Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
6889
Office Location: .°••� *ig Sou4, Mailing Address: Town Annex/First Floor,Capital One Bank ; 53095 Main Road 54375 Main Road(at Youngs Avenue) P.O.Box 1179 Southold,NY 11971 �lyy����� Southold,NY 11971-0959 �" 0" http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax(631)765-9064 COVER SHEET WITH ZBA FILE STATUS OF FILE ZBA# 6001 Name : L/4-7/1-111-4/ 1-Li Tax Map #: f ijco— 55 I.— Location : 660 Otz Aog_774- SZlc.c +O c) rxf Refund issued : CANNOT activate or reactivate file (Applicant has withdrawn application). [_.i] NO REFUND DUE, based on time spent for Town to process application and lfeafings. [ J h] Obsolete & expired; CANNOT reactivate this file: NEW APPLICATION NECESSARY: Extensive time has passed; Zoning Code changes are now in effect and this application expired. NOTE: Applicant may apply for a new application with Building Inspector for a new Notice of Disapproval and submit NEW application with all documents and current maps to ZBA, or modify plan to conform to the current code. This Town file based on applicant's previous year requests has expired. [ ] No forms to be scanned; FILE # VOID: APPLICATION RETURNED. (All forms were returned to applicant early in process, as requested by applicant.) 1k 1 • , 'A-,7A erm) A SciA) 1 zu.b 1-)e),-v--4 C (,,%lte)4i /14 3 ,u))) fhito"" PH- 1 (15Kis bo J svr(0-\,,z.0 Allison Latham 1755 Old North Road Southold,New York 11971 (631)765-0066 9 -NdY November 4, 2015 REcovEd Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals 20tj'VG BogRO p 54375,Main Road PAPp P.O. Box 1179 Southold,New York 11971 Re: Application of Allison Latham, "Application" ZBA File No. 6889 SCTM# 1000-55-1-7 & 8.3 Ladies and Gentlemen: I write in connection with my Application and the Building Department's amended Notice of Disapproval dated October 27, 2015. 'It is my understanding that the two lots involved in Southold Farm& Cellar's application under ZBA File No. 6861,have now been properly merged and deeds have been duly recorded with the Suffolk County Clerk. As a result of the merger and the fact that the amended Notice of Disapproval dated October 27, 2015 correctly includes the requirements of the Bulk Schedule,,it would appear that my Application is now moot. Due to the relationship between my Application and that of Southold Farm& Cellar's application under ZBA File No. 6861, I believe that my Application with attachments under ZBA File No. 6889 should be made a part of ZBA File No. 6861 as part of the record and request that it be so included. I, therefore, am withdrawing my Application under ZBA File No. 6889 on the condition that the contents thereof be made a part of the file and record of Southold Farm & Cellar's ZBA File No. 6861. Kindly forward a refund of my Application fee in the amount of $300.00. Thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, S'illdbROA1--/ Allison Latham Cc: S. Kiely, Esq. 0 ,4 RECEIVED SEP 18 2015 APPLICATION TO THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS REVERSAL/INTERPRETATION ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Regarding House No. 860 Street Old North Road Hamlet Southold SCTM 1000 Section 55 Block 1 Lot(s) 7 & 8.3 Lot Size 1 &22.65 Zone A-C I (WE) APPEAL THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED 9/10/15 WHICH AMENDED THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION DATED JUNE 19, 2015 WHICH AMENDED THE WRITTEN DETERMINATION DATED APRIL 9, 2015 Applicant: Allison Latham Mailing Address: 1755 Old North Road, Southold,New York 11971 Telephone: 631-872-5051 Fax: Email: alatham74@optonline.net Please mail all correspondence to the Applicant listed above. WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR REVIEWED AN APPLICATION DATED MARCH 26, 2015 AND DENIED SAME FOR: ( X ) Building Permit for construction of a winery and conversion of an existing building into a tasting room ( ) Certificate of Occupancy ( ) Pre-Certificate of Occupancy ( X ) Change of Use for a second use as a winery ( ) Permit for As-Built Construction ( ) Other: Provision of the Zoning Ordinance which is the subject of the Appeal. (Indicate Article, Section,Subsection of Zoning Ordinance by numbers. Do not quote the code.) Article: III Section: 280 Subsection: 14 Type of Appeal. An Appeal is made for: ( ) A Variance to the Zoning Code or Zoning Map ( ) A Variance due to lack of access required by New York Town Law—Section 280-A. ( X ) Interpretation of the Town Code,Article III Section 280-14 ( X ) Reversal to require notice of disapproval based upon Article III Section 280-14 A prior appeal ( X ) has ( ) has not been made at any time with respect to this property, UNDER Appeal No(s). 6861 Year(s). 2015 . Name of Owner: Carey Meador& Regan Meador (claimed former) and/or Meador Land Company LLC and Regan Meador(claimed new) ZBA File# 6861 D [Li r.; 11, I! \'1 a SEP 18 2015 3LDG DEF[ This appeal of the (second) Amended Notice of Disapproval dated September 10, 2015, hereinafter"Amended Notice", is made pursuant to New York State Town Law §267-a(4). I reside at 1755 Old North Road, approximately 900 feet from Southold Farm& Cellar's property. I have been and continue to oppose Southold Farm& Cellar's variance application#6861. I am aggrieved by the errors contained in the Amended Notice. I make this appeal on four grounds: (a) the Building Inspector erroneously determined that SCTM#1000-55-1-7, hereinafter"Lot 7", and SCTM#1000-55-1-8.3, hereinafter"Lot 8.3", had been merged, (b) the Building Inspector erroneously determined that, due to the purported merger of Lot 7 and Lot 8.3, Southold Farm& Cellar, hereinafter"SF&C", complies with §280-13(A)(4)(b), (c) the Building Inspector erroneously determined that, due to the purported merger of Lot 7 and Lot 8.3, the Bulk Schedule requirements of§280-14 requiring 80,000 square feet per use do not apply, and (d)the Building Inspector erroneously determined that, in any event the Bulk Schedule requirements of 80,000 square feet for a non-residential use do not apply. As a result of these errors the Amended Notice failed to include non-compliance with the Bulk Schedule 80,000 square feet requirement for each use, 80,000 square feet for a non-residential use, and §280-13(A)(4)(b). These errors are discussed in detail below. A. LOT 7 AND LOT 8.3 HAVE NOT BEEN MERGED Prior to the issuance of the Amended Notice, ownership of Lot 7 was in Carey Meador and ownership of Lot 8.3 was in Carey Meador and Regan Meador. The Amended Notice reflects that these two lots have been merged. This is in error. Lot 7 and Lot 8.3 have not been merged for two reasons. First, the instrument purporting to effect the merger—a deed dated September 9, 2015 from Carey Meador to Meador Land Company LLC has not been demonstrated to be effective. Specifically, there is no evidence that the deed prykfEfeggy SF&C 29 SEP 18 2015 1 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS has been recorded with the Suffolk County Clerk's office and no evidence that such deed is otherwise effective. Second, assuming a valid deed, the deed is ineffective to create a merger. Pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-10(A), only adjacent lots held in"common ownership"may be merged. Pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-10(B), "common ownership shall mean that the parcel is held by the same person in the same percentage of ownership as an adjoining parcel". The deed proffered by SF& C dated September 9, 2015 transfers Carey Meador's interest in Lot 7 to Meador Land Company LLC and her 50% interest in Lot 8.3 to Meador Land Company LLC. The effect of the deed, assuming it was recorded or is otherwise effective, is that Meador Land Company LLC owns 100% of Lot 7 and 50% of Lot 8.3 together with Regan Meador as to 50%. As the percentage of Meador Land Company's ownership in the two lots is not the same, the two lots have not merged. Thus, the Building Inspector erred in issuing the Amended Notice which reflected a merger of Lot 7 and Lot 8.3. B. NON-COMPLIANCE WITH §280-13(A)(4)(b) It appears that the owner of the winery license and business is SF&C. Assuming the purported deed is effective, Lot 7 is owned solely by Meador Land Company LLC and Lot 8.3 is owned by Meador Land Company LLC (50%) and Regan Meador(50%). Section 280- 13(A)(4)(b)provides as follows: "The winery shall be on a parcel on which at least 10 acres are devoted to vineyard or other agricultural purposes, and which is owned by the winery owner." (emphasis added) As SF&C does not own any of the real property, SF&C does not comply with §280- 13(A)(4)(b) and the Building Inspector erroneously omitted this requirement as a reason for RECEIVED disapproval from the Amended Notice. j IJV S31 SEP g8 2015 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 2 C. BULK SCHEDULE AREA REQUIREMENTS APPLY AND ACREAGE WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS MAY NOT BE UTILIZED TO SATISFY SAME Assuming Lot 7 and Lot 8.3 have been merged(although they have not), the Building Inspector erroneously excluded the requirements of§280-14 from the Amended Notice. I submit that, regardless of such purported merger, SF&C must still comply with Bulk Schedule requirements as to the multiple uses proposed on non-conforming Lot 7 and, in any event, with respect to any single use. In addition, I submit that the acreage without development rights may not be utilized by SF&C to satisfy the area requirements of the Bulk Schedule. 1. THE 80,000 SQUARE FEET PER USE RULE APPLIES The 80,000 square feet per use rule applies to SF&C's application and the Building Inspector should have issued a disapproval for insufficient area for 2 reasons. First, the Bulk Schedule, denoted as " 280 Attachment 1" and"280 Attachment 3"provides that in an A-C district 80,000 square feet is required for a use and the Southold Building Department, the Zoning Board of Appeals, and the Planning Board have uniformly applied the Bulk Schedule in this manner. See attached letters from Planning Board dated May 6, 2015 and September 1, 2015, relevant portions highlighted. Lot 7 is non-conforming and consists of only 45,512 square feet, approximately one-half of the required 80,000 square feet. As there is currently one use on non-conforming Lot 7, a one family residence, no other uses are permitted on Lot 7 without a variance. Indeed, the existing use cannot even be enlarged or altered pursuant to Article XXIII of the Southold Town Code. SF&C's proposed use of a winery with accessory tasting room constitutes a second use on non-conform:ng Lot 7, thus requiring an additional 120,000 square feet for this use so that a conforming total of 160,000 square feet would exist for the two uses. Second, this reading of the Bulk Schedule is entirely consistent with its provisions as to multiple x0.0RECEIVED SEP 18 2015 3 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS occupancy. Since a two-family dwelling in the A-C district requires 160,000 square feet, certainly a one family dwelling and a winery with accessory tasting room must require 160,000 square feet as well. 2. 80,000 SQUARE FEET ARE REQUIRED IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCE Even if a residence and an agricultural use are deemed to be allowed as overlapping uses on an 80,000 square foot parcel, this application cannot be sustained under this argument for two reasons. First, a winery is a commercial use, going far beyond Southold Town's historical agricultural uses such as raising of crops and barns accessory thereto. It constitutes a second, non-residential use and requires 80,000 square feet under the Bulk Schedule. Second, this application expands the uses on a non-conforming lot to two uses, and there is only 45,000 square feet available for such uses. The Bulk Schedule requires, at a minimum, 80,000 square feet for a residence and 80,000 square feet for a non-residential use (see 280 Attachment 1). 