Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-06/17/1971 APPEAL BOARD MEMBER Robert Vv'. Gillispie, Jr., Ch~irm~n Robert Bergen Charles Grigonis, Jr. Serge Doyen, Jr. Fred Hulse, Jr. MINUTE TOWN BOARD A regular meeting of the ~outhold ' 0 was held at ?.3 P.Mo, Thursday, Office, Nain Road, Southold~, New There were present: Messrs: Robot% Chairman; Robert Bergen; ~ed Hulse, ~ro ~erge Doyen, Jro Also present: Nr. Howard Tex~y, B~ PUBLTO HEARING: Appeal No. 14.34 application of Joseph Gioscia, 106 Asha~ New York, Peter D. P~zzs~elli, 20 Ponoa! York, & Reuben Wecker, 3 Y~ng~s i~ne, approval of access ove~ prlv~te right-o~ ~Ith the ~tate of NeW York To~n Law, of pr~p. erSy: south side of Main~.Road, bounde~ no'th by Main Road, east~ by Vmi] N~rbor, west by Hmkill. ~ee pa~d The Chairman opened the hearing by £or approval of access, legal notice of attesting to its publication i~ the o~f notice to the applicant. THE CHAIRMAN: N~. Bergen will tak APPEALS own Board of Appeals , 1971, at the Town ~. Giilispie, Jr., Charles Grlgonis, Jr.; ;!ding Inspect~. 7:30 P.M. (E.S.T.), upon oken Avenue, NoPthpo~t, ~ I~ne, -.St. ~m~s, New .eta~ket, N~w York, for -way In accordance tion 280A. L~ca~ion M ~ ~ast ~en, New York, ~, south by ~ie~t reading the application hearing, affidavit cial newsloape~s~ and the Chair, and I will NR. R~B~T BERGEN,~Acti~g Chairman: The application is accompanied by a s~vey. Is the~e anyone present who ~shes to speak for this application? MR. JO~SPHGIOSCIA: There sme three individuals involved, We went to the Plannin~ Board and they ~anted permission for a minor subdivision, and we would like permission fo~ a right= Of-~ay~ ~l~. BERGEN, Acti~q~ Chairman: ~Is there anyone present who - ~ wishes to speak against this applsca~ion? After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant ~eQmests permission for approval of access over private right-of-way on property located on the so~x~h side o~ Main Road, East }~vion, New York~ The applicant, s mimer subdivision has been approved with revisions as required by the Planning Board of the Town of ~outholdo Access to Lot~3 as shown on the accompanying map is required because Lot #3, ms approved, has no direct assess to a public highway, a si~uation not shared by the surrounding pr~oPerties. The building now existing and located on V~ot #3 has for many years had access f~e~ the public highway. The Board ~inds that strict application of the Ordinance would produce practical difficulties or unuecessa~yh~dship; the hardship created is u~ique and would not be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in t~h~ same use dist~iet; and the v~riance does observe the spirit of the 0~di~anee and will not change the character of the district. 0n ~otionby I~, Eulse, seconded by Nro G~igo~is, it was RE,OLd, ED Joseph Gioscia, 106 Asharoken Avenue, No~$hport~ New York;~Peter Do Pizza~elli, 20 Pinoak Lane, ~t. James, New York; & Reuben~ecke~, 3 Y0~r~s Lane, Set,kef, New Yo~k, be ~A~ approval of access ,ve~ p~iv~te right-ef~way as applied fo~ on prepe~ located south side oF Main Road, East ~ion~ New Yo~k. Vote of ~he Boa~d: Ayes:~ ~lessrs: Bergen, ~lse, G~igonis, Doyen. ~ the ~eeo~d: R~ber~ ~. ~illispie~ ~r.~ C~fr~n, abstained f~em vo~Ing ~nAppeal No. ~3~. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. 24~ . 7:45PoM- (E.S'To), upon application o~Robert Fe~ker, ~tchogue, New york,~ifor a special exeePtiomin ace~r~uce with theZoni~ ~rdinance, A~ticte III, ~ection 300, Subseotio~ 5 (d)' fo~ permission to es~ablish a~d operate a riding academy a~dpomy rides. Loc~tlon o£ property: land of Agnes Do McGunnigle, mgrth side of Middle Road (C~ 27), Outchegue, NewYo~k, bounded north by ~o ~tmcik-~oclety~for the Propagation of the !~alth, east by A. & .B.-Pawluczyk, south by ~iddte ~oad (CR 27), west by Thomas Shalvey. Fee paid The Cb~L~m~n opened the hearing by reading the applieatlon for a special exception, legal notice of hea~ing, affidavit attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applisant, THE OHAIR~: The application is accompanied by a survey and is also accompanied by a $ppy of a le~se. One of the pertinent conditions in t~e !ease is ~It ~s understood and agreed that this lease is for the buildings and the property immediately amound said buildings, that Landlord has o~ w}!l lease the balance of the "farm for farming. Tenant here~n shall in ~o way obstruct or encumber or otherwise deny asses? to the ot~er Tenant ~r Tena~ts~tothe balance of said prope~y. It shall be agreed t~at all Tenants on Landlord's entire parcel shall have anlimited rights across ~hat portion, leased herei~ for purposes of ingress and egress at all t~mes? The'lease is signed by Agnes D. MoGurm. igle and Robert ~eake~. ~s ther~ anyone present who wishes to speak f~ this application? NR. ROBERT~: This is strictly for pony rides, and it's all fenced in. THE CHAIRMAN: The a~ea ~ propose to use is the fenced in area in front of the barn. ~ere ~o you live? ~. FEAEER: On 'West Road in Cutchogae. THE CHAIRNAN: Do yo~ expect to smpervise it? NR. ~: I have tw~ girls to help me. rides only en weekends. ~$e will have pony NE. Jo PRATT: Bob Feaker and I were in pamtnersh!p when we started but he is.taking~it o~ero ~ne ponies a~e led, they are not free. There are three po~ies. MR. E0-~: Is that all you p~opose to have? ~. FEAEER: I will have fo~Ar ponies but i den~t know how many will ~be~ ridden° THE GHAI~J~: Is pmmking for this fasility beyond that extra, fence? NE. FEAEER: It's a good 12 feet off the road. I put a rail out front for people to drive up to it. There is plenty of park- ing. ~. BERGEN: That's a high speed highway. NE. PEAEER: That's why ~ put the rail there so people won't drive on across. The g~ass is Just for looks. PRATT: If that is an obJestion we could move that railfmrther in towards the building. THE Ct~IRMAN: T~affic is definitely a concern° In talking to one of the local Judges the other night, he said that he had heard 800 traffic cases in the first three months of this year and that is the equivalent of what he previously heard im three years. MR. I~_~XEER: The ponies would never be taken outside. They would be kept strictly inside the fence. THE O~IRMAN: How do you tell a pony from a small horse? MR. FEAEER: Y~u can always tell a pony from'a horse. Ey ponies are small, they would never be considered horses. TEE CEA~r~_NAN: You are aware of all the trouble we have had with stables? MR. FEAEER: Yes, but I don~t see why yc~ womld have any tro~bie with my operation. This would not be like having horses. Child~en would ride the po~ies en weekends. It womld Just be on Saturdays and ~ndays. ~ CHAIRNAN: What is your acreage there? NE. F~AEER: Itts abomt 150 feet ~ 150 feet. THE CNA!RMA~M: Personally, I would like to reserve decision° Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this appli- cation? (There was no response.) MRs G~!GONIS~: Nouldyou have pony rides on holidays? NE. ~E~ER: I w~!d like to have approval for holidays as well as for weekends. NE. BERGEN: We would have to have you move the fence back. MRs FEAEER: I measured that space off and there is a good 12 feet beyond a bumper. When a person baoks out he is not even on the road. BERGEN: What about a car goingS0 or 60 miles an heur~ TEE CHAIRNAN: We might want te rearrange p~king. ~t would-be far.better to have adequate parking than to have.the grass there. 1~t. FEAEER: I brought in gravel to make the road hard outside the fence. TEE CHA!RNAN: We will adjourn until later in the evening when we will.make a decision. You should know by tomorrow. ~L~. ~EAEE~: If you disapprove because of pa~king, we can make changes. THE CHA!RNAN: It would probably be for a limited period° We will have to discuss parking, a time limit, the number of ponies. How many hands high is a pony? ~o FEAEER: I have two that I would call~hetlandso They are about 3 feet 6 iuches. ~eme are about three feet. TEE CHAIR~2~: We can make that no higher than 4 feet. We will postpone decision until later. Thank you for coming in. PUBLIC HEARING: API~AL NO. !436 - 8:00 P.M. (E.