HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-55.-2-18.1JAMES A. SCHOND
TOWN ATTORNEY
ROBERT H. BERNTSSON
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1939
[:AX NO.
(516) 765-1823
INTER-OFFICE MEMO
FROM THE TOWN ATTORNEYS OFFICE
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Town Board and Planning Board
James A, Schondebare. Town Attorney
April 26. 1989
Sterling Idea Ventures. Article 78 against Southold Town
Planning Board
Attached is the Article 78 of Sterling Idea Ventures against the
Southold Town Planning Board.
Please review the same as we will have to admit to each paragraph
contained therein.
JUDITH T. TERRY
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1 179
Southold, New York 1 1971
FAX (516) 765-1823
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801
TO:
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
JAMES A. $CHONDEBARE, TOWN ATTORNEY
JUDITH T. TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK
STERLING IDEA VENTURES, ARTICLE 78 AGAINST
SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
APRIL 21, 1989
Transmitted herewith, please find Article 78 of Sterling Idea Ventures
against the Southold Town Planning Board. Please advise to whom
copies should be distributed.
Court, $~LK County
Full title of action
In the Matter of the Application of
~T~/NG IDEA VENTtrRES,
Petitioner,
For a Judgment Pursu&nt to Articte 78
of the CPLR,
-against-
Plaintiff(s)
Petitioner(s)
against
PLANNING BOARD OF THE TfX~ OF SOUTHOLD,
[] Request for preliminary conference
[] Note of issue and/or certificate of readiness
[] Notice of motion (return date ...................................................... )
Relief sought .................................................................................
[] .............................................................. :,
(Clerk will enter return date ............................................ [ ........... )
Relief sought
Tort
[] Motor vehicle
[] Medical malpractice
[] Dental malpractice
[] Seaman
[] Airline
[] Other tort, including but not limited to personal injury,
property damage, slander or libel (specify): .: .................................
Index No.
Date Purchased.
REQUEST FOR
JUDICIAL
INTERVENTION
For Clerk Only
Date of assignment
[] Issue joined (date ....................................................... ) (check if applicable)
[] Bill of particulars served (check if applicable)
In the City of New York only:
[] The City of New York is a party to tfiis action.
Defendant(s) [] The Transit Authority (or MABSTOA) is a party to this action.
Respondent(s J!
NATURE OF JUDICIAL INTERVENTION (check) [] Other ex partc application
[] Notice of petition (return date ...~'~t~:_.~t...~}~ ..................... )
Relief sought .~-...~.~g~'~...~.~ Art. 78 of
[] Notice of medical malpractice action
[] Notice of dental malpractice action
[] Statement of net worth
[] Writ of habeas corpus
[] Other (specif.v): .................................................................. i .......................
..................................................... !EC =tV D2' ..........................
NATURE OF ACTION OR PROCEEDING (check' ~/~D~c:~----ff<:)~,/~ -
Special Proceedings ' ...~'!~'~ .~ 1,,~;gsg. '
[] Condemnation ff/~oU(hol~"~.., r,l.,,~--~_
FI- Foreclosure
[] Incompetency or conservatorship
~)ther special proceeding, including but not limited to:
[] Article 75 (arbitration)
[] Article 77 (express trusts)
J~ Article 78
[] Other (specify): ............................................................................................
OTHER ACTION
[] Matrimonial (contested) [] Contract
F1 Matrimonial (uncontested) [] Other (specify)': ...............................................................................................
Instructions: ~ttach rider sheets if necessary to provide required information.
If any party ~s appeanng pro se (without an attorney) the required information concerning such parly is to be entered in the space
provided for attarneys.
Attorney(s) for plaintiff(s)/petitioner(s)
Name
WI~KHAM, WICK~AM & BRESSLER, P.C.
Address
Main P~ad - P.O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
Phon~
516-298-8353
Attornev(s) fordefendant(s)/respondent(s)
Name
Southold T~wnAttorney
Southold Town Hall
Address
Southold, NeQ York 11971
Phone
516-765-1800
Name of insurance carriers (if applicable and available)
RELATED'CASES (if none, write "NONE" below)
Title Index #
Nature of relationship
i affirm under penalty of perjury that, to my knowledge, other than as noted above, there are and have been no related
actions or proceedings, nor has a request for judical intervention previously been filed in this action or proceeding.
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.
^uomcy(s) ~'or Petitioner
Office & P.O. Address
Main Road - P.O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
In the Matter of the Application of
STERLING IDEA VENTURES,
Petitioner,
For a Judgment Pursuant to Article
78 of the CPLR,
-against-
PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,
ReSpondent.
INDEX NO.
NOTICE OF PETITION
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that upon the petition of STERLING
IDEA VENTURES, verified April 21, 1989, and the exhibits annexed
thereto, an application will be made at a Special Term, Part II
of this Court at the Courthouse, Griffing Avenue, Riverhead, New
York on the 19th day of May, 1989 at 9:30 o'clock in the forenoon
or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, for a judgment
pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules
granting to the petitioner the following relief: vacating and
annulling the decision of the Planning Board of the Town of
Southold dated March 2.2, 1989 as arbitrary and capricious and an
abuse of discretion, compelling the Planning Board of the Town of
Southold to approve the site plan of petitioner, and granting ·
petitioner such other'and further relief as is just and proper.
Petitioner designate~ Suffolk County as the place of
trial.
Dated:
TO:
Mattituck, NY
April 21, 1989
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER,
Attorneys for Petitioner
Main Road, P.O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
(516) 298-8353
PLANNING BOARD OF SOUTHOLD TOWN
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
(516) 765-1938
17/sterling
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
In the Matter of the Application of
STERLING IDEA VENTURES,
Petitioner,
For a Judgment Pursuant to Article
78 of the CPLR,
-against-
PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD,
ReSpondent.
INDEX NO.
VERIFIED
PETITION
Petitioner, STERLING IDEA VENTURES, by its attorneys,
WICKHAM, WICK/~AM & BRESSLER, P.C., respectfully show to this
Court and allege:
1. Petitioner, Sterling Idea Ventures, is a New York
Partnership with principal place of business at Main Road,
Mattituck, New York and the owner of the premises described
herein.
2. Respondent Planning Board of the Town of Southold is a
planning board organized and existing by virtue of Section 271 of
the New York State Town Law.
3. In or about June, 1987 petitioners applied to
Respondent for site plan approval for construction of retail
office space on petitioner's premises at C.R. 48, Southold, New
York, more particularly descrlbed as SCTM # 1000-55-2-18.1.
4. The application has been pending before the Respondent
since on or about June, 1987 with no final approval given.
5. On March 22, 1989 Respondent by letter determined that
certain conditions be satisfied prior to final approval of the
site plan. A copy of this letter is annexed as Exhibit A.
6. The provisions set forth in the determination of March
22, 1989 are arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of discretion
in that:
a) the letter requires that petitioner's site plan
must now be reviewed under and measured by the requirements
contained in the Southold Town Zoning Code as amended on
February 1, 1989;
b) Petitioner's property consists of approximately
0.63 acres of property that was zoned B-1 under the Zoning Code
which existed at the time of the application in June, 1987 and
continued through January, 1989;
c) Petitioner diligently pursued its application
before Respondent and complied with every reasonable and legal
request of Respondent in attempting to obtain site plan approval;
d) Petitioner has incurred substantial expenses in
connection with the application to date consisting of taxes,
architectural fees, and other expenses in excess of $ 5,000.00;
e) On or about June 26, 1987, Petitioner submitted a
prepared site plan to Respondent for its property above
described, together with other, required documentation;
f) Thereafter and'between June 26, 1987 and August 7,
1987, Respondent advised Petitioner that it desired certain
changes to be made to the proposed site plan. Implementation of
those changes necessarily required an application to the Southold
Town Board of Appeals for a variance for required rear yard
setback. A copy of letter dated August 7, 1987 from Petitioner's
representative Garrett A. Strang, setting forth Respondent's
requirements, is annexed as Exhibit B;
g) On or about August 26, 1987, Petitioner submitted
a revised site plan, meeting all of Respondent's requirements
outlined in the August 7, 1987 letter. A copy of the August 26,
1987 letter of transmittal is annexed as Exhibit C. The result
of this revision was to reduce Petitioner's net retail sales area
by 300 square feet;
h) On or about October 13,
Petitioner, by letter, Copy annexed as
certain other changes to the site plan,
1987, Respondent advised
Exhibit D, required
including a one-way loop
around the proposed building. Moreover, it advised Petitioner
that no new site plan application could be considered unless and
until the existing site plan for the property was withdrawn.
Both such requirements were arbitrary, capricious and
unreasonable and the conditioning of a new site plan application
on withdrawal of an existing site plan is illegal.
i) On or about October 15, 1987, Petitioner's
responded to the letter of October 13, 1987, by letter dated
October 15, 1987, from Garrett A. Strang. Petitioner properly
pointed out to Respondent that. a one-way loop in the rear of the
property would either reduce the landscaped area to less than 25%
or require removal of a front yard buffer required by Respondent.
As such, Respondent's request was arbitrary and capricious.
Petitioner also advised that it wanted the instant application
treated as an amendment to its existing site plan so that it
would not loose its prior approval. Petitioner's prior site plan
was approved prior to the time periods at issue herein.
j) On November 25, 1987, Respondent advised
Petitioner by letter, copy annexed as Exhibit E, that it would
proceed with Petitioner's application upon receipt of an
application fee and withdrawal of the prior approved site plan.
Such latter condition was arbitrary and capricious and in
violation of the law.
k) On or about December 2, 1987, Petitioner advised
Respondent that it would not withdraw its approved site plan
until it received approval of the pending application. Copy of
letter of Garrett Strang of December 2, 1987, annexed hereto as
Exhibit G.
1) On or about December 17, 1987, Petitioner paid to
Respondent the sum of $ 100.00 representing payment in full of
Respondent's fees. A copy of the check of Garrett Strang is
annexed hereto as Exhibit H.
m) By February 4, 1988, Respondent had taken no
further action on the application and as a result Petitioner
contacted the Southold Town Attorney by letter to attempt to get
the matter moving. ~opy of letter of Garrett Strang of February
4, 1988 is annexed hereto as ~xhibit I.
n) On February 4,-1988, Petitioner requested by
letter an appointment with Respondent to attempt to get the
project moving. Copy of letter of Garrett Strang dated February
4, 1988 annexed hereto as Exhibit J.
o) Respondent failed to respond to the letter of
February 4, 1988 and on February 29, 1988, Petitioner again wrote
to Respondent requesting a response. Copy of letter of Garrett
Strang dated February 29, 1988 annexed hereto as Exhibit K.
p) On or about March 7, 1988, Respondent advised
Petitioner that it would contact the Town Attorney for input
regarding its requirement that the prior site plan be withdrawn
before consideration of the new site plan would proceed. This
was confirmed by letter of March 14, 1988 from Garrett Strang to
Respondent, copy annexed hereto as Exhibit L.
q) By letter of April 4, 1988, Respondent advised
Petitioners that it no longer required withdrawal of the prior
site plan as a condition to consideration of the current
application. Copy of letter of April 4, 1988 annexed hereto as
Exhibit M. By virtue of its arbitrary and illegal position the
Respondent created a five month delay in processing Petitioner's
application.
r) At a meeting of April 7, 1988 Respondent advised
Petitioner that it was requiring circulation for trucks behind
the building and would send a letter to Petitioner on how to
proceed. No such letter was sent.
s) On or about May 11, 1988, Petitioner filed with
Respondent an amended site plan which met the Respondent's
requirements with respect to rear circulation, westerly placement
of curb cut, and movement of loading zone. Copy of letter o{
transmittal of May 11, 1988 annexed as Exhibit N.
t) On or about May 18, 1988, Respondent returned to
Petitioner a site plan with its proposed revision. Copy of
transmittal letter annexed as Exhibit O.
u) On or about May 23, 1988, Petitioner delivered to
Respondent a revised site plan meeting ~.ach and every requirement
of Respondent as set forth in the May 18, 1988 revision request.
