HomeMy WebLinkAboutLL-1999 #45
Local Law Fil._ rg W YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE
41 STATE STREET, ALBANY, NY 12231
(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.
l~~tlit)K~iC
Southold---------------------------
Thwn
Ym X
LOCAL LAW NO. 45 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) # 1000-074.00-03.00-020.000
FROM THE
(R-80) RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO THE
(HB) HAMLET BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AS FOLLOWS:
Please see attached.
(If additional space is needed, attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.)
(11
t ,
LOCAL LAW NO. 45 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) # 1000-074.00-03.00-020.000
FROM THE
n (R-80) RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION TO THE A
(HB) HAMLET BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. 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. The open
farmlands are not only highly cherished for their economic value, but for the scenic vistas they provide.
The open space and scenery created by brntland additionally contributes to the quality of life of the
residents white promoting tourism and recieation.~
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 many 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
water supply issues. The preservation of open and recreational space is not only aesthetic, but also
a necessity for the present and future needs of the Town.
3. Preservation of the Rural, Cultural, Commercial and Historical Character of the
Hamlets and Sumundlug Area
The Town of Southold is mawned for its rund, cultural, commercial and historic
character. This unique character is re pizod in all of the documents reviewed. Based on the input of
Town residents, the Final Report and Recommendations states that the two most prevalent and key 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 rife 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
,eater 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,pe reflect the past and present vision of the Town and the
work that stilt 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 rural 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 marine-recreational 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 hamlet center businesses, historic heritage, architecture, a sense of place, of rural and open
character, agriculture, and marine activities;
11) to preserve prime farmland; and encourage the diversification of agriculture,
12) to preserve the historic, cultural, architectural and archaeological resources of the Town,
13) to ensure visual girality of hamlet centers;
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.
C rb)
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
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
SC-rM# /000 - 0 74. 00 - 03 - 00 - Q ZO . 000 (and as more fully described
herein below) from the
((k0) RESI DENT ! & L Sul - ~E~) S I T zoning district designation to the
+(A-IKLE-r M ME SS zoning district designation.
u
e
scTM # 1000-074.00-03.00-020.000
ALL that certain plot piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements
thereon erected, situate lying and being at Peconic, Town of Southold, County of
Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows:
BEGINNING at apoint on the easterly side of Peconic Lane distant 169 feet
southerly from land of LONG ISLAND RAILROAD CO.;
RUNNING THENCE along land formerly of ANNIE PRINCE and now or
formerly of HENRY J. SMITH (1)54 degrees 10'00" East 82.78 feet;
(2) North 56° 12' 50" East 137.26 feet; and (3) South 34° 33' 20" East 50 feet;
THENCE South 55 26'40" West along land now or formerly of JAMES H. RICH
ESTATE 220 feet to the easterly side of Peconic Lane;
THENCE North 34° 33' West along the easterly side of Peconic Lane 50 feet to
the point or place of BEGINNING.
ii
BEING AND INTENDED TO BE the same premises conveyed to the parties of
the first part, as to a one-half undivided interest, and LEON GORDON, as to a one-
half undivided interest, by deed dated September 16, 1985 and recorded in the
Suffolk County Clerk's office on October 7, 1985 in Liber 98, Page 483.
i
:I
ii
~ C~d~
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 mitlan change of zoning district designation for said parcel.
Section 4.
i" THIS LOCAL LAW SHALL TAKE EFFECT IMMEDIATELY UPON FILING WITH THE
SECRETARY OF STATE.
(Complete the certttication in the paragraph that applies to L.,c 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. MS----- of 1999 of the (&d(t2(t~)(Mr%Fown)(MML)o Southoid........................... was duly passed by the
Tow_n____oard_ on _October_ 19 19 99, in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
(Name of Legislative Body)
2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or repassage after disapproval
by the Elective Chief Executive Officer*.)
- - of 19------
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No.
of the (County)(City)(Town)(Vllage) 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 Executive Officer-)
in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
3. (Final adoption by referendum.)
19------
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of
of was duly passed by the
of the of -
on 19----, and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed after
(Name of Legislative Body)
disapproval) by the------------------------------------------------ on------------------- 19----. Such local law was submitted
(Elective. Chief Executive Officer-)
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.)
of 19----
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No- of
of was duly.passed by th,
of the of
on 19----, and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed afte
(xame of Legrrktive - Body)
disapproval) by the----r on------------------ 19 Such local law was subject t
(EletaveChief ExemSive Officer-)
permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
* E ective Chief Executive. Officer means or includes the chief executive officer of a county elected on a county
wide basis or, if there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a city or village, U
the supervisor of a town where such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or oidinaa
(2)
i
5. (City local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law 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 thunty legis five body, City, own or Village Clerk
or officer designated by local legislative y
Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk
(Seal) Date: /l lag ~q9
(Certification to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or
other authorized attorney of locality.)
STATBOFNBWYORK SUFFOLK
COUNTY OF
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law contains the correct text and that all proper proceedingE
have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law annexed hereto.
t
Signature
Mar C Wilson, Esq. , Assistant Town Attorney f
Gred rv F Yakaboski ESa^- Tojyn 4 ttnrnav
tic
~dGl(t~t
=:K of Southold -
Ibwn
MI MW
Date: L 123'9`!