~.T.)~ - Application withdrawn by Norman Ac Reil~, A~ ReiIly & Sous, Inc., ~attituek, New York. (upon application of Walter Wisniewski, Grand Avenue, ~Iattituek~ New York, for a va~riauee in accordance with the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, ~ection 305, for permission to construct an addition to existing dwelling with reduced frontyard setback. Location of property: west side of Grand Avenue, 2~attitmck, New York, bounded north by Henry Zi~noski~ east by Grand Avenue~ south byNo Brusich,~ west by Robert Holfelder.) PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No. I~37 - 8:15 P.M. (E.$oT.), upon application of Paul Haslach, Ma~lene Lane, M~ttitu~k, New. York, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning Ordinmnce, Article Iii, ~ection 305~ for permission to toast,ct addition tO existiug dwellir~ with reduced frontyard setback. Location of property: west side o~ Marlene Lane, Mattituck, New York, bounded north by W. J. Keil, east by Marlene Lane, soUth by Joseph ~anning, west by Matt!tuck Park properties. Bubdlvision. Fee paid $5.00o The Chairman opened the he~ri~g by reading the application for a variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, ~ud notice to the applicant. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak for this application? (There was no response.) THE CHAIrmAN: Is there anyone preseut who wishes to speak against this.application? {There was no response.) I~R~ BERGEN: Th~ house is right in line with the four houses on each side. THE C~: The ho~ses on either side of this house a~e in a perfect line. The front yard is about 40 feet deop. The appli- cant has room on one side. He has a lot which is 75 feet wide. I can't agree with the reasoning of the applleant. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that the applicant requests permission to construct addition to existing dwelling with reduced frontyard setback located on the west side of Marlene I~ne, ~ttltuck, New Tork. The Boa~d does not agree with the reasoning of the applicant as it finds th~.t the ho~ses on either side of applicantts h~ase m~e in a perfect line. The freest yard is 40 feet deep; au. addition would reduce it to 34 feet~ The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would not produce practical difficulties or u~eoessaryhardship; the hardship created is not unique and would be sha~edby all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the vari~ce will change tho character of the neighborhood, and will not observe the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by }iv. Bergen, seconded by Fro. Grigonis~ it was RESOLVED Paul Haslaoh, I~vlene !~ue, Mattituck, New Yo~k, be DEN!ED~permission to construct addition to existing dwelling with reduced frontyard zetback on west side of Ms~leue I~ne, Mattituck, New York~ Vote of the Boards Grigonis, Doyen° Ayes:~ Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse~ 2UBLTC h~ARING: Appeal No. 1438 ~ 8:30 P.M~ (E.$.T.), upon applicmtion of Donald & Viola Meyer, I15 Ash Street, West~°ood, New Jersey, fo~a variance iu accordance with the Zonim~ 0rdinanoe~ Article III, Eection 305, for pe~ission to constr~ot addition to existing dwelling with reduced f~ontyard setback. Loc~tiou of property: south side of Ave~ue B, ~ishers Island, New bounded north by Avenue B, east by ~E. J. Doyen, south by G~llagher, west by Hermy Zabahonski. ~eepaid The Chairm~n opened the hearing by ~eadlng the application fo~ a. variance, legal notice of hearing, affidavit attesting to its p~blication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. THE CHAIRM~J~: Is there ao~vone present who wishes to speak for this application? ~L~o H~w~) TEP~RY~ Building ~nspeotor: If you are not familiar with Fishers Island, Avenue B is in.back of ~Zabahonski~s supermarket so this man, in order to get any view over the houses~ has to get out in front of his house and b~ild there so he can look out and see the water; it~s mountain goat country. &venue B is a one-way, dead-end street. ~. ~ERGE DOYEN, JRt.~ Itts very unique topograp~yo The lo~ cation where he proposes to put the deck falls off to where there was a gulley at one time. Fisherm Island To~ Road is maintained by the Town. It's no more than 1,000 feet.from Mair~ Road. Itts almost a dead-end. The only two houses a~e the ones o~ed by my father and this man. The setback has a very unique angle. My father has no objection to his constructing his deck° It falls very sharply on three sides, ~r.d it projects out to Avenue Bo Avenue B is used by a very limited number of homes; maybe five or six homes. It is a very little used road. The way it is situated, it is almost inconceivable that any other homes would be built on Avenue B. This is an open deck. It's big enough to live on in the summer time. ~The Board discussed sketch of premises. ~ After investigation and im_spection the Board finds that applicant requests perm~isslon to construct addition to existing dwelling with reduced frontyard setback located on south side of Avenue B, Fishers Island, New York° The findings of the Board are that topographical situation is extremely ur~sual and applicant is precluded from enlarging lot. Applicant can not enlarge the deck size by extending it across the front of the house as it would, necessitate removal of a priceless 50 foot pine tree which adds to appearance and value of the home. There ~is 12 feet of lawn from the property line on Avenue B to the actual paved s~eet which creates a deeper set-back appearance. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance wo~ld produce practical difficulties or ~nnecessary hardship; the hardship created is unique and would not be shared by all prope~ties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district; and the variance ~ill not change the character o~ the neighborhood, and will observe t~ spirit of the 0rdi~nce. On motion by ~. Gillispie, seconded by M~. Bergen, it was RE-~OLVED Donald & Viola Meyer, 115 Ash Street, Westwood, N. ~. be GEANT~D permission to constr~ct addition to existing dwe!li~ wish reduced frontyard setback on property located on south side of Aven~e B, Fishers Island, New Tork, subject to the following condition: That the deck shall remain open and there shall be nothing constructed above the level of the deck other than a railing° Vote of the Board: Ayes:-Eessrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, Gr igoni s. For the record: Mr. Doyen abstained from voting. ~bdivisfon 6 of~the To~ ~w, of the State ~f New Yo~k~ on the Bond's motio~, rehe~i~s~will be held on Appeal No. 126 Pete~ ~eh~ Jr~ - Ap~al No. 237 Peter ~eh~ ~r. - Appeal No. 825 D~vid S~ ~g ~ a~ re,tire to. establlshi~ and operating a ~i~ at the no~h side of Ca~ Mineola Road, on ~a~s C~eek, ~ttit~ck, New T~ C~ir~n ope~d the he,lng by ~eading th~ legmi notice of he~ing and affidavit attesti~ to its p~b!ication in official new~pape~, ~d notlc~ to the applicant~ dated~Dece~e~ 18, 19%8 ~d was as Be~ grants special ~exceptie~ to establish a ~in~ as provided ~der ~ticle I~, Eection 300, ~bsectiom 3a in a residential ~ea with~moo~i~ spaces for moo~ing approxi~te~ 3% boats and a la~c~m~ ra~ together with a parki~ lo~ iu a southeasterly direction from the p~ement structure~ Ee~vices to be provided ~or p~ivately owned boats u~er 26 feet~ ~bJsot to the fo!lowi~ co~dit ions: !. ~ere shall be no services provided for p~ bo~ts and/o~ ce~e~eiai operations. 