HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-03/03/2011 Hearing1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
.24
25
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: STATE OF NEW YORK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Southold Town Hall
Southold, New York
March 3, 2011
9:34 a.m.
Board Members Present:
LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson/Member
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER - Member
JA/~ES DINIZIO, JR. - Member
GEORGE HORNING - Member
KENNETH SCHNEIDER - Member
JENNIFER ANDALORO - Assistant Town Attorney
VICKI TOTH - Secretary
Jessica DiLallo
Court Reporter
P.O. Box 984
Holbrook, New York 11741
(631)-338-1409
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
INDEX OF HEARINGS
Hearing:
Pierce Rafferty #6451
Joyce Barry #6453
Sterling Harbor, Inc #6448
Jerome and Sandra Martocchia,
George and Ruby Gaffga, #6438
David J. Verity #6452
TK Alpha, Inc. #6437
Benali, LLC #6422
Mary Ann Price #6447
Jr.
#6449
Page:
3-10
10-16
16-25
25-39
40-55
55-74
75-86
86-89
90-153
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
HEARING #6451 - PIERCE RAFFERTY
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: "Request for variance
from Article XXIII Code Section 280-124 and the
Building Inspector's January 7, 2011 Notice of
Disapproval based on an application for building
permit to construct an addition to a single
family dwelling at 1) rear yard setback of less
than the code required 35 feet, 2) lot coverage
of more than the code required 20% at; Avenue B
Fishers Island, New York."
Would you please state your name for the
record, please?
MR. AHLGREN: Thomas Ahlgren.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And would you please
spell your last name?
MR. AHLGREN: A-H-L-G-R-E-N.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. And you're here
representing --
MR. AHLGREN: The property and the
contractor building.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Let me just
double check -- we have correspondences in our
file, which is a notice from the County of
Suffolk indicating that this application is for a
local determination. If you would like a copy,
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
we could provide
proceed.
MR. AHLGREN:
March 3, 2011
you with one? Please
Ail right. They are
applying for a rear yard setback, which I belive
zoning is 35 feet and we're requesting 28 feet.
And that is on the plan. It is actually for the
roof and the deck and the side of the house. And
there is also lot coverage, which is 21%, and I
believe zoning is 20%. And the (In audible)
building a deck on the back of the house with
a roof overhang. That is before the Zoning
Board.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Sir, is that a
27 -- in the Notice of Disapproval, it
feet?
MR. AHLGREN: It does, it says 27 feet.
believe it was 28 when it was scaled out.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We have a site plan
here stamped out by registered architect?
MR. AHLGREN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Christopher (In
audible).
MR. AHLGREN: Yes, that is correct.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That is showing
feet. I just want to make sure that it
27
says 27
March 3, 2011 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. AHLGREN: That will be fine.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me start with Jim,
and we will go down the line.
MEMBER DINIZIO: That is all I wanted to
clear up with the applicant.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That's it?
MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah. The 21%?
MR. AHLGREN: Right now, we're requesting
21%.
MEMBER DINIZIO: There is no way to cutting
that back to 20, I guess?
MR. AHLGREN: I can make the deck smaller,
if that is what the Board wants. Right now it is
a 14 foot deck.
MEMBER DINIZIO: 14 from the side of the
house?
MR. AHLGREN: Right.
MEMBER DINIZIO: What would it take for
you to do that? How much
deck?
MR. AHLGREN: To get
square footage off the
to 20%, I believe we
are proposing 588 square feet. So to bring it
down, I can take it down to a 12 foot deck, we
would be at 20%.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3,
MEMBER DINIZIO: That
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
2011
is all I have.
That may accomplish
with what my question was going to be, which is
why the wrap around is necessary and -- you have
an existing stoop?
MR. AHLGREN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: But in this particular
corner, you put a pocket in there by eliminating
one variance by eliminating this piece (In
audible) but I wanted to hear why?
MR. AHLGREN: It was just nice to wrap
around the house. (In audible).
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I figured it was for
aesthetic reasons, but I wanted the record to
reflect in discussions whether that was necessary
dimension --
MR. AHLGREN: (In audible).
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MR. AHLGREN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
It's a covered porch?
It's defined both
ways. So it's an open covered porch. George?
MEMBER HORNING: That answered one question.
So we are defining it as a porch. We don't have
a survey. We have a site plan.
MR. AHLGREN: We have this site plan. And
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
then I have a
supplied also.
March 3, 2011
(In audible) survey that
That was done by CMA.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Can we see that? I will
make a copy of that.
MR. AHLGREN: I have an extra copy, if you
want?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You do?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let the record reflect
that the Applicant's agent has submitted a survey
approved by the Planning Board of the Town of
Southold, December 8, 2008. Just because we are
tape recording, we need to get you on the mic.
MEMBER HORNING: The other question that I
had on the right of way, what is the width of
that? That is part of the driveway?
MR. AHLGREN: That is the road that comes
up Avenue B. That is 20 foot wide.
MEMBER HORNING: And is that a private right
of way or a public right of way?
MR. AHLGREN: Well, that actually goes from
next to the big (In audible) they have on here is
12 foot.
MEMBER HORNING: So are you saying the whole
thing is 12 foot?
MR. AHLGREN: That is what they have on
1
2
3
4
5
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
here. I believe because I have been on the
road many times, I believe it is definitely
bigger than 12 feet.
there.
MEMBER HORNING:
of way.
MR. AHLGREN:
I have to go by what is on
It's at least 12 foot right
Right.
MEMBER HORNING: Is it a private or a public
right of way? For the immediate adjacent
neighbors?
MR. AHLGREN: Right, I would say it's
private. There is no reason for anyone to go
down that road.
MEMBER HORHING: So that being declared the
front yard; correct?
MR. AHLGREN: That's right.
MEMBER HORNING: Okay. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Ken?
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No questions.
like to see a survey though.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You are intended to
add (In audible) to this structure for storm
water runoff?
MR. AHLGREN: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Anyone else?
I would
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MEMBER HORNING: Ken might have questions.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER:
calculations added used
the lot coverage?
MR. AHLGREN:
Was the right of way area
in the determination of
I believe, no. No, sir,
because there are three houses that use that
right of way.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER:
indicated 16.
MR. AHLGREN: That
MEMBER HORNING: The
survey that wasn't on the
a right of way?
MR. AHLGREN: Right.
of way. Correct.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I
questions.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
else in the audience that
this application?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Board?
I am looking at the one
is not a right of way.
strip that was on the
site plan, that is not
They are not a right
Ken?
have no further
Okay. Is there anyone
would like to address
Anyone else from the
(No Response.)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no further
questions or comments, I would like to make a
motion to close this hearing and reserve decision
at
a later date.
MEMBER GOEBRINGER:
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Ail in favor?
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
Second.
Seconded by Gerry.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
HEARING #6453 - JOYCE BARRY
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next application
before the Board is Joyce Barry, No. 6453.
"Applicant request a Special Exception under
Section 280-13B(14). The Applicant is the owner
requesting authorization to establish an
accessory Bed and Breakfast, accessory and
incidental to the residential occupancy in this
single-family dwelling, with three bedrooms for
lodging and serving breakfast to the B&B casual,
transient roomers. Location of property:
10
March 3, 2011 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
1855 Depot Lane, Cutchogue, New York."
State your name for the record?
MS. BARRY: Joyce Barry, B-A-R-R-Y.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Hold on one
second. We have in our file, a letter from
Suffolk County indicating that this matter is for
local determination.
you may have them?
MS. BARRY: Not
If you would like a copy,
necessary. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Ail right, please
proceed.
MS. BARRY: Okay, we are asking for
permission for a Bed and Breakfast. We would be
adding three rooms for our guests. Total square
footage for guest occupied is 608 feet. Owner
occupies square footage is 973. Guest owner
occupied is 861, approximately.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You have 973 square
feet for the owner --
MS. BARRY: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And guest owner is?
MS. BARRY: 861.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me review my
questions. I am going to start at this end now.
Ken, any questions?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I am looking at the
survey. I haven't had a chance to do a field
inspection. I would like to do that in the
future, if possible.
MS. BARRY: Okay.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Maybe you can contact
the office when it might be convenient for you?
MS. BARRY: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: George?
MEMBER HORNING: The occupancy for the Bed
and Breakfast, you mentioned to me in a private
conversation when I went yesterday, that you
would hope to get going in May, are you going to
run it seasonally or would it be year --
MS. BARRY: No, it would be year round.
Except when we go away.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You mentioned to us that
you were having difficulty, I don't know why with
this weather, in putting the driveway?
MS. BARRY: The driveway will be done as
soon as we get past the first rock or dice. We
do have another driveway. I am not sure if you
noticed, but it is on the opposite side of
property by the barn. And we can fit five
there.
the
cars
Three across and then two backed up
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
against the fence.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
MS. BARRY: But the driveway will go in.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And you occupy the
dwelling year round full-time?
MS. BARRY: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And you will continue
to do that. The plan shows adequate parking on
the site. The Board hasn't had often, with
respect to applicants for (In audible) to be
located as opposed to rear parking. And we are
requesting that they do not back out onto the
road.
MS. BARRY: No, there will be a turn around.
I don't back out into the road.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Has there been any
plans to install such --
MS. BARRY: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
code will require a code
egress from the second
MS. BARRY: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MS. BARRY: Yes,
Two upstairs bedrooms
Are you aware that the
conforming emergency
floor?
Some down ladder?
we have pull down ladders.
and the third bedroom that
13
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
will be
will have their own outside entrance.
March 3, 2011
for guests, is on the main floor and they
So that is
already
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
installed?
MS. BARRY: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
no further questions.
MEMBER DINIZIO:
Very good. I have
Jim?
No, it's just kind of
confusing. We talked about some Bed and
Breakfast and then a road, I was a little bit
confused, and maybe we can clear it up now.
MS. BARRY: If you have the plan in front of
you, the floor plan. When you come into the
front of the house, the living room/dining room
area will be first guest and owner occupancy.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I was going to ask you
about that. I thought
corner --
MS. BARRY: Yeah,
closet.
MEMBER DINIZIO:
it was just the
we stick them in the
This is for the record. So
included for the square footage that you
that was
gave us?
MS.
of
BARRY: Right. I gave you a breakdown
areas that we will be using with the guests.
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
The guests alone, which will be the three
bedrooms and what is just for us, which is the
kitchen/laundry area. That
And of course, our bedroom.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Ail right. Thank you. I
just had a hard time looking --
MS. BARRY: There is a lot on there.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I just have a couple of
other questions concerning the accessory -- is
that the reason why you have a handwritten
is just for our use.
drivers license? Is that the reason so?
MS. BARRY: Yes. We sold the house on North
Cove Road a few years ago. This is our only
residence. I love it where we are. No regrets.
We have really nice neighbors.
MEMBER DINIZIO: That's all I have. I just
wanted to make sure you were living there.
MS. BARRY: Yes, I am.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there anyone in the
audience that would like to address this
application?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no further
comments, I would make a motion to close this
hearing and reserve decision at a later date.
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MEMBER HORNING: Second.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Ail in favor?
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
Seconded by George.
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
HEARING #6448 - STERLING HARBOR, INC.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next application
before the Board is for Sterling Harbor, Inc.,
No. 6448. I will read the legal notice into the
record.
"Request for variance from Code Article III
Section 280-15 and the Building Inspector's
Deceraber 9, 2010 Notice of Disapproval based on
an application for building permit to construct
an accessory garage 1) proposed garage location
is other than the code required rear yard; at:
2404 Camo Mineola Road, Extension in Mattituck."
for the record?
Pawlowski.
Paul Pawlowski.
And
Would you state your name
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Paul
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
16
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
would you spell it please?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: P-A-W-L-O-W-S-K-I.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you, sir. We
have in our file, a letter of a local
determination from the County of Suffolk and a
copy of the Local Water Front Revitalization
Program Review, indicating consistency with the
LWRP. Do you have a copy or would you like a
copy?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: I have a copy, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I am double checking
that you have all the records. Okay, please
proceed.
MR. PAWLOWSKI:
15X24
I would like to build a
detached garage, which would occupy .9%
of the lot coverage in front
was just recently built.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
of the house that
Before you continue,
we haven't received from you, any of the white
slips or green slips regarding the (In audible)
of neighbors.
MR. PAWLOWSKI: I have the original. (In
audible). This is the second one that they
received because I already went through the
Trustees. All the neighbors have seen it. They
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
have seen the Trustees process already. So
they have been looking at the same application
for the last two month.
CHAIRPERSON WEIS~LAN: So you will e-mail
that to Vicki in our office?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Absolutely.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All right.
MR. PAWLOWSKI:
digitally and online
for it.
But they did get it
it shows that they signed
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Good.
me start with Gerry and we will
through.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
Perfect. Let
work our way
know the access to
this property is not part of this particular
hearing; however, this is through the marina, are
you asked to do anything with this road? Do you
pay for any portion of the enhancement of the
snow removal?
I think I am new to
I just built a house.
the
road? Do you pay for any
MR. PAWLOWSKI: No.
neighborhood obviously.
It is deemed private years ago. I think it is
passed over to the Town. The Town maintains up
to my house and the end is privately
maintained.
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: The reason why I asked
that question is because the County of Suffolk
owned that property at one time and I don't know
if they own it now.
MR. PAWLOWSKI: It went up for auction.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Did someone buy it?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: No. They still own it.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You referenced to a
question of the garage. Is there any particular
reason why the garage can't go into a conforming
location?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: It's a strange lot and there
is no way to put it, in a conforming location --
would be to the driveway. There is a -- it's a
triangle. It really can't work. There are
setbacks from the rear yard that are complicated,
so this is obvious the best area. I could put it
maybe to the side of the house but this would
really make it difficult to navigate.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You mean attached to the
side of the house?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: I don't really want to do
that because the house on pilings. So just
next to it. That would look weird and I would
have to put in a larger driveway and so that is
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
why I am proposing to put it there.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Were you required to put
the house on pilings because of FEMA?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: The situation is I wasn't
required. I bought the property with the
existing permits and approvals. And so it took
them a few years to get that. So I didn't want
to go back. So just what was allowed. The
property is no longer in the FEMA flood district
from the new FEMA maps. I don't know the dates.
But it is no longer deemed a flood zone.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Is the garage going to
be used only for storage purposes?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Yes.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: George?
MEMBER HORNING: Sure. What is your
affiliation with Sterling Harbor?
MR. PAWLOWSKI:
bought the property.
for business reasons.
house myself.
MEMBER HORNING:
MR. PAWLOWSKI:
MEMBER HORNING:
That is my company. I
Got it for my company just
But I own and occupy that
And who is Joe Weed?
He works with me, my uncle.
On the AG statement, the
20
March 3, 2011 21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
copy that I have is a big "X" on it; is there any
reason for that?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: When I went to get the
application the people helped me "X" that out and
said that I did not need to do that.
MEMBER HORNING: Okay. Is the property
currently for sale or are you the one who
purchased it?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: It is currently for sale
but I am looking to take it off the market.
MEMBER HORNING:
market?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Yes.
MEMBER HORNING: To
You are taking it off the
Gerry's question with
need a variance if you
the garage, you wouldn't
attached it to your house.
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Here is the reason why. I
built the house that I was permitted to build. I
didn't want to go back and spend two to four
years in the permit process. The house is
currently on pilings with an elevation of 12
So it is like a 4 foot difference in
To put a garage attached onto pilings is
it there
foot.
grade.
pretty tough. So I would like to put
where it would work a lot better and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
architecturally look a lot better.
MEMBER HORNING: And on your application,
you suggest or you say that the alleged
difficulty was not self created, how do you
explain that?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: The alleged difficulty of
what?
MEMBER HORNING: Needing a variance. Were
you not aware of some building codes --
MR. ?AWLOWSKI: No, I was fully aware.
That is not why I said "no" to that. I don't
really get that question.
MEMBER HORNING:
consideration.
MR. PAWLOWSKI:
It is part of our
I understand.