(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
SPECIAL MEETING
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
OCTOBER 6, 1999
5:00 P.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
Councilman William B. Moore
Councilman John M. Romanelli
Councilman Brian G. Murphy
Absent: Justice Louisa P. Evans
Town Clerk Elizabeth A. Neville
Town Attorney Gregory F. Yakaboski
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I would like to reconvene the hearing on the
proposed zone changes on Route 48. This evening will be doing Peconic 2A
and 2B in this first segment. Bill will read the tax map numbers of the
properties and who the owners are.
COUNCILMAN WILLIAM D. MOORE: Peconic 2A, SCTM# 1000-74-3-13
Dorothy Victoria and John Mumster; 73-3-14 Sidney Waxler; 74-3-15 Mr. E
Mrs. Edward Dart; 74-4-15 Mr.& Mrs. Paul McGlynn; 74-4-16 Louise Day;
74-3-16 Patrick 1; Robert Adipietro; 74-3-17 Olive Hairston Hayes; 74-5-1
Mr. E Mrs. Bennett Blackburn; 74-5-5 Mr. Robert Johnson.
SUPERVISOR: Would anyone like to address the Town Board in relation to
any of these parcels? At this time? Yes..
LOUISE BLACKBURN, PECONIC: I am sorry that 1 come here kind of
ignorant of the law and the zones, but I received a letter about wanting to
change into a hamlet business district there. I am trying to understand, is
that the property where the school was proposed for? Or is it actually on
Route 48? 1 don't understand...
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We will have to find you on the map first....
MRS. BLACKBURN: We are right on Peconic Lane. That little "L" shaped
piece across from the park or recreation area...
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: O.K. Let me find you, Peconic 2...
MRS. BLACKBURN: 2 B. It is actually under Bennett Blackburn E wife.
I received a letter and it stated that you wanted to change it to a hamlet
business district and 1 am not sure that I understand what property you
are talking about.
COUNCILMAN BRIAN MUPRHY: Your property.
MRS. BLACKBURN: What about the property that was proposed for the
pool? would that include that area also?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: No, that 's going to be a playground with
baseball diamonds, all for children. It will remain a recreation park area
like Tasker Park? O.K.?
MRS. BLACKBURN: O.K. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would anyone else like to address the Town
Board?
(There was no response.)
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Are you sure?
(There was no response.)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would anyone else like to address the Board in
relation to Peconic 2A or 213? or in general, in relation to the plan? If not,
then we will adjourn until the next hearing at 6:00 P.M.
Time: 5:30 P.M.
6:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: O.K. I am reconvening the hearing on Peconic 2C,
D, and E.
COUNCILMAN MOORE read the SCTM #'s and owners of the property as
follows: 2 C, D, E E: SCTM# 1000-74-3-19.3 Kenneth Dickerson; P/O
74-3-19.2 Kevin Terry; 74-3-20 Alice Platon; 74-3-24.2 Mr. E Mrs. Alvin
Combs.
SUPERVISOR: Thank you. You have heard the parcels we are
discussing. We would appreciate your input? Is there anyone that would
like to address the Town Board?
(There was no response.)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: If not, we will adjourn this section of the hearing
and at 7:00 P.M. we will take up Southold 1, 2A, 26, and 2C.
Time: 6:20 P.M.
7:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I will reconvene this hearing in relation to
proposed zone changes on Route 48. This hearing will cover Southold 1,
2A, 213, E 2C. Bill will read the lot numbers and the land owner.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: SCTM# 1000-69-4-2.2 Mr. E Mrs. Gerald Gralton;
69-4-2.3 Helmut Haas; 69-4-3 Ruth Enterprises, Inc.; 69-2-1 William
Zebroski, Jr.; 69-2-2 Carol Zebroski Savage & Others; 69-2-3 Steve
Doroski; 69-2-4 Bayberry Enterprises; 69-3-1 Steve Doroski; 69-3-2 Steve
Doroski; 69-3-3 Steve Doroski.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would anyone like to address the Town Board on
any of these parcels?
ROBERT JENKINS, CUTCHOGUE (representing Steve Doroski): Good
Evening. in regard to 69-3-1, 69-3-2, and 69-3-3, you recommended zone
changes from Light Industry over to Agricultural Conservation. I would
just like to re-familiarize everyone with the definition and purpose of
agricultural conservation. The purpose of the agricultural conservation
district and the low density residential district is to reasonably control, to
the extent possible, and to prevent the unnecessary loss of those currently
open lands within the Town containing large and contiguous areas upon
agricultural soil which are the basis for a significant portion of the town's
economy and those areas with sensitive environmental features. Those
three parcels that I just called off contain 2 1/2 acres. We have on that 2
1/2 acres, a barn for the packaging and storage of produce, four
residences for labor, a building used for refrigerated storage and an
additional building used for machinery storage, a loading dock and
driveways to and from the buildings, leaving very little agricultural land on
which to grow in an AC district. So, I would certainly request that the
Board consider keeping that light industrial. It's not suitable for farming.
The second thing that I would like to address is the other parcel 69-2-3.
