HomeMy WebLinkAboutLL-1999 #32
Local Law FZl i- 6g :W YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE
41 STATE STREET, ALBANY, NY 17231
(Use this form to file a local law with the Secretary of State.)
Text of law should be given as amended. Do not include matter being eliminated and do not use
italics or underlining to indicate new matter.
r~f ax x
lEr (
lbwn of ---------=--------------------Southold----------------------------------------------
vm X
LOCAL LAW NO. 32 OF THE YEAR 1999.
A LOCAL LAW TO CHANGE THE ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION OF THE PARCEL
OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS Suffolk County Tax Map (SCTM) # 1000-140.00-01.00-011.000
FROM THE
(B) GENERAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO THE -
(RO) RESIDENTIAL OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AS FOLLOWS:.
Please see attached.
3
(If additional space is needed, attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each-)
fil
i
LOCAL LAW NO. 32 OF THE YEAR 1999.
A LOCAL LAW TO CHANGE THE ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION OF THE PARCEL
OF PROPERTY KNOWN AS Suffolk County Tax Map (SCTM) # 1000-140.00-0 1,00-011.000
FROM THE
(B) GENERAL BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO THE
(RO) RESIDENTIAL OFFICE ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AS FOLLOWS:
Section I. Legislative Intent
Consistent with our comprehensive land use plan and our established objectives and goals as
reflected by the existing zoning patterns within the Town, and based upon our current County Route
48 Land use study as well as numerous land use studies and plans developed heretofore, we hereby
determine that it is necessary and desirable to revise and amend the zoning designation applicable to
the parcel identified herein as well as other lands; thus, we hereby identify and adopt the following
overall themes of (1) Preservation of Farmland and Agriculture; (2) Preservation of Open and
Recreational Space; (3) Preservation of the Rural, Cultural, Commercial and Historical Character of
the Hamlets and Surrounding Areas; (4) Preservation of the Natural Environment; which derive
from the shared vision held by residents and local public officials of the Town and which are
intended to foster a strong economy and which encourage and preserve the existing high quality of
life, as more specifically set forth herein below:
1. Preservation of Farmland and Agriculture
Farmland is a valuable and dynamic industry in the Town of Southold. Theopen
farmlands are not only highly cherished. for their economic value, but for the scenic vistas they provide.
The open space and scenery cued by farmland additionally contributes to the quality of life of the
residents, while promoting tourisin and recreation.
2. Preservation of Open and Recreational Space
The Town of Southold relies heavily upon its scenic beauty and open landscapes for
recreation, clean air and water, as well as for its attraction to tourists and recreation-seekers. The
Town has attracted marry second homeowners because of its "natural resources, abundance of
open space, farms, picturesque villages, and the ever-present waterfront" (Master Plan Update,
1985). Due to this open space, the Town has a tremendous development potential. Bleak pictures
have been painted in a few documents, warning of strip-type development, suburban sprawl and
f water supply issues. The preservation of open and recreational space is not only aesthetic, but also
a necessity for the present andfuture needs of the Town.,
3. Prr eetvsEtlRat of the Rural, Cultural, Commemllal and Historical Character of the
Hwrnlett*M s
thtildis rcuaw4ed for its
caamc w- This t! 'aad blstoric .
Town residents, ri and' Sta` 066 t~~ isf
pit=vmmaeitey issues
are keeping growth in the existing hamlet centers and preserving the enhancing the surrounding rural areas.
Additionally, the Master Plan Update recommends the provision for "a community of residential hamlets
that are comprised of a variety of housing opportunities, commercial, service and cultural activities, set in
an open or rural atmosphere and supported by a diversified economic base (including agriculture, marine
commercial and seasonal recreation activities)."
4. Preservation of the Natural Environment
Accommodating "growth and change within the Town without destroying its traditional
economic base, the natural environment of which that base rests, and the unique character
and the way of life that defines the Town" is of utmost importance" (Ground Watershed
Protection and Water Supply Management Strategy). The Master Plan Update
recommends preservation of the Town's natural environment from wetlands to
woodlands and to "achieve a land use pattern that is sensitive to the limited indigenous
water supply and will not degrade the subsurface water quality.
The outstanding needs enumerated below are the culmination of careful comparison of the intent and
objectives of the town (as stated in past land use plans and studies) and the currently existing conditions
along the County Route 48 corridor. These needs reflect the past and present vision of the Town and the
work that still needs to be done due to the proximity of County Route 48 to the hamlet commercial centers
and to avoid potentially conflicting development strategies for such areas. These outstanding needs we find
exist throughout the Town and are specifically identified as follows:
1) to provide for viable land use development at levels of intensities which are sensitive to subsurface
water quality and quantity
2) To maintain and strengthen hamlet centers as the focus of commercial, residential, and cultural
activity;
3) To preserve the open, agricultural and coral character of areas outside of the hamlet centers;
4) to provide for a variety of housing opportunities for citizens of different incomes and age levels;
5) to enhance the opportunities for pedestrian-friendly shopping;
6) to continue to the support of the Town's agricultural economy-,
7) to maximize the Town's natural assets, including its coastal location and agricultural base, by
balancing commercial, residential and recreational uses;
8) to strengthen the Town's motional and marine-commercial activities;
9) to encourage the preservation of parkland and public access to the waterfront;
10) to support tourism by maintaining and strengthening the Town's assets that foster a tourist trade,
namely bamlet center businesses, historic heritage, architecture, a sense of place, of nuai and open
character, agriculture, and marine activities;
11) to preserve prime farudand; and encourage the diversification of agriculture,
12) to preserve the historic, cultural, architectural and archaeological resources of the Town;
13) to ensure visual quality of hamlet venters;
14) to encourage appropriate land uses both inside and out of hamlet centers;
15) to promote balanced economy and tax base;
16) to preserve the integrity of the Town's vegetative habitats, including freshwater wetlands and
woodlands.
cab
Section 2. Enactment
Therefore, based upon the aforementioned goals and identified needs of the Town and upon our
consideration of the recommendations and comments of our Planning Board, the Suffolk County Planning
i ` Commission, our planning consultant (CCG) and the public comment taken at the public hearing and
otherwise, we hereby change the zoning district designation for the parcel known as
SCTM# / - .J[_~ - O/, (jYj - /3 (and as more fully described
herein below) from the
()lr d?~7C,Si;JFS~ zoning district designation to the
7
E5 i )EE ~ Z zoning district designation.
SCTM # 1000-140.00-01.00-011.000
ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town
of Southold, County of Suffolk, and State of New York, bounded and described
as follows:
BEGINNING at a point on the southwesterly side of Maiden Lane with the
northwesterly side of Middle Road CR48 (as widened);
RUNNING THENCE from said point of beginning along the northwesterly side of
Middle Road CR48 (as widened), South 44 degrees 40 minutes West 114.53 feet to a
point;
THENCE along land now or formerly of Pierce (formerly Brown), North 47 degrees 35
minutes 20 seconds West 62.56 feet to a point;
THENCE along land now or formerly of Carrig & McDonald (formerly Long), north 44
degrees 44 minutes 50 seconds East 114.71 feet to a point on the southwesterly side
of Maiden Lane;
THENCE along the southwesterly side of Maiden Lane, South 47 degrees 25 minutes
10 seconds East 62.40 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING.
Being and intended to be the same premises conveyed to the party of the first part by
deed liber 5014 cp 456.
f~
l
Section 3.
The zoning map as adopted by section 100-21 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold is
hereby amended to reflect the within change of zoning district designation for said parcel.
Section 4.
THIS LOCAL LAW SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY UPON FILING WITH THE
SECRETARY OF STATE.
(Complete the certulcatlon In the paragraph that applies to filing of this local law and
strike out that which is not applicable.)
1. (Final adoption by local legislative body only.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. 3Z------------- of 1999
of the ( dttxt (ISr own)('M) 6) of Southold _ was duly passed by the
own oar d on-Octobgr _19 19 99, in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
(Name ofLegirladve Body) _
2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or repassage after disapproval
by the Elective Chief Executive Offlcer*.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 19-----
of the (County)(City)(Town)(Viillage) of was duly passed by the
on 19 and was (approved)(not approved) (repassed after
(Name of Legislative Body)
disapproval) by the----------------------------------------- and was deemed duly adopted on 19----
(Elective Chief Eremrive Officer-)
in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
3. (Final adoption by referendum.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 19----
of the (County)(City)(Town)(ViIlage) of was duly passed by th
on 19---- , and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed aft'
(Name of Legislative Body) -
disapproval) by the------------------------------------------------- on------------------- 19----. Such local law was submitte
(Eleefive ChiefErecadve Ofrcere)
to the people by reason of a (mandatory)(permissive) referendum, and received the affirmative vote of a majority of
the qualified electors voting thereon at the (general)(special)(annual) election held on 19---- , in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid petition was filed requesting
referendum.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 19--
of the (CountyxCity)C1bwn)(Village) of was duly.passed by
on 19----, and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed a,
(Name ofLegisladve Body)
disapproval) by the------------------------------------------------- on 19 Such local law was subjec
j (Eteeafr<cudF~tettdw ofoer)
permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of 19---- . in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
F wAve Chief Executive 0Meer means or Inctudes the chlef executive oMCW of a county, elec"-,oh a coot
wide basis or, if them be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a dty or village
the supervisor of a;town where such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or ordin
(2)
_ 5. (City local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto designated as lot:al4aw No. of 19__----
of the City of having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of
section (36)(37) of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the
qualified electors of such city voting thereon at the (special)(general) election held on------- 19---- ,
became operative.
6. (County local law concerning adoption of Charter.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No- of 19
of the County of State of New York, having been submitted to the electors
at the General Election of November 19----, pursuant to subdivisions 5 and 7 of section 33 of the
Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of the cit-
ies of said county as a unit and a majority of the qualified electors of the towns of said county considered as a unit
voting at said general election, became operative.
(If any other authorized form of final adoption has been followed, please provide an appropriate certification.)
I further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same
is a correct transcript therefrom and of the whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in the manner in-
dicated in paragraph 1------ above.
Clerk of the unty legislative body, City, T or Village Clerk
or officer designated by local legislative body
Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk
(Seal) Date: !~Z~c~9%
(Certification to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or
other authorized attorney of locality.)
STAnOFNMYORK
ODUMOF SUFFOLK
1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law contains the correct text and that all proper proceedings
have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law annexed hereto.
gaature
Mary C. Wilson, Esq., Assistant Town Attorney f(
rea F. Y
nn~
of Southold
Date: ,f~zs~99
(3)
P
SPECIAL MEETING
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
OCTOBER 4, 1999
9:00 A.M.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED ZONING MAP CHANGES ON ROUTE 48
IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD.
Present: Supervisor Jean W. Cochran
Councilwoman Alice J. Hussie
Justice Louisa P. Evans
Councilman William D. Moore
Councilman John M. Romanelli
Councilman Brian G. Murphy
Town Clerk Elizabeth A. Neville
Town Attorney Gregory F. Yakaboski
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: At first I was angry, and then I think I was sad
more than anything else. It has been brought to my attention in addition to
having some phone calls, that there are people in the community that do not
feel that they can come in, and present their position without being jeered
at, or heckled. Now this isn't the Southold I know. The Southold that I
know everyone has the opportunity to say how they feel. But, because
there is this concern I am going to put some rules into the proceedings.
There will be no heckling, jeers, or applause from the audience, no
demonstrations. We are here to have your input and your side to the issue.
Every speaker should be treated with respect. There will be no side
comments or discussion while a speaker is addressing the Town Board. Each
speaker should identify themselves at the mike, and also who they
represent. I will give everyone three minutes. When we reach the point
where everyone that wants to speak has spoken I will go back, and ask if
you would like to address the Town Board a second time. This perception
is out there, and sometimes.. well, the perception is out there. It is not
how I view Southold so, please, give courtesy to every speaker. I know
you will. 1 know most of you. I know how you are. So, we will now open
the Special Board meeting of the Southold Town Board, Monday, October 4,
1999 for the purpose to hold public hearings on the proposed Local Laws
for the Amendments to the Zoning Map, and any other business that may
properly come before this meeting. Mary, we are going to have to read
each one of these properties?
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY WILSON: Yes.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: These are in order according to..l have all of
these, but I am not sure of what order they should be. We will have to
pg2-PH y
take turns. We have a lot of reading to do. Bill, do you want to start with
the first one scheduled?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The first public hearing is on a Local Law in
Relation to Tax Map parcel #1000-113-12-14. It is a parcel in Mattituck, 1A,
supposed to go from Limited Business to R80, residential low density.
Parcel is owned by Michael Caraftis and wife, Port Jefferson. The public
notice was placed in the Town paper, and placed on the Town Bulletin
Board.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: We have to go through public hearings on all
of these? These are all scheduled for 9:00 o'clock?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You do one at a time. Am I correct, Mary?
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY WILSON: You do the reading on each
individual parcel.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Do it as a group, and then you have a little bit
more give and take.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: All 1A. Property 113-12-11, 113-12-12, 113-12-13,
Principi property, 113-14-10 Feinberg, 121-6-1 Philip and Susan
Cardinale, Michael Adamowicz and Others, I did Craftis parcel
already. Mattituck 113 part of 121-5-4.1 Michael Adamowicz and others,
part of 122-2-23.1 Emanuel Tsontos, part of 122-2-24 Charlotte
Dickerson, part of 122-2-25 Suffolk County Water Authority, part of
122-2-8.1 Frances Acer. That makes up all of Mattituck 1A, 1B. So, the
public hearing is now open on Mattituck 1A, and 1B.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone who would like to address the
Town Board in relation to any proposed zoned changes that Bill stated?
Yes, ma'am? Please state your name and who you represent.
TIPPY CASE: My name is Tippy Case. I live in Southold, and I
represent North Fork Environmental Council. In regard to 121-5-4.1, 1
know the Board had discussion about keeping this parcel zoned Light
Industry. I urge you to vote for the Cramer recommendation for the
following reasons. Number one, it is a busy area, and traffic would become
even more congested with curb cuts, and entering and leaving parking lots.
The land is now wooded, and overgrown, and there seems to other more
appropriate places to build or develop than presently a wooded lot. Three,
it includes acreage that is now protected by the Department of
Environmental Conservation as wetlands. It is a recharge area that should
be maintained by clustering development, and maintaining the green belt
that exists now. It is not that we are against eliminating light Industry
zoning. It is just that it seems to us that there are more appropriate
pieces of property. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like
to address the Town Board? Yes, sir?
PHILIP CARDINALE: Philip Cardinale. I would like to address the
Board on the property 121-6-1. Thank you for the opportunity to speak. I
pg3-PH
will begin, commence with this, that all of you people are trying to do what
is best for the Town of Southold. I expect no less when zoning is
addressed as member of the Riverhead Board, so expect you to respect the
same. However, I have learned over two years on that Board that
benevolent intentions do not necessarily result in benevolent actions. It is
my intent today to point out what fundamental fairness, good planning
principals, good sense, and restraints of law require that the Board decline
to accept the Cramer Study recommendation in regard to the parcel in
question. I will limit myself largely to the specifics of this parcel,
because I understand that we have been noticed for hearing in regard to a
proposed public law in regard to this single parcel, so that the unique
aspects of that single parcel are of course critical to your consideration.
My wife Susan and I own this 3.5 acre parcel on the north corner of Cox
Neck and Route 48 in Mattituck since February, 1989. We purchased it then
for $227,500. It was then General Business. It was upzoned to Limited
Business subsequent to our purchase as part of your 1989 study. We pay
over $3,000 a year for taxes for eleven years. We have had the parcel
available for purchase for eleven years. On May 4, 1999, through the real
estate broker Coldwell, Banker, Celic, Susan and 1 contracted with
Leib Sellers, LLC, Marclay being the principal who is here today with
his attorney Gail Wickham. We are priced at $305,000. If upzoned as
proposed in the Cramer study I have been advised by qualified real estate
appraisers, and I intend to submit those appraisals. That parcel will be
essentially unsalable for residential purposes, or for any other purpose in
AC Zone. I have been further advised that even if a purchaser could be
found for this parcel for use as residential it's fair market value would be
less than $80,000. It has been said that what you are considering will
diminish by several millions dollars the values of the properties that are
being considered. I would like to explain to you right now where $225,000
of that is going to come from, my parcel. When I spoke with Supervisor
Cochran subsequent to my initial letter in this matter she was very
pleasant, and very quickly set up the meeting, and her reaction to this
parcel being residential, I think, says it all. She asked me, would you
build a house on this parcel? I wouldn't. I think that is the truth of it.
No one would build on this parcel a house. When purchased in 1999 the
parcel was zoned Business (B) General Business zone. Some of the other
aspects of the history of it, the Town Planning Board had in fact just
before our purchase required that this 3.5 acre parcel be set off at the
zoning district line from the 36 acre residentially zoned parcel to it's
core, which was then subject of subdivision application. Shortly after our
purchase our parcel was upzoned to Limited Business as a result of
comprehensive study earlier proceeding the town by rezoning, which
occurred in October of '89. That study concluded that the adopted zoning
established that Limited Business Use as defined in the Town Code was
appropriate for those parcels on Route 48, such as our parcel, which is
close to hamlet centers. So, as not to stretch the development along Route
58, they permitted certain hamlet centers such as this area to develop.
Cramer suggested upzoning as relation to our parcel is therefore not
consistent with the history of previous Town Planning Board action in
regard to this parcel, and certainly not consistent with the Town Board's
comprehensive plan of 1989, which underlines the present Zoning Board.
Then it comes back to would you build a home on this parcel? 1 think the
honest answer is no. Besides the history the fiscal configuration of the
parcel and it's location are unique. This is a corner parcel with a
pg4-PH
frontage of 439 feet on Route
48 and 492 feet on Cox Neck Lane, really 900 feet of frontage. The value
of the parcel derived from it's corner frontage. You have a survey
attached. Route 48 is a 'primary east-west thoroughfare and Cox Neck is
increasingly used as a major north-south thoroughfare. Because of the
fiscal figuration of the lot, it's corner location, the heavy traffic flows
around here, and other factors are not appropriate for residential use.
Again, the same question, would you build a house on this lot?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Phil, I am going to have to... Your wife, is she
here?
PHILIP CARDINALE: Yes.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: She has three minutes, if you want to use hers.
Would you mind? I hate to cut somebody in the middle.
PHILIP CARDINALE: The surrounding uses is another issue besides the
history of the piece, and the configuration of the piece I would like you to
consider. On the northeast corner of Route 48 and Cox Neck a shopping
center was approved by the Town in 1990. The southwest corner opposite
our parcel is developed and has been utilized for many years for commercial
purposes. The southeast corner of Cox Neck Lane and Route 48 has been
developed and it is being used as a restaurant. Because of these existing
surrounding uses our parcel is not appropriate for residential use. In the
current Town Zoning, Cramer's proposed zoning, and the actual use of
every other corner at the intersection of Cox Neck Lane and Route 48,
except ours is commercial, so the existing zoning, the proposed zoning,
everything is commercial except our corner if you take this action.
Accordingly no reasonable persons would place a residence in this location
surrounded by every other corner of commercial use. Finally in regard to
the proposed use under the existing contract of sale, the contemplated use
for a parcel is not another strip center. It is in fact for a winery. The
proposed development of our parcel for this use is favored by the Southold
Planning Board.' The purchaser, another interesting aspect of this piece's
history, Lief Sellers was recently was disappointed by rejection of proposed
winery development elsewhere in town. He specifically requested that the
Planning Board of the Town of Southold recommend several alternative sites
for his winery. The Planning Board selected this particular site and
recommended it. Site plan approval and Suffolk County Health Department
approval are in place, essentially in place. The Southold Zoning Board of
Appeals has approved this site for the use intended. No Town or County
agency objects to the proposed use as a winery. The prospective purchaser
has expended thousand of dollars in regard to survey site, architectural,
legal and other pre-construction costs. Where it not for the twice extended
and continuing one year moratorium imposed by the Board the impending
sale would have closed already. Under Cramer's study rezoning as a winery
would not be permitted. The next point of the six I would like to make is
the rezoning is contemplated under the Cramer study, and by the Town
Board, as a legislative act. We know that. As such it requires careful
balancing of varied interests. It must conform with the Town's confidential
planner, and careful consideration of specific and unique factors effecting
each parcel of property for which the rezoning is contemplated. It is
suggested that careful balance interest and careful review of the Town
pg5-PH
Comp Plan as it relates to our parcel will lead clearly and inevitable to
rejection of the Cramer proposed zoning as it relates to this parcel. I
think you have to ask the question of balance, and at what price each of
these parcel will you change the zoning? Finally I indicated that there was
some legal restraints that I wanted you to be aware of, and I think you are
aware of them. We can not afford to not challenge upzoning as a
regulatory taking of constitutional recognized property interests. We know
the conservation of property value is the important purpose of zoning.
Certainly that purpose is ill served in this case. New York Court of
Appeals has stated that reclassification of land residential use is
unconstitutional, whether the land is unsuitable for residential development
due to surrounding commercial use and exceptionally heavy traffic, just as
we have here. New York Board of Appeals state in the same case, while not
itself depositive of Constitutional issue of taking without due process and
just compensation and violations of the 14th Amendment, a drastic
reduction in value, a chance to establish the properties not recently suited
by the use prescribed by the Zoning Ordinance. Another case states
unnecessary hardship, and the legal sense means unreasonable financial
loss. Consider balancing all revellent taxes will, I believe, leave the Town
Board to decline to accept the Cramer Study recommendation as to what
parcel. Declining to accept Cramer recommendation as relates to this parcel
I think will serve the interest of fundamental fairness with compliance with
the law, good planning and good sense. 1 would also like to submit.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Phil, I am going to have to ask you to conclude.
PHILIP CARDINALE. I understand. I would also like to submit at this
time a protest pursuant to Town Law Section 265. 1 submit it to the Board,
which I understand will require a super-majority of this Board to change
the zone on this parcel. I understand there will be a number of those
petitions submitted by Steve Angel, including another of my property
sometime today or tomorrow. (A petition was submitted signed by Philip
Cardinale and Susan Cardinale in pursuant to Section 165 of the New
York Town Law in protest of the proposed change of zone for a certain
parcel in the Town of Southold at Mattituck, which parcel is shown on the
Suffolk County Tax Map as 1000-121-6-1 so that the zoning of said parcel
shall change fro Limited Business (LB) to R-80 Residential Low Density.)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Phil. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board?
MARK LIES: Thank you for letting me address the Board. My name is
Mark Lieb. Some of you might know me. A little bit of history, I did try
to build a winery on another piece of property, and did go to the Town
Planning Board, and worked with them, choosing this piece, and 1 have
spent a lot of time, money, and effort, in developing this piece. We have a
set of plans which I think will be well suited for this area. It will be
something that will be designed with low traffic, low intensity, but, you
know, for the record I would like to say that I have a contract on this
piece of property, and if the zone is changed the contract will not go
through. So, I stand here in protest, and hope that it does not get
changed. 1 am also here to answer any questions about what might be built
on that property.
P96-PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Mark. Who would like to be next?
pg 7 - PH
ED DART: Good morning. I am Ed Dart, a fellow Southold business
landowner with property on Route 48. You claim to be a bias-free
government, but 1 see a distinct double standard in the actions of this
Town Board. You are demonstrating different treatment for two different
segments of Southolders, those being landowners who happen to own
farmland and landowners who happen to own business property. Owners of
farmland you invite in and offer to pay them for their development rights.
Business land owners on the other hand are dealt with differently. You
simply do a low cost change of law to limit their land uses without
compensation. Are they more noble than we? Are we less deserving for
some reason than they? Don't we business land owners also deserve a
voluntary plan of some sort where, like farmland owners, at our option
where the town could buy down our permitted uses allowing us to be a
compensated partner in preservation of Southold rather than an
uncompensated victim. In light of this Town Board's established practice of
purchasing land use privileges from certain of it's citizens, I feel you are
morally and ethically obligated to do likewise with us. My family has lived
in this town and been contributors to the quality of life in this town for
four generations. We have never yet been a victim of a crime or been stolen
from in over 80 years. This proposed rezoning of land is taking without
permission. This taking without our consent is tantamount to stealing, and I
urge that before you go down this path any further, and before you
worsen the hard feelings among all of us who live together as friends and
neighbors that immediately here and now put aside this rezoning plan and
work instead to design and implement a means where we business
landowners, who so choose can voluntarily participate in a land use buy
down scheme providing compensation similar to what you make available to
our brothers who own farmland. I will not stand by without a fight while
you take my property rights, or see other of my neighbors similarly
affected. Who among you will have the moral and ethical conviction to move
to discard this unjust rezoning process and instead choose to seek a means
to work with us not as second class citizens, but equitably and without bias.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Make that motion.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: What motion?
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Ed's comments regarding the study at this
point, come up with another plan.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Second.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: There is a motion on the floor and a second. Any
discussion? i don't think we can do this in the middle of a hearing. Mary?
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Muddy waters, I don't doubt that.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: 1 don't know if we can or not. I will call a
recess, and 1 will check. Mary, go get the law books.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, what I am going to do, we gave a call to
the Association of Towns. They have three or four attorneys on staff,
which know Municipal Law inside and out. They have recommended 1
pg 8 - PH
adjourn the hearing. A motion can then be placed on the floor. The vote
will be called for, and if the vote goes down we will continue the hearing.
If it goes up that's it. I adjourn the public hearing. John, now you may
present your..
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: I propose that we take into consideration Mr.
Dart's recommendations, and hold off on the Cramer Plan, and come up with
a proposal to buy down property rights similar to what we do with
agriculture.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Before I vote let me explain where the fallacy is and
what is a very intriguing idea comparing the business owners to farmland
owners. The difference is this. When you buy down development rights of
the farm you are taking all possible development off that farm, and leaving
it in it's open state. It is not because the Town feels so benevolent and
wonderful that it wants to pay farmers. That is required by the
Constitution. That is the kind of thing that you compensate. When you
rezone properties part of the community plan, and you go from one
business zone to another, from a business zone to a residential zone, that
is not the same, unless you can show in your instance that you have been
left with no value to your property, the municipality, the public, public
funds have to used to pay you for your property rights. That is the law.
The Supreme Court has ruled upon that for years, and years, and years.
And while it is intriguing and interesting to suggest paying for the
buy-down of rights, that would be a gift, an inappropriate gift, of public
funds. So, while it is interesting, it is intriguing, I don't believe that
we can do that with the public's money. We do it when we buy development
rights off a farm, because we want to leave them as farms. If you have a
case to be made, or you can persuade the Board that you are left with no
use whatsoever after the proposed action is considered, that is a different
argument all together. But to say I am going from B to LB, LB to RO, RO
or anything to AC generally speaking does not trigger the need to use
public money. It is not my money. It is the public's money, and it has to
be shown to be part of a comprehensive zoning scheme. So, I vote, no.
Vote of the Town Board: Ayes: Councilman Romanelli, Councilwoman
Hussie. No: Councilman Murphy, Councilman Moore, Supervisor Cochran.
This resolution was LOST.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: Some of these parcels are adjacent to farmland.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: John, the motion is defeated. We will continue
with the hearing. I am opening the hearing again. Is there anyone that
would like to address the Town Board?
pg9- PH
ABIGAIL WICKHAM: Good morning. My name is Abigail Wickham, and 1 am
here representing Mr. Lieb, who recently spoke pertaining to the
Cardinale property, section 121-6-1 located on the northwest corner of
Cox Neck Lane and Route 48. In addition to Mr. Cardinale's comments I
would just like to say on behalf of my client the reasons we feel this
proposal is inappropriate to this particular property are. First of all the
location as a proposed residential site would be inappropriate because, A,
you have a shopping center directly opposite on one side, which is as you
probably know from your own observations an extremely busy business.
Also opposite to the south on Route 48 you have commercial industrial uses,
including a property which the owner himself reminded the ZBA at a recent
meeting was described by one of the local newspapers as one of the ugliest
properties in Southold Town, not somewhere you want to build a house
probably, is at the location where Route 48 does narrow down creating a
further traffic hazard, and certainly you can see by that beautiful beech
tree, if anyone was to look at the trunk how many nicks there are in the
tree, it is a hazardous site, and it is also directly opposite in Limited
Business, Light Industrial area, which is currently on your Zoning Maps,
and a restaurant also. It is just not a site that is conducive to
residential usage, and my client Mr. Lieb has proposed what he thinks is
a very amenable plan for that area, that will help bumper between the
eastern residential the northern residential, and the north... northeastern
residential, excuse me, and western residential areas between those areas,
and some of the other high intensity uses. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Gail. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board?
MARIO FUSARO: Board members, good morning. My name is Mario
Fusaro. 1 am part owner of parcel that is on the east side of the
shopping center on Cox Lane. The parcel is now zoned LB, and it was
rezoned from B to LB in the 80's, which devalued it. Now, we are looking
at the possibility of changing the zoning to R80. The problem here, we are
upset about this is because, like everybody else is, it is going devalue it
further with it being taxes being over $2,000. If this should occur on my
particular parcel, which is three acres...
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Mr. Fusaro, I don't see your name on the list,
but I know that you have property. What is the number of it?
MARIO FUSARO: 113-12-13. Now, I have voiced my opinions before in
writing, and to the Board in the verbal sense, but the problem here is if
you build one's home on three acres, you got to fairly decent size to
balance it out with the plot, which means the house has to in order for it
to be properly (unintelligible) Who is going to be buying a house, or any
house, not even a house of higher price range of this sort. On the other
hand you could change the road back. Buy it back from the County and
make it a one on two lane road. Again, it is going to be a tremendous
amount of money, and nobody wants to do it. On the other hand we bought
this property years back, and now we will have to take less of a potential
profit. It is really not fair. I see where you are coming from, but I think
to balance it out the best way to deal with this would be as was sort of
touched upon by some of these other people, approach the various property
p9 10 - PH
owners, and some of them will probably go along with a change of zone.
They wouldn't care. It wouldn't affect them one way or another, and/or
buy it out. If you feel that strongly about it get the monies up. I mean
years back they didn't the development rights. That was more or less came
up with. Something could be done along these lines here. On this plot
here also people are very upset and concerned about the high voltage.
There is a lot of controversy about affecting your health and so forth, and
there probably some truth to it. Nobody want to touch it, as far as living
there with children and so forth. So, this again is another downgrading,
and it is not fair to us. It really isn't. I am hoping that the Board will
deal with it with proper means that would help us. There are other issues
to be addressed that are more important to the Town.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your comments. Anyone else like
to address the Board?
RAY NINE: I have a piece of property on Route 48. Is this for all pieces,
or are you taking..
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Ray, to the mike. State your name. We haven't
gotten to your section yet, really.
RAY NINE: In other words I can't give a statement on mine yet.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: It would be better until we actually were looking
at your piece.
RAY NINE: My question is, I am a working man. I work every day, and I
have to get back to work right now instead of taking time to do this.
have a letter into the Town Board. Will that letter be addressed when mine
comes up?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: All letters will be entered into the record of the
hearing.
RAY NINE: So I will not have to be here myself personally for the hearing
then?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is up to you, Ray. I am not going to say,
yes or no, but any letter that we received to date I have sent over to
Betty, and they are all a part of the record of the hearing.
RAY NINE: Everyone on the Town Board has seen my letter I guess?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Yes.
RAY NINE: I am going to get back to work then. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone like to address the Town Board, either
pro or con? On this section, anyone else before we go to the next section?
LAUREN GRANT: My name is Lauren Grant. I live in New Suffolk. I
think that what has been demonstrated here today is the ability to give and
take. I came in here adamantly opposed to any development on 48. Hearing
pg 11 - PH
the argument of Mr. Cardinale I feel that he has some very valuable
things to contribute to the Town of Southold, and he has a building he
wants to put up there, and I think that if. A know it is going to be a long
and tedious process to go through parcel by parcel, this is the way to do
it. This is what democracy is all about, and I applaud you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Lauren. Ray, do you want to stick
around a minute? We are going to go to your section any second, and I
will call on you first. Okay? Any other comments? Anyone speaking in
relation to the Mattituck area? (No response.) If not, we will move on to
the next section. We are not closing any of the hearings today. We are just
going to adjourn them, so we have additional input. Now, I am going to
adjourn the hearing on Mattituck to and Mattituck 1B. Then we can open
the hearing on Mattituck 2A, 2B, and 2C. Ray, you are on.
RAY NINE: Good morning, Town Board. My name is Raymond Nine. I own
a piece of property between Westphalia Road and Love Lane. I have 450 feet
on the dual lane highway. It is presently totally zoned for Light Industry.
run my business there. It is the proper zoning for the type of business
that 1 run, and I would continually like to be able to do that, and to keep
the property zoned the way it is. What has happened is, I get three tax
bills on it. One piece is 2.9 acres that is being zoned from Light Industry
to Light Business, and the other two parcels are proposed to go from Light
Industry to RO, and I would appreciate it very much if the Board would
consider leaving it in the Light Industrial the way that it is, the way I am
presently using it. Thank you for your consideration.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Ray. Anyone else like to address
the Board in relation to Mattituck 2A, B, and C? Gail?
GAIL WICKHAM: Good morning again. I represent John Sidor, who has
the parcel just of the south of Mr. Nine up to the Long Island Railroad
tracks. That is an area that has been a potato grading facility for many,
many years, and also has also has frontage over on Love Lane. You are
proposing to rezone it from Light Industrial to Limited Business. Mr.
Sidor asked me to come down today. He will be here tomorrow evening.
His problem at this time is that he is so thoroughly confused by the
process of whether if it is zoned Limited Business what that would mean
and what it wouldn't mean, because we don't know if the second phase of
the Cramer recommendations with respect to use will be going through. He
hasn't really figured out how he feel about this rezoning. He does however
feel that it will devalue his property significantly in any event, and he
would like an opportunity to address you that. But, that is the concern
that many people have expressed to me that we don't know what the
ultimate use of the parcel will be, if it is rezoned.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Gail. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board pro or con?
HOWARD MEINKE: My name is Howard Meinke talking for the North Fork
Environmental Council. I know the purpose of the study is to either uses
that exists will be a practical matter to maintain, but we don't want those
uses to get more intense. I think that Light Industrial parcel is case in
point. I really don't think Light Industrial there in a succeeding business
pg 12 - PH '
accommodates things like office buildings, and telephone exchanges, and
contractor yards, and things where people do their business, but they are
with the site plan requirements, always screened. They are very careful
about traffic flow, and there are protection in your Code that do afford an
area that is zoned Light Industrial. Safeguards, when they come up against
higher uses. But, certainly where you have a potato grading facility, 1
don't know if any of you have ever been there when that is in operation,
that is not a pretty use, and your Light Industrial Uses that are permitted
in that zone are certainly not going to be anymore offensive than that type
of use, and certainly will maintain the value of the owner's property, which
I think is something that really just needs to be considered. This is not an
area where the vistas on important on Route 48. They are not in a farm
belt. You are in downtown Mattituck. You are opposite the business area
that is segregated by the railroad tracks. It is not an inappropriate and I
think that is one reason he was objecting. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Town
Board?