Some of those
questions, I don't really see how they fit or
conformed with what I was doing. It was a
little strange from the booklet. I said no to
the ones that I couldn't understand.
MEMBER HORNING: If you recently purchased
the property, we expect the applicant to be aware
of the Town Code. So therefore, it would be sort
of a self created hardship to want a variance
knowing what the codes are, rather than not being
self created.
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Sure. I understood the
code but I didn't understand the question. So I
don't know how putting the garage --
MEMBER HORNING: Well, you don't need to put
the garage there. You can attach it to the house
for example. You can work around it so you
didn't need a variance.
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Sure.
MEMBER HORNING: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Ken?
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No questions.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Jim?
MEMBER DINIZIO: I think the reason why you
are putting it where you are putting it there is
because it is most economical.
MR. ?AWLOWSKI: Actually, the house
I had to build to that footprint exactly.
driveway works best for the property. I
disturb one tree on the property. It is
completely natural vegetation. Navigating with
that driveway was the best and mainly, to attach
an at-grade garage with a 4 foot high house on
pilings is pretty ugly and pretty hard to do.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Those are the
I built,
The
didn't
considerations.
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR.
is natural vegetation. There is no lawn.
looks like you dropped it out of the sky.
MEMBER DINIZIO: You built as per a
footprint that was required by whom?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Originally the original
owner went through the entire process with the
Trustees and the DEC and you know --
MEMBER DINIZIO:
footprint?
MR. PAWLOWSKI:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
March 3, 2011
PAWLOWSKI: Yes. The entire property
So it
So they set this
Yes.
So attaching it to this
house would upset this footprint?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Absolutely. I didn't want
to go back. It took them four years to get it.
I liked the footprint. The one thing that they
didn't take into consideration was some storage
space. So this was my best option.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Did you go to the
Trustees?
MR. PAWLOWSKI: I went through the Trustees
and they approved it. So it has already been
done. I just did it simultaneously. So I was
hoping that I would get the answers at the same
time. So it could work out.
24
March 3, 2011 25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MEMBER DINIZIO: Thank you.
MR. PAWLOWSKI: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Any other questions
from the Board?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there anyone in the
audience that would like to address the
applicant?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no further
comments or questions, I will make a motion to
close this public hearing and reserve decision to
a later date.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Ail in favor?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
MEMBER HORNING:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
Second.
Seconded by Gerry.
Aye.
Aye.
Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
HEARING #6449 - JEROME AND SANDRA
MARTOCCHIA, JR.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: "Applicant requests a
Special Exception under Article III, Section
280-13B(13). The applicant is the owner
requesting authorization to establish an
accessory apartment in an accessory structure at;
67795 CR 48, Greenport."
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Good morning, Ladies and
Gentlemen.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Good morning.
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Before we begin, we
recently got a letter from our next door
neighbor.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: First, would you
please state your name --
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Sure. Jerome Martocchia.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And would you please
spell it for the record?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Sure, it's
M-A-R-T-O-C-C-H-I-A. And the house, like I said,
my next door neighbors were part of the
original family that owned -- it was originally a
dairy farm. And they have a letter attesting to
their recollection of this building that I call a
"cottage" or whatever, as being used as that.
And I have a notarized letter and I have five
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
copies,
the record?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
And while you are doing that
of the green cards?
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
those to Vicki, please.
March 3, 2011
if you guys want it and I can put it
Please do, yes.
sir,
(In audible).
into
do you have any
If you would submit
If you could contact the
post office and try and contact them to see if
they were ever received?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: I know my next door
neighbor received hers but she didn't send me
anything back. She just broke her femur and the
other cousin that lives in that house, has a bad
heart and is getting heart surgery. They wanted
to be here today but obviously they are elder
and handicap and can't be here today. She can't
get to the mail or couldn't get to the mail to
send it back, but I can go over there and pick it
up, if need be.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. We have a
letter from Suffolk County indicating that your
matter is for our local determination.
MR. MARTOCCHIA: What does that mean?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It means that they
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
have nothing to do with it. That this is for
the Town of Southold to deal with it. This is a
matter of law that we have to notify Suffolk
County and to see if they have ay interest of
jurisdiction and they sent it back with a "no," a
long with a list of other applications. So let
me understand this, you have a pre CO on this
building that states that it is an accessory
building, not a cottage. But this letter seems
to suggest that it was a cottage.
MR. MARTOCCHIA: As far as they can remember
they think the building was built in the 20's and
then the gentleman that owned it, Edgar Burke
lived there his whole entire life and then when
he passed away, he had no family, so it went to a
probate or something like that. So you know, as
far as calling it an "accessory," I don't know.
When I bought the house I have known it as a
little cottage. When I was there, there was
actually Section VIII people that live there that
no longer live there. And the neighbors like I
said, it has always had electricity, running
water, heat. So I mean, I understand the law a
little bit but I don't understand what you call
cottage or you know, a one and a half story
28
March 3, 2011 29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
building.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What I am getting
at, your pre CO called it as an accessory
structure, that would mean it was either a shed,
a barn, a storage building or a garage. And in
fact, what you are saying this has always
existed as a second dwelling on the property.
MEMBER DINIZIO: If I can, (In audible) and
I got in trouble of going back there for going in
the back. I thought I was doing my public duty
but the Chief didn't think it that way. I can
attest that it has always been somebody living
there. Whether the owner of the subtenant. I
can tell you it was always there. And the way it
is. It might have some new shingles on it. It
never had any garage doors on it, as I can
recall.
MEMBER HORNING: If you have an accessory
apartment in a building that is only an
apartment --
MEMBER DINIZIO: I think the problem is,
is here to legalize that. (In audible). I
think that he is claiming preexisting.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Here is part of the
dilemma and that is --
he
don't
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3,
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
for accessory storage.
2011
I do use the second half
If you want to say that
I don't use part of the building,
story, I use for storage.
MEMBER HORNING: How do
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
There is pull down stairs. It's
the winter, so I have some pumps
that half
wouldn't want to keep out
it up there.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
you access it?
I access via the building.
not freezing in
and stuff that I
in the cold that I put
There are two issues
that I think that are important and to clarify on
the record. The law now permits the
establishment as "as built" or proposed
apartments in a legally construction. Meaning
that it had a CO. Storage buildings are a garage
and that suggests that it would have (In audible)
that the apartment is an accessory to a second
use. The whole building is not used for the
dwelling. It's a garage or storage or something
or whatever. Those three things. And so if you
can establish that you have storage in
buildings. That maybe one route to go.
other is to say, is that
written correctly by the
these
The
the pre CO is not
Building Inspector and
30
March 3, 2011 31
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
4
to get them to correct that.
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Yeah. I talked to some
people about that and they said, "you might as
That is never going to happen."
know how this process really
well forget it.
I don't really
works, whether I have to go in front of them or I
don't know who to talk to. You know, it's hard
economic times. I am spending a lot of money for
the survey, for the architectural plans. It's
getting to a point where my money is running dry
to be doing all the applications that I need to
be doing. This was the route that I was guided
to. So if it's possible, I would like to stick
with it for a conclusion here.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. I just wanted
to be as clear as possible. As Jim suggested
that from his knowledge, it has already been used
as a dwelling consistently. You have a letter
stating such. That was
pursue.
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
just one
I appreciate
avenue to
that and that
would have been something that I would have
thought about, if I had not chosen this route.
They told me that I needed to talk to the ZBA and
go this route.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Would you like to
proceed?
MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah, I would just like to
ask him twelve questions. You should know the
answers pretty much. The dimensions. The first
one is, is the accessory apartment located in an
accessory building?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Yes.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Are the owner of the
premises occupying either the existing single
family dwelling unit or the accessory apartment
that is detached accessory structure as the owner
of the principle residence?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Yes.
MEMBER DINIZIO: You are living in the house
in the front, and they are going to live in
back in a detached building?
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
the
Yes.
Is says the other dwelling
unit shall be occupied by a family member or
resident, who is currently on the Southold Town
of Affordable Housing registry or is eligible for
placement (In audible)
years. So do you have
there now?
for a term of one or more
an idea of who is going in
32
March 3, 2011 33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
okay.
My niece.
So that is a family member,
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If I can just
interrupt for one second here?
MEMBER DINIZIO: Sure.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Are instructions
for affidavits of who is going to be living
there --
MR. MARTOCCHIA: No problem.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If you can provide an
affidavit that it is a family member who has been
living there and continues to live there -- has
she been living there?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Like I said, I didn't even
know that I was even doing anything wrong.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
paying any rent?
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
actually watches my kid.
It's okay. Is she
Not really, no. She
I have a kid that is
3 1/2 years old and she is
no work out here.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
out?
MR.
23. There really is
You are helping her
MARTOCCHIA: I mean really, you can't
March 3, 2011 34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
afford to live out here. Not only to my niece,
it's good to have a place where they can stay.
You know, I have relatives that are kind
of old,
I mean,
after them.
MEMBER DINIZIO:
to formalize that.
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
who knows, I might put them there to look
In any case, you might have
Okay.
Can you tell me how many
square feet of livable floor area?
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
plan?
MEMBER DINIZIO: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Wouldn't it be on the floor
I see it.
(In audible). 676.
MEMBER HORNING: Can you give us the area of
storage?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: It's either a quarter --
the whole upstairs is basically a storage area.
I don't have the exact calculations but I am sure
we can do one.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It's the same as the
house except for the height?
MEMBER DINIZIO: I doubt that it --
MR. MARTOCCHIA: I can stand up there.
MEMBER DINIZIO: It's not livable floor
March 3, 2011 35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
area.
MEMBER HORNING: He is trying to help you
establish the fact that you can use that for
storage.
MEMBER DINIZIO: This is the code I am
assuming --
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: No, that is the
standards. That is in the code. So we're trying
to establish storage.
MR. MARTOCCHIA: I appreciate that.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Give us some square footage
on that?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Do I need to go to the
architect for that? I am pretty good on numbers.
MEMBER HORNING: So let us know what the
storage area square footage is and how you access
it?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: I can supply pictures of
whatever.
MEMBER DINIZIO: You have three parking
spaces?
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Yes.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Not more than one
accessory apartment shall be permitted on the
parcel --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3,
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
an6ther building.
MR.
barns.
all
subject
that?
MR.
MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
the requirements.
to a building
MARTOCCHIA:
2011
That is correct.
You have your house and
Two others. They are just
They are not apartments?
No, just barns.
No bed and breakfast?
No.
Accessory apartment meets
(In audible) shall be
permit? You are aware of
Yes. At the time that I
bought the -- you know, I don't know any of
this stuff. This is a big giant learning
process. So --
MEMBER DINIZIO: Existing building, which
is converted which has been made into the
apartment has been
prior to January 1,
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
in existence and valid CO
2008.
Yes.
We know that. Shall comply
with all the requirements of Chapter 280 of the
Town Code. The Building Inspector will make
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3,
sure that that happens.
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
2011
Yes.
The conversion of the
accessory apartment shall comply with all
regulations in New York State Construction Code
and other applicable
CO?
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
MEMBER DINIZIO:
ladder in to go up the
questions that I have.
as simple as possible.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I
statement for the record.
codes. Again, you have a
Yeah, a pre CO.
You might have to put a
stairs. That is all the
I am trying to make this
just want to make one
Jim, when I walked
around the house with you and walked around with
you and Vicki, I saw no scouring on this
foundation. There were no ramps built to this
structure because of the elevation of the
structure above the ground. If there were ramps
as used as a garage, I would have seen ramps
broken away from the foundation in some way. If
they were part of the foundation or adjacent to
it. I saw none of that. So I honestly believe
that it is a cottage.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I agree with that.
37
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3,
2011
They built them on the
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
ground in those days.
MR. MARTOCCHIA: I have been trying to
restore the barn but money is an issue. It has
trees for floor things.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Ken?
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No questions.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Anything else from
anybody?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Is there any one in
the audience who would like to speak to this
application?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Being no further
questions or comments, I will make a motion to
close this public hearing and reserve decision
subject to receipt of a square footages of the
storage area and affidavit that is notarized
indicating the occupant of the accessory
apartment will be a family member.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And subject to a
lease. And again, that is between you and the
occupant. It could be a $1.00 a year.
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MR. MARTOCCHIA: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
the money, but it has to be a
and a name. You can
We don't care
lease with
a
about
a year
go to the stationary and get
form --
MR. MARTOCCHIA:
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
All in favor?
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
Okay.
Gerry seconded.
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
I make a motion to
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
recess for three minutes.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
Second.
Ail in favor?
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
(Whereupon, a recess was taken at this time.)
HEARING #6438 - GEORGE AND RUBY GAFFGA.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next hearing
before is George and Ruby Gaffga. That is
No. 6438. "Request for variance from Code
Sections 280-13(A) (1) and 280-18 and the
Building Inspector's October 26, 2010 Notice of
Disapproval based on an application for building
permit to demolish and construct a new second
single family dwelling at; 1) more than the code
required one family detached dwelling, 2) less
the code required rear yard setback of 50
at: 175 Laurel Avenue, Southold."
like to state your name for the
than
feet,
Would you
record, please?
MR. GAFFGA:
G-A-F-F-G-A.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
I am George Gaffga,
indicating a
application.
would like?
And Mr. Gaffga, we
have in our file a letter from Suffolk County
local determination for this
And you can have a copy, if you
It simply states there are no
issues with the County on this application.
MR. GAFFGA: No, thank you. I also want
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
to introduce Mr. Robert Tast who is the
architect working with me.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMJtN: Okay.
MR. GAFFGA: I just want to give a little
background, the area that I am talking about
has probably almost 100 years that my grandfather
first lived in that community and that particular
area that I am looking to build this house. I
grew up there. My brother and his family live in
one piece of that property that has been
subdivided some years ago. My mom lives in a
cottage size house right next door to the house
that I am looking to build or demolish first.
And the one that I am looking to demolish and
rebuild, is a rental right now. About five
years ago, I bought the property from my mom.
My wife and I did. It was major termite damage
in that rental property and I had one carpenter
and I hired a building engineer to look at it, in
terms of any rebuilding and they both advised
against it. And the situation
of 62, I will retire someday.
happen to be a pastor that lives
is provided for me in Mattituck.
like to build this
is now at the age
I have no home. I
in a house that
And so I would
home. A family property that
41
March 3, 2011 42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
my children can come to and at
them actually own. That is my
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All
least one day and
story.
right. Let's
begin, George, do you want to start?
MEMBER HORNING: Sure. I was interested
in your report of house inspections, why did you
do that?
MR. GAFFGA: I wanted to know for myself
if anything could be done for the house. I
hired a carpenter to do some wall repair for some
extensive termite damage. The whole basement we
cemented and resealed and so I had this man come
and give this inspection and give his opinion at
the end of the report.
MEMBER HORNING: I read it. He does mention
termite damage but other comments is chimney is
in good shape, roof if in good shape. You feel
because of the termite damage --
MR. GAFFGA: The whole bottom of the house
-- and I don't really understand the terms, but
something that goes around, but the whole house
would have to be moved off of that old wells and
be rebuilt. The foundation would need to be
rebuilt. The (In audible) on the foundation
would need to be redone and he said that would be
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
rather cost prohibitive to do that. Then
the house is too small for me to have it and then
have any family come.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me ask a couple
of questions. Sir, maybe (In audible) to work on
a renovation reconstruction then it would be to
just tare down and start over. The dilemma here
and I am not sure if you are aware of the law,
you have an illegal structure because it is
preexisting and nonconforming. It's now new
construction. Once that is torn down, you lose
that nonconformity. You lose that CO, and that
is very problematic because the law does not
permit the construction of a second dwelling on
the same property. There is nothing preventing
you from enlarging the existing dwelling. Even
rebuilding and reconstructing in same kind is
permitted with the lifting it up the foundation.
You can practically build the whole thing. You
can enlarge, but once it is gone, its leveled and
demo'd, all bets are off the preexisting
nonconformity, and I just want the record to
reflect what the law is so you are aware of what
is the dilemma of having to present a second --
or proposing to build a new second dwelling on
43
March 3, 2011 44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the property.