If I could take three minutes from Mr. Steve Doroski's time, I would like to
read this letter to the Board. He couldn't make it personally, he asked me
to present this letter to you. "Dear Supervisor and Town Board Members:
In 1936 1 rented this parcel of land which extended from what was known
as the North Road, at that time, to Soundview Avenue to the north. Then
in 1953 1 purchased this land from my mother and father-in-law, Mr. E
Mrs. Frank Zaveski. My wife Frances, now deceased, and I farmed this
land and started a small roadside farmstand where we sold our farm
produce, plants and roses we grew on our farm. In 1967 Suffolk County
took 3 acres of my property and divided my farm leaving me with a serious
drainage problem, north and south of the highway, making Route 48 eight
feet higher than my property. Since my farm property was decreased in
size and traffic flow was re-routed off the North Road to Route 48, in 1968
1 built what is now knows as Doroski's Carden Center E Nursery, Inc. At
that time my Garden Center was zoned limited business and has operated as
such all these years and i have paid Limited Business taxes on this
property. My Garden Center faces east on Ackerly Pond Lane and has no
entrances or exits onto route 48. 1 have buffered Route 48 and my
property with trees and landscaping so as to obscure any unpleasantries.
Also on the west side of this property we have planted our nursery stock,
which I feel adds to the rural look of Route 48. My family and I try to
keep our Garden Center attractive to the passerby and a pleasant place to
visit. Today the Southold Town Board wants to change my property to a
Residential office. 1 am opposed to this change as I do not see how an
office building looking like a home can be made out of a greenhouse. Will
my taxes decrease with this change, or will I continue to pay the same tax
rate or more? Also at this time, I do not know what the permitted usage
will be with the new proposed zone land usage changes. i trust that the
elected officials of Southold Town will take the initiative to consider leaving
my family's and my Garden Center as well as my other properties as they
are presently with their present usages. Sincerely, Steve J. Doroski,
Doroski's Nursery, Inc. He encloses a photograph of the drainage problem
at County Road (which Mr. Jenkins presented together with the letter to be
made a part of the file.) If nobody objects, I would just like to address
the issue of the hamlet business and keeping business in the hamlets. I
don't care how old you are or how young you are, everyone can remember
hanging out in the village at their favorite soda shop or sneaking in and
smoking a cigarette illegally, or whatever. I as well as everyone else would
like to see a viable commercial center in every hamlet. But rezoning isn't
necessarily the answer. Good business practices will save the downtown
merchants in the hamlet areas, not zoning. Internet shopping, over the
internet, 1 800 shopping, call L.L. Bean, go to B.J's and other wholesale
clubs, regional malls, all that hurts much more than the few business
properties that are on County Road 48. 1 think that the Town Board might
be better spending their time putting together a economic task force. 1
think they did put together one, but I don't know how far it went to help
all the businesses that are in town continue to operate and exist as best
they can. So, as 1 said, 1 don't know that zoning, or no businesses on
the North Road is going to save those businesses that are downtown. They
are having a hard enough time, they have an awful lot of empty stores
now, and there's very few business on the North Road at this time. That's
all I have to say for now. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bob. Anyone else like to address
the Town Board? If not we will adjourn, Oh...
ROBERT JENKINS: I just have a few letters from us that I would like to
turn in.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: They will be put in the file and made a part of
the record.
Petition Pursuant to Section 265 of the New York Town Law signed by Steve
J. Doroski protesting against said change of zone were received for SCTM#
1000-69-2-3 as well as six (6) letters from the following individuals saying
that while they are not voting residents of Southold Town, they do shop at
Doroski's Garden Center and are opposed to the zone changes for that
area: John R. Cramer and Theresa A. Cramer; Guy A. Buonincontro and
Barbara Buonincontro; Frank J. Lash; and Patricia Gergyes
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Is there anyone else present who would like to
speak at this time?
(There was no response.)
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: If, not, we will recess until 8:00 P.M.
Time 7:10 P.M.
8:00 P.M.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: At this time I would like to reconvene the County
Road 48 hearings. We will be doing Southold 5B and Southold 6.
Councilman Bill Moore will read the SCTM #'s and property owners.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: The properties involved are #1000-055-5-2.3 Mr. E
Mrs. Gary Rempe; 1000-55-5-4 Linda Bertaini E Others; 1000-55-5-5 Audrey
Berglund; 1000-P/O 055-2-24.2 Frank Field Corp.; 1000-55-2-23 Madeleine
Schlafer; 1000-055-5-10 George Penny IV E Robert Boger; 1000-055-5-11
Joann Rizzo; 1000-055-5-12.2 Mr. E Mrs. Donald Tuthill; 1000-055-5-9.1
Patricia Miloski.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would anyone like to address the Town Board in
relation to any of these properties? Pat?
PATRICIA MILOWSKI, WINDSOND COUNTY STORE: Good evening
Supervisor Cochran and Members of the Town Board. 1 am not going to
repeat my statement from Tuesday which everyone already has a copy of. I
just want to summarize basically what I said. I respectfully request that
the present "B" zoning be kept as such as it has been for over 30 years. 1
have filed two protest petitions in the Town Clerk's Office regarding Town
Law 265. 1 ask that you please re-read my letters to you from August and
September regarding my property and my last statement from Tuesday. I
have requested that all letters and correspondence regarding the opposition
to the zone change be included in this public hearing and also in the
hearings to follow. I have explained the uniqueness of my parcel due to
the two structures, the setbacks from the road, the lot size and map
configuration, the surrounding "B" zone areas including across the street
and how the current C.O.'s clearly fit into business zoning only. I have
explained how changing my zoning from "B" which it has been for over 30
years will create a non-conforming business on a non-conforming lot and
will result in substantial emotional and financial hardship. I have cited
several examples of why Mr. Cramer's report appears to have been
arbitrary and capricious in his proposal to re-zone my property. I have
submitted a letter from a local realtor regarding the dramatic reduction of
property value should a zone change occur. Again, every town in Suffolk
County is against non-conforming uses and in this case, Mr. Cramer is
taking a conforming area and making it non-conforming. I am a woman sole
proprietor 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. A small business has to be allowed to grow within
its permitted uses in order to attempt to serve your customers.