3. ACREAGE WITHOUT DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS CANNOT BE UTILIZED TO SATISFY THE 80,000 SQUARE FEET PER USE RULE Acreage without development rights cannot be utilized to satisfy the 80,000 square feet per use rule for two reasons: (a)the Planning Board does not permit such acreage to be utilized to satisfy the requirement when development rights are being sold to the Town, and(b)to allow such acreage to be utilized to satisfy the requirement would set a dangerous precedent and work to completely undo the land preservation program and zoning and planning throughout the Town. It is my understanding that when one proposes to sell the development rights of a parcel, they are advised that the Town strictly applies the Bulk Schedule requirements of 80,000 square feet per any proposed future use. This understanding has been confirmed by the Southold RECEIVED 19'82°\ SEP 182015 4 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS • Planning Board in a writing to the Zoning Board of Appeals dated September 1, 2015. This clearly means that one cannot utilize the acreage of its development rights sold land to satisfy the Bulk Schedule requirements. If one is selling development rights to the Town, he would then have to leave 4 acres out of such sale if he intended to use the development rights retained property for a house and winery in the future. This is the only sensible approach since to hold otherwise would result in extremely dense and cramped development on small parcels and an inability to formulate an acceptable site plan. That is exactly what is being proposed here. Allowing acreage without development rights to be utilized to satisfy the Bulk Schedule requirements of 80,000 square feet per use would set a dangerous precedent and completely undo zoning and planning throughout the Town. This would mean that anyone could purchase a parcel on which the development rights have been sold, purchase an adjoining parcel with a one family dwelling on which the development rights are intact, and propose additional uses on that developable parcel regardless of its size and non-conformance with the Bulk Schedules. The results would be catastrophic as far as zoning and planning. There could be at least 2 other wineries like the one proposed by SF&C in my neighborhood alone. A copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map depicting my neighborhood displaying such potential is attached. D. HISTORY OF THE LOTS The history of Lot 7 and Lot 8.3 is critical to the understanding of what SF&C is improperly attempting to accomplish, as it sets a new dangerous precedent for the Town. The development rights of Lot 8.3 (the 22.65 acre parcel) were sold to the Town in addition to those on other adjoining parcels in 1992—23 years ago—by the Dickerson family. Lot 7 was never a part of the Dickerson farm parcel. Lot 7 has never been utilized for agriculture, and was never used in conjunction with agricultural production in any way. It is my understandin that, at the RECD 2c1\ SEP 18 2015 5 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS time of the development rights sale,the Dickersons carved a 1.8 acre parcel of land out of the sale so that the reserved parcel could still be developed. This parcel is SCTM#1000-55-1-8.1, and is the residential parcel now owned by Mr. Burns. E. SF&C'S PURCHASE OF LOT 7 AND LOT 8.3 SF&C purchased Lot 7 and Lot 8.3 in 2012 with the benefit of local counsel knowledgeable in zoning matters. While it is purely conjecture on my part, I suspect that, either SF&C did not advise its counsel of its aspirations, or it did, was advised as to the difficulties in connection therewith and, nonetheless, continued on its course despite such advice. SF&C purchased Lot 7 and Lot 8.3 as two separate lots 20 years after the sale of development rights on Lot 8.3. While SF&C certainly is permitted to merge these two lots, it cannot now expect to be permitted to retroactively apply the acreage from Lot 8.3 to Lot 7 for the purposes of satisfying the Bulk Schedule requirements in connection with its application for a second use on the non-conforming one acre parcel. SF&C either knew, or is charged with having known, the restrictions pertaining to the two lots. F. CONCLUSION Regardless of merger, a) the non-conforming acreage on which the residence and the winery are proposed is insufficient to sustain two separate uses, and b)the acreage on which the development rights were sold cannot be utilized in connection with the Bulk Schedule requirements. As such,the Building Inspector erroneously issued its Amended Notice dated September 10, 2015, and such Amended Notice should be reversed and amended to provide for the need for a variance from Code §280-14, Bulk Schedule of 80,000 square feet per use or, at a minimum, 80,000 square feet for the winery use. The variance proceeding#6861 should be held RECEIVED SEP 18 2015 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS 6 in abeyance until this appeal is determined so that all issues as to the scope of the variances requested are properly addressed. 4/1/11S-tlk U1440/Th., Allison Latham, Applicant SwoEi to before me this /7 day of September, 2015. [+ _ L I ' �'�-- N:rry Public DONNA McGAHAN Notary Public, State of New York No. 01MC4851459 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires Aug. 18, 2018 9 VU fEI'VED SEP 1 8 2015 M.NINO BOARD OF APPEALS 7 APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees.The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. jai*an' 4fIi.so YOUR NAME: 0 / IVL , (Last first name,uliddle initial,unless you are applying in the name of someone else or other entity,such as a company.If so,indicate the other person's or company's name.) TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply) Tax grievance Building Permit Variance Trustee Permit Change of Zone Coastal Erosion Approval of Plat Mooring Other(activity) N p Wbr .A /TeYprt,i-ecliOn Planning Do you personally(or through your company,spouse,sibling,parent,or child)have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold?"Relationship"includes by blood,marriage,or business interest."Business interest"means a business,including a partnership,in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of(or employment by)a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5%of the shares. YES V NO If you answered"YES",complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. c5' (y � Name of person employed by the Town of Southold ►+ Q.7t I� a,rn Title or position of that person Po I i L e cf r Qrrf- Describe the relationship between yourself(the applicant/agent/representative)and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A)through D)and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse,sibling,parent,or child is(check all that apply): A)the owner of greater that 5%of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant(when the applicant is a corporation) B)the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity(when the applicant is not a corporation) C)an officer,director,partner,or employee of the applicant;or D)the actual applicant DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP his bait\k ?')JSubmitted this I—7-11:- day ofge.141 ,20 I 5" V Signature _ RECEIVED Print Name AI I I SUV . LCI'hair SEP 18 2015 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICANT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees.The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. / �/j YOUR NAME: t-A411ar) /$On , li I . (Last name,first name,mid le initial,unless you are applying in the name of someone else or other entity,such as a company.If so,indicate the other person's or company's name.) TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply) Tax grievance Building Permit Variance Trustee Permit Change of Zone Coastal Erosion Approval of Plat Mooring Other(activity)Plat, Planning Do you personally(or through your company,spouse,sibling,parent,or child)have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold? "Relationship"includes by blood,marriage,or business interest."Business interest" means a business,including a partnership,in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of(or employment by)a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5%of the shares. YES V NO If you answered"YES",complete the balance of this form and date and sign where indicated. n Name of person employed by the Town of Southold Q av l avre, v�. Title or position of that person " n Kfak/ I 11+ Describe the relationship between yourself(the applicant/agent/representative)and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A)through D)and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse,sibling,parent,or child is(check all that apply): A)the owner of greater that 5%of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant(when the applicant is a corporation) B)the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity(when the applicant is not a corporation) C)an officer,director,partner,or employee of the applicant;or D)the actual applicant DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP Submitted this /7 day of et24. ,20 ID RECEIVED Signature filitAWALIAL&'tiajr SEP 1 S 2015 Print Name ill isOn M . I ha.r11 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS APPLICANT/MANOR TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FORM The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on the part of town officers and employees.The purpose of this form is to provide information which can alert the town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. n YOUR NAME : ) Hij'vj A"I I I c 6n M . (Last name,first name,mitdle initial,unless ou are applying in the name of someone else or other entity,such as a company.If so,indicate the other person's or company's name.) TYPE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply) Tax grievance Building Permit Variance Trustee Permit Change of Zone Coastal Erosion Approval of Plat Mooring Other(activity) i ei/eVS /Z ev lyd ja, Planning Do you personally(or through your company,spouse,sibling,parent,or child)have a relationship with any officer or employee of the Town of Southold?"Relationship"includes by blood,marriage,or business interest."Business interest"means a business,including a partnership,in which the town officer or employee has even a partial ownership of(or employment by)a corporation in which the town officer or employee owns more than 5%of the shares. / YES 1/ NO If you answered"YES",complete the balance of this for and date and sign where indicated. Name of person employed by the Town of Southold QUI a ).' or os Et Title or position of that person �` VI(ad(t , Describe the relationship between yourself(the applicant/agent/representative)and the town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A)through D)and/or describe in the space provided. The town officer or employee or his or her spouse,sibling,parent,or child is(check all that apply): A)the owner of greater that 5%of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant(when the applicant is a corporation) B)the legal or beneficial owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity(when the applicant is not a corporation) C)an officer,director,partner,or employee of the applicant;or D)the actual applicant DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP (j,►i c-Ie. RECWEn Submitted this / day of Seek_ ,20 /6- AY2 EP 18 2M5 Signature .ftLL{ k-- M C i(/64-- ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Print Name PdIt&ô,i al. W/1 airi I?) art Ct U nL% J2°' RECEIVED FORM NO. 3 RECEIVED TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEP 10 2015 BUILDING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD, N.Y. ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: April 9,2015 AMENDED:June 19,2015 AMENDED: September 10,2015 TO: Southold Farm&Cellar 860 Old North Road Southold,NY 11971 Please take notice that your request dated March 31, 2015 For permit for the conversion of a an existing building to include a tasting room and the construction of a new winery building at Location of property: 860 Old North Road, Southold,NY County Tax Map No. 1000—Section 55 Block 1 Lot 7&8.3 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: Pursuant to Article III, Section 280-13A,4, (c)The winery structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from a major road;and (d)The winery shall obtain site plan approval. The proposed winery building is located 60 feet from Old North Road. This Notice of disapproval was amended on June 19, 2015 to address t - issue of two se, acreage for inert', and rear yard setbacks. It was further-amended to eliminate the needfor certa' ,riances after the ..pli ant le:ally combined two parcels. Authorized Sign. - Cc: File,ZBA,planning RECEIVED SEP 18 2015 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Pp1 ) ii,'' MAILING ADDRESS: l p 1 INC,P BOARD MEMBERS I��ot�QF SO(J, / P.O. Box 1179 1/ ' `.- Southold, NY 11971 DONALD J.WILCENSKI �0S=Yf' o� \ to / Chair I� ,; f titer -p pr `'`1 i. °' OFFICE LOCATION: V ../t< WILLIAM J.CREMERS % 't•-:Am� !, ''-`,4 % Town.Hall Annex ' � �`;-�r� ;fit,�" �'1 ` PIERCE RAFFERTY G ;t,, f. ` �p �� 54375 State Route 25 JAMES H.RICH III ~ fir,- ,= LAV''''�.�� or (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) 4 MARTIN H.SIDOR _4-COUNTY��.I" Southold,NY — .