ITS PATRONS CONCERNING ITS SERVICE
DR. WILLIAM
41-40 - 63rd STREET
WOODSIDE 77, NEW YORK
HAROLD E, TUTHILL
~.OLITHE]LD, L, I.~ N,Y.
Southold To~,~n Board
South Street
Greenport, N.Y.
Orient, i~ew York
April 5, I963
Dear Sirs:
As I will be unable to attend your public meeting on April 9,
I ~ v~iting to call to your attention the rapidly increasing
interest throughout the United States in preserving v~atever is
left of the natural beauty spots, and in keeping the atmosphere
of charming co~uniti~s. The travel sections of newspapers and
magazines constantly advise readers of places where lovliness is
preserved. Tourists ~1± tell you o~' their hunt for countryside
unspoiled by billboards and ugliness. Those places that have
eliminated billboards and have kept the beauty of the surroundings
have had fantastic success in attracting hordes of tourists-- more
and more every year. This is a national trend that is growing by
leaps and bounds.
Should our billboards be preserved, I feel that our town board
would be looking backwards instead of forwards, and would be
sho?tsightedly helping to kill the goose that lays the golden egg.
Sincerely
5 April, 1963
Mr. Lester Albertson
Southold Town Supervisor
Office of the Supervisor
Greenport, L.I., New York
Dear Let:
I strongly oppose the repeal of Section 1002
of the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Southold relating to un-
authorized bill boards and signs. These bill boards and signs
are in general a disgrace to the community, tasteless and
dangerous since they in many cases impede the view of roads,
etc.
Certain signs under proper control both
from the esthetic and safety standpoint could be tolerated. How-
ever, a repeal of Section 1002 would legitimize a condition which
should not be permitted. The basic idea that unauthorized signs
should be removed is strongly to be supported.
If signs are necessary, and I see very little
value for the community in them, at least there should be re-
strictions on their size, content and location. I also oppose
allowing buildings to have signs on all four walls.
The community is presently an attractive
one but I see no reason in letting it degenerate into a waste-
land of commercial words and timber.
Very truly your s,
P. O. Box 308
Southold, L.I., iN. Y.
Mrs. F]o~ :trd F. Katzenbcr~
45 Gr:~mcrcy Pat'i~ Ne':¥ ¥orL I*, N. Y.
~ACQUE$ WEBER
6o BRADFORD ROAD
SCARSOALE, NEW YORK
April 4th, 1963
Mr. Lester Albertson, Supervisor
South Hold, L.I.,
New York
Dear Mr. Albertson:
I would like to go on record on the subject of bill
boards on which there will be a public hearing on
April 9th, 1963.
As a property owner in your Village I think anything
you can do to REDUCE the number of bill boards will
enhance the attractiveness of the Village. Bill
board advertising reduces the value of property and
will destroy the beauty of our Village. Just look
at the slum atmosphere prevailing at Port of Egypt.
JW: dj
Sincerely yours,
~Jacqu~s Weber
4 ~pril 1963
l~r Lester ~lbertson
Southold Town Board
~reenport N Y
~,,~r ~hlbe rt son,
Provisions of the Zoning 0r~inance as state8 in
Section 1002 were applauded by residents of Southold Town
when the law was passe~. Unsightly signs and billboards
ad~ nothing to the charm of our town, and in effect, null-
ify the efforts of individuals and groups who try to n~in-
t~in and improve appearance by roa(~side planting, etc.
&ccording to the regulation, the signs shoul~ have
been remove~ not later than J~pril 1962. No ~ction h~s been
t~ken in 'this direction ~s the sign~till wi~h us.
~nd now an ~endnent is propos~8~ to permit the
erection of more signs, including the u~e of four w~lls of
any business building. This proposal is ~stonishing in view
of the original ~ction of the Town Board in a(iopting the
original ordinance. ~
'/Je all realize that changes in' zoning laws ~re
necessary as time passes and as the need arises. Is this
a need. o ~kre such signs essential to our welfare? ~:/ill it
be expedient now and regrettable five years later?
Let's have no more large signs. Let's try to work
out a compromise relative to existing ones, with ~ventual
elimination as the objective.
I urgently request the Town Board to table repeal
of Section 1002 and to oppose the amendment. ~'iany part
time residents and taxpayers who have a real interest in
this proposition cannot be present at the hearing on ~pril
ninth. I will be away on that day and am therefore stating
my views to you an~ the Town Boar~, with the knowledge that
others who will be absent share my views in this important
mat te r.
Cordially yours
CLEMENT W. BOOTH
~ou~-~o,~. ~.. ,.. ,,,. ,,.