Economically 1 cannot survive or get my investment back, my retirement,
unless you keep my zoning as business. I once again request that the
Town Board reject the proposal to re-zone my property and to keep it
business zone as it has been zoned for many years. Respectfully
submitted, Pat Miloski.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board.
Mr. Guarriello?
ROBERT GUARRIELLO G E S ELECTRIC: John Bertani and myself, Robert
Guarriello purchased the property at 3460 Youngs Avenue ten years ago to
have a place to operate our family business from. We have improved the
property and use it to store material and equipment necessary for our daily
operations. We have our two generations of family and employees that
depend on G E S Electric for their livelihood. You simply cannot take this
away without compensation. It is something that I cannot believe could
happen in this country, not here in Southold. I ask that you put yourself
in my position and stop and think.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bob. O.K. would anyone else like to
speak?
JOANN SANTORO (RIZZO): Joann Santoro, business and property owner on
Route 48. 1 would like to go on record as being opposed to the zoning
changes that will affect the value of my property. I have owned and
conducted a business on this property zoned "B" for twenty years. Being
a local business person I have supported many organizations and employed
many locals. I am planning retirement within a few years. I am now being
asked to limit what I can sell my property as or what a new owner can use
it for. This greatly reduces potential life and value of my property. I
recently sold a home on Route 48 for $122,000.00 because no one wants to
live on Route 48. We are a relatively small group of business owners on
Route 48 and yet we are being asked to absorb the cost of ensuring open
space for all to enjoy. It comes to mind, that this an unbalanced plan.
Thousands of our taxpayers dollars have been spent on studies and more
studies and yet nothing suggests that all of north fork property owners,
both business and homeowners share the cost of maintaining our rural way
of life. Let's give all of Civil Service Employees advancement tests, and
when they pass and expect promotions, tell them that the rules have
changed. That is what is being proposed as re-zoning, it is not very
different. Why? Let's then, make it against the law to clutter our local
landscaping with hundreds of unsightly political advertisements. Thank you
for your time.
ANN MILOSKI, CALVERTON (PAT MILOSKI'S MOTHER): It is very sad to
have watch these people come up begging to keep their property as it is.
There are only small business owners. Right now, I would like to speak to
the Town Board and Supervisor Cochran, i am speaking on behalf of Pat
Miloski's business property located on Route 48, # 055-5-9.1. Pat Miloski
took on an enormous task to materialize a hope and dream of a unique
country store. When she first leased with an option in 1993, it was with a
condition that she could do retail sales in this business zoned parcel. She
went to the Southold Planning Board and they conferred that the present
zoning was commercial business with a current C.O. for such. She was
told to go to the Building Department and ask an Inspector to come out to
see what she needed to do to obtain a C.O. to retail on the front
building. The Building Inspector came out and informed her of what she
needed to obtain a retail business C.O. She completed the work and the
Building Department Inspector returned and approved it and she received
a C.O. for retail business. The rear building C.O. was already in place
and in use. She continued her enormous task of restoring this beautiful
neglected building and materialized this structure into an upstanding
business within the north shore business hamlet area of Southold. A safe
investment for her family's future. She restored this eyesore with her own
money, no town grants, no tax incentives. Instead of cutting down stately
35 ft. evergreens that blocked visibility, she had them trimmed from the
bottom up, therefore, preserving the trees and giving her the visibility she
needed. Instead of blacktop, which would have been cheaper and easier to
maintain, she searched and found an orange colored dust free flagstone
recycled product that was more in character with the nature of the
building. In 1995 she exercised her option to buy, but first went back to
the Zoning Board to see if everything was in order. They told her the
property was business zoned and retail and current uses with C.O.'s in
place. They also mentioned that she had done a wonderful job with this
property. They further stated that a current Town Board member was part
of the Town's Route 48 Master Plan study that kept the zoning on this
parcel as business. Now you are telling her that after 30 years of business
zoning, you are going to change the zone from business to RO which has
none of the permitted uses that she is doing. I would ask that you reject
the current proposal and keep her zoning as "B" since this is a developed
unique parcel in a business area. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Would anyone else like to address the Town
Board?
JOHN SATKOSKI: I want to go on record that I am opposed to any zoning
changes to my property and all the other properties that are on Route 48.
1 think you rascals better do some looking, deep down.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you , John, what did you call me John, a
rascal, you made me feel young again. A little rascal, Thank you,
John. Anyone else like to address the Town Board? Mr. Penny...
GEORGE L. PENNY, IV: Hi, good evening. Once again, George Penny. I
would just like to ask at this time, have we heard from the Town Planning
Board and the County Planning Commission?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Not yet, George. Not to my knowledge.
MR. PENNY: Not to your knowledge, because I read in last week's paper
that the Planning Board had acted on something over a week ago, it was in
last Thursday's paper...