MR. GAFFGA: So that I understand, if you
took part of the house down, you can build the
whole thing much larger than the footprint that
it is on now?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Not much larger but
you can propose additions to a preexisting
nonconforming structure. You can enlarge it. If
it increases the degree of nonconformity than
what you are proposing, that your setback is
going to be different, if you add to what is on
there now. If the Board so choses, we can grant
the variance to that nonconformity, but what is
illegally very difficult to say, is just tare it
down and build a new building. You no longer
have that CO. You no longer have that preexisting
CO.
MR. GAFFGA: Sure. Does it matter -- the
setback on the new house is more conforming
than --
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yeah, you want to --
let's see, you are proposing a rear yard setback
of 44 1/2 feet, where the code requires 50, which
is 1.8 feet greater than what is currently
existing. So you are creating a little
March 3, 2011 45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
more
nonconformity? No.
structure, you are
-- you are saying you are a less
Once you enlarge that
enlarging the nonconformity.
MR. GAFFGA: Right.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The whole building is
nonconforming. So we want to work with you on
resolving the matter but it is important for you
to understand what financial reasons, what are
important to everybody including us. Legally we
can't do anything that if you tare this down and
start from scratch, the law does not permit the
construction of a second dwelling on a
property.
MR. GAFFGA: Okay. But is that why we are
asking for permission to do this? Are we
asking --
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If you want to put a
second dwelling, and you want to build one, you
would have to come before this Board for a Use
Variance, which is very different standards from
an Area Variance. An Area Variance has to do
with saying "my setbacks are nonconforming, my
height is nonconforming.
nonconforming." You know,
which is
My lot coverage is
that kind of thing,
kind of where it is now. Given the
March 3, 2011 46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
fact that you have a preexisting CO. So it was
grandfathered. This second dwelling is
permitted legally on the property. If it gets
removed then the only thing that you can pursue
here is a Use Variance, which means that you are
adding a second use. Not permitted by law unless
this Board approves it. And a Use Variance has
very different standards and it is very
difficult to achieve. You have to prove that you
can not -- you know any kind of gain on the
property and that there is hardship there. It
is very rare that this Board grants these
variances.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
we go from here?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
The question is where do
Exactly. Do you
understand what the issues are, both of you?
Would you like to speak, sir?
MR. TAST: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Would you state your
name for record?
MR. TAST:
regard to the
a detriment to restore it, unless complete gut
restoration and basically the foundation and the
My name is Bob Tast, T-A-S-T. In
existing house that really would be
March 3, 2011 47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
floor system has to be replaced. Also the
first floor height is only 7.3. So Mr. Gaffga,
is a tall guy. So we need to increase the
height. Thirdly, the size of the dwelling would
not be conducive to the way that he would like to
live in his retirement times. So all of those
things brought us to the conclusion that it is a
better project to replace it rather than just to
restore it. We do things and patch things
together, which have already been done a number
of times. I think that you will see that in the
report. It was probably built some time before
1920's. So it's old. And we did apply for that
very reason. At the end of the day, we would
like to say that we would like to make a home for
Pastor Gaffga and it would be a nice home that he
can retire in and live next to his mom and his
brother, who has a piece of property on Laurel.
How we achieve it? We thought it would be better
to replace it.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I totally understand
your reasoning.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Mr. Tast, could you take
the existing foundation and leave it there and
superimpose another foundation over the top of
March 3, 2011 48
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
4
that?
I guess you could put holes
from one wall to the other.
was willing to grant
are looking for, but
I mean, I really it is an argious task.
in the wall and go
Assuming the Board
you the setbacks that you
if this Board is concerned
mainly about the issue of this area variance,
that is really the only thing that you can do.
Certainly this particular foundation based upon
the location says that it can't support and
structure. And any structure -- this house is
completely substandard in reference to the height
to one of the members in the family. (In audible)
we have a real dilemma here and that is the only
way we can see around it.
MR. GAFFGA: It's a concrete block
foundation and it's old and with lots of open
joints. And the termites can crawl right up.
Yes, but we would still like to make a little
bigger than it is now.
MEMBER HORNING: If you tore the house down
and you left one exterior wall, and you left the
foundation, it is still a demolition. Am I
right?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: My understanding is
when you remove 50% of the existing structure.
March 3, 2011 49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
However, there is nothing to prevent a
reconstruction (In audible). There are a lot of
dwellings that exist in Town that are really
substandard. And there is a difference in
defining reconstruction and demolitions. If this
approached as a reconstruction, we have the
jurisdiction and we have the ability also, to
authorize additions to a reconstructed
preexisting nonconforming dwelling.
MEMBER HORNING: Is there
reason why you have angled new
way that you have, rather than
any compelling
construction the
keeping it in the
same sort of parallel to the existing?
MR. GAFFGA: My wife is concerned with the
sun and where the sun moves and lighting up a
kitchen and those kinds of issues and I think it
is very important that she has it the way that
she wants.
MEMBER HORNING: Are you trying to maintain
some sort of separation from the garage?
MR. GAFFGA: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Pretty close to it as
it is. Ken, do you have any questions?
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Not at this time.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Jim?
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MEMBER DINIZIO: It is a
Variance, as you demolish this
(In audible) Use
as proposed the
CO,
that -- you know asking us to put a second
residence on that property is very difficult to
us. I have been on the Board on and off for 25
years and I think maybe have seen three use
variances granted, and those were pretty big
hardships. So you can't say you don't have any
place that you can live. You have a garage that
you can put an apartment in now. We have a law
now. If the building is that far gone, that is
why they makes things nonconforming because at
some point in time, those goes away. I know it
sounds heartless, quite honestly, I don't agree
with it, but it is the law. In our course of
business, that is our core of business. We are
to listen to you and your explanations and then
render decisions that are fair to both. So I
don't
to do.
creative.
house in a one-story house and not need a
variance. But I don't know how that is done.
MR. GAFFGA: How would we know before we
that is on it no longer exists. And I think
know if you want to rethink what you want
I know there are people that are very
Somehow they manage to fit a two-story
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
even proceed what the parameters would be in,
which we know it is going to be accepted?
MEMBER DINIZIO: That is the dilemma. We
can't tell you what we accept. We have to listen
to what you have to say and base our decision on
that. So it is not -- you couldn't get anything
that there is some standard that we would
from us
accept.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think I am hearing a
slightly different question. I think it's how
you can proceed in order to ensure that you
weren't technically demolishing the structure
that you would technically lose the CO, that
begins with the Building Department. You need to
talk with them about calling it a reconstruction
renovation with additions and alterations to a
preexisting.
MEMBER DINIZIO:
Building Department.
MS. ANDALORO:
I am not sure that is the
I mean, you work there.
(In audible) sounds like this
house is in some bad shape. So I am not sure
they are going to be able to get some kind of a
letter to open this up and take some things
apart, it might fall all apart.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: They have a letter and
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
it sends
no major
March 3, 2011
out mixed messages. It says there are
construction concerns. The existing
hearing date
the Building
and see on how
doesn't remove
foundation is probably not strong enough to
support a second story. So what is needed -- I
won't call it a "patch job", but what you need to
do is how to deal with a restoration (In audible)
and stubs to create a greater cavity for
installation but that is (In audible). But if
you have the time, if we adjourn this to another
to give you some time, go back to
Department and think it over. Look
you can approach this so that it
your CO. That is the main thing.
We don't want you to lose
then it is a very complex
then granting a second dwelling on
that CO. If you do,
and unlikely scenario
that property.
The law says
conformity.
accomplish
that we are looking for a greater
So the task is to how to
and maintain that preexisting
nonconformity.
MR. GAFFGA: Okay. So if you
particular time, we can then go to
Department with our plans
to the house?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
adjourn this
the Building
or do they have to go
You have an architect
52
March 3, 2011 53
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and I would think that you can go to the
Building Department with a slightly different
proposal, saying we are not going to demolish the
house. We are going to renovate this. We are
going to maintain
reconstruction and
required.
MEMBER HORNING:
(In audible) renovation
addition (In audible)
What we
variance
are saying is that
jack their existing
MR. GAFFGA: Okay.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If you require more
variances then what you have already paid for,
then you may have to add an additional fee but
don't know that. You don't lose the money.
are not starting over.
we
You
MR. GAFFGA: Okay. I just wanted to know of
another date, you won't have
fees.
we have seen other applicants
foundation up and redo the foundation, change the
foundation to build and addition and reconstruct
portions of the existing dwelling with getting an
involvement with the second use.
MR. GAFFGA: Excuse me for this question, I
had to pay $600.00 to do this?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If we adjourn to
to pay additional
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
the costs.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What you can do is
when we go beyond where we are today, then we can
possibly advise you Qf that, but we can't
predetermine what it is going to be?
MR. TAST: I just have a question, do we
resubmit another application or is it still in
effect?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It would just be
amended.
MR. TAST: In terms of the a new date?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We can adjourn today
for a specific date and then you will know when
is your next date and you can submit your
materials in before that?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: How long do you think it
would take you to do that? A month or two
months?
MR. GAFFGA: Two months.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That is going to be
May 5th. All right. Anyone else in the audience
like to speak on this application?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
questions or comments,
Hearing no further
I would like to make a
54
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3,
motion to adjourn to May
there a second?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
2011
5th at 1:00 p.m.
Second.
Ail in favor?
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
HEARING #6452 - DAVID J. VERITY.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next hearing
before us is for David Verity,
for variance under Article II
the
Building
#6452. "Request
Section 280-9 and
Inspector's November 17, 2010,
updated January 19, 2011 Notice of Disapproval
based on an application for lot recognition which
states the identical lot was created by deed
recorded in Suffolk County Clerk's Office on or
before June 30, 1982 and the lot conformed to the
minimum lot size set forth in Bulk Schedule Att as
of date of lot creation. Proposed lot is less
than the code required size and said deed was
recorded after the code required date at; 865
55
March 3, 2011 56
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
il
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Nokomis Road, Hiawatha's Path,
Pat, would you just state
Southold."
your name for
the record?
MS. MOORE: Patricia Moore, on behalf of
David Verity. He is the beneficiary also the
estate of his mother. At this point, the Estate
is wrapped up.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We have copies from
the Planning Board, do you have copies?
MS. MOORE: I did get that, thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Very good.
MS. MOORE: Their suggestion was a lot line
change. If this is approved, to come in and
modify the property.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Jim?
MEMBER DINIZIO: I was just told on Tuesday
night that I have a relative that is purchasing a
lot from Mr. Verity. So I just wanted to make
sure that this was not that lot?
MS. MOORE: No, maybe on the North Road.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I am not sure. I just
wanted to make it clear.
MS. MOORE: I think he had -- a property
that he had some storage.
MEMBER DINIZIO: It sounds to me like it was
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
a business piece of property.
MS. MOORE: Yeah, I believe.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I will check, and if it is,
I will just recuse myself.
MS. MOORE: That is fine.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We have no green cards
at all.
MS. MOORE: I thought she brought some
over. She didn't bring any? She didn't give me
any -- I have affidavit of mailing. Postal
receipts, and copies of letters to neighbors and
that we delivered on February 17th. Beyond that,
I don't know if we gotten anything back. If we
do, we will bring it to you.
MS. TOTH: Okay. Thank you.
MS. MOORE: Just to begin with, I know
David wanted to be here. Him and his wife had to
be out of town last moment. So I told him that
was fine. But he does want you to let you know
that he was very upset that he had to be out of
Town. But that they wanted to keep this process
moving. So here I am. And if there are issues
that I can't address, when he gets, I can address
to him. Also, some other housekeeping items, I
had submitted a pre CO's for both of these
57
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
structures. When I received the original pre CO,
it didn't have the original attachment of the
inspection report and I want to be sure that you
have it. You may, because sometimes you get
complete packets from the Building Department.
It just reflects that the structure that is on
the northerly parcel, is a dwelling. It has
heat. It has one bathroom. It is a five bedroom
house -- excuse me, five room house. Oil heat.
And a boiler and so on. And then it also
includes a one car garage. I will submit that
for the purpose of keeping everything in the
file. Because it has one tax lot number, the
Building Department can't give me separate CO's.
It has to be under one tax lot number. But I
thought it was more important that you knew that
these were Pre-existing structures, then to wait
to have pre CO's issued under separate tax
numbers. So let me start with the fact that this
is probably -- and I have been a long time but in
the 25 years that I have been out doing, this is
the first time where I have experienced something
like this where there is a deed from the 40's and
the deed doesn't get recorded. That is something
that is unusual and doesn't happen often at all.
58
March 3, 2011 59
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
The law (In audible) buy a piece a property and
you pay someone for a piece of property, really
gives you the protections of somebody down the
line buying the property and it is a recorded
document. But the fact is, Verity had bought the
property in the 40's in 1941,
of the original deed that was
County Center. And it is clear
that it is a 1941 deed from the
I gave you a copy
recorded at the
from the document
Frederick and
Coletta Wickham to the Verity's parents. That
deed from 1941 addressed specifically for the
southerly -- I am going to refer to the southerly
and northerly parcel because I don't have a
separate number to identify it. So the southerly
parcel is the big house. That is
is about 1200 square feet. It is
So as far as the lots how it was created,
-- the first one to be bought and it was
had not been for the fact that Wickham at the
time took back a small like a handshake mortgage.
the house that
a corner lot.
it was
-- if it
it all at once, just send me payments and he
described it as $100.00 a month for however long
it took. In the 40's it was very, very cheap to
In the olden days it was a tough time in the US
and the agreement was, I know you can't pay for
March 3, 2011 60
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
~25
buy property out here. The parents bought
property. They paid Mr. Wickham a $100.00
month. And then when the payment was
Wickham sent the deed to Mr. Verity.
you know, I guess laymen, are not that
sophisticated to know that when you get
the
a
completed,
The family,
a deed,
you need to make sure
the County Center.
unfortunately this
that you take it over to
For whatever reason and
did not come up until
Mr. Verity passed away, which again created the
difficulty when it was discovered. That major
date of June 30, 1983, he had passed away at the
time. So in '83 is when Mr. Verity passed away.
I am talking about at the parents level. When he
passed away, at that point, the estate is being
administered and they are doing some title
searches and so on, and what happened? What is
going on? This property since 1941, we don't
own. What happened? That is when they found the
deed. The recording of that document occurs in
August. The code read -- the magic date is
June 30, 1983. That prompted me to go to the
history of the (In audible) and there is a lot of
history there. And I know that the Zoning Board
was instrumental in creating the (In audible)
March 3, 2011 61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
lot. And two points became very
They were trying to create -- or
recognize in writing in the code,
apparent.
trying to
the properties
that were conveyed by deed. And they were all
over the Town. The farmers did it. You bought a
property, it had to be a certain size. After we
imposed the size requirements. Before that,
there was no size requirements but let's -- in
this case, there were size requirements, which
actually doubled. (In audible) 1941. But if you
met the size requirements, the seller would do a
deed and convey out the property. That was all
over Town and it was a mess because one
department recognized it this way and another
department another. So they created the code,
the lot recognition to recognize a parcel. And
the kicker is, they set forth that magic date of
the recording of the deed. I can't change a
recording date. All of the facts that I see and
all of the equities are, that
created. And to not recognize
real hardship on this property.
whole range of other procedures,
'41 deed, was
this property is a
It triggers a
which you know
are options but are not really good options. So
the other issue is reviewing the waiver merger
March 3, 2011 62
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
law, which the reason that that 1983 -- or the
way that it was described at the public hearing
was we were just setting -- the property had been
created before that 1983 date, which for sure you
have all of the facts that in fact that lot was
created prior to 1983. You can always look at
something a different way, and the other way is
that this lot was created and in fact owned by
the Wickham up until 1983. And the parcel was to
the east. The lot was sold off to the Town of
Southold -- so because this is a corner property,
the property to the north, the Verity Family
acquired later on and was purchased and recorded
and so. That was acquired in 1944. So that
established the northerly of the southerly piece.
