Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-140.-2-19HENRY E. RAYNOR. ~..Chairman FREDERICK E. GORDON JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI, ~. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jt, Southold, N.Y. 11971 January 18, 1980 TELEPHONE 765- 1938 Mrs. Michelle Becket Pike Street Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Mrs. Becket: The following action was taken by'the Southold Town Plauning Board at a regular meeting held January 7, 1980. RESOLVED to approv~ the site plan of plan number M-4596 of Donald J. Brown, R.A., 2or property of Michelle Becket locatad on the northeast corner of!Pike Street an~ ~r~ T .......... subject to the following: ...... ~n~, ~av~uc~, 1. Outdoor lighting schedule. 2. Location of outdoor signs. Yours truly, Muriel Tolman, Secretary Southold Town Planning Board TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUiLDiNG INSPECTo~ TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 q'~EL. 765-1802 April 2, 1980 Mrs. Michelle Becket Michelle,s Beauty S&lon Mattituck, N.Y. 11952 Dear Mrs. Becker: This in regard to your iproposed ch entr~a~.ce/e×it to your ~-~ anges of fencin~ ~ ~ &nd Pmke Street. J ~=~zng at the corner of Lo~e~ne The Code of the Tow~ ofiSouthold, Zonin Cha states your off-street ~arkin~ o~,~ ~ g. pt. 100-112A Planning Board. Access, Chapt. 100-112D states no entrance or exit for off-street I ~ ~=z~ ~e metermined by the fifty (50) feet of any ~arking area shall be located within ~treet intersection. This matter should be rOferred to the Planning Board who approYed your site plan iJanuary 9, 1978. Any curb cut or changes Of access to the Town highway should also be referred ~o the Supt. of Highways. Very truly yours, GEORGE H. FISHER Sr. Building Inspector TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 TEL. 765-1802 Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, New York Gentlemen: Re: Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 Proposed Addition - N/E Corner Pike St. and Love Lane Mattituck~ New York At the request of Murie~ Tolman for a site plan review, I submit herewith the following comments: The premises is lo~ated in a B-1 Zoned District and is re- gulated under Art. VII bf Chapter 100, Zoning Code, Town of Southold, N.Y. Under Sec. lO0-71,1bulk schedule of this article, total lot area required is 30,O00isq. ft. Property data on plan gives lot area of 11,716 sq. ft or, only 3~ of todays lot requirements. Bulk schedule provides for lot width of 150.0' along front yard. Site plan shows 100.0' On Pike Street and 102.30 on Love Lane. Schedule also provides For a front yard set back of 35.0', with a total for side yards Of 50.0'. i.e.: 25.0' and 25.0'. Rear yard requirements are 35.0'; this being a corner lot leaves very little rear yard. Before reviewing p~oposed addition, I would like to point out the following non conforming conditions existing: 1. Insufficient lot area 2. Insufficient front yard width Existing building with insufficient side yard set back ~ The proposed addition iS for the purpose of creating two additional retail stores. Under this article, retail stores are a permitted use. Sec. 100-70 A (~), (C), and (d). It would appear ~his addition will create'a building with a com- bination of retail stores as stated in Sec.100-62 and would be Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 subject to requirements Centers". Accordingly, under this section. set forth therein, "Retail Shopping the following comments are being made A. Reference to Art. XIII Site Plan approval 100-131 objectives: b. Parking only 19 Proposed traffic access 1. Pike Street scaled 40.0' to corner -- (50., ' required) Love Lane, next to railroad crossing blocked b_~p~'oposed building. This reduces v~sability. lot adequate. Total 22 spaces required: ~rovided c. Not adjacent to residential property B. Lot area required shall be one acre with lot not less than 150.0' ~w~- C. Required landscaping, 25% of lot reduces obtainable parking arealto 19 soaces D. Required set ~ck is 35.0'. Where an average has been established, imt may be used, i.e., Love Lane. However, this is not ~onsistent with the intent of this Code. With.referenqe to Sec.100-33, front yard set back, this Section permits using average within same block. This premises is not on same block, i.e.$ ~ -".~ buildings so~th of Pike Street not same block. E. Required side!yards of 25 feet are not being met F. Parking, as m~ntioned, not complied with G. Rainfall, storm water, storm drains not provided. Refer back to Art. III,i Sec.100-134 D Proposed develope~ent plan does not include: Outdoor Tighting Locationi of outdoor signs (6) ProposedI grading and landscaping (7) Locationi of water and sewage lines Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 It would be my recommendation not to approve this site plan for the following reasons: " 1. The presence of three non conforming conditions with the existing structure. 