�i� Telephone: 631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny.gov 0 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 6 Ro/ MEMORANDUM F.- RECEIVED MAY 01, 0,5 To: Leslie Weisman, ZBA Chairperson Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals ®ARD OF APPEALS From: Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairman `IA Members of the Planning Board 9c?9 Date: Ma Y 6 2015 RECEIVED Re: Request for Comments for Southold Farm & Cellar SEP 2015 SCTM#1000-55-1-7 ZBA#6861 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS The Planning Board has reviewed the request for comments on this application referenced above, and has also made a preliminary review of the Site Plan Application for this winery and accessory wine tasting (aka "tasting room"). The subject parcel appears to have been created in 1962, and is a separate parcel from the adjacent vineyard (see attached Assessors' property cards). It is one acre in size. The Planning Board is very concerned that a winery is being proposed on this small parcel. There is already a single family dwelling on this parcel and a winery would result in a 2nd principal use on an already non-conforming lot, according to the Bulk Schedule in the Town Code. Adding a winery to this one-acre parcel would seem to require a substantial reg Variance (160,000 sq. ft. of lot area required where only 45,000 sq ft. exists — a 71% lot area difference). As you are aware, Town Code §280-13 A (4) states that a winery "shall be on a parcel on which at least 10 acres are devoted to vineyard or other agriculture purposes, and which is owned by the winery owner. At one acre, this parcel does not appear to meet this Code section. Further, the Code section above also states that the winery must be set back from the road at least 100 feet. This setback for a winery was enacted to help mitigate impacts of wineries and their accessory retail activities (wine tasting, special events) to their -- - --- neighbors-and-to-the public streets:-This application proposes to locate the building-only -- 60' from the road (40% difference). • • hold Farm & Cellar, Inc. — May 6, 2C'— The garage or barn on the property, only four feet from the property line, seems to have . an open Building Permit for a farm stand (BP#38951, 6/10/14), however, there.is no farm on this one-acre parcel. Whether a farm stand could even be allowed by Town Code on this parcel must be investigated further. Also, the Farm Stand Code (In Chapter 72), requires that 60% of the offerings ar ae ctual produce from the farm (fruit and vegetables) (only 40% can be "processed" —wine is an example of a processed item). Another issue with this building is that it is now being proposed to be converted to an accessory wine tasting building. Would the change of use from a barn/garage to a retail accessory wine tasting building require a variance to the setback distance from the property line? Finally, from a long-range planning perspective, allowing retail wineries on parcels with no room for more than a handful of parking spaces will lead to serious traffic safety problems over time. This has already proven to be true in numerous locations in Southold. This location is on a narrow local street, which is not designed to handle the usual winery traffic that includes stretch limousines and buses. There is no shoulder available for parking on the street. A retail winery at this location would be incompatible with the neighborhood - there are houses on three sides of this parcel in very close proximity. The Planning Board is concerned that the only Variance noted in the Zoning Board of Appeal's request for comments is for the 100 foot setback. The other zoning issues identified above need to be addressed and resolved prior to the Planning Board processing this Site Plan Application further, or providing comments to the ZBA on their application for relief. In summary, those other zoning issues are as follows: 1. Bulk schedule for principal uses — 2 proposed principal uses on a 1 acre lot in the AC Zone. 2. Requirement in 280-13 for a winery to be on a parcel with 10 acres of agriculture or vineyard. 3. Farm stand/accessory wine tasting building use, compliance and setback. To make the process more efficient for the applicant, we recommend a meeting be arranged between the Planning, Building, and Zoning Board of Appeals departments to discuss how best to move forward on this proposal. Please contact the Planning Department with any questions or to arrange a meeting at your earliest convenience. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on this application. A5r. Y.? RECEIVED SEP 18 2015 2 - - ------ - zoNINO BOARD OF-APP - Y _ J� CANNING BOARD MEMBERS r�!� MAILING ADDRESS: �; tJ0 8.00 `u P.O.Box 1179 --3 J0\\,9 , .DONALD J.WILCENSKI ���O Ax- -fa- • Southold,NY 11971 V� \ Chair . ts4,S / .ms`s', j 4..,t. %�` ) �' WILLIAM J.CREMERS • r 7- ` k'' „I- ,�' OFFICE LOCATION: c' ' Town Hall Annex �� PIERCE RAFFERTY , v ;�� Q c, �\, �`- JAMES H.RICH III `���� `"�;•-�. � 0 S!�' 54375 State Route 26 ( tj MARTIN H.SIDOR ��,t, �� ,{i (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) V -- CORri l\\`'i tJSouthold,NY Telephone:631 765-1938 www.southoldtownny,gov PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD lo RECEIVED MEMORANDUM SEP 01 2015 BOARD OF APPEALS To: Leslie Weisman, ZBA Chairperson Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals From: Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairman el7 * Members of the Planning Board Date: September 1, 2015 Re: Second Request for Comments for Southold Farm & Cellar SCTM#1000-55-1-7 ZBA#6861 The Planning Board has reviewed the application referenced above, along with the revised Notice of Disapproval, and provides these comments as follow-up to our previous comments from May. The Planning Board does not support granting relief for a winery to be located on this parcel. As stated in our last letter, the Planning Board has serious concerns over the long-range effects of allowing retail wineries on parcels with no room for more than a few parking spaces. Southold is already experiencing the serious traffic problems that occur on and around sites that do not have enough space for parking. This location is on a narrow local street, which is not designed to handle the usual winery traffic that typically includes stretch limousines and buses. There is no shoulder available for parking on the street. A retail winery at this location would be incompatible with the neighborhood-there are houses on three sides of this parcel in very close proximity. While we appreciate the assurances of this applicant that they will not welcome buses and limousines, their very existence on the map of wineries will lead to this type of traffic attempting to visit by virtue of being easily located on internet maps b- and GPS systems. Also we must consider that future owners might have a different �,p business model. U �� RECEIVED — - ---- . __ SEP 18-2015 - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS r- South,'Farm & Cellar, Inc.—August, 2015 The Variances are all substantial and this is also a cause for concern to the Planning • Board. This would set a precedent. The Code stating a winery must be set back from • the road at least 100 feet was enacted to help mitigate impacts of wineries and their accessory retail activities (wine tasting, special events) to their neighbors and to the public streets. This application proposes to locate the building only 60'from the road _(40% variance)..And this proposal would create two principal uses on only 45,000 sq. .ft., where the Code calls for 80,000 sq. ft. of lot area for each principal use. The applicant has stated in writing in their"Amendment to Southold Farm and Cellar Zoning Application", dated as received by the ZBA on 6/26/15, that they will merge the parcels. It appears this action is necessary if there is to be any consideration of relief by the ZBA (it could be a condition of relief if the applicant is reluctant to merge the parcels prior to a decision). If the parcels are not merged, the Variances are so extreme that it would appear the door is open for just about any property next door to a vineyard to build a winery and conduct public wine tasting. 8,??Should the ZBA consider granting relief, the Planning Board recommends strong `' covenants that restrict the future uses. The following are some ideas for covenants: RECEIVED • A winery for wine-making only, with no public tasting; • No special events—there is no space on the one-acre parcel; SEP 1 $ 2015 o No outdoor music or other entertainment; A membership club model where only club members come for tasting;ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS • Very limited hours or days of operation; • Limit the number of people to only those that can park on site in accordance with a Site Plan approved by the Planning Board; o 30 minute visits and tastings limited to 1 oz. each type of wine (this is from the applicant's description of their retail wine-tasting business in their 6/26/15 amendment to their ZBA application). Any covenants imposed by the ZBA should be coordinated with the Planning Board prior to their being filed with the County. Finally, any relief must be conditioned on Site Plan approval by the Planning Board and the Variances should be considered null and void if they cannot obtain Site Plan approval. There should be acknowledgement that a Variance is not a guarantee of approvals from any other agency. This site is small enough that the Planning Board could conceivably be unable to safely site plan the uses. The larger question of what rights remain with regard to the bulk schedule after a Sale of Development Rights must also be explored further. In other words, does the acreage from the development-rights-sold land count towards the Bulk Schedule for a winery principal use? Currently, when someone is selling their development rights, they are told that a strict reading of the Code would require them to leave out from the sale at least 80,000 sq. ft. per future proposed use (house, winery) to meet the Bulk Schedule. /c( 1 Perhaps the Town Code needs to be revisited to clarify this point. I RECEIVED 2 --- - - --- ------ --- - - ------- --- - - -- - -- -- ------ BOARD OF APPEALS • South_ ..,)Farm & Cellar, Inc.—August, 2015 One last point, the very large Variances being requested can also be taken,as a sign • that the Town Code might need a closer look by the Town Board. In this case, the issue • is whether there some way to codify and allow the small wine tasting room/producer use, without opening the door to potentially adverse impacts from traffic and noise. Thank you for the opportunity to provide input on this application. /lA,� RECEIVED SE 1 3 2015 BOARD OF APPEALS RE-C. '0113 SEP 18 °Z015 3ONINGf3®ARD®F APPEALS 04400/ / / _"S•-•,'"._... q\\ \ 1,0011 SCE.•.C-„O.oao ul i 4,- 034690 ,- .,,r w, 0021-97 lj 03-600 PM)OM / ti ��._.7 J L32,i'rrr Y�� - t .t'am 'e 013000 •02-0S01 / / 3 �s 00-»-01 .. M • 'TIB 24 4010, 01.2.2 / a ' ' 1 "j B 01.1003 ; • ti < .74111111177, ) l,.w ,F ,n •• +, m 'Qf y'� 03.110] 011]-0] ttille clip A t J 07-1403 micoe /•/ Iww„',:,. ].]Ar ' 1 £ r • / 11.1..00 nn tlllan �• ',..4 r . �B 1 '1 t,5 / oe 000 / .M.p'r u7 e s �°'- .15.0.1.(c) I 'S 0a-2111 il /i u? ��� • �/.4O sd , et . B / o1z111 :'/, IwA(c1 B ` F`� i4r• 0111lOr..i41 w��tsl n i/ m]au yO lar rai ]] _' .� �, a �. ' 4 ' 3. 1.3Arr, Y `\ L. � J S ,n „ Z. FF , at, if hip. K61r:, i . • ... 31 , ' 0 7 ". yJ \. rJ' 4 1•••• ... 4, ...1'4) 0 '4 .24tr N N3 r e 1., ,..... 46,44,. .s.., 'v i 0 -7.;:7.4: , 44p. 0 :-.: .,e,J I • // ' ' ` a!J. a r I j / feJ 3`� J .a f"��"."/1. o a ... 1 I •? eo s J ` / Jl a - / mei Jg Q ,„.. 4. e� s £ ,,., 1/\,' t��"✓ .T``o /mO 2p ?I F ,5, a N.,, I..,., I f ' '4407 a �•; ' 4,4, , / ••• 4'44!: P/� r� p u.'O r '� Iai/ F 5 �.4,!,.. 4 P y tt. lyC C&I /r , ' /h ;4 l '• ldD ' I'° OY 31e n t 4.3A J 3'/ , _e G, f�, O. w�-�I . rte/ .-, / (e,, O ®44 e ., J 4, 30.OA J�vl w l AOQ. I lr I 10 / O IOINI OF ' O • / SOWN= t3' �O /i +.H? r 11 F•�` QYJ • pwn1u 00110.0 . • !qtr•. O ry 0c111rlvcBlt°clnsl °'v .�///�/_ //J{I'J��J�J • 11 S� 7t'• J 6 si'• /� ,LIjYIjI•lY�V ®, JJ a - TOWN OF I. Zil Olt'ti. •' SOWN= 116 • ' -� RECEIVEd J SLI ., a t'° a 'e'' » . ''61(e i , Y TOM/o i i ,�7� s A t J uuww / �,. ' , J »] ' 77 o ;s a• G qi- '.;>• J .,,J41.. 2 t]a 9. ZONI �F /° , :y4T ' i°�� 0. � J : . LOAM NG BOARD / _ �, a ® y !Alt 110***' , , „ APPEALS �FtiNy J•1pr® � .s]r ® v �r.•o. � 4: � r]a ti J / ' ]0-e r 4 r / 7]A /• °NJ e4 ' / t I®� d `�tF74ron •ve IIo a 3]Alcl /+ SEE SEC.NO. / ‘2‘ .. Rf. „�,,,° ^ .. M....