Copy of transmittal letter of May 23, 1988 annexed as Exhibit P.
v) On or about June 6, 1988, Respondent advised
Petitioner by letter that after the Board of Appeals
determination the Planning Board would require elevations and a
drainage plan and determine the type of outdoor lighting. Copy
of letter annexed as Exhibit Q.
w) Thereafter, Petitioner diligently made application
to the Board of Appeals on or about June 22, 1988, for a rear-
yard variance due to the Respondents requirement of building
placement. But for this requirement of Respondent no rear year
variance would have been required. The zoning ordinance at the
time required a 35 foot rear yard set-back, but the Planning
Board was arbitrary and capricious in requiring a 25 foot
setback, and same resulted in additional delay to Petitioner of a
month and a half.
x) On July 22, 1988, Petitioner was advised that the
Board of Appeals granted the application.
annexed as Exhibit R.
y) On or about August 10, 1988,
Copy of decision
Petitioner delivered
to Respondent a site plan which complied with all of Respondents
requests. Copy of letter of Garrett Strang of August 10, 1988
annexed as Exhibit S.
z) On or about September 19, 1988 Respondent advised
Petitioner by letter that it required further changes to the site
plan : deletion of the word "retail" from the plan, amendment of
the lighting plan previously approved by Respondent, and location
of a dumpster, copy of letter as Exhibit T.
aa) On or about September 27, 1988 Petitioner filed an
amended site plan aqain complying with all of Respondents
requirements, except noting that no deletion of the word "retail"
was required since the necessary parking was present. The
parking requirement at the time was one parking space for each
100 square feet of sale area. Since total sales area did not
exceed 2900 square feet, the 29 spaces as shown were adequate.
Copy of transmittal letter annexed as Exhibit U.
bb) On or about October 7, 1988 Respondent advised
Petitioner that it was requiring yet further amendments to the
site plan: a chain of dimensions in both directions and an
interior floor plan. Copy of letter annexed as Exhibit V.
cc) On or about October 25, 1988, Petitioner aqain
delivered an amended site plan to Respondent complying with all
of Respondents requirements, except for a floor plan which was
not a proper request for site plan approval and, in any event,
had not been yet determined, as tenants had not been procured.
Copy of letter of Garrett Strang dated October 25, 1988, annexed
as Exhibit W.
dd) Respondent failed to approve the site plan or
respond to Petitioner until on or about December 20, 1988 another
period of almost two months when it advised Petitioner that it
would not proceed in the absence of a floor plan drawn to scale.
Such a requirement was arbitrary and capricious and illegal.
Copy of letter of transmittal annexed as Exhibit X. Copy of
Applicable zoning ordinance Sections 100-130-131, and 134 annexed
as Exhibit Y.
ee) The history of this application amply demonstrates
that Petitioner proceeded diligently in attempting to procure
site approval, that it submitted at least three site plans which
met every legal request of the Respondent, that Respondent acted
knowingly with intent to hinder and delay and did hinder and
delay Petitioner by imposing illegal conditions in connection
with the application (withdrawal of the prior plan/floor plan)
and by asking for "one more thing" each time petitioner appeared
before it.
ff) The letter of March 22, 1988 and the new zoning
ordinance require landscaping of 35% of the property. By
Respondents own demand, the landscaped area is now less than 25%.
The letter of March 22 and the new zoning ordinance require a 25
foot landscaping strip across the front of the property. By
Respondents own demand the landscaped strip in front of the
property is five feet.
gg) If Petitioner is required to proceed under th~ new
zoning ordinance it will have wasted approximately two years of
time, over $ 5,000.00 in direct expense, and will be required to
obtain substantial variances due to the size and shape of the
parcel and the new zoning regulations. Copy of old and new
zoning ordinance bulk schedule annexed as Exhibit Z. The size of
any permitted building will, in all probability, be substantially
smaller to accommodate the foregoing.
hh) There was before the enactment of the new zoning
ordinance a proper site plan before Respondent on numerous
occasions. The final site plan of October 25, 1988 met all of
the Respondents legitimate requirements.
7. The respondent should be compelled to approve the site
plan of petitioner as last submitted on October 25, 1988 since
the plan complied with all applicable requirements at the time
and the respondent has willfully and unreasonably withheld its
approval of same has delayed and hindered Petitioners
intentionally throughout the process, resulting in unnecessary
delays of almost 1 year, and but for such withholding, delay and
hindrance of Respondent Petitioner would have obtained a building
permit and commenced construction and made significant
improvements prior to the amendment to the zoning ordinance in
January, 1989, all as more particularly described in Paragraph 6
above.
8.
Petitioners have no other adequate remedy at law
available for the relief sought and no prior application for the
relief sought herein has been-made.
WHEREFORE, petitioners respectfully request that a judgment
be entered pursuant to Article 78 of the Civil Practice Law and
Rules in favor of petitioner and against respondent vacating and
annulling the determination of Respondent contained in the letter
of March 22, 1989, as arbitrary and capricious and an abuse of
discretion, compelling the Planning Board of the Town of Southold
should approve the site plan of petitioner, and with such other
and further relief as is just and proper.
Dated: Mattituck, NY
April 21, 1989
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER,
Attorneys for Petitioner
Main Road - P.O. Box 1424
Mattituck, New York 11952
(516) 298-8353
PoCo
· Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
TELEPHONE
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 22, 1989
Garrett Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE:
Proposed site plan for
Sterling Idea Ventures
SCTM ~1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The Planning Board was required to review all pending site
plans under the new zoning code which was adopted on February 1,
1989.
The above-referenced plan must be revised to bring it into
compliance.
1. Sign information including size and location must be
provided pursuant to Section 100-101C (2) and (3).
2. The bulk schedule requirement for the General Business
Zone~requires that 35% of the site be landscaped.
a. Section 100-212. B, requires a 25' deep
landscaping strip starting at the front property line
and a 5' landscaping strip across the front of the
building.
3. Parking must be shown as per the new code; indicate on
floor plan how interior space is to be used.
Upon receipt of revised ~ite plans the Planning Board will
proceed with your application.
VS/jt
· .,,~..~,,.'~y trulgyT~ /~ ~ /~
_/~ ,'" --'-~ ; /, '~ ./ / /
...'
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
GARR~TT A. STRANG
August 7, 1987
Mr. Bennett Orlows~i, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Department
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Sterling Idea Ventures, Horth Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
As of the outcome of my meeting with Valerie Scopaz,
your office, it is my understanding that the Board
Suggesting the following amendments to the above
cation:
of
is
appli-
1. Provide an offstreet loading area;
2. Provide an eight foot (8') minimum greenbelt be-
tween, the southerly property line and the southernmost
edge of the parking area;
3. Enlarge the east and west greenbelt between prop-
erty lines and driveways and area parking to a minimum.
of six feet (6') in width;
4. Relocation of the building to within
(20') of the rear property line.
I am sure that the Board is aware that this
tion necessitates the need for a variance.
my understanding that
cation.
twenty feet
recommenda-
It is also
the Board will support this appli-
I anticipate that the Board will address this matter at
the first meeting to be scheduled after the meeting of
August ]0th. For the record this application was made
on June 26th.
Very truly yours,
C^S/b
Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
GARRETT A. STRANG
A~CHITECT
August 26, 1987
r~r. Bennett Or]owski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, ~ew York ]197]
Re: P'roposed Retail Complex, North Road
Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and .~embers of the Board:
Enclosed are six (6) copies of revised Site Plan in con-
nection with the above referenced project.
Please note the fo]lowing revisions:
1. Provision of one (1) off-street loading area;
2. Provision of eight foot (8') greenbelt between
southerly property line and parkin& area;
3. Provision of five foot (5') greenbelt a]ong esst
and west property lines, in lieu of three feet (3') pre-
viously provided;
4. Relocation of building further to the north, so as
to provide for additional landscaping on the south side
of the site.
I am of the understan.ding this plan will be reviewed at
your Septenlber 14th meeting, at which time I will be
present to answer any question~ from the Board.
Very truly yours,
GAS/b Garrett A. Strang, R. A.
Encs.
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
October 13, 1987
Garrett Strang
P.O. ~ox 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Re:
Sketch Plan for Sterling
Idea Ventures
N/s County Rd. 48, 419.83'E/o
Young's or Railroad Ave., Sout
SCTM# 1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
With regard to the second revision of the above - named
sketch; it is suggested that when the site plan application is
made that the loading area be shown in the rear of the building.
Also, the curb should be moved to the westerly edge of the
property to avoid potential conflicts with C.F. Van Duzers two
curb cuts immediately adjacent to the easterly property line.
Finally, the proposed siting of the building is not
conducive to good vehicular circulation on-site; particularly
with regard to the one lane ingress/egress to the parking
spaces to the rear of the building. A one-way loop around
the back of the building would be better.
Your client should be aware that there is an approved
site plan for this property. It must be withdrawn before we
can accept a new site plan application.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. CHAIRMAN
SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
GARRETT A. STRANG
OCt ol)~?r
1;, 19.7
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southo]d, Ne~/ York ]1971
Re: Application of Stet]in0 ldca Ventures
North Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Orlow~ki and ~.embern of the Board:
I am in receipt o£ your letter of Octo:~cr 13th,
to reply as follows:
and wish
ih_ siting of the Ouilding Is a direct result of a meet-
lng with Ms. Scol}~z, as outlined in [ny letter to you of
A'JgUS[. 7th. The I',uildin.] ha:~ been shifted as far Lo the
nort~ as practical, Lo allow for an 0' planting buffer
along thc roadside property linc, also requested Dy ;ls.
Scopaz. Thi~ will necessitate a variance, which was
also called Lo yuur attention.
To provide & one-way 1,)ap around the rear u£ thc build-
lng, as you now suggest, will havo two ramifications:
]. Rcducti()n (~£ the l~ndsca|)ed area to less than
2~% or in the -]ternF, tiv,~, thc .re]ocaLion ,)F the
building fiurther to the ~outh, would eliminate the
~' planting buffe~, 7(,u c~icin3[Iy requested;
2. Hl~min.]tion of Lhe four (4) parkinq strolls on
I_he north sJdc c,f the [)rope['ty;
lna~much ,In the four parking stalls doD[cLod :)n the
north aic~ of the nropurty arc, intended for uge by ten-
ants and/or egployees, (as opposed t,) custome[ parking),
for ]onU t.~rm parkinq durin3 bu~ina~'~ hc, ul-:~, [ do not
sue how Lhis D~osenLs poor vehicula~ circu]~Lion.
Tho loading area (desJ,]na%cd parkinq stall), was also
provided at thc request of ~,s. Scopaz. Fhc location
onw which I fec] will conflict the ]ea~t wiLh usual
t~affic flow. Please bea~ in ~5[nd that'the proposed com-
plex is .~mall and would Dc usea infrcqucntly, as most
deliveries wculd be via small van-type vehicles.
Mr. Ber~nett Orlowski
P~O~ Two
October 15, 1987
Furthermore, if you absolutely require a loadinq area
in th~ rear, it wi].[ necessitate the !ess oF parking;
and the need for the circulation loop, which will have
the problems previously
'['he c~rb cut as shown (~djaccnt Van Duzc~'s) is more
compatible to the sitc for providin{~ ad."quate [qlrking,
oiven the tral)ezoidal configu~,~tio~ of the pre)perth.. I
feel the~e w~ll be little, if a~v, cc~nflict with traffic
flow with V~n Duzer's and thc su~ject sit~, inasmuch as
the business uses differ.
I am well aware of thc fact thaL al~ appr,~vcd site plan
exists for this pro)]ertl,. ;~f intention i~ to make this
submission ,~n amendment, rathcr than ~ new a.')pl[cat~o;],
since the pro[~oscd use i"- the same.
I rusl)ectfully request a pr,~m[ot resp¢,n~:e to the above,
since the matteu has been peadino since June and ml, cli-
ent would like to proceed with his plans.
t would be h;~pp,/ to meet with the [~oard ,st any time to
review and an.'~wer any questions.
¥cry truly yours,
(;AS/b ~;arrett A. Str~ng, E.A.
cc: Sturlino Idcu Venture_,;
Southold. N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
November 25, I987
Garret Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Re:
Sketch plan for Sterling Idea Ventures
N/s County Rd. 48, 419.83' E/o
Railroad (Youngs) Avenue, Southold
SCTM# 1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
This office will proceed with the above-named sketch plan upon
receipt of an application fee and a letter requesting the withdrawal
of the currently approved site plan.
Sincerely,
/.