ED DART: Ed Dart. Just one last follow up on my comments from before,
and 1 basically understand and appreciate the courtesy of Mr. Moore's
statement regarding the rezoning versus the development right purchase,
however, this may be an opportunity to plow some new ground here. The
farmland preservation didn't used to exist. It had to be conceived and
brought to a reality. I hoped that you wouldn't use the past as a reason
not to consider some new thinking. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Ed. (tape change)
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Now in Mattituck are 2A,2B,2C are 141-3-3 of Alice
Funn, 141-3-44 Clarence Booker and Others, 141-3-45.1 of Mattie
Simmons, 141-3-45.2 North Fork Housing Alliance, 141-3-41 George Penny,
Inc., 141-3.21 Harry Charkow and Wife, 141-3-19 New York State Hostel
#1077, 141-3-26 Joseph and Janet Domanski, 141-3-27 Margaret Ashton,
141-3-28 Raymond Nine, 141-3-25.1 also Raymond Nine, 141-3-29.2 Arnold
Urist, 141-3-38.1 George Penny, Inc., 141-3-22 Raymond Nine, 141-3-32.1
William Guyton, 141-3-29.1 John J. Sidor,Jr. and Others.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone else from that group? Sometimes
it makes it easy to hear the names also. Mr. Meinke? This is your
second time right now. Let me see if there is anybody else first. Okay?
Anybody else like to address the Town Board that hasn't? (No response)
If not I will take you Mr. Mienke.
HOWARD MEINKE: Howard Meinke of the North Fork Environmental
Council. I just want a minute, because it has come to my attention that in
other towns engaging in similar exercises we are doing here, on what was
called an arbitration panel was set up for the representatives of real
estate, from business, from environment, from planning, and etc. to help
weight the protests of people who has had zoning changes and to arrange
all sorts of inventive things that the engineer could help the town-special
use-and so forth, so that this theory of everybody getting together and
working with each other to make this happen is not a foreign concept. It
has been done. This may be something that we ought to reach out and try
pg13-PH
to accomplish, because there seems to be enough contentiousness here that
have trouble visualizing where this is going, that it is going to get us
anywhere that we are already without a lot of discouraging thoughts.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Howard. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board? (No response.) These hearings are not being closed.
They are being adjourned, and the first set that we did is adjourned until
Tuesday at 5:00 P.M., 10/5/99, and this 2A, B, and C is being adjourned
to Tuesday, 10/5 at 6:00 P.M. We will now go to Mattituck D, E.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: That is not until 11:00 o'clock.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: We have a 45 minutes break now.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Then we will take a break.
Recess at 10:15 A.M. until 11:00 A.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will continue the hearing, and we are now
taking input in relation to Mattituck D, E, F, and G.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved in this public hearing are
part of part of 141-3-38.1 George Penny, Inc., 141-3-39 Robert Boasi
property, part of 140-2-32 John Divello and Others, 141-3-18 Jeffrey
Gregor, 141-3-40 Andrew Fohrkolb, 140-1-10 Mark McDonald, 140-1-11
Steven Freethy and Deborah Gibson Freethy, 140-1-12 Henry Pierce and
Jennie Lee, 140-1-4 Raymond Smilovich, 140-1-9 Herbert Swanson,
140-1-6 Harold Reeve and Sons, Inc., 140-1-6 Harold Reeve and Sons,
Inc., 140-1-7 Rita Poneiglione, 140-1-8 Helen Reeve, 140-1-1 Stepahnie
Gullatt, 140-1-2 Leroy Heyliger and Wife, 140-1-3 William Stars and
Wife. I think that sums them up. Right?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bill. Is there anyone that would like
to address the Town Board in relation to these parcels. Yes, sir?
ROBERT JENKINS: Robert Jenkins, Cutchogue. It may not be in relation
to these parcels, but it is relation You are rattling off these numbers,
lot numbers, but sitting in the audience 1 have no idea what the zone
changes are from, what, to what, and how big the parcel is. 141-3-5 could
be ten acre Limited Business to Agriculture Conservation. If you could
just say from zone to what zone of proposed changes that would be helpful.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. We do have some additional copies of
what we are working from, and we will have more made so that everybody
can have a copy, and it does tell you exactly the section from the plan that
it comes from, what the zone is, and what it is being changed to, a
proposed change, and the name of the owner, so our Town Clerk will make
some additional so you will all have a copy. Yes, ma'am?
PAULINE PHARR: I just want to say that I noticed in the newspaper
notice you would list a property with acreage, but not all of that acreage
was involved in the change, so sometimes it would be an eight acre
property, but only one or two acres was involved in the change, so if you
pg 14 - PH
would be very accurate in terms of how much acreage we are talking about.
If you mention acreage and just read it from the legal notice, because a lot
of those properties are two zones already AC where the majority is only a
strip.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you.
ED DART: 1, too, have a question about the notification process. 1 am Ed
Dart, and I have a question about the notification process. Me being a
landowner I know that I received the certified letters, but did my
neighboring landowners also receive similar notices indicating that my
property would be changed, and wouldn't my neighbors need to know that
my property may have a zone change, which may or may not have a impact
on them? I don't know if they were notified. I know when you apply for a
variance you want to be sure that all your neighbors have been notified to
properly consider the zone change that may be affecting them, because they
live next door, or adjourning, but I am not sure that any of the adjourning
property owners were notified.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Let's see if we can get an answer, Ed. Mary,
can you tell us what procedure was handled legally?
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY WILSON: I believe Mr. Dart is speaking of
Chapter 58 of the Town Code which relates to a notice given for a petition
for rezoning.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Did you get that, Ed?
ED DART: I didn't understand that, but the neighbors were not notified,
and wouldn't they want to know if their neighbor was going to put in a
marina next door, or have the opportunity to put in a marina where they
previously didn't have that there, as a permitted use?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I believe the Town Attorney said that by law
when it is a zone change on the Town Board's own motion, that the
adjoining property owners do not have to be notified. Mary, is that what
you said?
ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY WILSON: 1 believe Mr. Dart is speaking of
Chapter 15 in the Town Code, which speaks to the proper notice, and the
placement of signs, when a parcel is going under consideration for
rezoning. That chapter relates to the petition for rezoning. It does not
relate to the Town Board on it's own motion. Now, these public notices
have been published in the official paper of the town, so in effect your
neighbors have been notified.
ED DART: Well, if they read the newspaper.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Ed. Ed, I am going to take someone
else, because you have been up four times, and after everyone else has
had the opportunity to speak I will come back to you. Mr. Penny?
GEORGE PENNY: Good morning. My name is George Penny. I am the
President of Penny Lumber, and I believe that although only one of my
pg 15 - PH
parcels was read off in that list, that I am here to address two parcels in
the Mattituck area, both of which are currently in use. The parcel that I
believe you left off at the opening of this hearing is parcel 041.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: It was referenced in the hearing before. If it was
supposed to be included for 11:00 o'clock we will amend that and include
that one as well. It was read off at the earlier meeting.
GEORGE PENNY: I have two sets of notices which came to me officially
from the Town of Southold which listed both of my hearings.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Then we will add the 41 piece to the 11:00 hearing.
We will take your comments now at 11:00. That is fine.
GEORGE PENNY: I would also like to address the confusion that has been
caused by the renumbering of my parcels. I went from Mattituck 2A and
2B to Mattituck 2D. I have absolutely no idea why. I consulted with my
attorney which was my only recourse, and he told me to address my protest
papers, and parcels, both as 213, which was the official notice of the Town
of Southold. I just want to say for the record that there is some absolute
confusion in the way the numbering changed in this midstream.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will look at that, George.
GEORGE PENNY: I am really uncertain as to where I stand as far as 2A,
213, and 2D are concerned.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, give us the opportunity to research that,
and then we will share it with you.
GEORGE PENNY: In the meantime I will share with you protest papers
addressing my two parcels. Let's first speak to my smaller parcel, which is
041. It is on Sound Avenue in Mattituck. We bought it in 1985. It was at
one point a potato warehouse. Before that 1 believe there was also migrant
housing upstairs from the sectional dividers that I found upstairs when we
gutted building. So, it was used for some sort of occupancy, but also used
as a potato warehouse since it's inception. It is a totally non-conforming
building. By non-conforming I mean it actually exceeds in some point the
property lot lines. I have copies here of my survey, which I brought to
share with the Town Board. The thing I can't share with you is any
pictures of this particular property because besides being quite ugly it
would be really tough, I have to get this thing from eighteen different
directions. It is bordered by the railroad tracks in the back and I actually
cross Town property in the front. There is virtually no parking on this
parcel, although we have knocked down a couple of overhangs, and a thing
marked frame building so we can allow tractor trailers to pull in and out of
this. This building by any standards for public occupancy would never
make it. It can't be used for much for much more than it is. We bought it
for what it is. If you change my zone you will make me a non-conforming
building in a non-conforming zone. Now, that all may not sound too bad,
because under your proposed changes in the law if I was to try to enlarge
the building by up to 15%, well, that is impossible anyhow. I can't go
anywhere. But the law is not changed provided that the building burns
down 50%,, because then if I have a non-conforming building on a
pg 16 - PH
non-conforming zone I lose total use of the entire parcel. This building
can not be converted to any substantial use for hamlet business. There is
not a Building Code in the world that would accept this building. It is
unheated. It is not lite. I am sorry. It has bare electricity, but it is
unheated. There is absolutely no toilet facilities, no nothing. It is a
warehouse. I urge everybody if they haven't through this area already to,
please, take a look at this, and if somebody can give me an idea of another
use for that building, 1 would want to hear it. It is good for what it is,
and it will never be anything else. Let's see what else I have here.
Regarding 138-1, that is our main lumberyard. 3.89 acres Light Industrial
zoned in Mattituck owned by our family since 1890. We are bordered on one
side by the Long Island Railroad. We are bordered on the back by
Mattituck Inlet here. Somewhere along the line somebody with a brilliant
idea of modern transportation cut a road for County Road 48 to the back of
our property, took away my grandfather's waterfront property. Now the
Town in this suggested hearing would take approximately one half of my
3.89 acres and reduced the use of that property to Residential Office. As
you can see by the picture, which I brought here, which is an aerial
survey which was done in the early 90's. Even that survey, if you went to
that property today, does not represent the amount of building material
that is stored on that property, the back half beyond the back wall. There
are natural buffers from County Route 48 and the neighbors, which Penny
Lumber has kept intact over the years just trying to be a good neighbor to
everybody. Another one of the reasons was is we didn't want people
driving by the back of the place, it was County Route 48, as an easy way
in and out of town to see what we have, and we kept those buffers there,
and those buffers, believe you me, if you blinked when you went by our
flooring center back there you would miss the fact that there is a
lumberyard behind it. As you can see from that picture there is probably
about a fifteen or twenty foot space, which is an old driveway, which used
to go in the back of our yard, which we have pretty much discontinued
use, and that is the only place where you can visually see any building
materials for County Route 48. So, if the idea is to protect the visual
quality of County Route 48, 1 believe it is being done now. If it is not
being done, if somebody would care to come to me, and say, would you
please put up a little screening here or there, and block off that remaining
twenty feet, I will be happy to do it. It doesn't take an amputation to fix
a spring. It is very simple. It is something we would do willingly.
Unfortunately there has been no public comment period where people have
come to use, and said, number one, that there is a problem with what
Penny Lumber is doing on County Route 48. 1 know there was a study,
and I know the study is different in the minds of everybody that sits in
this room. Everybody has a different idea of why it came about, where it is
going, and where it came from, how it is going to get there. Visually if
you drive by the back of County Route 48 you don't know that Penny
Lumber is there. So, why remove it? Now, maybe the word remove is a
little extreme, but then, again, I read in my conforming section in the
Code, and your proposed uses for Residential Office i believe the word
remove is fairly appropriate. Residential Office will not allow outside
storage of materials, which means I can not increase the outside storage of
materials in a parcel that is already in use. 1 can't increase the storage
area. I can't increase the parking. There is going to be millions of things
that I can't do, that I can do now. We have thirty-two employees that count
on us to make a living. You take away one half of my main yard, you are
pg 17 - PH
taking away somebody's future. Believe me. 1 don't know really where else
to go with this, except to say that there are two residential houses on this
property, the one in the back, the one that is kind of yellowish was my
grandfather's house, probably built in the 40's. The house in the front,
which is Victorian which shows like two chimneys coming up from it, that
was my great-grandfather's house built in 1890. Penny Lumber recaptured
those properties from different estates over the years. In 1982, right
along that dotted line, is the property that I bought from my father's
estate, the business bought from my father's estate, because that had been
carved out by my grandfather. The property in the front, which was my
great-grandfather's was recaptured back in the 70's from my great-aunt's
estate by my father. The idea being at some point in time if we want to
expand those were the places to do it. The property and all my
surrounding borders is totally used and occupied by others, so to take
away the use of half of my business property in this present location is
basically a kiss of death. A lumberyard can not survive on less than two
acres, not particularly in the main yard. I would have to totally transfer a
tremendous amount of material to another location and work out of that, and
at today's prices for commercial I think that you would find that the price
would be staggering. I am in the process of buying more adjacent property
that abuts me in Greenport, because we dealt down there as a satellite yard
on about an acre and a half to maybe an acre and three-quarters. (Two
petitions were submitted signed by George L. Penny IV in pursuant to
Section 165 of the New York Town Law in protest of the proposed change of
zone for a certain parcel in the Town of Southold at Mattituck, which parcel
is shown on the Suffolk County Tax Map as 1000-141-3-41 so that the
zoning of said parcel shall change from LI Light Industrial District to HB
Hamlet Business District, and Suffolk County Tax Map #1000-p/o 141-3-38
so that the zoning of said parcel shall change from LI Light Industrial
District to RO Residential Office District.)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
PAUL MURPHY: Paul Murphy of Mattituck. I represent Brower's
Woods. We submitted letter to the Town Board stating our position. 1 have
copies here.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: it will be entered into the record. Thank you.
Anyone else like to address the Town Board? Yes, sir?
HENRY PIERCE: My name is Henry Pierce. The reason I am here is
because I own a commercial building I have on Route 48 in Mattituck
opposite the Tank Museum. It is subject to being changed to RO from
Business zoned. I purchased the property on January, 1984, which was
zoned B-1 on that time. This property was built and owned by Eugene
Csisak and was operated as a machine shop. A Certificate of Occupancy
was issued on October 31, 1983. 1 believe K.G. Brown started his
refrigeration business at that location in a little old schoolhouse going
back 25 or so. At present Jeff NcNally is operating a business dealing
and constructing garden furniture and related wooden items. This building
has been used continuously In a similar manner with no effect on the rural
nature of the community. The proposal to change zoning to RO would
present a hardship and an inconvenience not to mention the financial
burden to me. This building is of masonry construction, cement block, and
pg 18 - PH
is located very close to the road in a manner similar to many industrial
buildings. Converting this building to a residence would be very expensive
and impractical. Since I do not have any plans to alter the appearance of
this building it would not effect the rural nature of Route 48. In the
fifteen years I have been there I have not had a single complaint from
neighbors or the town. I ask you not to change the zoning of this
property. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, sir. Those who were not here
earlier, if any of you have a written or prepared statement if we may have
a copy it would certainly help us when we have to translate the tapes. The
tapes aren't always as clear as they should be. So, if you do we would be
very happy if you would share a copy with us. It makes their job a little
easier. Yes, sir?
RAYMOND SMILOVICH: My name is Raymond Smilovich, 140-1-4. 1
bought my home about two years ago knowing that is Business-B.
(unintelligible) It would decrease the value of my property by a substantial
amount by changing for office.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Back when the first Master Plan was written by
Tom Wickham's father. He was on the Planning Board at the time, no
compensation, when you make zone changes on behalf of the town, when
John Nickles went from one acres to two acres zoning, no compensation.
When the Master Plan was done in the 80's, no compensation. It generally is
not what happens.
RAY SMILOVICH: Could you read that letter from Brower Wood?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Browers Woods Association Incorporated,
Mattituck, Suffolk County, New York. To: the Town Board of the Town of
Southold. Subject: Zoning District changes in the Town of Southold.
pg 19 - PH
Very truly yours, Paul V. Murphy for Brower's Woods Association,
Incorporation. It is entered in the record. Would you like to say something
else? Okay; thank you. Is there anyone else who would like to address
the Town Board? Yes, ma'am?
KATHLEEN GRASECK: My name is Kathleen Graseck, and I just wanted
to ask you about no compensation, when the town went from one acre
p920-PH
zoning to two acre zoning. In that instance property owners weren't
affected if they were already pre-zoned prior to that law, so it didn't
affect anybody who owned property. In this instance you affecting
everybody who is in this property and try to rezone. You are not talking
about areas were there are not buildings or businesses involved. Just
wanted to clarify.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else want to address the
Town Board? Jim King?
JIM KING: My name is Jim King. I live in Mattituck. 1 just want to say
kind of agree with this Brower's Wood Association as far as the Marine 2
zoning goes. if you approach this property from the water, this is all
undisturbed wetlands, and it kind of sends a message to change the zoning
for most local marine owners you have.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Jim. Jim King is one of our Town
Trustees. Howard, let me see if there is anyone else, first please. Is
there anyone else who would like to address the Town Board on this
section? Yes, sir?
ANDY FOHRKOLB: My name is Andy Fohrkolb. 1 live in Mattituck. I
have a parcel of land along Sound Avenue. I purchased this property ten
years as Light Industrial. I am in presently in contract for sale of this
property as Light Industrial.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board that has not addressed us thus far? (No response.) Mr.
Meineke?
HOWARD MEINEKE: Thank you. Howard Meineke speaking for the
North Fork Environmental Council. I think, and this has come up before,
you know the plight of the M-2 was to connect Mattituck Village more
directly to the Creek, and create that little economic boast to the Town. We
felt fundamentally that was a good thing, but we have said from the get-go
that the environmental affects of a Marine are very, very strong, and you
have to be very careful, and it may be that the current definition of M-1
and 2 don't account for the options that we would like to see there, so I
think the environmental studies have to be pursued and 1 am not sure that
particular property wants to be handled right now. I think environmentally
it is a special category from everything else we are doing. I think there
was logic behind doing what is proposed, but I just think the environmental
studies are so much more important that we find in more detailed than was
required for the rest of the corridor. That might be premature right at this
point. I have one other question. George Penny stood up, and he has
property on 48 with LI usage going on inside of it. He said it is currently
well screened, which I guess 1 it is. Is there anyway that long lasting
requirements and restrictions can be put on a property like that, because
from the point of view of the 48 corridor, if that property maintained the
proper screening, proper vegetation, and etc. 1 am not sure you really
care that the lumber yard usage gets intensified, so his point of your
hurting my liability of my business in the future, I am not the expert on
all the uses of your Code. So, if we had in our bag of tricks a way to put
a for now and forever that this lumber yard usage would invisible from
pg 21 - PH
Route 48 we accomplish a hell of lot of what we are trying to do in the
study without possibly making a zone change. That is a can of worms
legally. I don't know how it works out, but it seems it is an avenue that I
haven't heard discussed, and maybe it makes sense.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else?
ROBERT JENKINS: I would just like to add to the last speaker's comments
that what he proposed for Penny Lumber in Mattituck called be held true
for all the Light Industrial parcels that are under consideration for change.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board on these parcels?
GEORGE PENNY: Just to inject a little humor into this public hearing,
because there doesn't seem to be a whole lot of it. One alternative would
be to make County Route 48 go away. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, George. That is it, ladies and
gentleman until one o'clock. I don't close these hearings. They are going to
be left open.
Recess at 11:40 A.M.
1:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will now be doing the hearing on Southold 1,
Southold 2A, 2B, 2C.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Properties are, 69-4-2.2 Gerald Gralton and wife,
69-4-2.3 Helmut Hass, 69-4-3 Ruth Enterprises, Inc.,69-3-1 William
Zebroski, Jr., 69-2-2 Carol Zebroski Savage and Others, 69-2-3
Stephen Doroski and Wife, 69-2-4 Bayberry Enterprises, 69-3-1 Steve
Doroski, 69-3-2 Steve Doroski, 69-3-3 Steve Doroski.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, at this time we will be asking for input on
the parcels here in Southold on the North Road. Bill just said the property
that were involved, so at this time we would be very happy to take any
comments you may have. Yes, ma'am?
JOAN JENKINS: Supervisor Jean Cochran, and members of the Town
Board. My name is Joan Jenkins, Cutchogue, and 1 am Steve Doroski's
daughter. This is regarding the Suffolk County Tax Map that you just
read, 069-2-3, 069-3-1, 069-3-2, 069-3-3. 1 have lived and worked in
Southold Town all my life, and can not understand what you are trying to
do. I protest the zone changes on Route 48, as well as the zone changes to
my families' properties, Doroski's Nursery, and properties on North Road
Extension and Ackerly Pond Lane. How can you operate a garden center
and landscaping business in an RO zone? That would mean we would have
to make our greenhouse look like a residence. Our garden center does not
even face Route 48, and has no entrance or exit onto 48. My mother and
pg 22 - PH
father, Steve and Francis Doroski, built up this business sixty-five years
ago. They worked very hard to build a good business and reputation.
But, to have someone come and pull the rug from under us is not fair or
just. We work hard for our living, as to other businesspeople on 48,
therefore 1 feel you should leave the existing businesses alone. 1 would
worry about the accidents on 48 instead of zoning. A few years ago a boy
riding a bicycle was killed on Route 48 while trying cross the highway.
There are many accidents all the time. People don't look at the vista. They
are going too fast. The only time they slow down is when there is an
accident, then they slow down to gawk. I have a question. How often does
anyone on the Town Board drive down Route 48 and say, oh, how
beautiful, how serene, look at the quaint businesses? You didn't do that a
few weeks ago. You got on a bus, and drove around saying, we think we
should change this to this, stop this, move this place out, or move them
over here. You say betterment of the town is businesses. I think not. Do
you think changing established business is good for everyone? I do not
want to see a Home Depot on Route 48. Let's be realistic. Do you think
Home Depot would even consider coming to Route 48? Southold Town is not
like up west, and will never be because you already make it difficult to do
anything here already. So, why listen to a proposal from somebody up
west, who doesn't know a thing about the east end? We don't have their
problems, so why are you inviting trouble here? Why can't you leave well
enough alone? James Madison once said, the essence of government is
power, and power lodged as it must be in human hands will ever be liable
to abuse. You have upset the family over this, both physically and
mentally. I do not know a lot about politics, zoning laws, or government,
but 1 do know the difference between right and wrong, and what you are
doing is wrong.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Joan. No demonstrations, please. I
asked this morning for some of you that were not here, that we do not
have an demonstrations. We are trying to get the input from public, and
their feelings, and it is not necessary to demonstrate at this point. We
have had some people that felt they wouldn't come in, because they perhaps
jeered at if they stated their position, and I would like to believe
Southold people are not like that, so I ask you to please cooperate. No
demonstrations. Would someone like to address the Town Board?
TYLER CORNELL: Good afternoon. My name is Tyler Cornell. You hear my
voice shake a little bit. I was the second to the last baby born in
Greenport Hospital before they closed the maternity. 1 had to leave the
town to try and make a substantial income, so that I could actually afford
to come back, and try and raise a family here. The property values have
skyrocketed along with our town taxes. I am here to represent my father,
because he is working right now trying to support the number of families,
that he always has in this town by getting most of his work up west and
bringing the money back out here to help us and the town. I am highly
distressed with this in question of two property that we have. One i have a
number of different articles about the process that we went through to get
the Zoning Board, and the Town Board, and everyone else that is involved
in this town to okay the building.
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Excuse me, what properties are you specifically
addressing?
pg 23 - PH
TYLER CORNELL: Right now, specifically the one mentioned previous by
Mr. Moore for Ruth Enterprises. It is a family business. It was also
mentioned, second hand I have heard numerous times that it was pointed
out to be exactly what the town would like all the businesses to look like
with the exception of parking in front. Which makes me wonder. I have
an article right here that says that when we went for the permits to
increase the number of parking spaces, I called the Suffolk Times, from
fifteen to eighteen by Mr. Goehringer. Now, I have always been
somewhat of an idealist, and I think I should be because I am American. I
live in this town. I have always taken pride in this town, but if you
have-this is just the ones that you find, this many articles about us
trying to get permits to build on our own property, which we purchased
and paid real estate taxes to the town for. What does it all stand for?
So, it can be changed a few years later? So, that we have to spend time,
and money, and nights, and hardship, and not sleeping times to save the
vista? 1 will tell you what. I moved down to Florida a few years ago to
start up a business. I have always started businesses. I started my first
business in this town, as a matter of fact, when I was twelve years old. I
moved down to Florida to open one up. I came back after taking it public
with the money to potentially get married in January and move up here. I
don't want to do that anymore. How can I, 1 am one of the fortunate ones
that was able to be successful, and get the money to potentially be able to
live here, and now I have to try to follow my parent's way, which is
investing in your town, then get another parcel of property that is up to
be rezoned just straight agricultural. Two years ago they got an offer for
$110,000 or so, and they turned it down. They said, that was their
retirement. If that is rezoned to agricultural that property is going to be
worth about $3,000.00. Is that what we get for investing in our town, and
not investing other outside town activities. it is completely unfair, and
you are devastating a younger generation from coming back home. 1 feel
that this decision, although in many ways may be trying to do the best for
the people is really going to hurt the people, and stop people from coming
here, and I mean after all if you take $110,000 and demise it to $3,000 or
$4,000, 1 don't know if you call it theft. I don't know what you call it in
particular, but I do call it a loss out of someone's pocket. I was raised
to work with the people so we could find the solution. If the people of the
town really want to make this go through, then they will have no problem
after all the money that was spent on all the different tests, and
consultants, and lawyers, and all the law suits that are going to come out
of this. I mean there will be well over a million dollars probably in this
by the time we finish. The Town will probably rather save that money, take
appraisals, and devaluation that is being rezoned, and at least compensate
the individual landowners instead of devastating them. If I was a
representative and in politics in this town I would work to make everyone
happy, not a few. I appreciate your time.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much for your comments. Would
anyone else like to address the Town Board? Yes, sir?
ROBERT SCHROEDER: Robert Schroeder. I represent Bayberry
Enterprise. 1 happen to have a piece of property on Ackerly Pond Lane,
and on the corner of Route 48 the same as the Doroski's. Some of the
comments that you had made previously that you were going to leave that
zone alone, you thought that should be untouched. One side of my property
pg 24 - PH
is the Suffolk County Water Authority, railroad tracks behind me. I have a
lot of business. That is the reason I bought the property. I have moved
from one place to another place in this town. It is very expensive to stay
here and run a business, and to be downzoned to RO, or any other zone,
would be a detriment to myself, and put a tremendous hardship on myself
and my family. So, my sentiments are with the Doroski's. 1 think all the
zone changes on Route 48 are actually unfair, and I think it is ridiculous.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board?
GERRY GRALTON: Gerry Gralton up next to Cornell here. This RO
stuff, I just put up a building there about ten years, 5,000 square feet,
can you tell me what somebody with an RO would want to use that building
for? That is what I am trying figure out.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I don't know right offhand what it could be used
for, but we certainly will accept your..
GERRY GRALTON: Down zone again, down zoned before. It used to be
heavy. It went down to light.
SUPERVISRO COCHRAN: Actually the term is upzoning, not
downzoning. Everybody uses the term downzoning, but it works the
other way. This is called upzoning. We will take your comments, and
they will all be considered. Thank you. Anyone else before Bob? (No
response.) Okay, go ahead, Bob.
ROBERT JENKINS: I am referring an aerial photograph which I have. I am
not familiar with the numbers, because I don't have that information in
front of me. First I would like to say that Bayberry Enterprises, Mr.
Schroeder, since moving across the street from us, has been a very good
neighbor. I runs a light industrial business. There is very little traffic
flowing in and out of the property. You wouldn't even know anybody was
operating a business out of there, because they are out of there early in
the morning, they come home late at night, and it is a pleasure to have you
as a neighbor. Secondly, 1 would like to say that Doroski Nursery being
zoned business Light Business for sixty-five. That's a long time almost
sixty-five years to be in business, and it would be very, very difficult to
make a greenhouse look like a residential home. I want to refer to the
Light Industrial piece of property across the street on North Road
Extension and Ackerly Pond Lane. It butts up to the railroad tracks. It
is next to the Suffolk County Water Authority, and the once famous, now
forgotten Temik filter that is enclosed with lovely green plywood by
Greenport Village. Across the street is a Suffolk County sump, and across
the street the opposite direction is Doroski Nursery with nursery stock,
and they certainly have no objection to the Light Industrial property being
kept out of this. So, I would ask the Town Board to examine these
properties using common sense, as well as other properties along Route 48,
or deny the zone changes. I will just hand this aerial map to you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: If anyone has a written statement, because
sometimes transcribing it is difficult to hear, the girls that do it, so
pg25-PH
written statements help make their job easier. That sump that is on end of
your property, Bob, that is County owned?
BOB JENKINS: Yes, it is.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It doesn't show on their tax map, so that is why
I was curious. I felt it was.
ROBERT SHROEDER: Robert Schroeder Bayberry Enterprises, again. 1
just wanted to say in the Suffolk Times in the article in background you
showed you were on ...piece of property. The way the picture portrays it
is something you are looking to protect and save. To go to RO building,
like the gentleman previously that has a big storage building, as I have the
same thing, an old barn, an existing office, and an apartment upstairs, so
for me to go to an RO zone, or sell that property in the future, and have
somebody conform to RO, it certainly would have a negative impact. It just
doesn't make sense, so if you would take that into consideration.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We certainly will. Thank you. Yes, ma'am?
STACY PALIOVRAS: Stacy Paliovras, Peconic. I would question
who decided to do the zone changes?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Who decided to do it?
STACY PALIOVRAS: Yes.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I presented a resolution to the Town Board to
have a moratorium on the North Road, and to look at good zoning and
planning. The purpose, part of the purpose being that we are trying to
keep the businesses in the hamlets. If you look west we certainly should
take a lesson from some of it. You have Nesconsett Bypass. You have
Smithtown Bypass. You have all these bypasses that were built years
ago, and then town's zoned heavy use of businesses on it. So, what the
people of Southold for the last fifteen to twenty years have been...
STACY PALIOVRAS: Actually you did not answer, who decided?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Who decided what?
STACY PALIOVRAS: The people that decided the change of the zoning.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: No changes of zone have been made.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This is all proposed. Nothing has been decided.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The consultant provided recommendations.
STACY PALIOVRAS: I would like to know, these people do they have
business property on Route 48?
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: No.
pg 26 - PH
STACY PALIOVRAS: Thank you. Also, I would like-be patience with
me, please. I have property on Peconic Route 48 and Paul's Lane, and
right now it is General Business. If the proposal passes it is going to
change into a..half is going to be Residential, and the other half Light
Business. The front part where Route 48 is going to be Residential, and
the back, all the way in the back is going to be Light Business. I have
another question now. Why are you asking me to hide business behind my
house? It doesn't make any sense. Why don't you do the same on Route 25?
Why hide it? I don't understand you are asking us to hide the business
behind the house. Next to our property there is a gas station. You want
me to put my house next to the gas station, but hide my business behind
the house? Thank you. It doesn't make any sense, really. I am sorry.
am frustrated.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is right next to the gas station?
STACY PALIOVRAS: Yes.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Next to the gas station?
COUNCILMAN MURPHY: Across the little street?
STACY PALIOVRAS: Right on the corner Paul's Lane and Route 48.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The proposal is for Residential Office.
STACY PALIOVRAS: Yes, but still you are hiding my business behind
the house. I Route 25 you have all the business right in the right where
the street is, right on Route 25. Why is my business behind it? I don't
have any business yet.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You lost me, because I am trying to picture a
business back there.
STACY PALIOVRAS: Well, you have the property Light Business,
which is in the back of the property, but right on the front of Route 48,
you want me to keep it residential.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: There is two houses on that property?
STACY PALIOVRAS: No, actually it is one. The other one is just the
storage house.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: As I drove down Paul's Lane there was a house
on the front part, and then there was another house.
STACY PALIOVRAS: A tiny one, but it was just for storage. It is not
a regular house back there.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. We will look at it. Anyone else like
to address the Town Board on this area?
ABIGAIL WICKHAM: Good afternoon. Abigail Wickham. I am here
representing Terry and Marion Latham, who own two lots on Route 48
pg 27 - PH
known as Suffolk County Tax Map #69-4-1.2 and 1.4. Those parcels are
immediately to the west of the Cornell or Ruth Enterprises, and Halton
parcel, and the Zebroski. The Lathams currently have a petition
pending before your Board for a change of zone from Residential to Limited
Business. We are here to object to the proposed rezoning of the properties
to the east of them. Part of the basis of the Latham's application was
that there is other zoning in the area, which is business comparable to the
type of use that we are seeking. Our other basis is that your proposed
rezoning or upzoning to Residential Office in this area just isn't
appropriate. The area that you are considering is a very small pocket. It is
sandwiched between Route 48 and railroad tracks. The two western pieces
have two warehouses on them. They are shielded with landscaping from the
houses further to the west in the Peconic area. These parcels that you are
proposing to rezone have existing businesses on them that are in keeping
with the current zoning. It doesn't make any sense at all to rezone them.
They are backed up the Suffolk County Department of Public Works, which
is basically a trucking facility, and I don't think the proposals that you
are making here are doing anything to improve, number one, the vistas on
Route 48 that you are trying to protect, because there aren't any here.
There are existing buildings already constructed and being used for those
pieces. Second of all, I don't believe the uses that are proposed are going
to help in any way in the terms of the traffic in and out on Route 48,
which as 1 understand is the second reason for this proposal, so I would
ask that you not approve the proposal for the reasons that these people's
previous to me have so 1 think convincingly stated, and also the reason I
have given. I also would like to ask that the comments that I will be making
in connect with the next session on the Krupski brothers property be
incorporated into this record, because I will go into more detail, and ask
that those comments be appropriated into the record.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Is there anyone else like to address
the Town Board, either pro or con? (tape change) If not, 1 will go back
to Bob.
ROBERT JENKINS: Robert Jenkins, Cutchogue. First of all, I would like
to hand in letter of protest to the Board on parcels 069-23, 069-31, 069-32,
and 069-33, and I would like to read a letter from Mr. Steve J. Doroski
to the Town Board.. Dear Supervisor and Town Board members. I, Steve
J. Doroski, have been a resident of Southold Town for 83 years. When I
bought the property in question on North Road Extension and Ackerly
Pond Lane there was no zoning in Southold Town. As time went on and
zoning laws were initiated this same property was zoned Light Industrial I
operated a produce business and paid Light Industrial taxes with no
exemptions for over 50 years on this two and a half acres of land. Today
the Southold Town Board wants to take my life long investment and turn it
into Agricultural Conservation, which will require a minimum of 5 acres in
lot size. I will be forced to purchase Development rights from other
property in Southold Town in order to sell that parcel of land, otherwise I
will be non-conforming to the Code. Will you reduce taxes on the property
you change the zone on or will they remain the same or more? I further
want to add that this property is not on Route 48 and has no vista and can
not be seen from Route 48. It is across from the Suffolk County Sump and
Suffolk County Water Authority abuts it to the east. The Long Island
Railroad abuts to the south and I own the parcel to the west. Do you think
pg 28 - PH
this will have any impact on Route 48's vista? I trust, as elected
officials, you will not be unduly influenced by those who are unfamiliar
with our town and respectfully request that you not change any zoning on
any of my properties. Sincerely, Steve J. Doroski.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. May we have that, Bob? Thank
you. Sir?