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Our Planning Board?
MR. PENNY: Yes.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I didn't see it in the paper, we haven't gotten
anything in relation to, it would go through Betty......
MR. PENNY: With regard to my parcel, the one in Southold, George L.
Penny IV and Robert Boger and George L. Penny Incorporated in
Mattituck, two parcels, have there been any other communications which
have normally been part of any public hearing I have participated in. I
would like to know if there is a record of any correspondence regarding my
properties?
TOWN CLERK BETTY NEVILLE: There are approximately 100 proposed
changes and many letters received. My office is still in the process of
sorting them into the individual file folders according to tax map numbers.
COUNCILMAN JOHN ROMANELLI:1 am sure there have. Letters of
protest....I have seen so many letters...
MR: PENNY: That specifically mention my parcels?
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: George, I don't know.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: George, I get stacks like this.. both pro and con
MR. PENNY: I am asking regarding my parcels?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: George, they get sent over to Betty and she will
be making it all a part of the public record and we will have copies, but we
don't necessarily.....
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: There are so many, they are really not sorted
out yet.
SUPERVISOR: We haven't gone through them all yet. We will get that
when we get all of the hearing transcription and everything else. Betty
could check.....
MR. PENNY: I am only asking out of habit because the 8 years that I was
on the Town Board, these were read at the beginning of each hearing and
that's why I am asking, for no other reason. I am not trying to put
anybody on the spot.
COUNCILMAN MOORE: Betty is setting up a separate file for each tax map
parcel and make sure that any letters associated get put into the proper
file.
MR. PENNY: You understand my reason for asking, the eight years that I
was on the Town Board these were read at the beginning of each public
hearing. That's why 1 am asking, for no other reason, I am not trying to
put anybody on the spot.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: What you are saying is when you have a hearing
and you read the public notice, usually attached is any correspondence that
you receive to that point, O.K. There wasn't really any correspondence to
that point, it's All come in after the public notice was printed and as we
have gone through this, during these last few days. We have received
some every day, we've received a form letter in opposition, a form letter in
favor of. Not as many personally written letters, all of that goes over to
Betty's office, it is all becoming a part of the public record, it will all be
reviewed by the Board.
MR. PENNY: Will this be available to the individual property owners, if
there are comments made about their property, so that they can address
them in the final hearing on the 14th of October?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It's public information, yes. If that's what you
are looking for, yes, we could do that. If there is any letter there that
relates to your property or any others, we could certainly see that you can
come in and pick it up.
MR. PENNY: 1 know that for eight years this is what we did. If
somebody wrote something about their property or had comments about
anything that was going on, people could respond to it in a public domain.
I mean if you were to hand me comments that people made that they found
something....
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: George, nothing has changed. I sat on the
Board with you. Nothing has changed.
MR. PENNY: Yeah, but we don't have that.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You will be getting them as soon as she can get
them separated into files for each separate land owner. We certainly... It's
public information, George, you know that...
MR. PENNY: I will have them for the final hearing?
SUPERVISOR: You should have it before the hearing.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: Are you asking that the comments for anyone's
property be read into the record at that public hearing.
MR. PENNY: That is always the way it was. I don't know what has
changed. I mean lot has changed since I have been on the Board, it's
been 6 or 8 years or whatever it is.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: It's no different.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: At the final hearing, I am sure that we will
have them all separated out.
COUNCILWOMAN: Then we can read each one, in your instance, so that all
the comments about your property can be read into the record at time.
MR. PENNY: Right, comments that were made, concerning the public
hearing I will at least have a chance to have seen what comments were
either for or against me, so that I can address them.
COUNCILWOMAN: Your point is that you want them in the public record,
rather than something that you can just go down and look at.
MR. PENNY: I want all of the cards on the table. We always had all of
the cards on the table.
SUPERVISOR: They still are. Let me say this to you. They are already
a part of the public record. They all go to Betty. They are all included
in the public record which will be a part of the transcription. If what you
are asking that you would like to know ahead of time, if there any letters
that relate to you, personally, so that you can answer that before the last
hearing date?, we can work this out.
MR. PENNY: Absolutely.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We can work this out. We can give you these
copies. But, please give Betty the chance to get through it all. They are
still coming in every day.
MR. PENNY: I am just trying to find out when they are going to be
available?
SUPERVISOR: Betty, when do you think?
TOWN CLERK BETTY NEVILLE: My office copied them today and they are
going to sort them tomorrow. Everyone in my whole office is doing all that
they possibly can.
MR. PENNY: So, sometime between now and next Thursday, I can stop in
the Town Clerk's Office?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: 1 would say yes.
MR. PENNY: Thank you very much.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: O.K. anyone else like to talk to the Town Board
to share your thoughts with us?