Valerie Scopa~
Town Planner
cc: Planning Board
Robert Celic
GARRETT A. STRAN(~
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD. p O BOX
SOUTHOLD. NEW YORK 11~71
Hn. Valerio Sc')~az, Planninq
Town of Southold
Ma i n Road
$ouLhold, Nt:w York 11971
Re: Application of Sterlin¢
S C'['M ~ 1000-55-2-]8. I
Tdo8 VentuEes
D,;ar tis· Scopnz:
I am in receipt r~f your letter of November 25th in con-
neet!on with the 0!)ov(3 apolicatiol.
t-i.v client will be har~py to withdraw his currunt nile
p],]rl upon r'ec0ipt of anprova] oF the mite. ,nlan, which in
f)en(t~n{! ',~ofore the I~odr(J, at the t)roi;ellt t~ne.
Ben t re,la rd.~3.
,,_ry truly yours,
GASh Gar['ctt A. StL%mq, i:.A.
cc: SLur] in,'] idc;] Vonttlr'cr;
GARRETT A. STRANG L.~
SOUTHOLO. NY n97i
THE NORTH FORK
m:O2~kO79~2~:
3431
OARRETT A. STF~ANG
ARCHITECT
February 4, 1988
Jay Schondebare, Esq.
Town of Southold
Hain Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Robert Celic,
SCTM #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Jay:
On June 26, 1987 an application was made to the PlanninQ
Board to amend a site plan for the above referenced
property. On August 7th, I was directed by the Town
Planner to make certain changes to the application,
which [ assumed were at the direction of the ~oard.
These changes would also require my client to file for a
variance.
On August 26th, a revised site plan was submitted with
the rcquested changes. It wm~ not until October 13th
that I received a letter from Mr. Orlow~k ~ ~ugge~tiD~
further modifications tO the site plan and requestinQ
that the existing site plan approval be withdrawn, prior
to the Board's acceptance of thc new site ~]an applica-
.tion. '
I responded on October 15th, addressing some of the ad-
ditional modifications and clarifying to the Board that
our intention was only to amend the existing site plan.
Obviously, an amendment would supersede the previous
plan, upon which.the approval exists.
On November 25th, ! received a letter from Planning in-
dicating that they would p~oceed on the "Sketch Plan"
upon rece~Dt of the application fee and a formal letter
requesting withdrawal of the existing, approved site
plan. .
On December 2nd, I forwarded the -fee and indicated that
my client would withdraw the current site plan, in con-
junction with approval of pending application.
¥ -7--
/C~ARF~ETT A. STRANG
~ A~CH{TECT
Jay Schondebare,
Page Two
February 4, 1988
Esq.
Approximately one week ago, I called to make an appoint-
ment with Hs. Scopaz to review the status apDrovaI pro-'
cess and was informed that the Board now refuses to re-
view the site plan further until such time as the
existing approval is withdrawn.
It makes no sense for my client to withdraw an existing
site plan approval, without written approval of the
pending application, as there is no assurance that the
Board will approve the pending site plan.
I respectfully request that the Board be directed to
proceed with the review of the site plan, since their
imposed modifications will necessitate our making appli-
cation for a variance, which will take more time.
Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation.
-'Very truly yours,
.b/ Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
cc: R. Celic
GARIRETT A. STRANG
A~CHITECT
February 4~ 1988
~r. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterlin0 Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SCTtl #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
I am herewith requesting an appointment to meet with
discuss the above pending site plan on February 8th.
Please call my office to confirm same.
Thank you.
.Very truly yours,
b/ Garrett A.
cc: J. Schondebare
Sterling Idea Ventures
Strang, R.A.
. .,.,.,~x A, S,/'- ,..7--
GARRETT A. STRANG
February 29, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
~ain Road
Southold, New Yo~k 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SC'¥M ~1000-55-2-18.1
Dear ~r. Orlowski and Hembers of the Board:
On February 4th, I requested a conference with the Board
in Connection with the above application, and as of this
date, have not heard from you.
I herewith respectfully request Same at the earliest
date. I look forward to hearing from you.
Very truly yours,
CASh
Enc. Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
cc: J. Schondebare
Sterling Idea Ventures
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
April 4, 1988
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Proposed Site Plan
Application for Sterling
Idea Ventures
SCTM # 1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
At its last work session, the Planning Board agreed to
accept a site plan application for the above named site without
requiring the withdrawal of the existing site plan.
jt
Very truly yours,
B~N~ET~ O~LOWSKi, j~.~
CHAIRMAN
GARRETT A. STRANG
May 11, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Department
Main Road
Southold, New York ]]971
Re: Sterling Idea Ventures, North Road, £outhold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
Enclosed are six (6) copies of a revised site plan for
the above, as per the most recent information and marked
up print received from your office.
' ~ respectfully request that this be reviewed and ac-
cepted, at your earliest convenience, so that I can make
application for the necessary variance. Due to the na-
ture of this application, a final site plan inclusive of
drainage calculations, will be submitted after a vari-
ance is granted.
Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation.
Very truly yours,
GASb Garrett A. Strang, R.A
Encs. ·
Idea Ventures
cc: Sterlino
$outhold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
May 18, 1988
Garrett A. Strang
Main Road
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, N.Y. 11971
RE:
Sterling Idea Ventures
1000-55-2-1
Dear Mr. Strang:
Enclosed please find a copy of the above mentioned site plan
with revisions.
Please contact our office if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.
CHAIRMAN
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
R,?: SterlJnfl Idea Ventures, North ]:o,~d, Goutholc'.
['.ear Hr. Orlo%;ski and Members o~ thc
Enc]ozed are six (~) ct~pic,~ or o rcvi.'~3C =itc n]aq for
the above, ,3m ~eY thc most rec,'~nt infiorm~tion a::d m.~rk~d
up p~int rece i v.3d from ~'our offico anR datct! Mat,
kqaJn I res,~ec't['ullv reouest thz~t thia >,, rc. vic,,/ed ,ar, d
,3c'cq~)te,f, ~f your (?sKI Jent- conv~nJE, nce, ~o th,~t I c~n
m.]ke ~pDljcatJon For the neccr:nt~ry v.nriance. ~r prev~-
Jnc]L'SJve r~r drainage celculatiom., wi]] he au{,mitted
~fter a varimnce
';'h~,nk vc'J for
CASh G~rcett .\ · ;:tt'~r, rl, P.A .
cc: Sterlinc Idea Venturcs
Southold. N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
June 6, 2988
Garrett A. Strang
Main Road
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Sterling Idea Ventures
SCTM# 1000-55-2-1
Dear Mr. Strang;
As stated in your conversation with Melissa Spiro on
June 6, 1988, the status of the above mentioned site plan is as
follows.
Elevations and a drainage plan will be submitted to the
Planning Board after the Board of Appeals has made a
determination on the application before them.
The height of the poles for the lights will be a maximum of
18 feet. The type of light to be used will be decided after
the ZBA has made a determination on the application before
them.
If there are any problems or questions concerning this,
please do not hesitate to call this office.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. // ~,l
CHAIRMAN
Id To B d t App
ou o wn oar o
MAIN I~OAD- STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11'
TELEPHONE (516) 7~
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN. JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Upon Application of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES for a
Variance to the Zoning ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71,
Bulk schedule, for approval of insufficient rearyard setback from
the northerly property line for proposed principal building, at
premises known as 46025 C.R. 48, Southold, NY; County Tax Map
Parcel No. 1000-55-2-18.1. B-1 General Business Zone District.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 14, 1988, in the
Matter of the Application of STERLING IDEA VENTURES under Appl.
No. 3749; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded;
WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony
and documentation submitted concerning this application;
WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are
familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and
the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the Board'made the following findings of fact:
1. This is an Application for a Variance from the
Provisions of Article VII, Section 100-71 for permission to
locate new principal building with a rearyard setback at 25 feet
as recommended by the Southold Town Planning Board under its
pending site-plan review.
2. The premises is referred to as 46025 C.R. 48, located in
the Hamlet of Southold, Town of Southold, and is identified on
the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 55, Block
2, Lot 18.1.
3. The subject premises contains a total area of 27,305 sq.
ft. with 185.61 ft. frontage along the County Road, is located in
the "B-l" General Business Zone District, and is presently vacant
land.
4. The principal building is proposed as sho~n on the
May 28, 1987 Site Plan Map, prepared by Garrett A. Strang, R.A.,
~ - Appl. 3749
.er of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES
~cision Rendered July 14, 1988
with the following setbacks: (a) closest setback from the
westerly property line at 26 feet; (b) closest setback from the
easterly property line at 26 feet; (c) closest setback from the
front property line at 77 feet; (d} closest rearyard setback at
25 feet, under consideration herein.
5. Article VII, Section 100-71, Bulk Schedule, of the
Zoning Code requires a minimu~ rearyard setback at 35 feet.
The amount of relief requested is 10 feet.
6. In viewing the area, the following information is noted
for the record:
(a) the existing principal building immediately.
adjoining this parcel on the west side has a setback of approxi-
mately 42 feet from the front property line;
(b) the existing principal building nearest thisparcel
on the east side has a setback of approximately 75 feet from the
front property line;
(c) the premises adjoining this parcel to the north
which would be the parcel most likely to be affected by this
variance is a drainage sump maintained by the County of Suffolk.
6. It is also the understanding of this Board that
expansion of the County Road (extending from Horton's Lane in
Southold to Main Street in Greenport) to a uniform pavement width
of 46 feet is proposed under Project No. 5145, and the best
interests of the traveling public would be served by the grant of
a reduction in the rearyard in order to provide additional open
frontyard areas.
7. In considering this appeal, the Board also finds and
determines:
(a) the relief requested is the minimal ~ecessary;
(b) there is no other method feasible for appellan~ to
pursue;
(c) the project will not be adverse to the character of the
neighborhood;
(d) the difficulties claimed are unique to the property and
are not personal in nature; ·
(e) the project is within the spirit and intent of zoning;
(f) the practical difficulties are sufficient;
(g) in view of the manner in whiOh the difficulties arose
.and in considering the above factors, the interests of justice
Will be served by granting the application as applied.
jAppl. No. ~49
of STERLING ~AS VENTURES
Rendered J~y 14, 1988 '
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by
Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance under Appeal No. 3749 as
applied in the Matter of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES for a reduc-
tion in the rearyard to a minimum of 25 feet for the newly
proposed principal building.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent.) This
resolution was duly adopted.
lk
F~'~GERARD P. GOEH~IN~
CHAIRMAN ~
GARRE~T A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
klAtN ROAD. P 0 BOX
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 1197i
o
August ]0, 1988
Hr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Eoard
Nain Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling
North Road, Southo]d
Dear Mr. Orlowski and r{embers
Idol Ventures,
of the Board:
Enclosed are six (6) copies of a finalized site
plan for the above referenced project. In ~iddition
I have included a photocop./ of the exterior light-
ing fixtures proposed to be used. '
[ would like to call your attention to the fact
that drainaqe calculations wero base(] on two inch
(2") raiilfal] containment, 0ivcn the nature o£ thc
project. As pQinted out in recent applications I
have pending before'your bo,ltd, I believe a 2" de-
sign criteria is more than f~dequate in this area.
I am in receipt of the decision of the Zoning Hoard
of Appeals dated 3u]y ]4, 1988 qrantinq the
quested variance and ti~{~refore ask th;it yr~ur Board
take the necessary nction on this aDp]Jcat ion at
the earliest possible opportunity.
If '/gu have.any questions, or if additional infor-
mation Js required, please contact my {,trice.
truly ¥otlrs,
Garret A. Strano,
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
T£LEPHONE
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
September 19, 1988
Garrett Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE:
Proposed site plan for
Sterling Idea Ventures
N/S CR 48; 419.83' E/O
Railroad (Young's) Ave.
SCTM #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The Planning Board reviewed the revised site plan dated
August 12, 1988 and requests the following changes:
Because parking is based on office use (1 space for
every 150 square feet of office area), the word
"retail" should be deleted from the plan.
'The lighting could be reduced to fewer and lower
lantern type.lights. It was also noted that the east
driveway scales at 17' not the 20 feet shown. Further
the location of the dumpster is~ot shown.
Upon receipt of these revisions, the Planning Board will
forward these plans to the Building Department for certification.
Very. truly yours,
BENNETT · ORLOWSKI , JR.
CHAIRMAN
jt
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD. p O. BOX
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
:Ir. Bennett Orlow~ki, '-'t,airm",h
Southold ]'own ~l~anin~ 3oaLod
~,la i n Roud.