TYLER CORNELL: Tyler Cornell, again, on behalf of Ruth Enterprises.
Like the lady had mentioned just previously I would like to comments on
made reflected on both pieces of property, and the possibility that we may
not be able to make other meetings, because we are trying to make a
living. I wanted to clarify one of the reasons I had mentioned the Suffolk
Times article with our having to increase the parking space for spaces
available at the building with Enterprise. I was asked by the Town when we
fist went to for the permits. The reason I mentioned that is as it was
stated, from what I am told secondhand, that on the bus trip that this is
what the Town would like the other buildings to look like. It was also
mentioned to me that the new zoning would not allow the parking in the
front. It would have to be done in the back. I mentioned this for a couple
of good reasons. First the Town wanted more parking, now they don't
want the parking in the back, and the parking in the back is almost
impossible to do. If you were back there two weeks ago I had a mile worth
of wire being prefabricated across that back parking, so in other words
there was no room to have any parking for employees or things of that
sort, which actually in the beginning they wouldn't let us go to the back
parking lot and utilize that at first. It was one of the objections when we
were going for permits. The other thing I would like to get on record,
because my father is not here right now, because he is trying to run a
company. He has prepared a letter. He was not in the office. I was not
able to obtain that beforehand. I will try to bring that tonight for the
other hearing, if I can get here. The third thing that I wanted to clarify
real quickly was as far as trying to get an understanding because of the
size of the town and all the people that you represent, and all the people
who pay you, and we pay for the different decisions that the Town makes.
Was that if that it was put up to a public vote, and the entire town
realized that they may have to pay $2,000,000 or $3,000,000 for this
rezoning, because that is what would be literally be taken out of the
pockets of the owners of this property I think there would be a lot more
dissension from the people, who right now think you are representing. A
lot of people say it is a great idea until you go to their wallet, and we
had to go our wallet when we went to buy this property, and until that is
actually brought up most people won't understand it, so I really almost like
to make a motion, although 1 don't believe I can at this point, to actually
put it to a Town vote and tell them exactly how much it is going to cost
them to buy the property. I just hope that is the way democracy works. If
not, it is really upsetting, and do plead with you, and I thank you for
your time once again.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your comments.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: As far as your letter goes, we are leaving the
hearing open, so if you want to just get it to us. If it is not convenient
you can do that.
pg 29 - PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Yes?
THEODORE SZCZOTKA: Supervisor and Town Board members, my name
is Theodore Szczotka. At this time 1 am confused, and not quite sure
what I want to say about the zoning changes on Route 48, until I see what
the final law will be as to land use in the LB, RO zones, so I would like to
reserve my comments for later. One of our families' parcels known to most
people as Doroski's Carden Center has been proposed by Mr. Cramer's
report to be changed from Limited Business to R O, therefore leaving me in
quandary. The Town Board has not made any decisions as to what the law
will be for Limited Business and Residential Office until after these
particular hearings. At this point I am opposed to any changes on Route
48 corridor, as well as any changes on Doroski's properties. I also would
like to see limiting new businesses on Route 48 and keep rural with scenic
vistas, but I feel the Town Board has taken the wrong route. Does it make
sense to take a 65 year old established business, and other existing
businesses along this corridor and change their zoning and land uses after
all these years. My parents worked very hard all their lives to establish a
business to serve our community with quality products. We, as a family,
are working just as hard to maintain quality that our parents were so proud
of. Our garden center is not even facing Route 48. It faces east on
Ackerly Pond Lane. How can you tell me that this has impact on traffic
on Route 48? There are no exits or entrances from Route 48 to our garden
center. Our property on Route 48 is buffered by landscaping and trees.
We have planted nursery stock on the westerly half, which we feel adds to
the scenery on Route 48. In my opinion this Town Board has made a very
big mistake. Mr. Cramer's report has made a mockery out of Route 48 in
Southold Town. I hope that you are all embarrassed by the way this was all
handled. The $35,000 spent on Mr. Cramer's report could have been used
to study the number of traffic accidents and deaths along this corridor and
how they can be prevented. This money could also be used for land
preservation in our town. In closing I will like to say that I hope you will
seriously take into consideration the reasons for all the opposition to the
changes of Route 48. 1 don't know how you can sleep all night knowing the
anguish you have caused all of us on this highway, the disruption in our
lives, unable to concentrate on our business, and sleepless nights because
of all this. I have doctor bills to prove it. I read it for my wife.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
Teddy, can you give us a copy of your statement? Thank you. Anyone
else like to address the Town Board? Let me make sure I have gotten
everybody on the first time. Anyone that hasn't spoken yet like to address
the Town Board?
RUTH CORNELL: I am Ruth Cornell. I just don't understand. If you go
through all this trouble to get CO's and the permits for all the different
things, and then someone can just come and say to us, oh, guess what? We
changed it. Why would I ever do that again? Why would I spend all that
money, all that time, and all that aggravation? It took us two and a half
years to get the permits for the EECO building, and it is a beautiful
building, but I would never do it again, because I don't know if I spent all
that money and did it, and then ten year later you are going to say, oh no
you can't have that anymore. That doesn't make sense. I think that is not
good. I mean I wouldn't do it to my family. You are our town. We are
pg30-PH
supposed to trust you. We elected you. We are supposed be a family.
don't understand. If I can't trust my family, then why do I want to live
here? It is all like mixed up in my head, and you can't sleep at night,
because I have seen other towns get messed up, and feel that this town is
getting messed up, and it wasn't, and 1 have been here thirty years, and 1
have loved it. But, I don't know if I would want to go through all the
things that I believe.. everybody says if you want stay you have to go
through all these permits, call the Board of Appeals, and then two weeks
later after 1 got the same permits you don't need them anymore. 1 just
spent almost $300.00 getting myself wound up for a permit on a gazebo, and
then they say you don't need permits on fences and gazebos. They knew
that before when I was battling for it. What is going on?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: i don't know if they knew that before, but we
certainly take all your comments under consideration.
BOB SCHROEDER: Bob Schroeder, Bayberry Enterprises again. The way
you started out the meeting was that you were looking to move a lot of the
business to Route 25 hamlet area. I know if you drive down those roads on
the weekend..
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I didn't say, move.
BOB SCHROEDER: Well, try to actually put the businesses on Route 25
area. If you drive Route 25 on the weekends between the farmstands and
the wineries. Just this past weekend you actually run or jog faster than
the traffic moved. So, if you were isolate al the business in that area,
make Route 48 wide open, I just don't see that it is viable reason to do
this.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This allows businesses on the North Road, Bob.
BOB SCHROEDER: I understand that, but the congestion if this plan went
through the way it is designed I think the congestion would be a detriment
to our town, and you wouldn't be able to move, except for maybe a few
people who do have offices on Route 25.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your comments. Anyone else like
to address the Town Board on this portion, Southold 1A, 2A, 213, 2C? The
next is scheduled for 2:00 o'clock, Peconic. Anyone else like to say
anything? Go ahead. We have a couple of minutes. The next hearing for
the next group is scheduled at 2:00 o'clock. You can start late on a
hearing but you can't start early in case the guy that wants to speak is
coming through the door, so we have a couple of minutes, and then we will
be reading the notice.
CLIFF CORNELL: Tyler Cornell from Ruth Enterprises. I did fail to
mention that the Ruth Enterprises building has been, in essence, you could
say the parent to many families in Southold, and not only supporting them
in their regular job, but also taking for instance Tom Krukowski family,
and getting them into Local 25 Union under the sponsorship of my father,
so, he will be employed, and bring tax revenue into the town for the next
25 years. Glenn Staples, also, who is no longer with my father, is with
Local 25 getting money from the west. Ann Staples is still actually working
pg 31 - PH
with my father. Cheryle King, the list is very long, and I was brought
in under short notice, because my father couldn't make it, but I think we
talk for the town. We are asking for help.
SUPERVISOR Cochran; Thank you. If your Dad would like to send
something in writing the hearing remains open, so he certainly..feel free to
have him mail in his written comments. It all becomes a part of the record,
and the things the Town Board looks at in reaching decisions. I guess we
will have a ten minute break, and then we will go into the next session.
2:00 P.M.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved now are, 74-4-10 Chester
Misloski and Others, part of 74-4-4.9 Paliovras family, part of 74-4-5
John Krupski and Brothers, Inc., part of 74-409 Andreas and Stacy
Paliovras, 74-4-5 John Krupski E Brothers, Inc. That is Peconic 1A and
B.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Okay, we are now in Peconic once again. Anyone
like to address the Town Board on the properties that Bill just mentioned.
Gail, and Gail has two clients with her, so she is going to have some of
their time also.
ABIGAIL WICKHAM: For the record my name is Abigail Wickham. I am
representing John P. Krupski and Brothers, Inc., who own the property on
the south side of Route 48, Tax lot 5, which is proposed for two separate
rezoning. I would like to address both of them. John P. Krupski and
Brothers Inc. is comprised of Walter and Vincent Krupski, who are here
with me today, and the families of their brothers, John and Stanley. This
family, as you probably know, together with their father, Andrew, was the
heart of the farming community together with a number of other families,
and being in farming for over sixty-five years through the ups and the
downs they probably, better than any of us, know the value of a buck,
and they take strong objection to this proposed rezoning, because with a
swipe of a pen you are really wiping out a value that they have worked for
many, many years to acquire on this property. They are, as a farming
family, very supportive of farming, of vista preservation. Stanley's widow,
Jane, who lives right on Route 48, she knows what traffic is all about, but
we don't feel that the proposed rezoning accomplishes either the
preservation of the vistas, and the farming atmosphere or the traffic
considerations that we understand this study is about. 1 would like to
address all of them with respect to this specific property one at a time. As
I look through, first of all on the issue of vistas, as I look through
report it struck me that there are only as we are hearing through these
hearings specific pockets of areas scattered throughout the length of Route
48 that identified for rezoning proposals. The vast majority of the milage
along Route 48 is not being addressed, because those vistas are out there.
Those are farms. Those are vineyards. Those are properties that are zoned
such that, that vista is out there on a existing zoning map, and it is going
to stay that way. You are not suggesting that those be touched. You are
pg32-PH
only looking at specific little areas of Mattituck, Peconic, and Southold,
and I think what the report doesn't recognize is that any kind of
continuation of a highway there are going to be areas that just by the
nature of their geographical location, their surroundings, they are going to
be not fitting with the norm. They are going to be different than what it is
you are trying to accomplish during the entire landscape of that Mattituck
to Greenport travel. It has got to be recognized that there are areas, and I
think this Peconic area is one of them, where you only have a few hundred
feet between the highway, and the railroad tracks. There are no vistas
there to protect. There are traffic consideration, which this report doesn't
seem to address, but what you are doing here by proposing rezoning is not
fully that, and I think that is why we are so concerned about it. Let me
address the property. Their is a former potato grading warehouse on this
property. It is about 6,000 square feet. It has been resided. It is now an
attractive building. It is right up against the railroad tracks, and it is
being used currently for a workshop. It is well off the highway, and it
does not present a problem for vistas. There is a large open area, which
part of the remaining property, which under your plan still could be
developed with building, so you are not helping the vista concern from that
standpoint. You can still put buildings up in the front, and interfere with
whatever vistas that you are trying to protect, although quite frankly there
it is very limited, because right next to it you have a gas station. Right
after that you have the property of the lady that spoke earlier. Right past
that you have a Light Industrial area. So, there is that whole pocket there
of stuff that is not going to ever going to be a vista that you want to
protect. It can be upgraded in terms of landscaping and those types of
things. That type of development the Planning Board is supposed to do.
But, I don't think that the vista argument makes it on this rezoning. As to
the traffic concerns the uses that you are proposing do not take out a lot
of the retail uses, and it doesn't decrease the traffic generating uses that
you might want to try and limit if your focus is on avoiding access in and
out of Route 48. On the other hand what you do do is create a great
damage to the Krupski's in terms of the diminution of their property
value, and that happens for two respects. First of all, here and I noticed
in some other areas in the areas you are splitting the zoning. You are
proposing approximately a 15,000 square feet area up on Route 48 right
next to the gas station, the Mobil station, for RO Residential Office. It is
a hundred feet wide. It is about 150 feet deep. It is really not big enough
to be operated as a residential office use. Moreover the Code does not
permit that. What you would have to do you need a minimum of 40,000
square feet, so you would have to take 25,000 square feet of what is
theologically the more valuable Limited Business in the back if this rezone
goes through, and use that for your residential office. Otherwise that
property is basically worthless and unusable. So, you are basically
subdividing property in the way that doesn't make sense by splitting up
the zoning, and frankly I think it is ridiculous, and he has proposed it in
several different locations throughout the town, and I don't understand it.
If he is trying to accomplish the object of buffering there are better ways
to do it. The second damage that the Krupski's will suffer is by limiting
the uses particularly where you have this large building, you are going to
devalue the property, because the uses to which the property can be put
will no longer be available to them In the extent that they are now, and
should they need to sell, or re-rent the property they would not have the
same ability. We will be submitting a real estate, letter from a real
pg 33 - PH
estate appraiser during the process of this hearing which specifically
addressed that in dollars and cents. But, if you could just give me
another minute I would like to tell you what types of businesses will now
unavailable to the extent that they would apply to this type of use. You
are taking out the ability to have, for instance, an auction gallery. For
some reason you are taking out artisans, craftsman workshops, and if
make a mistake here 1 apologize because it very confusing going back and
forth as to what would be allowed, and what wouldn't, but I think I have
got most of it straight. You are taking out auditoriums and meeting halls,
for which you would use a large building like this. Repair shops for
households, plus a train station that may not apply, theatres or cinemas.
You are taking out a number of uses that would previously been permitted,
and required Special Exception such as warehouses, wholesale businesses,
building, electrical, and contractors businesses. You are removing the
ability, which 1 think would be very important in this particular building,
a cold storage plant, because cold storage is something that you could do
economically in a building like this. Wholesale, retail beverage
distribution, funeral homes, telephone exchanges, none are them are
permitted in a Limited Business use, which they are permitted in a current
general business use, so there is a real restriction, and the types of uses,
that you could use a large building like this for including, if I read the
Code correctly a workshop. As far as the proposal to Residential Office,
you are even more significantly limiting the use, and as a matter of record
your Code and Code provisions will show that, but basically you are
eliminating it to a professional office, or a residence with an office next
to it, and I am not sure that that is area where someone would be amiable
to building their home and office, if they have other chooses in the Town
given the surrounding local. I have for submission on a record a protest
pursuant to 265. 1 would like to thank you for the time to make my
comments. As 1 said we will be submitting additional comments.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Gail. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board? Anyone that has not yet spoken?
STACY PALIOVROS: Stacy Paliovros. I strongly oppose the new
zoning proposal, basically because my property value is going to go way
down, and also I don't think it is going to be a good idea for me to have
my business behind my house. I think I mentioned it before.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is on the record all ready. Thank you,
Stacy. Yes, sir?
ANDREAS MARKAKIS: Andreas Markakis. Somebody saw me
coming in earlier, and asked me do you have property on Route 48? No, I
don't, and i asking if any of you has property on Route 48? But, I do
come here because of pain that I have suffered through the years,
discrimination, bias, and frankly I don't want to see any of the people here
suffering the same thing, or anything close to that. It is a shame, and I
want to also remind you we have a United States Constitution, and as an
American citizen, and taxpayer, I anticipated protection of the
Constitution. In all respects in every part of this country this Southold
Township is part of the United States, and let us not forget that. Having
said this I would like you to know that Andreas and Stacy Poliovras
are making a hard life here to raise their kids. (tape change.) In fact,
pg 34 - PH
many, many people don't know. They scratch their head and wonder what
is happening? What is behind all this? We don't have anymore serious
business to spend my hour of precious time? (tape change) Working very
hard, and Stacy Paliovras is doing the same thing with the same
objectives. The man is tired of working in this business, in the dry
cleaning so many years. Very hard work, long hours, no help, pressing,
washing, everything. He is very popular for his honesty, and his broken
English, too. It is time to get out of this. He hopes to continue living in
this town, supporting his family. For those who don't know the older girl
Buiris, is attending University of Berkley in California. She is
studying the research field in biology. It is a pride for this Town of
Southold. Our children go away, because unfortunately they can not make a
decent living. They are not involved in the landscaping. In a cutthroat
competition they can't make a decent living. We don't help them to make a
decent living. I just glanced at the names here, and I noticed a few of my
fellow Helen's Creeks, Chairman of the Board their Helenic-American
Taxpayers Association, and I have a duty to stand by their side whenever
necessary and the need exists. In this case I came to plead. You don't
remember the torture that I went through in this town, but remember there
is bright days ahead, and let us make them brighter by not touching basic
rights and benefits afforded to the citizens and the taxpayers by the
Constitution. We try to balance development with the other side, but in the
process, please, please, please, don't discriminate. We don't talk about
Route 25. We talk about Route 48. Why I don't know, and in fact many,
many people don't know. They scratch their head and wonder, what is
happening? What is behind all of this? We don't have any more serious
business to spend our of precious time?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Andreas, I am going to have to, and if there is
no one you can come back for your second time. Is there anyone else that
would like to address the Town Board? (No response.) Okay. You are on
for your second time.
ANDREAS MARKAKIS: I will come back later. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You reserve that right. You certainly may.
Anyone else like to address the Town Board on the pieces, Peconic 1A and
Peconic 1B? Anyone else like to address the Town Board on the Peconic
pieces? (No resonse) If not we will have to wait a couple of minute
until 2:30, and then we will be going into Peconic 2A and 2B. So, we have
a five minute break.
Recess at 2:23 P.M.
2:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will be taking input on Peconic 2A, Peconic
2B.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved in those areas are Section
74-3-13 Dorothy Victoria do John Mumster, 74-3-14 Sidney Waxler,
pg 35 - PH
74-3-15 Mr. and Mrs. Edward Dart, 74-4-15 Mr. and Mrs. Paul McGlynn,
74-4-16 Louise Day and Another, 74-3-16 Patrick Adipietro and Robert
Adipietro, 74-3-17 Olive Hayes, 74-5-1 Mr. and Mrs Bennett Blackburn,
74-5-5 Robert Johnson. Those are the pieces for discussion now.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone that would like to address the
Town Board or give us any of your input in relation to the properites
just read? Anyone like to address the Town Board on any of these
properties?
TIPPY CASE: I am Tippy Case from North Fork Environmental Council,
and although in general we are more for upzoning that for downzoning,
I just think that this is a place that might be, I heard people talk about
protecting the hamlets, and I think that is such a excellent idea to help to
encourage growth within the hamlet. When 1 was kid I can remember
Peconic being much more-there was a post office. There was a little store
that you could go to. There were all sort of things you could go to there.
This is one of those areas where it might be good to encourage the growth
of Peconic, and to make it, you know, encourage the growth of the
businesses around there, so this might be a good place. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Town
Board? (No response.) Are you sure somebody doesn't want to say
something? If we go from here we have another hour. There is a 3:30. This
is the 2:30. After this the next time would be 3:30.
BOB JENKINS: Regarding the piece of property on Peconic Lane and North
Road 074-4-15. 1 wonder if that traffic study was done in relation to the
zoning study, because it seems to me that that is a very dangerous
intersection there. To have a business there you would want to make sure
that the flow of traffic was not out on County Road 48 on Peconic Lane.
There should be a traffic study on all these zoning changes.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bob. I think eventually with all the
traffic up there you will see a street light on every corner, unfortunately.
They are all dangerous. People try to beat the traffic. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board? Yes, sir.
JACK WILLIAMS: Jack Williams from East Marion. Should I wait until you
are off the phone? Otherwise you might not get the benefit of my remarks.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would you please repeat yourself, sir? Oh, you
didn't start yet.
JACK WILLIAMS: I didn't start yet. I was waiting for you. It is a
courtesy we extend to the Town Board. Like everyone else in Town I got a
flyer from the Republican team over the weekend, and on there was a page
devoted to what I consider to be..
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Sir, if this is going to be a political speech, it is
not allowed during this hearing. Sir, if it is going to be in relation to
the topic at hand. This is a public hearing in relation to this particular
topic.
pg 36 - PH
JACK WILLIAMS: I am a member of the public.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Yes, you are. Jack, I would like to say, no
political speeches, please.
JACK WILLIAMS: It seemed me in reading that ad that there was ambiguity
in it, and at one point it seemed as though you were referring to the Route
48 rezoning as a done deal, and another point you were saying that maybe
would be coming up in the future. Now, if it is a done deal, then this
entire series of public hearings is a travesty. On the other hand if it is
not a done deal then 1 think you are guilty of some false advertising.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. That was non-political.
JACK WILLIAMS: How well you know me.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I knew you were get in there somehow. Anyone
else like to address the Town Board in relation to the zone changes that
are listed through the Peconic A, B? If not, we will take a break until
3:30. That is how they have been advertised, and it wouldn't be fair to
people that might want to come in for.
BILL GOGGINS: I would like to address the Board before you break. I am
Bill Goggins. I am an attorney in Mattituck. I represent the estate, and 1
am not sure if you called it already, it is Southold 1. It is Suffolk County
Tax Map number Section 69 Block 4 Lot 2.3. The name of the owner is
Helmut Hass. Has that been discussed yet?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: It was on for 1:00 o'clock.
BILL GOGGINS: I was wondering if I could address you now? I couldn't
make it at 1:00 o'clock.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: That hearing is still open.
BILL GOGGINS: Okay. I have petitions to object to the zone change. I
had faxed one to the Town Board, and it was in my name signed by the
property owner. (Submitted petitions)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bill.
BILL GOGGINS: Let the record reflect that I did submit these petitions to
the Town Board. It may be confusing. Helmut Hass is deceased, so the
property is presently..the filed document is in the name of Helmut Hass.
I have gotten a deed from the estate of Helmut Hass, which is going to
the beneficiary, who was his wife, Natalie Hass. Natalie Hass is
deceased, and I am handling the estate of Natalie Hass, so that is where
the deed is going to be aligned within the next two weeks. So, there may
be some confusion about the ownership of the property. That is why I
wanted to make the Board aware that within a short period of time it is not
going to be from the estate of Helmut Hass. It is going to estate of
Natalie Hass. The documents that 1 have submitted objecting to the zone
change is signed by the Executrix of the estate of Natalie Hass. Okay?
pg37-PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Cot you. Thank you. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board? (No response) If not, we will break until 3:30,
which is the next publicized time.
3:30 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We are moving along, and we on Peconic 1A, 1B.
There is a sheet up here that gives a listing as to what is included in
those areas. I'm sorry, 2C and 2D and 2E, Peconic. Okay, Bill, at this
time
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved in this discussion or this
hearing are Section 74-3-19.3 Kenneth Dickerson, Part of 74-3-19.2 Kevin
Terry, 74-3-20 property of Alice Platon, 74-3-24.2 property of Mr and
Mrs. Alvin Combs. That is Peconic 2C, D, and E respectively.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I would just like to share with you that one of
the property owners in this section is my nephew, Kenny Dickerson, and
will listening at this point, but when it comes time for decisions in
relation to that property and that zone I will not take part. Okay, would
like anyone like to address the Town Board in relation to the zone changes
of Dickerson, Terry, Platon, Combs property in Peconic? Jack.
JACK COMBS: I am Jack Combs, Peconic Lane. I understand that possibly
it would be changed to RO. I am just confused. What does that RO mean?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: What does RO mean? Residential Office.
JACK COMBS: I have a B&B, that would fall in that category?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: it would continue to be in that category. It would
add other potential uses.
JACK COMBS: Sometime in the future you want to do something else, what
kind of business would you allow in that kind of residential zone?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Professional offices and businesses, and things like
that, as opposed to a home office. Presently in a residential zone you can
have a home occupation, but under RO zone you can have someone put an
office in a home like that, but not have to live there. There is some other
uses being considered as well.
JACK COMBS: With an old house you wouldn't change the exterior. It
would be same. You wouldn't have any kind of stores, or any kind of
business, black top, possibly, or anything like that?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Depending what the Planning would require for a
site plan. They want an asphalt parking lot if somebody wanted to put a
doctor's office in there, or an accountant's office in there, or something
like that, they may require an asphalt or a stone parking area, if you
wanted it that way.
pg 38 - PH F
JACK COMBS: To me 1 don't see there would be any difference in what I
have now. Just changing over to that zone it wouldn't really bother me. 1
am not opposed to it, so I am satisfied with that.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Jack. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board? Kevin Terry?
KEVIN TERRY: Can I hand in a couple of surveys?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You certainly may. Thank you.
KEVIN TERRY: I am selling this property to Hamlet Business. As you can
see there is no road frontage there anywhere. Right now it is like Light
Industrial. I am using for storage only, but to Hamlet Business 1 couldn't
see anything making it there except for a storage facility. The only access
we have is from that private road that I own going over to Carroll
Avenue, and nobody is going to use that. No retail customer is going to
use that. As far as bothering neighbors it is a perfect spot for what I need
it for, you know that piece of property. I just don't think it is... I think
you should keep it Light Industrial, and not go under a Hamlet Business
zone.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will certainly take your comments under
consideration, Kevin. Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Town
Board? Janet?
JANET DICKERSON: My name is Janet Dickerson, and I have come to
express my opposition on the Route 48 zone change. I have married into a
family with strong deep roots in such a place, and I am very proud to call
it home. This will enable my husband and 1 to teach our children the deep
roots of such a prestigious place called Southold, the same as my in-laws
have taught their children. I am saddened by our government, who I feel
has done a wonderful job taking care of Southold's future until now.
think you are about to make a terrible mistake, first by heeding to other
political holds, who have literally ruined their own community. You must
open your ears, and listen with your hearts to the very people who have
deep roots and real understanding of such a task, the very people who
have built with their own hands what we have now. Infringing on their
property rights, which have been in place for many, many years was
wrong. Devaluating their property, downzoning is wrong. I am all for
preservation, but not for groups of people who call themselves
preservationists, and do not pay taxes in this town. Perhaps if this
government should have it's way, and change the zoning the next
government will be able to put it back to the way it should be. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Janet. Mr. Dickerson?
KENNETH DICKERSON, JR.: My name is Kenneth Dickerson, Jr. I am
speaking on behalf of my father, Kenneth Dickerson, Sr. Stanley has
been part of Southold since 1650. My father started our family business,
K.L. Dickerson Excavating in 1966. He moved to the business to Peconic
Lane, Peconic, in 1970, which it continues to exist. This is piece of
property that has been in continuous use as Light Industrial since early
50's. We recently purchased the property, and are opposed to any zone
pg 39 - PH
change that would make us a non-conforming business. We do have future
plans to renovate the existing building, and add more attractive
landscaping. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Kenny. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board? Mr. Smith?
HENRY SMITH: My name is Henry Smith. I am the past owner of Kenneth
Dickerson and Kevin Terry's piece of property. I inherited the piece of
property from my father, and I since have sold it to Kenny and Kevin for
the use of Light Industrial. That is the reason they bought it. Now, this
property was used as a fuel depot since the early 1950's, and at that time
Let Albertson, the Supervisor, told my father, don't worry you can store
anything there, any kind of fuel, this property is industrial. You can do
anything you want there as far as, you know, fuel storage or equipment,
and anything like that, and so I feel kind of bad because here I sold this
property and it was zoned Light Industrial, and now you are trying change
it. I mean, what if Mr. Murphy's farm up there, they said, okay, you can't
do what you are doing here. Mr. Romanelli, what if they said you can't run
a fuel oil business on your property, which is basically the same thing, the
same situation, Light Industrial, and I am sure you would be very upset.
Mr. Moore, what if they said your practice out of your office in Mattituck?
If they want to change that I am sure you would be very upset. I think
this totally unfair, and I know other people have bought, you know bought
industrial property in town, or business property in town. Ten years ago
they said, oh, you can't run your business out of your home anymore. We
are going to crack down on this, so what happens you make those
Industrial center and things like. People bought property, and now that
they got their property that they are running their business out of, now
you say you want to take that away from them, too. You know, these are
not large parcels, twenty, thirty acres, where Home Depot could come in,
or you know the big shopping chains, and things like that. These are just
small individual pieces of property. We are talking about an acre, two acre
pieces. 1 don't see how it is going to change anything. In the town of
Peconic, 1 grew up there. When I grew up there, there was post office.
There was a Laundromat. My mother had a grocery store there. Walter
Stern had a newspaper and coffee shop. Mr. Larsen had a hardware store
there, and today they can't even rent those stores. Nobody wants them. I
mean, the train don't even stop there anymore. I know Mrs. Crathwohl
used to, you know people used to board the train there, and be there for
the weekend. It is gone. Times change. Things change. What they are
doing there now is basically, the only way you can survive there is..Mr.
Dickerson runs a clean business. His truck goes in the morning. They go
out at night. Sometimes they are there during the day. 1 mean, that is no
big disruption. Kevin just want to store his material there, and things like
that. I can't see why you want to change it. It is not broken. Why do you
want to fix it? Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Henry, thank you for your comments. Would
anyone else like to address the Town Board?
LINDA BERTANI: Linda Bertani. I would just like to say I am opposed
to the zone changing of the Dickerson property and the Terry property.
I would like the Board to think about where would you like people with
.t
pg 40 - PH
their types of businesses to go? I mean they are there. They are not
bothering anyone. They have been there for years. Where do you want
these people to go, and other people that have businesses like those, where
would you like them to go? Think about that.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Linda. We will certainly consider all
comments being made. Yes, sir?
SIDNEY WAXLER: I am not sure I should be speaking now. My name is
Waxler. I am kind of two way R40, RO, 074-3-14. We got a notice about
the property changes, redefinition of zoning. I live on Peconic Lane, south
side, east side of the Lane, second house from Route 48. My dominate
interest is will these change increase the density in that area? I am
unalterably opposed to increasing density. Anybody who wants to go
through the boring details of what that does in any town, just has to look
at budgets in Nassau, or for that matter the budgets in Southold for the
past twenty years, and the increase in debt obligations. I Have been here
almost thirty-five years. I pay taxes for thirty-five years, and invariably
the big controversies for Southold always come up having to do with
property. It is always property. Re-definitions, intricate definitions that
will wager most people, who are not in business don't even understand,
including myself. I don't know what to do, except I urge you if this
increases the density in in that area of 125 lots, or whatever is involved
in it, please approve it.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, sir. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board? You are getting to be a fixture. Bob, go ahead.
ROBERT JENKINS: I have address the Town Board in defense of some of
these people. In a conversation with Ken Dickerson, Jr., I said, Ken, I
see your property is scheduled for a rezone. He said, yes, he was not
very happy. I said, well, you should be happy because they are changing
you to Hamlet Business, and you can divide that acre of yours into half,
because Hamlet Business is only 10,000 or 20,000 square feet. You could be
a on one lot, a cigar and newspaper store on the other lot, and if you
don't want to run the store you could sell the property, and make a hell of
a lot more money than the business you are in right now. He said, but I
must tell you, Bob, 1 am not interested in that. All I want to do is run my
business like my father before me ran his business, like I am running the
business now, and pay my taxes, be a good citizen, and be left alone.
think that is what he should have the opportunity to do. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bob. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board, either pro or con? We are not closing any of the
hearings. They are all being left open, all the ones we have heard today,
and we will be here tomorrow and Wednesday, so you still, although you
come in today and have some input, if you would like to add anything else
to it on second thoughts you can do it in writing or come back. Sir?
SIDNEY WAXLER: Would it be proper to ask a question, and have the
Board respond to it? 1 am curious as to the judgement about whether the
changes that are being proposed would increase the density in that area?
What is the judgement?
` pg41 -PH
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: I don't think it would increase the density. RO
could increase traffic on your lot in particular, because as an example to
change it to RO it becomes office it could increase the traffic on that
road, and on the piece of property, or anything once you change the
residential zone to RO. Also a B change would also increase traffic. So,
density, no, but traffic, yes.
GLORIA WAXLER: My name is Gloria Waxler. I live on Peconic Lane.
If it were changed to RO would there be restrictions as to what sort of
office?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Presently RO district has professional business office
type uses.
GLORIA WAXLER: Professional business type only?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: And we are looking at some other possibilities, as
well. We set up a hearing on Tuesday, the 12th.
GLORIA WAXLER: What encompasses professional business. Could a
tattoo parlor be a professional business?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: What kind?
GLORIA WAXLER: A tattoo parlor. If you say professional you
immediately think of...
COUNCILMAN MOORE: That term has been understood in the Zoning Code,
lawyers, doctors, accountants.
GLORIA WAXLER: As I just said, is there a possibility that could be
used over to consider something else professional?
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: You could stretch it. You could make that
argument.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That is a big stretch. There are definitions for
all of these terms that are usually standard and used in the zoning.
GLORIA WAXLER: The home owner, I would be concerned without having
some business other than what you now consider professional, if my next
door neighbor, or even two houses down the street.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Perhaps you ought to come to the.. are we
having a meeting on the 12th? On 12th, we have something for
changing in the Residential Office zone. Perhaps you should come on the
12th right here and have an opportunity to speak to the particular
change of zone. Right now we really don't know.
GLORIA WAXLER: May I also question, I just found out today the two
houses on Peconic Lane north of railroad on the east side, has that been
zoned for Hamlet Business?
pg 42 - PH
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: That has been suggested to be changed to Hamlet
Business, yes.
GLORIA WAXLER: With all the empty stores on the other side of the
street, where the general store used to be, where the grocery store used
to be, where 1 used to get my newspapers. All of those stores are empty.
Can I ask why you are rezoning this to Hamlet Business?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You are talking about where the houses are with
the multi-family dwellings?
GLORIA WAXLER: Yes. There are two house.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Two or three families in each house, and across
the street right next to the track is Reynolds in there also, the one right
next to the track.
GLORIA WAXLER: I am talking as I saw on your map.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: There are no changes in these.
JUSTICE EVANS: The one across the street from them.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Yes.
JUSTICE EVANS: One is Adipietro and one is Hairston.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That is the ones I spoke about first, yes, and
now, I am going across the street from that. Thank you. Anyone else like
to address the Town Board? (No response) If not, we will take a break
and we come back at 6:00 o'clock. At six we will be going into parts of
Southold, 7 Southold, 8 Southold, and 9 Southold.
Recessed at 3:55 P.M.
6:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We now in Southold 3 scheduled for 6:00 P.M.