2. No boats will be rented or leased. Location of property: Ja~s C~eek~ ~ttituck, N~ Y. b~ed on the north by ~. Zebromki, on the east by Ca~ Mineo~ Road, zo~th by R. Makro, and on the west by J. ~eb~eski. A ~eq~e~t for engagement was ~oted on on date of November ~ !9%9~ as Follow~ Resolved that the applicmt!ou be GR~ as applied u~er the fol!o~ng conditions: The gasoline service faoliitie~ be located at the southerly end of the ~de land ~djoi~i~ Ja~s Creek which runs to the west of ~hls property. ~rthe~ condltieus: t~t the original special exception pe~mitti~ 35 berths ~ expanded to i~c~de pe~ission for ~p $o 100 boats of a class la~ge~ than A~2 (26 to ~ feet)~ All of She same conditions except as to ~he~er of berths which applied on special e~ception No. 126 also apply to the ~anting of this special exception. The third applicatiou dated Japery 13~ 1966 was acted on ~ebruary 10s 1966 = Appeal No~ .825, David S. Etrong~ for permissio~ to erect a etorage buildi~. ~e Bo~d dete~iued ~ollows: ~ter investigation and i~pecti~ t~e~o~d appr~i~te~ 1965, David ~tro~ purebred '[ acres cz ~n~ trmot of l~nd. Peter ~eh, ~. included all the ~Ina f~cillties which he formerly operated° Fmc Strong h~s applied for permission to build a 60 foot by 60 foot by 20 foot alumir~Am boat storage shed to be used solely f~ ~he purpose of p~sie~i stop,ge of boats of local home o~ers. To date $om~ accommodation of this de,nd has been furnished by leasi~ ~ ~i~.ir~ several milos distant on the No~h Road~ ~ p~eJeoted buildi~ wou~ be located ~pp~oxi~te~ 500 feet easterly of the p~esent m~i~ facilitie~ bui!diug. ~Jec~ions of local adjoini~ remidents ~e cenoe~ed with the depreciation of property values as a result of c~nglng the hat,ally attractive ~d hig~y ~esidential c~aeter of ~m nei~borho~ ~ includi~ a coEerciml b~llding and other activities associated with storage and movement ef boats, such as p~inti~ and traile~s~ ~In spite of ~estrictlons it is u~easo~ble te assume that a boat stored fo~ the season w~Id not be p~inted at the point of storage)~ ~e Board finds furthe~ that the location 02 this m~ina In a ~tural me~dow a~ea is highly visible from most of the s~cuuding residential ~eas. In considerir~ the above the Bo~md finds: I. That the proposed storage use would adversely affect the orderly and reasonable uso of the adjacent properties. 2. That the character of existing and probabl~' development of residential uses in the a~ea would bo adversely affected. 3. That the conservation of property values and the encouragement of appropriate uses of land would be adversely affected~ 4. That the BoSmd finds itself' in general agreement with the position advauee~byWilliamWickham~ Esq., attorney for Salt Lake Village Associationj tha~ the June~ I965 revisions of the SoutholdTo~ Bm~Idi~g Zone Ordinance co~cernim~ma~fna uses permitted in the several ~ones reQui~e a new and me~e limited interpretation of permitted residential marina uses; s~ecificmlly, limited te considering marinas for the docking and mooring or accommodation of not more than six (6) non-commercial boat~. Boat storage y~ds a~e permitted under. Article IV, as revised, "B~ Business District, ~eotion 400, ~ubsection~lg. There is some doub~ whothe~ a storage facility may be permitted in a "B-l" Business D~strict or a ~B-2"B~siness District, however we.~ve'.convi~ced that the limitmtions noted above mnst prevent favorable consideration of this application in a residential zone. 5. Until now, storage facilities have not been reque~tedo The Board finds that the public convenience and welfare and Justice will not be served mmd the legally established or permitted use of neig~hborhood property and adjoining use dls~ triers wil~ be permanently or substantially injured and the ~pirit of the Ordinance will not be observed. Theref~re~ it was RE~OL~ David S. ~tro~g, Camp Mineola Road, Mattituck, New York, be DENIED pe~missien to erect a storage buildin~for boats on the premises of a ma~i~a that is now subject to a special exception use on property located en Ca~p Nineol~Road, Mattitnck, New York, bounded north by Peter Allen, west by Ja~s C~eek~ T~E GNA~: These are the Actions of'the Board of APpeals. The ~preme~Oomrt upheld the Boa~d of Appeals in thei~ decision. I will now read you the Opinion ef the.0o~rt- Memorandum by Geiler, J.$.C., Supreme Court, Suffolk Oounty: Richard J. Cron, EsT. Attorne2 for Plaintiffs Domini~ T. AurichiO~ ~sq. Attorney for Defendant Action by p!aintLff for a declaratory Judgment establishimg the following: 1. That the Zoning Ordinance of the Tow~ of $0uthold d~es not prohibit plaintiff fr~m erecting a suitable boat storage facility upon the premises at which a marina is being operated as a non-conforming use. 2, That' the ac$ien of the ~outhetd Town Zoning Board of Appeals im denying pl~intif~ a special exception to erect a boat storage faci!itybe declared ~ull and void. 3. That the Court determime the validity of t~ Zoniug Ordinance, and the extent to which the Zonir~ Ordlnanc~ affects the plaintiff's proposed ~se, enjoyment, improvement amd develop- ment of his land. The plaintiff acqmired title to a parcel of land consisting of ? acres from Peter2~veh ohM ay 14, 1965~ A zoning ordinance was adopted in APril, 1957 and the K~eh property was placed in an ,A~ Residential and Agricuit~va!District. A marina is pro- hibited im this district anles~ permitted by a special exception of the Zoni~gBoard of Appeals. of his property by placi~ a small building thereon and d~dging the same te accommodate eight boats of approximately twenty-six feet in length. On December 10, 1958, he obtained a special exception the Z~ningBoa.vd of Appeals to operate a non~commercialma~i~ adjoining the dredged portion of his p~emises. The fell~ restrictions were imposed: 1. Mooring spaces te be provided for 35 boats and a launching ramp together with a parking lot. 2. Services to be provided for privately o~ed boats under 26 feet. 3. No services shall be provided for party beats and/or commercial operations. On Novembe~ ~?, 19%9 this special exception use was expanded to permit moe. i~g facilities fe~ 100 boa%s of ~ c~ss n~ lo~e~ ~ Jazzy 13, 1966 plai~f ~e ~pplication ~er a speola! exception ~o the Zoni~ Board cf Appeals b~ilding on t~ p~emises at which~he oenti~ed to ocelot the ~rina business of his predecesso~ in title~ ~s denied. Plaint~f ~eugh$ this actio~ te dete~ne what possesses with res~ct to the co~uct of as a non-co~ormiug use~ ~d secondly, by virtue of ~s r~ght to oo~ot such business as a special exception to the Bo~thold T~ Zomim~ A use of land which la~w~.ully existed prior to the enactment efa zoning ordinance and which is maintained after She effeot~ive date of the ordinance ~Ithou~ it does not comply wi~h ~se ~ st~ictions applic~ble to ~he ~e~ in ~ich it is situated is. co~n~ referred to as a ~non~co~orming use" (Rhyne~ ~nic~pai ~w ~c. 32-26). The only non-cor~forming use established by the plai~if£ was the accommodation of eight boats on two acres and nothing more. The ~i~t to centime a no~co~o~ing use does not inc~de a ~i~ht to e~e~ or e~arge it (Van ~keu v. Eider, 1930, ~1 Niso. ~05, 252 N.Y.S. 329). It is evident that Ereh realized that his non-conformir~ use w~s limited and on two separate occasions applied for special exceptions to extend his use. Plaintiff.ts contention that the special exceptions g~anted are part of the non-cor~forming use and the right to dock one hundred boats automatically incl~ded the right to build storage facilities is without foundation. Justice~ed J. N~nder while sitting at~pecial Term, ~preme Co~t, ~folkCounty~ On ~eptember lC, 196% in M~tter of County o£ ~uff~ik, 48 Misc. 2d 39 stated: ~Both sides have referred to this situation as one resulting in a "non-conforming ~se"$ b~t that te~m is applied only to a structure or~se existing at the time of the adoption of a zonim~ ordinance that does not conform to the new remtrictlve r~guia~ tions a~ which hence is permitted to be contiuuedo The subsequent creation of a non~cor~orm~nce is not permitted. In other words, a party cannot by erection of buildim~s or other acts in violation of a zoni~ restriction establish a legal right to a non-conformi~nguse. Stati~ the ~!e somewhat ~o~e broadly~ .