2. The creation ef additional non conforming conditions should the Board So otherwise. Also, approval of this site plan would be in conflict with Art. Sect. 110-10 purposes: The facilitations of the efficient and adequate provision of public facilities and services. B. The assurance iof adequate sites for residence, industry and commerce. D. The preventio~ and reduction of traffic congestion so as to promote efficient and safe circulation o~ vehicles and pedestrians. F. The gradual elimination of nonconforming uses. Ge The enhancement of the appearance of the Town of Southold as a whole. I would like to recommend, however, that the following be con- sidered. Redesign the addition so as to hold to permitted front and side yard set backs~ This would include established non con- forming 14.9' on easterly line. There is a buildable area within oermitted set backs totaling approximately 3007.12 sq. ft. Addition proposed with existing ~tru~ture totals 2651 sq. ft. The existing building is presently within this 3000.0' se. ft. area. In 8~m~ so, sufficient parking Can be obtained (22 ~paces). This[-i~-~° opinion, would eliminat~ a dangerous condition, i.e.: %he,ton% yard reduction on Love Lane recently approved by Board of Aopeals #2643 dated November 14i 1979. ' R~ectfully su~mitted, i EDWARD F. HINDERMANN EFH/mw TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 TEL. 765-1802 Planning Board Town of SOuthold Southold, Mew York Re: Site Plan #M 6596 - 11/79 Proposed Addition - N/E Corner Pike St. and Love Lane Mattituck~ New York Gentlemen: At the request of M~riiel Tolman for a site plan review, I submit herewith the followlng~oommen?s: The premises is 1Dcated zn a B-1 Zoned District and is re- gulated under Art. VIIlof Chapter 100, Zoning Code, Town of Southold, N.Y. ~ Under Sec. 100-71i bulk schedule of this article, total lot area required is 30,000 sq. ft. Property data on plan gives lot area of 11,716 sq. ft )r, only 3~ of todays lot requirements. Bulk schedule provides Site plan shows 100.0, Schedule also provides a total for side yards yard requirements are little rear yard. Before reviewing out the following non I. InsufficJ 2. Insuffic~ 3. Existing set back for lot width of 150.0' along front yard. on Pike Street and 102.30 on Love Lane. for a front yard set back of 35.0', with of 50.0'. i.e.: 25.0' and 25.0'. Rear $5.0': this being a corner lot leaves very ~roposed addition, I would like to point :onforming conditions existing: ent lot area ent front yard width building with insufficient side yard The oroposed addition ir for the purpose of creating two additional retail stores. Under tnis article, retail stores are a permitted use. Sec. 100-70 A (!), (C), and (d). It would appear this addition will create a building with ~ com- bination of retail storss as stated in Sec.100-62 and would be - 2 - Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 subject to requirements set forth therein, "Retail Shopping Centers". Accordingly, the following comments are being made under this section. A. Reference to Art. MIII Site Plan approval 100-131 objectives: a. Proposed traffic access 1. PikeiStreet scaled 40.0' to corner - (50.0' required) Love~Lane, next to railroad crossing blocked by proposed. : building. This reduces v~ty. Parking not adequate. Total 22 spaces required: only 19 provided c. Not adjacent to residential oroperty B. Lot area required shall be one acre with lot not less than Required landscaping, 25% of lot reduces obtainable oarking area to 19 soaces Required set Sack is 35.0'. Where an average has been established, it may be used, i.e., Love Lane. However, this is not Consistent with the intent of this Code. With reference to Sec.I00-33, front yard set back, this Section permits using average within same block. This ~remises is not on same block, i.e.~ '~ ' o's- buildings south of Pike Street not same block. E. Required sidelyards of 25 feet are not being met F. Parking, as mSntioned, not complied with G. Rainfall, storm water, storm drains not provided. Refer back to Art. IIIi Sec.100-134 D Proposed developement plan does not include: (3) Outdoorlighting (4) Location of outdoor signs (6) Proposed grading and landscaoing (7) Location of water and sewage lines Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 It would be my recommendation not to approve this site plan for the following reasons: 1. The presence of three non conforming conditions with the existing structure. 