19 Clinton Place,
Baldwin, L.I.N.Y.
April 4th, 1963.
Southold Town Board,
Office of the Supervisor,
Greenport, L.I., N.Y.
Dear Sirs:
It has been brought to my attention that
there will be a Public Hearing on April 9th, 1963 with
reference to the proposed repealing of Section 1002
which required the removal of all unauthorized bill
boards and signs erected before 1957.
I also understand that the Board proposes
an amendment which would permit the erection of a
sign $ foot by 4 foot on any lot vacant or improved
anywhere in the residential and agricultural zone.
I am heartily opposed to the repealing of
Section 1002 and any amendments thereto.
I own a Cottage in Bayview and have been
a summer resident of Southold for the past 30 years.
Southold is one of the few places still
left on the eastern end of the island with some of the
old natural charm. Please leave it this way.
Verx truly yours~_--
AUGU~/~'A. FINK
~,~r. l,estem ~,]oertson, BuFervfsor,
Town of Soutnold
m~.Je in qo]dim:~ :Iow, o~ sf~.'~oo~,fi3 cn th.:.~ North Fork
~ut th3 ~ ~o~osefl ,~,~erflments to the o ~t].dln zone april-
l~,',~ should be t:-,v{~ ' to "-' "
is ,-'h-~t the amendment F, roposes to
[:re~nures of the fe,~,, .~?airst the wishes of the
T~t't not fall iuto t'qis error ~.m ~o,zt~.ol~
%Pen 9~vi.s
41 Foster Avenue
Valley Stream, Long Island
April 4, 1963
Supervisor Albertson
To~m of Southold
16 South Street
Oreenport, Long Island
Dear Sir:
As a residential property owner in the Town of Southold I was
more than a little dismayed upon learning of the Town Board's proposal
to amend the Building Zone Ordinance with respect to the erection and
removal of signs.
I was always under the impression that the Supervisor and
Board members were elected to serve in the best interests of the Town
of Southold. Certainly the proposal to amend Article III and IV and
repeal Article X is not in the best interest of the Town.
~ith respect to Article X I would appreciate hearing from you
as to why Article X, Section 1OO2 has not been enforced. I understand that
all unauthorized billboards and signs erected before 1957 were to be removed
by April, 1962. Ma~y are still standing. Is it not the Town Board's
responsibility to see that our zoning ordinances are upheld and enforced?
I am certain that the residents of Southold do not wish to see
their town take on a garish atmosphere. The proposed amendments and
repeal constitute the first step in this direction.
Respectfully submitted,
Copies to:
Justice H. A. Clark
Justice R. W. Tuthill
Councilman L. Demarest
Councilman C. Grathwohl
Town Clerk A. M. Richmond
Southold-Peconic Civic Association
255 SO. FRANKLIN STREET, HEMPSTEAD, N. Y.
JVanhoe 3-6984
Florists
GEORGE MERRICK TISDALE
4 SUTTON PLACE
NEW YORK 22, NEW YORK
NEW YORK STOOK EXCHANGE
ELEVEN WALL STREET
NEW YORK 5, N .Y.
WILLA~ D K.VAN DE~BECt~
v,c~,~ April 4, 1963
Town Supervisor
Greenport, Long Island
New York
Dear Sir:
As a taxpayer and resident of Southold, I wish to
register my protest against the proposal of the Town Board
that the unauthorized billboards and signs erected before
1957 be permitted to remain indefinitely.
I also wish to protest the amendment which would
permit the erection of a sign, two sides if desired, 8 feet
by 4 feet on any lot vacant or improved anywhere in the
residential and agricultural zone.
I also wish to register my strenuous objection to
permitting signs across all four walls of any public building
in addition to the business signs now allowed.
The Town of Southold is a beautiful place of which
we all are proud. Some of the signs that are there are
serving to mar the beauty of our town and we can well do
without them.
If the Town Board goes through with these proposals
there will be only one result -- the deterioration of a lovely
community and the exodus of the kind of people which you and
the Town Board undoubtedly want to have as residen~ of the
Town.
It is my sincere hope that you will do everything in
your power to persuade the Town Board not to adopt these
proposals.
Sincerely yours,
SOUTHWOOD PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INc.
SOLITHOLO, L. ~., N. ¥.
April * ,196~
S~pe~vimer Lam%er M.Al~er%mem
Maim ReaA
Sea%held, N.Y.
Dear Mr. Alber%sem,
The Beard ef D~reetera ef this Assecia%lem weald like
%e em%e~ a st~e~ pretest a6ai~t repealin~ See%lam 1002 ef the
weulA remeve preme~% ~emira~le remt~e%ie~m em a~vertimt~ mica.