-,44...a•• GY o _ • r 0»00]0180 ,:,,,,,> 1701/77 t ay =0V ,et¢J ®' O`� P IMTCN -Pr UNE • y ' • �'1T0 t Y]' I O 9 ,f�, R 1 ''139''•4. rar`~` 9 ,� , ; Icy _— A 410 ?' ../---.... ....,...„; ,—.•'••• OIN O .P' COUNTY OF SUFFOLK © K °• SOUTHOLD SECTION NO e ... ,....."...r -• e...... __---_ .n-.n..•.., --t0•-- n...w"+,•. --.-- •••••••114.0430.•0030..3. ' NOTICE ay.,' E E .,•...-....0_ —-Z.-- ..,•_..,_.«, I211 ,_... O2 �'_z• `'""° V•.Real Property Tax Service Agency r „ f, ,...,_ a.. ., ....o•»,•. --..-- ..,...t...n..--...—— wvt¢410,4 Of/An P.110,10,IfiC ans,uwesuc cA 4 E __ �^ "..._ --- , , -- -- ,n.•.O.nl..--•-- ',.. man , CountyCenietNW,me,aNY11901 41 uGor 54 MS N ......M 11 a ...�vl.ve.u,. ....... ___— .. .:,.. --.-- .........°...,..--.,.-- ..,ara m .•u.,..n. MI•ranwntitl�x:.svov0--.c1O �.9 :utc rat: .m A M nslazlro 1000 PM mann r.Ma sou.A.M.' >_ir.`� �L�_--, N PROPERTY MAP Mxv10...1000„1 0008015 • • 01019 n,xr x ��,\ >\� Y . \ a. 1102 B9e _ /� ''\ tEa1 Lena> \- \ j f rut s t.o .. ♦ \ `, OIT3D1 " .',,VAP \\ NORTH ' p 2 \ / OS].0 CL y 04.11-01 y 03'2102 �� dp m IN 40. 2.IAIc1 \' /w 011x,1-02 .. •'• R •. _ 1 aA(cl t` .•••• ""• lk 010)-0] OB100< Ekh7 •t�\ 13 \ x51, ]Si y 0 y ♦ % •�� E s 04]6-04 1' 1� x.x,ycl T0A t 0 O t0ae cs �" -�� B 4 • 1 seal r 0130.06 'b. 1 - 04.07. 1 1 7 308 7 5 A• • w EE0. 010.2108 33 1aµ 3 20.2Aa1 f 10Atc1 . LpaO CP • SP C6-01.0/xoia� °. + i _s 'n MOS________f : %a 06.0107 i 0x-2 w 1tK, z�Z 8 _ r 0411.12 96 x08 Li _ tau-1z litit;i0;\ ten Li m 03.07.13 .H0 - - - - - � • .1 iu iaA _. O - c 00111111. vp #101:',.‘:' 1101 ' y =WY 04 31/74044 of t0 c 5r -- n4 ,40.:16. 16,14,,,,.:40,, a .1 111: 81080 ' 3-n 198 • 1.0 9158 at4 ov•r[xr�•crs 18.1. Vii, 1 n 1 �� .. 1.QAa._, 36 108 O 101 Z• y .• _ n 1 11 wt 1x.084) B ,.0 • 25 782[1 { 1.082[4 1.3 a.�,'e NRq y �,'/1/j�'/)(�,///(/ E . L -S' v, E ////fffv/'/, J / P f 7 B V / V w I 'r M ''16 t 6 L7 %{111111111 S il• COTT w f:ECEI ED \ o x ,m N2 .n 1 0.5 mono V• 1^/\ytf�/t,/n,V', /.48141 • a B.a w„rvsa,rrAxO ` �µA SEP 1 ��1 • 19.28 orvrtOrurNraicnrsl� Bat S..: 1 S O r OSw •a. (TOWN IX sourXao n• 1y,Ec1 w n ]115E 1 w1 3 tw 6 7( 283 x60 0EVE400.ENr A,0Nr.0 j 111 i et y1S1 pPt E Ael .' 1` SO ( • -'°" QQ 0.A 11µ' S': "DT 1♦ �� >r • ONING BOARD OF a PPEALS a 10 1 E 1s.s E �. ♦}.. lrowress00,n0ra ,. w• t5 Ca' 1? o+ y 15 , .• CEVF40AM:xr BrGnr51 1516 � P• +) ' • - 11� 1517 4itilt4-4:11‘ #4,0447, • �1Ko11* « ^,see 1518 :A //////■�,I/�/D E�/J� q 9^' '\/"I VW�' - 8B' ^ •a B, ‹few P 4op�� 15191fi' w ' � offeA IB 3A 1r' 07.1.OV,55t4.147, epPl� . , - , G N �� 1114 ,�t � CIA19 e- Gg1T y;N, E U p1 ;R 0 1 1r q1K] •„ 154 . 155`-y` 1sp ,D ♦"{ PartV I w � 11111, 151 aill w'155 ' Ofyp1E E1 15 81 P 033.2 . s :ill: p. 15.]9 X580 .0A( e 1011‘60011 090'C 1 ' 0.w E 6 x 37491 .. w3 1.y e 2.1:.....,"::°' 33 1 P .i w Or" s to 1e '( 639:7'160: AO M N 07 NbA(e) n O \‘‘,:',,,,o1.,o 1 / 1)84 ? SNOlO pyl 3.rX Z *• 111 d 0 / 10 O 10 (0/00.,,, .+ NAN \,+�My_ 1] s• �• 1018 •tcl 5'° 10. I.SGicl 3,.<A • •¢, �Y', B µ+4` �ot .. a y • 15.7A �/ 1FAI E WI. FOR PCL NO a 5. .� S w / . 27 � ��� Y ]t 1 3 Std4Y *• SEE SEC.NO M1. _ // TA ,3.‘„;,1.<3 0010].025 • .../ 31Afcl _ '� ��E T� - 31] ,fir Xln 2N _ •'• MATCN - UNE x fNIm0ESO0NxN0 MATCH UNE , - Orv[lOA4•rNrA•ri / SEE SEC.NO.063 .1 f e / E e L ,.•...w...• w..au. ^• w.._, - ar4...... --4w-- ........ -- . n• • NOTICE ,TIVZO COUNTY OF SUFFOLK © e SOUTHOLO SECTION NO E �...�.,_ -�- .9.................,. (2i) �-,,, .- - --.- n•• - Real Property Tax Service Agency r • ---". A.... .. .- - . F - . G- r .9.9.93, �.-.Te3_.. .+ ... „ ti " E9‘1.. - - - •-74.56 �, y�C1 -T,xw•£ ,.49.Sr - 33.20.00 I1L6W SEE SEC r.. _ 0•.' N]1)eta. LINE II ] >R F MATCH -Z.-- _�_ _ - _7/. roN PCL NO. ax +w2 w, n�A M1� / \ �j --- \-. 11.14 -�-- rp4Ph q•�, /NrJ `SEE A0.N0 / / '� /,,/IIS. i,, ®OFFOUr ELIZABETH A.NEVILLE,MMC ���hyo® Gy Town Hall,53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK ® P.O.Box 1179 % - Southold,New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL.STATISTICS ; ��� Fax(631)765-6145 MARRIAGE OFFICER =�$' " �®�'.�� Telephone(631)765-1800 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER - 91 www.southoldtownny.gov www.southoldtownny.gov FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER ,,, ,,,, OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Elizabeth A.Neville DATED: September 18, 2015 RE: Zoning Appeal No. 6889 Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeals No. 6889 for Allison Latham-The Application to the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals for a Reversal/Interpretation. Also enclosed are Three Applicant Transactional Disclosure Forms,Notice of Disapproval to Southold Farm &Cellar Dated April 9 of 2015; Amended June 19 of 2015; Amended September 10 of 2015, A Memorandum from Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairman of the Planning Board to Leslie Weisman of the Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding Request for Comments for Southold Farm&Cellar- ZBA#6861 Dated May 6 of 2015,A Memorandum from Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairman of the Planning Board to Leslie Weisman of the Zoning Board of Appeals Regarding a Second Request for Comments for Southold Farm&Cellar-ZBA#6861 Dated September 1 of 2015, Section No. 54 Property Map Showing Lots Marked in Green Are the Development Rights Sold; Lots Marked in Purple Are the Adjacent Buildable parcels,-Section No. 55 Property Map Showing Lots Marked in Green Are the Development Rights Sold; Lots Marked in Purple Are the Adjacent Buildable Parcels. - -. * * * RECEIPT * * * Date: 09/18/15 Receipt#: 193509 Quantity Transactions Reference Subtotal 1 ZBA Application Fees 6889 $300.00 Total Paid: $300.00 Notes: Payment Type Amount Paid By CK#2738 $300.00 Latham, Allison &Scott Southold Town Clerk's Office 53095 Main Road, PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Name: Latham, Allison &Scott 1755 Old North Rd. P. O. Box 1294 Southold, NY 11971 Clerk ID: SABRINA Internal ID:6889 ! • #12475 STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Karen Kine of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn, says that she is Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly newspaper, published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly published in said Newspaper once each week for 1 week(s), successfully commencing on the 29th day of October, 2015. LEGAL NOTICE '/''''''';//1--- 71('-/..-6/11L-C-'-j'''''. SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING Principal Clerk BOARD OF APPEALS THURSDAY NOVEMBER 5,2015 PUBLIC HEARINGS NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, )..\' pursuant to Section 267 of the TownV Law and Town- Code Chapter 280 me this dayof ° 2015. s (Zoning),Town of Southold,the fol- lowing public hearings will be held 10:40 A.M.-RICK NAPPI#6828 by the SOUTHOLD TOWN ZON- - Re-Opened by Board Resolu- 79 r1 ING BOARD OF APPEALS at tion - Request for Variances from the Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Article XXIII Section 280-124 and P.O. Box 1179, Southold, New York Article XXII Section 280.116B and 11971-0959, on THURSDAY NO- the Building Inspector's December VEMBER 5,2015. 3, 2014,AMENDED September 22, 9:30 A.M.-ANTHONY and LiSA 2015 Notice of Disapproval based CHRISTINA VOLINSKI SANNINO#6882-(Adjourned from on an application for building per- September 3,2015)Request for Van- mit for additions enato NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK ance under Article III Code Section Demolition of existing single family No, 01V061 0 5 050 280-13A(4) and the Building Inspec- dwelling and construction of a new tor's June 17, 2015, amended June single family dwelling, at; 1) less Qualltiad In Suffolk County 23, 2015 Notice of Disapproval for a building permit to construction of than the code required front yard My Commission Exr.,I,na Frabruory 28, 2016 setback of 35 feet2) less than,the a winery/tasting room, at: 1) winery code required minimum single side 1;30 P.M. - ADF VENTURES, 2:15 P,M, - SOUTHOLD FARM located on a parcel less than the code yard setback of 10 feet,3) less than LLC. #6850 - Request for Varianc- and CELLAR, INC. (MEADQJU i egtiired minimum of at least 10 acres the code required bulkhead setback es from Article XV, Sections 280- #6861 - (Adjourned from 8/20/15) devoted to vineyard or other agri- of 75 feet, located at: 5218 Peconic I 64B&C and 280-63 and the Building Request for Variances under Article cultural purposes, located at: 15975 Bay Boulevard(adj.to Great Pecon- Inspector's June 9, 2014, renewed III Code Section 280-13A(4) & 14, County Route 48(aka Middle Road) is Bay) Laurel, NY. SCTM#1000- February 23,2015, amended Febru- and Article XXIII Section 280-124 and 7495 Alvah's Lane Cutcliogue, 128-2-22 ary26, 2015 Notice of Disapproval and the Building Inspector's April NY.SCTM#1000-101-1-14,6&11.4 11:00 A,M.-JUJAX PARTNERS, based on an application for building 9, 2015, amended June 19, 2015 10;00 A.M. - STEVEN and AN- LLC. #6891 - Re uest'for varianceAMENDED September 10, 2015 DREA KOLYER#6860-(Request to q permit to constructna aommercial Notice of Disapproval for a building WITHDRAW by letter dated October from Article II Section 280-9A&B building for an electrical oontrac- and the Building Inspector's Notice tor's yard, at; 1) less than the code Permit for conversion of an existing 2,2015 by the applicant) (Adjourned of Disapproval dated September 8, required average front yard setback building to a tasting room and con- from September 3,2015) (Re-opened 2015 based on a building permit ap- of 16 feet,2) less than the code re- struction of a new winery building, by Board Resolution due to error in plication for lot recognition, at; 1) quired minimum rear yard setback at:1)(winery building)less than the Notice of Disapproval) Request for , subject parcel is nota recognized of 70`feet,3)proposed structure with code required minimum setback of Variances under Article III Code lot, located at: 1975 Sound View more than the code allowed maxi- 100 feet from a major road,located Section 280-14 and the Building In- Avenue(adj. to Long Island Sound) mum of 60 linear feet of frontage , at: 860 Old North Road Southold, spector's March 9,2015,Revised July tviatti tuck,NY.SCTM#1000-94-1-11 on one street,located at:620 Corwin NY.SCTM#1000-55-1-7&8.3 20,2015 Notice of Disapproval for a 11:15 A.M.- PAUL ROMANEL- Street Green ort,NY. SCTM#1000- The Board of Appeals will hear building permit for a subdivision, at: P allpersons or their representatives, Proposed Lot 1-(lot 10)-1)less than - 48-2-44.2p 11,-CONT RA.CT.VENDEE (ROB- 2:00 P.M.-ALLISON LATHAM desiring to be heard at each hearing, the code required minimum lot size ofe- i 6 and/or desiring to submit written 80,000 sq.ft.,2)less than the code re- tion DO' and'CAROL RbHN1 #6892 P....18_12.-This is a request under Sec- statements before the conclusion of quired minimum lot width of 175 feet, This is a request under Section tion 280-1460 for an Interpretation each hearing. Each hearing will not Proposed Lot 2-(lot 9)-1) less than 280-146D for an Interpretation of of the Town Code,Article III, See- the Town Code,Article VIII,Section tion 280-14, "Bulk Schedule", a start earlier than designated above. the code required minimum lot size of 280-38A,"Permitted Uses", appeal- pealing the BuildingInspector's Files are available for review during 80,000 sq.ft.,2)less than the code re- PP September p regular business hours and prior to quired minimum lot depth of 250 feet, ing the Building Inspector's Septem- p mber 10,2015 Amended Notice located at 4075 Paradise Point Road bcr 15,2015 Notice of Disapproval; of Disapproval regarding number of the day of the hearing. If you have (adj to a boat basin) Southold, NY applicant's business "Suffolk Secu- uses proposed on property located questions, please contact our of- applicant's is not a contractor's business, at: 860 Old North Road Southold, fice at, (631)765-1809, or by email: SC10:20 000-81-1-10.1 located at:50300 NYS Route 25(aka NY.SCTM#1000-55-1-7&8.3 Vicki.Toth@Town.Southold.ny.us. 10:20 A.M.