Southold, New York 11971
Re: SC'J'H #1000-55-2-18. I
Dear ,'Ir. Orlowski alld .Ic. mi-,e~rs of tho
i am in receipt of your letLer el Ju~t'.mI'cr
" [ - 19th and have
closed six (6) revised copi~, ,,f. th~ site ~)lan and would lik~
both of,. lc( and/of ret;, i [ u ;~ . YOU h,lve req~l,e:~ted -
delete the word .ut.7~i fro~, the -.Pg]lc.~ti,m, sil}cc it is
"r~ ]" that wc
your opinion that tile Far~.ino i:] ~' '' '-&'-~'"lll~&cc for office
use. The l)arkinq' rc',lui~'~d ;or rot3[1 :]~c i~ i,asc(I orl
-ql),gco per ]00 sq. I't. (.,t- Zj](,:; ffc,l.. 'i']l~ ~ictudl :;ales arc, a
of the entire buildi,lq (exctu::ive of toilet room~;, nervice
areas, and access ~t,]ir3 Lo thc ha:~c, meat) ia 'a,J93 ;;q. ft.,
as showll on revi:icd ~:itc plain. 'l'~.2rcl'~;~,;, thc 29 3paces
provided will adequut: ~, ;crvi,.e either retail o? office use.
I aave cnclof:o<] [)h~tl~cuDic~; ,)I .
~ ,u:.,. tit~mtc :xccrior lighting
fixture of the ~YDc ',,ou Jc"~utgL{:{t, with ~, qot3t{Un
site plan that thc:no l'ixturu$; !<' m,mnLcd ~,t 12' ~n lieu of
15' . ilcwcver, tho IItm;nll{;f Of i'ixturo~: must [.2r.1,]il1 tho SaCIO ill
order t() provide ,]dertuaL,~ il
Bennett Or ] ow.~k i,
Septemba~ 27, 1986
t;ith renpect to ti~e ,!Jscrepanc% of the scal,:d dimension of
17' vs. the noted dimension of 20', construction will follow
thc notcd dimension.~ ~.ilc,,.~n on the drawin¢.
The ]oc&tion of the dum!)nter is now del)ictod ¢,n the d~0wing,
behind the building, ;,cces:%[~,le fFo~ thu s.3Fvice drivew~]¥.
I trust this ~ - ~- '
Ve r'¥' tEu ]'!
(~\.,/b [;~%rl'utL .\ . l;trsng, il.,%
l:nc. -
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
$outhold, New York I 1971
TELEPHONE
(516) 76.5-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
October 7, 1988
Gar~ett Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE:
Proposed retail office
structure for Sterling
Idea Ventures
SCTM #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The
dated as
comments.
Planning Board reviewed the recently received maps
amended September 27, 1988 and had the following
As per the discrepancy of the scaled dimension of 17'
verses the noted dimension of 20', the Planning Board would like
to see a chain of diminsions is both directions shown on the map
for this area.
The Board also requests that a floor plan be submitted for
the record.
Ver.~ ~u-ly yours,
.... .
; ;~ ~ ~-~-',~'.I"..; .J /- ,,'/
/ ~ '..,.. , .~¢~'.~ (i .'" ~-.'-~ .~" ' ~"
B~NE~ ORLOWSKI ,JR. '~'
CHAI~
jt
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAiN ROAD, p. O. BOX 14h~
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
I',qar t!r. O~]c)~l:j and ,4'?nh~r~; of th~ :'o,~rd-
Town HaH, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) ';65-1938
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr. Strang:
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
December
RE:
20, 1988
Sterling Idea Ventures
Retail/Office Complex
SCTM #1000-55-2-18.1
The Planning Board has reviewed your letter of October 25,
1988. It repeats its October 7th request for a drawn floor plan,
to scale, to accompany the site plan.
Upon receipt of six copies of same, the Board will proceed
with this application.
~ Verw-t-~uly yours,
BE~E~ ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAI~
VS/jt
§ 100-125 SOUTHOLD CODE § 100-130
(3) The zone district classification of such property.
(4) A detailed statement of the relief sought by the
petitioner.
(5) The provisions of the zoning law applicable to the
relle~ sought by the petitioner.
(6) A statement that within five (5) days such petition
will be filed in the Southold Town Clerk's office. Main
Road, Southold, New York, and may then be
examined during regular office hours.
(7) A statament that a public hearing with respect to such
petition must be held by the Board of Appeals of the
Town of Southeld before the relief sought can he
granted; that the person to whom the notice is ad-
dressed, or his representative, has the right to appear
and he heard at such hearing; and that a notice of such
hearing w/ii he published in the official town
newspaper not less than five (5) days prior to such
public hearing.
B. In lieu of complying with the provisions of this section,
written verified waivers of notice executed by the persons
entitled to receive such notice may he filed with the Town
Clerk at the time of filing the petition.
C. Failure to comply with the provisions of this section shall
not affect the validity of any action taken by the Board of
Appeals.
ARTICLE XIII
Site Plan Approval
§ I00-130. General requirement.
In ail cases where this chapter requ/res approval of site
development plans by the Plannin~ ,~ard, no buCding permit
shall be i~sued by the Building Inspector except upon authoriza.
t/on of and in conformity with the plans approved by the Planning
Board.
§ 101)-131 ZONING § 100-132
§ 100-131. Objectives.
In considering and acting upon site development plans, the
Planning- Board shall take into consideration the public health, safety
and welfare, the comfort and convenience of the public in general and
the residents of the immediate neighborhood in particular, and may
prescribe appropriate conditions and safegnards as may be required
in order that the result of its action may, to the maximum extent
possible, further the expressed intent of this chapter and the
accomplishment of the following objectives in particular:
A. Traffic access. AIl proposed traffic aecessways are adequate
but not excessive in number; adequate in width, grade.
alignment and visibility: not located too near street comers or
other places of public assembly; and other similar safety
considerations.
B. Circulation and parking. Adequate off-street parking and
loading' spaces are provided to prevent the parking' in public
streets of vehicles of any persons connected with or visiting the
use, and that the interior circulation system is adequate to
provide safe accessibility to all required off-street parking lots.
C. Landscaping and screening. All playground, parking and
service areas are reasonably screened at all seasons of the year
from the view of adjacent residential lots and streets, and that
the general landscaping of the site is in character with that
generally prevailing' in the neighborhood. Existing trees over
eight (8) inches in diameter measured three (3) feet above the
base of the trunk shall be retained to the maximum extent
possible.
D. Architectural features. The architectural features of proposed
buildings and signs are in character with that generally
prevailing in the neighborhood. [Added 5-31-88 by LL. No.
16-1988]
§- 100-132. Effect of approva~l.
A. No building permit shall be issued for any structure covered
by this Article Until ah approved site development plan or
§ 100-133
SOUTHOLD CODE
§ 100-134
modification in design or operation would be necessary for
conformance. A copy of the report of such consultant shall
be furnished to the Planning Board, Building Inspector
and applicant.
Amendments to a site development plan shall be acted
upon in the same manner as the approval of the original
plan.
The Planning Board may require that site plan approval be
periodically reviewed.
§ 100-134. Site development plan elements.
'The applicant shall cause a site development, map to be
prepared by a civil engineer, a surveyor, land planner, architect or
other competent person. Site development plan elements shaft
include those listed below which are appropriate to the proposed
development or use as indicated by the Planning Board in the
presubmission conference:
A. Legal data.
(1) Lot, block and section number, if any, of the property,
taken from the latest tax records.
(2) Name and address of the owner of record.
(3) Name and address of the person, firm or organization
preparing the map.
(4) Date, North point and written and graphic scale.
(5) Sufficient description or information to precisely
define the boundaries of the proper~y. All distances
shall be in feet and tenths of a foot. Ail angles shall be
given to the nearest, ten (10) seconds or closer. The-'
error of closure shall not exceed one (1) in ten
thousand (10,000).
(6)' The locations, names and ~xisting widths of adjacent
streets and curhiines.
(7) The location and owners of all adjoining lands, as
shown on the latest tax records.
10060
§ 100.134
SOUTHOLD CODE
§ 100-136
(3) The location, direction, power and time of use of any
proposed outdoor lighting or public address systems.
(4) The location of and plans for any outdoor signs.
(5) The location and arrangement of proposed means of
access and egress, including sidewalks, driveways or
other paved areas; profiles indicating grading and
cross sections showing width of roadway, location and
width of sidewalks and location and size of water- and
sewer lines.
(6) Any proposed grading, screening and other land.
scaping, including types and locations of proposed
street trees.
(7) The location of all proposed waterlines, valves and
hydrants and of all sewer lines or alternate means of
water supply and sewage disposal and treatment.
(8) An outline of any proposed deed restrictions or
covenants.
19) Any contemplated public improvements on or ad-
joining the property.
(I0) If the site development plan indicates oniy a first
stage, a supplementary plan shall indicate ultimata
development.
E. Any other information deemed by the Planning Board
necessary to determine conformity of the site plan with the
intent and regulations of this chapter.
§ 100-135. Fees. [Amended 11-15-83 by L.L. No. 13-1983; 1-8-85
by L.L. No. 1-1985]
Ail applications to the Planning Board for approval of site devel-
opment plans shall be accompanied by a fee of one hundred dollars
($100.).
§ 100-136. Cluster developmeut. [Added 5-29-73; ameuded 2-1-83
by L.L. No. 2-1983]
The Planning Board may, in the exercise of its discretion,
require cluster developments for one-faraily dwellings in an A
10062 z- ~a- ss
Lan scape area {percen(age) 35 25 35 25 20 .15 2S
ZONING
Light General LIabt General
25 2~ See Ar~. See Artt- 8e~ Arfl. flee Arti-
cle VI cie VI~ cie VIII cie IX
8-25.83
STATIC. OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF ss.:
I, the undersigned, an attorney admitted to practice in the courts of New York State,
3 [] c*n*~tio, certify that the within
~ eV^.om~v has been compared by me with the original and found to be a true and complete copy.
~[~] ^.or.,v', state that I am
the attorney(s) of record for
in the within action; I have read the foregoing
and know the contents thereof; the same is
true to my own knowledge, except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as
to those matters I believe it to be true. The reason this verification is made by me and not by
The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows:
I affirm that the foregoing statements are true, under the penalties of perjury.
Dated:
STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF
I, ~B.-.-"~
being sworn, say: I am a. ~ o1~ b'~l.:[.r~ Tal~a ~Ze. nblre8/
,.d~v~o.a, in the within action; I have read the foregoing POFc5.~:..~.co. ~ l:)o,l:].,a.~ono.~ l.~...o~jlt /
and know the contents thereof; the same is true to my own knowledge, except as to
¢o,0or,to the matters therein stated to be alleged on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe it to be true.
Verificationthe of
a corporation and a party in the within action; I have read the foregoing
and know the contents thereof; and the same is true to my own knowledge,
except as to the matters therein stated to be alleged upon information and belief, and as to those matters I believe
it to be true. This verification is made by me because the above party is a corporation and I am an officer thereof.
The grounds of my belief as to all matters not stated upon my own knowledge are as follows:
E"IC~ ~OJ~,THA. BRESSLER
Public. State of New
Sworn to before me on .z~pr..Ll 21,
STATE OF NEW YORK, COUNTY OF
I,
of age and reside at
On 19
No. 52-4622371
Qualified in Suffolk County ~/
Commission Expires May 31, 19 -//-
being sworn, say: ! am not a party to thc action, am over 18 years
I served the within
by depositing a true copy thereof in a post-paid wrapper, in an official depository under the exclusive care and
custody of the U.S. Postal Service within New York State, addressed to each of the following persons at the last
known address set forth after each name:
by delivering a true copy thereof personally to each person named below at the address indicated. I knew each
person served to be the person mentioned and described in said papers as aparty therein:
Sworn to before me on
19
~;i~:-P[ease take notice that th~ within is a (certified)
lrue copy of a
duty entered in the office of the clerk of the within
named court on 19
?~'CKHAM, WICKHAM & BRE$SLER, P.C.
f tt~sfor Office and Post Office Address
[0
Attorney(s) for
Index No. 89-7714 Year 1929
~JP-P~-~ CCURT OF '~:q STATE OF
In the ~atter o.f the A.r{~licatic. n of
ST~RL~;G ~
Petitiener,
Sir>Please take notice that an order
.}f which the within is a true copy will be presented
for settlement to the Hon.
'meOhe judges of the within
on
at M.
Dated,
Yours, etc.,
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLER, P.C.
named Court, at
19
%homey(s) for
WICKHAM, WICKHAM R, BRESSLER. P.C.