We kepe yeu will m~ppe~ eur peaitiea.
We are im fever el:
1-Eafereemea% If restrie%le~a that have beam en the beaks
siaee 19~7.
2-I~previn6 t~e al~pea~anee ef Se~thsld and l%e
at%rea%lye plaee %e live-wkieb a~l%ipliea%ien ef
will met
3-Iaereami~ t~e m~fe%y ef eur hiShwaym-whieh %~e dimtrae%in~
effeet ef sig~aa will ~et de.
· -~iein6 the qmaliSy as well as the velune ef leeal
w~lsh +~e e~ea~en$~ effeet ef ~la%an%
will ne%
~-Ea%ablish~ a ~epreeen%ative,nem-pell%ieal,vel~eer Bea~i
%e pass e~ the lesal~%y and e~%a~llX%7 ef ,x~ati~ er
p~peseA si~s,~d te reee~enA exeeptiena la easee whe~
X~previ~ .%~e appea~anee ef eur eennun2%ies and hig~hways
is ~eal ~re~ss.Le%~s net ~e ~ae~ar~se
Ye~rl very truly,
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
SOUTHOLD TOWN BUSINESSMEN'S ASSOCIATION
Fred W. Young P.O. Box 831
President Southold, N.Y.
John Bennett
Secretary
April 3, 1963
Dear Member:
We wish to call your attention to the public hearing to
be held by the Southold Town Board at the office of the Super-
visor, 16 South Street, Greenport, New York, on April 9, 1963
at 7:30 P. M.
This hearing is in reference to the Town Building zone or-
dinance as it concerns signs. Many of our Business people will
find these provisions adequate to their needs. Others will find
them far short of their needs.
As a person doing business in Southold Town, we suggest
you check your local paper for the detailed proposals. We urge
you to attend the public hearing and let the Town Board hear
how you feel regarding the effect this ordinance will have on
your business.
Please bear in mind this ordinance is another regulation
imposed on business. Even if you are indifferent to this par-
ticular question, it is imperative that the business people
are well represented to insure future consideration.
Sincerely,
Fred W. Young
April 3rd, 1963
Dear Let~
A have hasrd about %heproposed changes in the law~, om
billboards and signs.
Over the years, as a man in ~he advertising business,
ihave ~ed billboards and signs and know their value.
~ve even ~eed elias In this area ~o advertise
· srner's chips.
I am not in favor of removing all signs erected before
1957 as that might hurt local business, and we are
used to these signs.
H~ever, I object vigorously to letting d~n ~he present
restrictions and permitting any mere billboards to be
put up either cn property c~ on buildings.
This is an area to which we wiwh to attract more taxpayers
and we should keep the a pearance as good aspossible.
If we convert it to a place with many billboards and signs,
it will meke %he Tow~ look junky and less i~viti~g both
to vacat~ists and possible permanent residents.
~ have heard t~at Cape CoO has Just about been ruined ~n
appearance due to lack cf restrictions. ~et's be fore-
sighted ar~ p~eeeet anything like that here.
Sir~
As a pr:~perty o~ne:' arid taxpa?:~c iri the ~o~ of
SouPloid (P~conic) 1 vigorously protest
repea~.in~ Section 1902 vdiicn r~:.uir~c ~he uemoval of
a~l ~giauthorize~ bi,boards, i als) oppose the ~i.~iend-
ment. to permit signs on vaclmt Lots or on bus~es~
buil,iings as propose~_~.~z ....... ~.
Bilib~rds are ~ly, destroy tliec.~r' ' a of our
co~m:~m~ity, che~xpen its appear~ce ~ ~o no
except ea~ a few dollars for those o~,ning the locations.
i ~u surio~ised that you ~d the other m~mbers o.f the
To~ Bo~ra ar~ so iackim~__~__ __~ civic prime as to enter-
t~
April 3, 1963
Southold Town Boar~
Office of the Supervisor
Greenport, L.I., N.Y.
Gentlemen:
I was dismayed to learn of the Board's proposal to
repeal Section 1002 of the Zoning Ordinance. At a time
when communities in m~ny parts of the country are belatedly
tx~ing to undo the d~m~ge caused by years of ,,~eetrained
billboard construction, it seems distinctl~ ill-advised for
our own public officials to recomme~ the repeal ~nd alter-
~tions of regulations designed to conserve the n~tural beauty
of our countryside.