- 7850 MAiN ROAD, I Dated:October 5,2015 1,t,C d/b/a THE BLUE INN at Main Road) (corner Jockey Creek ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ,N_ J j-I FORD-#6675-Re-Hearing Drive) Southold, NY. SCTM#1000- per Board Resolution based on Con- 70-2-15 LESLIE KANES WEIS- 11:30 A.M. - PAUL ROMANEL- MAN, . CHAIRPERSON dition#13 ina ZBA amended decision I i, CONTRACT VENDEE (ROB- • BY:Vicki Toth dated September 4,2014 - Request 54375 Main Road(Office Location) for Special Exception per Article ERT and CAROL RQIINI #6890 53095 Main Road(Mailing/USPS)SII Section 280-35(B) to expand I VIIII CodeoSection c280 38A (Per the P.O.Box 1179 the current restaurant use to include } mitted Uses), and the Buildin Southold,NY 11971-0959 being open to the public, enclose spector's Setember 15,2015 Notice 12475-1T 10/29 existing patio and surround with a of Disapproval based on an a -�. -� 3 1/2 foot wall located in a Resort pp pplica- Residential (RR) District, located tion for building permit to convert at: 7850 Main Road and Orchard an existing legal non-conforming Lane (aka Old Orchard Road) East real estate agent office to a contrac- Marion,NY. SCTM#1000-31-6-17.2 tor's business, at; 1) contractor's - business is not a permitted use,lo- .. cated at: 50300 NYS Route 25 (aka Main Road) (corner Jockey Creek Drive) Southold, NY. SCTM#1000- 70-2-15 RECEIVED ":\\ 6\11/),, f 1 r ,h NOV ®-5 2015YIU ` � , In response to Appeal #6889 By Allison Latham I - ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal #6861 By Carey & Regan Meador In response to Notice of Disapproval last dated October 27, 2015 (1) Object to Allison Latham's Appeal of the Amended Notice of Disapproval dated September 10, 2015. Latham does not have standing to appeal. Latham admits that she is 900 feet away from the premises. Latham is neither adjacent nor proximate for purposes of objections to the applications made by Southold Farm& Cellar farm winery. In land use matters especially,the Courts have long imposed the limitation that the plaintiff, for standing purposes,must show that it would suffer direct harm, injury that is in some way different from that of the public at large (see, e.g., Matter of Mobil Oil Corp. v Syracuse Indus. Dev. Agency, 76 NY2d 428, supra; Matter of Sun-Brite Car Wash v Board of Zoning&Appeals, 69 NY2d, at 413, supra; Little Joseph Realty v Town of Babylon,41 NY2d 738, 741-742; Cord Meyer Dev. Co. v Bell Bay Drugs, 20 NY2d 211, 216, rearg denied 20 NY2d 970; Empire City Subway Co. v Broadway& Seventh Ave. R. R. Co., 87 Hun 279,283, affd 159 NY 555; see also, Warth v Seldin, 422 US, at 499, supra). The Latham property is more than 900 feet away,their home is on a flag lot without direct frontage on Old North Road and her home is surrounded by agricultural uses which are in Agricultural District#1. A 400 sf wine tasting building has not harmed,nor will it harm,the Lathams. The Meador family lives on the property and runs the small winery from their home. In response to Allison Latham's Points: A. Ms. Latham claims that Lot 7 and Lot 8.3 have not been merged. Ms. Latham is wrong. In response to her claim,we have obtained an independent opinion from Advocate's Abstract which states that title to both parcels is held by Meador Land Company LLC. Meador Land Company LLC principals are Carey Meador and Regan Meador. The name of the winery is Southold Farm and Cellar which is owned by Carey and Regan Meador. The County of Suffolk will continue to maintain two tax map numbers for the combined parcel for real property taxation purposes of the sold development rights. Exhibit A B. Non-compliance with Town Code Section 280-13 (A0(4)(b)which states "the winery shall be on a parcel on which at least 10 acres are devoted to vineyard or other agricultural purposes, and which is owned by the winery owner" The purpose of merging the two parcels was to meet the language of 280-13 (A)(4)(b)which states "The winery shall be on a parcel on which at least 10 acres are devoted to vineyard or other agricultural purposes, and which is owned by the winery owner". The winery owners are Mr. and Mrs. Meador. Meador Land Company LLC is a Limited Liability Company"owned"by Mr. and Mrs. Meador. Southold Farm&Cellar,the winery business, is owned by Mr. and Mrs. Meador. - C. Bulk Schedule Area Requirements apply and acreage without development righf , a ig2 utilized to satisfy same. AND 0111,NOV 0 5 2015 BOARD OF APPEALS Newest Notice of Disapproval in which the building inspector has been advisea to address this issue in the notice of disapproval is contrary to the Town Code and to the past applications of the code. Exhibit B There is no basis in law or fact to the claim that development rights sold land can not be used to support Southold Farm and Cellar home, 400 sq.ft. tasting room and agricultural storage building used solely for wine processing and storage(no retail) on the reserve area. Such an interpretation would violate the New York State Constitution and stated public policies supporting agriculture. Agriculture is promoted by the Town throughout the zoning ordinance,the multiple existing land use studies,the proposed comprehensive plan, and the LWRP all uniformly promote agriculture. The State of New York also promotes agriculture; agriculture is a protected use in the New York State Constitution. Such a restrictive application of the zoning ordinance would be a violation of New York State Agricultural and Markets Law. The Use on the 23 acres is "Agriculture"and all of the other listed operations are a subset of agriculture: A. Vineyard is the crop B. The farm house supports the farm family which grows and tends to the crop C. The barns enable the farm to store the grapes for fermentation(production) and equipment D. The 400 sq. ft. tasting shed allows the fanner to display, sell, and educate the customers The above are not"separate uses"they are all an integral part of the agricultural use and without these integrated functions the agricultural production on the parcel is placed in economic jeopardy. A small farm winery owner, like any small farmer, lives and works on the farm. The proposed processing building holds the vats for the fermentation process and other equipment stored in the barn. The 23 acres constitute the full spectrum of agricultural uses. Furthermore, the farm winery agricultural use including the ancillary buildings and uses is regulated by the New York State Farm Winery License. "Winery" is not a defined term precisely because it is subject to widely varying descriptions of the use. The Southold Town Code makes no attempt to define or describe what constitutes a "winery"at all leaving the use open to myriad interpretations. As Mr. Meador testified during his numerous public hearings,his winery is considered very small. The Town of Southold has, in the past, site planned the larger wineries with large facilities to support the marketing of the agro- tourism and an entertainment model. The land is very expensive and supporting the employees, the overhead costs,processing and production costs can be overwhelming. The cost of production at large wineries necessitate the emphasis on an entertainment model. 0 V 052015B ADD IN : is Southold Farm& Cellar, and other smaller wineries, focus strictly on the wine poi A �� entertainment. The East End wines have developed regionally and have greatly improved in PpEALS quality. The wines are able to compete nationally and internationally. At Southold Farm& Cellar the wine drinking experience is primarily educational. The beauty of the location next to the vines and pastoral setting adds to the experience. The experience offered is the quiet enjoyment of the agricultural surroundings, not external sources such as pony rides or food vendors. In Town Code Section 280-13(A)(4)(b)the winery shall be on a parcel on which at least 10 acres are devoted to vineyard or other agricultural purposes. Any agriculture, and any uses which support the agricultural purposes, are considered meeting the acreage requirement. The code does not state that the 10 acres must be with full development rights in tact. In our previous written submission, we provided several examples of wineries with 10 acres which were pieced together with development rights sold as well as full fee title parcels. Exhibit C The Latham appeal and the October 27th, 2015 notice of disapproval would fall directly contrary to the opinion expressed by Robert Somers, director of New York State Agriculture and Markets, from the Sannino Appeal#6882 (herein attached). The Ag&Markets opinion states that all of the activities on a farm, including the homestead and farm structures support agriculture. These uses are not to be interpreted to be"separate"uses. The application of the"bulk schedule"requiring 2 acres per use would be considered an unreasonable restriction interfering with an agricultural use. NEW ISSUE: Notice of Disapproval Amended 10/27/15 At no time has any department in the Town of Southold applied the bulk schedule 80,000 sf of property, where development rights intact, require 80,000 sf per use. Examples of Wineries on the "reserve area"or non-development rights sold land which have not applied the bulk schedule on the intact development rights are as follows: Bedell Cellars Vineyards, 36225 Main Road, Cutchogue: In 1986 49.3 acres of development rights were sold. Area #1:2.61 acres reserved with winery, two story single family house, agricultural structures,greenhouse and barn for winery use. A Special Exception was granted for the winery use in 1986 Appeal#3451. In 2002: The existing winery was approved for an expansion (now a permitted use) and approved by Southold Town Planning Board. In 2004 the Planning Board had approved an expansion and addition to the winery of 4,602 sf. This project was reduced by the owners of the winery for a new tasting room, larger tank room and crush pad which site plan was approved. RECEIVED.ep NOV 05 2015 - McCall Winery,Peconic: BOARD OF APPEALS On the Planning Board's 11/2/15 resolutions for public hearings:McCall has a pending application for a 17,100 sgft. "Wine production and storage facility, including agricultural equipment storage on 1.8 acres (reserve area)on 1000-109-1-38"Exhibit D The reserve area being used for the production building is attached to 35.8 acres of Development Rights sold land(1000-116-1-3.4)Exhibit E Also the Winery tasting building in the reserve area with less than 1 acre, with a single family dwelling, is located along Rt 25 and approved in 2011. Shinn Winery: Shinn purchased property in 1999, and sold development rights on all but 2 acres. In 2010 the Planning Board site planned for the winery, the single family residence with a B&B in the house (previously approved by ZBA), the production and storage building, and later a windmill. Sherwood House: No variance was required. Property contained 2 ac. Reserve area with the house, accessory pool and wine tasting shed/out door area. Sctm:1000-100-4-5.3 & 5.4 D. History of the Lots is irrelevant. Throughout the Town of Southold farmers, including farm wineries, are purchasing parcels to increase wine production or for other purposes. The two parcels are"contiguous". Allison Latham's claim would violate Real Property Law. There is no prohibition on"combining contiguous parcels"....in fact the Town of Southold has always preferred re-joining parcels rather than"subdividing parcels". At the last hearing the applicant submitted the analysis of an area variance; however,no Variances are required: Area Variance for Barn: The proposed barn located at 60'from Old North Road(a non-major road) is not for general public access. The barn is strictly for wine production,processing, storage and farm equipment storage. The proposed barn does not change the character of the area. Mr. Meador has taken photographs of barns within the neighborhood. (See attached photographs of the barns in the neighborhood) The required variance, if denied, would result in an unreasonable restriction of an this agricultural use. The 100' setback discriminates and unequally treats agricultural uses. Merely because the barn is used for storage and processing by the"winery", it must be set back 100' from the road. 'This proposed barn is not for the public, it is for pure agricultural production and stores the processing vats for fermentation, as well as storage. If the barn were being constructed for any other agricultural use, other than wine production,the setbacks required would be at most 60' (the setback of a"principal structure")which setback can be met. RECEIVED aoh- NOV 0 5 2015 b gn Finally,the buildings will require site plan review as would any farm. However,gd t eOF APPEALS limited access of the public to only the 400 sq.ft. "Tasting building",the site plan review should be that of an"agricultural site plan". Site plan review for a 400 sq.ft. "Tasting" building must be reasonable and take into consideration the scale of this winery. To do otherwise would violate Agriculture& Markets Law. A barn used for wine production,processing and storage should not be penalized through a bureaucratic maze merely because it falls within some pre-conceived, one size fits all definition of "winery"which,as pointed out above, is not found in the Town Code. Planning Board Comments': As to the Planning Board's comments,they are not based on the facts of this application. 