ROBERT JENKINS, CUTCHOGUE: Good evening. I am referring to the
reason that was given for this study to keep the hamlet businesses viable
and in the hamlet. I wonder if the Town Board is able to, or has
addressed the fact that probably the single most important thing is to keep
the post office in that. I know that Love Lane in Mattituck, the post office
is the economic center of Mattituck. They are considering enlarging or
moving it and Mattituck is very fearful that they will lose the post office
from Love Lane. I know when the post office moved from Main Street in
Southold to the back of Traveler Street. The Main Street hamlet center as
we knew it, ceased to exist. So, I think that the Town Board might
contact the regional postmaster general, or who ever that might be and
assure that all of the post offices stay in the hamlet centers. I think this
will keep the hamlet center more viable than re-zoning those parcels of
business property on County Road 48. That's my first thing. The second
one. Instead of re-zoning those businesses on County Road 48. 1 feel that
the Town should do more to enforce the zoning codes that we already have
in place. God knows, it's tough enough to be in business today. As
business must pay Workmens Compensation Liability Insurance, Medicare,
FICA, State sales tax, etc., etc. we have a lot of businesses that are
operating out of residential zones, out of agricultural zones. Some with
agricultural exemptions running more than one business. Legitimate
businesses are being told that they should be re-zoned to a lesser use and
businesses that shouldn't be operating out of the zone that they are in, are
left alone to take cash off the books and operate any way they feel. I
think that should be addressed. Thirdly, after 3 days of being at the
hearings, I don't see the fervent out cry from the public to re-zone these
businesses. I see that there is some very civic minded persons that were
here speaking in favor of the plan, overall, of not allowing Route 48 to
become like Route 58. 1 think all of us in the Town of Southold 100%, agree
with that. But, 1 don't see the general public supporting the Cramer
study, as we know it. And last, but not least, I thank you for putting up
me for three days. 1 hope you put this in the box and put this down in
the infamous cellar, and let it stay there. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: You don't want to give us a copy of your
remarks?
MR. JENKINS: i don't have them written out.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: O.K. Thanks, Bob. Mr. Meineke?
HOWARD MEINEKE, NFEC: 1 just had some thoughts after being here on
and off for the duration of the hearings. The hearings of the past
3 days have been long and demanding and actually more interesting than I
had expected. Many factors were uncovered during the proceedings and
many views were brought forth. That part is worthwhile. But, we cannot
let the volume of the testimony of the property owners obscure the real
reason we came to the hearings. And that is that the North Fork is at
risk, Route 48 is the subject, because it seems to be one relatively straight
forward place to join the battle. A short list of what confronts us is the
fear of over development and helter skelter development on Route 48, the
threat of residential zoning that exists on all of the farmland, declining
water quality, every increasing non-stop traffic, and many more items. We
come away from these hearings with a few convictions. One, the status
quo, everything is fine as it is and there is no problem is not good
enough. We recognize the critical need to work on these problems on that
list and we should make a positive start on it. Second point, present
ownership of the various properties is one situation, but possible acts of
owners in the future present another more difficult dimension. Your zoning
today and the one on one contact with the owners is much different than
what it will be when a new owner moves in at some future time. The Route
48 Study is important because it is in opportunity to take an important
positive step toward the oft repeated goals from the 30 or so past studies.
After all of those aborted reports mildewing in the basement really do need
a start, an actual beginning and not another cop-out. We attach
extraordinary importance to success on this endeavor because we firmly
believe that the first step is the hardest, and then once we start, we will
surprise ourselves and find out that yes, we can do it. We like you did
not agree with all the Cramer recommendations, but that is not the prime
point. The real point is we have to begin. I think to begin we should
pass some part, the best part of the Route 48 legislation and start. This
is what we expect of the Town Board. This is a very important overall
agenda and this is just a starting point. I think we need the feeling that
we are really in the game and we are doing it. As a starter, we again
suggest the appointment of a panel, and this had been used elsewhere.
Possibly composed of expert in real estate, agriculture, planning, business,
the Town Board, and other folks, if necessary to sit and work with all
affected property owners at this point those along Route 48 subject to
zoning legislation at this time to develop procedures and solutions and to
consult with the Board as required. I think constructive thinking can do
wonders and through this all we do have to achieve fairness and everybody
out here is worried about fairness. I think we can sneak up on fairness if
we work on it and that's a method that I would suggest. I would think
post haste that we should get involved with that. We applaud the Board
for wading into the Route 48 question. It's had it's fits and storms, but 1
think it was a good start. It had to be done and if we now act on what we
are learning, we will some day look back and be proud that we started and
be proud that we did it.
Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address? Yes,
ma'am..
CONSTANCE CASE: My name is Constance Case. Yes, 1 am a member of
the North Fork Environmental Council, but I am also a person who lives in
Southold like Bob was talking about and very much in favor of the Cramer
report and I urge you to adopt the recommendations. It has been very
hard to sit here these three days and listen to the hardships that are
expressed by people who have very valid issues with it. And yet, I am
urging you, I guess to look to the good of Southold in general and to the
future of Southold for us for our children and for generations to come,
because what we have now cannot be replaced. It is very hard to put that
against the stories that I have heard or problems that I heard that have
been addressed by individual people. I guess it is a case, to me, of the
good of the whole area in general, versus individual issues and yet, those
have to be addressed. So, I do ask you to pass the recommendations of
the report. But I also, maybe a possibility, is the one that Howard just
recommended. That maybe there is a some kind of arbitration panel to
address after the report has been passed, to address the needs of
individual people and to look at some of the issues and some of the
problems that need to be addressed. But, please continue to focus on the
good of the township, in general. That's the courage that is needed here
and that's a hard thing. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much. Anyone else like to
address the Town Board?