Attorneys for ~et~%i(~l~r
Office and Post Office Address, Telephone
MAIN ROAD. P.O. BOX 1424
To
Attorney(s) for
Service of a copy of the within
Dated,
is hereby admitted.
Attorney(s) for
. Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 22, 1989
Garrett Strang
P.O. Box 1412
$outhold, NY 11971
RE: Proposed site plan for
Sterling Idea Ventures
SCTM 91000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The Planning Board was required to review all pending site
plans under the new zoning code which was adopted on February 1,
1989.
The above-referenced plan must be revised to bring it into
compliance.
1. Sign information including size and location must be
provided pursuant to Section 100-101C (2) and (3).
2. The bulk schedule requirement for the General Business
Zone~.requires that 35% of the site be landscaped.
a. Section 100-212. B, requires a 25' deep
landscaping strip starting at the front property line
and a 5' landscaping strip across the front of the
building.
3. Parking must be shown as per the new code; indicate on
floor plan how interior space is to be used.
Upon receipt of revised site plans the Planning Board w~ll
proceed with your application.
VS/jt
~ truly you~s~
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. ...'
CHAIRMAN
GARRETT A. STRAN(3
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD, P. O, BOX 1412
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971
Fo~ruarv 6~ ]98!)
qr. ?e~:nett Oylowski, Chairman
SolHth~2d, ~[3W York ]1972
PLANNIN6 BO.ARD
with Feoard to the above referenced matter, It is my un-
¢]uNstand~nq thc 3card wi]] ~eview the .harking ~equire-
mentc for this ano]ication.
Pxs dJscuE:s~d, the present parkJno FequiremenE, under the
recent]y i~dorlte{] ma~ter elan and zoning code amendments,
nan4ate~ one nnrkinq spncc for each 200 r~q. ft. of oros~;
h:nilding are~. %cco~<]inqlv, this april ication wcd]<] ro-
ounce ~ tota] <>~ 22 ~plceg ~o acconmodate the d,22,{ sq.
ft. hn]lding anco. Y<'u wJ]] note, 29 spaces hev~ ~)~c ~
ncovide4 as show~ on the Site Plan.
In liqht nf the above, I respectfully request that th{}
lk>drd .//a ] ve the prevJou~ request
o!~n. In addition, t acknow]edqe the ;cards commenl::
c]uctiop I~ ~:N~ num~ er of p}rkinq '~paces to ho provided.
[F thc roqui~er] Darkir? is reduced to 22 space~, c not
r~aJn of 1,~00 es. ~t. <)f londscaned area v/i ] ] he had.
~o ti~].:; -~nnlJcatJon can
TF ,/ou ha,/,, 0ny questions,
qarrett ~ n(7, R.;\
· .q t r ~ .
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765~1938
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr. Strang:
PLANN~G BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
December 20, 1988
RE:
Sterling Idea Ventures
Retail/Office Complex
SCTM ~1000-55-2-18.1
The Planning Board has reviewed your letter of October 25,
1988. It repeats its October 7th request for a drawn floor plan,
to scale, to accompany the site plan.
Upon receipt of six copies of same, the Board will proceed
with this application.
Very,~e~uly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI,JR.
CHAIRMAN
VS/jt
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
OCT 7. 6 1988
SOUI'HOLD TOWN
PLANNING BOARD
MAIN ROAD, P 0 BOX 1412
$OUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971
October 25, 1988
~lr. }]ennett Orlowski, Chairman
i'own of Southold, Planning Board
~lain F, oad
Southold, New York 11971
R(;: SCTH #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Nr. Orlowski and Hembers of the Board:
Ir] response to your letter of October 7, 1988 I am en-
cl¢)sing herewith six (6) copies of the site plan revised
to show the chain of dimensions ]n both the north/south
and east/west directions.
Uith regard to your request for a floor plan, there has
been no final floor plan developed since there have been
no prospective tenants at this time. For the record,
the building is envisioned to be divided into fifteen
(15') foot wide bays, with a toilet, basement stair, and
c]oset area located at the north end of each bay.
%t the time application is made for building permit, we
will be more than happy to provide m copy of the draw-
in{Is to your Board for your records.
I trust you will act expeditiously in granting fiqalrap-
proval in the above matter.
If you have any questions, nlease call.
Very truly yours,
GAS/B Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
October 7, 1988
Garrett Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Proposed retail office-
structure for Sterling
Idea Ventures
SCTM 91000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The Planning Board reviewed the recently received maps
dated as amended September 27, 1988 and had the following
comments.
As per the discrepancy of the scaled dimension of 17'
verses the noted dimension of 20', the Planning Board would like
to see a chain of diminsions is both directions shown on the map
for this area.
The Board also requests that a floor plan be submitted for
the record.
ly yours,
CHAIRMAN
jt
(3ARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAiN ROAD, P. O. BOX 1412
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK H971
September 27, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, ~ew York 11971
Re: SC'I'M #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear flr. Orlowski and ;1embers of the Board:
I am in receipt or your letter of September 19th and have en-
closed six (6) revised copies of the site plan and would like
to respond to both issues referred to as fol].ows:
From the onset, this project has been cossidered suitable for
both office and/or retail use. You have requested that we
delete the word "retail" from the application, sinne it is
your opinion that the parking is only adequate for office
use. The parking required fop retail use is based on one
space per 100 sq. ft. of sales area. The actual sales area
of the entire building (exclusive of toilet rooms, service
areas, and access stairs to the basement) is 2,893 sq. ft.,
~s shown on revised site plan. Therefore, the 29 spaces
provided will adequately service either retail or office use.
I i~ave enclosed photocopies of a substitute exterior lighting
fixture of the type you requested, with a notation on the
site plan that these fixtures be mounted at 12' in lieu of
15' However, the number of fixtures must remain the same Jn
order to provide adequate illumination.
~!r. Bennett Or]ows~ki,
Page 'FWO
September 27, 1988
Chairman
N/th respect to the discrepancy of the scaled dimension of
17' vs. the noted dimension of 20', construction will follow
thc Doted dimensions shown on the drawing.
The location of the dumpster is now depicted on the drawing,
behind the building, accessible from the service driveway.
I trust this answers any of your questions.
(R S / b
[:nc.
Very yours, ~
~~i. S t~--~---r<a n-~-, }i .,\.
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 965-1938
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
September 19, 1988
Garrett Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE:
Proposed site plan for
Sterling Idea Ventures
N/S CR 48; 419.83' E/O
Railroad (Young's) Ave.
SCTM %1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
The Planning Board reviewed the revised site plan dated
August 12, 1988 and requests the following changes:
1. Because parking is based on office use (1 space for
every 150 square feet of office area), the word
"retail" should be deleted from the plan.
The lighting could be reduced to fewer and lower
lantern type lights. It was also noted that the east
driveway scales at 17' not the 20 feet shown. Further
the location of the dumpster is not shown.
Upon receipt of these revisions, the Planning Board will
forward these plans to the Building Department for certification.
jt
GARRETT A. STRANG
aRCHITECT
MAiN ROAD, P. O. BOX 141Z
SOUTROLD, NEW YORK 11971
August 10, 1988
Hr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures,
North Road, Southold
Dear Hr. Orlowski and Hembers of the Board:.
Enclosed are six (6) copies of a finalized site
plan for the above referenced project. In addition
I have included a photocopy of the exterior light-
lng fixtures proposed to be used.
I would like to call your attention to the fact
that drainage calculations were based on two inch
(2") rainfall containment, given the nature of the
project. As pointed out in recent applications I
have pending before your board, I believe a 2" de-
sign criteria is more than adequate in this area.
I am in receipt of the decision of the Zoning Board
of Appeals dated July 14, 1988 granting the re-
quested variance and therefore ask that your Board
take the necessary action o~1 this application at
the earliest possible opportunity.
If you have any questions, or if additional infor-
mation is required, please contact my office.
Very truly yours,
GAS/B
Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
GAIRRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD, P. O, BOX 14la
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK ll971
August 10, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
~4ain Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application Of Sterling Idea Ventures,
North Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:.
Enclosed are six (6) copies of a finalized site
plan for the above referenced project. In addition
I have included a photocopy of the exterior light-
ing fixtures proposed to be used.
I would like to call your attention to the fact
that drainage calculations were based on two inch
(2") rainfall containment, given the nature of the
project. As pointed out in recent applications I
have pending before your board, I believe a 2" de-
sign criteria is more than adequate in this area.
I am in receipt of the decision of the Zoning Board
of Appeals dated July 14, 1988 granting the re-
quested variance and therefore ask that your Board
take the necessary action on this application at
the earliest possible opportunity.
If you have any questions, or if additional infor-
mation is required, please contact my office.
Very truly yours,
GAS/B Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
Southold Town Board of A Is
ppea
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H, SAWICKI
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Upon Application of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71,
Bulk Schedule, for approval of insufficient rearyard setback from
the northerly property line for proposed principal building, at
premises known as 46025 C.R. 48, Southold, NY; County Tax Map
Parcel No. 1000-55-2-18.1. B-1 General Business Zone District.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 14, 1988, in the
Matter of the Application of STERLING IDEA VENTURES under Appl.
No. 3749; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded;
WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony
and documentation submitted concerning this application;
WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are
familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and
the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact:
1. This is an Application for a Variance from the
Provisions of Article VII, Section 100-71 for permission to
locate new principal building with a rearyard setback at 25 feet
as recommended by the Southold Town Planning Board under its
pending site-plan review.
2. The premises is referred to as 46025 C.R. 48, located in
the Hamlet of Southold, Town of Southold, and is identified on
the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 55, Block
2, Lot 18.1.
3. The subject premises contains a total area of 27,305 sq.
ft. with 185.61 ft. frontage along the County Road, is located in
the "B-i" General Business Zone District, and is presently vacant
land.
4. The principal building is proposed as shown on the
May 28, 1987 Site Plan Map, prepared by Garrett A. Strang, R.A.,
Page 2 Appl. No. 3749
Matter of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES
Decision Rendered July 14, 1988
with the following setbacks: (a) closest setback from the
westerly property line at 26 feet; (b) closest setback from the
easterly property line at 26 feet; (c) closest setback from the
front property line at 77 feet; (d) closest rearyard setback at
25 feet, under consideration herein.
5. Article VII,
Zoning Code requires
The amount of relief
Section 100-71, Bulk Schedule, of the
a minimum rearyard setback at 35 feet.
requested is 10 feet.
6. In viewing the area, the following information is noted
for the record:
(a) the existing principal building immediately
adjoining this parcel on the west side has a setback of approxi-
mately 42 feet from the front property line;
(b) the existing principal building nearest thisparcel
on the east side has a setback of approximately 75 feet from the
front property line;
(c) the premises adjoining this parcel to the north
which would be the parcel most likely to be affected by this
variance is a drainage sump maintained by the County of Suffolk.
6. It is also the understanding of this Board that
expansion of the County Road (extending from Horton's Lane in
Southold to Main Street in Greenport) to a uniform pavement width
of 46 feet is proposed under Project No. 5145, and the best
interests of the traveling public would be served by the grant of
a reduction in the rearyard in order to provide additional open
frontyard areas.
7. In considering this appeal, the Board also finds and
determines:
(a) the relief requested is the minimal necessary;
(b) there is no other method feasible for appellant to
pursue;
(c) the project will not be adverse to the character of the
neighborhood;
(d) the difficulties claimed are unique to the property and
are not personal in nature;
(e) the project is within the spirit and intent of zoning;
(f) the practical difficulties are sufficient;
(g) in view of the manner in which the difficulties arose
and in considering the above factors, the interests of justice
will be served by granting the application as applied.
!
Page 3- Appl. No. 3749 ~
Matter of STERLING IDEAS V~ES
Decision Rendered July 14, 1988
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by
Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance under Appeal No. 3749 as
applied in the Matter of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES for a reduc-
tion in the rearyard to a minimum of 25 feet for the newly
proposed principal building.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent.) This
resolution was duly adopted.
lk
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD, p, O. BOX 1412
SOUTHOLO, NEW YORK 11971
516-765-5455
May 11, 1988
~r. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Department
Main Road
$outhold, New York 1197]
Re: Sterlin~ Idea Ventures, North Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
Enclosed are six (6) copies of a revised site plan for
the above, as per the most recent information and marked
up print received from your office.
I respectfully request that this be reviewed and ac-
cepted, at your earliest convenience, so that I can make
application for the necessary variance. Due to the na-
ture of this application, a final site plan inclusive of
drainage calculations, will be submitted after a vari-
ance is granted.
Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation.
GASh
Encs.
Very truly yours,
Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
cc: Sterling Idea Ventures
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
June 6, 2988
Garrett A. Strang
Main Road
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr. Strang;
RE: Sterling Idea Ventures
SCTM# 1000-55-2-1
As stated in your conversation with Melissa Spiro on
June 6, 1988, the status of the above mentioned site plan is as
follows.
Elevations and a drainage plan will be submitted to the
Planning Board after the Board of Appeals has made a
determination on the application before them.
The height of the poles for the lights will be a maximum of
18 feet. The type of light to be used will be decided after
the ZBA has made a determination on the application before
them.
If there are any problems or questions concerning this,
please do not hesitate to call this office.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. // ~ff
CHAIRMAN
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
RECEIVED B~'
- --
Hay 23, 1988
MAIN ROAD, P. O. BOX 141~
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORk 11971
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Department
Hain Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Sterling Idea Ventures, North Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
Enclosed are six (6) copies of a revised site plan for
the above, as per the most recent information and marked
up print received from your office and dated Hay
18,1988.
Again I respectfully request that this be reviewed and
accepted, at your earliest convenience, so that I can
make application for the necessary variance. As previ-
ously noted in my letter of May llth, a final site plan
inclusive of drainage calculations, will be submitted
after a variance is granted.
Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation.
Very truly yours,
GASb Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
Encs.
cc: Sterling Idea Ventures
TO ~' D
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(616) 765-1938
May 18, 1988
Garrett A. Strang
Main Road
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, N.Y. 11971
RE: Sterling Idea Ventures
1000-55-2-1
Dear Mr. Strang:
Enclosed please find a copy of the above mentioned site plan
with revisions.
Please contact our office if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.
CHAIRMAN
8outhold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
April 4, 1988
Garrett A. Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE:
Proposed Site Plan
Application for Sterling
Idea Ventures
SCTM # 1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
At its last work session, the Planning Board agreed to
accept a site plan application for the above named site without
requiring the withdrawal of the existing site plan.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. ~S
CHAIRMAN
jt
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD. P. O. BOX 1412
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971
March 14, 1988
Mr. BEnnett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
Dear Mr. Orlowski:
At the conclusion of the Planning Board meeting of March
7th, you indicated that your office would contact the
Town Attorney for his input with regard to proceeding on
the above appication, without the need to withdraw the
existing approval.
I would like to take this time to remind you that the
changes your Board requested to the site plan, will ne-
cessitate a variance and that if existing approvals are
withdrawn and the variance not granted, my client will
be left with nothing.
As per the outcome of a telephone conversation with your
office earlier today, I was advised that Ms. Scopaz has
not addressed this issue with the Town Attorney.
I would appreciate your help in expediting this matter.
Thank you for your courtesy and cooperation.
Very truly yours/
GAS/B ~Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
MEMORANDUM
To:
Bennett Orlowski,Jr. Chairman
Members of the Planning Board
From: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
RE:
Sterling Idea site plan
w/s of C.R. 48;E/o Shoreline Auto Body
and Youngs Avenue, Southold
SCTM # 1000-55-2-18.1
The attached memorandum from the Assistant ~Town Attorney includes a
recommendation that the Planning Board set up a meeting with the applicant's
representative, Garrett Strang. I .suggest that this meeting be held at a
regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Board.
In order to be consistent, the Planning Board may wish to adopt a
resolution stating that NEW site plan applications will not be accepted until
the existing site plan is withdrawn.
JAMES A. SCHONDEBARE
ROBERT H. BERNTSSON
A$SISTANT TOWN ATYORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Valerie Scopaz, Southold Town Planning Board
Robert H. Berntsson, Assistant Town Attorney
February 29, 1988
APPLICATION OF ROBERT CELIC
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1939
A question was raised as to whether the Planning Board could
require an applicant for site plan approval to withdraw a
previously approved site plan before considering a new site plan
for the same parcel.
Section 274-a of the Town Law allows a town board by local
law to authorize the planning board to review and ~prove,
approve with modifications or disapprove site plans. That
section continues that after such authorization a planning board
may adopt such rules and regulations as it deems necessary tO'
exercise the powers so granted. The Southold Town Board gave
this authorization to the Planning Board under the Zoning
Ordinance, Article XIII.
The Planning Board may adopt such rules and regulations it
deems -necessary to exercise its powers. The Planning Board
should adopt such rules and regulations it deems necessary with
regard to previously approved site plans and the consideration of
proposed site plans for the same parcel. Once such rules or
regulations are adopted they can be uniformly carried ou~. ''
I spoke with Garrett Strang today (2/26/88) and advised him
that the Board had taken the position it will not review a site
plan on a parcel with an existing approved site plan. He has
requested a meeting with the Planning Department. to discuss where
to go at this point.· Please con~act him ~o set up a meeting.
RHB:cms
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
February 4, 1988
ROAD. P. O. BOX 1412
$OUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971
516 -765-5455
Jay Schondebare, Esq.
Town of Southold
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re:
Application of Robert Celic,
SCTM ~1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Jay:
On June 26, 1987 an application was made to the. Planning
Board to amend a site plan for the above referenced
property. On August. 7th, I was directed by the Town
Planner to make certain changes tc the applica.tion,
which I assumed were at the direction of the Board.
These changes woul~ also require my client to file for a
variance.
On August 26th, a revised site plan was submitted with
the requested changes. It was not until October 13th
that I received a letter from Hr. Orlowski, suggesting
further modifications to the site plan and requesting
that the existing site plan approval be withdrawn, prior
to the B6ard's acceptance of the new site plan applica-
tion.
I responded on October 15th, addressing some of t~e ad-
ditional modifications and clarifying to the Board that
our intention was,only to amend the existinc site plan.
Obviously, an amendment would supersede the previous
plan, upon which the approval exists.
On ~ovember 25t~, I received a letter from Plannin~ in-
dicating that they would proceed on the "Sketch Plan"
upon receio~ of the application fee and a formal letter
requesting withdrawal o'~ the existing, approved site
plan.
On DecemDo~ 2nd., I forwarded the fee and indicated that
m'? client wou~d w~thdraw the curren.5 site ol~n, in con-
junction'w~th approval.of peQding a~p~icatioh.
Jay Schondebare, Esq.
Page Two
February 4, 1988
Approximately one week ago, I called to make an appoint-
ment with Ms. Scopaz to review the status approval pro-
cess and was informed that the Board now refuses to re-
view the site plan further until such time as the
existing approval is withdrawn.
It makes no sense for my client to withdraw-an existing
site plan approval, without writtgn approval of the
pending application, as there is no assurance that the
Board will approve the D.ending site plan.
I respectfully request that the Board be directed to
proceed with the review of the site plan, since their
imposed modifications will necessitate our making appli-
cation for a variance, which will take more time.
Thank you for your courtesy~ and cooperation.
Very truly yours,
. b/
cc: R. Celic
Garrett A. Stran¢3, R.A.
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARC;HIT[CT
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971
February 4, 1988
Hr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman' -
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SCTM ~1000-55-2-18.1
Dear '-Ir. Orlowski and ~".Iembers of the Board:
I am herewith requesting an appointment to meet %{ith
discuss the above Pending site plan on February 8th.
Please call my office to confirm same.
Very truly yours,
Thank you.
to
b/
CC:
Garrett A. S.t~anq,
J. $chondebare
Sterlinc Idea Vent0res
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD, P, 0 E~OX ~412
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK H971
516-7~5-5455
February 29, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, [~ew York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
s ...... 1,ooo- _1
North Road, Southold, mmv,
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Membero of the Board:
On February 4th, I requested a conference with the Board
in connection with the above application, and as of this
date, have not heard from you.
I herewith respectfully request same at the earliest
date. I look forward to hearinq from you.
Very truly yours,
Eno.
CC:
J. [;chondebare
Ster]in~ Idea
-Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
Ventures
(3ARRETT A. STRAN(3
ARCHITECT
MAiN ROAD, P, O. BOX 1412
SOUTHOLD. NEW YORK 1197l
February 4, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planninq Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 1197]
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SCTM ~1000-55-2-]8.1
Dear -lt. Orlowski and '!embers of the Board:
I am herewith requestin~ an appointment to meet w~th
discuss the above pending site plan on February Oth.
P]ease call
Thank you.
fay office to confirm same.
Very trulv yours,
to
b/ Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
cc: J. Schondebare
Sterlinc Idea Ventures
JAMES A. SCHONDEBARE
ROBERT H. BERNTSSON
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Valerie Scopaz, Southold Town Planning Board
Robert H. Berntsson, Assistant Town Attorney
February 29, 1988
APPLICATION OF ROBERT CELIC
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1939
A question was raised as to whether the Planning Board could
require an applicant for site plan approval to withdraw a
previously approved site plan before considering a new site plan
for the same parcel.
Section 274-a of the Town Law allows a town board by local
law to authorize the planning board to review and ~prove,
approve with modifications or disapprove site plans. That
section continues that after such authorization a planning board
may adopt such rules and regulations as it deems necessary to'
exercise the powers so granted. The Southold Town Board gave
this authorization to the Planning Board under the Zoning
Ordinance, Article XIII.
The Planning Board may adopt such rules and regulations it
deems -necessary to exercise its powers. The Planning Board
should adopt such rules and regulations it deems necessary with
regard to previously approved site plans and the consideration of
proposed site plans for the same parcel. Once such rules or
regulations are adopted they can be uniformly carried ouE.
I spoke with Garrett Strang today (2/26/88) and advised him
that the Board had taken the position it will not review a site
plan on a parcel with an existing approved site plan. He has
requested a meeting with the .Planning Department. to discuss where
to go at this point. Please contact him to set up a meeting.
RHB:cms
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
February 4,
1988
MAIN ROAD. P. O. BOX 141E
EOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971
Jay Schondebare, Esq.
Town of Southold
Maim Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Robert Celic,
SCTH #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Jay:
On June 26, 1987 an application was made to the~ Planning
Board to amend a site plan for the above referenced
property. On August 7th, I was directed by the Town
Planner to make certain changes to the applica-Lion,
which I assumed were at t~e direction of the Board.
These changes would also require my client to file for a
variance.
On August 26th, a revised site plan was submitted with
the requested changes. It was not until October 13th
that I received a letter from Mr. Orlowski, suggesting
further modifications to the site plan and requesting
that the existing site plan approval be withdrawn, prior
to thc B6ard's acceptance of the new site plan applica-
tion.
I responded om October 15th, addressing some of t~e ad-
ditional modifications and clarifying to the Board that
our intention was:only to amend the existinc site plan.
Obviously, an amendment would supersede the previous
plan, upon which the approval exists.
On ~:ovember 25t~, I received a letter from Planninq in-
dicating that they would D~oceed on t~e "Sketch Plan"
upon recciDt of the application fee and a formal lettbr
requesting withdrawal o! the existing, approved site
plan.
On Decembor 2nd, I forwarded thc fee an~ indicated that
my clicnt wouid withdraw the current site plan, in con-
junction w}~h appr6val.of pending a~p~icatioh.
Jay Schondebare,
Page Two
February 4, 1988
Esq.
Approximately one week ago, I called to make an appoint-
ment with Ms. Scopaz to review the status approval pro-
cess and was informed that the Board now refuses to re-
view the site plan further until such time as the
existing approval is withdrawn.
It makes no sense for my client to withdraw-an existing
site plan approval, without writtpn approval of the
pendin~ application, as there is no assurance that the
Board will approve the ~ending site plan.
I respectfully request that the Board be directed to
proceed with the review of the site plan, since their
imposed modifications will necessitate our making appli-
cation for a variance, which will take more time.
Thank you for your courtesy, and cooperation.
Very truly yours,
. b/ Garrett A. Stranc3, R.A.
cc: R. Celic
GARRETT A. STRANG
&lAIN ROAD, P. O. BOX 141~
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11~71
February 4, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman- -
Southold PlanDing Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterlin{] Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SCTM #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear ~r. Orlowski and ~'.lembers of the Board:
I am herewith requestinQ an aDpointment to meet with
discuss the above pending site plan on February 8th.
· Please call my office to confirm same.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
to
b/ Garrett A.
cc: J- $chondebare
Sterlinc Idea Ventores
GARRETT A. STRAN(3
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD, P. O. BOX 1412
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 119TI
February 29, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
~ain Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SCTM #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
On February 4th, I requested a conference with the Board
in connection with the above application, and as of this
date, have not heard from you.