1. There is no traffic problem on Old North Road. One neighbor who rides her bike daily on the road corroborated this fact. The Town of Southold Highway Superintendent has made no recommendations to make any changes to Old North Road. For the sake of argument, if Old North Road was a dangerous road,the Town of Southold would have a duty to address safety issues. Generalized safety issues do not fall on one property owner to resolve. 2. Site planning is for a 400 square foot seasonal tasting building in the rear of the property. The parking regulations require 2 spaces. The family runs the farm and their vehicles are at their home. The applicant has offered 5 times the required number of spaces. 10 spaces exceeds their current or future needs. 3. Old North Road, while not a"major road", is not a"narrow local street",the road is 50 feet in width. 4. The "usual winery traffic"allegedly including limousines and buses, is not applicable at this site. Southold Farm& Cellar is specifically on a list of wineries which do not accept either limousines or buses.2 4. Incompatibility with the neighborhood. The applicant lives on the property with their two infant children. Their home is on the east side of the 400 sq.ft. tasting building. The neighbor on the west supports the application and testified at the hearing. This house was one of the original farm houses (Dickerson Home). 5. A Reasonable condition which is applicable to the 60' front yard variance for the barn, while un-necessary,would be acceptable. A. "No wine tasting in the barn" (the subject of this variance), as suggested by Planning Board, ' The responses below track the numbered or lettered comments given in the Planning Board memo to this Board. 2 At the Shinn farm winery,the Planning Board imposed a condition on the site plan approval prohibiting the parking of busses and limousines on the site. is already, by their application an implied condition of the variance. The variance is for a barn used for wine processing, production and storage and not for public access,wine tasting or retail sales. Further restrictions on the winery use are beyond the scope of the Board's authority. A winery is regulated under State Law. All other recommended conditions have no relationship to the requested variance. B. Special Events would be reviewed, and up to this Board, if an application is made. C. Outdoor music or other entertainment would have to abide by noise ordinance. SF&C has not had outdoor entertainment,however, if a radio is playing or a musical instrument is being played outside we do not want issues with the Town. Again, this condition has no relationship to this application for a processing,production and storage barn. D. "Hours of operation" exceed the scope of the Town's authority. Hours of operation are regulated by State Law. E. Parking is proposed in the proposed spaces If the owners have a private party this is their home. F. "30 minute & size of tasting limit" is beyond the scope of the Town's authority. This is regulated by State Law. RECEIVED (10-- NOV 0 5 2015 c� BOARD OF APPEALS ADVOCATE'S ABSZ . .ACT, iNC. Issuing policies of Estewart title Insurance company RECEIVED 04— N0 V 0 5 2015 October 29, 2015 BOA Co���- �D OF APPEALS To Whom it May Concern: Re:Meador Land Company LLC Title to 1000-55=1-7 and 8.3, two contiguous parcels, are held under one`title and last deed of record is from Carey Meador to Meador Land Company LLC,:by deed dated September 9, 2015 and recorded October 13,, 2015 in Liber 12836 pg. 084 in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk. The chain of title to the lastdeed of record: As to tax lot 8.3: Title was previously held by Regan Meador and Carey Meador by deed dated June 7,2012 and recorded June 14, 2012 in Liber 12696 page 388. Title was then conveyed out to Carey Meador by deed dated September 9; 2015, recorded October 13, 2015 in Liber 12836 pg. 83 in the Office of the Clerk of the County of Suffolk. As to tax lot 7: Title was previously held by Carey Meador by deed dated June 7, 2012 and recorded June 14, 2012 in Liber 12696 page 387. Very truly yours, ADVOCATE'S ABSTRACT, INC. By: s 4(. Stephen M. Richardson, President SMR:jam 6302 Route 25A, PO Box 958 • Wading River, NY 11792 631-929-6686 • 631-929-3708 fax RECEIVED Ai ' FORM NO. 3 NOV 0 5 2015L4,r,, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT BOAOF APPEALS SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: April 9,2015 AMENDED:June 19,2015 AMENDED: September 10,2015 AMENDED:October 27,2015 TO: Southold Farm&Cellar 860 Old North Road Southold,NY 11971 Please take notice that your request dated March 31,2015 For permit for the conversion of a an existing building to include a tasting room and the construction of a new winery building at Location of property: 860 Old North Road, Southold,NY County Tax Map No. 1000—Section 55 Block 1 Lot 7&8.3 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed construction is not permitted pursuant to Article III,Section 280-14, No building or premises shall be used and no building or part thereof shall be erected or altered in the A-Cs R-80,R-120,R-200 and R-400 Districts unless the same conforms to the Bulk Schedule and Parking Schedulell1 incorporated into this chapter with the same force and effect as if such regulations were set forth herein full. Pursuant to Bulk Schedule,80,000 square feet of property,development rights intact,is required per use.The portion of property with development rights intact is+1-40,000 square feet. Pursuant to Article III, Section 280-13A,4, (c)The winery structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from a major road;and (d)The winery shall obtain site plan approval. The proposed winery building is located 60 feet from Old North Road. This Notice of disapproval was amended on June 19, 2015 to address the issue of two uses, acreage for winery,and rear yard setbacks.It was further amended to eliminate the need for certain variances after the applicant legally combined two parcels. This notice was further amended to add the need for a variance under bulk schedule. ----1 Authoriz- e- Cc:File,ZBA,planning,town attorney , WILLIAM M.DUFFY SCOTT A.RUSSELL TOWN ATTORNEY bill.duffy@town.southold.ny.us �� vSOUjy� Supervisor STEPHEN F.KIELY � �� � �� Town Hall Annex,54375 Route 25 Y : '4; .1W1 P.O.Box 1179 ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY p y y � Southold,New York 11971-0959 ste hen.kiel @townsouthold.n .us I G ® r Q,�� LORI M.HULSE li, Telephone(631)765-1939 ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY C�U ';;ri�� Facsimile(631)765-6639 lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us RECEIVED 1 Vl: OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY NO V 0 5 2Q l- TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOA11® OF (0 07_1, AppcALs MEMORANDUM To: Mr. Michael Verity, Chief Building Inspector From: Stephen F. Kiely,Assistant Town Attorney , 63) Date: October 27,2015 • Subject: Zoning Board of Appeals Application#6889 (Allison Latham) • Be advised that this office has reviewed the Zoning Board of Appeals application #6889 (Allison Latham) which is seeking an interpretation of§280-14 and a reversal of the amended notice of disapproval, dated September 10,2015 (hereinafter referred to as "NOD"), issued in connection with Southold Farm and Cellar, Inc.'s (hereinafter referred to as"SF&C")building permit application regarding"the conversion of an existing building to include a tasting room and the construction of a new winery building"located at 860 Old North Road, Southold,NY(hereinafter referred to as the"subject property"). Notwithstanding the fact that the subject property, which originally was one acre and has been subsequently merged with an adjoining parcel now making it 23.6 acres,it is the opinion of this office that the NOD is incomplete in that the §280-14 ground for disapproval is absent from same. In the AC zone pursuant to §280-14 (see 280 Attachment 1) 80,000 sq. ft. is required per use and since a 1-family detached dwelling already exists on the development rights intact(hereinafter referred to as "DRI")portion of the property(which is 40,000 sq. ft. +1-and nonconforming)any additional use, such as a winery, would require an additional 120,000 square feet,which is lacking here. The reason the lot size is lacking is that the 22.6 acre property merged with the subject property is development rights sold(hereinafter referred to as"DRS") land which is encumbered by a covenant that prohibits"processing or retail merchandising"on the property. Therefore, since SF&C could not put a winery on the DRS portion of the property it may not benefit from such acreage by merger,for"bulk schedule"purposes. v 1 In accordance with the above it is recommended that your Department amend the NOD to include the §280-14 ground for disapproval. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact this office. :64—' RECEIVED cc: Leslie Weisman, Chairperson Zoning Board of Appeals Nov 0 5 2015 BOARD OF 4PPE4L S 2 i 1 • RECEIVED '�EW-'NEWAgiltt�ilture �' `+� SfAq N'and,MarketsOV 0 5 2015 �� AND W . cuotio Ricffl � A. 64LL _ BOARD OF APPEALS Governor Commissioner September 1, 2015 Anthony Sannino 7490 Alvahs Lane Cutchogue, NY 11935 _ RE: Vineyard, Town of Southold, New York Dear Mr. Sannino:' Thank you for your inquiry concerning your vineyard.: You indlcateci that you own two parcels of land and lease another two parcels for the productin of grapes, which are used by you to produce wipe, You indicated that all but one of the parcets is located within a county adopted, State certified agricultural district. Upon review of the niap-for Suffolk County Agricultural Dietcict No. 1, your 5.22. acre property 'ie located within said district. The adjoining parcel tftat'was purchased is notin an;a rJcthtural district at this time, but you intend to plant 3 acres of grapes on that parcel of land this fall, You also indicated that your leased land consists of 10.5 acres of grapes in Peconic and another 7.5 acres of grapes in Cutchogue down the road from your principal vineyard and residence. Both of those parcels are located within an agricultural district. Because your home parcel le located within an agricultural district, you have the ability to request the Department to conduct a review of local laws that may unreasonably restrict your farm operation. Your farm produces approximately 2,000 cases of wine annually and 85 to 90 percent of the juice used to produce the wine comes from the grapes grown by you on land that is both owned and leased. Based upon our phone:conversation. you stated that the Town of Southold's Zoning Code requires 10;corttlguous acres of land to be considered a farm. The Code Enforr merits:Officer further stated that since the Town Zoning District where your property is located requires two acres for the house, that acreage is deducted from your total acreage to determine the amount of land available for a farm operation. AML §301(11) defines "farm operation" to mean ".;.the land and on-farm biAlings, equipment,... and practices which contribute to the production..oreoaration_ and marketina;,of crops, livestockand-livestockproducts.as a commercial enterprise. .. -Such far rri aperatton"may donsistr-of-one OT-iiiore parcels of owned or rented land, which parcels may be 'coiitiguoi.as;or noncontiguous to each other." (emphasis added) The definition of"cropsdivestock aril 1fveitock, pr'odi cts; as contained in AML §301(2) (b) includes, but is not limited to "(f]ruits," including "...apples, peaches, grapes, cherries and berries." The on-farm "production,d__oreparatfon. and marketirq; [AML §301(11)1 of grapes and other fruits, as part of a winery, are considered part of `a farm operation. The Department considers agricultural commodities produced "on-farm" to include any products that may have been produced by a farmer on his or her "farm',cs erttJ'on," which could include a number of parcels owned or leased by that farmer throughout a town, county, or the State, RECEIV D err t NOV 0 5 Z015 6:i9 Anthony Sannino APP�ALS 21Fage BOARD �� In prior reviews, the Department has determined that local laws that require a minimum acreage to be considered a farm is unreasonably restrictive. Municipal Codes should recognize that land leased by a farmer or owned, when the land IS contiguous or not contiguous to one another, is part of the farm operation when such land is located within an agricultural district. The definition of "farm operation" under the AML. does not specify minimum acreage or gross sales and includes as part of the farm land that is owned and/or leased by the;'reifj�ion. The land does not have to be contiguous to one another, You also asked about the Town's establishment of a building lot and .ci6ducting, that acreage from the total aer.0.4 1e owned to determine if Town established acreage requirements are met. First, establishing a minimum acreage, as previously discussed, may be unreasonably restrictive. Rirgifitrrnpre, when the Department conducts a review of the farm operation, it looks at the land•iii production as being part of the farm and does not reduce the amount of land in agricultural production :0*-,-c,upon local zoning. The Department examines actual use. For agricultural assessment purpo es, the Department of Taxation and Finance also uses=aatualiuse, not zoning, to determine what land is eligible for an agricultural assessment (see en'OlOila4 Tax and Finance Opinion). If you have any questions concerning these corrinie rta, please contact me at 518/457- 8887. Sincerely, l iRe, ,aeriz P D: Manager, Agricultural'*MC%fon Unit Division of Land and Water Resources 1 10B Airline Dr,Albany,N.Y„ 122351 518/457-37381wwwfiitt;d4iillikeaiy.gov Volume 11 - Opinions of Counsel LPS No. 92 Page 1 of 3 RCrvED A+ �!