And the piece to the east, that shows as Susan
McKensize right now was sold off by Wickham to
the Town of Southold in 1949. And then since
has been developed and affordable. Here you have
the lot that is created by deeds in a sense to
the lot to the north and the lot to the east.
Beyond that, I think I have given you the history
all throughout my written paperwork. The
timeline, the fact that the two houses were
developed at the time. I love the 40's. People
March 3, 2011 63
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
didn't get surveyors at that time. You know,
they would go out and measure and be like, that
looks like we are in a good spot. They built
the house. In fact, what is shown as a cottage
is a year round house. It has been a year round
house. It is built out of cement blocks and
covered with siding. When I asked Mr. Verity if
it's feasible to pick it up and move it, that's
hard because it is a cement block house. There
are options there but I don't know if picking it
up with cement blocks is feasible. I would like
to try to address issues or questions that you
have? Otherwise I will be reading from the whole
dissertation, while you have it in front of you
already.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Lets look first
at the issue that the fact the deed was not
recorded. It is my understanding that this Board
does not have the jurisdiction to rewrite the law
by recognizing a deed that was not recorded on or
before the date that the law requires it to be.
We don't have the jurisdiction to create a waiver
of that law.
MS. MOORE:
at
There is another way of looking
it by the fact that the parcel was created by
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
the deeds to the north and to the east.
fact,
sense.
So in
it was created by deeds of two deeds in a
Those deeds were recorded prior to the
1983 date.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We are looking at the
deed for this particular parcel.
MS. MOORE: I understand that.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Why didn't you just
file for a minor subdivision for a lot area
variance for a nonconforming lot size and go to
the Planning Board?
MS. MOORE: I prepared this application
multiple times. And one of the ways was that
way. In fact, in speaking with the Building
Department, they felt that the equities in this
instance were so strong and that the Zoning Board
had jurisdiction and recognized the parcel. That
they wanted -- their suggestion was come to this
Board with this application and then come to us.
If we are to come in with area variances to
create undersized lots,
Planning Board, I don't
the Planning Board goes,
and then go to the
know what -- as far as
are we going to be
paying $7,000.00 for a new lot as a subdivision?
I mean -- I don't know, if this considered a new
64
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
lot or a re-subdivision? I don't know the answer
to that. I don't want to preach the code. You
know, conservatively my client can be spending
$7,000.00 on a lot that has a family that the
family has owned since the 40's. So there is so
many ways taking it through one avenue versus
another. That, you know, I am here at the
suggestion of the Building Department.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You are the lawyer.
MS. MOORE: I take responsibility. There
are often times that I disagree with the Building
Department, but I do have to go my direction that
it should go where the
directs me. There are
property.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Building Department
deeds that creates this
We are still looking
at a deed that does not have a recorded deed on
or before June 30, 1983 and this Board doesn't
have the legal right to recognize that deed. It
just doesn't.
MS. MOORE: Okay. I think if that was the
position had, I could have saved the
Waiver-Merger application fee and all the time.
So I am somewhat surprised that is the option and
the reaction that I am getting. If typically you
65
March 3, 2011 66
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
guys feel that there is no jurisdiction, you
don't even take an application. "We don't have
jurisdiction. Go a different avenue" as I said,
I did this application three different ways. One
other way was certainly an area variance and I
feel (In audible) these
since the 40's.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
surprised that
MS. MOORE:
lots have been in place
That is why I am
you didn't submit that way.
I plucked from that application
and went to this one.
adjourn this one so that my client
to repeat the filing and so on?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Certainly. Lets get
the other Board members comments.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I feel a little bit
differently about not accepting the deed. We are
only saying when the deed was created when it
Is it possible to just
doesn't have
when it just has the date on it and preexist
zoning and certainly, I believe we have granted
waivers based on -- listen, I didn't know the
laws existed. I think not accepting that deed
is a stretch, but if you want to try a different
was, the 1941, that lot was described as a lot.
I just thought what difference does the deed make
March 3, 2011 67
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MS. MOORE:
application has
your code.
way --
MS. MOORE: No, I mean if the majority of
the Board wants to accept it, I would be
thrilled.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I am no legal person. I
don't real estate that well. In reading through
the application, it seems so simple to me that, I
know the Verity's. I went to school with David.
You know, I just don't quite understand why it
would be a problem.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think that having
checked into this matter prior with legal
counsel, the ZBA does not have jurisdiction,
because the fact that it is changing the law. We
can have sympathy for an application. We can
work to try and accomplish, you know, various
things. It just simply does --
But then again, every zoning
resulted in an interpretation of
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes, but not the date.
We can grant area variances. We can do a number
of things but we can't change the date.
MEMBER DINIZIO: He has offered proof that
this existed before that date.
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
4
March 3, 2011
I know what you are saying.
deed. I understand the
MS. MOORE:
It's the recording of the
legal process.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I know you do because
you are a very good -- very well informed
attorney. It's not that the deed doesn't exist
or the property doesn't exist, we are not denying
that, it is a technicality, but it is one that we
are bound by. We -- if it is not recorded, it is
not recorded. So I -- there was no question that
this second lot -- the bottom line is, these lots
existed, and if they show up for a subdivision
map and I don't think that is something that we
are contesting. There is documentation in
evidence. There is character of the
neighborhood. The procedure by which we manage
to actually legalize the second lot. That is
really what is before us.
Gerry, do you have any coraments?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No, I think we are bound
by what you say we can't do. Let's address it in
another way. Fortunately, we have it another
way.
George and Ken?
I concur.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MEMBER HORNING:
68
March 3, 2011 69
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MEMBER SCHNEIDER:
questions.
MS. MOORE: Sure.
the
I have a couple of
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: The northerly portion of
lot, I guess we are calling it. That was
conveyed by the Verity -- by Wickham by deed?
MS. MOORE: Yes.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER:
file?
MS. MOORE:
the same time.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Second question. So
the southerly lot, the Wickham's owned that.
did they establish that lot by the Wickham's
order to preconvey it to the Verity's?
MS. MOORE: The Wickham's bought the
property in 1935 and between '35 and '41,
they did on a map that wasn't a filed map.
And we have that in the
It was conveyed and recorded at
MEMBER SCHNEIDER:
MS. MOORE: Yeah. I
like a different map that
what
lots. And what they -- in that time, in the
40's, if you wanted to split off your property
you could do it by deed and by -- it is almost
like an informal map. Dan Powell, had a lot.
then
How
in
This one?
think they actually
they did as proposed
March 3, 2011 70
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
They would go to the surveyors and say I want you
to plot out (In audible) I am thinking about
developing this property. I want to develop 30
lots.
period of time,
off their lot.
They would draw up the map and over the
the developer, owner, would sell
They would almost use it as their
retirement. They would sell it off every year.
That I think is what Wickham did here. I think
what he did, which was a little unusual. He (In
audible) that map was a filed map. That shows up
in the County Center as a filed map. So he
stated off in '35 by drawing the lots and then in
I think also in '35, he may have filed the roads
of that entire lot and also the southerly
blackened waters. And from that point forward,
he soiled those properties. It wasn't that
complicated.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I understand.
MS. MOORE: It went into the 1950's. So it
was a long period of time that the Wickham's
developed this area.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: The northerly lot is
recorded at the County Center?
MS. MOORE: Yes.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Why do you think it does
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
4
March 3, 2011
not show up on the tax map?
MS. MOORE: That is a total mystery. The
tax map comes from the Assessor's in the
way --
MEMBER HORNING: No, it does come from the
County when it is actually filed.
MS. MOORE: County -- the real property
should have showed it from the 40's from the
northerly piece and then the southerly piece is
still Wickham. It is not a mystery. It should
have shown up on the records. And then what
happened is, between '59 and '61 is when the
Assessor's started documenting and making
property cards. The first notation that you see
in most of the property cards is 1961. In 1961
that was what was on record. Why they didn't
show it as two parcels. It was kind of repeat of
two errors.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It was all done on the
actual geographical maps. There is a great
possibility that it was never sent over to the
map and real property to actually show it on a
tax map. Just for everyone's benefit, the second
floor, those are the mapest (sic).
MS. MOORE: But they base it on recorded
71
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
1
2
3
4
March 3, 2011
deeds.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You are correct.
There was a deed specialist in the Assessor's
office and that gentleman just returned. But he
was probably actually the second or the third
one. He would come in at certain times and say
yes, this was split off. And then they would
send it off to the mapest and the County held the
actual bible map. It is a possibility that it
just fell through the cracks. We all know that
there was an attorney in Riverhead who was
notorious for not (In audible) the deeds.
MS. MOORE: So the message that I am getting
is that we would adjourn this for a set date?
Do we need a new notice of disapproval?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You can do an amended
one?
MS. MOORE: It is still the same issue.
MS. ANDALORO: It won't be an
interpretation anymore. You would have to show a
lot area --
MS. MOORE: That is what I am going to get
to. I have a map that I had John Masker of
Peconic Surveyors show the property line that was
between the two properties. He gave me
72
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
certain setbacks -- since I am here, would you
mind if I showed it to you? It is more of a
tell me if you want me to change it or not or, if
it more acceptable rather than me submitting it
and you telling me that you would rather switch
the setbacks from one to the other. I think if
I show you the survey it will make sense to you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Why don't you come
forward.
MS. MOORE: Okay.
MS. ANDALORO: Pat, these are just informal
comments of the Board. They are going to have to
look at them more in depth.
MS. MOORE: I know. It is as a courtesy.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: My question to you is,
we can adjourn this to next month, if you want or
do you want to go two months out?
MS. MOORE: Yeah, why don't we have
time -- my packet is 99% complete but it doesn't
hurt to push it into May.
the process. So --
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
that still there?
MS. MOORE: Oh, yeah.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
I don't want to rush
That wooded building, is
It's all there.
73
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MS. MOORE: Everything that is there, is
there.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Hearing no
further questions or comments, I will make a
motion to adjourn this hearing at May 5th at
1:30 p.m.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Seconded by Gerry.
Ail in favor?
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
{See Minutes for Resolution.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I will make a motion
to recess to 1:00. Is
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
Ail in favor?
MEMBER HORNING:
there a second?
Second.
Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
(Whereupon, a recess was taken at this time.)
74
March 3, 2011 75
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
HEARING %6437 - TK ALPHA
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next application
Board is TK Alpha. It is a
So we don't need to read the legal
before the
carryover.
notice.
MR. GOGGINS: Good afternoon,
William C. Goggins, from the Law Offices of
Goggins and Palumbo, 1333 Main Road, Mattituck,
New York, for the applicant. I understand that
this matter was January 6, 2011, at which
point it was adjourned until to today, for the
applicant to adjust his plans. At that time,
there were four issues, one was that the building
was less that the required 40,0000 square feet.
Less than the code required minimum setback of
15 feet. Less than the code required of 10 feet.
And the building was
side yard of 25 feet.
has adjusted the plan,
less than required of the
Since then the applicant
so that the issue number
two was elevated. There is a 15 foot setback.
So he is in compliance with that. Issue number
four that the building was less than the total
required setback of 25 feet, he reduced the width
of the building. Got rid of one of the
commercial uses and he now has 5 feet on in the
March 3, 2011 76
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
inside side yard and he has
side. More than the 25 feet required.
that this application is now tared down
28 feet on west
So now
to one
that the lot size is not 40,000.00 square feet
and two that the side yard is less than 10 feet.
So I would like to address the side yards first,
if I could. The -- if you look at the new plan,
the driveway area which is on the left side is
approximately 23 feet from the west side boundary
to the building. (In audible) is about 25 feet
wide. That (In audible) two-way traffic. So
that is something that the Planning Board is
going to require. There is going to be parking
on the site. They are going to need to get
access to that parking. And the Planning Board
as well, they want to have two-way traffic there.
I guess this is all subject to Planning Board
approval. I understand that the 25 feet is going
to be a minimum that they are going to require.
So that kind of leaves the applicant where he can
only do a 5 yard setback on each side, which is
what we will be asking that you give us a
variance for. That variance is in compliance
with the other buildings in the area. In this
area, downtown Mattituck, it has been (In
March 3, 2011 77
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
audible) 1845.
types of uses in the area.
as the current structures
There has been many different
Right now, as far
are concerned. Most of
them don't even have a side yard setbacks at all.
What I would like to do is give each Board member
a copy of the tax map and that shows the area of
Love Lane and Railroad area.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I went through the
entire litany as I knew it for the applicant at
the last meeting. I just wanted to say that
having been here for a couple of years, after
your presentation, it would behove of you to
present this to the Planning Board so that we
could work cooperatively with them. For the next
couple of months and see if we can get something
that is pretty etched in stone. That is my
particular opinion.
objection to that?
MR. GOGGINS:
Do you have any particular
No, not at all.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
application and then we
before us --
You make the final
have the final variance
MR. GOGGINS: I know that the Planning Board
likes to have some guidance before they start
acting but maybe my presentation, the Board
March 3, 2011 78
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
can kind of give them some ideas on where to
go with it. (In audible) the current plan as it
is. And make it final, and then we can go to
the Planning Board and see what they want to do,
without requiring us to come back.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I don't know if we can
specifically do that because the majority of what
sits here is Site Plan on their particular part.
I am just hearing your testimony on the egress
and ingress, it makes sense to me. But your
client eluded to the fact that some of -- he and
his partners owned the piece next door. So they
may ask for some future access and so there could
be modifications over the next period of time.
That -- this is how its worked for the last --
1980. Lets deal with it and everybody voice
their opinion and all the people that are within
the jurisdiction and that have standing. Lets go
together and see what we can do.
MR. GOGGINS: That would be great. Let me
go -- I will go through it as briefly as I can so
that I don't waste the Board's time. I give you
the tax map. The red highlight areas is the
applicants property. The property across the
street that is designated as Lot #4, that is
March 3, 2011 79
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
owned by Jean Zarra. She has absolutely no
setback at all. That building is built right on
the property line. So there is no front yard, no
side yard and no rear yard setbacks at all. The
parking goes around that. That property on the
corner, there is no setbacks at all on that
property. If you go to the property on the
corner that is known as Pulaski Hardware, that is
actually owned by Love Lane Realty Company. Tax
Map #3.4, that property has two front yards. The
one on the left has zero setback. The north side
yard has zero setback and the rear has about 40
feet setback. Then there is a property going
down Love Lane, which would be #42.4, which is
the -- actually, $3.1,
front yard on the west
north side. They have about a 12 foot side yard
on the south side. Then the next building down
is $42.3, which houses the Post Office and some
other retail buildings.
front yard setbacks and
50 feet is in the back.
Love Lane, that has no
side. No side yard on the
is a right-of-way in the back. So having a
variance of 5 feet on the side is not
substantial. It really conforms with this
Again that has zero
zero side yard setbacks.
Tough to gauge but there
March 3, 2011 80
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
District.
(Stepped away
MR. GOGGINS:
I also did a Google (In audible).
from mic.)