Most of us who favor controlling the size and disposi-
tion of advertising billboax~s ere as aware of the need for
business &dvertieing as we are of the need for m~intaining
the natural attractiveness of our Town. We san
that if some merchants are pe~it~ea to continue the use of
l~rge ~ bl~t~t billhooks, the~ wo~a ~ve ~n
over ~heir competi~oPe if the l~tter were forced to
with the provisio~ of the Oral--ce. ~t if all old-law
billboards ~a been ~lterea to oo~o~ wi~h the re~l~tione,
auri~ the very~e~te period allowed for such
~11 merch~te wo~a by now be on e~l footi~. None wo~
have the co~erci~ aav~t~ge of outsize aiepla~ boards.
~ the reei~en~ of the Town, ~s well as visitors to
would not be f~oea b~ ~sigh~l~ ~d view-blocking signs.
Ax~yone who doubts the need for advertising billboard
regulations need only travel a short ~istance west on Route
25 to see some frighte~/ng demonstrations of l~ndecape dis-
figurement. I hope the members of the Town Boe~ will pay
come heed to these nearby examples. I urge that rather than
amendin~ or repealing zections of our Zoning 0rdin~nce, the
Southold Town Boar~ should start the long-over-due enforce-
ment of the regulations.
Samuel Epstein
Box 1042
Southold, N.Y.
Sincerely Yours,
ROBERT W. THOMPSON COMPANY
April 3, 1963
Southold Town Board
Office of the Supervisor
Greenport, L.I.
Gentlemen~
The writer is the owner of a home on Town t~rbor
Lane, Southold.
I respectfully submit a request to the Town Board
to vote a a~t the ~ of Section 1002 which
requires the removal of all illegal sized signs
and billboards erected before 1957.
I also ask that you oppose the amendment which
would permit signs to be placed across all four
walls of a business building other than the signs
now permitted under the Ordinance.
In general, the Zoning Ordinance should be strengthG
ened rather than weakened by such amendments, if we
are to prevent defacement~of our area.
Yours very truly,i'/
April 3, 1963
Box 1132 Peconic, N.Y.
De~ T. ester,
I believe that our understanding is such that we can
speak most frankly on subjects, concerning Sou~hold.
With regard to the sign ordinance proposal, I donSt know where
the consol ease fram but it is certainly not well considered, or
wi~her l~e pressurel but I am convinced it is most unwise to even
entertai~ such ideas as ~browing Southold wide open,as such~to
t~he sign people and some limited business elements, in favor of
wholesale use of signs.
I have never heard such ~=~mity of opinion, and I say this
very sincerely, against the sign explosion. .This is a phrase taken
from t~he population explosion boys. We have too ma~y illegal signs
~aw. They are not a pretty sight.
With a growing Southold this pressure for more signs will gro
at a terrific rate, as in ~he past 5 years. We either put the ¢lampd
down, ex,force the present ordinance, or a slight variation of it,
or go down the road which the Sown boar~ has indicated. This will ~-
be an ugly looking "Southold" with all the implications involved.
I need not spell it out- you fully understand.
I believe that this is going to kick up quite a ftxss. I belieV~
confidence in the Town Board will be greaty shaken, and it could
lose an election, because of it.
I think this is a good time for the Town board to deoide
Southold "what direction'. I mean a fundamental appraisel of the
future. Once you k~ow where you are going, you can make the proper
decision on the day to day issues. T~zls is fundamental thinking, the~
~oughest kind of thinking. I have several friends that could help
the Board in this respect if they were invited privately.
Cordially . , ~.~ ~. ' / ~/, .
April 3,, 1965
Town Supervisor
16 South St.
$outhold, Long Zsland
Dear Sir;
As a member of the Southold - Peconic
Civic Association, Inc., and as a taxpayer, Z
am strongly opposed to your reapling section
1002. Z feel this action would result in a
greater number of billboards along the scenic
routes, that Southold is so well known for.
I am aware, as are you, that $outhold and
surrounding villages, with their quiet beauty
and quaint charm, attracts people. Many of
these people come from an urban section of the
country. They come not to read billboards, but
to view one of the few towns left on Long Zsland
that has not been diseased by co~nercial atmosphere.
Sir if you would refer to the back cover
of the "CONSERV~TIOMiST!', State of New York
Conservation Dept. ~eb. March 196~ issue, you
will see Southold Town beach sans billboards.
~ hope you will t~e into consideration my plea
for the well being o£ Southold To~n.
Indian ~eck Lane
j. econic,I ong Island
A)ril Z,1963.
Southoid io?n~ Uoard
qoutl~old, Long Island.
Sirs;-
I unc[erstand that ti~e ma~ter of removinf: the
billboards erected before 1957 is no'.'; at hand a:ain.