HENRY SMITH: My name is Henry Smith. I don't have a personal interest
in any of these properties we are talking about here tonight. But, these
people are my neighbors. They are business people. They are hard
working people. And to take away their property rights the way you are
doing, I think is totally wrong. I think you are going about this whole
thing the wrong way. I mean there are a lot more problems in this town
than these little Mom E Pop operations, that we have to take away their
property rights. What would happen is we had some kind of blight in the
ground that the ground was no longer any good for grapes? We couldn't
grow grapes here anymore. Now, the land is useless. We have one grape
farmer that has almost 500 acres. There is no farmland preservation rights
sold on his property. Now, he can develop it and the other wineries can
do the same thing. Now, all of a sudden, what are we going to call the
Town, "Wineville". We could have hundreds of hundreds of thousands of
homes on these properties. To take away these rights of these people. I
don't know, it boggles my mind that this is what you are doing. 1 am just
opposed to it and these people are Southold. I see everybody wants
Southold to be beautiful and everything. This is Southold, they want it
beautiful too. I mean they don't want to see it ruined. They are just
trying to make a living. They are hard working business people. I will
tell you one thing, it is a lot different when you sign the front of the
check then the back of the check all the time. They know what it is to be
in business and have to pay bills and try to make a profit. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Henry. I am going to take someone
who has not yet had the opportunity to speak. Is there anyone else who
would like to speak that has not had the opportunity as yet? Your letter I
received
yesterday has been sent to the Town Clerk's Office to be a part of the
record.
KATHLEEN GRASECK: I am Kathleen Graseck. 1 just want to say that
actually you pretty much have two segments of the Town here. I don't
think that you are hearing from all of the voters of the Town, or all of the
people who live in the Town of Southold. I think they should be given the
opportunity to voice their opinion on this issue. To be very truthful with
you, we are not the problem as far as vistas go. We are a very small
portion of the acreage. I know in the papers they put it down as square
footage. But, you know we are really a very small part of the Town. To
have this study pinpoint us, you know, the property owners, and try to
gauge them is just so completely unfair. So, I really feel that we need
more public input on this whole thing. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the
Town Board that has not spoken yet? Mr. Huntington.
RAY HUNTINGTON, CUTCHOGUE: I just like to stand up to thank the
Town Board for raising this public discussion. I don't really believe that
we are trying to indict anybody or to take rights away from anybody. We
are trying as a community to look within ourselves and find out what is the
right thing to do, for the future, and for the near future as well. So, my
thanks to all for bringing forth this discussion, listening to all of these
hours and continuing with your efforts until the 14th, I guess it is. It's
not an easy job, it's probably one of the toughest ones we have had. But,
the idea that we are at doing it is very good for Southold.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else? Before those get a second chance?
ANN MILOSKI: I would just like to address some of the things that the
North Fork Environmental Council has said. I have always supported the
NFEC and I have also gone out and supported many of the things that they
have done and I am a member of it. But, I think when you ask for
arbitration after you ask to have something passed, is wrong. Arbitration
should have been before. The people should have been asked to participate
in this before. You don't ask for arbitration after you ask for zoning. If
this it the way the NFEC is going to do things, I am the first one that is
going to cancel my membership. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board?
JOANN SANTORA: 1 hadn't planned to do this again. But, I'm a little
confused on one thing. Things like the Cox Lane industrial park? Does
the environmentalists think that is nice? I don't understand it. How come
that was allowed? 1 mean, 1 think that is an eyesore in our quaint little
rural Town. I also think that the two strip malls right down the road from
me, I think they are unsightly. How come that was allowed? The
environmentalists didn't mind that, they thought it looked good. 1 don't
understand what is happening now. Maybe it could be explained better to
me, but these are allowed. But business that have been in the same little
houses for many years are being changed?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Joann, please. I don't want anyone to go home
with a burning feeling or an unanswered opportunity to say what is in their
heart. So, we thank you for standing up and sharing your thoughts with
us. Is there anyone else who would like to address the Town Board?
GEORGE PENNY: This is regarding Penny Lumber in Mattituck. As I
understand, now, we are up to three goals. One is the visual quality of
people that drive through Southold Town and I am sure that includes the
1,500 to 2000 people that go both ways to the ferries in Orient and back,
that don't affect our life in any way except create havoc and hardship and
the need for sometime in the very near future, a traffic light at every
crossroad. But, I understand that is important that we improve things for
these people also. But, visual quality is what we are addressing here.
Traffic, and preserving the hamlets. Well, Penny Lumber can't be seen
from Route 48. My small little carpet store can, and we generate maybe 10
cars in and out of there every day. As far as preserving the hamlets go,
Penny Lumber cannot operate in a hamlet atmosphere. We are a light
industrial business that cannot move into a hamlet. So, there is no
competition between me and anybody from the hamlet centers regarding a
lumberyard. So, let's address the carpet center. I am probably the one
carpet center anywhere that does not have a warehouse directly behind it.