Michelle's Beauty Salon by a
company called LCND Land Company, LLC. The
owners are (In audible) they have no side yard
setback. They do have a front yard of 59 feet
and it has a rear yard of 12 and another side
yard 17. So I guess the point that I am making,
is that the 5 feet that we are asking for is not
substantial, compromised with the other
businesses in the area. And as to the size of
the lot, I did some calculations based upon the
square footage set forth on the tax map. And
then also, measured the buildings actually. I
spent a lot of time doing that. Pulaski Hardware
is actually on a lot of approximately 13,000
square feet. The building covered 10,400 square
feet. So they have an 80% coverage on their
property. The lot 321 on Love Lane, their lot is
10,000 square feet and their building contains
about 5,000 square feet of usage. The coverage
is 50%. The next building that houses the post
office next to the retail buildings is #42.3, the
address is 80 Love Lane. The lot size is
approximately 16,000 square feet. The building
March 3, 2011 81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
occupies about 9500 square feet. The coverage
is about 58% on that lot. If you go back over
to Pike Street, Lot #4, that is owned by the
Zarra's, their lot is approximately 7200 square
feet. As to the beauty salon on the corner,
which is Lot #19, that lot size is approximately
10,200 square feet. And the coverage is about,
2,678, which is 26% coverage. The applicants
property according to the survey is 11,561
square feet. The buildings that are intended,
the new building is the existing building -- the
building coverage is 2,780 square feet, which is
a total coverage of 24% lot coverage. The
existing buildings that are proposed by the
applicant actually have less coverage then all
these buildings intact. So I know that we are
asking for a variance of 40,000 square feet, but
we are dealing with lots that are created -- who
knows when, 1800's, 1900's. And you know this
structure does not exceed any of these structures
that exist at a better coverage area than
everyone else. None of these commercial
properties have any parking. They all rely upon
municipal parking. The applicant submitted plans
that he would have seven parking plus one
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
handicapped parking. None of these other
structures have any parking at all, other than
the beauty salon next door. I think it might be
six or seven, it was difficult to tell. The
Planning Board has said (In audible). I think
that is it. I just want to see if I missed
anything. I do have pictures. I will -- (In
audible). (Stepped away from the microphone.)
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: If there is a
possibility, when you meet with the
Board and so forth, if you can give
pictures of some renderings of what
to look like?
MR. GOGGINS: To clarify, there are a group
of investors that formed the applicant and next
door, there are different sets of people who are
Planning
us some
this is going
involved. They are not all the same people.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It doesn't make any
I think Gerry made a
difference to me, it may to the Planning
Board.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
good point. The Planning Board is probably going
to recommend that this go to the Architectural
Review Committee to look at what the building
looks like. Are you know going to be conforming
82
March 3, 2011 83
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
to setbacks, which is a mixed residential
business along Pike Street or all along Love
Lane, which there are no setbacks. There is a
sidewalk and they are just sitting there. It is
very different kind of design standards.
MR. GOGGINS: Right.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The Planning Board
has jurisdiction over that. You know, also
there is parking schedule -- they may need to
require you to have designated parking spaces for
the tenants onsite as opposed to supplementing
for the commercial or retail municipal parking.
So they have so much to say about this. It would
be probably beneficial that they chime in, so
that we don't do something (In audible). There
recommendations and you don't have to come back
and say this and now we have to change
again
that.
One thing that I do want to ask about is
because we previously talked to your client,
Mr. Broidy, about the existing building in the
back, and at that point he voiced an interest in
removing that building. Now, I know you removed
one of the buildings --
MR. GOGGINS: Right.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Three stores and two
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3,
apartments and now it is
apartments. I just want
thinking is now about that
back?
MR. GOGGINS: His
as supplemental income,
commercial.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
2011
two stores and two
to ask what the
building in the
intent now is going to use
residential or
Well, that will
certainly make a difference whether it
residential or commercial,
and all that other stuff.
MR. GOGGINS: He is
commercial.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
might say it's fine with
is
in terms of parking
leaning towards
The Planning Board
commercial and an
apartment
parking, that
in.
is
above. But to have a residence on this
is why I think they need to chime
MR. GOGGINS: Okay.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I looked at
the difference between
MR. GOGGINS: I don't
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
plumbing, commercial --
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
the plan,
(In audible)?
know.
It's a type of
what
It's water flow.
84
March 3, 2011 85
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
bathroom in it.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER:
grease track?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
So you can have a
One might require a
Yep. So is there
anyone else in the audience -- are you here to
-- no, you are here for somebody else. What if
we adjourn this to without a date until you sort
some things with the Planning Board and then you
to say you are ready to be
get back to us
re-calendered?
MR. GOGGINS:
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
a motion?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
I think that would be best.
Do you want me to make
Yes, go ahead,
Gerry.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I make a motion to
adjourn without a date, awaiting for a call
counsel to allow us to re-calendar.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Subject
Board.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I'll second it.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Jim seconded it.
from
to Planning
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
All in favor?
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
HEARING #6422 - BENALI, LLC
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. The application
before us is Benali. We have -- I am going to
open this hearing. It is a carryover, so we
don't need to read anything. We have a letter
from the applicants attorney requesting an
adjournment to May. I can tell you here and now
that it is going to be July. However, before we
adjourn, I want to bring up a couple of questions
that were very relevant to what we are talking
about this morning of about asking for
additional information before a hearing in order
to expedite it. This has been going on for a
really long time and we have new information, and
by the way, (In audible) Anderson got a copy of
everything that we got, as of yesterday. And we
are giving them time to respond. You know, we
86
March 3, 2011 87
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
have new information, it is more then what
they wanted and Vicki is not going to be here
in May. And I am not going to burden (In
audible) in having to deal with this and that
thing. She is going to come and take her place
for that one day. Although I think we have
finally took the issue about wetlands and that it
is not our jurisdiction and the record most of it
confirming of the DEC, Kevin Potts. We are bound
by basically them. We also have a conform by
Mark Terry. We have (In audible) water from
(In audible). We have the DEC's denial but what
I am aware of is that #1, they may want to change
the proposed location of that footprint based
upon the dock (In audible) survey. They may
also -- we can't really evaluate the character of
the neighborhood, with seeing (In audible)
without seeing how that compares to the character
of the neighborhood. Everything they have given
us has been out of cast and plopped on a piece of
paper and didn't show it in context with any
site. And I would want to see that. Also, the
buildable area of the lot is going to be
different based upon the Fox survey. And they
need to recalculate that. I still think that
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
they probably will not need a lot coverage
plan, but they might and we need to know what
that is. So you know, how does the Board feel
about trying to get some information in
preparation of this upcoming hearing, to provide
this before or at the hearing? This try to keep
the ball rolling.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No, you need it
before.
MEMBER DINIZIO: If we wait for the hearing,
it's not going to be until July.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
trying to have them ready.
on this.
MEMBER DINIZIO:
That is why I am
So we can get going
Absolutely. Someone
should compose a letter and address it.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: How about, Vicki, Jen
and I get that going before the next meeting.
We have plenty of time but lets notify them that
the calendar is not available to July. And I
will say another thing, not that I want to know
more about the wetlands, to tell you the truth.
It's done, but there is much more
determine during a growing season,
the winter when all
they can
then during
of this was discussed. But
88
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
we have plenty of time to talk on that.
It's time to look at the variances at this
point.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER:
impacts?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: There
placed over (In audible) marsh.
small portion of the southern part of the
property is considered Riverhead sandy (In
audible) soil. So Vicki and I and Jen will
attempt to write a letter, but I will prefer
Board have a look at it before it is
that the
sent.
So
Do we have environmental
is (In audible)
And that only a
I know make a motion to adjourn the
Benali hearing to July 7th at 1:00 p.m.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
MEMBER HORNING: Aye.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
HEARING #6447 - MARY ANN PRICE
89
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Our next and final
public hearing of the day is Mary Ann Price. And
this is a carryover. Is there anyone here
representing the applicant?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: If in fact the
applicant does not appear, we can take testimony
for the public record for anybody that wants to
say something. We will have to adjourn the
hearing to get another date. The applicant will
have to have an opportunity to respond to that
testimony and be heard. Why don't we wait five
minutes, and we will see if they come and then
we will start. We are going to wait a few
minutes and then we will formally begin the
process.
Here is some confusion, in my notes, I have
that we adjourned the hearing until 2:30.
I can now explain to you all what the
confusion was. My notes of the record -- the
hearing that took place February 3rd, at the end
of the that we adjourned till 2:30 today. The
legal notice; however, incorrectly states
2:00. The applicants are here and we have to
figure this out.
90
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
Lets go ahead and officially begin this.
There is no need to read the legal notice. It
is a carryover. They have an amended application
before us. I would like the applicants to -- I
want to be sure of all the letters that we
received since our last hearing. If you would
like to approach and take copies of these. You
may have copies of some, but we want to make sure
that you have everything. You need to come to
mic and state your name for the record, not that
we don't know who you are.
MR. HARTZ: My name is Bob Hartz. I would
like to make a statement that I will give a
written copy to the Board for the record. At the
last meeting of this Board, there were statements
made of Margaret Ashton, which are now in the
record in written form. Her statements were at
best, exaggerated and facetious and untrue. I
feel it necessary to respond for two reasons.
First, there should be another written record of
rebuttal for anyone who wants to read these
minutes in the future. I simply can't allow
these allegations to go unanswered. I am going
to address five points. Four are to add to
Ms. Ashton's statements. They are total hearsay.
91
March 3, 2011 92
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Only the last one can be refuted with fact
from the level of exaggeration is considered, it
becomes clear that the previous should be placed
on the first four. First, there is the matter
of alleged excessive noise created by vendors in
the morning. There is absolutely no basis and
truth to this allegation. Since we are expectant
to take the word of an overzealous neighbor who
(In audible) she opposes,
hearsay. I can say that
alleged noise is untrue.
offers no evidence but
the description of her
It is also erroneous
that any vendor has ever arrived 6:45 -- not
before 6:00. Any earlier is untrue. I have
always contacted several of the core vendors and
asked them if they ever had a complaint from any
neighbors. They also answered in the negative.
I can offer no evidence,
statement is truthful.
conversation with Ms. Ashton.
the issue of dog poop. In the
but she states that the
It is not. This is a
Second, there is
summer, many, many
boaters travel with pets. They frequently walk
from the Mattituck Marina to Town. Obviously
they must then walk back to the marina. Since
there is no sidewalk on our side of Love Lane, we
walk on the west side of the street. Plenty of
March 3, 2011 93
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
opportunity for an inconsiderate pet
failed to clean up after their dog.
that the people at
is plain nonsense.
owner
Intending
the sale are the cause of this
There is no evidence to prove
and to be brought up at this forum, is
inappropriate. Suggesting that the sale produces
liter is ridiculous. Ail the vendors do not have
municipal trash pick up in Mattituck. Ail at
least of their own trash and have done so (In
audible) for years. As a matter of beer cans is
concerned, in a matter of nine years, I have
never once seen a single instance of all being
consumed by either vendors or customers. And
again, the allegation is being made with
absolutely no corroboration. In the new site
plan; however, included that we install a 30
gallon trash can. It is placed on the lawn in
the morning and removed after the sale. We are
doing this only to be agreeable, but no actual
issue. Fourth, if anyone should have a complaint
about their driveway being used for u-turns. It
should be us. People make them in our driveway
seven days a week and on Sunday's. This is a
reality of living on Love Lane. Also, for years
Ms. Ashton ran a preschool out of her residence.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
There was constantly people coming and going.
I couldn't even begin to count the number of
times in our driveway. I invite all of you to
come by and look and see (In audible) because of
this. I would also like to point out that there
are regular deliveries made to Ms. Ashton's
residence. The truck is a 10-wheeler. Probably
in an eight to ten ton range. I think the cause
and effect of the truck in the driveway damage is
probably because of the u-turn. This is just
another self-serving exaggeration that should be
omitted. Last week, the one complaint that can
be addressed with evidence and not hearsay is the
so-called dangerous traffic situation. In this
case, records were kept. I went and filed for
SEQRA information with the Southold PD. I asked
for all records of accidents on Love Lane between
April and October for the past nine years. Just
to be one accident report and the incident
occurred on the south end of Love Lane. No where
near our venue. I have made a copy --
MR.
traffic.
correct.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We have it.
HARTZ: There is no problem with
I have made it abundantly clear.
The apparent exaggeration of the
I was
94
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
"nightmare" traffic issue should be (In audible)
for the first four undocumented points raised
by Ms. Ashton. They are overblown and should be
taken for what it is. Self serving (In audible).
Like it or not, Love Lane has grown to a Business
District and will continue to grow regardless of
the outcome of this hearing. Progress can't be
stopped. Prejudice of the area are incapable of
seeing that and it is time for them to adjust
their thinking. In closing, I would like to
commend, Ms. Sharon Tuttle for her letter to this
Board. She acknowledged Mary Ann Price and by
extension (In audible). While, she felt it
necessary to express her concern, she did so in a
pointed thoughtful objective non-confrontational
manner. I suggest that Ms. Ashton use this model
as a pictorial as a basis for neighborly
behavior. Thank you for the opportunity to
address this Board.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you.
MS. PRICE: I did not have the chance to see
the last two letters that were from Ms. Aston and
(In audible) addressing information that I had
prior to that. I would like to address
Ms. Straub's complaints at the last meeting that
95
March 3, 2011 96
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I continued to hold yard sales beyond the one
year of the original variance request. When I
met with the Board back in 2001. My property is
zoned Hamlet Business and not Commercial Business
or Light Industrial. A flea market was an
allowable use of the property. I was renting the
commercial space at the time and the need for
that basis has to be taken for consideration.
The Board felt that it would be good for business
on Love Lane. They felt that they wanted to see
it in action and make a determination. So the
Board suggested a one year period of operation
and then be reviewed. I received the results for
the hearing for the allowed one year and various
stipulations that I had to meet. It was never
made clear on how this was to be reviewed. I had
submitted all the necessary paperwork on my end.
The rest of the Board (In audible) in September
of 2002 to (In audible) in 2003 as I was unable
to get vendors to participate in the first
season, but for the next five years, there was
never more than four or five vendors. And many
weeks one or two and certain times none. I was
not going to hide anything and certainly the
Zoning Board had an objection, it would be
March 3, 2011 97
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
I1
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
brought to my attention. I live on Love Lane
and have accepted the fact that belly bags, and
paper cups and soda cans, candy wrappers,
cigarettes, fliers and etc, would have to be
picked off my lawn regularly. I also have
u-turns in my driveway on a daily basis when they
can't find a parking space down the block, they
decide that they have to turn around. I have now
filed all the same paperwork and drawn new site
plans (In audible) no complaints to the Town. I
do not want to cause my neighbors distress but
Ms. Ashton has blown things out of proportion.
The right thing would have been to do is to bring
these concerns to my attention. A number of
vendors who depend on a sale were put out of
business with no warning.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
was not at the microphone,
Thank you.
Since the applicant
let the record
reflect that she had just submitted a six page
petition signed by various people from a variety
of different locations,
for the Board and make
for anyone to look at.
come to the flea market.
Lets do this, lets
which I will make copies
available for the record,
From the people who have
review the amended
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
application that was by the applicant and we
will continue to answer questions. Member
Horning, who lives on Fishers Island had to leave
at this time in order to catch the ferry back.
There is just no other possible connections for
him and we appreciate his efforts making to be
here. So he left. Okay. This amended
application suggest the hours would be on Sundays
and Holidays from 8:00 a.m to 6:00 p.m. with a
set-up starting at 7:00 a.m. Would one of the
applicants please stand at the podium so that you
could corroborate that this is correct
information. Is that correct?
MS. PRICE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Again, it's Ms. Price
who has answered "yes." You were also suggesting
that vendors be onsite by
MS. PRICE: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
reservation?
That all parking for
vendors will be onsite and driveways will be
closed for parking for customers. You are now
proposing 18 vendors. You are offering the
possibility of a three foot high fence or shrubs
along the Love Lane property line to create some
buffering and a circulation control. And higher
98
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
shrubs along the property line
privacy from the neighbors.
will be closed to the public
is open; yes?
MR. HARTZ:
market closes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
to create
The restaurant
when the flea market
We will open when the flea
Yes, that is fine.
MS. PRICE: But we do offer drinks and
lunches to the vendors and the people that are
shopping. Our business is pretty much
So we don't have a lunch business
We are basically --
reservations.
to the public.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I want to get that
clear because the parking spaces that you would
normally use
vendors are going to be?
MS. PRICE: Yes.
MR. HARTZ:
for lunches would be where the
The only actual food business
on Sundays for the business is mainly
We
that we do
for the vendors and it's very, very limited.
might make a hamburger for them. We have
Iced-Tea and soda for them. But
for business until you know,
dinner.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
we are not open
(In audible) for
So it's not until the
99
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
flea market is closed?
MR. HARTZ: Correct.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Now,
is the substance of the changes,
any?
MR. HARTZ: You got the heart and soul of
I believe that
did I miss
the changes. I am not sure if you noticed, we
closed the main driveway also.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Yes.