�p 1 lie tt of Nov52015 , • Taxation anciF, inancQBOAR b g' r `. D °F APpEA`s Volume 11 w *pinions of C.tinsel SRS 92 Opinions of Counsel index Agricultural exemption (soil classification)(required revision); (generally) (zoning compliance) -Agriculture and Markets Law, §§305, 306;Real Property Tax Law, §481: An Es54,- pr may not require a county soil and water conservation district to revise its worksheets which the assessor uses to administer the Agricultural Districts Law, but the assessor may request such revision in certain circumstances.An assessor may not rely solely on zoning requirements to conclude that areas classified by such worksheets are residential in nature; rather,the assessor's personal observation is required. Our opinion has been requested concerning the Agricultural Districts Law(Agriculture and Markets(AML], Article 25 AA; Real Property Tax Law, §481). An assessor has asked us whether he may require owners of land receiving agricultural assessments to submit corrected soil group Vi.ot?1,:ji ets because the property's current worksheet soil classifications purportedly are not consistent with the minimum residential lot size required by zoning. Soil Group Wot!Mhes The Agatural Districts Law (AML, Art. 25-AA)authorizes agricultural assessments for"land used in agricultural production" (see,AML,§§301(4), 305(1)(a) and 306(1)). The approval of such an agricultural assessment for eligible land requires the annual filing of an application by the tandocner. Each such application must include "classification information prepared for the applicant's land or water bodies used in agricultural production by the soil and water conservation district office within the county" (AML,§305(1)(a); see a/so,AML, §306(1)).' The current method by which assessors determine agricultural ats0slWientvalues for eligible agricultural land,which.was added to Article 25-AA in 1980 (L.1980, c.79), is based on such "classification information." The"soil group worksheets"which assessors use to make such determinations of value are "prepared at the request of the laiiEi Wner by the local Soil and Water Conservation District office pursuant to rules established by the Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets" (7 Op.Counsel SBEA No.105; see a/so,1 NYCRR Part 370).- The applicable rules of the State Department of Agriculture and Markets (1 NYCRR Part 370) do not provide that an assessor has the right to "require" that a county soil and RECEIVED 1 Volume 11 - Opinions of CounselQS No. 92 Page 2 of 3 NOV 0 5 2015 to9161 -- water conservation di@t rgai epic orok huts(see, 1 NYCRR§§370.10, 370.11). Nevertheless,we believe an assessor may request such a revision in certain circumstances(see, RP-305-d). We do not believe that such a revision request is appropriate when an assessor solely relies upon zoning requirements to conclude that areas classified by one or more worksheets are residential in nature.Since that appears to be the case in this matter, it is our opinion that the county district need not revise the worksheets in question. However, it is also our opinion that the inclusion of those areas in the worksheets does not pt;ecIU the assessor from determining,based on actual observed use,that such lands are not eligible for agricultural assessments. Zoning and Agricultural Assessments Also in our opinion, assessors generally may not base determinations of taxable status on whether the use of a property is in compliance with zoning:In reversing an assessor's denial of a tax exemption,the'Court of Appeals stated "[t]he additional requirement imposed by the Appellate Division that an applicant must possess a special use permit is...not found in"the exemption statute[RPTL,§420-a](Legion of Christ v. Town of Mount Pleasant,1 N.Y.3d 406,412,806 N.E.2d 973,9'77;774 N.Y.S.2d 860,864 (2004)). There are exemption statutes that do provide that qualified property must comply with land use regulation. One such example is RPTL,section 489, which a court found requires the issuance of a permit by New York City government before a building improvement could be considered "completed" and thus eligible for tax abatement and exemption(see,31171 Owners Corp. v. New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development, 190 A.D.2d 441, 599 N.Y.S.2d 19 (1st Dept.,1993)):.No such qualification is stated in the definition of"land used in agricultural production"that is set forth in AML,section 301(4).Accordingly,we believe an assessor may not deny, in whole or in part, an agricultural assessment application solely based on land use restrictions set forth in the'tO Wfl's zoning ordinance.3 April 21, 2005 AML,section 306(1),states in relevant part that"[s]uch assessment shall be granted pursuant to paragraphs a, b and f of subdivision one of section[305] as if such land were in an agricultural district." 2 We note that 1 NYCRR§370:10(a)states"[a]n applicant for an agricultural group value assessment,or an authorized representative, shall personally deliver,at least 30 days prior to the applicable taxable status date to the county soil and water district office,the assessment roll description,tax map land parcel number or numbers or any other documentation necessary to identify the parcel or parcels and their respective acreage used in the preceding two years for agricultural production." Subdivision(b)of this same rule states "[t]he district office shall outline on an appropriate soil:rnap or maps the parcel or parcels identified in subdivision (a) of this section and shall delineate land used in agricultural production from nonagricultural land." Volume 11 - Opinions of Counsel "'-R!'S No. 92 Page 3 of 3 3 However,such a taxable determination by an assessor in no manner interferes with the power of a municipality to enforce its zoning ordinance (see,Town 1.0,y; §268). Updated'February 28,2013 RECEIVED�1* 11 NOV 052015 ®ARS OF bn- APPEALS - - • - - '-- . A„ "Al RECEIVED P4:3c4\ Southolt __wn Planning Board — November 2, 2:,,j IVU V 2015 Approval Extensions: �� �I BOARD OF APPEALS Stronq's Marine Pavilion - This amended application is for the proposed construction of a 32' x 24' (640 sq. ft.) pool cabana with two (2) pergolas at 14' x 20', storage and attached changing rooms with no plumbing on 8.8 acres in the Marine II Zoning District. The property is located at 2255 Wickham Avenue, 670' n/w/o CR 48 and Wickham Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM#1000-114-3-1 Set Hearings: Boyle Agricultural Barn II - This Amended Site Plan Application is for a 60' x 130' (7,800 sq. ft.) metal agricultural barn where there exists a 60' x 120' (7,200 sq. ft.) metal barn and a 25' x 95' (2,375 sq. ft.) metal barn on 22.3 acres in the R-80 Zoning District. The property is located at 24435 Route 25, ±125' n/e/o Platt Road and NYS Route 25, 'Orient. SCTM#1000-18-2-34 McCall Wine Production Facility - This application is for the proposed construction of 5i a multi-level 17,100 sq. ft wine eduction and storage facility, including agricultural Tr" equipment storage, on a 1.8 acre reserve area (SCTM#1000-109-1-38) attached to ±35.8 acre of farmland (SCTM#1000-116-1-3.4) with Dm__ elonmeat R;ahts held by Suffolk County in the AC Zoning District. This facility will not be open to the public. The (9, property is located at 22600 NYS Route 25, ±1,800' s/w/o Alvahs Lane & NYS Route 25, Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-109-1-38 SITE PLANS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Determinations: A & S Southold Oil Corp. - This Amended Site Plan is for the construction of a 1,568 ‘\)-i3Ojj sq. ft. canopy pursuant to ZBA File #6757 to cover the existing fuel pumps on 0.3 acres in the General Business (B) Zoning District. The property is located at 49670 NYS Route 25, on the corner of NYS Rt. 25 & Main Bayview Road, Southold. SCTM#1000- 70-7-4 Southold Gas Station & Convenience Store - This Amended Site Plan is for the proposed conversion of an existing 3,476 sq. ft. building (formerly for vehicle detailing, weir- RV sales and servicing) to a convenience store and vehicle fuel sales with: 6 fuel pumps (12 fueling stations), two canopies, one at 50' x 24' (1,200 sq. ft.) and the other at 50' x 50' (2,500 sq. ft.) and 29 parking spaces on 1.46 acres in the General Business , `a (B) Zoning District. The property is located at 45450 CR 48, on the s/w corner of CR 48e,� and Youngs Avenue, Southold. SCTM#1000-55-5-2.2 `l\ Page 12 II RovWats-=SAO SITE DATA t. `tO Rawmru-t>ROAO PARKING CALCULATIONS: M# 1000-109-1.40-,936 ACRE IOSVSLwamwDR rrenrm-r Ltxo Location ae. 49 =ma May ns srAOSs 1000-116-1-2.2.4847 ACRES IDeVSLOalt...wo980{D) _ WINERY teooec OOSNSPuz s 1000.116.1.34-35,6 ACRES (mVeuaeeemw°xw SOLD) �4o Tmuv� DOM Oeae°uwm 1000.109.148-1.84 ACRES tOereLOwvrtw°xrswrAOD �,•_ <0AwO&"r v'ePPncssewtxc ADDRESS 22600 MN ROAD OUR NEW YORK,11935 A it. 4 OWNER: WALKER POO BOX 271 CALL,LLC. P%• ``�,,. w,six c ds CUTCHOOUE,NY 11935 �l SITE: 87.046 ACRES 2 9� s�•� VINEYARD 20.7 ACRES g0.% `",e\_ <wry ZONING, AC S' �i°p LOT COVERAGE re o a °s. ALLOWABLE:.29% _." _ "�oy4P, EXISTING:0 085%SURVEYOR: JOHN EHLERS Re\ 6 EAST MAIN STREETW\ RIVERHEAD,NY 11901 [ LICENSE#50202 WLL \ ' a'dDATED MAY 3,REEJ2//1 \yam 48'4'%'' 2009 YOUNG BYOUNG LAND SURVEYORS F- Dik 400 OSTRANDER AVENUE G RIVERHEAD,NY 11901 al /' \� <.°�� �t °,0- LOCATION MAP < C: .4,...,.....„...,___,,,.... '.Land now or Formerly ��' ` _ Bartle Poco T^\\ \ •• �I g �4/ Or=` °OWxED ev° FFotll �__- ,lana nav a FarmmlY 517E - - • .1:'"s'. p \ \,• SWAMIES _ Poem.Land hue{ , .•..•.•, \ \ 'A.an.. iI ITECa�-_` ./ \ 1 32800 MAIN ROAD.OUTCNOGUE,NV :11 \ \ °""omuemL�o{ r \I l' snW*AR: _..,_..,...„.7 �, i\R ' m• 15]21 • — —invi 15aADRE9 `'� t n 1 '..,...'"e-A7- .. ?t. X,..... t ..-._c^--.,._.�-_._,.•--.�,.,_2 fw• �6fH • • _ MIIIIIIMIMINI111.11111 ,;•t m m \ Ila APPROVED BY • \ � PLANNING BOARD ,,, \ 4a\' TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 9 Eat„.>•o .• ...... 4r DAR 045 14 7011 KEY PLAN ,.. SCALE:NOT TO SCALE One. rat: YA :\ WA t x 211 T` Ny s�rg cNECItEa ay p RATS doer 16.2010 ecA{E Norio TJd.6 •�- - - 04 SREErTR{S scrS�•tatmmon -^" \. SITE PLAN ® �vr • —ems • m—r,V.• r. XaRearw°. ri Suffolk County Dept of Health Services _ Town of Southold Site Plan Approval II -p o 6 m (I) 4 _.€ ` x g� -9 II L1y C=1 a._� r\ I 1R\ //t0 157 -LL (�ner - nc \ IcD 10 \i // 7 I\\\ I \ - ..- �® OVIDEDMILFTOLK Ytli CTMRES i I \` \\ //- 4 • co \ ���0 O I �� ill i < 11 _ ��� t- \\1 / Wag 1 �a I / 0 NOW OR 00VgLY P CANIC 1AFm 1NOSi I / _\ Z 4:1Z �°O�bio 0.<B' `O / LINEW EM4TN9 O AS F£N 9ATTEE 6 I I APS At \ P4 czars.Nra 0 - Y _ r_� DEONTTR 2 `\\ I ODD`DD.e - _ �AT = 57 �a'w —— — - - - - -^--- --——_ -..;�& Y/ 6e,. _ TUI 19 R10�RY , \\ I I °I'e'w�s -:0 19.`.rC'Mrg • �I; — . / s , eAs„ \ � t)�llsssa �tii2 �,� \ =1332'6"W. �syss�- iIR • ;�.Ki:s.. �;� _ .. \ rte. N a �l,/ La 3'322, 66 \ • m \ ` s 'Cnf`yf ..yS^Ii�:� 1i --7`---�..__-y--%-_._ RELDCA.. o r` r � �_ 'v: / +� u �n _ ewsTRaz sreN 1� unLm• -a D �PQM DND/ ro� \ iJ7�7 '£P41� { Dk N .‘,,i IDOSTO69--/ • \ C100STIYNNF \RaAD.MN .r,d / :-.....--7..... / ,��,-• / ' ��a'u'.?"��,'��pilo - '��hk,1�- I I r J �� I \\ �E ::. H 9FL1R10 LlId9 Mop? l' %: �;� F �¢ I NIND SENERATOR 607)1 OMENT RIGHTS I // , y. -• POPLARS / w - ew5nRFi '�5 DEVELOPMENT wCHTS 0h9- f�' a y $ -,-BARON \ INTACT ��. -r- -. k 1 r• u -J/ l 1 6 a :, 6 ACRES EL•�]5 ���,,�I ,-J;�11I' Y.• / y w N • • ewxw9 PAT Row � i } �T __ u�e'G9nIm r�Tr�u - _ I \\ a'-. 