?est of t::e ])sopie of 9outhold would like to
see ail bi].iboarda removed excei~t those defini'[el¥
necessary for busines~ or other legi%immte rea~con~',-,lircct-
ional ~2ns, of motels, hoteis~)l~ces of in't~trest m <i ~ on,
.~yonc wi~h a sense of beauty ~ ~] ~dnzrat:~on
Jror otlr n~turo~ily lovely countryside can not tn~ers:tgnd
~ h7 ~outhol<~ o~iows the erect.on of ~hese ugly sixThs,and ~'~y
any an~! ~ of them a~e not removed.
'Yher~~ are other
~dver~:isinS. Billboar~[s
a bon~ut:;.£u 1 landscape.
~". (! ~15~ l~lea~; O~'
are a blot on what
Let's eliminate all billboar~Is
e~cept those necessary for local interests.
~AL /~9~ICE
NOTIC~ OP /~ARING
~D Z~O ~A~C~
~rs~ant ~ ~ ~5 of ~e'
To~ ~w and ~ ~ of the~
Town ~f Southo]d, S~Holk ~$y,~
N~ Y~k, p~blic h~s ~H
held ~y the ~uthold To~ ~d~
at ~e offi~ of ~e ~ervl~r,
$ou~ St~t, ~, NeW Y~k,
~ ~d ~ on the 9th ~y of Ap-
~ of ~d ~y, ~ ~e fol~g,
~p~ to ~nd ~e BuH~:
Zm~ ~l~ (~ud~ the~
S~ ~ne~) of ~ ~
of ~u~Id, Suf~ ~unty, New~
I. ~y ~dl~ A~i~le IH, ~-
tion 3~,' Subdiv~on H of the'
S~dl~ Zone O~nce of .~e'
To~ of S~cld ~ r~d as ~1-~
lows:
one (1) si~, ~ or d~ble-~
f~ed, ~t ~ ~ fo~
fe~ ~ ~l~ht ~d eigh~ (8) ~t
In wld~ ~ ~w~ ~ge of w~
s~ll ~ not ~ ~ two
f~t ~bov~ ~e ground and the
up~.r ~e of w~ch shall not
ext~ ~re t~ six (6) f~%'
above ~ ~und, ~vid~, how-
ever, th~% s~h si~ s~l ~ set'
~k ~t le~ ~ ~ty-five
copt that .~here a ~-ba~ line
h~ b~n est~bll~ed In ~ ~-:
c~ty where 9~ent ~ld-,
ln~ of mo~ ~r 1~ ~ ,thirty-'
five (35) feeS, su~ s~ ~1
not ~oj~t beyond Zh~
H~ ~ ~bH~ed, ~d Drovid'~
ed .f~he~ ~t s~h s~
~ ~t ~ nos ~ ~an fifth
(15) f~t f~ ~1 pro~y 1~.~
. H. By ~ending ~lcle IV,
~ ~, Su,bdiv~ion (bi of t~e~
BulldOg Zone ~d~e of t~'
T~n of ~uthold ~ re~ as
(bi ~r.r. ~,~ ~ One (1)I
si~ a~ to ~ ~cor~
~ ~ buH~ wall ~d
v~ only ~e ~bm~ con-,
ed s~ s~ ~s ~t:
Il. ~c~ two (2) ~u~e
tn ~ ar~ for ~h hor~n~
2. ~ ~ ~ 0~ hun-'
z~ m~ent of such
3. ~d ~n (I0) feet In~
4. ~ce~ fif~en (1.5) f~t six~
(~) tnoh~ fwm $wund level toi
~e ~ edge of si~, ~d
5. ~j~t mo~ ~n o~ (1)~
f~t ~m ~ch wa~.
~I. (By repea~ ~icle X, ~-
t~n 1~, of 8he B~R~g ~
din~ce of ~e Town of ~u~old.
STATE OF NEW YORK, ]
~ ss:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK,
~. ~P,~.~..~... ~4.c.~,--~. .......... being duly Sworn,
says that. .. is P~nter ~d Publisher of the SUF110LK
TIMES, a newspaper published at Greenpo~, in said county;
and that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy,
has been published in the s~d S~fo~ Times once in each
week. for .......................................................... ~ ........................ wee~
commencing on the
successively
day of . j~).~ ~:~ ..................... 19~$. ......
Swo~ to before me this ..~ ......... ] ~/~
day of .. ~'~ ....
CORNELIA C. KEOGH
hOt'AiRy PUBLIC, St.~te of New YO~
No. ~,2-2093890
Qualified ia Suffolk Count*]
Term Expires March 30,
NOTICE OP HEARING ON PROPOSAL
TO AMEND ZO~/I~G ORDINANCE
Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law and Article IX
of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold. Suffolk
County, New York, public hearings will be held by the Southold
Town Board at the office of the Supervisor, 16 South Street.