~non-cor~orming t uses commenced subsequent to a zoning regulation or restriction ~e not entitled Mc~illin, Nunieipa! Corporations (3d ed~), Sec. 25~186~ ~rthermore~ plaintiff seeks to e~tend the non-conforming use l~o~ 2 acres to 7 acres. An extension of a non~cor~ormin~ use to land not ~s~d for that p~rpose p~lor to the ordinance is an ~mlawful ex~en~ion ~Breed v~ Clay~ 21 Misc~ 2d 856, 201 N.Y.$~ 939). Plaintiff p~oduced an expert in the marina business who testified that a marina could not be narrowly circumscribed so as to timer the uss ~of the present facilities to the me~e dock~ge of boatm but was required te be interpreted in its broadest aspect including the right to build restaurants and motels~ ~n~ plai~ti£f contends that tD~ grant of a special exception to operate a marina automatically includes the right to build any facility in connection with the marina without approval of the Board~ The special exception technique was never intended to give a party~ mnlimited rlghts~ The theory behind special exceptions is to soften the impact of certain uses upon a~eas where they will be incompatible unless conditioned in a manne~ suitable to a particular location (see Eontng in New York Btate, 104 N.Y~ Dept~ of Commerce, 196!)~ Plaintiff's definition may be ideal from a commercial point of view but no~ from the facts in this case~ We a~e not conce~ned in this case with the operation of every facility which could possibly be embraced within the term ~m~rina~ The p~emises of the plalntif~ ~e net situated in a business district but in a ~eslden~!al ~ea and the ordinance specific~l~ ~es~icts t~ business of oper~ti~ a ~Ina to t~se ~ted unde~ a s~cial exception~ C~sequent~ whether a fu~and c~!ete ~i~ business ~y be conducted is whol~ depe~e~ upon the pa~ticu~ district in which it ~y be conduoted~ Zt is clea~ that the plaintiff does not have an unlimited right.to oDerate eve.~j~ facility which 'may be included in the b~oadest inte~pretatmon of the word "ms~ina"o Plaintiff~s predeeemsor recognized this fact as evidenced by his two previous applications to extend his business. ~nus it is clear that the business can only be e~tended by approval of the Zoning Board and not as of right. The plaintiff purchased th~ premises with his eyes open and w~!l knew, or is presumed to have known that at the time of the purchase his business was restricted to the conditions embodied in the special exceptions. The Court sympathizes with the plaintiff?s economic situation b~t is not a guarantor of profits° The town fathers have appointed citizens of the community to sit on the Board and this~Co~rt is not ~ - so vain as to substitute it~ judgment for that of ~he c~t~zens closest to the sit,rich. The Cou~t finds the Be~d has net ~oted arbitra~i!y or capriciously and wi!! not upset the decision of the Board (Re Cosden, 6~ N~T.$. 2d 37, ~ff~do 270 A.D. 1018, 63 N.Y.$. 2d ~0. The foregoing constitutes the decision of the Co~r~ pursuant to O.P.L.Ro ~ectlon 4213. ~ettt~ Jud mont. here tonight is that~ it is perfectly rehearing of any hearing. It should ~pproprtate to ask for a that this Board may reverse, modify i~. ann~ll its original order, decision cr determination. W~'~n all of the foregoing as backg~omnd, I will also ~ead a letter addressed to Hen. Albert Ma~occn~a, Supervisor, Town of Seu~hold~ w~itten by A~temas E. Ward, P~esident of ~alt I~ke Village Association, Matti~ck, N~w York: Dea~l~. N~mtocchia: The~Board of Directors of Salt I~ke Village has asked me to w~ite to you to call your attention and te p~otest, the continued co~olal operation of Strong~s directly across James Greek Chanuel from Salt Lake Village. I should like to review the background of this operation. P~ior~to April 27, 1957, when the ~wn of $o~thold enacted its zoning Ordinance, this prope~y was owned byF~ed~ a~d Peter F~eh~ It was placed in ~ "A~ Residential and Agricultural district. ~i~ to the so~ing, ~eh had improved t~ two acres byplacing a s~bui~i~ t~eon and~edgi~ a fo~e~ i~et operating ~t they te~ed m ~ina~, which, however, beene limited in its scope ~o seven, o~ eight boats 26 feet in length. 0n December 18, 1959 the E~ehs applied for a special exception p~suant to the provisions of the zoning o~din~nce and were g~ted such exception upon the following conditions: 1. Mooring space having approximately thirty-five boats of twenty-six feet in length o~ less~ ~ud a !aunchingramp~? 2. A parking lot. 3. Nc service for part~yboats and/or commercial ope~ations~ ~. No boats rented o~ leased. No appeal from that decision was taken by the applicants and apparently F~eh operated under that special exception until on or about Nevembe~ 27, 1959o At that time, aforesaid special excep~ tionw~s further expanded as follows: I. Location of ga~o!ine facilities; 2. The spmce for thi~t~-flve berths (as provided in the preceding exception) wa~ to be expanded to inc~Ade permission for 100 bcat~ up to 42 feet in length~ 3. All othe~ conditions were continued~ No appeal from that special exception was ever taken and it appears that both K~eh and his successor in interest, David Strong, have operated unde~ that special exception ever since the date of the decisio~o ~ Y~ehs, h~r~rever, erected a building 30~ x 40,l on the property for which we believe'mo pe~mi~ ~s eve~ ob~ined~ ~e prop~r~ ~s sold abo~t ~y ~, 196% te ~he presen~ o~er ~nd opera~ David 0n ~y 13~ 1966 ~t~e~g applied f~r a special ~xceptfo~ pe~isslon to e~ct a stop,ge bui~ing fo~ boats on the premlsem efa size of 60~ x 60? x 207. ~is application was denied and in an extensive decision the Boa~d~ of Appea~ pointed out that the pe~iSt~d ~se was in a Residential District and the boat sto~age yards were not pe~itted In said district. No appeal fr,m ~t dete~mi~tion ~s ~de within the 30 day statuto~ period. afte~, ~t~o~ cO~enced an action in the ~up~e~ O~u~t of County for a decla~ato~ judg~nt establishi~ the ~ollowi~: 1. ~t t~ Zoning ~dinance ef ~he To~ of $~mth~ did not p~ohibi~ p~intiff ~om erecting a suitable boat s~orage facility ~pon the p~e~ses at which a ~rlna was bei~ operated 2. T~t the action of the ~theld To~ Zoni~ Board Appeals in denyi~ plaintiff a special exception to e~ect a boat Storage facili~ be decided ~ll z~d void. 3- ~a~ the Court dete~i~e ~hat val!diSy of the Zoni~ 0rdi~nce~ and t~ exte~ to'which th, Zoni~ O~di~nce_~fec~ed t~ plai~tiff~s proposed use, enj~ent, i~rovement and develop- ~nt of his l~nd. The C~t on ~rch 31, 1967 ~ound t~ Board ~d not acted arbitrarily or capriciously a~d would not upset the decision of the Bo~d. This decision was ~ter ~firmed by the Appel~te Division on ~eh ~ 1968. It sh~ld be pointed out_that altho~h the To~ of ~thold ~s ~epreseuted by Epecial Co~nse!, the Association ~etained its o~ attorneys to-look ~er its alo~ ~th othe~ property o~e~s mud the co~nity at la,ge,~ both in the ~mpre~ Oour$ and in the appeal to the Appellate Division. ~ey prepared all She brief work and attended the hea~ings both Judicial ~tro~ conti~es to coquet th~ p~emises under a complete co~rciml operation i~c~di~ sal~ and repai~ of boats, sto~age of s~ duri~ wiute~ sease~ and ether services incidental to operation, all oontr~ to the ~w. ~rt~r, he has ~ve~ttsed publicly as set forth in the ~reto attached xerox copy of au which appe~ed in t~ ~rsday, Eeptember ~, 1970, issue of the L. I. T~ave~r. In view of the ~h of ti~ which has elapsed since the decision by ~h~ Appellate Division, it is imperative ~ud the borden du~, pursuant to the high oou~t decisions and the statutesa for the Board to cause this illegal operation to cease ~ot on~ because it is at va~ianc~ with' the statuto~ ~equi~ements coveri~ the ~esidentizl mono in which it Is located but .that It is detrimental to the ~ea ~nd contributing to the dimi~tion of the value of ~esldencem on both sides of ~ne ~ = please keep in mind the ~esessity for maintaining the environment, and avoidance of polluting the waterways incidental to this operation. You~ attention is c~lled to th~ ten kodakole~ prints o~ photog~ap~ t~en by me e~ the ~ubJect ~t~ong M~na". ~ believe yom ~!l a~ee that it does not e~ance the beauty of ~nd t~. It is suggested that a personal inspection be made in the near future by you and yo~ associates of the TownBoard in which the undersigned and Association counsel would be happy to Join. Appreciating an early reply, with regards Re spe ct fully, A. E. ~ard, President THE CHAIPJEAN: I b~ve been reading the record of.this case but some of the_things that Mrs Strong has done are incidental to operation. We do not consider them violations~ I ~eoeived copies of th~ ~ads~ that were ~laoed iu ~ffo~ Life on J~ne 9th and June 16th, t971 adve~tising ~acto~ A~thorzzed ~ervice~. At one $i~ peop~ came out here ~d.saw boatz ~iding up and do~ in front of th~m and thought It was wonderful, but later they bec~e disll~s~ ioned~ Today a m~ina is not a popula~ activity to have in ~ont of your house. ~ whole concept h~ ch~ged. At on~ ti~ ~ ~eh hmd 3% boats$ p~ior to that it wms s~ o~ eight ro~omts. ~e p~t i~to the o~iginzl actions wh~t we thought wam pertinent to k~eDi~ a ~ri~ residential~ H~ever, items a ~e some where yo~ c~n sleep, som~ whets you can eat, and some w~ you can buy a new boat. ~ purpose w~s to ~intain ~ residential ~rlna and we have tried to cooperate as we believe that ~i~s ~e necess~y~ ~e will be glad, first, to hear from each of you who wishes to speak for the continuation of this mariu~ Zt seems to me that we are going to fi~ that this Board has th~ power to p~t ~. St~o~ ~t of busiue~ and we ~e not happy to ~ve this power. ~n you give y~r points against the co~ti~tion of this ~inm~ t~ not to repeat what somebody else has said. ~e ar~ ~w~e that ~ $tro~ is storing bo~ts, ~nd we ~e also awa~e that t~ ~p~e~ Oo~t told him that ~ could not store boats. RICHARD J~ CRON, ~Q.: I am represeo~ting?~. David Strong. E think there are some corrections to be made. The ~E~preme Cou~t~ Appellate Division, never decided the issue as to whether storage was prohibited on the premi~es. The only thing brought to the S~preme Court was the ~pplication for erecting a building. The S~oreme Court prohibited the erection of a b~ilding 60 feet by ~0 feet by 20 ~eet. Tha?s all the Appellate Divi.sion upheld~ ·nere was noth~ determined in connection With e~msti~ storage~ The Supreme Court has not decided t.hat pa~ticular factor. ! do~t know why the application dealing with the storage building is subject to review because there has been un action by M~ Strong to reenact that ~ppllcation~ We are not deali~ with other types of storage~ We a~e deali~ with ~ partic~la~ building~ The application for that bufldlug was denied° TEE CHAIRF~: i take exception because the o~din~nce became clearer in 196~ in that storage y~vd~ are placed in business zone. He is in a res!de,rial area. ~. CRO~: Perhaps we can define, if the Board will~ what it means by sto~age~ f£ he is being accused of storage~ THE CHAL~d~2 Y~ have heard the complaint which ! read from the Bali i~ke Association~ ~o CRON: I would like to clarify what the issues are this evening~ I assu~ the hearing w~s brought ou by the Board as ~ result of inspectio~. I thinkwe should define the areas that the Board has some Questions on. THE CHAIRMAN: 'What constitutes storage? ~g~t doesn't con= stitute storage? ~ MR. CRON: In what way is he violating the ordinance? THE CEAIRF~N: Z would say that if you c~n see 30, 40 or ~0 boats in a~ meadow~ that, s storage. ~ DAVID STRONG: As ~ar as hauling bo~t~ to other buildings, a ' there is no other w y. Zt~canbe done. Almost all of the residents are in favor o£ us. {~ Strong presented a petition to the Chai~n containing approximately 400 names.) TEE CEAIP~MAd~: The petition reads ~I am in favor of ~trong~s Marina~ continui~ to. provide the services it presently offers° winte~ stop,ge.~ 2~Ro STRONG: Ninety per cent of the people are in favor o~y the ~!t Lake AssOciation is against. THE CHAIRMAN: I should think a solution would be to change the zone. ~R. STRONC-: If i~ becomes Business zoned it would open up to restaurants and motels. ~ intention ham ueve~ been to build. anythi~ug of that nature. THE CHAIPd~: What we are dealing with is what has happened in the~past~ I~i~i. STRONG: In the original ~pplication "services to be provided for privately, o~rned boats (26 feet to~42 realize this is open to interpretation but the action did not say this is limited~ -17- MR. CRON: When the special exception was originally granted this Board saw fit to enumerate items which were prohibited. Zn light of the ~act that outside storage was in no way a prohibited item, I think it was intended and rightfully soo You can't run a 100 boat marina with boats 42 feet in length without providing services. I don{t thi~k that this Bo~d ever intended that that should happen~ E will take the issues one at a time. I don~t know what the specific complaints are. E am concerned that the Board is holding a rehearing. THE CHAIRMA~h I think our job is to t~y to establish the facts and also to go over the complaints as presented. MR. JA~ME~ McCARTHY: ~hould it not be brought to a vote the majority? Pifty percent of the people own boats. This marina has been in existence for years. THE CEAIP~N: '~en the Town, Board passes an 0rdi~ance you don~t get a.chance to vote on it. Et is not a popularity contest. MR. PAUL EDWARDS, Ole Jul~ Lane~ Mattituck: I live 100 yards northwest of.F~, ttrong~s m~ri~ao I have yet to see any pollution coming from F~. ~t~ongms marina but I have many ti~es noticed grass clippings coming from the direction of Salt Lake Village. 2~P~. JEAN EDWARDS, Nattltuck~ I live immediately attached to that marin~, it iS about 250 ~eet from it, Reeve Avenue and Craig Road~ east of the ma~tna~ I see nothing ~ong in that marina. Actually it's nice to sss people down there. MR. OTTO Fo BOOEi(ILIER, 0lc Jule I~ne, Mattituck: I store my boat there. E feel~th~.t it is very~convenient, and ! don~t think it~$ an eyesore. ~. JOSEPH'E. D~tTBRAVA, 01d Ju!e Lane, Mattituck: ~ utilize ~tuong~s marina. People are complaining about ecology and they think it~s au eyesore to the neighborhood. I don~t believe that it is. TEE CHAIRNAN: According to the advertisements this is a business. MR. CRON: ~ouldthe~e be ~n objection if he discontinues advertising sales o£boats? THE CEA~w~AN: We have not heard from those ~against"o 1,~. CRON: ~o~ 'of the reasons for the mz~Ir~ are that it is convenient; that I can't afford to buy a trailer; the Town of ~outhold provides_no facilities to launch boats; it's a clean operation; it's a convenience because I can use it from my house; we are very limited i~ bei~ able to utilize ~ boats; it's a necess~y service; we have no To~ ~a~s. ~Ye want a resort area and ~t people are const~tlybringi~ up a~gu~nts to destr~ A ~ina is important~ We discourage people ~om ~ttlizing water facilities. ~R. PETER S~AN: I have been m friend oF Bayers for six years and I have stored my boat for about three years~ I know Kreh who originally owned the property. They started with rickety docks and unpainted