2 OEYELOPAIENT MORS Vf% Ti y !L. _ o T-•'-uriD • 01 PO ' P COUNTY �./"/EXIST. N I,TOD SAL I- D TAM HT1 . / Allillili .rc 05.00 ACRES \ 7�e TREE BPT DIA 4 F LO OD '\PJfIST.IRRIGATION / .':.e_Yii!ii. p.✓• OPr DIA XOPT.M \� .C,O crWb \ •��,r_Tc�y,T,� AP.9%-Lk-9-1 .-. Pr Nr(Do EXISEN9 DIRT PAW/RGAD ' \� a. R. J—_. TWW9.11x _ .. F &RBaATm \B *Y.1� 1• TOP W Li'TNTC \ I RDS, a�'.\ 9 / 91 DEBASE % . \ \ + .\25 wu'x Br. NS.UE \ CNECAm6Yz N6 N \ \� / \\\ OATE NOVERIEER1S.2010 1.y NAP 11 N111, PLAN 6NEETIIRE SITEfl /�N -`,` / APPROVED BY b SITE SCALE: 1"=20'-0.• - - :.��, .">W�..nt. PLAN /\ - - 6"Te- '.: )15.)1)11SS BOARD / ''Y2.,�D ...�"®0 TOWN OF soun101D SUFFOLK COUNTY DE0ARTMENT-OPHEALTH-SER.CE -• • •• ME . ] PDII APPROVAL:7)16110 !4 —` REFERENCE 0 010.10-0001 �•..'y SME6TMO- DESIGN FLOW:329 Opd AD;DEFI oaeR _ USE:WINE TASTING AND STORAGE .iS.,.'..--,.- 3�'.t1L �p/p�r No18rb 64.44.040.4.0%.6"" (J • NY STATE DOT �� pc 7.74% 0vamtadaps..'PT SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH ro°°°Om1p°441' TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SITE PLAN APPROVAL II II I c) 17Revbirn°.=MOE [1' L l+ta. of eoam t 2 tee.re.atolls a- (s (� wm�s�ero 0 r LLt ,, LU N 264' 0 LU C-Z ® E_ O ///ioaiiiaaia�ai� �raiiaaaia�i�i oaaia�o�iaii iai���i��ia�iii� ai�aiaaaiai�olaiiiaaaiaaiaiiiaaD ` AWL 0 i �IMMI TASTING ROOM j W. EXISTING g g WINE STORAGE ) C 132 sr GIVER HEAD ueNr BOMAR! I GLAD ON $ 0 0 I• wOmrNJ y r. - y V j 2 I t ,. 00'. _ _/ 7p� 7N'g T hf@l5�TOILET E'pOMOILET' � ,.i / i/i1J�l ' iii // / /�/ <JO,.t. O,s mss.SiA MI w.0e 11 411111 ,,' �mm �5 hill EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING EXISTING a: �A P.wsTIRs�Tor� OUTDOOR OUTDOOR OUTDOOR - OUTDOOR MIIISTALL STALL STALL STALL lJ/= 'el4li, NOTE. ALL STALLS TO V REMAIN OPEN ANO 6®FOR MISG - eer `9�. �3 man VINEYARD � ° +:�', . AGE �, PR:�3F•ip 0914 -� BRAW :V. NS APPROVED BY PLANNING BOARD FIRST FLOOR PLAN TOWN OF SOVFNOLD 6AfE JAN.15,2010 SCALE 1/P u 1•-0' •�� NAR]4 2911 1 TASTING ROOM OCCUPANTS IIMEMIIIII SHEET TrrLE. TABLES Arra TASTING BAR AS SHOWN,38.0 PANTSn pj FIRST TABLES AND TASTING BAR AS PER NY STATE BUILDING COON, 7 .7'0i/ FLOOR IS 5P ND-T)p62 PERSON.124 SFAS a 45 OCCUPANTS PLAN SIll 11 211 SHEET NO 11 Suffolk County Dept of Health Soreloes Town of Southold Slte Plan Approval ` II 1 1 �,, MAILING ADDRESS: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ,�` ,OF S0(/j�,'- P.O.Box 1179 MARTIN H.SIDOR ,"40 Odd Southold,NY 11971 Chair J1tt OFFICE LOCATION: WILLIAM J.CREMERS r!s Town Hall Annex KENNETH L.EDWARDS � pCt• 54375 State Route 25 JAMES H.RICH III -A •/ (cor.Main Rd.&Youngs Ave.) DONALD J.WILCENSKI Co ��,�� Southold,NY Telephone:631765-1938 . Fax:631 765.3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEIVED @}r' March 15, 2011 NOV 0 5 2015BOARD j otg Ms. Nancy Steelman APPEALS do Samuels &Steelman • 25235 Main Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 Re: Approval: Proposed Site Plan for McCall Farm Winery Located at 22600 Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM#1000-109-1-40 Zoning District: A-C Dear Ms. Steelman: The Southold Town Planning Board adopted the following resolution at a meeting held on Monday, March 14, 2011: WHEREAS, this site plan is to construct a 724 s.f. wine tasting room and a 782 s.f. wine storage area by altering an existing 2,480 s.f. barn on an 87-acre parcel in the A-C Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on January 19, 2010, a site plan application was submitted for review by the applicant's agent, Samuels&Steelman; and WHEREAS, on March 23, 2010, the Southold Town Planning Board formally accepted the application for review and distributed the application to agencies having jurisdiction _for their comments including the following: Town Engineer, Architectural Review Committee, Cutchogue Fire Department, Suffolk County Planning Commission, Local Waterfront Revitalization Coordinator, Southold Building Department and NYS DOT; and WHEREAS, the comments from those agencies were received and reviewed by the Planning Board, discussed with the applicant, and incorporated into the site plan to the satisfaction of the Planning Board; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2010, a public hearing was held and closed by the Southold Town Planning Board regarding the site plan; and RECEIVED?,l4 ' _ % - NOV 052015 (IST'. BOARD OF APPEALS McCall Farm Winery Page Two March 15, 2011 WHEREAS, on May 17, 2010, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-131 C., received a reply from the Suffolk County Planning Commission with the notation that the application was a matter for local determination, with two comments: 1. No off-street parking should be allowed to overflow onto adjacent Suffolk County (purchase of development rights)farmland property; 2. A fence (in accordance with the Zoning Code) or a landscaped buffer should be located between Lot 40 and Suffolk County PDR farmland property to the south. Both comments were considered by the Planning Board and the Development Rights Easement Area was noted on the plan, however, a fence or landscaped buffer was not required because both uses are agricultural and screening was not considered necessary; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act(6 NYCRR), Part 617.5c(7), has made a determination that the proposed action is a Type II Action and not subject to further environmental review; and WHEREAS, on August 23, 2010,the applicant submitted the Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval, Permit (#C10-10-0003) and a copy of the plan approved by the SCDHS, on which one hand-written notation was made (and subsequently noted on the site plan to be endorsed by the Planning Board); and WHEREAS, on March 9, 2011, the applicant submitted plans approved by the NYS DOT with their Curb Cut Permit#10-094P, and those plans were found to be in agreement with the site plan except for one detail showing an existing curb cut to be abandoned. This was subsequently noted on the site plan; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2011,the Cutchogue Fire Department reviewed the plan and requested an emergency vehicle turn-around, pursuant to State Fire Code Appendix D103.4, be installed as the driveway is a dead-end greater than 150' in length; and WHEREAS, on March 11, 2011, the Southold Town Building Inspector reviewed the plan and certified that the proposed action is a permitted use in this A-C Zoning District; and WHEREAS, at a Work Session on March 14, 2011, the Planning Board determined that all applicable requirements of the Site Plan Regulations Article XXIV, §280—Site Plan Approval of the Town of Southold have been met; therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that the action is consistent under the policies of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program; and be it further — _. . . RECEIVED Aft ' NOV 0 5 2015 0.1 6 McCall Farm Winery Page Three MaraCiN/ i F APPEALS RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grants Approval and authorizes the Chairman to endorse the site plan entitled "A New Winery at the McCall Farm", prepared by Nancy Steelman, R.A., dated January 15, 2010 and last revised March 11, 2011, including the following pages: Sheet No.: SP-1 Key Plan Sheet No.: SP-2 Site Plan Sheet No.: SP-3 Details Sanitary& Drainage Calculations& Diagrams Sheet No.: 1 First Floor Plan Sheet No.: 2 Building Elevations Please also note the following requirements in the Southold Town Code relating to site plans: 1. Any outdoor lighting shall be shielded so the light source is not visible from adjacent properties and roadways. Lighting fixtures shall focus and direct the light in such a manner as to contain the light and glare within property boundaries, and to shield the light from the sky. 2. All storm water run-off from grading, driveways and gravel areas must be contained on site. 3. Approved site plans are valid for three years from the date of approval, within which time all proposed work must be completed, unless the Planning Board grants an extension. 4. Any changes from the approved site plan shall require Planning Board approval. 5. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Planning Board or its representative, must inspect the site to ensure it is in conformity with the approved site plan and issue a final site inspection approval letter. Should the site be found not in conformance with the approved site plan, no Certificate of Occupancy may be issued unless the Planning Board approves the changes to the plan. A copy of the approved site plan is enclosed for your records. One copy will also be sent to the Building Department and the Town Engineer/Highway Department. If you have any questions regarding the information contained in this resolution, please contact the Planning Board Office. Very truly yours, lik-"Zt41 Ikt &1st Martin H. Sidor Chairman End. cc: Town Engineer w/map Building Dept. w/map • WORK SESSION AGENDA RECEIVED ,44 SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Monday, January 7, 2013 ® 'Z015 - 2:30 p.m. Nov Executive Board Room, Town Hall Annex ����� o: APpEpbgLSg�- Site Plan Applications Project name______[Surrey Lane, LLC _ 1 SCTM#_- 1000-fi9-5-1_.-_—.___._._^__•i Location: 46975 NYS Route 25,Southoldi Description: This site plan is for the proposed construction of a 90' x 42' (3,780 sq. ft.)i agricultural equipment storage building on a SC Development Rights property of 43.7 acres in the A-C Zoning District Status: Pending_ ;-Action_ i Review comments from referrals. _-__�,-,�___-__-_- Attachments: jStaff Report _ Project name: McCall Farm Winery -- j SCTM#:1.1000-109_1-40 _ _-___� i Location: 22600 Main Road, Cutchoc_ue 1 Description: This proposed site plan is to construct a 724 sq. ft. wine tasting room and a 782 sq. ft. wine storage area by altering an existing 2,480 sq. ft. barn on an 87-acre parcel in the A-C Zoning District.______ ___ _ ._- Status: Approved site_plan_ Action: Review comments from final site ins ection. l Attachments:__ _____ , Draft letter (-Pro'ect Hamer Tikal 1 Convenience Store 1 SCTM#: 1000-97-1-6.1 Location; 250 Cox Lane, Cutchogue _� Description: . This site plan is for the proposed conversion of an existing 3,200 sq. ft. building to include a 1,244 sq. ft. retail convenience store and 1,956 sq. i ft. of storage space on a .68-acre parcel in the General Business (B) _ Zoning District Status: Pending Action: Review comments from referrals. „Attachments:__•_..__-_._ -Staff Report _._____1 - - - - • - -- —� 416(C*49 .*0 °) St Li,qfoi � Town Hall Annex 4 Telephone(631)765-1802 54375 Main Road Fax(631)765-9502 P.O.Box 1179 �p Southold.New York 11971-0959 T yCOU�' RECEIVED O \-\' BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOV 2015 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BOARD OF APPEALS MEMORANDUM TO: Martin H. Sidor,Planning Board Chairman BAR 15 FROM: Michael J. Verity, Chief Building Inspector DATE: March 11, 2011 REQUIREMENTS FOR SITE PLAN ELEMENTS& CERTIFICATION Project: McCall Farm Winery Location: 22600 Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM# 1000—Section 109-Block 1 —Lot 40 Date: January 15, 2010 Revised Date: March 25,2010 1. ALL BUILDINGS AND USES SHALL COMPLY WITH CHAPTERS 144 AND 280 OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CODE. 2. OFF STREET PARKING BY AUTHORITY OF THE PLANNING BOARD. 3. ALL FENCING, SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING BY AUTHORITY OF THE PLANNING BOARD. 4. THE PROPOSED USE Winery IS A PERMITTED USE IN THIS AC DISTRICT AND IS SO CERTIFIED. Michael J. Ver t Chief Building Inspector _ a �,.��Q"""--_ MAILING ADDRESS: PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ,r' f 801/) P.O.Box 1179 MARTIN H.SIDOR s h�� �_ Southold,NY 11971 Chau * *, OFFICE LOCATION: WILLIAM J.CREMERSN Town Hall Annex KENNETH L.EDWARDS � � 54375 State Route 25 JAMES H.RICH III O! , (cor.Main Rd.&Youngs Ave.) DONALD J.WILCENSKI �C�Uti4 ,1/ Southold,NY • Telephone:631 765-1988 Fax:631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEIVED 0 - ar MEMORANDUM _ NOV 0 5 2015 m BOARD OF APPEALS To: Michael J.Verity, Chief Building Inspector From: Heather Lanza, Planning DirectorQ9 Date: March 9, 2011 Re: McCall Farm Winery 22600 Main Road, Cutchogue SCTM#1000-109-1-40 The Planning Board refers this application to you for your certification by Friday, March 11th, if possible. This site plan is proposing to alter an existing barn totalling 2,480 sq. ft. into a winery within a development rights intact area of an 87.03 acre parcel of development rights sold land. The proposed winery will have a lot coverage of 0.065% in the A-C Zoning 'District. Thank you for your cooperation. End: Site Plan