2. The creation of additional non conforming conditions should the Board ~o otherwise. Also, approval of this site plan would be in conflict with Art. I Sect. 110-10 purposes: ' The facilitations of the efficient and adequate provision of public facilities and services. B. The assurance of adequate sites for residence, industry and commerce. The prevention and reduction of traffic congestion so as to promote efficient and safe circulation of vehicles and pedestrians. F. The gradual elimination of nonconforming uses. G. The enhancement of the appearance of the Town as a whole. of Southold I would like to recommend, however, that the following be con- sidered. Redesign theiaddition so as to hold to permitted front and side yard set backs. This would include established non con- forming 14.9' on easterly line. There is a buildable area within permitted set backs totaling approximately 3007.12 sq. ft. Addition proposed with existin~structure totals 2651 sq. ft. The existing building is presentSy ~ithin this 3000.0' sq. ft. area. In doing so! ~ufficient parkmng ican be obtained (22 spaces). This, in my oo~n~on, would eliminate a dangerous condition, i.e.: the~ront yard reduction on Love Lane recently approved by Board of Appeals #2643 dated November 14~, 1979. ~ ReSpectfully su~mitted,i EFH/mw TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILD15~G INSPECI'OR TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 TEL. 765-1802 Planning Board Town of Southold Southold, New York Re: Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 Proposed Addition - N/E Corner Pike St. and Love Lane Mattituck~ New York Gentlemen: At the request of Mur~el Tolman for a site plan review, I submit herewith the following comments: The premises is located in a B-1 ZOned District and is re- gulated under Art. VIi of Chapter 100, Zoning Code, Town of Southold, N.Y. Under Sec. 100-7' area required is 30,0( area of 11,716 sq. ft Bulk schedule provide~ Site plan shows 100.0' Schedule also provide~ a total for side yardi yard requirements are little rear yard. , bulk schedule of this article, total lot ~0 sq. ft. Property data on plan gives lot or, only 3~ of todays lot requirements. for lot width of 150.0' along front yard. on Pike Street and 102.30 on Love Lane. for a front yard set back of 35.0', with of 50.0'. i.e.: 25.0' and 25.0'. Rear 55.0'; this being a corner lot leaves very Before reviewing!proposed addition, I would like to point out the following non !conforming conditions existing: 1. InsuffiCient lot area 2. Insuffm¢ient front yard width 3. Existin~ building with insufficient side yard set bacM The proposed addition is for the purpose of creating two additional retail stores. Under ;this article, retail stores are a permitted use. Sec. 100-70 A (1), (C), and (d). It would appear this aiddition will create a building with a com- bination of retail sto~es as stated in Sec.100-62 and would be Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 subject to requirements set forth therein, "Retail Shopping Centers". Accordingly, the following comments are being made under this section. A. Reference to Art. XIII Site Plan approval 100-131 objectives: a. Propose~ traffic access I. Pik~ Street scaled 40.0' to corner -- (50~0' required) 2. -- Love Lane, next to railroad crossing blocked bM ~roposed building. This reduces visability. b. Parking!not adequate. Total 22 spaces required~ only 19iprovided c. Not adjacent to residential property B. Lot area required shall be one acre with lot not less than 150.0''~~T~ C. Required landscaping, 25% of lot reduces obtainable ~arking area to 19 soaces Required setiback is 35.0'. Where an average has been established~ it may be u~ed, i.e., Love Lane. However, this is noticonsistent with the intent of this Code. With referemce to Sec.100-33, front yard set back, this Section per$its using average within same block. This premises is~not on same block, i.e.~ '~ ~ ~ · buildings sSuth of Pike Street not same block. E. Required side yards of 25 feet are not being met F. Parking, as ~entioned, not complied with G. Rainfall, storm water, storm drains not provided. Refer back to Art. II!, Sec.100-134 D Proposed develop~ment plan does not include: ~(3) Outdoor lighting /~) LocatiOn of outdoor signs ~6) Proposed grading and landscaping (7) LocatiSn of water and sewage lines Site Plan #M 4596 - 11/79 It would be my recommendation not to approve this site plan for the following reasons: 1. The presence of three non conforming conditions with the existing structure. 