I herewith respectfully request same at the earliest
date. I look forward to hearing from you.
Very truly yours,
GASb f~arrett A. Strang, R.A.
Eric. //
cc:
J. Schondebare
Sterling
Idea Ventures
C~ARRETT A. STRANO
ARCHITECT
HAIN ROAD, P. O. BOX 141~
$OUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971
February 4, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SCTM ~1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Orlowski and ~embers of the Board:
I am herewith requesting an appointment to meet with
discuss the above pending site plan on February 8th.
Please call my office to confirm same.
Thank you.
Very truly yours,
to
b/ Garrett A.
cc: J. Schondebare
Sterling Idea Ventures
Strang,
R,ao
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD, P. O, BOX J412
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK ~1971
December 2, 1987
Ms. Valerie Scopaz, Planning Board
Town of Southold
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
SCTM ~1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Ms. Scopaz:
I am in receipt of your letter of November 25th in con-
nection with the above application.
My client will be happy to withdraw his current site
plan upon receipt of approval of the site plan, which is
pending before the Board, at the present time.
Best regards.
GASh
cc: Sterling
Very truly
trang,
Idea Ventures
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
November 25, 1987
Garret Strang
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr.-Strang:
Re:
Sketch plan for Sterling Idea Ventures
N/s County Rd. 48, 419.83' E/o
Railroad (Youngs) Avenue, Southold
SCTM# 1000-55-2-18.1
This office will proceed with the above-named sketch plan upon
receipt of an application fee and a letter requesting the withdrawal
of the currently approved site plan.
Sincerely, .
alerie Scopaz
Town Planner
cc: Planning Board
Robert Celic
OARRETT A. STRANd3
ARChiTECT
RECEIVED BY
SOUTJ-JJ]LO 'JO~J~ FL~i~i;iJ,'~G BgA,~[~
FEB - 5 1988
DAlE
MAiN ROAD, P. O. BOX 14i2
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK H971
February 4, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Hain Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold, SCTM #1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
I am herewith requesting an appointment to meet with
discuss the above pending site plan on February 8th.
my office to confirm same.
Please call
Thank you.
b/
CC:
J. Schondebare
Very truly yours,
~rang
Sterling Idea Ventures
, R.A.
to
GARRI=TT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
October 15, 1957
~CE[VED EY
OCT ! 1987
MAIN ROAD. P. O. BOX 1412
SOUTHOLD. NEW YORK 1 1971
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Sterling Idea Ventures
North Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
I am in receipt of your letter of October 13th, and wish
to reply as follows:
The siting of the building is a direct result of a meet-
ing with Ms. Scopaz, as outlined in my letter to you of
A~]gust 7th. The building has been shifted as far to the
north as practical, to allow for an 8' planting buffer
along the roadside property line, also requested by
Scopaz. This will necessitate a variance, which was
also called to your attention.
To provide a one-way loop around the rear of the build-
lng, as you now suggest, will have two r~mlflcatlons.
1. Reduction of the landscaped area to less than
25% or in the alternative, the relocation of the
building further to the south, would eliminate the
8' planting buffer, you originally requested;
2. Elimination of the four (4) parking stalls on
the north side of the property;
Inasmuch os the four parking stalls depicted on the
north side of the property are intended for use by ten-
ants and/or employees, (as opposed to customer parking),
for long term parking during business hours, I dc) not
see how this presents poor vehicular circulation.
The loading area (designated parking stall), was also
provided at the request of Ms. Scopaz. The location is
one which I feel will conflict the least with usual
traffic flow. Please bear in mind that the proposed com-
plex is small and would be used infrequently, as most
deliveries would be via small van-type vehicles.
Mr. Bennett Orlowski
Page Two
October 15, 1987
Furthermore, if you absolutely require a loading area
in the rear, it will necessitate the loss of parking;
and the need for the circulation loop, which will have
the problems previously mentioned.
The curb cut as shown (adjacent Van Duzer's) is more
compatible to the site for providing adequate parking,
given the trapezoidal configuration of the property. I
feel there will be little, if any, conflict with traffic
flow with Van Duzer's and the subject site, inasmuch as
the business uses differ.
I am well aware of the fact that an approved sitc plan
exists for this property. My intention is to make this
submission an amendment, rather than a new application,
since the proposed use is the same.
I respectfully request a prompt response to the above,
since the matter has been pending since June and my cli-
ent would like to proceed with his plans.
I would be happy to meet with the Board at any time to
review and answer any questions.
Very truly yours,
GAS/b
cc: Sterling Idea
~rett A. Strang, R.A.
ven'tures
Southold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1938
October 13, 1987
Garrett Strang
P.O. BOx 1412
Southold, NY 11971
Re:
Sketch Plan for Sterling
Idea Ventures
N/s County Rd. 48, 419.83'E/o
Young's or Railroad Ave., South
SCTM# 1000-55-2-18.1
Dear Mr. Strang:
With regard to the second revision of the above - named
sketch;it is suggested that when the site plan application is
made that the loading area be shown in the rear of the building.
Also, the curb should be moved to the westerly edge of the
property to avoid potential conflicts with C.F. Van Duzers two
curb cu~s immediately adjacent to ~he easterly property line.
Finally, the proposed siting of the building is not
conducive to good vehicular circulation on-site; particularly
with regard to the one lane ingress/egress to the parking
spaces to the rear of the building. A one-way loop around
the back of the building would be better.
Your client should be aware that there is an approved
site plan for this property. It must be withdrawn before we
can accept a new site plan application.
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. CHAIRMAN
SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
MAIN ROAD, P. O. BOX 1412
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK ll971
August 26, 1987
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Planning Board
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Proposed Retail Complex, North Road
Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
Enclosed are six (6) copies of revised Site Plan in con-
nection with the above referenced project.
Please note the following revisions:
1. Provision of one (1) off-street loading area;
2. Provision of eight foot (8') greenbelt between
southerly property line and parking area;
3. Provision of five foot (5') greenbelt along east
and west property lines, in lieu of three feet (3') pre-
viously provided;
4. Relocation of building further to the north, so as
to provide for additional landscaping on th~ south side
of the site.
I am of the understanding this plan will be reviewed at
your September 14th meeting, at which time I will be
present to answer any questions from the Board.
GAS/b
Encs.
Very truly~ %;ours,
~rrett A. Strang,
RECEIVED BY
SOUTHOLD IOWH PLAHHING BOARD
AUG 2? 1987
DATE
GARREtT A. STRANG
$OUTHOLD, NEW YORK 1 1971
August 7, 1987
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Department
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Sterling Idea Ventures, North Road, Southold
Dear Mr. Orlowski and Members of the Board:
As of the outcome of my meeting with Valerie Scopaz, of
your office, it is my understanding that the Board is
suggesting the following amendments to the above appli-
cation:
1. Provide an offstreet loading area;
2. Provide an eight foot (8') minimum greenbelt be-
tween the southerly property line and the southernmost
edge of the parking area;
3. Enlarge the east and west greenbelt between prop-
erty lines and driveways and area parking to a minimum
of six feet (6') in width;
4. Relocation of the building to within twenty feet
(20') of the rear property line.
I am sure that the Board is aware that this recommenda-
tion necessitates the need for a variance. It is also
my understanding that the Board will support this appli-
cation.
I anticipate that the Board will address this matter at
the first meeting to be scheduled after the meeting of
August 10th. For the record this application was made
on June 26th.
Very truly yours,
GAS/b
. .ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT - PART
· Garrett A. Strang ~ R.A.
~,.
Sterling Idea Ventures
C/O ~r. Rober~ Celic .
P.O.Box 786
(~.~.;
Southold, New York, 11971 .......... -~ .....
Ma~tituckr N.Y. 1195'2
_ 516-298-8000
: ... ~ ~.'.. . .. . · , . % · .;;...
~" A. S[TZ ~C~T:~'I '"~ ~"'~" "", ': ?'I ~ ...... ': ~ '
3. - ~mJK. ~a.O~c~ .... ~' · ....... .: . · ?..
~ ,Ve~dcw or ~rusfllan~ 0.6 3 a~-s ~Cr~s ' - ·
:4. 15 :r
~ac2r Sur~3ca
Unvt~cac~
·
7.
8.
g.
10.
11.
1Z.
13.
ee
Apl)roxi~ate percentage of proposed pro;Jec~ sice wt~ slopes: 0-10: _q 00 ,'.; 10-15: _
~S p~ect ~ ~uouS ~. or contain I butldtn~ or site 1~sted afl t~e National RegisCer of HIstoric
places~ Yes X ~ .
~ h~t~n~ Qr ffsh~ng op~K~l~tes presan~1~ ~t5t ~n the proJec~ area? , .~es ~ "~
~es p~jec~ s~tl cofl~l~ ~Y sp~ls Qf plan~ er animal life ~at ~s Identified u t~reqqened,
' ~eafleere~. - Yes ~ ,~, ic~tflg~ to - [dlflC~fY each Ipectes '- '
Are CSere iffy mlque or ~ugl land ~ on tho p~decC stta? (I.e. cliffs, dunes, o~er g~logtc~l
fo~Ctons- ,~es ~, ~. '(hscr~be
~es' ~he pres~t's~te offee or tnclu~ s~fltc v~s or v~s~s ~n ~ ~ i~fl:
Yes X,~ "' ' ' '
i. ~ of strm and Aa~ Of etver ~ ~htch It Is tr~but~ ~/~
1S. La~s, P~5, ~ecland a~as Ninth or ~n:~guouS ~ pro3ect a~a: .-~/A ........
a. H~ ,,.~'h. Size (In acres) ~
1~. ~at Is the ~atnant lan~ use ~d z~lng classtftcEt~on vlth~n a 1/4 mile radt~ of
single f~tly ~s4dentt~l, R-~) and ~e scale of developm~ (e.g. ~ storg). ~os~Ress ~ ~-~
O~e
I. Physic1 diceflS~ofls ud s~le of p~ect {fll~ lA dtr~nslons as app~pr~te) -.
To~l ~ttg~us ac~ag ~ed b~ pK~tct sponsor 0. lores. · .....
p~ect ac~age ~ r~ilA undevelop~ 0 ,.. ,' · .'
Length of p~Jec:, In mtle~:, (If app~p~taCe)
age ; ~velo~d at.age
fl~er of off-st~t parking spaces ex~sttng ~ ' '"'""
~xt~ vehtcu1~zr tr~ps generated per hour 30 .(upon c~plet~on of p~ect)
If ~stdent~&1: K~er an~ t~pe e~ housing
butldtng squar~
Xntt~al
UIti~te
Ca~..~rc~al
IAdusCrJal
Total height of,tallest prQposed st~Jcture -
Nefclh.~ornood<i :y.;legtona ! r~c~mated implol~ment
Nei~hborho.od _ 8
'24' feet. , · .... :, ,,,.
· 8.
9.
10.
11.
6.. if' s'iog~e phase pre,|ect:
If mulctoph&a~d project::
How much natural m3tarial (I.e. rock, e3rth, etc.} Will be re~ov~.d f'rom the site - tons
I , 300cubfc ~ar
~ tony 4c~s of vegetation (trees, shahs, g~und covers) w~11 be re~ved fr'o~ site - O~ 63acres.
~111 any ~Cure fores( Cover 100 ~ears old) or oC~er locally-important vegetation be re~ved by this
pro~ecc? Yes X
Are ~ere any plus ~or ~-vageCaCton to replace ChaC re~oved during const~ct~on? ~ ~ Yes 'Ho
~ttclpated parted of const~cCton T ~nths, (Including d~l
· . Total n~er of ~hasas anticipated ' No. '. - . -
b. ~ClctpaCed date o~ ~nce~nC phase 1 ~nth year (Including
G ~roxtmate co~laCton date ~tnal phase e~nth Year.
d. ~s p~se 1 ftnancta11~ dependent on subsequent p~as~s? .- Yes
N!11 bias:tog oc~ar during constractton? . Ye~ X No ' ". .~.
~er of Jobs ~nerated: ~ng const~ctton 0 ~ altec p~ect ts complete ~
N~er of ~obs ei(mtnated by thcs ~roJect ....~ . . ·
~ill pro, eot requt~ ~tocatt~ of ~y p~ects or factlft~es? Yes ~' Ho. If 7es, explatn:
12. a. ~s surface er subsurface l~qutd waste dls;osal involved? ,, × Yes Ko.
b. If 2es. Indicate type of waste (se~age, ~ndusCrial, etc.) S~wage
c. ~f Surface disposal n~t~eof stream into which effluent will be discharged ..