MR. HARTZ: That will also provide a bit of
safety for the vendors walking across the
driveway or if someone is walking across the
driveway to the lawn. The ingress and egress
would be the back driveway.
MS. PRICE: Not the back --
MR. HARTZ: The south side driveway.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: This is a Zoning Board
and not a Planning Board. The Planning Board is
the Board that has the jurisdiction for site plan
approval. Traffic flow and what is safe and so
on; however, since you have really 12 designated
spaces in the rear --
MS. PRICE: Actually, when I have five
spots, there is really room for six.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, what I am
100
March 3, 2011 101
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
looking is, designated fifteen extra tenants. I
am assuming that it is possible for you to park
your vehicles and possibly even the tenants in a
driveway that is now closed off. Is there any
reason why you couldn't operate this business
with all vendors parking in the back and limit it
to twelve or thirteen vendors?
MS. PRICE: Possible.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Because it looks very
crowded and it looks very awful to try and go off
the d~iveway and off the grass --
MS. PRICE: I only did that because that was
a suggestion at the last meeting, that I use part
of my front lawn for the parking.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I don't feel that
it is necessary to send this to the Planning
Board unless there is other people on this
Board.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I think it should.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What do you think,
Jim?
MEMBER DINIZIO: It's a very intensive use.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It is an intensive
use. That is why I am looking at the elimination
of the vendors parking all the way in the back
March 3, 2011 102
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
where it has already been described, as spaces
-- because that is approved site plan. Spreading
out tents on your lawn without any vehicles, with
just pedestrian traffic where the driveways are
blocked off, certainly looks as though it could
be safe.
MR. HARTZ: The only thing that I can say to
that is without that in place, we never had a
mishap. So I would have to say with this in
place -- with someone getting hit by a bolt of
lightening, you know, what possible danger is
there?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Let me see if
there are any other Board members that have
questions. Ken?
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No, not at this time.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Gerry?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Well, having signed this
original permit and been on this Board for a
significant amount of time and lived in
Mattituck, I have to tell you that I have been
inundated with people calling me. Every patron
on Love Lane that I
particular concern.
all this has arisen from.
have spoken to, has a
I don't know where all of
And they have done it
March 3, 2011 103
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
discreetly. I have told them that I can't
talk to them about it. The hearing is today.
And there is a great concern. There is no
question about it. It has escalated a great
deal. I am not saying that it hasn't been (In
audible) to a certain degree but there are a
great amount of people, certainly on the
weekends, at this yard sale. So my particular
opinion on the whole situation is, we need to
come to a figure on what Leslie is bringing up,
Ms. Weisman is a fair and reasonable one. I have
been a fireman in this Town for 43 years in the
Hamlet of Mattituck and I am happy that anything
hasn't happened. Ail I can tell you is, as we
know, Mattituck is getting busier and it is very
busy in the summer. The reason why I wanted them
to go to Planning is because I wanted them to
review ingress and egress and I think that we can
determine the amount of patrons that you can
utilize, and that is just my opinion.
MR. HARTZ: Mr. Goehringer, I couldn't
agree with you more. I think coming to a happy
median is all about.
MS. PRICE: Now,
day that we got
that being said, the one
to nineteen vendors last year.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
We were shocked. The vendors were shocked. It
is the only time that happened in nine years.
And I can understand how people said, "holy
smokes. Look at all those people.
seen this." We didn't expect it. But again,
is the only time that this has ever happened.
The average amount of vendors that we have ever
had, was six or seven. I don't see any reason
why, No. 1, a limit is set and it will never be
exceeded. And I
get to the limit
the history.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
I have never
it
don't think that we will ever
on most Sundays, just because of
Mr.
these people take up.
you are going to have
MR. HARTZ: That
It's not only that,
Price, it's the issue of how much spread
And that is something that
cretail (phenetic).
is on the new site plan.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I understand that, but
grass in the gray
yet spoken to the
are you going to draw on the
areas for them to utilize?
MR. HARTZ: We have not
but we have spoken to ourselves about
There are certain vendors who
certain places on the lawn. We
how many
vendors,
delineating areas.
like to set up in
are going to set ground rules about
104
March 3, 2011 105
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
tables. The sale will be done by reservations.
So we will know who is coming. So we are
eliminating large trucks. We are only having
vans. Pick-up trucks, SUV's, or automobiles. We
are really trying to get to what your concerns
are. The important thing is lets find a number.
Lets agree and move forward because we now have
the blessing of this Board that is going to make
a million compromises but there are vendors
livelihoods that are at stake. Frankly, the sale
brings a lot of ancillary business to our
restaurant. People that don't know about the
place but wind up coming in for dinner later.
And it has been good of the Town. Good for the
traffic. People love the spill over business.
People love Love Lane Kitchen. They go and have
an expected haircut, whatever it is. It is an
overall, I think it has been good for block and
I think the Zoning Board saw that years ago.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
have the comments
February 1, 2011.
Let me say this, I
from the Planning Board dated
And I am going to take the
time to summarize the comments. I won't read the
whole thing. And I believe you have a copy and
have responded to the issues raised here.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
Because these are the things
concerned about and some of my comments
based on these recommendations.
originally proposed 28 vendors
that they were
have been
You
as you recall and
their comments are based upon that.
all,
the
First of
the concern of the Planning Board would be
flea market use is proposed for weekends and
holidays and potential traffic and so on. They
go on to summarize their recommendations. 1) the
multi use of the substandard parcel may need to
scaled back. It would be recommended that
conditions need to limit the amount of vendors.
Limit the retail use to days, hours of operation
of when the flea market is in use. This has been
discussed, you have proposed operating hours for
8:00 a.m.
7:30 a.m.
MR. HARTZ: Correct.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Sunday's and holidays only.
MR. HARTZ: Which would
only.
to 6:00 p.m., with set-up starting at
You have proposed
likely by Sunday's
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: No. 2. Onsite parking
is a concern. Zoning Board should consider
limiting the number of vendors to the parking
106
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
spaces for each vendor, due to the length of
time a vendor would occupy any offsite parking
space. It should be noted, based on the survey
submitted, provided the retail use was not in
operation. 12 vendors can be accommodated for
onsite parking. Which is what I was referring
to. No. 3, the flea market use may add to
seasonal parking and traffic congestion. It is
recomanended that the Zoning Board limiting the
retail use to hours and days when the flea market
is in use, which we did. And should traffic and
parking become an issue, the Zoning Board should
require a traffic control parking plan to reserve
the right to revoke the special exception. Any
special exception permits by the way, can be
revoked by this Board,
terms.
MR. HARTZ: It's
rules.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
if they do not meet the
called playing by the
So it appears to me
based upon what your amended application is and
my bringing up the feasibility if 12 or 13
vendors, who are confined within the parking area
already in existence and striped and clearly
moving the two tenants cars in the driveway,
107
March 3, 2011 108
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
which is blocked off.
operation to the days
that it is seasonal.
Limiting the hours of
of the year and knowing
It looks to me that a
number of these concerns are addressed. I would
like to hear any other questions that the Board
might have and certainly take comments from the
audience to see how they feel about it.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: If for any reason a
vendor brings two vehicles, something carrying
their wares, and a second person comes, that
person has to park down the block. They can't
park --
MR. HARTZ: That has never happened.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: But if it did.
MR. HARTZ: That would not be a problem.
Again, it has never happened. We have never had
a vendor come in two vehicles.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: One of the
catastrophes's of some of these situations and we
have seen (In audible) happen to be a Lion's
Club member also. If there was a thunderstorm
and the ability for people to run to their
vehicles to put things in, particularly things
that can not withstand wind or rain, one of the
worst things would be hail and thunder and
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
lightening. I think you would need (In audible)
with that aspect also. And you should really
look into something of that nature. So that the
cars and vehicles are readily available and
parked in a particular position so that people
can do that. In other words, park nose in and
with the ability to place things in
And not to move out of those spaces
everybody is out of there. Because
problems that existed when the Strawberry
Festival --
MR. HARTZ: I can already envision a
scenario where we can emphasize that. People on
the east side of the parking lot park head in so
that storage capacity's of their vehicles are
facing west. And the people on the west side of
the parking lot park nose east, so
end of their cars face the grass.
storage areas in the vehicles would be available
them quickly.
until
these are the
from the lawn. And you
or 70 feet to them --
MEMBER GOEHRINGER:
that the back
Ail trunks and
are only dealing with 60
You need to put this in
writing for them. They will not be able to
move until everybody has their stuff in the
vehicle.
109
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MR. HARTZ: Okay.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: This is as safety issue
in general.
MR. HARTZ: That is not a problem.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I cherish this Town and
I cherish this Hamlet, and I have to tell you
that all of these things are things that have
happened at high intensity use of the Strawberry
Festival. When we moved from the school to where
we are now, thank God, I was instrumental
getting that piece of property purchased.
been
a wonderful situation,
wouldn't have been able
that was the case.
MR. HARTZ: Again,
in
It has
and we probably
to have the festival if
anything that you would
like us to do that is within our power to do, we
are very reasonable people.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Well, you have to inform
these people and you might even ask them for an
initial so they understand what their
responsibility is if there is a problem.
MR. HARTZ: Consider it done.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, I am assuming
that as responsible business people, you would
create guidelines for your vendors.
110
March 3, 2011 111
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
one
MR. HARTZ:
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
other comment from the
Well, we have too.
I just want to make
Planning Board for the
public to hear and then I am to see if there
are other Board members who have questions, and
then I am going to open this up to the audience.
Based upon the above, which I have already
described to you. Planning Board would recommend
that the Special Exception be granted provided
their are appropriate conditions placed on the
use. Jim, do you have any questions or comments
at this point?
MEMBER DINIZIO: No, I would just like to
know what the bear minimum is. You know, I want
you to be successful.
are open that you meet
are allowed on there.
I want everyday that you
the maximum persons that
I think we need to decide
how much the neighborhood can tolerate and not
necessarily depend on, "Oh, we had a lucky day."
It is a very intensive use. You know, I don't
know if 12 is a good number or not. I think we
need to hear more about that. That overflow is
going to go right up the street. There is no
stopping that. It is an intensive use. And
you have a number of uses on that piece of
March 3, 2011 112
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
property already. I thought I heard you say
that it increases the number of people that go
to your restaurant.
MR. HARTZ: We have 12 seats. It is really
tiny. So if on a given Sunday people go to the
flea market, people drive by and it says 4:30 to
8:30 but people don't know that it is a
restaurant. I can't figure that one out. When I
say additional business, we might see 4 or 5
customers. Now, we are maybe at 6 or 7. We are
not talking about lines of people coming into our
eatery.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I wondered how you got 12
people in there.
MR. HARTZ: Well, we talked with Damon. He
asked us the same question. When Mary Ann first
bought the property, it did not have the blessing
of the Department of Health. They came in and
inspected and said, "well, yeah, you have
everything in place here. So why don't you seat
people?"
MS. PRICE:
denied seating.
different
variance,
We decided to seat people.
I didn't know that Frank was
I thought he just chose a
operation. When he went to the
it was not Hamlet business. It was
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
Light Industrial with greater restrictions.
But Damon had told me that he had straightened
that all out already back in this past
December.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Do you have a permit
Department of Health?
from the
MR.
MS.
small of
HARTZ: Absolutely.
PRICE: And he basically said it was too
an operation for it to be called a
restaurant. It is more of a retail. That was
his way of putting it.
MR. HARTZ: If we exceeded seating for 16
people, that would change everything. We don't
even have the room for that.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Like I said, I think we
have to look at it as a successful business. Not
as you know, what your medium is. If we grant
something, then you are allowed to have
something. A lot of this is near a residential
part. I was wondering if you can just confine
it to the size that the William (In audible)
property is. And leave the part in front of your
house open, maybe without the parking. If that
is something that is workable?
MS. PRICE: It's possible.
113
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MEMBER DINIZIO: It's just a thought. I
hate to be standing out there on a Sunday and
see a circus. Regardless of what your home's
zoned, it's your home. I know you consider that.
I think you ought to reduce to another, that you
can live with. It is too many now.
MS. PRICE: What about the 12 that was
suggested? I put large areas. You know, some
people only put two of these tables.
MEMBER DINIZIO: If you can confine it to
that and not use the lawn at all -- you know, I
am just making a suggestion. As to how many you
can get in there, is up to you.
MS. PRICE: Too few vendors make people not
want to come out there because they feel not many
people will come to shop. That is kind of what
happened in the beginning and people would call
up and say that is not
when people see one or
don't want to.
MEMBER DINIZIO:
enough people. Because
two tables, they just
I am going to put my two
cents in on the Planning Board because they may
need to look at it too. I understand the letter
but they need to take some testimony and put
their expertise --
114
March 3, 2011 115
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
problem with that.
place the comments
this Board has the
the willingness of
I don't have any
I was attempting to just
into the record and say that
jurisdiction and would appear
the applicants, to develop a
amended application that adheres to their
recommendations. To the fact that you have 13
designated asphalted, stripped parking spaces in
the back and should all vendors be parked back
there. That should determine the amount of the
vendors. What is an acceptable number to you in
terms of your business operation? That you feel
will be profitable enough and encouraging enough
for people to show up and by reservation, and
that seems to me to be a number. In terms of the
placement of those actual spot, it looks as
though it would be useful for people to enter and
exit on the primary driveway as a pedestrian link
to the road, then to wonder around. I think Jim
has a good point..
MR. HARTZ: That is a perfectly reasonable
suggestion and workable.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Any other comments of
the Board, otherwise I would like to open it up
to the public, and see what they have to say.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
They are here waiting patiently.
Who would
the Board? Please come to the
like to address
podium.
MS. STRAUB: Margaret Straub, S-T-R-A-U-B. I
am presenting a letter. Is it all right for me
to read it because it does address the concerns I
had. It specially goes
Southold Town?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MS. STRAUB: I guess
over the precedent set by
Okay.
prior to reading that,
I just want to address one thing about a comment
earlier of Mr. Hartz about hearsay, that
Ms. Ashton had early. I had the actual witness.
I did speak to him and it was 5:20 in the
morning, when I went and asked her to turn her
car radio off when she was unloading. And she
was the only one there but she was unloading for
a good spot. I actually did speak at the last
meeting and I did witness it. The Southold
Zoning Board of Appeals with regard to
Ms. Price's request for special exception for her
property at 730 Love Lane, Mattituck, New York.
I feel compelled as a resident of Love Lane to
address the pertinent history of the accepted
illegal uses already set in place for Southold
116
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
Town documented decision. The premises in
question was granted a special exception variance
to Frank and Diane Ammerati, ZBA 3407,
November 26, 1985, to establish "a country store
selling take-out foods and specialty items
including a catering service business in
conjunction with the owners primary single
family resident use on the second floor and
single family existent parking use on the first
floor." This multi use zoning (In audible)
subjected to certain conditions among which were
noted on motion by Mr. Goehringer and seconded by
Mr. Swiffy. Resolved to grant a special
exception be subject to the following conditions.
2) the business use granted shall be only for the
use of selling of take-out, prepared foods and
specialty items, including a catering service.
3) the dwelling use of the subject premises will
be reduced from 3 to 2 single family units. One
on the first floor and the second on the second
floor. The Board also made the following
"findings of facts." Including "property in
questions located in the C Light Industrial
Zoning District." During a time period where
surrounding properties were also zoned
the
117
March 3, 2011 118
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
harmoniously. Surround properties do not all
retain zoning at the present time. It is noted
that the Board considering this application in
1985 determined, "the use is in harmony with and
will promote the general purposes (In audible)
zoning." At a time when the northern end of Love
Lane was zoned as C Light Industrial. The current
population on Love Lane is mainly residential and
was rezoned and eliminating many of the C Light
Industrial Zoning.
Occupancy V-26922,
the issued use
stated above.
And updated of Certificate of
February 10, 2000 confirmed
of this property for the two uses
I would submit that the current
use of a sit-down restaurant special exception
that Southold Town granted, ZBA 3407, and we
benefit from a reexamination of the Board as a
specific business use was a condition of the
original special exception granted at the time
for the second use on the property. Ms. Price
signed a questionnaire with her ZBA application
that was received by the Town December 23, 2010
that lists "the present use or operations
conducted at this parcel," as a "retail
store/two-family," and gave the proposed use,
"same plus outdoor flea market." A retail store
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
not accurately define the current use of
does
a sit-down restaurant. My understanding as of
December 2010, she was acknowledging it was a
retail store in her handwriting and putting it on
that application or questionnaire.
Application ~4980, for the same premises, on
August 28, 2001 was submitted due to a building
inspectors Notice of Disapproval permit for a
third use, antique sales, "requiring additional
20,000 square feet of property and a total of
60,000 square feet additional under
Section 100-2."
730 Love Lane was referred to at
2011 meeting as a substandard lot
It appears seriously
requirements as per code
the February 3,
with 34,578 square feet.
deficient in square feet
Section 100-2. The findings of August 28, 2001
included using lawn areas that totaled over 7,000
square feet applicant submitted a plan showing
11 parking spaces for customers of the take-out
shop for the antique business." The Board
implicated "concerned about the adequacy of
onsite parking problem. For this reason the
Board will impose a condition that participating
antique dealers from parking on the property."
This was done so that the "actions set forth will
119
March 3, 2011 120
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
not produce an undesirable change in the
character of the neighborhood or detriment
property." The "resolution/action" by Memer
Collins and seconded by Member Goehringer
including "signs shall be posted at the property
from Love Lane directing customers to the parking
area. Applicant shall direct the dealers to
display merchandise to park their vehicles in the
nearby public areas and shall diligently work so
that they do not park in the area C spaces. This
variance application shall expire on
September 30, 2002. Applicant is free to apply
in a timely manner for further authorization by
this Board." That was a concern of mine because
it is directed in writing that the applicant
could indeed seek further authorization and it
was not done but the operation was carried on. A
current request for special exception for a third
use on the property ZBA 6477, received comments
of concern from the Planning Board Chair,
Martin E. Schneider in a memo February 1, 2011.
Specially, "number of uses and parking," were
cited. There is an assumption that a restaurant
does not operate on the premises. "As you are
aware currently there is a mixed two-story
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
building certified for retail use and apartments,
by special exception #3407, that allowed for a
country store selling take-out and prepared food
and catering only and two dwelling units. A
concern for "two parking spaces for tenants of
the building and additional spaces shall be
designated for the retail use, as well as leaving
less parking for the flea market." Scaling back
and limiting the amount of vendors seems to be
the amount concerned in this memo. Mr. Schneider
reserves the right to revoke special exception.
apparent of the illegally use for
Aside from an
retail use on
this property, which undauntedly
affects parking requirements for customers. In
light of a third requested use of the property,
the proposed use for flea market is on a scale
too large to harmoniously exist in a narrowly
residential section of Love Lane. The size of
the lawn space has jumped from 7,000 square feet,
August 2001 to 11,200 square feet, December 2010.
A map of the property submitted in 2001 shows a
setback from Love Lane of 20
vendor spaces were to be set up.
appears on the current proposal.
driveway shown on the property map is
feet before proposed
No setback
The old gravel
currently
121
March 3, 2011 122
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
overgrown as well. It is lawn. (In audible).
The Armnerati's received the approval for the
second use on this property while downsizing from
three dwellings to two units, maintaining one as
a primary resident. Current owner has a
notarized letter on file noting her residential
address is Rockville Centre. The ~m~nerati's were
our neighbor's 24/7. They were invested in our
neighborhood 24/7. The request was for a use
that accommodated the neighborhood and was
respectful of the neighborhood. There was no
constant parade of cars and doors slamming as
customers parked in the lot in the back of their
property. It is my understanding that the ZBA
adheres to standards that adhere (In audible) and
harmony within a community. For example, Code
280-143, addresses the issue of "overcrowding and
population." While an evergreen buffer and
fencing is appealing start, it would appear less
is more with vendor and parking. A little
respect for those neighbors would go a long way.
I personally would have welcomed meeting my
neighbors in a different manner. We didn't know
who lived there until they were identified at the
last hearing. A little dialogue prior to this
March 3, 2011 123
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
would have been beneficial, I am sure for all
involved. There is no animosity. I only request
respect of the process and allow us as citizens
and neighbors to express our concerns in a forum
for which it is acceptable to speak up, and not
have fear of retribution or intimidation. To the
Board, I would respectfully request review of the
current uses on this property and whether a third
use is likely to have adhered to as directed by
the Town or even be appropriate in light of the
size lot (In audible) on the northern end of Love
Lane. If a third use is deemed appropriate, I
would hope that the number of vendors be greatly
reduced, so that parking, traffic congestion and
noise is not as congested as it has been in the
past year on Sundays. It also appears that
Ms. Price might have stayed underneath the radar
longer had she continued with only 5
as she had prior to about a year ago,
noted by our neighbor, Sharon Turtle.
starting time of 10:00
to 8 vendors
as also
Also, a
a.m. would be more
respectful of our neighborhood on a Sunday
morning. We live on Love Lane year round. We
love a lazy Sunday morning just like the rest of
the northfork. Thank you.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me pole the
audience and see a show of hands
voice concerns or oppositions to
application?
And how many are here
that wants
this
to show support
to
for
this application? Okay, that goes no where. Let
the record reflect, it's about 50/50.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I just want to address
something that was said, concerning Damon Rallas,
Code Enforcement Officer, how they got from a
take-out restaurant to a 12-seat restaurant, is
going to be explored either by a letter to Damon
or -- we need to confirm his final decision was.
But the (In audible) may very well be moved. It
may not even be -- because they changed the
zones. And that's the reason -- Ms. Price was
kind enough to discuss the fact that she spoke to
him and that they were allowed to do that.
Certainly that raises the possibility how many
seats do you have or how many parking spaces do
you need to have a restaurant? Now, that is
going to take up some other ones. The Planning
Board has to determine that. So I want you to
know that is where we are heading. That variance
may not have any bearing on the hearing. That is
124
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
the reason why I asked that question.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The other thing to
followup, this is a permitted in the Hamlet
Business. It also requires Site Plan approval by
the Planning Board to determine traffic flow and
to determine safety and parking spaces are
required. It is a very small. As this hearing
unfolds, certainly this Board has the right to
grant not only a special exception but conditions
on it and limitations. One might be that we want
the Planning Board to take a look at this. From
their perspective that this is going to work and
for the welfare health and safety for the public.
We need to discuss this and take this all under
consideration and the comments that you are all
putting into the record, before we make any kind
of decision. Having said that, lets continue to
hear from the audience. And I would ask that
simply because the length of these hearings and
the cost of transcription, that if you have
already heard a point being made, you can say I
agree with that point and not restate it. And
then add whatever else you would like. It would
be helpful if you didn't repeat again and again,
the same issues. Who would like to address the
125
March 3, 2011 126
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Board?
MS. YOUNG: Hi, I am Ann Young and I am
representing myself and my husband. We actually
own the property directly next door to the Mary
Ann. I have never met Mary Ann before. It is an
investment property for us at this time.
However, it has been owned by a family member who
expired 8 or 9 years ago. And Love Lane have
always been Love Lane. A quiet country road. As
the house right next door, I can tell you I think
you should limit the amount of Sundays. The
amount of hours. Put heavy duty restrictions on
it. When you are going to bring that many people
together, where is the bathrooms? Where is
everybody going to go? And it is foot traffic
and where are they going to go to the bathroom?
I just don't know enough about the process. Ail
I got was a letter in the mail from the neighbors
next door as to what they wanted to do and when
they wanted to do it and how often they wanted
to. I am kind of ignorant to the process. But
as someone who has a vested interest on Love Lane
and particularly the very next door neighbor, I
vehemently do not want every Sunday flea market
and vendors and foot traffic. That is my opinion
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
and of
you.
March 3, 2011
course we will bow to the
Board. Thank
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Other comments?
MS. MAHAFFY: Allison Mahaffy,
M-A-H-A-F-F-Y. I live in Southold. I have sold
their a few times and purchased their a few
times. I really appreciate the antiques and
there is not to many places where you can find
them, and I really want to see them stay open. I
don't agree with the dog waste and I don't agree
with any of the garbage complaints. I don't
agree with any of the complaints on how we are
too early in the morning. By -- that can all be
worked into the new system, if you would allow
it. I think that if the (In audible) has to come
along. I do agree that Southold has too much red
tape in doing things but if the option does have
to come down the line, maybe they can do it
during a live Sunday instead of just a
walkthrough when no one is there. See a live
it works. How careful
it's about reuse and reuse
is clothing occasionally.
Sunday and how well
everyone is and how
and recycle. There
There was a pocketbook that I purchased and
sunglasses. Things are just useful and why
127
March 3, 2011 128
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
should it just go to charity. The
Church has enough money. I always
wherever I go. Reuse and reduce.
need a venue to sell these things.
always go far west or list on Ebay.
Catholic
entertain
And we all
We can't
We need a
venue where we can set up tables and set up
stuff. Thank you.
MR. STRAUB: Hi, my name is John Straub,
S-T-R-A-U-B. I also reside at 795 Love Lane.
And I feel obligated to voice my concerns. I
would like to state that the requested use of the
property to be used as a flea market will altar
the essential characteristic of the neighborhood.
The north side of Love Lane is primarily
residential. I will cut this short because some
of this has gone on before. The commercial side
of Love Lane is set-up commercial use. There is
adequate parking. Sidewalks, crosswalks, etc.
That facilitates commercial nature. The north
side of Love Lane is simply not equipped and
handle a large scale operation (In audible) flea
market on weekends and holidays. During the
summer months, thousands of people fly to
Mattituck and the surrounding areas. This causes
a lot of vehicle traffic as well as automobile
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
traffic. As witnessed by me over the past two
summers, the north side of Love Lane has become
virtual parking lot. I know, I live there. So
for someone to say hearsay, I see what goes on.
Cars are parked on both sides of the street, and
a
and told me what
my wife a liar.
being erected.
Sunday. Vendors arrive as early as 5:30 to set
up. Again, this is not hearsay, my wife got out
of bed to go speak to a vendor and came back in
she had done. I do not consider
The doors are slamming, tables
Tents being assembled, loud
talking and even music playing on occasion. My
wife had to ask a vendor on one Sunday morning to
please keep it
sleeping. Ms.
she is collecting a fee
know the clientele
Every Sunday night
quiet as people are still
Price may know the vendors that
from but she does not
that visits the flea market.
on my property there is liter
129
yes, sometimes blocking driveways. The use of my
driveway as a turn around is a constant
occurrence. The property at 730 Love Lane is
simply not large enough to accommodate vendor
space, vendor autos, thus creating a dangerous
situation due to lack of space. The flea market
also causes a considerable amount of noise on
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
that needs to be cleaned up. There were some
customers having a picnic on the adjacent at
730 Love Lane. It wasn't her property. As
witnessed by me. Again, not hearsay. One
visitor at the flea market even found it
necessary to relieve himself behind the bushes of
that said property. Again, not hearsay,
witnessed by me. Based on the comments, first
hand observations, I ask that you take into
consideration what I have stated and what I have
witnesses. The flea market in my opinion alters
the essential character of the neighborhood and
causes Love Lane to become a serious safety
issue. I would like to submit this to the Board
and also make one statement. It is my
understanding that the process of a variance is
to have an open forum for a discussion. From the
beginning of this process, not one item for
discussion, has been personal in nature in any
way. We are only stating what we have observed.
What we have seen. Since that time, we have been
personally attacked. As witnessed by today. As
witnesses by the lady who just spoke
catholic church having so much money.
irrelevant.
about the
It is
We are just simply stating what we
130
March 3, 2011 131
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
see and what are concerns
don't engage in that type
you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
are. That is it. We
of behavior. Thank
Thank you.
Anyone else like to address the Board?
MR. DOMANSKI: I am Joseph Domanski, I live
at 865 Love Lane.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Please spell your last
name?
MR. DOMANSKI: D-O-M-A-N-S-K-I. I have
nothing prepared but I am not here to shut
anybody down. But there are concerns of all of
us that do reside on Love Lane. There is trash
on our yards. I am at 865. I am on the corner
and I have had my driveway blocked by people
attending this. I am also an avid gardener. On
Sunday's I do need to pull more trash out of my
yard. It is obvious that it is coming from the
people on the street. These things are obvious.
I would just like to add, then when you asked for
a show of hands of people who support and don't,
I recognize 795 Love Lane over there. (In
audible). I recognize my mother. All people who
were against it, actually reside on Love Lane.
The people who are for the application, no
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
offense,
that is my statement
you.
March 3, 2011
I don't recognize any of them. But
for the record. Thank
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
Thank you. Anyone
SILL: My name is Wayne Sill. And I
else?
MR.
so. Primarily
stuff. It was
along. I have
"flea market."
reside in Shoreham, New York. I have been a
vendor on Love Lane. The last year and a half or
it has always been my family
a way for moving some of this
found that -- you use the word
That is not the word. It is kind
of a low-cased antique show, because there is
very little flea market there. It is
market type (In audible). I found it
rather upscale merchandise there. At
I allowed to have tents there. I was
from the beginning.
shows up and one of
But at no time, was
20% flea
to be
no time was
told right
someone
Once in a while,
these little tents go up.
a tent ever allowed to be put
And we were told to park over in the
We were told to get the
there as soon as possible.
up there.
municipal parking lot.
stuff out and get over
One thing that has to been mentioned, if there is
ever a chance in any weather, of rain that day,
132
March 3, 2011 133
t
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
nobody comes out.
the sky, nobody shows up. So,
a few Sundays in the summer.
every Sunday type thing. I
If there is any cloud in
it rains on quite
So it is not the
thought I was the
earliest
been a
longer
at 7:30, and nobody has -- and there has
couple of lady's before me. Takes me
to get around now so I have been the early
one and the late one. You know, everything is
always as neat as a pin. I don't know about the
neighbors property. I have just been the last
one out of there because it takes me a long time
to get out. It's really upscale merchandise
there. I wouldn't say it's a flea market as it
has generally been known.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Would you characterize
it as an open air antiques market?
Collectibles?
MR. SILL: That would be better description
of the property. So that is my personal
opinion and I just wanted to point that out.
Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, certainly having
cars move on site is a very dangerous
proposition. And it makes a good deal more sense
early on arrive and the only movement on site, is
March 3, 2011 134
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pedestrian. Anyway, people coming to visit
are not going to want to go into a back parking
lot. They are going to pull up and see if they
are interested and if not, they will go to the
next place. That is the way it works out here.
MR. SILL: Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Your welcome. Any
other comments?
MS.
name is
DOMANSKI-OGIEJKO: Good afternoon. My
Janet Domanski-Ogiejko, O-G-I-E-J-K-O.
I also live at 865 Love Lane. And I can
absolutely contest to the trash on my front lawn
on every single Monday morning. The one incident
that really got to me,
the 20's brought their
relive himself. And I
a woman and her husband in
dog on my property to
went out on my front porch
to please ask them to stop and wouldn't engage me
in a conversation until her dog had finished.
This is not uncommon. It has happened at least
four times since the time that I have lived in
that house. The other thing that concerns me is
that there are boaters that go to Mat-A-Mar from
the dockage area to Love Lane. Normally they
have use of the sidewalks but with the cars
parked on the road. They are walking out on the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
road. They are not walking on the sidewalk.
The other thing that has crossed my mind and I
don't know if it's really true, with the traffic
and the fire department, are they avoiding Love
Lane on a Sunday and using Wickham, because they
are aware of the traffic and the cars on Love
Lane. And if that is the case, is that going to
deter their arrival to a house fire on the (In
audible) area? I don't know, it is just
something that answered my mind?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I can answer that
question.
at any time. (In audible)
mainly because everything has
because of OSHA requirements.
They are not obliged to use Love Lane
emergency access and
gotten so large
We try to stay
trucks and everything. We try not to use. I am
not speaking for the Chief's of the Mattituck
Fire Department. I am a ambulance driver but I
have been told not to use Love Lane. Just so you
are aware of it. If there is a call, we are
going to use it. And we are going to be extra
special careful because of the width of it.
MS. DOMANSKI-OGIEJKO: Okay.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No truck can pass. One
has to pullover and almost touching mirrors for
135
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
car to go by. They are not big
ambulances
the other
ambulances. We actually scaled the
down sp that they can maneuver.
MS. DOMANSKI-OGIEJKO: Thank you. And one
more last comment too, is the blocking of my
driveway. One day I was getting into my car and
a gentleman with two young children was parking
and looked at me and saw me getting in my car.
And he actually started to walk away and go to
the flea market and leave his car there. That is
unacceptable. I had to chase this man. So I
don't know if the answer is to get rid of this
whole thing or if we need people out there
trafficking the cars. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Anyone else want to
address the Board?
MS. ASHTON: Margaret Ashton, A-S-H-T-O-N.
The 730 Love Lane variance request should
rightfully be studied to see if it conforms to
the current Southtold Town master planning.
About this plan, Mark Terry is quote as asking,
residents don't want their hamlets to turn into
hodge-podges of corporate bussel. Yard sales and
flea markets are nothing but hodge-podges of
bussel. I believe this is why they have been
136
March 3, 2011 137
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
severely restricted in Southold Town to once
a year per property and require a permit. In the
Suffolk Times online edition, shortly after the
February hearing, a comment was posted comparing
these sales to the Strawberry Festival and
Mattituck Street Fair. This is a good
comparison. Only the latter occur once a year.
Not every week during the good weather. The
Southold Town master plan under (In audible) is
especially sensible to Mattituck. We now
realize, that by driving into Mattituck's
business quarter, on Route 25, this creates the
first impression for our visitors of Southold
Town. What was relegating to this stretch in
years passed, is not so inviting now. Under #4
and going in a sightly different direction, but
it was brought up
connection across
transient boaters.
as a destination.
here, provide pedestrian
Route 48 to Love Lane for the
We have established Mattituck
Attract those transient
boaters. Bring visitors out adding motor vehicle
traffic and parking problems. Mattituck Hamlet
on Love Lane has created the ambiance to attract
the TV company. Lets not junk up Southtold Town
and Mattituck in particular. I strongly urge the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
Town to find another location for a continuous
yard sale flea market for all of these wonderful
vendors. Thank you very much.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you. Anyone
else?
(No Response.)
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Let me ask a couple of
questions of the applicants. It's clear that,
should this be granted there -- you can clearly
control your own property and what happens on it,
but it is very difficulty to control the public
at large up and down and doing what they do and
you can't see what they are doing. Whether it's
popping a can of Coke or having a dog. We
certainly want to take everything in
consideration. You offered trash cans on the
property already on your application. The
furnishing of a port-a-potty for days of
operation, Sunday's, for example, would be used
by vendors and any one visiting?
MR. HARTZ: We have a bathroom on premises
available to the vendors all day.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: How about the public?
MR. HARTZ: Anyone that is a customer of the
flea market is welcome.
138
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: How are they made
aware of that?
MS. PRICE: They will ask the vendor if
there is a bathroom.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Signage that directs
the public that way is something that could
possibly help.
MR. HARTZ: Not a problem. Done.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Any additional signs
directed customers to not block any driveways.
To deposit all trash here. I am notjsaying that
is going to control people, but people are going
to do what they do. But if you make an effort at
least, publicly provide some boundaries and
guidelines of being respectful to the neighbors.
HARTZ: We will gladly make and post
MR.
signs.
MS.
PRICE: I would be happy to make sure
that there is nothing on anyone else's property.
And also nobody is on the street that they
shouldn't be there. To not take up spots in
front of the property.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
to do that?
MS.
How would you propose
PRICE: There are certain people who
139
March 3, 2011 140
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
come and spend more time that your average
shopper and they would have to be told, you
that they shouldn't --
know,
MEMBER DINIZIO:
feasible.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
I don't think that is
Unless you have a
parking attendant that can supervise --
MR. HARTZ: If I can clarify that a little
bit. Particularly early in the day, there are
some vendors that come to visit certain vendors
on the property. We know who they are. They are
regular faces and sometimes these people will
park for an absorbant amount of time. What Mary
Ann is addressing is telling those people not to
park in front of the property. Park by the train
station. Allow for the public to park in front
of the house. It does affect the early part of
So that can be controlled quite
We
However,
the sale.
easily.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
seasonal operation.
know this is a
it is during season
when most
backyards
you know,
wouldn't be
neighbors will be outside in their
and wanting to enjoy their garden. So
if this was a winter operation, people
quite so concerned of what is
March 3, 2011 141
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
going on.
MS. PRICE: Since it has become busy, one
might say, I don't want to leave my house because
of the sale or when they are only a few vendors
out there. I never saw anyone out their on the
block on a Sunday. So I didn't know who my
neighbors were either. They said they don't know
who I am. I fully respect their privacy and
their entitlement of having not something crazy
going on and I wish I knew how they felt as
strongly as they did. It all came to a head this
summer. I don't know where these people appeared
out of the woodwork. A lot of people out of the
norm. And I wasn't even prepared for it. Then
we got the letter from Zoning. But I fully want
to work within some kind of boundaries and make
it some type of attractive seasonally wonder to
be. I always tell people, you can sneak a
toaster in and -- you know this and that. We
tell them we want antiques and we want a certain
look. We want table cloths on the table. Not
just a sheet with just a junk on it.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Do you advertise?
MR. HARTZ: No.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Just word of mouth and
March 3, 2011 142
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
passers-by. Of course, yard sales are very
popular on Saturday's and Sunday's and it's very
possible that people are driving by and see a
bunch of tables with --
MS. PRICE: Well, we put signs up on Sunday
mornings on a couple of corners.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Well, I guess what I
am saying is that if the perception is that it is
a yard sale, people will be probably running over
there, then the people you are specifically
targeting in the antiques. It seems to be they
may be different audiences here. There is a lot
to consider here and I appreciate your openness
for trying to be respectful of your property and
the neighbors property rights and willingness
that this Board has a pretty substantial
jurisdiction of limiting the intense use of that
property. I don't think there were others that
wanted to make comments. Do you want comment
on something that you heard that you would like
to address at this hearing?
HARTZ: One thing that I would like to
There was a comment that was made a few
MR.
address.
minutes ago -- well a couple of comments.
would like to have met my neighbor under
March 3, 2011 143
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
different circumstances. I forget who made it
and I am paraphrasing. If an effort had been
made to speak to us as neighbors rather then
making an anonymous complaint and we then
received a letter cease and desist, that created
contention automatically. It would have been
much better scenario, and I am the most
reasonable guy on the planet. And said we have
an issue here. What can we do to solve this? I
constantly have trash on my lawn. You know, what
-- if it's something that was generated by
something on my property, I will go pick it up.
I didn't know about it. There is noting left on
my front lawn during
and ends empty. The
start and at the end.
the day. It starts empty
lawn looks the same at-the
We have done everything
that we can to comply with the rules that the
Board set for us back in 2001 to whatever it was.
The vendors were told to park in the municipal
lot. We don't want to have an issue with the
Town. Any of these people would have told you
that is my speech. We are looking to make it as
smoothly, as safely and as enjoyably as we can.
So to my neighbors, I respect everyone and I
expect the same. Respect me, speak to me as a
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
man.
anonymity.
MS. PRICE:
at 5:30
that is.
March 3, 2011
You don't have to hind behind
I would like to address
in the morning. I believe I
That is someone that lives
who came
know who
in Mattituck
and would come really, really early in the
morning. Before any of the vendors. She had
already had told me that she is not setting up
anymore. She comes maybe once or twice a year
and I don't think that she was there this year.
She wasn't there at all this year. She would
tend to come very early in the morning. But as I
said, she is no longer participating. That is
all I wanted to say.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I would like to ask
some of the neighbors who voiced some concerns,
and had some negative experiences. If there are
any things that you can think of that you would
like this Board to consider that would mitigate
potential problems, please come forward.
Margaret Straub. In addition
your question to what was
is an incorrect assumption.
MS. STRAUB:
to just answering
just said. There
I
don't know who made the complaint. Ail these
years I have said, I was wondering what was
144
March 3, 2011 145
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
going on. We didn't know what was going on
just of what the Ammerati's had in place. We
saw something that was rather large and out of
control. Ms. Price said herself, unexpectedly
volume of vendors increased. I see that there
is an issue here and this isn't something that
was zoned, I guess, we didn't even know about
that temporary variance until that last hearing.
I just want to clear the air on that. I don't
know who complained, but I am not going to sit
back and pretend that everything was copasetic
and we love having all that extra activity on
that one day of a quiet weekend. I would like to
ask, you mentioned yard sales to the advertised.
There are signs at the end of Love Lane and Main
Road and Route 48 that do draw people that are
looking for that bargained yard sales. You said
it is a different clientele then antiques. There
are young kids that look for their Fisher Price
toys that a get a bundle for their $5 bucks.
It's different and that is what I believe they
represent. But there are signs at the end of the
road that represent that and that's where you get
the volume of people pulling. You might have
less traffic if you don't put up yard sale signs
March 3, 2011 146
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
that advertise it. That would be my one request
is not to allow the public to perceive it as a
yard sale, and the volume would probably be
effected. (In audible). Like I said, I didn't
even know who the neighbors were. It was only
when I saw those people in their yard. I think
greatly limiting the activity that they have over
there would be greatly respecting and welcomed.
Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN:
MS. YOUNG:
door neighbor.
You are very welcome.
I am Ann Young, I am the next
I think what I am hearing here is
the first time that I am hearing is that we are
going to have a flea market every Sunday during
the summer. I think communication was a big
problem. And I think planning, planning,
planning was a big problem. We just purchased an
area 36 acres, where we are going to hold events.
And I can tell you that the requirements needed
for gathering crowds and roll-in bathrooms, are
to the letter. I think the planning here,
although it might be wonderful, it is sorely
lacking, and the neighbors had no idea. I had no
idea. If you are going to embrace your neighbors
and not having anonymous calls, then the
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
neighbors should not be like, "what is going on
over there." And "how often is that going to
happen?" There shouldn't be a question. I think
it needs to be policed. I don't think we can
arbitrarily grant a variance and say who is going
to check on big brother because when you gather
that many people, you can't possibly, when own a
venue like that, control what they are going to
do on the outskirts. So I think that heavy
duty planning has to be done here. Thank
you.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you. I do want
to say one thing here, people are using the term,
"variance" let me make it clear that that is not
what this is about. I know it is technical. A
special exception permit is a review by this
Board of what is a permitted use. Should an
applicant meet certain standards that are
described in the code, and we can add conditions
to ensure that those conditions are met, and
conditions that are more than what is general.
So just so the audience, that this process is not
about a variance. It's about a special exception
permit and those permits can be revoked at
another public hearing, should these standards
147
March 3, 2011 148
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
be violated, an enforcement procedure. It's
like a Bed and Breakfast. It's allowed in the
house based on certain criteria.
MS. PRICE: I believe I had submitted
with my application a letter that I had written
to two of my neighbors who have said that they
knew nothing of the -- none of the specifics
about it. So I am a little confused about that.
Because I recall making copies
letter so that they knew.
MR. STRAUB: John Straub.
of that cover
Again, those
letters only go out to properties that are
adjacent or across from the property in
question, so I did not nor did the Domanski's
receive a letter. That I know for a fact.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That is correct.
Did you get the yellow notice?
MR. STRAUB: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That is the way in
which the applicants that come before this Board
to post a notice to anybody. To say that there
is a hearing on this property.
MR. STRAUB: Well, we were contacted by our
neighbor who did receive a letter.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMJtN: I am saying that is
March 3, 2011 149
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
the procedure that we use for beyond the
adjacent neighbors for other people are notified.
It also helps us find the site. Because Board
members do go out and inspect the site. I
don't know if you know that, but there are five
Board members and we all inspect the site for
this application. So that we can look at the
adjacent properties and the neighborhood and see
the environmental impact.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Okay. The question is,
do we limit this hearing now to only testimony?
Do we close the hearing today bearing in mind
that we might be requiring or requesting
Planning Board approval? Working with the
Planning Board?
MS. ANDALORO: May I make a suggestion,
Gerry about the Planning Board. I believe the
Planning Board on its own should determine what
its jurisdiction is. There are criteria that
trigger jurisdiction in our code. I don't know
-- I mean, they say at a suggestion that they
want you to take a closer look at this and
perhaps do a Site Plan approval. And Site
Plan is triggered by certain things in our
code --
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: But Jennifer, they
are running a restaurant with no Site Plan
approval. This should have Site Plan
approval.
MS. ANDALORO: I would let them make that
determination. For this Board to say to the
Planning Board that you need to approve this, I
don't think that is appropriate.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: What we can do --
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Subject to Planning
Board approval.
MS. ANDALORO: Yes.
MEMBER DINIZIO: I think we should have
contacted Damon and gotten his comments --
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Story.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Yeah. That would explain
a lot.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: That would help. The
other thing that we can do is describe the
amended application. They saw the 28 vendors.
We now have an amended application. Many of
things that have been addressed by the
applicant. Leaving commentary open, for people
to add to the record, for us to gather additional
facts. Without us having to have a hearing.
150
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
People can
period of time. It's all a public record.
you all have access to it by coming to our
March 3, 2011
respond to those comments within a
So
office and filling out a FOIL application.
maybe a way to do that is to get Damon's
So
coraments into the record. To get the Planning
Board additional comments now based on a scale
back proposal and see where that leaves us. I am
not sure if taking more testimony is going to get
us anywhere.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: That is why I suggest
written comment, 30 day or 45 days?
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think 30 days should
be fine.
MS. ANDALORO: I can talk to Damon tomorrow.
(In audible).
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: And we can appear.
They can also just write to us for questions.
MS. ANDALORO: That would probably be best.
Remember that this application came
December. And also understand that
staff, we just lost two people. So
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I don't want
delay for anybody. But we are
as much facts as quickly as we
our planning
to
trying to get
can and before we
151
March 3, 2011 152
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
make a determination. To be sure that we are
to balance the reasonable rights of the property
owner and with the welfare of health and safety
for the neighbors. That is our job and that is
what our goal is. And we are very, very careful
in trying to do that job with a great deal of
consciousness and carefulness. So we don't want
to rush it, nor do we want to delay this. And
our attorney is correct, they are very short
staffed, two planners have just
have a very difficult situation
we leave this hearing open to the next
resigned. So we
there. So if
regular
meeting, which
are able to use that time
gather. It's for written
is going to be April 7th, and we
for more facts to
comments only. We will
not be taking any more testimony but we welcome
written comments and if your material comes to
our file and if any neighbors want to comment on
those materials, then we are open to receiving
them. So it can be an ongoing dialogue and
correspondence. To hold another hearing and take
oral testimony, it is probably going to be
repeated with the same thing.
has an awful a lot of material
So how about we do that.
I think the Board
to think about.
I will make a motion to
1
2
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
March 3, 2011
hold this hearing open until the next regular
meeting of the ZBA, which is April 7th.
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: During which time we
will have written commentary and we will explore
additional comments from the Planning Board and
code enforcement. Then we will close the record
at that time. Gerry has seconded.
Ail in favor?
MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye.
MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye.
MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye.
CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye.
(See Minutes for Resolution.)
(Whereupon, the public hearings
for March 3, 2011 concluded.)
153
March 3, 2011 154
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
I, Jessica DiLallo, certify that the
foregoing transcript of tape recorded Public
Hearings was prepared using required electronic
transcription equipment and is a true and
accurate record of the Hearings.
Signature: / ~ ~J/~
Je~sica-DiLallo C ~ ~
Jessica DiLallo
Court Reporter
PO Box 984
Holbrook, New York
11741
Date: April 18, 2011