2. The creation:of additional non conforming conditions should the Board So!otherwise. Also, approval of this site plan would be in conflict with Art. I, Sect. 110-10 purposes~ A. The facilitations of the efficient and adequate provision of public fa6ilities and services. The assurance of adequate sites for residence, industry and commerce. D. The prevention and reduction of traffic congestion so as to p~omote efficient and safe circulation of vehicles and pedestrians. F. The gradual elimination of nonconforming uses. G. The enhancemSnt of the appearance of the Town of Southold as a whole. ~ I would like to recon~end, however, that the following be con- sidered. Redesign th9 addition so as to hold to permitted front and side yard set backs. This would include established non con- forming 14.9' on easterly.line. There is a buildable area within oermitted set backs t~tal~ng apprOxmmately 3007.12 sq. ft. Addition proposed with existing structure totals 2651 sq. ft. The existing building is presently~ithin this 3000.0' sq. ft. area. In doing so, sufficient parking can be obtained (22 spaces). This, in my opinion, would elimzn~te a dangerous condition, i.e.: thefront yard reduction on Love Lane recently approved bM Board of Appeals #264~ dated November 1!4, 1979. ReSpectfully su,~mitt e~, EDWARD F. HINDERMANN EFH/mw bear !r ~,,r i m't puttin/{?:: tddition on to m}r exis-t:in? bu_ildin~ !aessures 3~'x 40'~ ~' x 4°'. ~lhis 9ddition ,.rill be used th,~t 's 't'/o retail shops. 2he ne~z bu. ildin~ ~.'ill be divided so thr~t o]le shore ,,.rill ]!eve ~7' frontr~qe ~nd the other will h~ve 95' ours tr~l z, ' ' /~2~ p;? i iehe!le ~ec ~er .TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FOR~ SHORTET~VIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT INSTRUCTIONS: (a) In order to answer the questions in this short EAF it is assumed that the preparer will use currently available information concerning the project and the likely impacts of the action. It is not expected that additional studies, research or other investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any questionihas been answered Yes the project may be significant and a completed Environmental Assessment Form is necessary. (c) If all questions have been answered No it is likely that this project is not significant. (d) Environmental A~sessment 1. Will projec~ result in a large physical change to the project site or physically alter more than l0 acres of land? ........................ Yes,,No 2. Will there be a major change to any unique or unusual lan form found on the site? .......... Yes /%No 3. Will pro3ec alter or have a large effect on existing be y of water? ....................... Yes~_..No 4. Will projec, have a potentially large impact , on groundwcter quality? ....................... Yes ~ No 5. Will pro3ect significantly effe?t ~?ainage flow on od acent sites? .................... Yes No 6. Will projec!t affect any threatened or V endangered jplant or animal species? ........... Yes~No 7. Will projec!t result in a major adverse effect on air quality? ............................... Yes No 8. Will project have a major effect on visual character all the community or scenic views or vistas known to be important to the community? YesAN° 9. Will project adversely impact any site or structure oJf historic, prehistoric or paleontological importance or any site designated jas a critical environmental area by a local agency?. Yes No lO. Will project have a major ef~ec~'~A exi~iA~ or future <ecreationol opportunities? ......... Yes XNo 11. Will project result in major traffic problems or cause a major effect to existing \/ transportation systems? ....................... Yes~No 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable odors, noi~e, glare, vibration, or electrical dzsturbanc~ as a result of the pro3ect s operation?~ .............................. Yes~No 13. Will projedt have c on public health or safety?.I ................................... Yes,No 14. Will projeqt affect the existing community by directly c~using a growth in permanent population faf more than 5 percent over o one year period or have o major negative effect on the cha~a~-~er of the community or/kJ/N neighborhodd? ................................. Yes o 15. Is there pdblic controversy concerning the project?..~ ................................... Yes ~ No ,I ;! L ! F-.. PLAN NO,~, ~- 4¢q~, ' I OF 'J SCALE: ~5 ' ~D~ DATE ~, [qqc "THESE PLANS ARE ,FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE STRUCTURE ONLY. [~SE OF THE~E PLANS FOR ANy ADDI- ~'TIONAL STRUCTURE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE ARCHITECT, WIt, L THEREBY TRANSFER ALL R, ESPONS- IBILITY FOR THEIR USE TOTHE USEE~ND,THE AUTHORITY ACCEPTING THEM." iI t :PLAN.NO, ~. ~G~ ~ ~ Of "THESE PLt~NS ARE FOR THE EONSTRUETION OF:A SINGLE STRUCTURE: ONLY, USE Of THESE PLANS FOR ANY ADDI- TIONAL STI~UCTURE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN APPROVAL THE ARCHITECT, WILL THEREBY TRANSFER ALL IBILITY FOR THEIR USE TO THE USER AND THE AUTHORITY ACCEpTIN~ THEM," '1 T "THESE PLANS ARE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE STRUCTURE ONLY· USE OF THESE PLANS FOR ANY ADDI- TIONAL STRUCTURE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE ARCHITECT, WILL THEREBY ~rRANSFER ALL RESPONS- ' IBILITY FOR THEIR USE T~'THE USER AND THE AUTHORITY ACCEPTING THEM."