Bill do you want to read the property owners?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The parcels involved in this part of the hearing are
59-1-4 of Edward Koster, 59-10-5 of Cliff Cornell, 59-7-31.4 Ellen Hufe,
59-7-32 Alice Surozenski property, part of 59-10=3.1 Jack Wiskott and
Roberta Garris, part of 59-7-29.2 Alfred and Juliet Frodella, part of
59-7-30 Clement Charnews, part of 59-9-30.4 Walter Pharr, Jr., part of
59-10-2 Steven Defriest.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That's it. Defriest is the last one. The next
batch is at seven o'clock. Is there anyone that would like to address the
Town Board in relation to the properties that were just listed?
pg43-PH
WALTER PHARR: My name is Pharr, and I want to discuss our
property as part of a community. Section three is a business cluster. I am
glad to see that there is increasing recognition of the goals of the Route
48 hearing is the economic health of our town. Even Cramer accepts
legitimacy of business cluster on Route 48. His decision not discuss the
Cutchogue Route 48 properties is an affirmation of the legitimacy of
business clusters on Route 48. Our cluster has existed for decades. We
complement the hamlet centers, and we are in compliance with the Town
Code presently proposed. I do not know why Cramer was so hostile to our
group. He arbitrarily separates all two of our businesses. By the way, I do
not know why that is not spot zoned. He arbitrarily separates off two of
our businesses, and describes what is left as residential, urban and other,
meaning vacant. Well, he overlooked the fact that there are two businesses
in this section. He calls our section urban. Urban! And he wants to
upzone us to agriculture. Does he even know what is there? Cramer
cites that our group offers the potential of a strip shopping center, while
the Southold Code is quite clear on this issue. No general retail is
permitted in Limited Business. Amen. Cramer has trouble with the math in
our group. The acreage that he cites does not equal sum total of individual
lots when added together. 8.89 acres to 10.96 acres, that is not a small
discrepancy, if truth and accuracy are the criteria. Cramer cites that our
group could yield nine housing lots on the basis of 80,000 square foot lots.
Excuse me, but if I do the math the answer 1 get is closer to five. In
conclusion 1 want to argue that the zoning of our cluster should be left
intact as being Limited Business. If you take one lot here, one lot there,
the resulting polka-dotted zoning map could lead to in the future spot
zoning. I want to address ladies and gentlemen of the Board of Southold
this not be made into a game. It is your political mandate to find a way to
reunite our community.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, sir. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board?
LAURA COSTER: I am Laura Coster, Mrs. Ed Coster. I am
Vice-President to ELCO Machine and Tool Company located on the south
side of Route 48. Thirty-one years ago we were permitted legally to build a
concrete block building to house my husband's machine shop. This shop is
a small business but it has employed local people, and paid taxes
throughout the years. If these proposed restrictions had been in effect
then, thirty-one years ago, we would not have come out here. We would not
have brought our business out here. We are not retail. We do not generate
a great deal of traffic. Employees come in in the morning. They go out in
the afternoon. UPS trucks come. As it is my husband has spent thirty-one
years, sometimes twelve hours a day, and many time six and a half days a
week to build up ELCO. Someday he is going to retire, and he would
have to sell it. He will sell it as a going business. He already tried that,
and he failed to sell it as a going business, so he is going to have to sell
the building. Now, this Cramer if you adopt it will change the Light
Business designation to Agriculture. It is very possible that we will have a
2,400 square foot building on a third of an acre, that can not be sold or
even rented. Who in his right mind would buy it for agricultural use, and
it is much too big for a farmstand? What are we supposed to do looking
down the road? Will we be paying taxes on unusable property? Will we
have to abandon it, because we can't afford to carry taxes on something
pg44-PH
that does not generate an income? That building is still going to be here,
but my husband's hard labor will have gone for nothing. We really don't
know what the future holds for this parcel if these zone changes go
through. There is another point to be made, which has been made. There
are already a number of buildings and stores in this town that have been
vacant off and on throughout the years, even without these restrictions. Do
you want to add more vacant buildings. We also thought that the idea had
been to keep the hamlet, hamlet attractive little downtown hamlet, and let
48 be the place for business, not run away development, not strip mall, of
course, but sensible fairly zoned productive and taxpaying properties.
Another point, how long do you think that young people who are our
future, who live here now, would stay here and live, when businesses that
would otherwise hire them must downsize, perhaps even close because
they can no longer operate, or improve their properties under such poorly
conceived and unfair zone changes? We have heard it that, and we have
seen it written, that you people made an investment, you will lose it. If
that happens, too bad. It is too bad, and nobody really wants that to
happen, anyone in this town. Please, remember we businesses on 48 are not
the enemy. We are your neighbors. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your input. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board? Yes, ma'am?
ELLEN HUFE: My name is Ellen Hufe. My husband and I own Future
Machine Products on the North Road and Kenny's Road in Southold. We
have been at that present location for over thirty-five years. Fist we
rented it. Finally after many years we were able to purchase it. We have
put on three extensions on the building since we purchased it. When we
came here thirty-five years ago people said to us, how come a young couple
came out here, there is nothing to do? We started a one man operation, and
then my husband expanded to a total of ten people. Well, we have
encouraged some jobs. We currently employ ten people, all local, all live in
Southold. Many have been with us for almost twenty years. We are maxed
out on that building. We can not possibly expand anymore. We did have
more property there originally, but some of it was taken for frontage when
they widened 48. Several years ago I purchased property in question. It is
a lot right behind us. It is 123 feet on Kenny's Road, 300 feet on Route
48. 1 purchased it because it was zoned LB, and we were hoping that
maybe someday to be able to expand, but the if the Cramer study goes
through this is changed to AC. That would be totally impossible. Now, the
parcel that I am talking about with questions is in Southold 3. 1 was
looking at..l also have to talk about the other parcels in Southold 3.
Looking at the yellow sheet it depends what the goals are. They want to
keep industrial expansion on Kenny's Road. Well, there is only one lot on
Kenny's Road, and that is mine. The total acreage of Southold 3 totals to
8.89 acres. Most parcels already have business or homes on them.
Speaking of potentially zoning to AC, I looked on the first sheet on sheet F
of the big book, that unless time, certainly if you are in business you
don't have time to do, there are only two parcels that they are changing
from the Light Industrial Light Business to AC with a total of 12.9 acres. I
believe, if I can find it quickly, okay here it is. Okay, Southold 2 and
Southold 3 comprise 12.89 acres. My little 1.8 acres, and they are rezoning
that to AC. Those are the only twelve acres in all of this property, 272
acres that is being downzoned to AC. I don't know what is allowed in
pg 45 - PH
AC. I fail to see how changing this 12.89 acres from LB to AC is going to
preserve any open space, or any other so called goal. I know
philosophically I believe in absolutes, if there is one the change is
constant, but I don't see where these changes are going to help the town.
read some letters to the Editors, some pros and some cons. One letter
stuck in mind. Well, this change is good for the town as a hold, so it
affects a few business people. Well, that kind of thinking would even
justify his means. To me it is Communism. That is about it. In conclusion
think we have been selected, this whole agriculture piece, which is mostly
businesses and houses already, small parcels, and I don't see where that is
going to help the open space in the town.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your input. Is there anyone else
who would like to address the Town Board on Southold 3, this area?
ELLEN HUFE: 1 have one little sidebar. My neighbor Alice
Surozenski owns a little white house next to us. Alice has lived here her
whole life. She has mentioned to us several times that when she is ready to
sell she would give us first choice, which would be very nice. It is a very
small parcel, and whatever is fair, whatever the market would bare. If you
downzone her piece from LB to AC what is that going to do to her?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board on this area of Southold?
JACK WEISKOTT: My name is Jack Weiskott. I have recently purchased
a property in the area, six and a third acres. My intended use right now
is agricultural, but the first quarter of my property is Light Business
zoned. If this were to change my future plans might not be able to be
completed, and if ever I want to sell it, it severely reduces the value of
that property. I consider this legislation that you are proposing to be the
taking away of development rights. I am kind of confused since we did go
for several bonds to purchase development rights, why some development
rights are purchased, and some can be legislated? I think the people want
open space, and open views that have to own that land. They can't just tell
someone to keep it open. If it is not economically feasible to do, people
have to do something else with their property. You can make someone be a
farmer. If they are not making it as a farm, what is going to happen? That
is all 1 have to say.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone else who would like to address
the Town Board?
WALTER PHARR: I wanted to point out that Mr. Charnews, who is not
here tonight, is waiting for the death of his brother, and I don't want
their absence to be interpreted as approval of this zoning.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: 1 know they have been attending different Work
Sessions, and so forth, so I know that they are concerned. Anyone else
like to address the Town Board? (No response.) If not, we have until
seven. Okay, we will recess until seven o'clock. It stays open.
pg46-PH
7:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: In relation to properties in Southold we will be
looking at Southold 4A, 413, and 4C. Alice, will you read the properties
involved?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Southold 4A, the property of Mark Mendleson
and Others going from LB to RO, 63-1-15. The property of Nicholas
Batuyios from LB to RO, that is 63-1-16. The property of CEC Associates
from LB to RO, 63-1-18.2. The property of North Fork Professional Realty
Association going from LB to RO, 63-1-19. Property of Winds Way of
Southold Associates going from LB to RO, 63-1-20. Property of Carl and
Caroline Graseck, 63-1-21, also LB to RO. All of these are. Joseph
Wallace, 63-1-22. Lisa Cowley, 63-1-23. John Ross, 63-1-24. We are now
into Southold 4B. These two properties are going from Business to Light
Business John and Joan Callahan, 59-3-29, Deborah Edson, 59-3-30. 4C
David Cichanowicz from Business to RO, 59-3-31. Timothy Gray Business to
RO, 59-4-9, Jimbo Realty Business to RO, 59-4-9, Thomas and Susan
McCarthy Business to RO, 63-1-1.6. That's it.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Alice. You have heard the properties
that included in this area of proposed changes. Would anyone like to
address the Town Board? Yes, sir?
VINCENT CLAPPS: My name is Vincent Clapps, and I am partner in C
and C Associate, and we own, my partner a piece of property in question.
Do you have the tax map number there?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: 63-1-18.2.
VINCENT CLAPPS: Right. Got it? The first thing I would like to say is
that my partner and I had to buy this piece of property at a time when the
Town did not have RO as a district in the town. In other words, if you
wanted a professional office, you had to live within a residence, and
because of that we had to go out and buy a piece of business so that we
could build our dental practice on it, and because it was business property
we had to go before the Planning Board, and we were subject to all the
Codes and regulations for business building, and that is why we have a
huge parking lot there. Now, since we bought the property it was
upzoned from Business to Limited Business. When we saw that and it came
through we didn't make such a big deal about it, because the only service
that would lost in it was the right to do a gas station, which we didn't
feel was something that we wanted anyway. However, we had to go through
great expense to do this at that time. Now, you created an RO district
you have enough office space all over this town. If this goes through, and
this property really needs to be zoned back into Limited Business for us.
We have invested our futures here in this piece of property. We went to
the Planning Board. We can do another three buildings on this piece of
property besides the two we have there. The property was used for
business anyway from the get go. We bought it from the Long Island
Cauliflower Association, and then used to do their auctions. They used to
line up their trucks, and bring them down to Ed Dart's barn there and
auction it off. We are in a regular developed business area. I can't see why
pg 47 - PH
you would want to change the zone on this property, especially on a piece
of property that already went through the proceeding for a business in this
town. 1 mean we went by a Master Plan before that Master Plan was even
approved to develop this piece. We put in separate buildings, which is a
much greater expense then doing strip mall, because everyone wanted
cluster type buildings, so we did it, and now you want to change the zone.
You want to make it residential, and that is not really fair. It just isn't.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Vinny, on the Horton's Lane, who wide is that
property on the end where you own it?
VINCENT CLAPPS: It has different widths. You know, if you look at
map.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Where it comes up behind here, and it fronts on
Horton's Lane. Fifty feet? Thank you.
VINCENT CLAPPS: That is where the macadam was for the trucks to
enter for the auction.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would you like to share anything else with us?
VINCENT CLAPPS: No, do you want to ask any questions?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: No. Thank you.
ALFRED CILETTI: Dr. Alfred Ciletti. I am partners with Doctor
Vincent Clapps on this piece of property. The only question I have for
the Board is this. Have you given any thought to tax ramifications with
this upzone? In other words, we are taxed a certain way being business
property, is this going to change? Are we going to get a tax rebate, or
are you going to lower our taxes, because now we are going to residential?
mean there is got to be some kind of quid pro quo here. I think the
business people on Route 48 are being asked to shoulder the entire burden
of the vista initiative and the open space. I think it is something that
all of the residents of Southold Town should share. My feeling is that if
you want to change our zoning, and upzone us, and limit the potential
for future growth for our property, well, okay, but we should be given
some kind of financial renumeration in the form of a tax cut. So, maybe ten
years down the road we will realize some of the lost appreciation to our
property. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Town
Board Mr. Cichanowicz?
DAVID CICHANOWICZ: Dave Cichanowicz. I own a piece of property right
behind Johnny's Car Hop. You have it presently scheduled to go from B
to RO. I bought the property back in 1988 as an investment. I bought
many properties throughout the town. I thought business property would be
a nice added part of my book. You have an area around there that is
without question, in my view, business oriented. There is little mini, what
you call a mall or stores, next to Johnny's Car Hop, and I am popped
right in the middle, and you want to change it to Residential Office. Maybe
because of the size, or because 1 have not done anything with the property
pg48-PH
yet, but what you are going to do is limit my options to the property,
where I feel it is going to be a great financial loss to myself. One of the
things that I have observed with your Town's proposal to upzoning, as
you call it, I call it downzoning, these different parcels nowhere in town
have you done like you are trying to do, or potentially going to do with
that TDR thing, transfer another location for these businesses to be
operating out of. You are just completely eliminating Light Business
Business properties, and not allowing any other spot in town for them to
exist. It seems to me that you are trying to force business out of town not
allowing them to grow. That is part of what makes this town so great is the
businesspeople themselves who put their heart and soul into the town, and
make it what it is today. My father, potato farmer. You know you have
your property that work with your hands all your life, and you turn
around and somebody says you can't use that property for what you are
using it for now. Obviously you are not touching farms but relatively the
same feel. I have a business zoned property, and now you are not going
to allow me to have a business zoned property. Well, if I can't have it
there where else can I have it? Did you allow us any other spots? I didn't
see it. I strongly object to the entire proposal that you have throughout
the Town of Southold. I think you better rethink, first of all, get a better
balance of the feel for the people of Southold, because I don't think you
are hearing the entire Town of Southold, and I guess that is it.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Dave, thank you for your input. Anyone else like
to address the Town Board? Let me just take a moment. Anyone that has
made a presentation, and you have it written or typed out, may we make a
copy, because it makes the job of the secretaries that translate the tape a
little bit easier exactly what you said. You know, this is verbatim, but
sometime you miss a little of what you said.
JOHN CALLAHAN: My name is John Callahan. We have the little strip
mall next to Johnny's Drive-in. We bought that about eight or nine years
ago as Business zoned. We have maintained it, kept in the same look that it
always been. Painted it. Kept the railings up. It is an old looking
building, and to me it looks very nice where it is. Now to go to Limited
Business, which as was said before, that to me is like downzoning. We
put a lot of money into the building to keep it up, and I think this is
going to be a very hard financial burden on us to down to Limited
Business. We also have five stores, three which we are using ourself. Two
or three others, which would affect them also. One is the real estate. The
other is an accountant. We also have a taxi guy there. This would really be
a hardship on us. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board?
GERARD GRASECK: My name is Gerard Graseck. I am one of the
owners of Southold Quarry. My father built this five years ago. He just
passed away recently. The shares were left to my mother and myself. It
has been a family owned business. We have been there over twenty-five
years. If this zone was changed to Residential Office it will affect the
value of the land. I know that sometime I will retire from the business, and
we are dependent on this business in building our support for our families
and retirement. If we sell our business it can only be sold as Residential
pg49-PH
Office. It is a limited type of business that can be allowed in our
building. It lowers the value of our property. We feel our building, a one
story building, with ceder shakes siding, and windows with shutters are in
keeping with the rural character of the town. It is located with walking
distance of the hamlet of Southold, around the corner from the post office,
and should be considered part of the hamlet of Southold. We have always
donated as a community business to all the schools, fire departments,
churches, and fraternal organizations. I hope you will reconsider the
proposed zoning on Route 48. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your input.
GERARD GRASECK: I have pictures. It was done with a digital.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Any else?
KATHLEEN GRASECK: Hi. I am Kathleen Graseck, and am one of the
owners of Southold Quarry. I would just like to take a little of your time
up. This is supposed to be America, and supposed to be the land of the
free, and you are trying to take away our rights to run our business, as
pre-existing business, and someday we want to resell this business
property as business. We have been business in Southold since 1978, and
you have donwzoning us once from Business 1 to Light Business. Now
you are trying to downzone us again to RO, Residential Office. Does the
town need more RO? I don't think so. Winds Way Professional Building
next door already has plenty of vacancies. Do you want a lot of vacant
buildings on Route 48? Who is benefitting by this zone? I had over fifty
letters from residents of Southold Town who are not property owners on
Route 48, who have nothing to do with the zoning change, but who are
voting, you know, residents of the town, and they have been brought down
to the Supervisor's Office. So, that is just an indication of, you know, how
the voters of this town feel about this issue. Also, I would like to let
you know that a Home Depot takes up three and a half acres for the
building alone, and then if you figured out what the parking lot would be,
that would be another three and a half to four acres. I don't think there
is one of these lots, that is in question, that has anywhere near this
acreage. We are all small property owners, and so I don't see where the
benefit is to the town by taking away our Business zoned property rights.
Another thing is we would be very happy to provide you with some kind of
screening with trees, or whatever you want, so to enhance our property,
or to make it more scenic as people drive by. If that would make all the
residents in Southold happy. Or perhaps the Town would like to relocate us
on the Main Road in the hamlet on Route 25 close the town where we would
have equal value of property, and pay for our moving of our building and
our parking lot, and all the other things that cost us money to set up
business to begin with at the Town's expense. Of course there would be a
lot more congestion on Route 25 going through the town with more traitor
trailers and trucks, and 1 think you all remember about the time the tractor
trailer got stuck under the railroad bridge in Mattituck. Of course, there
is a lot more noise, and pollution from trucks going through the town on
Route 25. That is why originally they made a Route 27A, which is now
Route 48, a town bypass, and 1 hope you will reconsider downzoning us,
and perhaps even we could have a referendum and leave it up to the voters
of the town. Thank you.
pg 50 - PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much, and the fifty letters that
you turned over were turned over to the Town Clerk, and they are in the
record for this hearing. Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
DICK WESTGATE: I am Dick Westgate. My wife, Dr. Lisa Cowley has
property on the North Road. My questions are more or less rhetorical, but
1 would like the Board to keep them in mind in their decisions. One,
whatever the advantages for us as business owners to have our developed
property downzoned from Light Business to RO, if you downzone our
property could we expect our property taxes to go down? Why can't the
Town change the zoning on existing developing properties only if it
enhances their value RO to LI. Why can't the Town grandfather in property
already developed and zoned as it, but undeveloped property zoned as you
please. When you buy property undeveloped it is like buying stock. It
could go up or down, but people with already developed property
considered their savings account for future retirement, and the changes
you intend to make could eliminate their nest egg if you will, and I wanted
you to realize that. What is the opinion or vote of each Board member on
this proposal so, we as voters are aware of who is looking out for our best
interests? The proper thing to me seems to be tab the vote now before the
November elections, so we as voters know who supports the town's best
interest. I say, town, because it is businesses in existence. We pay
substantially property taxes, we do need Town services. Our agricultural
vista will not be destroyed by leaving existing building zoning as is on
County Road 48. However, the possibility exists for businesses looking
empty like Feather Hill with this needless tampering. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Dick, we have that copy? Do you mind sharing it
with us, or let us make a copy of it? Is there anyone else who would
address the Town Board, so we may hear your views on this action? Mr.
Charnews?
CLEMENT CHARNEWS: My name is Clement Charnews. I own a piece of
property on the North Road, 526 feet of frontage. The Town has allowed a
Morton building to be constructed there. It is half finished. Now, they
want to turn it into agricultural. What am I supposed to do with the
building. They have put in the pools, cesspools, drainage pools. It was at
great expense. I paid taxes on this property when it was farmland, the
eight acres, $1,000 for the eight acres. Now, I understand the taxes are
$4,800. 1 have to pay the taxes because the person was in default. I pay
$30,000 taxes on this property, $6,000 a year because of the penalties to
the County. I used to pay $1,000 a year. Now, I am paying $6,000 a year.
I have an unfinished building there, and now the town wants to turn it into
agricultural, and it is 526 feet of Light Business property, which I own,
which I took back. I can't understand how the Town could allow a building
to be built, and now you are trying to tell me I can't use it. Does the
Town want to buy this building? What am I going to do with it now. I can't
pay this extravagant amount of taxes. I just don't understand.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Clem. There is a few things I would
like to check, but thank you for your input. Anyone like to address the
Town Board?
pg 51 - PH
JOAN CALLAHAN: My name is Joan Callahan, Southold 4B 059-3-29. My
husband and 1 came out here ten years ago, bought this nice little building
right up on the North Road from Markel, right next to Johnny's Drive
In. It is a nice little town. Everybody knows how nice Southold is. Our
daughter is in high school. Nobody wants to go up west. Nobody wants to
go shopping up there. Everybody wants to stay in town here. This is how
we have been running it. Nobody wants to go up. We don't want to lose
our business. This is our retirement also. The family going into another
business. There will be no place for us to go, and you will be hurting us,
and I don't think it is right. I really don't think it right. I am sorry.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You can say what you please.
JOAN CALLAHAN: This is not what Southold does.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We appreciate your input. Thank you. Anyone
else like to address the Town Board?
TOM MCCARTHY: Good evening. Tom McCarthy. I own property on
Route 48. 1 have to vacant pieces on Route 48. They are listed here,
Southold 4C and Southold 5A. My comments would be the same for both of
them. Just a little background and history, I am a resident of the town,
born and raised in Southold, and 1 am sure it is the same story you have
heard from a lot of other people. Product of local schools, and I have
chosen to stay and live in this town, and make my living. I am the
youngest of eight children. Everyone else is gone, except myself and one
brother, so that is six gone, and two stayed in town. Trying to make a
living in town is not all that easy. I was fortunate after pursuing a piece
of real estate for two years while it was in foreclosure on 48, the Southold
Square Shopping Center, four years we managed to purchase it after
foreclosure sale, and my wife and I have worked very hard to get it back
into a going concern, and i think it is the only full piece of property,
fully tenanted. The parcel across the street is not, unfortunately. There
are some other vacancies around town, and I wish other people the same
amount of luck we have had. The two properties that we have right now on
the corner of Horton's Lane, the southwest corner of Horton's Lane and
Route 48. That is a three acre piece and also the piece of property between
John Ross, Ross' Restaurant and Tidy Car. They are both zoned business
B. One is slated to be changed to RO. The other one is slated to be
changed to LB. I am not in favor of either one of these changes. 1 am
not in favor of reducing the rights, and ability of what can be done on
those parcels. Both of those parcels were previously products of
subdivisions. The parcel on the corner of Horton's Lane was attached with
the two parcels. Immediately adjacent to the west it was looked at, and
endorsed by the Planning Board. Cross access agreements were put into
place at the time, so that they limited the number of entrances on Route
48. They allowed a side entrance on Horton's Lane, and they provided,
some thought at the time, to connect the property, so that you wouldn't or
four driveways on Route 48. 1 think it was smart move by the Planning
Department at the time. The other parcel next to Tidy Car, between Tidy
Car and Ross', is similar. It was looked at by the Planning Board, it was
subdivided, and it had the approval of the Planning Board at the time that
it was done. It also provided for very specific criteria, points of egress
and ingress on 48 to look at traffic to get people in and out of there
pg 52 - PH
safely, so those issues were looked at the time, and endorsed by the
Planning Board. As I mentioned I am not in favor of having these parcels
changed in their zoning. The definition changes the lot sizes, changes the
setbacks, changes the setbacks, changes the number of allowable uses. It
changes a whole lot of things, and most importantly it changes the value.
We look at the Route 48 study, and the Route 48 Study says we want to
grow the hamlets, and you want to preserve the scenic vistas on Route 48,
and I can certainly appreciate that. Scenic vistas on Route 48, 1 don't feel
will be severely affected by leaving the commercial properties that
presently zoned commercial on Route 48 intact. I will provide the Town
Board within the next week, and I don't if anyone has done it, but the
frontage that you have on Route 48 from where it starts in the moratorium
area, and where it stops, and the number of parcels that are affected, I
give it to you as a percentage, and I think you will be really surprised to
see what fraction or percentage are really business zoned properties in the
corridor, and then those that are presently improved, and what will
actually change. It is just a very minuscule percentage along the whole
Route 48 corridor, so I don't think that we are going to gain a significant
amount for scenic vista. I think there are some proper planning tools that
can be put into affect on the properties up there to make them cohesive to
the Town. When you look at the Town Code, and you look at the study,
and they say they want to build the hamlet centers, maybe I am amiss, but
don't really see a definition of hamlet in the Town Code. Maybe it is
different to you than it is to me. Maybe it is just on 25, but if you turn
off 25 on Horton's Lane, and come to the first property that is not in
hamlet. Where do we define where the hamlet starts and where it stops.
One thing I can look at in the Town Code is the definition of hamlet density
for projects such as, shall we say Founders Village, where they allow
increased density, and the standard that is taken there is within a half a
mile of the post office, and all the properties that you find on Route 48,
the ones that are in subject for LB to RO, my properties as well, and many
of them are all within that circle, and that radius, that you take from the
half of mile that is designated in the Code to be allowable within the
density. I don't know if anyone has looked at that. Is it just on 25, or
why can't we consider Route 48 to be part of that, if that is one thing that
the Town Board should really take a look at. It is not just on one road.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Are you talking about Hamlet density or Hamlet
Business?
TOM MCCARTHY: I believe it is Hamlet density.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: That is for housing only.
TOM MCCARTHY: It is, but what I am trying to get at, Alice, is when
the Code was drafted they were looking to get a concentration of people in
a particular area, and in order to do that you had to define what was
allowed, and what wasn't allowed, and where the boundaries start, and
where they stop. That is one thing that looked at within the Code was a
half of mile from the post office.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: And that was the center of point.
pg 53 - PH
TOM MCCARTHY: That was the center point. I don't know if Mr.
Cramer took a look at that, took that into consideration, when he did this
study. The next radius point that you see out is affordable housing
district, and that has another segment, and that is a mile away from center
point. You take most of the properties that are affected, especially in the
Southold area that we are talking about tonight. They are all going to be
within the area. So, I think there is an effort to define what the hamlet
is. Do we see it as a half a mile in hamlet density, and we see it for the
affordable housing district. I think most of the people in the room tonight
that are affected fall within those two zones.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is a good point, Tom.
TOM MCCARTHY: Just to reintegrate, I am not in favor of the parcels
being changes, and I am not in favor of the plan. There could be a few
more holes shot in it, but that's all I have.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That is a good start. Thank you, Tom. Is
there anyone else who would like to address the Town Board on any
properties in this set? (No response.) If not, our next hearing is
scheduled for 8:00 o'clock. We will recess until 8:00.
8:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: If I may have your attention, please. The 8:00
o'clock scheduled properties for hearing, for proposed changes is Southold
5A, and Bill will read the owners and the tax map number.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The parcels we are talking about in this section are
55-1-11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4 of Ed Dart, 55-5-2.2 William Penny III, 55-5-2.4
is Tom and Susan McCarthy, 55-5-6 John Satkoski and Rita Patricia.
Those are the pieces that are packaged together for this discussion.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you.
KATHLEEN GRASIK: I just wanted to ask if I could possibly say
something for A group, the last group. I would just like to speak on
behalf of Joseph Wallace. He is in the hospital. He is hoping to come to the
meeting tonight. She did send the Board a letter. I don't have a copy of
the letter, but I know she definitely, Mr. and Mrs. Wallace, are definitely
against the rezoning.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for that information. Anyone else like
to address the Town Board in relation to the parcels that were just stated
in the 5A category? Mr. Dart?
EDWARD DART: I am Ed Dart with the four affected parcels in 5A. First
let me state clearly that I object to any changes to the zone or the
permitted uses, which would reduce or further restrict my options to do
with my property as I please beyond the restrictions of the current law. My
property lies on the north west corner of Route 48 and Youngs Avenue in
Southold in the heart of the most intensely developed stretch of the Route
pg 54 - PH
48 corridor. My property is zoned Business B. It was zoned Business B
when I purchased it, and because of that I paid a premium price for it
when I bought it, and premium real estate taxes ever since for the uses of
B zoning allows. My Route 48 property represents by far my single largest
personal asset. My family and I have sacrificed over the years to make the
down payment to pay all the mortgage payments, and all the real estate
taxes, and I resent any attempt on your part to take value from us now
without just compensation. I played by the rules when 1 paid the premium
price to purchase this land with the 61 Business zone established by your
predecessors. While it's membership may be changed over the years there
has always been a Southold Town Board. This particular assembly of
individuals comprising this Town Board and Supervisor are considering
changing the zoning of my land to a more restrictive one. Please, don't ask
me, the individual who has played by the rules, and paid the premium all
these years to now pay the price because some of you may feel that the
Board may have made some zoning misjudgements in the past. When I make
a mistake I have to pay for it. If you make a mistake you should pay for
it. Please don't take it out of my family's pocket. Now, all four corners of
the intersection of Youngs Avenue and Route 48 currently have the B zone.
Three of the four corners, including mine, are slated to be changed to LB.
While I wish no ill fate to my neighbor I feel that it is unjust that my
land is not proposed to be continued as B zone in the same fashion as his.
The northeast and southwest corners of the intersection are presently the
site of ongoing retail B zone type business. Under the current proposal one
will be allowed to intensify it's uses, because of it's retention of it's B
zoning. The other will likely continue as a preexisting non-conforming
enterprise for decades to come, because it is owned and operated by a
young man. Now, without a traffic light at the intersection of Young's
Avenue and Route 48 that intersection is perhaps the most hazardous
intersection located in Southold today. Now, because of the traffic light in
Southold village by the bank northbound traffic is channeled up Youngs
Avenue to the unprotected intersection (tape change) at Route 48 and
Youngs Avenue in the not to distance future. The traffic hazard is not a
consequence of land use. It is a consequence of the overall increase of the
volume of cars everywhere on the North Fork. Rezoning will not relieve the
need for the traffic light there. Now, the placement of that inevitable
traffic light would allow for the safe ingress and egress of the traffic
that You fear is associated with the more intensive uses of B businesses.
What better place to locate B zone businesses than at controlled and safe
intersections? Frankly, I dispute the contention that limiting the
intensity of the business activity on Route 48 would serve to encourage
business growth in the hamlet centers. There is comparatively little
business activity on Route 48 now, and yet the Southold Village continues
to decline. The concept of concentration of cute little retail shops has
been tried and failed. Now, whereas, in my view, the traffic light is
inevitable, and whereas, tow of the four corners will continue to operate B
zone type enterprises anyway, and whereas, the Cramer Study itself
recommends continuation of B zone activity at the intersection. I therefore
feel that the Cramer Study was flawed with respect to my parcels, and that
Is justifiable and better planning for you to allow continuation of their
current zoning. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Ed. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board? John Satkoski?
pg55-PH
JOHN SATKOSKI: 1 think you are going to make a real hardship for me
and I hope you consider strongly not to make this decision of changing
property values and all of that, and if you do I would like to see you do
something about compensation for some of the poor rascals like myself.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, John. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board?
WILLIAM PENNY: I think you guys know who I am. Bill Penny of Tidy
Car. I guess I can probably stand up here for about an hour, because I am
a little bit confused. I started my business working out of the back of my
truck more to the Main Road, down to a place that I rented. I worked
there for many years. I was told I probably had to leave just because of
the aspect of my business. Went way over debt buying a piece of property
on the North Road, came down to the Town, talked to everybody. I went to
Board of Health in Riverhead, talked to everybody, and they said, this is
great, this is where we want you. It was a gas station, an automotive
related, accessory related. Literally being ten years building the business.
We still have our problems. I am just confused. 1 was told when I went to
the Town back then, this is great, this is where we want you. We want
the businesses on the North Road. We want that type of business there.
So, we moved. We built the business. We spent a tremendous amount of
money, when I redid the buildings on the property. I doubled the size of
the buildings. At that time I decided, well, 1 am going to keep everything
Colonial. i remember talking to John Bertani, who did the building for
me. You could put the flat roofs on, fiberglass doors. I said, listen John,
I love Southold. I don't want this place to look like a dump. I wanted to
put wooden doors back on the front of the building. I wanted a gable roof
on the rear. 1 don't want a flat roof. You know, I want it to look Colonial.
I wanted it to look the way it should belong. We did that. We decided to
take on campers. It is not a motor vehicle. It belongs in the same area as a
cap. Outdoor storage, same thing, we have always had caps outside. It is
now ten years, I still don't have a CO for those buildings. I have been told
by the Building Department that I comply. I have done everything down to
the letter, and they are finished, but I still don't have a CO. I was
brought to Criminal Court in Southold Town, because of the campers out
front. I am told it was Criminal Court. I was really surprised. 1 mean I
came dressed like this, and I was made to go home and change my clothes.
I didn't even realize it was that severe. I paid $6,000 for a lawyer and
won, and I still don't have CO's, and I am finding out they are trying to
change my zone change on the property, and I just couldn't believe it. I
guess I feel that, you know, 1 put a big effort Into making sure that we
keep the place clean. We want to run a business in Southold. We have
done our very best, but I feel that I am going nowhere, but I really
appreciate if my zoning doesn't change. That is my retirement. I don't
know if anybody in this room feels any different than I do. I mean, that is
my retirement. That is my kid's. If I pass away tomorrow that property
goes down the toilet, including the business, because the business is me. I
mean if anything happens to me nobody is going to come in, and run that
place the way 1 do. It will probably will have to be some sort of other
business similarly, but it Is not going to be exactly the same. I am
confused. I don't understand, you know, what is happening. I love
Southold. I want to keep it exactly the way it is. I want it to look nice. I
pg56-PH
will spend thousands of dollars if I have to, to make sure that that stays
the way it does, and doesn't turn into, you know, what you guys are
trying to eliminate. I don't think anyone in this room feels any different
than 1 do. I think if they have a business property in this town they want
it to look nice, they want to be appealing to people. All they are doing is
trying to run a business, trying earn a living for themselves. I could have
sat up here for an hour. I had so much stuff in my head. I didn't write a
speech. You know, I just feel very strongly that I will make sure that
whatever I have to do to make Southold look the way it does, and remain
the way it is, I will do it. Spending $6,000 on a lawyer, that is
unnecessary is one way I feel that is just a waste of money. It could have
been put in so much more things, and all somebody had to do is come to us
and say, listen, this is what we want, and I would have said, great, not a
problem. You know, you tell me what you want to do, and we are working
on that right now, and I know it is in the process of, you know, still the
process being worked out. But, the zone changing is wrong, especially for
a preexisting business. 1 don't get a chance to read the paper. 1 don't
follow stuff as much as 1 probably should, because I am very busy, but it
seems like it is very selective, too. 1 don't understand that either.
Again, I hope that the zoning doesn't change my property. It is my
retirement. It is my kid's, you know, whatever.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bill. Is there anyone who would like
to address the Town Board on anything from the 5As? Mr. Grey?