Gre~nport, New York, in said town on the 9th day of April.
1963, at 7=30 o'clock in the evening of saidday, on the
following proposals to amend the Building Zone ordinance
(including the Building Zone Maps) of the Town of Southold,
Suffolk County, New York.
I. By amending Article III, Section 300, Subdivision
11 of the Building Zone ordinance of the Town of Southold
to read as follows:
11. When authorized as a special exception
by the Board of Appeals as hereinafter provided,
one (1) sign, single or double-faced, not more than
four (4) feet in height and eight (8) feet in width,
the lower edge of which shall be not less than two
(2) feet above the ground and the upper edge of
which shall not extend more than six (6) feet above
the ground, provided, however, that such sign shall
be set back not less than thirty-five (35) feet
from all street lines except that where a set-back
line has been established in the vicinity with
permanent buildings of more or less than thirty~
five (35) feet, such sign shall not project beyond
the set-back line so established, and provided
further that such sign shall be set back not less
than fifteen (15) feet from all property lines.
Page 2 - Legal Notice
II. By amending Article IV, Section 408, Subdivision (b)
of the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold to read
as follows:
(b) WALL SIGNS--One (1) sign attached to or
incorporated in each building wall and advertising
only the business conducted in such building,
provided such sign does not~
1. Exceed two (2) square feet in total area
for each horizontal foot of such wall, and
2. Exceed in width one hundred (100) percent
of the horizontal measurement of such wall, and
3. Exceed ten (10) feet in height, and
4. Exceed fifteen (15) feet six (6) inches
from ground level to the upper edge of sign, and
5. Project more than one (1) foot from such
wall.
III. By repealing Article X, Section 1002, of the
Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold.
Any person desiring to be heard on the proposed amendments
should appear at the time and place above specified.
DATED~ March 26, 1963.
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD
TOWN BOARD.
~LRERT W. RIC~4OND,
TOWN CLERK.
PLEASE PUBLISH ONCE, MARCH 29, 1963 AND PORWARD 'IT~J~E (3)
AFFIDAVITS OF PUBLICATION TO T~E TOWN CLERK, MAIN ROAD,
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK.
copies mailed to the following on March 27, 1963:
The Suffolk Times
The Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman
Southold Town Planning Board
SOUTHrlLD, L. I., N.Y.
PLAN NINC~ BOARD
MEMBERS
John '*~icEharn, Chairman
]-Icn ry Mois~
A~fred C~rebe
Archibeld Youn8
'~¢Gllie m Unk¢lbech
Report to:
Southold Town Board
16 South Street
Greenport, New York
March 25, 1963
Gentlemen:
This is to certify that the following action was taken by
the Southold Town Planning Board at their meeting March 19, 1963:
In the matter of the proposal of the Southold Town Board to
amend the Building Zone Ordinance as follows:
I. By amending Article III, Section 300, Subdivision 11 of
the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold to read as
follows:
11. When authorized as a special exception by the
Board of Appeals as hereinafter provided, one (1) sign,
single or double-faceda not more than four (4) feet in
height and eight (8) feet in width, the lower edge of
which shall be not less than two (2) feet above the
ground and the upper edge of which shall not extend more
than six (6) feet above the ground, provided, however,
that such sign shall be set back not less than thirty'
five (35) feet from all street lines except th~ where
a set-back line has been established in the vicinity with
permanent buildings of more or less than thirty-five (35)
feet, such sign shall not project beyond the set-back line
so established, and provided further that such sign shall
be set back not less than fifteen (15) feet from all pro-
perty lines.
II. By amending Article IV, Section 408, Subdivision (b) of
the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold to read as
follows:
(b) WALL SIGNS -- One (1) sign attached to or incorporated
in each building wall and advertising only the business con-
ducted in such building, provided such sign does not:
Page 2 - Report to:
Southold Town Board
1. Exceed two (2) square feet in total area for
each horizontal foot of such wall, and
2. Exceed in width one hundred (100) percent of
the horizontal measurement of such wall, and
3. Exceed ten (10) feet in height, and
4. Exceed fifteen (15) feet six (6) inches from
ground level to the upper edge of sign, and
5. Project more than one (1) foot from such wall.
III. By repealing Article X, Section 1002, of the Building
Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southold.
It is hereby RESOLVED that the Planning Board recommend to
the Town Board the proposed amendments to the Building Zone
Ordinance as setforth heretofore.
The Planning Board is of the opinion this is the only solution
to the sign problem which prese~__~exists.