buildlngs~ Dave Etrong has i~proved the Facilities 100% each year with improved bulkhead!rig. One ~sectlon that faces ~alt Lake Village ha~ floating docks~ ~ dontt ~hfnk that any house~in Salt Lake Vzllage faces directly toward D~ve~s marina. All the -gay down he has improved it ever since I have kno~ him. ~ also give him credit f~r sin~klng eve~ythtn~ he has made into improvements. He has b~!It a house on his property and he pays taxes on that° He is a ~esidsnt of the Town. i think you should take that into con~ s ideratton. ~R~ ARCHIE LIVINGSTON: I third, he is doing a terrific Job. THE CHAIRMAN: ~s there ~yone else who wishes to speak for this application? T'EE'CEAIRNAN~ Is there anyone present who wishes to speak against this application? EICHARD PELLICANE, ~Q.: I represent the ~a!t Z~ke Associa- tion. E~e~ythlngthat has been~said in favor of the.maintenance of ~trong~s marina certainly points out ~hat ~. ~t~o~ is a nice peasen and is ~u~ir~ a geed operation. H~weve~, the issue semethi~dlffe~ent. I won't ~epeat the histo~ of the special exception which is the~legal authority of ~trong~s operation. T~ facts a~e that the special exceptlen is being vio~ted by t~ sal~ of f~od on the p~ope~ty. ~t we want is not cessation but rathe~ that it be operated within the authe~ity given by this Beamd. The rationale t~t so~ethi~ is being done is not justification continuance of vicarious. No~ are petitions, beca~e we ~e not dealing with ~ election. The pattern in all zoning provisions is that when violations mrs permitted to exist it becomes a Creeping paralysis until the person in violation ends up with somethir~ he ~s not legally entitled to. ~e feel this is a very real danger and that it will a~fect propert~ values, cause increased traffic, and we feel it is m danger to the wetlands and a possible c~use of potl~tiono There is a definite di~tinctlon between the storage of boats and a marina. We would resp~ctful!y request that the Board see to it that all violations cease. If Mr~ Strong and the people of the BOard feel that something other than that would be J~stified, then the proper thing would be to change the zone. THE CHAIR~.N: The subject has been explored for a possible change of zone. The Town Board is the a~thority for that° It w~s not Favorably~receivedo I do not know whether the Board would change their view on that. Please list yo~r principle co~plaints~ I~R. PELLICANE: The special exception has not been complied with° Commercial business is being carried on. TI~ CHAIRNAN: W~hat specific instances can you give me other than the advertisements.* MR. PEI~ICANE: ~torage of boats and sale of food~ THE CHAIR~MAN: He has some sort of sandwich machine and a coca cola machine. Is there more than that involved? The coca cola machine could be considered a use for a ~rinao Mr. ~trong told us that he was tired of going dow~ town to get a coke, so that point I thio~k is minor. MR, HUL$~: This advertisement says "Factory sea-ice~, it doesn't designate "sale MR. JOHN MCP~E: ! believe the legal definition of advertising leads to sales° Wh~t is a service but prima facie that advertising is saleo THE CHAIP~MA~N: I believe that fishing tackle and the coca cola machine are primarily fo~ the use of the ~arina. I think we should concentrate more on MR~ PELLiC~: ~torage and advertising for sorvice are commer~ cial op®~ations. I would like to show pieties of the house ~ ~tro~ has built, It is an outsi~e building~ and amenable to the repairing of boats° MR. PE~ $~AN: 1,~. Strong~s house. I would also like to submit a picture of It's very nice from the other side. ~ PELLIC~E: ~e submit that's a subterfuge and a way to get around the ~prem~ Court, and the Appellate division. My final rem~k is that we have two dozen people out in the hall and they do want to come in. F~ ~JDW,~D S~: Most people here are interested in one side or the other. ~U~y can't this hearing be held where we can all hea~ the proceedings? I am sure none of us would be here tonight if we were not c~noeruedo THE CHAIR¥~M: if Counsel are wiliiug we will adjourn this hearing to a larger establishment some time in the future, probably July 8th. CRON: On beha~ of ~Lv~ Strom~ I will voice au objection° THE C~IP~¥~M: Perhaps some of the people who are in the room now will move out into the hall~ and let the people who waiting come in. ME. JOHN MORS~ ~alt Lake Village: I would llke to dimect my com~ents to the actual reasons for this heariug~ According to the facts, on March 31~ 1967 the Court of Appeals found that the local Board was not arbitrary in refusing to grant an increase in zoning~ ~20~ T~E CHAIR~', The Court of Appeals upheld the decision this Board in denyir~ a storage buildir~o FLRo MORSE: ~/o~ld it not be right to examine and see if the covenant was broken? THE CHA~ In m~ view, I donlt believe the Judge was too clem in w.h~t he said. I think there is room for ~. Cronls side of the case in thmt ~de¢isiono The ~udge did not say that you can't store boats on the premlses~ He said that you cau~t have a storage building. M~o CRON: ~t ~ give some of the legal background. Because no appeal was taken in 30 days I slated it for declaratory judgement. We had non-oor~ormlng use~ ~There were eight boats and it w~s dredged to accommodate more~ We argued that under special exception. By virtue of the definition of the word the only thing was the issue of whether ~e had the right to have 60 ft. x ~0 ft. x 20 ft. storage building° Anything else is not germaine. THE CHAIR~_~: A special exception was never intended to give a party u~limited rights. t/Ro R~C~RD ~CANE: It is true that the Judge decided against that ~0 ft. x.60 ft. x 20 ft. building and found that this Board did not act arbitrarily° Considering that the Judge considered all the facts and circumstances yo~ can not say~ that the decision stands only for a 60 ft. x 60 ft. x 20 ft. building. That is not true. ER~ CRON: It is true. about storing boats. There were no facts brought forth ER~ PELLICACE: A principle was what was decided. ~o CRON: 'We are not dealing with an Ordinance today. We are dealing with .special exceptions. THE CHAIRMAN: The ~rea is PA~ Residential and at the time they applied the Board of Appeal~.~as guided by a long list of r~les and regulations and was required to impose restrictions to make the special exception conform to the area. Then, ou April 6, 1965 it was amended so that the Board could not consider a special exception for a ~rina for more than six boats~ There is only one other approach, assuming yo~ are correct abo~t the storage of boats. E, personally, believe that the Judge has not clearly defined whether boats can be stored in the open; so, the next approach would be violations. ~MR. CRON: There was no reason to raise the i~sue of taking boats out of the water and putting them on land because what we wanted was a building where we could store the boats inside. F~. PEY~ICANE: You are J~sti£ying because it was something that was always done. This is a oo~ercial operation~ Under the special exception and the conditions set forth' the storage of boats does net oo~ into it. There should be two paragraphs; one F~. CRON: I am sure this Board understood that in the winter time these boats~would be put on !and. ~nere would the beats go? P~ior to his asking for a storage building, the boats were alwaym taken ~t of the water. MR. JACK SAiMMiS, Mattftack~ Where ~e we going to put the boats? NE. CR~I P~lling boats out of the water Im not sto~age. Etorage i~ a building~ NE° DAVID ~TRONG: We h~ve stored boats since we were first there. ~verybody is ~r~tng around renting chicken barns for the purpose of stoking boats. ~*~o G~~ REYNOID~, Ealt Lake Village: O~ understanding was that M~, ~t~ong was deDied th~ exception he asked for° ~e a~e ordinary home owners. It is o~ feeling that ~. Strong has..not abided by'the law as such. The only reason we a~e here tonight is to complaiu about this. Why has he not abided by the !