TIM GRAY: My name is Tim Gray, and I wasn't here earlier when you
brought up 4C. There is a piece of property that I own up on the North
Road, and actually I am talking for my brother tonight, also, who owns
one. We are both opposed to the zoning change. So much of what I have
heard here I will just repeat. What they said about retirement from the
business. I have owned that property from many, many years, and I
thought the best thing to send my kids to college. So I hate to see it
devalued if it gets changed from the Business to Residential Office. I mean
if a building could go up there either way. As many of the people in this
town I love this town. I don't want to see it destroyed. I would do
whatever I had to, to make it presentable. If I did something there, or I
would like to be able to sell it to somebody who would do the same. I feel
that It is in good place for a business district. It is really..) don't know
what defines a hamlet, but it is within a half a mile from the post office,
and I am told that is a criteria, and it is intersection with a traffic
light, which means it has controlled assess, and it has a cross access
agreement with the neighboring property, which means that wouldn't be a
need for two accesses out on Route 48. 1 don't know, like I said I could go
on and repeat what everybody else has said. I just want to go down as
being opposed to a zone change. I have a letter.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board on
the 5A parcels? If there is anyone that hasn't spoken yet I would be very
happy to entertain your remarks now. Otherwise we will go for the second
round where Ton can have another shot.
TOM MCCARTHY: I will keep it brief. I want to reiterate my comments
on the last section that we went through. I would just like to add a few
other parts, and 1 would like to speak on behalf of John Ross, who is not
pg57-PH
able to be here. He is the affected owner tonight. He would like to go down
on record as being opposed to the zone change, as do a lot of the other
businesspeople that are probably still working at this hour of the night.
John is a guy that I am sure we all know. He has been in the community,
and he took a restaurant, and now he has a piece of the rock, and owns
his own piece of property on Route 48. He doesn't want to see his property
changed. Additionally 1 understand it is the political season. I am not
going to get into any of that, but some of things I have seen, some of the
comments in the paper regarding the amount of development that is possible
under the in the building present business,,~as and on well as thee development 48 1 don't agree. I business happen and I think
some of those numbers that were developed they may be accurate, as far as
the square foot and the lot coverage is concerned, but if anyone who has
been through the Planning process, sat in front of the Planning Board, had
to work on parking calculations, speak to the Suffolk County Health
Department, speak to the Water Authority, and speak to any other part
within the municipality that has anything to say about your property. It is
severely, severely, severely restrictive from what you have on lot coverage
calculations, and in the Cramer report, so of things in t wouldn't genewspaper. lot
you want to put up an office building, you certainly
coverage, because the septic criteria would be too high from what the
Suffolk County Health Department allows in Article 6. You would need to
have public water in a lot of properties, do not have public water, so there
is a lot of other considerations other than looking at this as to what is
possible on Route 48. 1 understand Mr. Cramer just looked at it as a
function of lot coverage, but it really has so much more to do with
parking, septic and water.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Tom. Sir, you wanted to say
something else?
TOM MCCARTHY: I just had to say that when I thought about the light,
I do really agree on that. We could stuff lawn chairs in front of our
business, and sell tickets for what goes on in that intersection. I see
people coming in like they are coming off the exit ramp on Long Island
Expressway. They come in from east to west, and come down the wrong
side, and pull right in at about 40 miles an hour. We have seen the
accidents. It is kind of mind boggling sometime with amount of different
type of people we have on the roads out here driving. It is almost scary,
and I think anyone of you guys can go up, and just stand there and
watch, and you will see what I am talking about.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I have to agree. It is not a very good
intersection. The Town Board can pass a resolution on Tuesday, or we can
send it to the County and ask for a traffic study. They do engineering to
see if it is feasible. It takes quite awhile, but we could put it in the
hopper now.
WILLIAM PENNY: Just out of curiosity when they put the light in down
the road, why there?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Hortons's.
WILLIAM PENNY: What caused that light to up?
pg 58 - PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: A large record of deaths and accidents. They
don't necessarily just look at accidents. They also look at traffic
patterns, and moving traffic, and so on and so forth. We can request a
study. Anyone else like to address the Town Board? Let's see what time
we are scheduled to these, 8:30, so we have seven minutes. We will take a
break for seven minutes.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We are looking at the parcels that scheduled for
hearing at the 8:30 period, and it is Greenport 1A, 2A, and 3A, and Bill
will read the tax number and the owner of the property.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: These property are Section 40-3-1 Kace LI LLC,
45-2-1 John Siolas & Catherine Tsounis, 45-2-10.5 Adrienne Solof,
45-2-10.5 Adrienne Solof, 40-3-6.1 Richard & Anita Wilton, 40-3-6.2 Linda
Wilton, 40-3-7 Steven and Lenore Atkins, 40-3-8 Antone Malinauskas,
40-3-9.3 Agnes Dunn, 40-3-9.4 Susan Mainauskas, 40-4-1 Suffolk
County Water Authority. part of 35-1-25 Peconic Landing at Southold. That
is it. The Suffolk County Water Authority piece is not up for discussion,
and 1B for that matter, which is at nine o'clock.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for the correction. If anyone would
like to address the Town Board on these parcels as listed. Yes, ma'am?
CATHERINE SIOLAS: i have to drive two and a half hours back to
Manhattan, so I would like to get this done. This is for the public record
and this is for every member of the Town Board. File notice of objection.
The Town Board's motion to change the zoning of our property from Hamlet
Density HD to Residential R80 should not be passed. I strongly disagree
with the plan of zoning of my property to a low density residential R80
district. We purchased this property for about $41,000 in 1985, when it was
being zoned for Hamlet Density. We paid a ten year land mortgage at
approximately 10% interest on a $20,000 loan. My husband John who is a
New-York City teacher worked long hours to pay for the mortgage. It is
our life savings. This rezoning will decrease the value of my property by
50%. We are probably one of the few land owners, who has been singled out
a second time for upzoning. In July, 1994, the proposed changes of our
1.2 acre parcel from HD to Residential was defeated. It was not upzoned
according to Alice Hussie, and the July 28, 1994 issue of The Suffolk Times
because it is too small. They really can't do anything with it.
Assemblywoman Patricia Acampora stated on April 20, 1994 in our defense
that while we must preserve the environment we must also insure that these
actions are not so severe and drastic that it will stifle the town's growth
and future development. We would harming the future generations, that we
are trying so hard to protect. Approximately a half acre of our land is
wetland. Only three quarters of an acre can be used. How can a BJ's or
a Home Depot be built on such a small parcel? How is my small plot of land
a threat to the well-being of Route 48? Why is my property always singled
out every five years by new political administration for upzoning? We
seem to be reliving the trauma of our 1994. upzoning case with Supervisor
Wickham again in 1999 with Supervisor Cochran. We agree with the
September 9th statement made by the Southold Business Alliance and the
pg59-PH
Traveler-Watchman. This article states that properties that are zoned
Industrial, Light Industrial, Business, or even Hamlet Density could be
restricted by a simple change in the Zoning Code without destroying a
property's value. We believe strongly that a property's zoning should not
be changed after a long period of time. The Hamlet Density of this property
was in the Master Plan of Southold since the 801s. The upzoning of our
property will create a financial hardship to our family. We will lose half
the value of our property in one shot. By taking away the value of our
property you are taking away our property rights as American citizens.
This upzoning will mark the end of the middle class land owner on the
going lose) it. The investor rigwho hts p of the their mlife iddle savings
east end of
and Island,
are n now and the
in lass
property, Long
property owner must be protected in Southold Town regardless of changes
and political philosophies or administration. Now, if you see carefully at
the pages I gave you I have 32 signatures of homeowners ranging from
deal of twelve signatures, the
Mattituck to Orient. Today I am acquiring another
as time goes on 1 seem to be getting a great momentum from
average homeowner that has a little piece of land saved for his grandchild.
Now, I just received another letter just now, fifteen minutes ago, from
Assemblywoman Patricia Acampora dated October 4th. I would like to read
by ie John tonight
property hearing owned scheduled
is ye to change s the Cochran, zoning of There the is a
on the motion and
Catherine T. Siolas from HD to R80. I have been contacted by Ms.
Siolas to intervene on her behalf to oppose this change of zoning. As you
know I very rarely interfere in matters outside of my jurisdiction as New
York Assemblywoman, however, I must make an exception to my policy
under these circumstances. You also know that I am committed to protecting
and preserving our natural resources in New York State, and particularly
on the North Fork of Long Island. I applaud the Town in your efforts to
do just that. Nevertheless we must also be committed our constituents who
have invested in the future of the Town of Southold. We can not penalize
the individual owners of property to the extent that investing lathe town
would such severe financial hardship, that future potential would look elsewhere before investing in our town. We can not permit to
such economic stagnation. I ask that the Town seriously balance the pros
and cons of the proposed zone change before proceeding on this matter.
Thank you in advance for your consideration. Now in front of you I have
documents going back to my first upzoning battle with the Town of
Southold in 1994. You have in front of another letter dated April 20, 1995
from Patricia L. Acampora to the Honorable Thomas Wickham. I would just
like to read one paragraph in here quickly. I understand and admire the
Town Board for trying to protect the Town's natural resources, and she
goes on stating basically the same, and she believes if the Town were to
enact zoning restrictions that are so severe that it would cause economic
stagnation reducing (tape change) April 27, 1994 from Suffolk Life,
basically it describes the problems 1 was facing back then. If you turn to
the second page of this I just want to quote one paragraph from here.
Siolas said, unlike larger property owners she can not afford to sue,
adding that her life savings are invested in the land. Instead of having my
money in the bank I have It in Southold land, because I believe in
Southold. She said, that while she believes her fate is sealed, because of
of other Council small she said she
the zone change has been the predetermined victimization the Town
is fighting to prevent class
property owners. Tsounis said she has enlisted the aid of Andreas
pg 60 - PH
Markakis, President of the Helenic-American Taxpayers Association of
Southold Town, which represents some 1,000 Greek-American residents to
start a grass roots movement. Next article, this one is from the Suffolk
Times. Dated July 28, 1994, 1 would like to quote two paragraphs here
concerning two councilman, who were there at my hearing. Second
paragraph, however Republican Councilman Joe Lizewski balk at the zone
changes from the beginning insisting that HD zoning on the targeted parcel
is necessary for the town's future affordable housing need. Unswayed by
Supervisor Tom Wickham contention that the parcels can be rezoned at some
point in the future to provide receiving zones for a Transfer of
Development Rights Program. Dr. Lizewski voted against all of the
proposed changes on Tuesday, and he blasted the actions of the Board
majority as moral and unconscionable. Councilwoman Alice Hussie sided with
her -Republican colleague in nixing five of the six rezone proposals,
although she vowed to okay upzoning Jen Commons, which she voted
against downzoning in December and it went to .2 acre parcel owned by
John and Catherine Tsounis on the North Road in Greenport. Ms. Hussie
had a change of heart on Tuesday, and spared the Tsounis land. Her's
was seen as a deciding vote on all proposals since a majority plus vote one
on the Town Board was needed to okay the rezoning. Then she goes on
saying it is too small, they really can't do anything with it. Next article,
Traveler-Watchman, July 28, 1994, third paragraph, and although
Councilwoman Alice Hussie cast the deciding vote that reduced the permitted
density on Jem Realities North Road property from one quarter acre to
two acres. She stood firm in her opposition to upzone the other five
parcels stating to take away these property rights without any compensation
considered or offered is unconscionable. Back of this page,
Traveler-Watchman I want to quote the last paragraph. Lizewski called
the action a deliberate attack to strip the people of their rights. In
successfully upzoning even one of the parcels, he said, the people have
lost a big piece of their rights. You could be next. Final article, Suffolk
Life, August 3, 1994, the back of the page, third paragraph, in explaining
her position Hussie said, while agree that one of Southold Town's premier
assets is our open space and that we must protect our environment. I can
not concur with those who would protect these at the expense of the rights
of the property owners. To take property rights without any compensation,
considered, or offered is unconscionable. Finally the next to the last
paragraph in agreeing fellow Republican Councilman Joseph Lizewski said,
taking away the property rights of the owners of these HD areas shows a
lack of moral consciousness on the -part of ruling majority of this Board.
Felinity said two and a half thousand years ago, history repeats itself. It
is history repeating itself today In 1999. In summation I would like you to
know that in the upcoming weeks more and more people are coming up to me
and asking to sign my petitions. Every week I will send every member of
the Town Board updated petitions with signatures and accurate addresses of
people on the east end. In summation 1 am depending on the free press of
America, and a grass roots movement of petitions from average American
citizens to bring before the Board the injustice of changing the zone of my
property. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Yes, sir?
ANDREAS MARKAKIS: I am Andreas Markakis of Southold. I have
to remind you that I do not own any property on Route 48. 1 come here to
pg61 -PH
assist my fellow citizen. I have a responsibility to the Association, and I
have to make some remarks also for the people, remarks which are with my
experience of the living in this town and paying taxes for the last
thirty-two years. We used to say to those who had the legal books, justice
rules. I have to quote. We pay taxes to buy civilization, and we came to
the difficult point of paying taxes today and by aggravation. However, in
this course of experiences of my life in town where i brought my family to
raise, the place I love, the place where I put my son in the grave. I
noticed that the apathy and the phobia that used to be a companion of the
people of Southold has gone. People come more freely, and state their
cases, and defend their cases, which is very encouraging in the democratic
process. I have known for many years the Tsounis family through civic
activities, through religious activities, and I know how hard workers they
are, all of them. I have heard the pain and the agony of many people
here, many people who I don't know personally, and I wonder what can I
add in this argument except to say that I have earned personal experience
in this town of pain and agony. This is only thing that brings me here to
add my voice to those in pain. I have no other interest, and I have no
political ambition. The case for the Siolas family stated clearly in
details that I don't have actually anything to add, but I have to draw your
attention to a couple of paragraphs that make me think twice about certain
On the Notice of Objection on the second paragraph I quote, we are
probably one of the few landowners who have been singled out a second
time in our zoning. I don't want to read the rest of it, but this gives me a
bad smell. Further down in the fourth paragraph, of 1.2 acre of land only
3/4 of an acre can be used, how can a BJ, etc. be built in this tiny
small lot? Why is my property always singled out every five years by a new
political administration for upzoning?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Andreas, you have five minutes. I would be
very happy to call you back, but let me see if there is anyone else first,
just in relation to this?
ANDREAS MARKAKIS: This second time and I will not tolerate. No, I
don't count the minutes. I think for the duration of the people waiting and
your time also. I join the voices of those in agony and pain.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Please, don't shout. I am not shouting at you,
sir.
ANDREAS MARKAKIS: I use my voice so I can be heard.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Please, don't shout. We are here to get input
from the public. I will take the rest of your comment.
ANDREAS MARKAKIS: If I start quoting fifteen cases of discrimination 1
have suffered in this town, you will now find a door to go out. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, sir. Is there anyone else that would
like to address the Town Board?
RICHARD WILTON: My name is Richard Wilton. I live at 825 Queen Street,
Greenport. I just wanted to bring a couple of things to your attention
before I make more comments. The Long Environmental Assessment Form to
pg62-PH
say the least is very misleading. The properties that you refer to are in
quote the frontage on the Queens Lane and Main Road in the hamlet of
Greenport. In the A2 section most of the properties do not meet this
description. While I am on this document I would like to bring something
else to your attention. Does the present site, this is item A14 site
description, does the present site include scenic views known to be
important to the community? The answer is, no. You go to Section C3, what
is the maximum potential development of this site if development is
permitted by the person zoning. The answer is six single family units. The
next question they address, what is the maximum potential development of
the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning. The answer is
six units. The question is, what is the purpose of the change of zone. I go
to the notice of public hearing. This refers to my property. The property
is located on the south side of Route 48 east of the intersection of Route
48 and Queens Street. I don't know what property you are talking about.
That is not my property. I don't live on Main Street. 1 live on Queens
Street, 825 feet up the block. Approximately eighteen years ago I
purchased what was then a migrant camp, and Jean, your husband knows
that property well because he spent many times up there with drunks, with
stabbings, as a brothel, and many other things. To get rid of this plight
purchased the property. That consisted of five buildings housing forty to
fifty migrants. Today that property houses two adults, two children and a
cat. We are 825 feet from Route 48. The property can not be seen from
Route 48. The property could not be seen from Route 48 with a ten story
structure on it, because of the topography of the land, the trees, and
berms in the area. How does this affect the scenic vista of Route 48? 1
can't figure that one out. Ten years ago this property was two acres. It
was subdivided for the purpose of providing a lot for my daughter and my
son-in-law to be able to afford to have a place to stay in Southold Town.
The subdivision was made, and it was done with the approval of the
Planning Board, and our Board of Appeals. Just who is planning on
running the town now, Mr. Cramer, Jones, or our Planning Board, or the
Town Board? I am confused. Why are we undoing what was done years ago.
To that it costs me thousands of dollars in attorney's fees and business in
this very room here. I ask you not to change the zoning of my property,
of my neighbors. It is totally unwarranted. We are group of homes. We
have old houses in there. We have new houses in there. Everybody gets
along. Nobody has any plans of putting a McDonalds in there or anything
else.. We just want to be left alone. There is really no reason to change the
zoning on any of those properties. If you do have a reason to change the
zoning, why don't you treat us like the farmers, and pay us for the
development rights that you want to take away. I think you are being very
discriminatory in this whole action, not paying us the same as you would
pay a farmer when you want to take our rights away. This whole procedure
what you started has really got me unglued, and I don't think it is right. I
can tell you for myself, my family, that when it comes time to pull the
levers in the booth this next month, we are going to take into consideration
very strongly the actions of this Board. 1 don't think what you are doing
is right, fair. I question the legality of it, also. I would like to give
you a petition pursuant to Section 265 of the New York Town Law, which
would require one more vote.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thanks, Rich. Is there anyone else from Queen
Street that would like to address the Board?
pg63-PH
r
CARL RUROEDE: Carl Ruroede. I am speaking in behalf of my wife,
Linda Wilton, and as Rich stated before he subdivided ten years in the
hope that someday we could build on it. If this is going to be what is going
to happen, if you are going to keep changing the zoning and everything,
why should we do this? I am strongly against your changing the zone
there. I hope you really think about it before you do anything on it.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to say anything from Queen
Street?
JIM DINIZIO: Jim Dinizio, Greenport. 1 am not affected by any of this.
Carl is an extremely good friend of mine, as is Rich, and I am here in
support of them and Mrs Steven Atkins and his wife. I have petition
pursuant to Section 265 requiring you to cast a super majority vote. If you
are going to do this, and I would like to comment that, you known, it
seems that if makes absolutely no sense whatsoever to change the zones for
these house. They are on small lots, and the only way that the town can
possibly ...with this is if a tragedy happened. If the place burns down to
the ground, non-conforming, I guess they can't rebuild it now. I guess you
get a vista up, but that is not the case. Nothing else could happen here.
You are still going to have these house. They have been now forever and
ever, and it will still be there. I would like to hand this out, and just
say, I stay the support of Rich, Linda, and everybody else, Mr.
Malinauskas, and I am hoping if someone doesn't show up to protest that,
that isn't taken as an encouragement for you to change their zone. Thank
you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else on Queens Street?
Tony, did you want to say something?
ANTONE MALINAUSKAS: Antone Malinauskas, owner of the one of
the parcels on Queens that are proposed for a Code change from R40 to
R80. The six parcels of the proposal are very near to, or include a portion
of wetlands that have been steadily creeping on particularly since the
County stopped the mosquito control efforts of keeping the nearby stream
clear of all the leaves and other debris, and therefore prevents proper
drainage from the pond area just north of County Route 48 all the way to
Peconic Bay. We are already restricted in the use of our land by virtue
of the wetland. In my particular case I have had to give up about 20 feet
of backyard lawn since I put it in 1971, because I can not keep up with the
surge of Phragmites, skunk cabbage, and even cattails, that have invaded
my property. Next year, I plan to abandon one of my blueberry pens,
which was originally placed on dry ground, but now it to has been invaded
with wetland vegetation to the point where it would be futile to attempt to
keep it in control. My comment therefore is that we are already restricted
in the use of our property, so I can not agree that we can be subjected to
an additional limitations. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board on
any of these parcels from the Greenport area?
AGNES DUNN: i am Agnes Dunn, and I own property just south of 48,
and on the corner of Queen Street. I would like to have a clear definition,
pg 64 - PH
no fancy words, on the zone changes. How it will affect the property on
Queen Street, and why are you considering changes, and will it devalue my
property which is already devalue. Malinauskas property has been in the
family for several generations, and hopefully will continue on. Therefore
the grandfather clause should apply. How about resale or rental? Also, how
will those zone changes beatify Route 48? The property north of Queens
Street is County owned. At one time it was all farmland with a pond we
skated on. Since the County owns it has not been maintained, and is now
overgrown out of proportion, and God only knows what creatures besides
rats and snakes inhabit it. That is not beauty. East of us is wetlands, and
mosquitos. I do not recall the Moore's Woods ever being sprayed, let alone
the streams flowing clearly as in the early years. At one time we were able
to walk alongside the stream in Moore's Woods, the park, and Scout camps
there. Now, the streams are stagnant. Traffic is also a problem, especially
summer, when we can not turn on to Route 48. We also have heavy rains
that form a huge pool on Route 48 just east of our property. Drainage is
not sufficient for the runoff. That alone devaluates my property without the
zone change. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board?
JOHN DUSLING: My name is John Dusling. I represent Peconic Landing
at Southold, Inc., a not-for-profit organization, and we developing the
Brecknock Hall property. I would like to commend the Board on what you
have in the Town of Southold, which is a unique seaside agricultural
community, and I think you are absolutely right, that if shake box retailers
move in along the North Road, that it will destroy the New England
character of the small towns along Main Road. I commend you for that. As
far as our property is concerned we are not in opposition to rezoning, in
fact as you are aware in our discussions with the Planning Board we have
agreed to not develope the HD or the LB portion of our property
approximately twelve acres, and that we will preserve it for Brecknock
Hall, and in fact we have committed to the Mayor of Greenport as well as
Southold Planning Board, that we will use, we will renovate, and that will
cost us between $2,000,000 and $3,000,000. We will renovate Brecknock
for use as a greater community cultural park center. The problem we have,
and concern that have in the zoning change is that we feel an R80 zone
would not allow our intended use for Brecknock Hall, and we feel that
Brecknock Hall and the ground surrounding the mansion home is a true
view in the town of Southold and Greenport. We can't imagine we or anyone
else could invest $2,000,000 or $3,000,000 in renovating Brecknock Hall,
and have it a single family dwelling. 1 can't imagine anyone who could
afford to purchase that property, or afford restore and maintain it. Our
point is that we as permitted go ahead with rezoning with the property, but
that we use care in selecting the proper rezone that allows us use the
property for the intended use that we have committed to both Greenport
and to Southold, and I am not sure how this process works exactly, but if
you are going to an up or down mode on all of the recommendations listed
here that were part of your original study, I would like to point out that
those properties east of the blinking light and up to Manhaset were not
part of that original study, but were added to the moratorium, that we
requested Mayor Kapell, so that this property would not be developed for
use. We are committed to that. We now have a contract, a draft contract
pg65-PH
with the Village of Greenport, and we committed in that contract that we
will not sell this property. If you must have an up or down on the entire
study proposal then we request that go back to the study area, remove
Brecknock property from the up or down load, and let us get together
and decide on what is actually the proper zone for those twelve acres from
Limited Business to whatever is appropriate to allow us to maintain and use
Brecknock Hall as a cultural arts center. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you.
9:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will move on to the continuation of the hearing
on the parcels we will be dealing with next. Bill will read the tax map
number and the properties, ownership of the properties.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The parcels involved here are Section 45-2-10.5 of
Adrienne Solof, Suffolk County Water Authority, 35-1-27.2 Frank Justice
McIntosh and Mark Anderson, Trustees, and 35-1-27.3 Frank Justice
mcintosh.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That is 1,2,3,4,5. Thanks, Bill. We will take
your input now on the parcels that Bill just read into the record. Is there
anyone that would like to address the Town Board in relation to these
parcels? Mr. Cuddy?
CHARLES CUDDY: I appear on behalf of the Solof, who own the 31
acre parcel, that is on the east side of Chapel Lane. It presently HD. The
proposal is to zone it R80. I follow with some interest the proceedings that
have gone before, and it was my original understanding that what was
being done was that Route 48 was being preserved, and that the farm fields
would be preserved. I think that others also thought the same thing. So, it
surprised me to learn, and surprised Mr. Solof to learn that a parcel on
Chapel Lane, and a parcel on Chapel Lane that clearly is away from any
land that would be preserved, farmland, is the subject of this Board's
rezoning. I think I would like to say a couple of things that 1 think go to
the heart of what you are doing. If my assumption is correct they were
trying to save the open space. Then to go west into Mattituck and east into
the hamlet of Greenport, it doesn't make any sense. I have read in the
newspapers and perhaps it is an error, but these papers seem to think
they are correct, that this has been to save Route 48 so it won't be like
Route 58 in Riverhead. I think that is a bad analogy. The proper analogy
is a Sound Avenue corridor in Riverhead, which has been saved, has not
been saved by rezoning, has been saved essentially through a system of
TDR, Transfer of Development Rights. That would appropriate for the
farmland area. It can be done. It has been done, but to do what this Board
proposes, and that is to tinker with what amounts to ten miles of zoning in
this town. It seems to me way beyond where the Board should be, but
perhaps that is my opinion as opposed to your opinion. I would like to
comment on behalf of Mr. Solof, who purchased his parcel within the past
year relying on existing zoning. His parcel has a condominium on it. His
pg66-PH
parcel has public water. His parcel not only has sewer, it has a sewer
contract with Greenport. He has a sewer station, a pump station, on the
rear of his parcel. He purchased it, and he is here tonight, and his
attorney also, Michael Permide, is with him tonight. He purchased it
relying on the zoning. They then came to Young and Young, and they came
to me, and they asked us to represent them to continue the condominium
development that is on their parcel. They believe that they have a
vesting, and 1 point that out to you, that they have intra-structure on the
parcel. They also have buildings on the parcel. You have bisected their
parcel. Their parcel isn't just a 1,000 feet. Their parcel extends beyond
1,000 feet from Route 48, and I would point out to you that your study,
perhaps erroneously, also suggests that the parcel below them, which is an
LB zone be changed. 1 don't know how you can do that, because that is
the parcel on the corner of Route 25, and that is way beyond 1,000 feet.
So, their parcel has a number of elements, that suggests to me that it can
not be changed. But, to change also means that the HD area, which is an
area that allows multiple dwellings, allows condominiums, and can only
really be successfully used where there is sewer, is now going to be
changed to prevent that. So, it appears to me that instead of preservation
what the Board is about is sterilization. You are actually stopping people.
There's a woman who has an acre and a half impassioned to you not to take
away her rights. Mr. Soilas has spent a lot of money. He has hired
people. He believes he has a piece that he can use. I believe he has a
piece he can use. 1 think it would be very inappropriate for the Board to
rezone this parcel to take away his use, and he has discussed this with the
Planning Department. He wanted to build senior citizens units at that site.
He is in a position to do that. He has a plan partly completely by Young
and Young. I think that when he bought the parcel he was quite aware of
the zoning. He wanted to do something. He had the right parcel to do it,
and I think it would wrong to take away his parcel. I think it is illegally
wrong to do. I think it is in inappropriate zoning. It is not necessary to
to achieve the Route 48 preservation, but it does continue what I think is
sterilization of certain areas. They should not be sterilized, and I would
hope you would very serious reconsider it, and take a second look at this,
because this should not be done. Certainly I am here to say to you, that
he believes that he is very vested, and would assert that at a future time.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Charlie. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board?
MICHAEL PERMIDE: My name is Michael Permide. 1 drove out to this
lovely town tonight. I am a member of Parker, Jasper,.... Garden City law
firm. We have represented Mr. Solof on his property, on his acquisition,
and also in his dealings with what we presumed to be a future of this
property. This property along Route 48 has more motel rooms than I have
ever seen, and also a nursing home. That is along 48 that separates our
piece from 48. Why we are in this we don't know. We have all the
intra-structure on this property to build the senior citizen homes, that we
are thinking of doing in a moderate range. We have water and sewer. We
have a pump station. We have eight homes already that are vested on
there. This was incomprehensibility to us when we found our that we were
put into this area, because we are within this zone of ten miles. We ask
you to absolutely consider that if anything is going to be done this
r pg 67 - PH
shouldn't be done here. We are prepared to protect our property rights. It
is not a threat or promise. We just have certain rights, and we feel that
they are vested, and we would like you to take that into consideration.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much for your comments. Is
there anyone else who would like to address the Town Board at this time?
Sir?
MATTHEW SOLOF: Good evening. I am Matthew Solof, and the only
thing I wanted to add was the fact that as a small developer obviously the
change of zoning would be a great hardship to myself and my family. Thank
you very much for your consideration.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Town
Board? Is there anyone else before I call on Jim, that hasn't spoken?
JIM DINIZIO: This is another person, another neighbor of mine. To Jean
Cochran, Supervisor, Town Board. Dear Madam Supervisor and Board
members. This letter will serve to advise you that I wish to retain the
current zoning on my property in Greenport, property tax map
035-1-27-1-2, and 35-1-27.3. Currently this allows me the options to
enhance the value of my land in a manner befitting and integrating the
area. Very truly yours, Frank McIntosh. I spoke with Mr. McIntosh
and explained to him, because he didn't quite understand what was going
on. You know, he had comments that, you know, that next door there is
going to be a development going on, and he feels somewhat that easier
being picked out single house, or in someway not being treated fairly by
the town.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board? (No
response.) We are not closing the hearing. It will remain open. We will be
starting again at 9:00 o'clock tomorrow morning, and going most of the
day. If there is any other place tomorrow that you would like input, we
would be very happy to hear your input. Thank you for joining us.
EI Nevill
Southold Town Clerk
i i
F.
SPECIAL MEETING
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
OCTOBER 5, 1999
9:00 A.M.
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON PROPOSED ZONING MAP CHANGES ON ROUTE 48
IN THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD.
Present: Supervisor Jean W_ Cochran
Councilwoman Alice J. Hussie
Justice Louisa P. Evans
Councilman William D. Moore
Councilman John M. Romanelli
Councilman Brian G. Murphy
Town Clerk Elizabeth A. Neville
Town Attorney Gregory F. Yakaboski
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: These properties are located at Route 48. Bill,
will you read the lot number and the owner of the property?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: This section is 55-5-2.3 Gary Rempe and Wife
property, 55-5-4 Linda Bertani and Others, 55-5-5 property of Audrey
Berglund, 55-2-24.2 Frank Field Corp, 55-2--23 Madeleine Schlafer,
55-5-10 George Penny IV and Robert Boger, 55-5-11 Joann Rizzo,
55-5-12.2 Donald Tuthill and Wife, 55.5-5-9.1 Patricia Miloski_
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: At this time we offer to you to address the Town
Board on anything pro or con that you would like to share with us. Is
there anyone that would like to address the Town Board? Linda?
LINDA BERTANI: My name is Linda Bertani. Ten years ago my
husband, John and I, and Bob and Ann Guarriello purchased a small
piece of General Business zoned property on Youngs Avenue in Southold.
The reason for the purchase was two fold. First and foremost we purchased
it as an investment in our futures and our children, some of whom are
working in the family businesses that we have. Secondly, the Town Board
frowned upon businesses with several trucks in driveways, and other
business related materials stored in the yard of home based businesses in
residential neighborhoods. Since my husband, a general contractor, had
trucks, tools, ladders, and other building materials, and Mr_ Guarriello,
an electrician had trucks, tools, ladders and other electrical materials we
looked for and purchased a piece of General Business zoned property. We
went about fixing up the existing house on the property, building three
pg2-PH
garages behind it, and fencing it in, so that our trucks and work related
items could be legally placed and out of sight of our new business
neighbors. My husband uses this property mainly for storage. Mr.
Guarriello actually runs his business from his office there. I have a
recommendation to the Town Board from someone up island, who has no
vested interest in Southold Town or it's business community, to rezone our
property from General Business to Residential Office it becomes fact the
following will happen. First, you will have a non-conforming business on
this property, which we do not want to do. We like being legal. That is
why we purchased the property in the first place. No one has bothered us
there. We bother no one, and we felt as though we are being good
ei bors
n gh by taking our work related items and business out our residential
neighborhood that we live in. Secondly, most important to us, what
happened to our investment in the future. Last month we had property
appraised by a certified appraiser at General Business and at Residential
Office. The value of the property would drop significantly. Who will
compensate us for this lot? You have money to purchase farm property, so
why don't you take some of that money and compensate the property
owners' for their losses, if there property is upzoned? With a stroke of
your pens you take away our property rights, and ten years worth of hard
work. Please don't do it_
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN_ Thank you, Linda. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board? Linda, can we have a copy? Anyone that has a prepared
statement, can we either make a copy, or give us the one you have? It
helps in translation of the minutes- Thank you.
MADELEINE SCHLAFER_ Good morning. My name is Madeleine Schlafer.
My husband :Cordon and I own 1670 House, Lot #055-2-23, a furniture and
home accessory store. We bought our business thirteen years ago known
formerly in the community as Wedgewood Shop. It was opened in 1959 as a
business forty years ago. We are very upset to find we are being changed
to RO. We chose to call the store the 1670 House because it is registered as
a Southold Historic House. It originally stood where the American Legion
Hall is, known then as the Josh Bordon house. From the outside today
you would never realize the furniture displayed inside, because we protect
the integrity of the historic house at our expense. We built an extension to
the rear. Actually John Bertani did this for us. Even at the time we
realized it would have been better if we had the building to the side, where
we could have had large windows with people going by. We didn't want to
ruin the charm of the house. Other people have said, take out the front
two windows. Well, we wouldn't do that either, because again, it is a
historic house, and we were protecting to the detriment. We have to
advertise. Looks are deceiving. We have eleven, twelve rooms inside.
People go by, and they don't know what we are about. When they do come
in everyone is always shocked to see what we have. We preserved the
visual and historic character of the town, and the surrounding area. We
ask that you do not penalize us and our future. We have preserved the
vista. 1 would like to present a picture. This is what it looked like in
1959_ This is what it looks like today. We have gone to the Planning Board
thinking of putting a small addition to the side, and they want to put
blacktop, white lines, and modernize it. Well, of course not, we want to
keep it gravel. We want to keep historic. So, we please ask that you
v
pg3-PH
would consider what we have tried to preserve and stop in and see what we
are about. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
Yes, sir?