And I mean directly because to run a carpet center requires warehouse
space. I don't believe that if Gerry Gralton from Southold Floor Covering,
or myself, or someone like Southold Quarry who requires warehouse space
were forced that there is anywhere that could occupy us. The warehouse
space that we require is much too much. I mean when you rent a store in
Town, you get 1,000-1,500 square feet where you can put a couple of
offices in and a restroom, that's about all you are going to get in a hamlet
center. So, the nature of the business is what designates where we are
and why we are there. To expect that we are going to move out of these,
or somebody else Is going to take out place and we are going to complete
with somebody In the hamlet center, is impossible. Because they can't get
that kind of space, there Is not that kind of room in the hamlets for the
nature of our business. We have trucks which we have to load and
unload. The carpet business particularly have 15 ft. rolls which
have to be unloaded with a forklift. Those rolls have to be stored. There
is padding that has to be stored that has to be manhandled. Luckily for
me, I don't have the warehouse directly behind Penny Center only because
of the Lumberyard which is behind it. Some 200 or 300 feet behind it, out
of sight, where the trucks come in off of Sound Avenue, not off of County
Route 48 and are unloaded by the men with my heavy equipment. If I was
to take and sell Penny Flooring Center to someone else, their immediate
needs would be to put up a warehouse directly behind that part of the
property. But it's not going that way. There is no need for it to go that
way. I mean, if it's not broke, let's not try to fix it.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Anyone else like to address the Town Board? If
not, we will.. Yes, O.K., come on Bob.
ROBERT JENKINS, CUTCHOGUE: Just a few quick remarks. Regarding
the overall corridor of Route 48. 1 believe that every citizen of the
organizations, every business person should realize that 92 or 93% of the
Route 48 Corridor is agriculture or agriculture conservation or low density
housing. It is not business, light business, industrial, or residential
office. A very small part, minuscule part of the County Route 48 Corridor
are those 4 different zones. Therefore, everyone should be very very
happy to know that over 90% of the Town of the Route 48 Corridor has the
potential of being preserved through the program the Town, County, and
the State has in place and it is a voluntary one. So, I think that Town
Board should keep in mind that comments made earlier that other people
made earlier about the hamlet business being viable to good business
practices, and the post offices I mentioned earlier. Thank you.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: The total acreage studied under the plan is 272
acres.
272.74 to be exact.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Mr. Huntington?
MR. HUNTINGTON: 25% of the parcels along the North Road proper in the
section that we are talking about are in the study and up for
recommendation. 75% are not, so if we are talking about businesses might
be established, I think that's an interesting fact.
COUNCILWOMAN HUSSIE: You know, while we are all talking about
numbers, I think I have to do something about numbers, Bob. Of those
272, 13 are being suggested to go to AC which is our most benign and
can't do anything but farm on it.
ROBERT JENKINS: Very quickly, of all the parcels that was just
mentioned, we are talking parcels, we are not talking acreage. I have four
parcels, one is a half acre, one, is an acre, and the third is two and a half
acres. So, we can't mention parcels, we have to go overall corridor
acreage, the vista, the overall effect. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you, Bob. Would anyone else like to
address the Town Board?
TYLER CORNELL: Representing the Cornelis and Ruth Enterprises, and
actually for this one, kind. of everybody. I would like to say that 1
appreciate the time that the Board has given. Three days straight. I
have been here as much as possible and you guys really have been
attentive and listened to everything that most everybody said. It seems
like most of us are calming down a lot. At least getting it off our chests
and being able to talk to you directly. My one concern, or in essence, a
question for you, out of ignorance to politics and the way the Town works,
is having grown up with most of the people that are here, or gone through
here. I have seen them on the good sides, I have seen them when they
are really upset. How do you budget the money for the lawsuits that may
come out of this?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: How do we budget it? We put money every year
in the budget, actually the Town Attorney puts money in his budget, for
legal expenses, it would probably be there.
MR. CORNELL: Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: I would also like to thank everyone that has
attended these hearings. They have been conducted in a very mature and
giving fashion. No one really became very angry, so it made our job a
little easier to be able to have your input, so that as we go through the
rest of the process, we know your feelings from all directions. So, on
behalf of the Board, I also thank you.Anyone else like to address the
Board, if not we will recess, we will.... Yes, Sir....
EDWARD KOSTER: My name is Ed Koster. I have a machine shop. I have
been a machinist all my life, and now you want to make a farmer out of
me. I'm still puzzled, Bill, I'm still puzzled. Can County Route 48 can be
saved without compromising the value of the established businesses. I
think we should all compromise some how. I think everybody would be
happy. We all want to save Southold and Route 48. 1 think it's pretty nice
now. It's not perfect, it's not 100%. If it were it would be like driving
through Kansas, everybody would go to sleep. I mean have a little blemish
here and a little blemish there. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Thank you very much. It's a good way to end
this. Would anyone else like to speak to the Town Board? If, not, we will
recess. As you know, the hearing continues until the 14th, if you have
anything written. George, Betty will try to get through those files
tomorrow, so they will be available to you. All of this information is public
information. Thank you very much for joining us. Henry would you like
to speak?
HENRY SMITH: I just have one question?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: We are recessed, but all right go ahead.
HENRY SMITH: Why were some of the business picked out and some of
them were not. Like the strip mall, why weren't they included in this
also? Did they miss the dart, when it was thrown or what?
SUPERVISOR COCHRAN: Probably Henry. I don't know, Henry.
COUNCILMAN ROMANELLI: On the final hearing, Cramer will be here and
you can ask him that question directly.
SUPERVISOR: No, we will be meeting with Mr. Cramer as soon as possible,
as a Board, to discuss the findings and everything else, so that date will
be set and the public cannot take part, but you are certainly invited to
come listen to the Town Board do their work.
This hearing was recessed at 8:45 P.M., to be continued at 9:00 A.M. on
October 14, 1999.
0
Elizabeth Nevill
Southold Town Clerk