13. Vi11 surface area of existing lakes~ponds, screens, bays or ocher surface wa:ar~a~s be increased or
decreased b~ proposal? _ Yes No.
14. Is p~ojecC or any portion of project located in the 100 year flood plain? × Yes
15. a. Ooes pro~ect lnYol~e disposal of ~oTid waste? × Yes
b. If Yes, wtli an ex~s:~ng seltd waste disposal factlit¥ be used? × Yes No .~ ...
d. Ulll ~g ~as:as not gQ 1nCo i savage disposal S~Stem or tote a san~ta~ landf~117 ~Yes
16. HIll project use herbicides or pesticides? ~es X No
17, ~111 pro~ect ~u:tnely p~duce odors' (~ ~han one hour per day)? Yes ~X No ~..
18, ~fll p~ject produc~ operating no~se ~ceedfng th~ fecal ~btence noise levels~ - Ye~ ~No
19. Vi11P~jecc result In an Increase in aner~use? X Yes No. ~f~es, fndfcate t~pe(s}
Electricity( Fuel oil or Gas
20. Zf wa~er supply Is f~m wells indicate pumping c~pactty . gals/minute. N/A
21. Total anticipated ~atar usage ;es day ---.90 gals/day.
~. Zoning: a. ~ha: Is dcmtnant':oning classification of s~t~?_ B-~ Business
b. Current s;eclffc toning c]~if~c3CJon of st:e ~ Same
c. [s prcpos~d use c:ns~szenC with pre~anc zaning~ - Yes
if no, In~icac~ desire~ zontn~
25. Approvals:
a. [$ any Federal per. it required? Yes × ,~o
b. ODes pn~ect Involve State or Feder3] funding or ftnancing?
C. Lo'al ,md Regional approvals:
City, To~n, V~11age 6Dora
Cf. ty. ?oMn, Village Planning goard
City, Town. Zoning Board
..... CI~ty, County He&ICh Oepar~'~nt
Other loc31 ~gencJis
QC~er regJon4] agencies
.' , State ~ncJes ..
~dera)
C. ZflFOR,'ATZG~Ua. DETA~L~
Approval Re~ui red
(Yes, ,'lo) (Type)
... Yes ×' No
Submittal Approval
(Date) (OaCe)
, ~ ,,~ce Flan ,'
· -Speds '".' ·
Attach any, addtttona! lnfo~atton.e$ ray b~.' needed co clarify your project. Xf chore a~ or ~y be any
~e~ to mitigate Or a~id ~~
'Garment ~. '~trang
~NT~aG: .... Owner- Sterling Idea Vensur~s
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- ~TATE RI-lAD 25 ~r'IUTH[3LD, L.I., N,Y. 119'71
TELEPHONE (5'16) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
ACTION OF THE BOARD OF APPEALS
Upon Application of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES for a
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Section 100-71,
Bulk Schedule, for approval of insufficient rearyard setback from
the northerly property line for proposed principal building, at
premises known as 46025 C.R. 48, Southold, NY; County Tax Map
Parcel No. 1000-55-2-18.1. B-1 General Business Zone District.
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on July 14, 1988, in the
Matter of the Application of STERLING IDEA VENTURES under Appl,
No. 3749; and
WHEREAS, at said hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded;
WHEREAS, the Board has carefully considered all testimony
and documentation submitted concerning this application;
WHEREAS, the Board Members have personally viewed and are
familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and
the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact:
1. This is an Application for a Variance from the
Provisions of Article VII, Section 100-71 for permission to
locate new principal building with a rearyard setback at 25 feet
as recommended by the Southold Town Planning Board under its
pending site-plan review.
2. The premises is referred to as 46025 C.R. 48, located in
the Hamlet of Southold, Town of Southold, and is identified on
the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District 1000, Section 55, Block
2, Lot 18.1.
3. The subject premises contains a total area of 27,305 sq.
ft. with 185.61 ft. frontage along the County Road, is located in
the "B-i" General Business Zone District, and is presently vacant
land.
4. The principal building is proposed as shown on the
May 28, 1987 Site Plan Map, prepared by Garrett A. Strang, R.A.,
"Pag~ 2 - Appl. No. 3749
Matter of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES
Decision Rendered July 14~ 1988
with the following setbacks: (a) closest setback from the
westerly property line at 26 feet; (b) closest setback from the
easterly property line at 26 feet; (c) closest setback from the
front property line at 77 feet; (d) closest rearyard setback at
25 feet, under consideration herein.
5. Article VII, Section 100-71, Bulk Schedule, of the
Zoning Code requires a minimum rearyard setback at 35 feet.
The amount of relief requested is 10 feet.
6. In viewing the area, the following information is noted
for the record:
(a) the existing principal building immediately
adjoining this parcel on the west side has a setback of approxi-
mately 42 feet from the front property line;
(b) the existing principal building nearest thisparcel
on the east side has a setback of approximately 75 feet from the
front property line;
(c) the premises adjoining this parcel to the north
which would be the parcel most likely to be affected by this
variance is a drainage sump maintained by the County of Suffolk.
6. It is also the understanding of this Board that
expansion of the County Road (extending from Horton's Lane in
Southold to Main Street in Greenport) to a uniform pavement width
of 46 feet is proposed under Project No. 5145, and the best
interests of the traveling public would be served by the grant of
a reduction in the rearyard in order to provide additional open
frontyard areas.
7. In considering this appeal, the Board also finds and
determines:
(a)
(b)
pursue;
the relief requested is the minimal necessary;
there is no other method feasible for appellant to
(c) the project will not be adverse to the character of the
neighborhood;
(d) the difficulties claimed are unique to the property and
are not personal in nature;
(e) the project is within the spirit and intent of zoning;
(f) the practical difficulties are sufficient;
(g) in view of the manner in which the difficulties arose
and in considering the above factors, the interests of justice
will be served by granting the application as applied.
'Page. 3 - Appl. No. 3749
~atter of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES
Decision Rendered July 14, 1988
Accordingly, on motion by Mr. Grigonis, seconded by
Mr. Sawicki, it was
RESOLVED, to GRANT a Variance under Appeal No. 3749 as
applied in the Matter of STERLING IDEAS VENTURES for a reduc-
tion in the rearyard to a minimum of 25 feet for the newly
proposed principal building.
Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehringer, Grigonis,
Douglass and Sawicki. (Member Doyen was absent. This
resolution was duly adopted.
lk
OARRETT A. STRANO
ARCHITECT
NIAIN ROAD. P. O. BOX
SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK
February 6, 1989
Ur. Bennett Ortowski, Chairman
Town of Southold, Planning Board
,~ain Road
Southold, New York 11971
L p,.~NI~ ~OARD ·
Dear ~r. Orlowski and ,lembe~s of the Doard:
Pursuant to our conversation at today's Board meeting,
with retard to the above referenced matter, It is my un-
derstanding the Board will review the park~nq require-
ments for this apn].ication.
~s discussed, the present parking requirement, under the
recently adopted master plan and zoning code amendments,
mandates one parki.pg space for each 200 sO. ft. of gro~n
building area. Accordingly, this ap~]ication v;culd re-
quire a total of 22 spaces to accommodate the 4,224 an.
ft. building area. You will mote, 2~. ~p~ces have !).~e~
provided as shown on the Site Plan.
In light of the above, I respectfully request that the
Board waive .the previous' requent for a building floor
~. In addition, I ackno~led(~e the ~oard~ comment
with regard to substituting ]an~sc3ped arela for a re-
duction In the number of parking ~paces to be provided.
~ thc requir~d~narkinq is reduced to 22 spaces, a net
qai~ of 1~400 90. ft. of landscaped area wi]] !'e bad~
look
forward to recei'.;]nq the [%oards recommendations
an~lication can !,~ ~]nalized ~nd b~oucht to a
Tf Vou have an':/ quest;on~ lo3 call
Garrett 5. o_rang, ~....
cc:: Sterling Idea V(?ntures
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
blAIN ROAD. P. O. BOX ~412
50UTHOLD. NEW YORK IIg71
September 27, 1988
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Southold Town Planning Board
~.~ain Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: SCT~] ~1000-55-2-18.1
Dear ~r. Orlowski and ~embers of the Board:
I am in receipt of your letter of Septomber 19th and have en-
close(] six (6) revised copies of the site plan and would like
to respond to both issues referred to as fol].o%;s:
From the onset, this project has been considered suitable for
both office and/or retail use. You have requested that we
delete the word "retail" from the application, since it is
your ()pinion that the parking is only adequate for office
use. The parking required for retail use is based on one
space per 100 sq. ft. of sales area. The actual sales area
of the enti~e building (exclusive of toilet rooms, service
areas, and access stairs to the basement) is 2,893 sq. ft.,
as shown on revised site plan. Therefore, tile 29 spaces
provided ~ill adequately service either retail or office use.
I have enclosed photocopies of a substitute exterior lighting
fixture of the type you requested, with a not.~tion on the
site plan that these fixtures be mounted at 12' in lieu of
15'. He,rover, the number of fixtures must rer~ain the same in
order to provide adequate illumination.
Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Chairman
Page Two
September 27, 1988
~;ith respect to the discrepancy of the scaled dimension of
17' vs. the noted dimension of 20', construction will follow
the noted dimensions shown on the drawing.
The location of the dumpster is now depicted on the drawing,
behind the building, accessible from the service driveway.
I trust this answers any of your questions.
~\S/b
Ve r~/~y yours,
/b~rrett A. Strang, }'.A.
~9
,I
RECEIVED BY
DATE
MAP OE, Pf'2OPE[;?.TY
' ' ~UI2VEYED
'"'T'-~" lNG" ..... ":%
'"'~ ~--!2L .- 'DEA VcNtUF2r:
A"F
TO%-x/N,, OF SOUTHQLD, klm
8UI LDTKi~ "
~HOLILD~I,~ 4,'~F' POAO ~
120DE~21CI~
/L)8 7~ ¢
N
iI'
Ilia
6.8 - 7~&'-'S4SS
,1'
..,/'
BTRANCt
arGh~tect
Main Road RQ. Box 1412 Southold N.Y. 11971
516 - 765. 5455
/000 -SS -.Z_ -/Z~, /
".OT TO BE USED FOR
:'NOT TO BE. ,USED FOR
:,,;, C 0 N. STRUCT I0
,- , ....... , ..... ~ ~A~/~
;. _ -:- :* ,:
~Alter~tlon of thfs Document except ~rchitect and Engineer's Sd
by 2n Architect .~r Licensed Profes; Sig, ature o'nly good for initial use
sionai,'Englnee~,isilrega?', . drawing. Change~, alterations or r~-
Section 7209, Subdigisfon 2, ' visioas to o(r~-us~ol d[~wfngs
N, Y. State Education Law. out Architect or Engineer's Approval
voids Seal and Signature on same,
/000 -.55 -X.'- /8. /
, A. llrTRANtt
Main Road FO. Box 1412 Southold N.Y. 11971
516- 765 - 5455
,C ~ 48,
po ~m '"~
A\AT~'-tTU[k , /~ "/ 1175'%
TT A.:
.r~hite:cC
!~11~ Road ~lO' B~X 1412 S({uthold N.Y.
516:- 7165 -: 5455
- )
3
:[
ii!:
Ii
iI
CUIZI~, ~IDE'W&LKA.m~JHOULDE'IZ CONt~T~UCT!ON
GARRETT A. STRANI~
architect
Main Road P.O. Box 1412 Southold N.Y, 11971
516- 765 - 5455
k
I
I
I
;1
+&
/000 55 ?- /E~,/
RECEIVED BY
SOI]IltOLD TO~I P~KI~G_BO~B
AUG g7 1981
DATE
GARRETT A. STRANG
archit ~,:ct
Main Road P.O. Box 1412 Sou[hold N.Y. 11971
516 - 765 .- '=~ %r
iI
/E
GARRETT A. STRANG
architect
Main Road P.O. BOX 1412 Southold NmY. 11971
r¥
!1,
h
CUR6, ~IOEWALK~,,o ,~HOULOE'IZ COIg,~'T~.IJ~ION
GARRETT ,A; STRANG
architect
Main Road P.O. Box 1412 $outhold N,Y. 11971
516 - 765 - 5455
I~' iCTZ61988 I,~L~