GORDON SCHLAFER: My name is Gordon Schlafer, and I am the
husband of Madeleine Schlafer of the 1670 House- One of things that
bothers me about this whole thing is that it is seems to be presented in the
newspapers and everything as a them against us syndrome. It is like it
has got be pristine, Route 48 a horrible Route 58. 1 don't think that is
way. I see these people write into the paper. One woman writes in she is
sick and tired of these greedy businessmen on the North Road. She says,
there is more of us than there are more of them. Now, this is the kind of
syndrome this thing has come down to. I don't think you people are out
? there relieve us of all our property, and I don't think that is route you
really want to take. The way it is presented reminds of the way they do
things in Washington when they want to cut the fat out of some bloated
program. They present it to people like us. Sir, would you like see this
program cut, and the people that benefit their children starve, or would
you rather see it passed? Oh, I would rather see the kid starve. You
know? This is the way this thing is, comes across. 'I would like to ask you
a question. You correct me. I am under the impression that we can not
sell our business or our piece of property, our store, unless someone is in
the same business. Is that correct?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Greg, will you answer that, please?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: If you have a non-conforming use? If it
became non-conforming?
GORDON SCHLAFER: Yes_
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: It is an intensity question. If you
continue that use, a new person, say, John bought, you can continue that
use, and a less intense use, when it becomes more non-conforming.
GORDON SCHLAFER: Well, let me give you a answer to that from us,
the way it concerns us. I have been in this business since 1951, and I am
71 years old. I am in retail. I was a wholesale representative for 27 years
on Long Island, and I will tell you there has never been a furniture store
business sold. So, that is like us trying to hit the New York State
Lottery, so that wipes that out for us. Okay? We are not young. We are
thinking about retiring in the somewhat near future. I mean, I don't want
to go from the furniture store to the funeral parlor without passing go.
What you are doing is this piece of property we have, I mean, it is a house
is not livable, number one. It has a 50 by 50 big empty space in the back.
It is next to a garage on the thoroughfare. Now, who is going to buy that?
You tell me_ Nobody. We have over $350,000 invested in that piece of
property. We won't get. $50,000 for it. I don't think it is right. I don't
think it is fair- I was going to say I don't think it un-American, but the
way things are in this country with the rules and regulations and the
bureaucracy maybe that is what we have become. You know? That's all
have to say- ,
t f
pg4-PH
k
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Can I just expand a little bit on what the Town
Attorney said as far as your question goes? There is a notion out there
that if a parcel becomes non-conforming the only thing you can sell it for
is the use that you were using it for, in your instance the furniture store-
That is not true, because what the law is and what the Code says,
obviously that use can continue from here on out- If you gave the business
to your kids or you sold it to somebody else, but you can also shift it to
another use, which under the Code at the time would be non-conforming as
long as it is of a use that is similar type of intensity, so the example
becomes..well, let's assume that a restaurant generated more traffic and
required more parking than your business does. That would be a more
intense use. You, couldn't shift over to a restaurant, but you could change
from a retail sales of furniture to some other retails sales that have a
similar kind of parking requirement, use requirement. I think that is
commonly forgotten. You are so limited in the possible uses. I don't know
if it makes you feel any better or not. I only meant to say, it is. not as
narrow a limitation, as people..
'r
CORDON SCHLAFER: It scares me, let me tell.
i
' COUNCILMAN MOORE: I respect that. Even if it goes to RO a
non-conforming use can continue, and it can change as long as the
intensity is no greater than what the prior non-conforming use was. You
don't automatically shift over to RO. If the retail business continues on
that property that can continue.
CORDON SCHLAFER: Who determines the intensity?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I am telling that is how it works. It is not
anywhere as narrowing as-.you may not like that answer, but it is not as
narrow as you may think.
CORDON SCHLAFER: The only thing I can tell it is a little better. The
only thing I can tell you is, you know, I read in the paper these greedy
businessman from Nassau, and they are coming out and they want to ruin
Route 48. Well, I haven't seen any of those people. All I see are people
who live here, and have families here, and trying to make a living,
investing their money and their time. I just think there is another way.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else?
PATRICIA MILOSKI: Good morning- My name is Pat Miloski. 1 own The
Country Store, and I am speaking today before the Town Board in response
to the public hearing, where you propose a zone change on my property,
Suffolk County Tax #055-5-9.1 from Business to RO. I especially request
that the present business zoning be kept as such as it has been for over
thirty years. I would like to be sure that my two letters to the Town Board
from August and September and any other correspondence be entered into
and become a part of this pubic hearing and any subsequent hearings to
follow. At this time I would like to also add that 2 Protest Petitions have
been filed with the Town Clerk's Office in regard to Town Law 265 on my
property. My parcel is unique in many ways due to the 2 buildings and the
setbacks from the road frontage, thereby not affecting the scenic vista,
and clearly fits under the zone of Business because of the lot size, the 2
r
pg5-PH
buildings, the setback and the current uses. The current CO's fit the
current Business Zoning. To change this Business zoning from B which it
has been for over 30 years would create a nonconforming business on a
nonconforming lot and would result in substantial financial hardship. Yes,
you have a purpose, but it makes sense to leave my property the way it
is. A mall business has to be allowed to grow within its permitted uses in
order to affectively serve their customers. My property was B zoned when
the structure was moved here in 1966. There is a shopping center that
border my property on the west side which is the same B zoning and a
shopping center across the street with the same B zoning all built after
this structure was here. The property on my east side is B zoned and the
next parcel to my east, a hair salon is also B zoned. Across the street
again "next to the shopping center is a auto service center and a furniture
gift shop also B zoned. The Southold Planning Board in 1988 had
designated my parcel and the adjoining parcel to my east as
Commercial/ Business zoned because the previous owner had a site plan
approval from all agencies involved including the State and County. In
addressing the County Rte 48 Corridor Report by Cramer and Associates,
the consulting company appears to have been arbitrary and capricious in
their proposal to rezone my property. On the south side of the street
where my property is located he defines the commercial strip as just the
shopping center and leaves me out, which across the street on the north
side he defines the commercial strip as shopping center and some adjacent
properties- How is this logical? My property is developed, active, vested in
use and should be kept Business zoned. My property does .not fit into any
other type of zoning other than B due to the lot size, the 2 buildings, and
the multi-business use. Even when you just look at the lot size and shape
on the map it appears to be part of the commercial strip. To change my
property from B to R,O would leave me with a non-conforming business on a
non-conforming lot with non-conforming uses. My property values would be
worth virtually nothing and if I ever did sell, you can imagine the
nightmare and legal fees it would be to get the permits and papers
necessary to please a title company or lender. I have a letter from King
Realty stating that changing my property from B to RO would dramatically
reduce the value of my property due to the less permitted uses allowed.
Please enter this letter into the record. The proposed zoning change would
create both financial and emotional hardships for myself both in the present
and the future. Therefore I cannot afford to not challenge the Town if you
change 'my zoning from B. Usually when a Board rezones, they try to
make an area conform to Code. Every town in Suffolk County is against
nonconforming uses and in this case Mr. Cramer is taking a conforming
area and making it non-conforming. Is this right? /mother area of Mr_
Cramer's report that seems to be in error is under the Section A called Site
Description, present land use in my Section 6 Southold. His report states
that this area is Urban and other and fails to fill in the blank under
other, and also does not check off the box Commercial. Why? Also, under
A, Site Description #16, his report claims there is a lake, pond, or
wetlands in this section. Where? And once again fails to fill in the blank.
How can one make decisions with incorrect information? I am a woman, sole
property of an established Country Store in this Hamlet Business
Community. This is my only asset. This business was established with my
own hands and finances. Economically, I cannot survi've or get my
investment back unless you keep my zoning as Business. All of us here
today look with optimism to the future. How can we allow an outside firm
t
pg6-PH
to propose changes to our vested community. I do not understand politics.
I do believe in traditional family values and integrity. I urge the Board to
do not what may be politically correct, but to do what is morally right-
once again request that the Town Board reject the proposal to rezone my
property and to keep it Business zoned as it has been for over 30 years.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
ANN MILOSKI: My name is Ann Miloski, Pat's mother-in-law. I am
member of the Master Zoning for Riverhead, a member of the Economic
Development Zone for the Grumman site. I am also a member of the North
Environmental Council. I believe in farmland preservation, land
development, and preserving the quality of life on the east end- I do not
understand though how you can consider rezoning this property, which is
in a business corridor. Next to and across from the shopping center, and
by doing so what benefit it would be to the family? When Pat wanted to buy
this property, which was at the time was an eyesore to the town, I asked
her how it was zoned? She said it was zoned Business since 1966. The
barn was rented out to a fence business and a woodworking business. Then
she said, well, maybe I should just get a job with retirement benefits.
said, you can buy the business property, fix it up, and make a viable
country type business. The equity in your business will increase, and when
you are ready to retire-you can sell it_ Little did I know the Cramer
Report would .pick businesses in the shopping corridor, and ask that it be
downzone. 1 implore the Town Board to leave this parcel business. It is
the right thing do_ Thank you_
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board? I will take Mr. Penny, and then Mr_ Smith.
GEORGE PENNY IV: Good morning. My name is George Penny. My partner,
Bob Boger and I own a small parcel east of Pat Miloski's. At this time
pursuant to Section 265 in the Town Code. I would like to leave a petition
against this rezoning. I would also like to speak on behalf of my
neighbors, the Schlafers, and Pat Miloski to whom I sold the proprty.
did not sell it to the Schlafers, but to Pat Miloski who bought a
portion of our property. Three partners, Bob Boger, Billy Graseck,
and myself, all local residents Bought this property from Bill Smith back in
the early 80's. We did because things were bursting out here, and we did
it for the obvious reason, to have.frontage in a commercial area- I always
thought at sometime that with some good plan and a little bit of taste I
could put up an additional cabinet shop, not a cabinet shop but have a
store as an accent to my business, or perhaps another flooring center.
That was my thought. The economy fell apart. Things went kind of
shabby, and so we never really got into this investment idea. However we
spent $3,000 on filed site plan, which 1 have a copy of, and our parcel
which we still hold in conjunction with Pat Miloski's parcel we put in a
little country complex, we planned a country complex which would be very
similar to what you see in Aqueboque. I think it is where the ski shop
is, Arlene's Boutique and that type of thing. I don't know if the town has
ever seen this, although this document has been in the Planning Department
since the mid 80's, or late 801s. I believe the date is on there. It has
been certified, and ready to go. The only thing we need is water. We
already had some power. The power split off from LILCO, so that was not
t ~
pg7-PH
a problem. If you were to take Pat's property in particular, one of the
main problems that she is going to have is outside display. It is not
allowable on Residential Office. Also, if you go one step further, and you
read very carefully into the new proposed zoning you are going to find out
that Residential Office does not allow retail sales. That will affect both
of these retail businesses. I mean, I don't understand what is going on
here. Across the street from us is a service station. We abut a shopping
center. How will you expect this little half acre parcel, that I have
would have to take a house, and face the Main Road. You would have to
face County Route 48 for an exposure. We couldn't put in a site plan like
that, which could be cute, buildings could be cocked off to the side, and
parking for the entire complex would be taken care of very deeply. The
Town of Southold with all the years that I spent on the Board' has spent
hours and hours trying to talk people into doing projects. I know that they
spent hours and hours of time with the Planning Board, trying to get
people in Mattituck to develop their properties together, have one joint
driveway, and have joint parking lots, and to limit the amount of egress to
and from the traffic flow. This particular project which you see in front of
you does exactly. that. It passed the Planning Board. It went through all
the scrutiny of the town at the time, and believe you me it will prevent an
extra driveway, and some sort of residential structure, possibly a doctor, a
lawyer, an attorney, or somebody else. The only person that would possibly
want to put an office out there, because across from the service station
don't think you are going to see a whole lot of people that are going to
jumping to this site. However, as commercial it makes sense, but the way it
is going with Residential Office it is not going to do anybody any good.
The lot will remain vacant for a very long time. You won't be able to see
the neighbor on the next side, who happens to be a hair salon who is in
the same boat as I am. I would like to say something on her behalf, too. I
mean that is not a residential house. I don't believe there is anybody that
has lived there or has lived there. It has a personal service shop, etc.,
etc- That corridor was meant to be what it is. If you read the existing
Master Plan, and I pointed this out at an earlier hearing, high traffic
businesses were meant to be on certain areas of Route 48. 1 read every
word. I read everything that there could ever be read on the Master Plan,
Which I spent four something years working on it, we passed here in the
Town Hall. The two of them do not fit together. If you are change the
Master Plan say so, but to have a report like this, which comes out and
says jL(st the opposite of what the Master Plan says is immediate conflict to
anybody that has read both document- The Master Plan is not that old. It
still on the shelf, and if you going to amend it, do so, and let's do it
publicly, because this is no way to amend..this is not an amendment. This
is an addendum 'or something else, but it is not what it claims to be. One
point even further, and this really, this is the type of stuff that irked me
during, the last Master Plan sessions that we had when we go to public
hearings and public officials would stand in front of people, and said,
don't be afraid of being non-conforming. You are going to get all of this
great protection. Don't worry. Everything is going to be fine, and read in
you proposed legislation the part which still hasn't changed, and I have it
right here. A 'non-conforming containing a non-conforming use, which has
been damaged'by fire or other causes to the extent of more than 509, of it's
fair value shall not be repaired or rebuilt unless the use of such building
is changed from non-conforming use. Cood bye old houses. One match and
you can forget about not only your house, but your business use at the
t f
pg8-PH
same time, and if that isn't made aware to people as part of this
explanation I think both sides of the coin should be presented to people
when you are trying to sugar coat a non-conforming use. What you are
getting, and what you think you are getting are two different things, and
that part has not changed-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It's in there now.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: That is what we were talking about
changing the other day.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It should be changed. Go ahead. I'm sorry,
George.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I think that is pretty much it for now. There is
going to be a couple of more sessions, and I will come up with some more
stuff on it.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am sure will. Thanks, George- George, do you
want this map back, or in the file?
GEORGE PENNY IV: It is in the town file, if you guys want it. Just one
question? I didn't hear any recommendations from the Planning Board one
way or another, the County Planning Commission-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We are waiting for those to come back, comments.
GEORGE PENNY IV: They have not come back?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Not yet. The County Planning Board meets
tomorrow.
GEORGE PENNY IV: Is that normal to hold a public hearing before you
have these comments back?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: You only schedule public hearings prior to
sending referencing to the County Planner.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I am just questioning because many years I was on
the Town Board we never did before.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Greg, you are the attorney.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: The whole purpose of the public hearing,
George, as you know is to gather information, and one of the things you do
is gather from everybody here, you take it from the Planning Board, Town
Planning Board, and the Planning Commission. The point about it, waiting
for the referral to come back from the Suffolk County Planning Commission,
or the Town Planning Board, or public hearings, you can't vote until after
you have all the facts before you. That is the key point.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We can't take any action.
T
pg 9 - PH
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Correct- There can be no vote until after
you have those type of recommendations back.
GEORGE PENNY IV: Yeah, but the public is here to hear what the other
agencies, and the other referrals have to say regarding our own properties.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Along that line, George, I think what the
j Board has said at the last Town Board meeting was that in addition to these
public hearings they are going to keep these public hearings open until the
date after the 12th, at which time the Suffolk County Planning
Commission. The findings or whatever they recommend will be back into the
Board.
GEORGE PENNY IV: Which means that everybody has got to come to three
sessions to make sure that they hear all the information when that is being
made reference on their property, and if they miss one of those sessions
they may miss the opportunity to get this information.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: One of the bumps in the road here is the fact
that we have not yet solidified what the RO and LB zones are going to
contain. We have proposals out there. Nothing is definite. I think that is
what you are referring to, because you can argue about something, or not
argue about something.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I am totally aware that now we are up to maybe three
or four public hearings to accomplish the goal of one. I am just wondering
in fairness to the community that is being effected by this, and who has to
take time off either during the work, or when their families come to many
sessions of the Town Hall, where they could do it all as one. Is that a
necessary burden to place upon the public? I mean, I believe that most
here work for a living. Henry just pointed out that he doesn't. I mean, I
just think.. I reread the Association of Towns brochure that they handed
out when I became a Councilman, and it said the idea is to give as much
information at the public hearing as absolutely possible, and I come in
here, and all you are reading is a few names and lot changes, and that is
it, and that is totally not the way we ever did things when I was on the
Town Board I just question the change. That's all.
HENRY SMITH: My name is Henry Smith. I don't have any personal
interest in any of these properties as a resident, but being in business
had a lot of business friends, which a lot of them are here today. When
read about this study we are doing. The papers had pictures of Route 58
in Riverhead, of the big shopping center and everything like, but I have
come here three or four times now, and all I see is, you know, we are
talking about Mom and Pop operations, no big land speculators that, you
know, they are going to put in these big shopping centers, and things like
that, no Tanger malls here in Southold. I mean we don't have room for
them. All we want after, that I see right now, are hard working people
that have put their life into their business and future, and you are going
after Mom and Pop operations- There is no big land speculators here we are
trying to cut off, or anything like that. These are just ordinary working
people of the town, the backbone of Southold by the way. You know,
businesspeople, you know I have been on fundraising drives with my
political party, the firehouse, the gun club, and everything like that- The
t T
pg 10 - PH
businesspeople because they are handy, and they are the ones that support
the hospital. You look at all contributions to the Eastern Long Island
Hospital, it is all businesspeople. It is all these Mom and Pop operations.
They are the backbone of Southold. If you do this to them I think it is a
great injustice. I can't help it. That's the way I feel-
SUPERVISOR . COCHRAN: Thank you, Henry. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board?
CAROL CUBINELLI: My name is Carol Cubinelli. I have no interest in
any property here, but l service all these properties, especially
Windsong. There isn't weekend, I don't think, that I don't stop there,
and I think it is very unfair to take their business away.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. George, first until everyone has
had the opportunity.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I just want to add to something. My property, a small
half acre there, gave the right of first of refusal on Miloski. It was her
intention to purchase it sometime in the future, that property. When I
consummated the deal on the original one, we had a handshake, that the
real estate broker know about, because it was intention sometime in the
future that she would like to have the first shot at that property.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Mr. Meinke?
HOWARD MEINKE: I am Howard Meinke of the North Fork Environmental
Council. Just a comment, I think that throughout these hearings we keep
hearing the focus on individual people, and really don't talk about the
overall goal of what we were trying to do. Now, Henry Smith said they are
all hardworking people. Nobody is going to do a Tanger mall or what
have you. I am sure that is true, and if it comes out that we are really
beating to death little people, we shouldn't be doing that. But, obviously
as time passes developers accumulate properties. They have real estate
departments that do that, so just because we have little businesses there
now it seemed innocuous doesn't mean that they can't be accumulated and
something else done, so the desire to make the zoning such that can't
happen is, in our opinion, an admirable goal, and sounds to me like it
would be admirable here. The difficulty is, are we or are not really
inflicting great damage on people, and that is for the Town Board to figure
out. I suspect that it is possible for the people on the outside looking in
to say that there is no damage. That is probably not correct. There is
probably much history on it stemming from the people directly affected. So,
somewhere in between is where it really lies, and the Town has to figure
out how to handle that, but overall the majority of the citizens have voted
to save the farms, save the vistas, try to keep the rural aspect of Route
48. So, by and large, there is a basic desire that is shared by
everybody, and we are getting extremely hung up on the mechanics of how
you are going to achieve that. The fact is there is a majority of folks time
and time again in various reports supporting those goals, and you can't
lose sight of the goals while we sit here and argue each property. I don't
say that meaning, the hell with the property owners, just charge ahead,
but somehow time is passing, and the big developers will have their agents
operating under assumed names and mysterious real estate companies out
pg 11 - PH
buying property, and putting things together to try to do what Riverhead
Center on Route 58 is trying to do. So, I think there is a problem here,
and I think the Town has to make the first move, it has to do something,
and I thought, we thought, that this Route 48 corridor initiative was the
first thing to do, the way to start doing something, because we have done
a lot of talk. We haven't done anything, and apparently the majority doesn't
realize that something should be done. Thank you_
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Howard, you used one term that I am
just going to correct you on, and I don't consider this arguing. Okay?
This is a public hearing. The process when you are going through a zone
change is to have input from the people that it affects, and so that is what
we are doing. When this process is done, we have made no decisions yet,
and when this part of the process is done, and we hear from Suffolk
County and we hear from our Planning Board, then we will be making
decisions. Up until that time none have been made. You know like someone
said earlier, it us against them- I would like to think it is not_
BOB JENKINS: Good morning. Bob Jenkins. Does Mr. Cramer or the
Town Board know how large the largest piece of Business zoned property
on County Road 48 is?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We have it all here-
BOB JENKINS: It is just that this mysterious real estate developer could
come.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: There is an Industrial piece in Mattituck.
BOB JENKINS: No, Business property.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: About three acres.
BOB JENKINS: 1 know Doroski Nursery is Limited Business. I don't think
this hysteria of west end developers coming in and buying up business
property on County Route 48. 1 think that County Route 48, certainly
over 806 of it is Agricultural, or Agriculture Conservation, thanks to all
the voters, myself and other business people included, that have voted for
these wonderful farm preservation bills. I think that the County and the
landowners in general have done a wonderful job of keeping County Road 48
rural, and a very minute amount of acreage involved from Orient Point to
Laurel Lane, that is zoned is not going to change the rural character of
County Road 48 other than if it was 100% developed, and there were would
have to be more traffic going through. I think you should consider that,
and the North Fork Environmental might take a different view of that if
they really examined how small business properties are. Thank you_
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Bob, to answer your question the largest one
under B Zone is 13.31 acres. That piece is in Southold 5A. In that entire
zone, the biggest piece has to be in there for the total to be the greatest.
BOB JENKINS: That is the total of five or six different pieces.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Yes, it is. Yes, ma'am?
pg12-PH
PAULINE PHARR: Pauline Pharr. Isn't there anyway, if you are
worried about putting together, that the Town could say, no business
property on the North Road larger ten acres, five acres, rather than
changing the entire zoning from one end to the other, downzoning them
to prevent something. There must be other ways to do this. Just as if you
don't want Home Depot, if there is some legal reason you can't say we will
not permit large chain wholesale stores, or I mean you say that about
McDonald type franchises, so if that is really what you are worrying about
those kind of monster stores then isn't there someway of preventing them,
which everyone would agree with. Is there some legal reason you can't do
that, you can't discriminate against a store?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: You can't prevent them from coming into the
town at all, but you certainly can guide them where you think they might
be the least offensive.
PAULINE PHARR: Can you look at the size of the business acreage?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: We have lot coverage rules.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: The size of property you are speaking-
PAULINE PHARR: Can accumulate six properties in a row, and make
narrow strip, forty acre, which would be long enough this to theologically
put in I mean if you can do that, if you can prevent it that way.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN. One at a time. Greg, would you answer this,
please, if you have any knowledge of this?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: I don't think you prevent an individual
from accumulating adjacent properties.
PAULINE PHARR: One huge thing?
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Correct.
PAULINE PHARR: In a LB they don't, because you have a lot say sixty
feet is the width of the building.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: That is the second part of what you are
saying. The first part is whether you buy and put them together. You can.
Some of the other things, which that business in town are you both
scheduled here, you lot coverage, area, parking. Some other points that
have brought up are if you look at both schedule there are sewer, water,
depending what it might be.
PAULINE PHARR: You done have those restrictions now to prevent
someone from putting a monstrous store on A piece of property. I mean,
Limited Business is part of loophole-.sixty feet. Sixty feet for a building,
that it has to be spaced, and then another sixty feet. Now, if people were
going to put in twenty-five sixty foot building, they could do that. That
is why it is a boogie man this idea of Home Depot coming. In addition to
which, we are like an appendage. North Fork is like an appendage. You
know this isn't a place to have a business like that. It is at the end of
pg 13 - PH
the road, where all the trucking... The only reason I hear is I live here,
and I was looking for some kind of business that would keep me here, but
it is very inconvenient. I cost me hundreds of dollars extra each year to
get the goods shipped out here. We are an appendage. We are not
Riverhead, which is at the center of two forks and has a western exposure.
We are different. We admit we are different. (Tape change-)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone that would like to speak that
hasn't? Mr. Foster?
ARTIE FOSTER: I really don't want to rip up the North Fork, and pave
over it. I just have a couple of questions. I would really like to know
exactly what the main reason is for all of this? I read many things.
heard many things, and I really just want to know -exactly what is the main
reason all this happening? Just one sentence to tell me why this is going
on, so that 1 will really know from the horse's mouth that half of the stuff
heard is untrue, and the other half that I read is also untrue. I just
want somebody to tell me why.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would you like me to answer?
ARTIE FOSTER: Anybody. Anybody that can give me a good answer.
That is all I want.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: The purpose is to maintain our hamlets, and to
allow certain types of businesses on the North Road with less intense
traffic, but if you look at many of the communities or village shopping in
many of the towns bypasses become the business area, and the towns then
begin to disintegrate. This is the theory.
ARTIE FOSTER: And the vista view, I understand completely, but I also
think from what I have seen that it is pretty much in place from east to
Mattituck all the way down to Doroski's. It is what it is, and what it is
going to be, and the places that are being affected are the places that
already contain small businesses, and we really don't have the room, or
wouldn't even get the room, or be able to get the variances to change into
any kind of expansion because the lots are so small.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I think I gave you the theory in relation to
Hamlet Business. Artie, don't see the vistas as the number one reason for
this philosophy-
ARTIE FOSTER: That is what is played up. That is what the papers are
playing up, the vista.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I think that they have lost the point.
ARTIE FOSTER: I know a little bit about it, because I was voted the
worse vista in town, so naturally I have kind of a personal interest in
this. I am really trying to clean up my act, so many next time around I will
only be second worsted-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN. I am glad you have a sense of humor.
pg14-PH
ARTIE FOSTER: In addition to that some of the RO designations that are
going to be proposed to change just outside, it is my assumption that when
you take something from an industrial or an LIO into a lesser use as you
approach the actual hamlet the RO is one of these that come into place to
allow..
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is part of a transition zone.
ARTIE FOSTER: We have to define what they are going to be at this
point in time, but I really think that in affect to put some of these
further out of the hamlet area might suck a little bit of the existing
businesses that are there now, where people have a commercial business,
let's say in Cutchogue a lady has a hairdresser, and all of sudden she is
now allowed to have that use in her home, and live upstairs, well., there we
got another empty store in town. I can potentially see this happening if
that is done, but you did answer my question. I appreciate it. 1 just really
want to know, because if you read the papers it is very confusing. What
we are all out there reaching for is maybe not what it is perceived to be.
just really wanted to know for myself why we are doing all this, because
most of areas from what I can see the people that are here, that have
worked all their life, as I have, might be committed to a sentence of
working for the rest of their life, if the value is taken from the property,
and I have to incur with that really, because I am in the same situation.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else want to speak that have not? Yes,
sir?
GORDON SCHLAFER: Gordon Schlafer from 1670. 1 would like to
direct a question to Mr. Meinke. I think he thinks we are guilty a little
bit about the harm this
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Sir, please, this is not a debate. This is a
hearing. Address your remarks to the Board, please.
GORDON SCHLAFER: I was wondering, I am sure Mr_ Meinke is retired,
and I am sure he is on a pension, and I would like him think about how he
would like if somebody took his pension, and knocked off about 600 of it.
That is what going happen to us, and that is what is going to happen to a
lot of other people I know.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. I don't want this to get into a
debate.
HOWARD MEINKE: I would just like to say that I spent my life being a
general contractor. I don't have a pension. I saved some money. I bought a
house, and I think l do understand where you people are coming from. I
am a small businessman. I was a small businessman. I was fortunate enough
to build where-in a town in Connecticut. That was good place to build,
and I live very frugally. I am very happy when the Social Security comes
in, so I am not as fat a cat as some might think. I have just been coming
out here since I was little shaver. My father started coming here 1932, and
think this is a magnificent place, and am interested in keeping it that
way. I fully understand about that. I am not part of any conspiracy to take
pg 15 - PH
your value. I said earlier that I had heard about towns that put into place
some more of arbitrators negotiation committee, so that if the Town went
ahead, and did some of the zoning things, and if you could be affected you
sit with representatives of real estate, or buildings, and town, of
planning, or banking, etc., and determine what the real facts are, and the
Town uses it's many methods between planning code changes, regulations,
special exceptions, land swaps- There is a variety of things that you could
do to help make you whole if you have the damage. So, I am not at all
sure, that there is a need to ever get so excited about..well, maybe you
should get excited because maybe it isn't clear how the solution is at the
other end of the road. That is always unsettling. I understand what you
are saying here, but I don't think it has to go that way. I would hope that
we could unite behind some method where we seem to agree that we don't
want spoil this place, and in my .experience as a little kid in 1932 and
going on, we haven't spoiled it yet, but it is harder to replace now than it
was then, and having seen what happened to the South Fork, and seeing
some of the big houses being built here that are creeping around from the
South Fork, I think we can see the writing on the wall, seeing Riverhead
developing. I think we do have to do something- Now, we can't do it and
balance it on the backs of you people, as a politician like to say, but we
really do have to do something I think.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you for your comments- Please, I don't
want a debate back and forth. George?
GEORGE PENNY IV: There is a way to handle some of this, and it is a lot
more gentle that this amputation you guys are talking about. If you are
worried about the side by side cumulation of properties by some unknown
real estate developer that is going to wipe out with a bulldozer all the
small community who seems very happy to exist and stay there right now. I
don't know that these properties are up for sale. One way is to reduce
your zoning maybe one notch. Look at the notches- What is available? What
can somebody put in a Business zone? Can a car dealer come out there on
48 in a Business zone? Somebody answer that for me.
TOWN ATTORNEY YAKABOSKI: Yes.
GEORGE PENNY IV: They can. Fine. Kick them to the Light Industrial.
What are the intense uses that are in a business zone are you afraid of?
Take them out of it. It is a very simple thing. You don't have to go from
B Business to RO to make a change. You could take an LB zone as a
Limited Business zone, kick somebody from a B down to a LB, and make
retail an allowable use with outside sales and storage. End of story. Then
nobody big is going to come along and buy it, because the way it is going
right now if you put a burden on a small business community, this burden
of non-conformity, this burden of non-expansion means that they can't grow
with the future. When they can't grow with the future, and can't compete
with big box stores that are Riverhead, then they can't compete. The first
thing they are going to do is go out of business- Then when they go out of
business some big developer is going to come in, and he is going to be
fine. One, two, three, four, five empty stores, and he is going to come
into the Town Board, and he is going to say then to the Town Board,
would like a zone change, because this is a rundown area. There is nothing
there. Those stores have been vacant for five years, and some Town Board
pg 16 - PH
outside of yourselves is going to give this guy the zone change, and there,
we have lost everything we have tried to gain. That is what you are doing
by stopping, by cutting off, by cutting the life out of your small business
community. I have been in the small business community all my life. I know
what it is like to be non-conforming. I know what it is like to have to
appeal to a Board of Appeals for every time you want to make a turn. You
go and beg for your rights. This last Master Plan took care of that. It put
legitimate uses in legitimate zones. Conformity was our goal, and believe
you me we are going in entirely the wrong direction. You sending the
wrong message here to the small business community. There is nowhere for
us to go. You can fix that, but this is not the way to do.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, George. Someone else had their hand
up. Anyone else like to address the Town Board? (No response) If not, I
will adjourn until the next session at ten.
10:00 A.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This part of the hearing will cover Greenport 1A,
2A, and 3A, and Bill will read the tax map numbers and the owners of the
property.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties that are being discussed now are
Section 40-3-1 Kace LI LLC, 45-2-1 John Siolas and Catherine
Tsounis, 40-3-6.1 Richard and Anita Wilton, 40-3-6.2 Linda Wilton, 40-3-7
Steven and Lenore Atkins, 40-3-8 Antone Malinauskas, 40-3-9.3 Agnes
Dunn, 40-3.9.4 Susan Malinauskas and part of 36-1-25 Peconic Landing
at Southold.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Most of the people in this area did come in last
evening, but if there is anyone else that would like to speak in relation to
these properties we would be very happy to have your input. Bob?
BOB JENKINS: Regarding the Peconic Landing, I see you propose Limited
Business to R80, and think that is the piece that has Brecknock Hall on
it, and I have read, and have been told, that they hope to make that into
a cultural center of some type, which I think is a fabulous idea, and 1
don't know if that would be allowed under R80. So, 1 think if it is allowed
under LB that it should stay LB, and not be changed. We might all benefit.
The other piece of property that I am familiar with is Mr. McIntosh's
piece, which is scheduled to go from HD to R80, and I am a little familiar
with the piece of property, and I thought since it was Reverend Young's
house originally back in 1650, and it is located in a beautiful spot next to
a potential center, what a great country inn it would make.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is a lovely home.
BOB JENKINS: It would make a great country inn, not a bed and
breakfast, but a country inn, and I don't think that is allowed under R80,
but it would be allowed under HD. So, I think you might consider keeping
that. That is all I have to say.
pg 17 - PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thanks, Bob. Anyone else like to address the
Town in relation to these properties, Creenport? (No response.) If not,
will close this part of the hearing, and the next session will take place at
11:00 o'clock here somewhere. I am not adjourning. I am recessing. We will
be looking at Southold 3 at 11:00 o'clock. The Board has some work to do.
We have several resolutions to look at, and the modular trailer for the back
of the building.
11:00 A.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This part of the hearing will cover Southold 3,
and Alice will read the tax map numbers and the property owners.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Property #59-10-4 of Edward Koster going from
LB to AC_ All of these are going to that designation- Clifford Cornell, Lot
#59-10-5, Ellen Hufe Lot #59-7-31.4, Alice Surozenski Lot #59-7-32,
Jack Weiskott part of 59-10-3.1, Alfred and Juliet Frodella part of
59-7-29.2, Clement Charnews part of 59-7-30, Walter Pharr, Jr. part of
59-9-30.4, Steven Defriest part of 59-10-2.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Alice. Anyone like to address the
Town Board on any of these parcels? Mrs. Pharr?
PAULINE PHARR: My name is Pauline Pharr addressing in particular
Tax #059-9-30.4 owned by my husband. I would like to give you written
summation of what he said last night for the record. Before I do I would
just summarize and say that he pointed out the inaccuracies in Mr. Cramer's
analysis of our whole section, and particularly the main reason he gave for
changing us which was that there was a great potential for a strip center
in that location, and if it is currently zoned LB, and in the proposed LB
zoning retail strip centers are not permitted. You can only have a sixty
foot building, and the only retail permitted is galleries, and craft work
shops, so the question of putting in a strip center is muted. Now, I would
like to address the question of vistas, which is being very important in the
discussions. 1 own a house in Southold, that backs up to a farm field. It
has a beautiful vista- That is part of the reason I bought the house. I love
the vista, and I hope that it will stay in farm fields forever, but I know I
don't own that vista. That vista belongs to the property owner, and by the
courtesy of him I still have a view, but it did occur to me to go to the
Town and say, change his zoning from Agriculture Conservation to
Agriculture only, so that he can never put houses there, because I want to
look at it forever. But, such a proposal was made by the Suffolk County
Planning Department Agriculture and Farmland Protection Plan quoted in the
Cramer Study. It said of the radical zoning approach recommends the
designation of Agriculture zoning category that would only allow
agriculture. Now, if you did that to the farmlands you would be doing what
you are doing to me in this proposal- Taking away, really, a major right by
zoning. But, you choose not to that. You choose to go to Agriculture Farm
Preservation Program then pay money for these rights, because it was a
fair thing to do. Now, 'yesterday Mr. Moore said, we are not doing this out
of benevolence. We are doing this because we are taking away the entire
pg 18 - PH
use of the property, I think what was, it is necessary. However, I don't
see that you are taking away the entire use of the property. When you buy
development rights all you are doing is taking away the maximum use,
which is housing. You are still allowing the farmer to use this land, to
make a profit off of the land by farming, and if you made wastelands so
they could do nothing with this land, then that would be more of what Mr.