Respectfully submitted,
Gohn W.tckham, Chairman
$outhold Town P'~ann.i. ng Board
SOUTHOLD - PECONIC CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC.
Southold, L. I., N. Y.
April 2, 1963
URGENT
TO Ail Members - - FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION:
The Southold Town Board has set a public hearing on Tuesday,
9th of April, 7:30 P.M., Office of the Supervisor, Greenport,
to amend the Zoning Ordinance.
They propose repealing Section 1002 which required the removal
of all unauthorized billboards and signs erected before 1957.
They were to be removed 5 years later -- April, 1962. They
are still there. The Town Board proposes that these signs
remain indefinitely.
The Town Board also proposes an amendment which would permit
the erection of a sign, two sides if desired,8 feet by 4 feet,
on any lot vacant or improved anywhere in the residential and
agricultural zone. No restrictions as to type of sign or
wording.
Another amendment would allow signs across all 4
any business building - in addition to the business
allowed.
walls of
signs now
A copy of the legal notice is on page 5, March 28 edition of
the Traveler.
Read it and make known your wishes by postal, letter, or phone
to any Town Board member or to the Supervisor. To be effective
this should be done AT ONCE.
Attend the public hearing at 7:30 P. M., Tuesday, April 9 at
the Supervisor's Office and speak up.
The Board of Directors
SOUTHOLD - PECONIC CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC.
Southold, L. I., N. Y.
April 2, 1963
URGENT
TO Ail HcrJoers - - FOR I~I'~.ED-~ATE ACTION:
h_ $cutho=d Town Board has set a public hearing on Tuesday,
9th ofAp.~,~ 7'~30 P.M., Office of the Supervisor, Greenport,
to amend the Zoning Ordinance.
They prcpo. 2 repealing Section 1002 which required the removal
of all unLutkorized billboards and signs erected before 1957.
They were to be removed 5 years later -- April, 1962. They
~re still %here. The Town Board proposes that these signs
remain indefinitely.
The Town Beard also proposes an amendment which would permit
the erection of a sign, two sides if desired,8 feet by 4 feet,
on any lot vacant or improved anywhere in the residential and
agricultur~l zone. No restrictions as to type of sign or
wording.
Anci~her araendment would allow signs across all 4 walls of
~ny business building - in addition to the business signs now
al~o~ .....
A copy of the legal notice is on page 5, March 28 edition of
the Traveler.
Read it and ma.~{e known your wishes by postal, letter, or phone
to any Town ~oard member or to the Supervisor. To be effective
this sh,'~lc? l)e clone AT ONCE.
At'Lend tke public hearing at
tile Supervisor's Office and speak up.
7:30 P. M., Tuesday, April 9 at
The Board of Directors
SOUTHOLD - PECONIC CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC.
Southold, L. i., N. Y.
April 2, 1963
URGENT
Ail Members
FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION:
The Southold Town Board has set a public hearing on Tuesday,
9th of April, 7:30 P.M., Office of the Supervisor, Greenport,
to amend the Zoning Ordinance.
~hey propo~e repealing Section 1002 which required the removal
of all unauthorized billboards and signs erected before 1957.
They were to be removed 5 years later -- April, 1962. They
~re still there. The Town Board proposes that these signs
re~zin indefinitely.
The Town Board also proposes an amendment which would permit
the erection of a sign, two sides if desired,8 feet by 4 feet,
on any lot vacant or improved anywhere in the residential and
agricultural zone. No restrictions as to type of sign or
wcr~ing.
Ano-ther amendment would allow signs across all 4 walls of
any business building - in addition to the business signs now
~!lowed.
A copy of the legal notice is on page 5, March 28 edition of
the Traveler.
Read it and make known your wishes by postal,
to any Town Board member or to the Supervisor.
this should be done AT ONCE.
letter, or phone
To be effective
AEkend the public hearing at 7:30 P. M., Tuesday, April 9 at
the Supervisor'$ Office and speak up.
The Board of Directors
SOUTHOLD - PECONIC CIVIC ASSOCIATION, INC.
Southold, L* I., N. Y.
April 2, 1963
All Mes~ers - - FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION:
The Southold Town Board has set a public hearing on Tuesday,
9th of April, 7:30 P.M., Office of the Supervisor, Greenport,
to amend the Zoning Ordinance.
They propo~e repealing Section 1002 which required the removal
:Df ~11 unauthorized billboards and signs erected before 1957.~
T.h_~c~ ~_~.~.~.~_~ r~0ve~._~jf~ars later -~ April, 1~362-~ They
~rc still, there. The Town Board proposes that these signs
remain indefinitely .....
The Town Board also proposes an amendment which would permit
~%e erection of a sign, two sides if desired,8 feet by 4 feet,
on any lot vacant or improved anywhere in the residential and
agricultural zone. No restrictions as to type of sign or
wording.
.~no-d~.'~er amendment would allow signs across all 4 walls of
business building - in addition to the business signs now
~!!owcd ~.t~
A copy of the legal notice is on page 5, March 28 edition of
~:he Traveler.
Reed it and make known your wishes by postal, letter, or phone
to any Town Board member or to the Supervisor. To be effective
this should be done AT ONCE.
Attend the public hearing at 7:30 P. M., Tuesday, April 9 at
the Supervisor's Office and speak up.
HUGH J, STERN · 3850 HUDSON MANOR · RIVERDALE 63. N, Y.
~arch Fl, 1963
~J~.Lester ~lbertson
Southold, N.Y.
Dear ~&r.~lbertson,
I understand that efforts are under way to have the
Southold Town ordinance revoked forbidding the display of commercial
signs except under strictly limited conditions, is a long time resident
and property owner of Southold I want to register my protest against
such action in the strongest terms possible.
~s so many others, I was and am attracted to South-
old because the past policy of the town fathers has enabled it to keep
commercialism in any form out; to retain the atmosphere of a purely
residential town ; to preserve its ~ew England resp.Old New York cha-
racter by a prudent conservatism which is under our eyes disappearing
in so many formerly beautiful m~s~ old towns. I consider it the duty of
the present generation to do everything to protect the heritage which
has come down to us over the centuries, because, if we don't, it will
be irrevocably lost.
I have under~ding for the merchants ~nd real estate
people who want to profit from the increasing influx of transients and
sportmen who are discovering for themselves the outstanding natural en-
dowments of this part of Long Island. But what they fail to see is that
once we destroy that unique beauty it is irretrievably lost, and with it
much of the attraction of Eastern Long Island. In the end the ~fect might
well be the opposite of what these interests try to achieve, ~nd our part
of the Island might loose that special charm which makes it at present
one of~the outstahding vacation and resort areas of our state. ~nd it
might loose those desirable residents like myself and many of m~ friends
who bring prosperity to Southold without making any undue demands on the
community, and might instead attract a greatly different crowd of undis-
criminating tastes and ~estion~ble value for the long range development
of the area.
I would appreciate it if you would bring this view-
point to the attention of the meeting which, unhappily, I am unable to
attend because of the pressure of business.
Sincerely
~ FF%E:R K
BDUTNDLD, L. I., N. Y,
March 12, 1963.
Mr. John Wickham
Chairman Planning Board
Cutchogue, New York
Dear Mr. Wickham;
Enclosed herewith is a
copy of a resolution passed by the Southold
Town Board at a meeting held on the 7th day
of March, 1963.
You are instructed to pre-
pare an official report thereon pursuant
to the provisions of Article IX of the
Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of
Southold.
Very truly ~,
Albert W. Richmond
Town clerk
't -~ ~;eeti~'ig of the fown Boar~ of the Town
u i ldiug
-2-
April 25, 1.~62.
Mr. J~hn Wlckham
De~r Mr. Wtckham;
copy of ~he resolution passed ~ ~e
~thol~ ~n ~d at, a stl~ held
YOU are inatructed to
prepare an official report theweon pur-
s~ to ~e ~ovl~lone of ~tic~e ~
~ of Southold.
Very truly yours,
Albert W. Richmond
Town Clerk
At a meeting of the Town Board of the Town of Southold held at the
Supervisor's Office, 16 South Street, Greenport, New York, on April 24,
1962.
WHEREAS, the Town Board believes that it is in the best interest of
the Town that all signs in existanee prior to the enactment of the zoning
ordinance of the Town of Southold should be allowed to continue upon the
condition that the owners of such signs obtain permits therefor,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Building Zone
Ordinance of the Town of Southold be and the same hereby is amended as
follows:
I. By repealing Section 1002, Article X of said ordinance.
II. By amending Article VII, Section 703A of said ordinance
to read as follows:
Section 703A - A permit will be required prior to the
erection of or addition to ali signs, including non-conforming
signs in existance prior to the enactment of this ordinance,
except signs permitted by Article III, Section 300, paragraphs
8, 9 and 10 of this ordinance. Metal identification tags
serially numbered shall be affixed by the Building Inspector
to all signs for which a permit is required.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Town Clerk be and he hereby is
authorized and directed to transmit a copy of this resolution to the
Planning Board of the Town of Southold with written instructions requesting
said board to make its official recommendations and report thereon pursuant
to Article IX of the Building Zone Ordinance.