~? ~e are not asking for any more than was agreed ~pon. MR. ARTEY~D~ P~esiden~, tal~ Lake Assoolatlon: I refer to the petltio~ The petition wa~ le£t. ina luncheonette and c~stomer~ would come in and be asked to sign. They did not read itc They were told to ~just sign it"~ ~ are not t~ying to put M~.. Strong out of business but we believe that the law of the land should be upheld~ i will be 86 years old in August and t love this village we areal.lying in, and Z want to see that we~will be protected not only on this marina button other laws~ I lived in East Marion for fifty yea~s. ~en zoning came in~ a person turned ~ barn into a rooming h~use to take care of eight families in the summer. Then he thought he would serve ~ome food. He was denied~ Then he put up a sign ~I~nch~o He was fined. He paid a fine of $10o00 and kept on that'~way until he sold the property, Just ignorin~ th~ l~w. All we a~e askir~ for is that F~. Strong comply with the law. THE CHAIRM~N: I think we are trying to determine Just what tl~e law is. ~My~.p,rsonal interpretation wouldbe that in ne way could you constrme anything that has happened as permitting storage of boats~ That is why this hearing is being held. :ME. E. ROGER~ Salt I~ke Village: Has it been admitted that they are selling food at.~the ~lna? sandwieh~m~shin~. MR. ROGER: You have I00 boats stored over there, some are 24foot and 26 foot boats. On these boats, i assume they have sleeping qu~ters. !~so~ I would like to know ?h~t h~ppens to waste material. I would not eat a clam out of tha~ cree~o -22 THE CHAIRMAN: Do you have any boats that have sleeping Quart er s ? M~. ~TRONG: ~e provide utility £acilities~ THE CHAIRF~: That would be a matter that would be up to the Tow~ or.County to decide. MR. ~ARD: Has IH. ~trong ever applied for a license to sell food? CRON: He doesn't have to apply For a license to put in vendlngmachlne. THE'C~2!P~MAN: He is trying to find out if you ever applied for a.!icense to sell food. NR~ STRONG: You are supposed to have a permit to sell Stewart sandwiches. Technically, you did not apply. MR. ~ILL!AM ~R, ~alt Lake Village: I Just moved to Salt I~ke and I would like to make a statement~ ~e enjoy seeing some of these boats go in ~ud out of ~ames Creek. We all like some boats but we all doubt like 100 boats. The peo~ple who have boats there enjoy h~ving them. There are people who do not have boats aud they don~t object to a few boats. TI~2 approve of moderation. When do you stop? A little bit is good but finally it gets out of h~nd. THE CHA!RM~!: It is not in ou~ Power to enlarge a ~esidentf~l marina.. It,s a.~esidential area and we are ouly able to consider six boaSs since 1966~ To~ see the concept has chauged so much. According to Wesley L~ ~eler, a marine specialist, ~nd a witness In beha~ of the plaintiff at 1966Appe~!: A~ri~ should ~ve ~ve~ything yo~ could possibly need; b~S~ cock, ail lounges, bo~ds, outbo~ds, etc~ That~ in his opinion~ wou~be the perfec~ ~iua~ initially, the Zoning Boa~d set up an whereby a distinctiou was ~de~ ~Ye were thi~i~ of p~ty boats and outbe~ds as co,arid to a re~identf~l~i~ whe~, it is convenient fo~ peopl~ to k~ep their b0~t~ Eo~ there were two concepts~ ~ter~ iu the 0rdiuanc~, bo~t stor~g~ w~s ~corporat~d iu~siness~i~m. ~ o~iginal thinkiug~ in g~znti~, was that it should be permitted to f~rni~h gasoline at z~iua it's a fire hazard to transport five gm!lou cans. Now~ iu the ~test m~riua we are denying that. MR. ~AR~: If ! ~ay comment, I thi~k all the people who have boat~ a~e aware that they can get gas~ I wo~ld object to big sign that says G~. It,s a residential ~rina~ does that mean you can't hire a boat. there? Are they all privately ~ued boats? One thi~ng we Fear is having ~his beautiful area become sial aud so crowded that it will be like Freeport~ M~. ~trong has a very good business going now~ How big does he want to get? THE CHAIR_MAN: The real issue is storage~ ~. ~D~'~RD BUREE: (Bay Ave. & Ja~s Creek) I conside~ a ma~in~ ~ neo~ssiSy when you live on the creek.~ A ~rina should opermte as a m~rina. T~ ~~. We have two concepts: a ~esideutial ~s comp~ed to a ~riua in a b~siness zone where all services would be provided. ~ B~: Gas and pmlli~ boats out of the water wo~id people object to a be basic f~cilitles. ~! don~t see why variance that w~$~ give~ legal~ ~s there a majority that rules thlsT As a point, the fence e~ected out in the Bay mi~t be because of som~ law~ ~ ca~ u~erstaud why he put it out T~ C~T: ~eu is ~ l~e not m l~ue~ k~eu the ~id you ~to b 35 feet back, It was late~ ~am~nded ~ a ~dg~ In ~estcheste~ who said one or two fe~t didn't mak~ ~y difference so, I say~ we don~t always ~ow exact~ what the ~w is~ speed limits ~re 30 or 50 miles au hour~ w~r~y go a little ~ B~: ~nat are their obj~ctionsT Is it obstructing their view? He is ~i~ted ~s to what he oa~ do. He ca~t lmm~t c~suts~ ~ver2 property o~er has bo~ts~ o~r creek there ~st be 25 ~ M~S~: It should be zoned ~ ~: ~. ~trong feels that if he ~ppl~e= For Business zoo. i~, m~ny people would object to it~ ~ C~~: Permlssiou is never granted to ~n fndividual~ It concede the use of l~d now or in the future~ ~ ~ON: Ef~ou ~e concerned ~bout limiti~ the operation, a c~uge of zone is no w~y to do 2~ S~ONG: ~e bone o~ conteutio~ se~m~ to be how ~any ~. S~: Speaking of minor violations o~ the law~ the State contends that there has to be a certain amount of i n a p~blic buz_ding. I belie~ we are violating the l~w tonight so Z would like to back up ~ objection that these proceedings be held iua proper place at a p~ope~ ti~. ~ C~3~: I question whether we would get a~ more pertinent i~o~tion t~u we a~eady have. ! am i~cliued not to ~dJouru this ~ ~(: T~ro are people in Salt ~ke Vi~la~e ~ho do like ~. Stro~ but they Qmesti~ whether h~ should s~o~ boats there in the winter. Some people who live there store their boats there~ t~. CR~: I believe it boils down to the business of storage. I would like to indicate to the Board that, in my opinion, the special exceptions that were g~anted to Peter F~eh and David Strong in no way prohibit his taking boats out. and storing them on the land, I don~t think we are in violation of anything notwith- staudi~ the decision of the Supreme Court dealing with a storage building. The original special e~ception in no way prohibits and we are not in violation~ MR~ PELLZCA~E: The~e is no authority to store boats~ 2~o ~A~NER: We have only lived here z month. We even took do~m a hedge so that we comld see the boats but we have been told that ~o E~rong wants to enlarge and wants to build a restmurant and motel~ That,s why we a~e here~ · think it is fine the way it is now as long as it doesn't grow° THE CHA~T: ~aybe I can explain. He is limited to 100 bo~ts and he is not up to capacity. & restaurant is out of the question, and a motel is out of the question in that area~ You heard the la~ryer on storage of boats on land from an esthetic viewpoint~ The services provided ~re mostly for residents who use the marina, and are so advertised~ FiR. CRON: W-here is it illeg~l to advertise? There is nothing wrong. At the time the special exception was granted he contemplated a certain amount of repair work~ and certainly he is in there for compensation. THE CHAIP~W~A~: it m~y be that what will come out of this is that we wiil~try to establish more definitely what you cmn or can not do, MR. STRONG: A lot of misunderstanding has been going on about these two advertisements that were offered° There would never be any question of a resta~ant or a motel. ~e are in a marina and intend to stay there. I fail to see from reading the exceptions where it says anythinE like that° Et ss~s '"services~, not wetlands, or restaurants. ~S. W,~NER: Is there a difference between a m~ina and a boatyard? TEE C~L~IRI~2~: That's where I think M~, Cron and I may disagree a little bit. I thi~ it borders on being a boatyard. Bo~t storage is provided in a Bmsiness zone. I think there is a lot that has been unclear. MR~ CRON: From a practical point of view', could you say that one could operate a marina without furnishing some type of services relative to repair and pulling boats out of the ~te~? THE CHAIR~N: There are some but there is no mone~ in it. There is one in Orient that ha~ 7% boats. -25- MRo CRON.: M~y I ask a question? ~ho are the ~outhold Tovnu_ Home Owners Committee? I live there but I doubt belong to it. They have an advertisement in the newspaper. MR. PELL!CA~E: Is this pertinent to this hearing? · ~E CHAIR~N: We will--the hearing at this time, and the Board will study all the info--rich that we have, and that we ~ve heard tonight. For the Record: Letter from~uffolk County Health Dept., dated June 7, 197i~ addressed to ~o James k~arner~ Royal ~lush ~tables, RFD Box 173, Oregon Road, Cutchogue, New York: Dear An. inspection by representatives of this department of your property on ~ne 3, !971 re~ealed that yo~ ~re improperly Sto~i~ he. se ~n~e. ~e Suffo~County ~nitation Code ~equires t~t all ~nure be properly s~ored so as not to c~eate a public health nuisance. ~is dep~tment ~eoom~nds that ail ~n~re be kept in ti~t~ covered containers and re~ved to the public dump~ Your cooperation in this ~tter will b~ appreoiated~ A reir~pection will be~de in one week. Very truly yours, %ames L. Corbin ~enior..~anitarian Appe~l No~ 1435, Robert Feaker, Cutchogue, New York: After investigation and i~pection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to establish and operate a riding academy amd pony rides ou !~nd of Agues Do McGunnigle, north side of ~iddle Road (CR 27), Cutchogue, New York~ The findings of the Board are that applicant desires to conduct a riding academy speci£tcally limited to Pony Rides for children. The ponies will be housed and cared for on the premises for which the special exception is sought. The academy will be open for riding omly on weekends and holidays. The Board finds that the p~blic convenience and we~are ~ud Justice will be served and the legally established or pe~mitted i districts will use o~ neighborhood property ~ud adjoin ng not be pe~uanently er substantially injured and the spirit of the Ordinance will be observed~ On motion by~, Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was EE~O~VEDEobert Fe~ker, O~tchog~e~ New York', be GRANTED permission to establish and operate a riding, aCadem~ and pony rides on laud of Agnes Do McGmnnigle, north side of Middle Road (GR 27)~ Cutchogue, New York, subject to the £o!lowing conditions:~ Pm~king facilities to be improved subject to the approval of the Building Inspector° There shall be a time limit of six months subject to application for renewal. There shall be a maximum of Four ponies on the premises. Thereshall be no horses; and no riding of ponies outside the enclosu~e~ The size of ponies may be no taller than 4 feet. All riding must be done ~nder supervision. Sign advertising "Pony Rides? shall be limited in size to 3 feet x 4 feet, and shall be inside the pa~king ~ail Fenee~ Vo~e of the Board: Ayes:-Messrs: Gillispie,'Bergen, Hulse, Grlgonis, Doyen. 0n motion by Nrc Bergen, seconded by~Lv. Grigonis~ it wms RE~OLVED that the minutes oF the ~thold Town Bo~vd of Appeals~ated May 27, 1971, be approved as submitted~ subject to minor correction° Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie~ Bergen, Hulse, Grigenis, Doyen. 0n motion by ~. Grigonis, seconded by Mr~ Bergen, it was EE~OLVED that thenex$ regular meeting of the $outhold Town Board of Appeals will beheld at 7:30 P.M., Thursday, July 1971~ at the Town OFfice~ Main Road, $o~thold, New York~ Vote of the BOard: Ayes:- Messrso Gillispie, Bergen, G~igonis, Doyen. -27- On motion by ~. ~il!ispie~ so,eroded by ~o Bergen~ it was RE~OL~ that the ~outhold Town Board of Appeals set 7:30 P.N~ (ReSeT.), Thursday, ~uly 8, 1971, at the To~ Office, Main Road, $outhold, New York, as the time ~ud place of hearir~ upon application of Edwin Hoenig, 875 Victoria Drive, teuthold, New York, For a variance in aco~auce with the ~oning 0rdtnance, Article III, Section 307, for permission to const_~uct addition ~attached~garage) to existing dwellir~ with insufficient sideya~d area~ Location of property: west side of Victoria Drive, ~o~thold, New York, bounded ~orth by James ~ohUson, east by Vietori~ Drive~ south by Raymond J. C0nno!ly, west by Highwood Subdivision~ Vote of the Board: Ayes:~ Messrs: Gillispie, Bergeb, Hulse, Grigonis, Doyen. On ~tionby M~o Bergen, seconded by M~ Hulse, it was ~ESOLVED that the S~thold Town Bo~rd of Appeals set 7:45 P.M~ ~EoS°To), Th~sd~y, July 8~ 1971, at the Town Office, Main Road, ~outhold, New York, as the time ~ud place of he~!ng upon ~pplicatton o~ Jmes Ho~to~ N~w Suffolk Road~ C~tchog~e, New York, fo~ a v~iance in acoe~danc~ with the Zoning 0rdi~auce~ ~tic!e I!~, ~ection 303, and~tiole X, Section 1000A~ ~o~ pe~mis~ion~to divide p~op~ty and set off lot with less th~u 100 ft. front~ge~ Location of p~oper~: e~st side of New S~ffo~Road, C~tchog~e~ New Yo~k~ b~ded uorth byE. ~ Billard & E. A. Vernon & ~uo~, east ~ J~ S~ Wic~am~ so,th by ~rrison Case, west by. New ~uffolk Road~ Vote of th~Board: Ayes:~ Messrs: Gi!lispie, Bergen, Hulse~ GriEonis, Doyen. On motlonby ~Lv~ Hulse, seconded by ~. Grigonis, it was ~SO~VED that the ~o~thold Town Board of ~ppeal~ set 8:00 P~M~ (E~$oTo)~ Thursday, J~iy 8, 1971, at the Town 0~fice, Main Ro~d~..~outhold, New York, ms the time ~nd p!~oe of h~a~ir~g upon app!icmtion of Harold m~Fred Rees~ 855 Su~ise Highway, ~nbrook, New York, for a speoi~l ~xc~ptton in accordance with the Zoning 0~dinance, A~ticl~ III~ Eection 300, Eubsection For permission to erect on p~ises over-sized subdivision identification ~ign. Loo~tion of property: east side o~ North Ro~d to Ba~iew, ~o~thold, New York~ bou~ded no~th by the ~pplicaut~ ~outh by L~ Adamson, Ba~iew Woods ~states sion, and othe~ land of applicmnt, we~t by North Road to Ba~iew~ Vote of the Board: ~yes:~ ~ssrs: Gillispie, Bergen~ Hulse, Grigonis, Doyen~ RE~OLVED that the Sou PoM. ~{E.~oTo), upon applic Su~ise Highway, Lynbrook, accordance with the Zoning chis, seconded by Ym. Doyen, it was thold To~n Board of Appeals set 8:15 ation of Harold and Fred Reeze~ New York, fo~ m special exception in 0rd~nance, ~r~icle II~, ~eetion 300, Subsection 9~ for permission to e~est on premises over-sized subdivision identification sign. ~ocation of property: southwest corne~ of Windjammer Drive and A~uchor Lane, lot no. 6 of Harbor Lights Estates, Section I, ~outhold, New York. Vote ~ the Board:~A~e~. M~ssrs~ Gitlispie, Bergen~ H~tse, Grigonis, Dcy~en. On motion byN~. Doyen, seconded by ~ Gillispie, it was R~.~0~VED that the P~Mo {E.$oT.)~ upon applic S~n~ise Highway, Lynbrook, accordance with the Zoning Eub~ectiou 9, for per~issi. subdivision identification corner of No, th BayvieW ~hoid Town Bo~vd of Appeals set 8:30 ~tion of Harold and Fred HesSe, 85% New York, for a special exception in 0~dinance, Article II!, ~ctior~ 300, ~n to erect on premises over-sized sign. Location of property: northeast ~d and B~ig~ntine Drive, lot no~ 63 of Earbor Lights Estates, ~eotion !!i, Southold, New York. Vote of the Boa~d: Ayes:- Messrs. Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, Grigonis~ Doyen. The t~eting was adjourned at 10:45 P~M° Re spectf~lly submitted~ N~vjorie N~oDer~ott, Secret~ry So~thold Town Board of Appeals