Moore stated when you said you have to pay because you were making it
wasteland. You are not making it wasteland, so it really is in my mind a
logical comparability between changing something to Agriculture only so that
you don't have pay the farmer for development rights and changing a
property to AC, so that you don't have to pay to take away the business
rights from that property. I have so many things to say. 1 have been
talking in my sleep for nights about all of this. What is the definition of
Agriculture Conservation? Because this morning I picked up off. the table
the purpose of Agriculture Conservation, which is the recommended zone
for our 8.8 acre property section. It says, the -purpose of Ac is to
recently control and to the extent possible prevent the unnecessary loss of
these currently open-, lands within the town containing large. and continuous
areas of prime agricultural soil, which is a basis for the significant
portion of the town's economy, and those areas sensitive to environment
feature. There are five businesses and two homes in my. section, including
the two businesses which were arbitrarily taken out. This is not a large
area of prune' agricultural use. It is a strip of business property, which
has been there ,for thirty years along Route 48. It doesn't fit in
Agriculture. Vt'doesn't fit in Residential. I have a 5,000 square foot, and
have had for 17 years, unheated warehouse. This is not a home by any
estimation. For me to sell this property as Agriculture Conservation someone
would have buy it and blow up the building, and cart away all of that to
put a house on a four lane divided highway. That doesn't make sense.
Neither does it make sense to buy a machine shop, knock it dowrx, and put
up a house on a four lane divided highway. What are you doing then? You
are taking away really almost all of the use of my property. I mean I have
on acre with a building on it. Who is going to farmk that. That is a house
next to me. If someone were to buy my building and that house, knock
them both down, so they could farm two acres? It is cbmpletel7 senseless.
So, supposing you say, okay, we are going to leave the. buildings that are
there, because they, have been there, but there is some !spots of open land
there. It is zoned Business, that hasn't been developed. yet. Let's change
them. Well, five. years from now somebody is going to. coine.;alorig and say,
what is Pharr Distributors doing there with all this agricultural property
around them. That is a spot of business that shouldn't .,lie there. Let's
change it to Agricultural, then they will fit into the Agriculture around
them forgetting that you made me a spot of Agriculture, because I was in a
whole continuous section of Business, that had been zorted Business for
twenty years. But, for you to start changing the open piece's and making a
checker board out of it, someone is going to come along and say that is
spot zoning forgetting that they did it. You say, oh, that won't happen,
but I heard young Tyler Cornell say, yesterday, that when his father went
through all the Planning things for his ECCO building, the Board told
him, the Planning Board, the Zoning Board, whoever, told him he had to
have more parking spaces then he had proposed, so he had to put more
spaces in front of the building, and when he put them in front of the
building now we are complaining that, oh my goodness, look at this, you
have parking spaces in front of the building. We don't like that. Let's get
pg 19 - PH
rid of them. Well, you asked him to do that. Not you but your
predecessors so people down the road can also forget that you asked me to
become a little island, that is being preserved as LB with the property next
to me or across the street from is changed to Ag. You did the same
thing Mrs. Coster's property. If you left her spot, and changed the
whole side of the road, somebody is going to come and take it away in the
future. Now, I just wanted to say as a final thing. Southold Town has
many resources. You know that. Business is one of your resources. The
Cramer Report said 20$ of the economic base of Southold comes from it's 700
to 800 privately owned small businesses- Agricultural products 160. All of
agriculture 160. Business 200. You are coming down very hard on business.
You are riot treasuring us. You are not saying, this is something that we
should encourage and maintain. So, I think the problems you want to
address they are really problems. There is a better way _of doing it then,
than making people's land virtually worthless.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like
to address the Town Board?
LAURA KOSTER: Laura Koster. I addressed the Town Board last
night, and what I want to say is very brief. Pauline has researched this.
She has done an excellent job. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone else like to address the Town
Board or any of the parcels in Southold 3?
CLEMENT CHARNEWS: My name is Clement Charnews. I addressed the
Town Board last night on the Defriest property which I acquired now.
am also opposed to changing my house, where I live. It is listed
Agricultural. 1 just figured it was a nice little place for a dentist office
or something. I did have a few offers, and now it will devalue my
property. I mean all I can say is I am opposed to this. I made that clear
last night about the property on the north side. It is here under Steven
Defriest, which is mine now. I am opposed to changing my place from
Light Business to AC.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Clem. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board on any of the parcels on this section. Yes, ma'am?
ELLEN HUFE: My name is Ellen Hufe. I am addressing the parcel
(unintelligible) and 1 just want to confirm what Pauline Pharr has done.
The research was absolutely excellent. I did speak on behalf of my parcel
last night. I do need to reiterate that at this time. As I stated last
night, I just want to reiterate, I found it very disturbing that
(unintelligible).
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board on
any of the parcels in Southold 3? Yes, sir?
TYLER CORNELL: Tyler Cornell, once again for Cornell family. A quick
question that I had that I realized last night. I asked the record to show
that my notes should be taken from both parcels that were in question. Is
there formal notes that are taking.
pg 20 - PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Oh, yes. We tape the entire proceedings anytime
you have a hearing, you know a public hearing, and it is all transcribed
verbatim. We have asked for printed or written statements because it does
help and support what is on the tape. There are time when people do not
speak loud enough or there is a garble in here, and we don't like losing
any words as they should be. That transcript will be available after the
hearing is closed. Give us a little bit. In fact, the first sessions we
have had are already being transcribed, so as soon as today is finished
that will start being transcribed, and we are trying to get them out as
quickly as we can.
TYLER CORNELL: Great. On a personal note in defense of Mrs. Pharr's
property, Mr. Pharr's property, if I may. I spent a lot at the house as
a kid growing up, and watching their small business start out of their
house. I got to play with the toys,and the things that they were
distributing- I didn't know what they were doing, and watch Mr. Pharr
grow with a small business out of his home into a 5,000 square foot
warehouse, and I remember my father always speaking so highly of his as
far as how long and how hard he worked to get the business going. It is
one of the reasons why I always worked so hard and tried so hard, and -I
would hate to see that taken away- On the second note to do with our
parcel, the one . that is being rezoned to Agricultural, I would like to
reiterate my point as of yesterday that to take $100,000 out of someone's
pocket is pretty stuff, especially when they are 60 years-old and would like
to retire soon. I really do think that it should be done in a democratic
fashion and the Vote to all: the people who want it, and those people who do
want it pay for it. Even as far as we pay taxes for years based on a
certain zoning for each piece of property. They were paying all those taxes
for it, and now is not only the property devaluated, but we don't obviously
get the zoning we paid for. There is another point I would like to bring
up. The second point is intriguing. I don't know if it is a question or it
is a point. It seems that most of the businesses in question, or the
properties in question right now belong to blue collar workers, and I highly
doubt if there is any sentimental discrimination..
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I wouldn't go that way.
TYLER CORNELL: 1 am not looking to bring it up, but what my point is,
can we have a granite shop in Feather Hill? Would it be good for Robert's
Jewelers to be filled up with dust and cutting? We have prefabricated
wires going into large companies up the island being done at the parking
lot of Feather Hill, or across the sidewalk on the Main Road of town. Can
we take a machine shop and have that noise going through the hamlet, and
the homes that are in the hamlet along with the small businesses? Once
again, I am just asking these things be taken into high consideration. As
with Gerry Gralton yesterday nobody knew what do to with his building
after it was rezoned. What do we do with our businesses? Where do we
move to, or where do we sell them off to? Thank you for your time again-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board on
Southold 3? (No response.) We will reconvene at 2:00 o'clock.
pg 21 - PH
2:00 P.M.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved are 59-3-29 John and Joan
Callahan, 59-3-30 Deborah Edson, 59-3-31 David Cichanowicz, 59-4-8
Timothy Gray, 59-4-9 Jimbo Realty Corp., 63-1-1.6 Thomas and Susan
McCarthy.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone that would like to address the
Board at this time?
STEVE ANGEL: My name is Steve Angel. We are attorneys in Riverhead. I
am here for a limited purpose in my representation to present protest
petitions under Section 265 of the Town's Law in connection with the
particular public hearings you just announced. I do have protest petitions
on behalf of some of those people. That is David Cichanowicz, John Ross,
Nicholas Batuyios, Carl and Caroline Graseck, Joseph Wallace, Lisa
Crowley, and John and Joan Callahan. I also have -a whole bunch of
others that relate to the hearings that have both been held and are
continuing to be held. These are the originals with an index, and I have
an extra one for the Town Clerk, and an extra one for myself.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
Yes, ma'am?
CATHY GRASECK: I am Cathy Graseck. I am in the firm of Southold
Quarry. My husband and his brother are the owners. 1 just wanted to let
everybody know I just put together another letter. Dear Town Board
members, Did you ever realize that economic loss of whole Route 48
rezoning would have on our community's economy. Besides the individual
zoning, the owner's property, it would effect their families as well as all
the employees of these companies that work with it, and it would also affect
other businesses that are related to these businesses, because in a small
community there are businesses that depend on one another. In our
particular business we work with ceramic tile setters, and also with
masons. We sell them supplies, as well as tools that they work with. It
would cause a hardship'on them. They would have to drive at least an hour
further out of their way to get these supplies. It would be more costly to
do their work, and it turn it would cost the people who they do work for
more money. So, this is another factor in this rezoning, and I wish you
would consider when you vote on this issue. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board on any of these Southold parcels for A, B, C? Mr.
Penny?
GEORGE PENNY IV: George Penny again. It was explained to us this
morning somewhat briefly that the purpose of doing this is to reduce traffic
on County Route 48, and I am not speaking for my property at this time,
but it is same relation to the Graseck property, I would like it explained
to me, if you would, please, in some many words, how making it
non-conforming, reducing them to Residential Office is going to have a
positive effect for County Route 48?
pg22-PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Who would like to answer this one?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I think the thought, George, is that maybe it is
part of the fear that goes on here is notion that that business can not
continue. Of course, you know that it can. The point of zoning is it is
zoned for the future. You take someone with a B zone and all potential uses
of B zone, all the traffic generated from a B zone, and down the road in
the future they want to change that use to something different, obviously
you are stuck with what you have there, if you want to look at it as being
stuck from a Planner's prospective, but that will have no impact whatsoever
on the traffic at the moment. It is down the road, if and when the day
comes that it changes and that use comes about it would be as intense as
present, or less intense. Certainly never more intense. So, the concern
that you have about losing your use, and losing the ability to use your
property as you presently do is an error, and you are really looking
towards the future- Down the road, fifteen, twenty, thirty, forty, sixty
years from now, you are trying to zone for the :future not immediately for
today's purposes, because the people of today are protected by the way the
Constitution has the right to protect them, Zoning Codes protect them.
That is what we are talking about.
GEORGE PENNY IV: So, this is all a grand scheme for thirty and forty
years now?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: As any of our children or grandchildren will be
there. The goal is to maintain the retail uses in the hamlets be extended
back. We are not going to sit there and take away people's property rights
today.
GEORGE PENNY IV: You mentioned you are changing from B, is there
property now in B?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I was just giving an example, B, or LB or RO.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I asked specifically for that property.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I believe it is LB right now.
GEORGE PENNY IV: With the size of their property as it is now, the
requirements for expansion on that property, what much more severe?
There are some scary edges to the LB Zone.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: If you don't want it in that location, yes.
GEORGE PENNY IV: The LBs?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Yes.
GEORGE PENNY IV: So what if you just remove some of those malignant LB
uses from the LB zone, and that way they can change?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: That is another solution. That was looked at a
couple of years ago- That is what we looking at a few years ago_
(Unintelligible)
pg 23 - PH
BOB JENKINS: Bob Jenkins, Cutchogue. I am just at a loss, and I don't
know if anybody on the Town Board can answer it. I am at a loss as to the
nature of the changes- It doesn't make sense that one business gets
changed to RO, and another business gets changes to RB, especially if
the business is off of County Route 48, no egress on and off the road, and
it gets changed to RO, which is a less potential use, than an LB, which is
right on County Road 48. You have traffic going in and out of that
building. I don't know if the person responsible for recommending the
changes explained to the Town Board why some would be RO, why some
would B, or did he just say, okay everybody on this list B is LB, and the
others RO.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will be sitting with the consultant after the
hearings are done, and he has been sitting here taking notes, and taking
all you input, and we will evaluate that. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board?
CAROLINE GRASECK: I just wanted to ask a question. You say these
new zoning proposal are for ten, twenty years down the road. Well, say
there is somebody in the family wants to buy this property. They actually
have to buy this property from the rest of the family members, wouldn't
they be affected by this?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The use will continue from here until eternity.
CAROLINE GRASECK: So, if we sold our business it could be sold for
what it is to anybody, and our zoning would not be changed at all?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I didn't say that. The underlying zoning could
change, but the use
CAROLINE GRASECK: That's the same thing.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: No, what you asked me could you sell your
business, and I said, you most certain could.
CAROLINE GRASECK: But the zone would change. So, it would be a
devaluation of property.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: If you are selling for the business, the business
can continue. That is the question I am answering-
CAROLINE GRASECK: But if the business is not complying with RO how
can you sell the business and the building? You can't.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The law allows you to do that. A business can
continue not withstanding in spite of it's non-conforming status. It would
be better for you to hear from your own counsel, your own attorney, than
to hear from me. But that is the law, a business can continue to operate in
a non-conforming status.
CAROLINE GRASECK: And they don't have to get any special permission?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: No.
pg 24 - PH
CAROLINE GRASECK: Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You are welcome. Sir?
TYLER CORNELL: Sorry, I really didn't want to speak, but I think that
Mrs. Graseck is trying to get to, where Mrs. Graseck wanted to sell
her business she could get a great value for her business- If she wanted to
sell her property separately then the rezoning would effect the
marketability of her property, so she would still lose on the asset- She can
sell her business but not the asset. So, although, it seems that she talk
to her attorney. It would help where she was going with it. It is definitely
true, but there is two assets there. Once the marketable goes down. Is
that is correct?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The business would continue on that site- I don't
how you separate them out, but I don't profess to a be a real estate
appraiser-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else to address the Town Board?
ELLEN HUFE: My name is Ellen Hufe. I have just been listening to
some of the comments, and I am somewhat confused. Two things, Mr. Moore
said shortly before that this is being done with thirty, twenty years down
the road, and it is for our children and our grandchildren. I think most of
the business owners here, or a good percentage of them, are precisely
thinking about our children and our grandchildren also, thinking of their
futures, so they could perhaps keep up the business- If they keep the
business it is going to be valuable. Any connection with that, I don't know
if you have ever tried to sell a business or part of a business, but it
certainly is devalued, when you go to market it if it doesn't have the right
zoning. I know that. I can't imagine trying to sell the business, the
purchaser then wants to know what he is allowed to continue there legally
as it is.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board on
the Southold parcels on 4? (No response.) If not, we will move on to 2:30.
2:30 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will be looking at what is listed as Southold
5A and the tax map numbers are?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Properties 55-1-11.1, 11.2, 11.3, 11.4, all of Ed
Dart's, 55-5-2.2 William Penny 111, 55-5-2.4 Thomas and Susan McCarthy,
55-5-6 John Satkoski and Rite Patricia.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN. Anyone like to address the Board in relation to
the parcels listed as 5A? I think everyone was in last night. They all
were. Anyone like to address in relation to 5A? (No response.) The next
are scheduled for 3:30. Yes, Bob?
BOB JENKINS: This just goes back to selling your business, and what the
property value might be worth- John has a business and is unable to
pg 25 - PH
continue in that business, so he leases the building and the property to
Bill. Bill runs the business. He runs it poorly. The business is out of
business. There is no more business, but John still owns the property, so
John has a buyer for the property, but the buyer does not want to be in
the masonry business. He would like to be the retail clothing stores, sell
men clothing, but he is not zoned properly for that business. It does hurt
the resale value of the property. That is my opinion. I might be wrong,
but that is my opinion.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bob. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board?
RONNIE WACKER: I have been out of town for a few weeks, so I am not
conscious of the specific changes that have been recommended by the
Cramer Report, but I just wanted to speak generally about my feelings
about what the Town Board is doing. Is that okay at this time? I just want
to, first of all, to congratulate the Board for doing something, because we
have got to do something if we don't want to see Southold go to waste like
the rest of Long Island has gone. I applaud you for tackling the thorny
question of Route 48_ Route 48, 1 think, is the canary in the coal mine. If
it dies it becomes another Route 58, and the rest of the town will also be
subject to decay. Look what has happened to Riverhead, every swap take
out shop and supposed discount house has been allowed to stay up there.
The rest of Riverhead has settled into lost business. Main Street has
become a belonged throughway with empty store windows. Southold however
is still a vibrant community, even though it too has been affected to some
extent., but Riverhead mindless approval of the commercial monster Tanger
Mall, but tourists still crowd our farm stands, and the youngsters run to
pick pumpkins. Let's keep it that way. 1 ask you please to consider
carefully and adopt the changes recommended by the Cramer Study as a
first step towards ratification of full Master Plan, which has been works
for the last twenty years. We need today to act boldly, to preserve and
assure the area, and assure our children will inherit a Southold that will
be as attractive a community as it is today. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
GERARD GRASECK: My name is Gerard Graseck. Has any members of
the Town Board or any of the Town have assessed any of the properties
that they are planning to devaluate, the present assessment versus what it
would be worth after? Has any property been assessed?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: No.
GERARD GRASECK: Should we have our properties assessed now?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That is your decision.
GERARD GRASECK: Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: George?
pg 26 - PH
GEORGE PENNY IV: Back to this question of parking and traffic flowing,
the reason for this whole thing- Let's use the Grasecks for an example.
How many parking spots do you have?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN. Parking spot where, George?
GEORGE PENNY IV: On their property. I believe they have filed a site
plan, that has been approved by the Planning Board, consisting of zoning.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: It would seem so, because it predates the Zoning
Code.
GEORGE PENNY IV: They have space for five cars, and people are not
parking out in the street what difference is it going to make to the future
of the town unless they come in to increase their parking, in which case
they have got to go through some stringent site plan review all over again,
and really basically start from square one from I understand from the way
the Code has been interpreted. If there is any change in the use or the
intensity of use that although the Courts may rule this unconstitutional
today, that the Town continues to pursue things in this area. So, why
when the scrutiny comes up couldn't it be addressed at that point, and it
just as easily turned down. I can't see anybody wanting to come and
intensify a business when they can't provide parking- Where are we going
with this?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN- What is your question?
GEORGE PENNY IV: Where are we going with this?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: What was it before then, seriously?
GEORGE PENNY IV: They have spots for five cars- How is that going to
have any negative affect on anything over the next thirty years? If the
traffic flows out on the street I could understand, but if the traffic flows
out into the street they are going to come into the town, and they are
going to pay for more space, the Town is going to have to deal with it
sometime in the future. Why are we assuming that the worse case scenario
is going to happen to Southold Quarry? That all of a sudden it is going to
generate twenty, thirty, forty times more traffic just because they are
there? Why are we making that assumption today?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I'm not making any assumption at this point,
George. I am taking input from the people involved, and my decisions will
come after discussion and evaluation. If he needs thirty more parking
places, God bless him, he is doing a good business.
GEORGE PENNY IV: If he needs thirty more parking place, you make him
non-conforming, he will not be able to expand his business to meet the
needs of those thirty people.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: That is a statement.
GEORGE PENNY IV: That is a statement and a question. I am just trying
to find out where we are going with this, because I heard for the first time
pg27-PH
today that this whole thing was about parking, and Bill just stated earlier
we dealing with something that is twenty or thirty years in the future.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: We are talking about a number of issue here,
George, no just parking. We can't just pick them out of the blue. It is the
uses that are allowed in the zone, and how you would like to see your uses
in your overall community developed over time, and that is what it is
about. Where do you want your retail businesses? Do you want them in
your hamlet centers. What kind of business do you want on Route 48? That
is what it is all about.
GEORGE PENNY IV: We did exactly that- We created the LB zone for the
abuses that were heavy traffic generating uses.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Actually they were designed to be the non-heavy
traffic generating. That was the purpose, and specifically for the
non-traffic generators.
GEORGE PENNY IV: And they were put on 48, because 48 was supposed to
be...
COUNCILMAN MOORE: That is why a significant amount of LB zoning is
still recommended on 48, and why B zoning is to be rezoned.
GEORGE PENNY IV: You lost me.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Go back and look over the whole town. There is
still a significant number of LB Zones on Route 48_
GEORGE PENNY IV: But you are taking away the LB that already exist.
In most cases you are reducing them to Residential Office.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: We are going to work with the consultant on how he
justified under those guidelines, and the Master Plan, which we looked at
the recommendations, and now we are listening to your input on Business
Office.
GEORGE PENNY IV: Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: would like to know when Mr. Cramer gives you his
input on this whole study, can we also be at that meeting?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You certainly can attend. It is a public
meeting. You will probably not take part in it. It will be a discussion
with the Town Board. It will probably be done through a Work Session of
the Town Board, but you are more than welcome to attend.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Will it be in the paper?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN. Definitely. Yes, sir?
pg 28 - PH
TYLER CORNELL: I do apologize. Like I said I would rather not be around
politics. Mr. Cramer is getting paid I would assume right now for his
notes. We are all here leaving our jobs and everything else. We are not
getting paid. Do we have the right to bill you for our time?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am not going to answer that.
TYLER CORNELL: I am not being wise- We are also all fighting to keep
what we have.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We understand that.
TYLER CORNELL: Why are we doing that? Let me step back a little. As
you know I was in Florida for a couple of years, and I left there a few
months ago to come up and see what I could work out with my family and
things of that sort to help them out. Since I left Florida there is about
seven radical changes that have gone on in the small area of Clearwater,
where I was from. The Wind Dixie shopping center completely left and went
into a bigger shopping center. Things changed, added, all of these
different things have gone on in the last couple of months. Since I left
Long Island to go to Florida in 1997 the only real change I see is a new
industrial park. It has not been touched as far the zoning is concerned.
Doesn't that make that property more valuable if it is the only commercial
industrial property in the area? That hasn't even been brought up yet.
Somebody say something about this industrial property while we fight to
keep ours, somebody else is going to worth a fortune down the road. This
is our town, right?, I don't know who owns that industrial property but
where are we going? We are going away from our people, going away from
our town.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board? (No response.) If not, we will recess until 3:30, and then we
will come back to Greenport B, 1, 2 and 3. Then following the 3:30 will be
the 5:00, which will cover Mattituck 1A through Mattituck 113, and then we
have at 6:00 more on Mattituck.
3:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will be dealing with Greenport 1, Greenport
2, Greenport 3, B, B, B, 1B, 2B, and 3B.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Property, Section 45-2-10.5 Adrienne Solof,
40-4-1 Suffolk County Water Authority, and 85-1-27.2, 27.3 McIntosh
property.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone who would like to address the
Town Board in relation to the Greenport 1B, 2B, or 3B parcels? (No
response.) Anyone like to address the Board on any general statements, or
anything?
GERRY WOODHOUSE: My name is Gerry Woodhouse. I live in Orient,
and I work in the Town of Southold. I have lived here for about ten
years, but my family has owned businesses and property since way back
pg 29 - PH
when. My great-great-grandfather was a Lutheran minister in the 1800's,
who formed a number of congregations out here on the east end. When my
husband and I were married we lived in Nassau County, and when it came
time for him to retire we thought seriously about where we wanted to go.
am younger than he, and was going to continue to work, and we choose to
live out here for the reasons that I think many people do, the vista, the
way it looks, the perfect combination of sky, and land, and water for us,
and that is what has kept us living here. Because I have been a
businesswoman myself for many years and appreciate the difficulties
involved in the decisions you have to make when the kinds of changes that
are being proposed affect people on the individual level. I can imagine I
have be aware this week. I have read all of the studies and all the reports,
and I can only imagine how difficult it is to hear things one by one when
somebody talks about, what they think might happen,to their property in the
future, and. how that would be marked by the decisions you are making.
But I want to say that I think you have taken some,-very courageous steps
to do what you are doing, to have these hearings, have;the moratorium, to
make the kind of recommendations for changes that are going to affect
everybody to the greater good for the long term, and I think that is the
issue. We are talking about what happens on the individual personal level,
and we also have to'i balance that what happens for the: greater good, for
the greater amount of people over the long run. While individual changes,
sometimes they are really hard to do, it is the big' picture, the broader
concept that makes the difference. We have business areas. I have read
every one of the studies over the last couple of years, and they all
remarkable say the same thing- We have business hamlets. We have
various, right now that have bacon businesses, they have bacon pieces of
property, that are very suitable for businesses. Sa, for those people who
are concerned about Businesses my suggestion would be that if there isn't
already been on the Town level, there be some liaison with businesspeople,
people who want to go in business, and people who want to purchase things
for business where they can come and talk to someebody who will apprise
them of what is here already, what exists, and Ay it is important to
situate those businesses in a hamlet area- Now, I drive often outside the
area to go and do my shopping, and do the kinds of things that I need to
do, because I can't necessarily find what I have to. Does that mean that I
want to have it in a strip mail on the North Road? .Absolutely not. I want
to come home to area that I love the way it looks., I don't mind driving a
little further if I have to shop, and I love to shop in the downtown hamlet
areas, because for me often I am shopping alone. It is much safer for me.
It is easier to park my car and go to businesses that are there. I don't
want to see them gone. When it also comes down to the issue of individual
property rights, andi property values it is hard for me to listen to the
heartbreaking stories of people without also thinking about the fact that,
you know, I am a property owner. I have rights, but property rights are
not absolute rights. Because I own property does not mean that I can do
anything I want with that property. I have responsibilities- The kinds of
responsibilities that go along with those rights are the kind of
responsibilities that are there because what I do with my property isn't
mine alone to do. It affects everyone else around me_ I can't put up on
property anything that I want because I have neighbors around, and I live
in a community, and so everything has to be balanced in a broader, larger
contents, and I think that is some of the issues that you are struggling
with now, how to stay true to the larger broader context of what you need
pg 30 - PH
to be doing, and what kind of policies need to be in placed to protect all
of us in the long run, and I would hope that as you make the kind of
decisions that you are grappling with that the emphasis is on upzoning,
not downzoning. There is mechanisms in place that deal with people who
have exceptions or individual problems- They can be dealt with by Zoning
Boards, and Architectural Review Boards. But the Board, the overall
Board, I think your responsibility is to set for all of us a broad picture,
the big policy issues, the broad stroke 'definition that will help all these
other pieces be looked at in a intelligent way in the future, so I urge you
to continue what you are doing, but to stay true to what all the studies
have said, and what I think the majority of people in Southold who have
supported scenic byways, the 48 Study, that we really want the open
space, the vistas, the things that are so unique and special throughout our
community preserved for the town, because if Route 48 looks like where I
used to live in. Merrick, where I used to live by.Sunrise Highway, I am
not going to stay !here. My children are not going to stay here, and my
grandchildren ,are not coming. So, in a long run the kinds..,of decisions that
will keep the areas; ,special is certain areas, and zoned certain ways, are .in
the best public interest and make the most economic sense, and make the
most business sense in the long run. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Is there anyone else who would like
to address the Town Board?
FRANK WILLS: My name is Frank Wills- I am a resident of Mattituck. I
have been around here close to forty years. I have heard yesterday quite a
few people who own property on 48, who have a business there, who will
rezoned, and the indication of emotional feeling I got was that they thought
they were going to be put out of business. I am certain that is not the
case and the intent. The intent I believe is to control and regulate the
future expansion of what is going on in 48, and from on, and hopefully to
limit what could happen, because it isn't it will go back to 58 and go
further east, further west, and see what kind of horrors happened, unless
they are forever, unless we have an earthquake, or some other catastrophe
the bulldozers will never remove all the buildings, and the stuff. The trees
will be gone and so forth. When I built my house back in '63 there were
really very few regulations and rules even though I had no background at
all in electrical work I was allowed to put my own electric work, I was a
business tech with the Long Island Lighting Company. If you go further,
a few years after that, I have several acres, and one of which was
separated from where my house is. The zones were changed from one to two
acres- If you -go back probably forty or fifty years there may have been
any zone. I think we have found quite that our nature, whatever it is,
egos, enlargement, greed, whatever, we want to do what we want to do,
forget everybody else. We have learned through many, many years that
doesn't work anymore. The old days, and when I started working people
were allowed to work six days a week, eight, nine hours a day. I had to
work a half a day on Saturday, very inconvenient. Eventually that
changed. What I am trying to make is we have found that even though our
own freedom is very critical, and the Constitution of the Laws protect it.
We do have to think of somebody else. Our neighbors next to us up here a
mile away basically represent what is good for the whole of us_ The
majority of us; I believe, the last few votes voted for the kind of thing
that I believe this study is trying to do, to preserve what we have, to
pg 31 - PH
limit the growth, and not let it go as it has in the past. Medical terms
described uncontrolled growth as a cancer- Most of you know what happens
when you get one of those. I have been there, so I know. So my request
and suggestion to you is to seriously consider what is recommended in the
Cramer Study, to approve it, and assure people who are in business on 48,
unless you add 25 in addition to this. It is surprising that wasn't included
in the study. But, no, you are not going to put it on, but any future
growth or changes will be controlled or limited.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN; Thank you for your comments. Would anyone
else like to address the Town Board?
TYLER CORNELL: Tyler Cornell. For my understanding is there any
possibility of it addressing speakers previous who have spoken on their
feelings about their view on the moratorium on 48?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Give it to me again, Tyler_
TYLER CORNELL: May I ask the previous speakers a question as to their
feelings on the Route 48 Study? The two people that just spoke, I was
wondering if I may ask them a question?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I think they expressed their position. I don't
want to get into a debate going back and forth, so why don't you ask the
Board the question, and then if they feel free they can answer. Okay?
TYLER CORNELL: I realize everyone feels strongly. Once again, I am
wondering how much the people who (unintelligible) are willing to
compensate the owners of the property that will be affected by a minimum
of $2,000,000 devaluation of their property? That is the basic question. Who
compensates the owners? My father started his business in a station wagon
with $1,800 in his pocket. He took his money, and reinvested in the town,
bought property. The valuation of one piece of property goes from
$100,000 plus to $3,000 or $4,000. How does he get compensated?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I don't know. I am saying this, but it has not
been determined if a compensation is due. That is something that is all a
part of any future discussion. That input has been given by many, many
of the owners, that they feel if you are going to take their property
rights, and change them that they should be compensated. Okay?
TYLER CORNELL: Does the Board have a plan to ask the people in favor of
the Route 48 changes as to how much they are willing expend personally to
keep those changes alive?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: The subject of money hasn't come up at all.
doubt that it (unintelligible)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I don't even know if you can legally use taxpayer
money to compensate an individual in this kind of a thing- Those are all
unknown questions at this time.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: You are presuming the right to be compensated.
You can't presume that right-
pg 32 - PH
TYLER CORNELL: Well, I am asking.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The question gets sidetracked when you say I have
to be compensated. You know we take the farmer from three acre to two
acre zoning there was no compensation. The farmers said, gee I think my
property was devaluated. Back in 1957, 1956, there was no Zoning Code in
the Town at all, and so when the Zoning Code was put in place it sat there
and said, you are going to have residences here and businesses there, and
industry here, and in 1957 the person who sat there and said, gees,
would have loved to put the sauerkraut plant, or the warehouse, or the
manufacturing facility, but now you are telling me it is residential. No
compensation was on there either.
TYLER CORNELL: Does it seem a little unconstitutional?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: That has been argued and debated in front of the
Supreme Court for a long, long time, and I have always told people who
own property who feel that the Board has gone too far to consult with the
people you are dealing with, the real estate, and the attorneys that you
know, and say, hey, has this gone too far. Is this a taking of my property
as it is understood to be? I don't want to counsel you on whether that has
been proposed here or not, but you know when someone comes in, and
says, gees, I have got a piece of LB property, and I think it ought to go
to B, and if whatever reason the Board grants that.
TYLER CORNELL: I completely agree with your recommendation with the
exception of it would impact (unintelligible). So what can someone in out
position do?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: You certainly made your position really good. I
understand it well.
TYLER CORNELL: It hurts.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I understand that. All I can see is, I am not your
attorney. I would say, go talk to your attorney, and say, this is what is
proposed, what do you think? Give us the kind of guidance that you would
suggest.
TYLER CORNELL: Back to the original question, is there a plan to get the
information from the public. I mean you are getting it from the owners
right now_
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This is public hearing.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: This is not just for the owners.
TYLER CORNELL; What does that mean? Does that mean that the owners
have spoken probably four times as much as the non-owners that we win,
or is there a formula?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: There is no formula. We are taking your input.
It will become a part of the entire discussion.
pg 33 - PH
TYLER CORNELL: Once again I appreciate it.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am going to call if there is anyone else who
would like to speak to the Board before 1 come back to you, Gerry. Well,
do the question quickly.
GERRY WOODHOUSE: I have heard lots of people talk about the fact that
property values will go from $100,000 to $20,000, $3,000, $2,000. if this
changes, and I wonder what evidence there is, or have there been
appraisals, proposed appraisals, that show or link this community or other
communities when changes are made, the direct financial impact, that the
change in zoning laws, as opposed to other things? For example, I lived in
a community where I had a piece of property that in one year it was
$400,000, another year it was worth $200,000. It nothing to do with
anything other than that is the market goes. The .market fluctuates. So I
wondered if anything like that, I don't recall reading the study anything
like that.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We didn't do any appraisals.
GERRY WOODHOUSE: Or if there is anything that is a guideline for
people that might quell some fears about the fact that zoning changes would
have a downsize in terms of the economy as opposed to a upsize in the
value of the property? The property could become more valuable if there is
limited amounts of property for vineyards or agricultural uses- I have seen
so many people come from other areas to purchase agricultural property,
because they want have a vineyard, they want to have a farm. That
property will become more and more valuable the less property there is for
people that want that usage, so is there anything out there that could help
this man back here, other people who are struggling with that issue of
finances?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is an unknown.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Real estate appraisers can help in that respect.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: But then it is the market.
GERRY WOODHOUSE: You have heard all the nuclear power leaks that
have happened in Japan. You could have something like that happen in
Connecticut again, and the property isn't going to worth anything anyhow,
because there is so many outside things that affect it. So, I think it is
hard for people who own property to get a fair sense of what is going to
happen if there is nothing that can provided for them in terms of.. Is
there any other part maybe Mr. Cramer knows, or other people, is there
any other part of the country where changes have taken place, or other
parts of the state, that can demonstrate the affect of zone changes on
property rights?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Look at our town, look what happened in '83, one
acre to two acre zoning.
GERRY WOODHOUSE: Well, how much is that property worth now?
pg 34 - PH
COUNCILMAN MOORE: That is a rhetorical question. It wasn't meant to
debate as to how it happened, but in the interim you had the stock market
crash and the economy went confluey. In the interim it is backed up, so
GERRY WOODHOUSE: If you hold on to it long enough. I was wondering
if somebody could do some kind of research to see if there is anything that
provides...
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board? I am going to wait and see if there is anyone else, Tyler,
please. Bob?
BOB JENKINS: Perhaps the Town Board could enlighten the audience with
the requirements necessary to build a house, that is .80,000 square feet,
two acres. A two acre parcel costs X number of dollars. A residential
office, which I think is 40,000 square feet, one acre, half the land
necessary to build a house. Hamlet Business which I think is 10,000 square
feet, one quarter of an acre-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: With water and sewage.
BOB JENKINS: Which certainly is much more valuable if you own two acres
to put eight businesses on it, and Limited Business I believe that is
80,000. That is also two acre zoning. Yes, I would think that different
zoned certainly have different economic values. If you are in one zone, and
requirement are 40,000 square feet, and you switch to another zone, forty
thousand square feet.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bob. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board?
TYLER CORNELL: Tyler Cornell from Southold. How about some of the
people in the audience, like Bob was trying to do. When I first got out of
college, and I was trying to make money to get back here I started off as a
loan officer for a mortgage bank. Specifically my job to do as efficient as
possible (unintelligible) If I didn't get paid at the end of the week. With
that I came knowing the appraisals, and knowing the property before it was
appraised and what affects the mix use for rezone as we have on our
property. I then became a manager of a part of that bank, and I can
assure you when leases are limited, zones are changed, I won't say
downgraded, but it affects the property values substantially, and the
marketability of that property. You got one person that is living by a
vineyard, agricultural property may be in demand at that point, but what
is definition of demand? You might get double your money if it is worth
from $3,000 to $6,000. You might even get four times, say, $16,000 or
$21,000, but the current zoning of our property particular over $100,000 it
is worth, even if we got that $16,000 or $20,000 for it if agricultural was
in demand. It is not in demand the same way that the Zoning Map currently
has this. (unintelligible)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
(No response.) We will come back at five. At five we will be going again
pg 35 - PH
for the second time, Mattituck 1A, 113, and at six we go to Mattituck 2A,
2B and 2C. Then our hearings will continue through the 7:00, 8:30.
5:00 P.M.
Public Hearing on Mattituck 1A, Mattituck 1B.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Public hearing remain open because the neighbor to
my north, I just spoke to him on the phone, and he is indicated he would
like to join in the protest of the zone change on that piece by submitting
his own 265 Town Law protest, as a adjoining property owner. The remarks
that I made yesterday were specific to the piece, and I think that
supplements those remarks, and I wanted to get them into the record- Will
the hearing be open until October 12th?
JUSTICE EVANS: The 14th.
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: I will have that protest to you in the next few days.
One other question was in regard to the filing of the Environmental Impact
Statement underlining this study, has there been a finding statement made
on that?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: We did-
UNKNOWN SPEAKER: Finally attached to the specific comments is Saland
Real Estate's letter, also the survey of the parcel. I attached a one page
general comment addendum to the public hearing comments, which I think
some of the forms have been before, but I just wanted to make sure that
they were in a the record. I think I will leave a, what do they call that,
teaser for you to read the entire written presentation, because you have
the last pages and it is general comments in regard to the study, and I
think with that I have said what I need to say, except I want to say one
final thing. I was last night, as I was watching the Met win, 1 had
occasion to review, because I know that you all have the County Road 48
Corridor Land Use Study Recommendation discussion, and I found in regard
to M1 I found two questions, and answers that struck me as unexpected,
and they are these. On page 3 if this particular strip is unexpected in view
of the comments in the underlying study about vistas, does the present
site, and he is referring to all the M1 sites, include scenic views known to
be important to the community? Answer, no. So, if this site inclusive of
my piece does not include scenic views know to be important to the
community, then certainly the underlying reason of protection of the vista
is not as essential-.is not present to the underlying zone change. The
second answer that surprised me is on page 6, is the proposed action
consistent with the recommended uses adopted with the recommended uses in
adopted local land use plan? Yes, and this is a reiteration of a point I
made earlier, and sit down. The reason that that M1 is zoned the way it
is, as you know, is from the '89 study, that they wanted to have hamlet
areas expand not east-west, but with the hamlets, and his proposed
rezoning may be consistent with his plan, but the question is the proposed
action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use
plans. He answers, yes, at least in regard to that rather important point-
The answer should be, no. That if you are going to do this on N1 you are
going to have to determine that the '89 idea is a bad idea of having
pg36-PH
extensions of the hamlet onto North Road, so as to avoid extensions of
commercial development running east-west. You want it on north-south. I
think that answer more correctly should have been, no, because the
proposed action is inconsistent with the recommended uses. In adopted local
land use 1 would argue on the proposed use. That is all I have to say,
and I thank you for listening.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Town
Board? Mr. Foster?
ARTIE FOSTER: Good evening. I am Artie Foster. I own property in
the area of these proposed zone changes. This proposed change will not
affect my zoning, but it will hurt me another way. I am presently zoned
Light Business. Prior to 1989 we were zoned in the heaviest business use_
My property in '58, housed bulldozer sales and service business, Kenneth A.
Pappish. It now houses my business, which is heavy, equipment also, but
not in the service business. Next to the off premises :as well as Town and
County road signs this was voted the worse vista in town. The properties
on either side of me are scheduled to be changed from LIO to R80, low
density housing, are now non-conforming but pre-existing. The piece
across the street is where Lieb would like to place his winery. This will
also go to R80 and change. On the northeast corner we have a small strip
type mail shopping center, and me on the catty-cornered to it. I can see
the writing on' the wall. If this is changed to R80 and houses are built next
to me it will restrict me in operating my business as I do now. Usually
ride to work around five in the morning to prepare for the upcoming day,
and in preparation I start up trucks bulldozers, and sometimes some
welding repairs to do which involves cutting, grinding., sledgehammer noise
and so forth. This work is done primarily outside, and is really quite loud
and I am sure it is going to be quite unacceptable at .5:30 in the morning-
So, if you rezone this. adjourning land to residential, and houses are built
on this property it won't be long before my residential neighbors will be
trying to dictate my hours of operation, and the condition of my property,
which I try to keep as neat as possible considering the use is for due to
my line of work- How much noise or even how dust may be created by the
trucks pulling on my property. There is one issue l think everyone should
be aware of., and that is traffic. Since the road was. resurfaced a few
months ago we have gone from a dangerous intersection to -a deadly one.
The screech of tires out there now since they brought all of this to one
lane is about a frequent as sneezing in a pepper factory; and I mean, we
are constantly running out there to see did it happen, or didn't it
happen- Before we used to have cars jock into positipn 'primarily in front
of me, and on the other side heading east and west„ now, because of the
lane changing it extends all the way down to Horton's` Lane, and see Bill
smiling- He has experienced it I am sure. So, it hPs really gotten kind of
worse, and it is another prime spot for a traffic light. As Mr_ Dart said in
his presentation yesterday that. what better place $o have a business at a
controlled intersection. I strongly urge that this zoning change not be
done. Leave the present zoning in place and perhaps you might consider
changing my zoning back to LIO, so that I will no longer be
non-conforming, and can establish my property values to what they were
before the zone change in 1989, and you know it all comes down to money-
When you decrease the intensity of use it devaluates the land, and I had
my land sold for $650,000, and a totally prospective buyer found out that
pg37-PH
he could not use the land for it's intended use. But he could have prior to
the zone change in a '89_ Of course, we were unaware of that, and didn't
know about it until after the fact, but now I am trying to get $300,000 for
the property, and I can't seem to do that, because of the lack of uses, so
guess it means I am sentenced to a life of work with no retirement,
because my retirement fund has lost it's value due to the wishes of the
previous Town Board. It appears to me that this present Board is heading
down the same 48, 48 corridor which may be a vista for some but a
financial disaster for others. That is basically all I have to say. I have
a copy of this if you would like it for the record.
SUPERVISOR .000HRAN: Would you please. We would appreciate it. Anyone
else like to address the Town Board?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Artie, you mentioned that you have the honor
of been selected as the ugliest property in town a number of times. I
guess there is sort of a reverse prize there, or something. Have you ever
considered taking the cesspool structure away?
ARTIE FOSTER: Yes, I did. I consider it, but I told Mrs. Cochran that
if she could get Bob Schroeder to get his down, I would take mine down.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Why would you the gentleman...
ARTIE FOSTER: Well, actually that was depicted in the paper as cesspool
rings, and nondescript businesses they said, but actually there is a lot
worse spots than that in town.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: This was a contest, and the public voted on it.
The public selected you, but I think it was as much the wires and
telephone poles as it was your cement.
ARTIE FOSTER: That was going to be my next statement. The signage
that is is in that area...
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is heavy.
ARTIE FOSTER: There is two or three off premises signs, which showed
up in that picture that don't even belong to me, but they kind of picked
me out as, you know they said nondescript businesses, and there is this
big sign, Artco Drainage. That doesn't seem very nondescript to me. So,
I am not blaming anybody for that. I just mentioned it, because you know
this is all about a vista. There is no vista there. It doesn't really make
a lot of sense to try and create one.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You couldn't afford that much advertising,
Artie.
ARTIE FOSTER: You wouldn't believe the phone calls.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I am sure. Anyone else like to address the Town
Board?
pg38-PH
DELORES PRINCIPI: I am Delores Principi_ I know I mentioned it last
time. I know that one of your real concern is the traffic- I do not see how
,you can make our pieces, RO with houses with children- School buses have
to stop and pick up the children, and that stops traffic both ways, and if
your concern is vista and traffic flow you have to consider school buses
when you are going to make all of this residential. I know I said it last
time. I just wanted to reiterate.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Good- Now it is in the record. Also I would like
to enter into the record, I had letter in my folder in my office from Ellen
Hufe, sent certified mail, and I will give it to the Town Clerk, and it
becomes a part of the record, of which the Town Board will get a copy.
Anyone else like to address the Town Board? (No response.) If not we will
come back at 6:00 o'clock, and we will be doing Mattituck 2A, 2B and ,2C.
At 7:00 we continue with Mattituck.
k k ]C
6:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will be taking input on Mattituck 2A,
Mattituck 2B, and Mattituck 2C. Now, over here we do have, which you
might want to call a program, and it tells you what is scheduled and the
listing of the people's names if anyone wants a copy. If not, Bill, will you
please read the tax number and the owner of the properties in this section
of Mattituck proposed change?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Properties being talked about now are 141-3-43,
which is property of Alice Funn, 141-3-44 Clarence Booker and others,
141-3-45.1 Mattie Simmons, 141-3-45.2 North Fork Housing Alliance,
141-3-41 George Penny Inc-, 141-3-21 Harry Charkow and Wife, 141-3-19
New York State Hostel #1077, 141-3-26 Joseph and Janet Domanski,
141-3-27. Margaret Ashton, 141-3-28 Raymond Nine, 141-3-25.1 Raymond
Nine, 141-3-29.2 Arnold Urist, part of 141-3-38.1 Geroge Penny Inc.,
141-3-22 Raymond Nine, 141-3-32.1 William Guyton, 141-3.29.1 John J.
Sidor, Jr. and Others.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. We would like to thank you for
joining us, and at this time anyone that would like to address the Town
Board we will be happy to take your comments. Mr. Penny?
GEORGE PENNY IV: Thank you again. George Penny. I have here a new
set of petitions with a different number on them against the rezoning. As I
mentioned at the earlier, unless there is a mix up somewhere to make sure
that I am covered, I have a second set- 1, also, have six copies of the
letter here regarding our commercial borrowing from North Fork Bank that I
can share with all.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thanks, George.
GEORGE PENNY IV: There are somewhere in the neighbor of 32 or 35 of
us, although not everybody is here tonight, and one of the questions, or
one of the things that have been a topic lately, as I tried to explain to
people why the Town would want to change my zone. I thought the
pg 39 - PH
opportunity would be here for the Town to explain to everybody here
present why they want to change the zone, because I believe it is your
obligation to do so. It is on the Town's own motion, and yet it has never
been explained to me, or to anyone else that I am aware of. As it was
explained today, at an earlier session, traffic seems to be a major
consideration, and if somebody from the Town Board would care to fill us in
here, so that we can all have a greater understanding of why the Town is
acting in this direction.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I would be very happy to answer, George,
first. If anyone else would like to they certainly can feel free. I have
said this in one of the other sessions that the main reason for limiting
certain types on the. Main Road, is to keep your hamlets healthy, to keep
your businesses in the hamlets. As you know, if you look to the west, and
this is' a philosophy of planning, okay? I am not stating my position at
this time, and I will not do that until I have all the 'input from everyone,
and we talk with the fellow that wrote the plan, and we come• up with some
compromises, solutions, whatever. But, intent, the main intent in my mind
was to keep business in the hamlets'. You can look to Riverhead, Central
Islip, on on, on agaan, where business has left the hamlets; and gone up
on bypasses be it Wesconsett,. be it Riverhead, be it Smithtown Bypass.
It goes on and on- and on. Another thing the plan talks about in
philosophy is vista, another one traffic. The business, are lower density,
demand for traffic, which you can argue that also, but that is the
philosophy of planning for the future, and that is what we are looking at.
No decisions have been made.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I understand that. You talked in generality, but
specifically how would changing the zone of Penny Lumber, which is not
allowed in the hamlets, we are a light industrial property, who have been
in business for 109 years, how will changing our zone help in any way, or
what is the reason for changing our zone?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It is part of the plan. It is not my
recommendation. It is part of the plan in changing- I won't make my
comments now in relation to your property, George, not until we are
finished with the whole process.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I don't want to put anybody on the spot, except that
I feel from what read, and what I heard that we are entitled to have an
answer, and it has been very difficult, if you can't explain it to me how
can explain it to everybody at work what is going on. One thing I would
like to see addressed, I don't want to spend a lot of time, because I know
there is a lot of other people here who would like to talk, but
approximately a quarter mile east of us under this plan the Town is talking
about increasing the intensity of several parcels of property on Mattituck
Creek. Now, I have spent quite a bit of time on the Town Board, and when
we did them whenever we discussed marinas there has always been quite an
impact of traffic, etc., etc., depending on how many slip are put in. Does
anybody know that in this plan, or this grand scheme of thing how slips
could be put into Mattituck Inlet?
pg 40 - PH
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: I don't think any marina plans have come
forward for that zone, so no one really knows. You are right. It probably
would increase the intensity of use.
GEORGE PENNY IV: In the planning process when you address the change
of the zone somewhere along the line the impact from that change of zone
has to be addressed. I mean you are not going to make 20 acres marine,
and expect to have one slip. I mean if you are going to do something that
is supposed to be of benefit to the town somewhere along the line that
impact should measured.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The consultant talking about the M zone, those
were some ideas that he has. presented for us to mull over. He also has said
that in that particular instance in that area is going to require far more
additional analysis, and he doesn't recommend that we take action that way.
That was part of the look at the Corridor Study, that recommended idea
that he has, but has not acknowledged to us it is going to require
analysis. He wouldn't expect us, or suggest to us to enact an M2 zone up
there without further study. He said that area by itself would justify a
study all by itself.
GEORGE PENNY IV: I just want to repeat that Penny Lumber has been on
the present site, and is existing. It is not a figment of somebody's
imagination. It is not a Planner's dream. It is not something that is in the
grand scheme of somebody's future- We have been there since 1890, and yet
you asking us when you look at this as an overall project you are asking
us to sacrifice, because of something on Route 48, or for some greater need
for the community to reduce traffic. Meanwhile two blocks or approximately
a quarter of mile east of us you are saying that it is perfectly alright
that you are going to take the traffic away from you, Penny Lumber, and
we are going to make you non-conforming, but in the meantime we are
going to increase the density less than a quarter mile from you in an area
that may never be developed- I heartily feel that this is part of an unjust
plan. I would like, at some point, for somebody to be able to explain the
rational of how two intense changes can happen. One may not happen
because it requires more study, but it doesn't require any more study, just
a decision of four or five people on a Town Board to take mine away. We
are already in existence.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, George. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board?
DON SAYRE: My name is Don Sayre from Southold. I work for Penny
Lumber, and have been there 25 years. I am opposed to this change of
zoning in Mattituck, because it may affect my job, the business. We have
over thirty employees working at Penny's Lumber, and they all signed
letters that I want to present to the Board in opposition to this change-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thanks, Don. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board?
ARNOLD URIST: I am Dr. Arnold Urist. I have a small medical practice
in an old white frame building by the railroad tracks on Love Lane, and
currently we have the office on the ground floor, and we have a one room
`pg41 - PH
apartment that we rent to a tenant. Now, with the rezoning, one, can I
keep my office and rental apartment the same way, and if and when I sell
the property can it be sold as an office/apartment for rent? And, what
happens to my taxation with this rezoning? Will it go up? Will it go
down? What does this do for my property value? What does it do for
taxation? What does it do for my property utilization?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Sounds what you have right right now is exactly
what your RO district would allow. If the Code changes it will be exactly
what you are doing.
ARNOLD URIST: We don't have more than two or three, in any given
hour more than two or three cars.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Professional office fits right into that zoning district.
ARNOLD URIST: So, that is no problem. What happens to the taxes,
the tax rate in comparison to the rest of the Town of Southold, Mattituck,
or whatever?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: I would check that with the Assessor, and see if
you been on Industrial.
ARNOLD URIST: What happens when I sell the property? When I sell
the property will the new owners be able to do the same, have an office
and an apartment?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: It is part of RO zoning.
ARNOLD URIST: Thank you.
MATTIE SIMMONS: Supervisor, members of the Board, my name is
Mattie Simmons, and right here it says that my property will change from
Light Industrial to Hamlet Business district. I just would like the meaning
of that. I am not familiar with that, and what it could do to my home.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Presently your property is zoned for Industrial type
uses, even though you have your residence on it_ The proposed list will
take yours to Hamlet Business, which could allow certain commercial uses of
it, as listed in the Hamlet Business Zone. It doesn't, as far as your
residence goes, you can continue to maintain your residence on your piece
of property-
MATTIE SIMMONS: What kind of business, light business, because before
we were down here to speak, Mr_ Rosen, and Alice Funn, and I, our
house, his house is in between our home and so far we haven't ever heard
just what is happening, and we live from day to day not knowing what will
be in that house next door, or who will buy it. No one has heard anything
at all.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: The house between yours and Alice's?
MATTIE SIMMONS: Yes.
6
pg 42 - PH
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Everything has been stopped because of
moratorium. Everything was in 1,000 feet of Route 48, so therefore your
property does come in that category- Everything is on hold.
MATTIE SIMMONS: It stopped because of that?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Right.
MATTIE SIMMONS: In the meantime it can be sold? The only thing we
are interested in learning about is that could be some commercial business
being there, put there, and this what we have for a long time concerning
that, so when the change comes what we will we be able to put that,
between us? What kind of business?
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: The same kind of shops that you might find in
downtown Mattituck, the center, a shop, a barber shop, a grocery store.
MATTIE SIMMONS: Well, this is what I am concerned about. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Mattie. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board? I am going to take Mr. Rich.
JAMES RICH: Thank you, Mrs. Cochran, members of the Town Board.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you. Please excuse my
appearance. I just came from soccer practice for the kids, so I want to do
that. Along those lines is something people involved with small businesses,
local businesses have to do, Little League, soccer, things like that.
mean, Clinton said it takes a village, and I believe it does. I am somewhat
nervous but I am one of thirty employees from George L. Penny, Inc.,
which does business under Penny Lumber. Many of us are here today to,
you know, basically oppose this rezoning. As a former business owner
myself, and I still do own a pretty big piece of commercial real estate. You
know, we pay a tremendous amount of taxes, have paid it, and the
flexibility of the property is of course part of the value, part of the
appraised value as George said when he spoke, and it could have a
detriment on the value on our property. I am very much aware, and I am
sure you are how difficult it is to run a small business in a town like
Southold or Mattituck, and Penny Lumber has been in business for 109
years. It really can't represent any change in the vista because you
stopped to think this place has been here before my father was born,
before my grandfather was born, and tentatively before anybody in the
whole town, since Carl Vail died. How many thousands of dollars the
Penny family has paid in property taxes over the years. I have no idea,
but I can only imagine, because I know what I have paid in the last two
years, located between a dual highway, 48, and an LIR, I don't think
that there is a better function for this piece of property than what is
being used right now. The property is really suited only for what it is.
don't think it is really suited for residential property, and again, we have
been there for 109 years. The last thing I want to say is the problem' of
rezoning right now, I mean you can't force us out of business, but if you
cripple our ability to react to the future, how are going to handle
additions, if we God forbid had a fire, tried to build, and things like
that. That is my point. Thank you very much.
~ B
b pg43-PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much.
ABIGAIL WICKHAM: Just following up on Mrs. Simmons. Alice Funn
contacted me today, because she is working this evening, and unable to
appear, but she asked me to submit this, and make that part of the record.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Gail.
ABIGAIL WICKHAM: Can I give you a couple of more? I also want to
apologize. 1 misread the notice on Mr. Nine. I handed his papers up
earlier, and I would ask that the letter and protest that filed be part of
the record- I also would like to appear tonight on behalf of Mr. John
Sidor and Martin Sidor. They own the Light Industrial at Section
141-3-29.1, which is immediately adjacent. to the Long Island Railroad
Station in Mattituck. Something that Jean mentioned at the hearing
yesterday, that has been sticking with me, and while .1 didn't disagree with
what she said it has been tugging at me, and that.was the comment which
think you just repeated, that we don't want to see Route 48, which a rural
bypass, turn into something like Nesconsett Highway, which we all
remember years ago was a rural bypass, and is now clogged with
development and traffic. One thing you didn't say, or maybe I missed it,
was that we also -I don't want to see Route 48 become another Route 24
Where on the south side you have houses springing up.in every single farm
field, and I think that the Sidors and most of us that live put here do
value the vistas of Route 48, and what you are trying to do to protect
them. The fact that you are buying development to try and protect the
vistas, but what this plan doesn't do, and what has been bothering me, is
don't think it in any way really does protect the business of Route 48 at
the extent that it could, because it doesn't address the `owners of the vast
expanses of Route'' 48 of the residential property from siprinkling their land
with house. Now, clustering would move it back somewhat, but stiJI you
could have incredible amounts of development, that would-effect all of these
long stretches of farmland that we now have- Instead. what the plan is
doing is singling out the limited number of mostly business owners, that are
in these pockets along Route 48 where, because of the".small areas they are
in, there is really not much room to do anything, lse. ~So, instead of
addressing, you kind of skipped over this whole YpoX4rhial,problem of the
residential areas, and singled out the business ownerst but you haven't
said they can't build. All you have done is said, noW lAfiey can't build the
.same thing that the could before, they are building a. lesser type of
intensive use. So, you are not really saying they Gantt' have structures up
there. You are just giving them different buildings they could build of
lesser value- So, you are devaluating their propeitAe~, and not really
addressing some of the other problems that could, happen on Route 48, and
do think you are purchasing development rights and,`.all those things you
are trying to accomplish are very good, but for insfanre, Mr. Sidor isn't
even on Route 48, and yet he is being told that his property can no longer
be used for many of the uses that it is now more suilz for. I have, and
would like to submit to the Board two things. One isl a letter that I have
written that more specifically addresses the concerps: I will read it if you
like, and also a 265 protest that Martin and John Sidor, who owns the
property. The Sidors are here tonight. They asked mp 'to speak on their
behalf. Specifically they object to the propose& rezoning, because the
resulting uses their property would be put would drazstira!lly be reduced. It
t J
e pg44-PH
wouldn't be suitable to the size and area of the property, are not in
conformity to the stated goals of preserving vistas, and reducing traffic,
and would substantially diminish the value of their property- They have
used this property for many years as a potato grading operation They have
a very large building on the property, which is located right on the
southerly property boundary of the Long Island Railroad. The property is
bounded on the west by Westphalia Road, across from which is Light
Industrial zoning improved with several concrete block buildings located on
the street line and a large brick warehouse. The property is bounded on
the north by Raymond F_ Nine's sand and gravel operation- If the property
were to be rezoned, as you propose, from Light Industrial to Limited
Business, it would significantly devalue the property because the many uses
now permitted would no longer be allowed- Those currently permitted uses
are much better suited to the size and location of the;,.property and the
large building on it than those in the proposed zoning. :The °uses that are
now permitted, which would be lost, would include mach ne and equipment
workshops, publishing and printing plants, light :industrial. usage,-' boat
building and storage, cold storage contractor's businesses or yards,
research laboratories, conference facilities, and boat:. `repair. The very
limited <retaif use and other uses that would be permitted "by Light Business
zone would not compensate for the devaluation of the property. There are
very limited retaH uses which are restricted, and they are not of the type
where substantial property value is attainable. Those uses are antiques,
arts and crafts, garden shops and galleries. Other retail uses are not
permitted. Moreover by permitting that limited type retail: zoning you would
be actually increasing the traffic considerations, which ymuld normally be
associated with the Light Industrial type of uses. Given the current
screening and other site requirements as the Planning board Proposes these
uses if 'they were developed at this point in the Light 'industrial zone could
be constructed to shield them from other propertiest and nobody knows
better than attorneys been battling with the Planning Braid for 25 years on
site plan, and they do their job, I am criticizing them;: I am not saying
they shouldn't,,,,but they are very cautious about things like screening; and
assess, and ingress, so there are protections in the Code that they carry
out that will ihsuilate neighbors from these types of uses- Another objection
is that the location of the. property, there is no relatl[onships to the vista
on Route 48, or Route 48 traffic considerations The location is not
advantageous to Limited Business uses. It is locattW at the Railroad
station with only a few feet between the building and: the railroad tracks,
so those businesses would be subjected to the noise and the vibration
associated with the train traffic coming in, going out, passing throuyh_ A
Limited Business type of use would find that probably much less offensive.
Also the only frontage, which is along Westphalia on the north side of the
railroad tracks does not make for a viable retail location„ because it does
not provide, or a, -professional office location, because, its does not provide
visibility. I would also like to mention that the logist al problem. we have
here' with the proposed zoning district changes tak ng affect before a
decision on what uses would be allowed in those zones' also because the
owner is very difficult predicament of not really knowin` what we should be
objecting to. For those reasons the Sidors do objct to the proposed
rezoning of their property from Light Industrial to Light Business. Thank
you.
r D
+ pg 45 - PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Gail. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board? Yes, ma'am?
EILEEN SANTORA: My name is Eileen Santora. I work at Penny
Lumber. Proud to work there. You are talking about the future, but you
have to remember our past. Penny Lumber has been there a long time, and
that is one of the reasons why (unintelligible)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. I will take this gentleman.
BOB MCCARTHY: My name is Bob McCarthy. I am the acting manager
of Penning Flooring Center, and I would just like you to ask to, please,
stop the change- I don't personally think it is needed. Thank you.
MICHAEL HAND: Good evening. My name is Michael Hand_ I am an
employee of Penny Lumber, and I would just like to let you know that I am
against the zone changes that you want -to do_ I also would like to add that
if you change the zones you make it harder for businesses to open. You
will encourage other businesses in Riverhead to open, and take tax money
out of this town and bring it to another town.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board? (No response-) We will conclude then the 6:00 o'clock listings
for the Mattituck area, and we can not start the next set until seven, so
we will take a short break and we will be back at 7:00. Thank you.
. 7:00 P.M_
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN! This section of the hearings will be Mattituck 2D,
Mattituck 2E, Mattituck 2F, Mattituck 2G. Bill will read the tax number of
the parcel and the owners name.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved are 141-3-39 Robert
Boassi, part of 140-2-32 John Divello and Others, 141-3-18 Jeffrey
Gregor, 141-3-40 Andrew Fohrkolb, 140-1-10 Mark McDonald, 140-1-11
Steven Freethy and Deborah Gibson Freethy, 140-1-12 Henry Pierce and
Jennie Lee, 140-1-4 Raymond Smilovich, 140-1-9 Herbert Swanson,
140-1-6 Harold Reeve and Sons, Inc., 140-1-6 Harold Reeve and Sons
Inc.,140-1-7 Rita Poneiglione, 140-1-8 Helen Reeve, 140-1-1 Stephanie
Cullatt, 140-1-2 Leroy Heyliger and Wife,140-1-3 Mr. and Mrs. William
Stars.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Is there anyone who would like to
address the Town Board in relation to any of these parcels? Sir?
JOHN DIVELLO: John Divello, Mattituck. I just want to read a letter-
I drafted this letter in response to the notification I received in the
mail, one by regular mail and one certified. It involves an acre and one
half that runs along the south side of the Long Island Railroad. The
property is 100 feet wide by 600 feet long. We bought this Light Industrial
property for the future business expansion some twenty-two years ago- In
1983 my parents called and told me they wanted to come back 'to New York
because living in a retirement community in Florida was very depressing-
pg46-PH
Just about every day they would hear of another neighbor that passed
away, but they wanted to remain independent. As we were not using most
of the property at that time we put a modular home on one sixth of the
property. My parents moved in within three day- My father passed away
five years ago, and my mother lives there alone at eighty-eight years old,
may she live another eighty-eight, but when the time comes I plan on
removing the 'house- I understand that the Town Board wants to
downgrade the zoning to Residential Office. My office is at the other end
of the block along the railroad tracks, and believe me you do no conduct
business when the train is going by with the horns 'blasting, as Bill
knows. The property is located on Hill Street, Mattituck, and it is very
appropriately as the property drops off drastically and the Long Island
Railroad becomes a natural berm. You can not see Route 48 and vise
versa. What the Town Board is proposing is the, complete: opposite of what
real estate is supposed to ' do over time. Most real. estate appreciates with
time but here with a stroke of a pen the town will depredate my yproperty.
strongly oppose this change of zoning of my property- ',T+hank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much. Anyone else like. to
address the Town Board?
DOUGLAS TONNEY: My name is Douglas Tonney. I am an attorney
(unintelligible) I represent Jeffrey Gregor. He is the owner of a parcel of
vacant land on the corner of Lipco Road and Route 48. It is tax lot 18,
and block 3. It is 1.87 acres. It is Mattituck 2D change of zone- The
recommended change of zone for my client's parcel is from Light Industrial
to Residential 40. My client opposes this change would clearly reduce the
value of 'his property, and it would eliminate any possibility of developing
it for the purpose of which it was intended when he purchased it in 1998_
By the way, after making sure that the zoning was Light Industrial. We
certainly recognize your legislative prerogative to change the zoning of
this property, but we question why the recommendation is subject to the
rest of that change through three zoning classifications to Light Industrial
to Hamlet Business zone, the Limited Business Zone to Residential Office
Business zone. I may be wrong but review of the entire Land Use Corridor
Study does not find any other parcel other than. the three and four that
are located ..in Mattituck 2D. Most of the recommended changes from the
Light Industrial properties on other parcels along the corridor, which were
either HB, LB, or RO: Nothing other than that in 2D is recommended to
R40. The proposed change immediately to the east of us from Light
Industrial to RO. Immediately opposite us is for Light Industrial to
Business. The proposal for the corridor Route 48 is LB, so we don't
understand the rationale for going all the way from LI to R40. We certainly
recommend and support the concept of trying to eliminate the
commercialization of Route 48. My client is a family owned plumbing well
drilling busfness. Your new proposed legislation for the LB allows for
contractors, that is what we ask you to consider for our piece. R40 seems
to be very impractical for this. We have three road frontages, which gives
us three front yards, a rear yard, no sides. Even if we were to subdivide
this parcel into four acre zoning we would be left with 50 foot setbacks all
the way around, and eliminate fifty percent of our lot, on both lots. We
would ask you to consider going from LI to LB_ Thank you.
pg47-PH
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board?
CHIP PENNY: My name is Chip Penny. I work at Penny Lumber. I am
kind of a new full time resident of the community, and I am not a business
owner, but I plan to be one. I am kind of new to this plan also. 1 only
read about it in the paper, and what I have heard in the last couple of
days, kind of both sides of it. I understand the idea. I love Southold-
That is why I going to live here the rest of my life. I look at this plan,
how it is going to affect my future, and the business has been there for so
long. It has been there 109 years. It has been in my family four
generations. It is unbelievable, because you have people here that have
these businesses, or have their futures. You know, you got the guy that is
here that bought the property,to expand on later in his life, and you.know
you go with this plan, he- can't do that. That's his investment night there.
You know, he is paying taxes on that property, and we have.<a .business
that 'is' pretty much. we are not really going anywhere. right now, z.but we
might have to sometime, because of some reason. So, I am looking at our
picture right here of our Mattituck location. We have our flooring center on
Route 48. Now, Cod forbid something happened to that. We had a fire
there, and you change our zone, that is it. Our business is dead. We have
a lot sitting on. Route 48, and talking about this marina property like a
quarter mile away, our zoning for marina, the amount; of traffic generated
at our flooring: center is nothing- 1 mean compared to what a marina
generates. This is kind of scary, because this is all off the tap of my head
here-
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: No problem. You are doing well.
CHIP PENNY: The planner that went through this community to do this is
not from this community. I mean just looking at it, it seems to me like he
went through Port Jefferson, and went, oh, this looks like nice. Let's try
to do it here. I mean, how can you change Lipco Road and Route 48 to
a...to a, oh, look residential property looks nice. Oh, let's put
residential here. You know you are playing games with these people's
future, with their money, and I mean you look at the other side of our
property on the Main Road, or the Old Main Road, I am not sure of the
name of the road, but we have where the railroad tracks meets the road we
have a potato barn, that we use for storage, and that want to change that,
too. I don't know the exact designation of the property but you know,
what if we have fire in that place? Our business is dead. We don't have
anywhere to put our material, which is all inside a barn. It is not like a
lot of lumber sitting out. It is inside of a self-contained unit, and there
has been no reason given for it, besides the fact that, oh, to preserve
hamlet businesses. We are not inside the hamlet, and we are not competing
with anybody inside the hamlet, so I don't see any reason for the change. I
think a lot more has to be done with this, you know, something logical
because this-.look at the way you are affecting everybody in this
community, and it is scary. It is really scary. I don't care how much has
spent on this, it is not worth it. I'm sorry.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Chip. I have only one correction,
Chip. You are not a new resident. You were born and raised here- Yes,
you were, so you are an old resident. Thank you. Anyone else like to
pg 48 - PH
address the Town Board? (No response.) If not, the next series of
hearing will be 8:30, and that is the last one for the day.
8:30 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will be taking input on Peconic 1A, and 1B.
Bill, will you please read the tax number and the owner of the properties
in this section of Peconic proposed changes?
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved are 74-4-10 Chester
Misloski and Others, part of 74-4-9 Andreas and Stacy Paliovras,
part of 74-4-5 John Krupski and Brothers, part of 74-4-9 Andreas and
Stacy Paliovras, part of 74-4-5 John Krupski and Bros, Inc.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone here that would like to address
the Town Board on any of these property changes?
THOMAS MCCARTHY: I would like to present petitions on my property
to the Town Board for the record.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Is there anyone else that would like
to address the Town Board? (No response.) We will adjourned this meeting
until tomorrow-
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk