Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
4227
.._C..R'~' 4~'& LoVE L/(, MAI~T~TUCK ~t] ZONE :140 5;-- '~, ~ (~- A~¢~ ~;~ ~,~J ~ 6 #422Y ph 4/~/94 S-etback of two ex±st±ng -- signs,.dO not comply,aS posted on fence. GASSER. ~,m. & Karen ~ /¢- ~¢/?~z APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPF, AI~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Appl. No. 4227. Application of WILLIAM GASSER and AMERICAN ARMORED FOUNDATION requesting a variance based upon the Building Inspector's February 4. 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application for two identification signs, as exist on fence, which do not meet the setback requirement of 15 feet from all property lines, ref: Article XIX. Section 100-91{c), Article XVIII. Section 100-81-C(2a) of the Zoning Code. Zoning District: Hamlet Business. WHEREAS, a public hearing was held on April 6, 1994, time all those who desired to be heard were heard and their testimony recorded; and at which WHEREAS. the Board has carefully considered all testimony and documentation submitted concerning this application; WHEREAS. Board Members have personally viewed and are familiar with the premises in question, its present zoning, and the surrounding areas; and WHEREAS, the Board made the following findings of fact: 1. BASIS OF APPEAL. This is an appeal based upon the February q, 199u, Notice of Disapproval issued by the Building Inspector under an application for a building permit for approval of two on-premises advertising signs for the American Armored Foundation, Inc. and William Gasser, as owner. The owner acquired the subject premises on September 3, 1981. 2. LOCATION AND DIMENSIONS OF SIGNS. The face of each of the two signs exists at 22.75 sq. ft. in area, with dimensions of 3'6" by 6'. The location of each sign is on an existing fence - one located at the entrance to the subject museum along the easterly side of Love Lane, Mattituck, and the other on an existing fence along the southerly side of County Road u,8, a dual-lane highway, and both signs are more particularly shown Ihighlighted) on the survey prepared by Roderick VanTuyl, P.C. amended December 23, 1993. The thickness of the fence is given at one inch. Page 2 - Appl. No. 4227 Application of WILLIAM GASSER Decision Rendered May 4, 1994 3. CODE PROVISION. The provision of the Code from which the variance is requested is Article IX. Section 100-81C. subsection 2(a) {referred from Section 100-91C-2} - which states that such signs are permitted accessory uses subject to the following requirements: ...(a) Free~ncling or ground signs: ~here the building is set back 25 feet or more free the street, one (1) sign, single or double fac~, not more than 18 sfl. ft., the leeer edge of ~hlch shall net be les~ than four feet above the ground,unless attoc~ to a ~a)l or fence, and the up~er nd~e of ~hlch shall not ext~ more than fifteen (15) feet above the gr~, ~nich sign shall be set back net less than 15 feet frem all street and property lines and shall a~wrtise only the business c~ on the pr~ses .... 4. EXISTING SIGNS. Any other sign which may be at the premises which does not have approval must be removed before issuance of building permits or certificate of occupancy pertainir~j to this property. 5. STATE AUTHORIZATION. By letter dated January 31, 1994, the N.Y.S. Department of Transportation has confirmed conformance with Sections 52 and 88 of the Highway Law, for two fence-mounted signs. 6. OPPOSITION BY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS. During the hearing, opposition was received from the adjacent property owners (on the north of this property), through their attorney~ together with a copy of a Memorandum listing the areas of concern -- all of which have been fully conslde~ed by the Board Members under this application. At the April 6, 1994 hearing, the attorney for the opponents alleged there were other areas to be addresse~l under the pending site plan application before the Planning Board, and that the subject variance may not, in her opinion, be segmente~ for only this setback variance application on the fence signs. (No current documentation from the enforcing officer(s) or case law was, however, submitted to support this claim.) In addition, opponents made other claims, at the April 6th hearing, stating there were improprieties or noncompliance pertaining to the site plan, although there was no evidence submitted by the opponents or their' attorney from the Building Department to support this claim- except that there was an intent by opponents to file a written complaint over the next few days with the Building Department, Town Attorney and/or Town Board to investigate or determine the alleged noncompliance. The Z.B.A. hearing record for the setbacks of the subject signs does show that the Appeals Board Clerk did speak as recently as the Pa'ge 3 - Appl. No. 4227 Application of WILLIAM GASSER Decision Rendered May 4. 1994 afternoon of the day of the hearing (April 6, 1994) with Building Inspector (Gary Fish) and that he told the Board Clerk there were no other items that he feels would be proper to bring before the Board at this time particularly since he has been communicating with the applicants directly and that the Gassers are proceeding to remedy any outstanding problem, such as necessary screening and other site elements normally addressed by the Planning Board under Article XXV of the Zoning Code, The issue raised during the April 6. 1994 hearing as to whether or not a parcel or building has unrelated violations is not properly before the Board. and must initially be addressed by the enforcing department or enforcing officer of the Town, A determination on the sign setback application as applied would not. however, preclude a subsequent appeal for different relief by the owners of the subject parcel or an aggrieved party as provided by New York Town Law. Section 267. 7. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS. The relief requested is an area variance which pertains to the manner in which the land dimensions or topographical requirements are to be authorized by the Board of Appeals {ref. New York Town Law, Section 267(1)} amended July 1. 1992. This amendment no longer includes the term "practical difficulty" or any particular test, and now provides that ZBAs consider two basic things: a) the benefit to the applicant if the variance is granted; and b) the detriment to the health, safety, and general welfare of the neighborhood or community that would occur if the variance were to be granted. In balancing the interests above, the Board Members have,consi- dered, and determined, the following five factors for this variance request: area a) there will not be an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties, if granted; the fence is a permitted structure which is used for screening, privacy and security purposes throughout the town. and the purpose for the proposed signs is for on-premises advertisement which is permitted in the Hamlet-Business Zone District as an accessory to the on-site use; the size of the sign is within the limitation recommended by the Code Review Committee at 24 sq. ft, or less; b) the benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some other method, feasible for the applicants, other than an area variance; placement of the sign on the interior of the property P;;ge ~, - AppI. No. 4227 Application of WILLIAM GASSER Decision Rendered May 4, 1994 (inside the fence enclosure) would necessitate a different variance as to sign height in order to be visible, c) the area variance is not substantial - particularly in light of the fact that the property is unique as to its L-shaped configuration, narrow width, limited buildable area, building location which preexists the zoning regulations, and other preexisting nonconformityl les); d) this area variance will not have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or business district; abutting the subject premises to the south are the Long Island Railroad tracks; to the north is a parcel of land occupied as a take-out restaurant service with dwelling use(s); the parcel was re-zoned on September 21, 1993 from Light-Industrial and Residential Office mixed, to Hamlet Business; e) although the fence signs have been existing for some time and was self-created by the owners, New York Town Law provides that such action does not preclude the grant of a variance when all the other factors are considered; f) the relief granted is the minimum necessary and at the same time will preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community; the sign is not unsafe, insecure, damaged, deteriorated, and is not a menace to the public. 8. PLANNING BOARD STATUS. Under the pending site-plan application before the Southold Town Planning Board a letter dated March 16, 1994 was sent to the owners/applicants that a variance was required for the setbacks of the two signs, as exist. It is noted that the site plan application is being held in abeyance pending the outcome of the variance application, and a further review is continuing. 9. PERMITTED SIGNS. The Building Department has indicated that its department's ruling is that one on-premises advertising sign is permitted for each road frontage;, and when a parcel has frontage along two roads, two on-premises signs would be permitted, one along each separate road contiguous to the parcel, either single-faced or double-faced; and that Section 100-81C of the zoning code does not in their opinion prohibit more than one sign under these circumstances. NOW. THEREFORE. on motion by Member Dinizio, seconded by Member Wilton. it was ,,' P~ge 5 - Apph No. 4227 Application of WILLIAM GASSER Decision Rendered May 4. 1994 RESOLVED, to GRANT the relief requested for the location of an on-premises advertising sign posted on the fence as situated less than 15 feet from the property lines - one being at the easterly side of Love Lane. and the other at the southerly side of County Road 48. as exists, with the following understanding: a) final approval to be obtained from the Southold Town Planning Board under the site plan regulations; b) approval does not expire from the N.Y.S. Department of Transportation pertaining to Sections 88 and 52 of the Highway Law; c) a fence permit to be obtained from the Southold Town Building Department; d) referral in accordance with the Administrative Code,to the Suffolk County Planning Commission this project is located within 500 feet of a County Highway; e) this determination shall not preclude application by the owners or an aggrieved party for different relief, filed in accordance with the requirements of New York Town Law. Section 267; f) compliance with all other sign and zoning regulations; Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen. Dinizio. Wilton, Villa and Goehringer. This resolution was duly adopted. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER//~ CHAIRMAN ~ To,,, C; 'T ~, ~ t:thold APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard R Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wil~n Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, that the following public hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLO TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS, at the Southold Town New York 11971, on WEDNESDAY, times specified below: Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, APRIL 6, 1994, commencing at the 1. 7:30 p.m. Appl. No. q221 - ARTHUR BURNS. This is a request for a variance based upon the March 1, 199~ Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector concerning a building permit application for fencing around the existing tennis-court, which height exceeds the requirements when located in a front yard; ref. Article XXlII, Section 1OO-231 of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: 3525 Private Road #13, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1OOO-105-1-~. Zone Oistrict: R-80 Residential. 2. 7:32 p.m. Appl. No. q218 - JOHN E. STRIPP and JUDITH D. STRIPP. (Continuation from March 2, 1994). Proposed dwelling with reduced front yard setback from Private Road off East End Road, Fishers Island, NY; 1OOO-7-2-9. Page 2 - Notice of H~gs Southold Town Boarc of-Appeals Regular Meeting of April 6. 199q 3- 7:40 p.m. A~pl. No. ~220 -- JOHN E. STRIPP and JUDITH D. STRIPP. This is a request for a variance based upon the Building Inspector's February 24, 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application for a swimmingpool with enclosure in a front yard location; ref. Article III. Section 100-32 of the Zo~i.g Code. Location of Property: Private Road off East End Road. Fishers Island. NY; County Parcel ID 1000-7-2-9. 4. 7:45 p.m. Appl. No. 4222 - CINDY BENEDETTO. This is a request for a variance based upon the Building Inspector's March 4, 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application for an addition at the rear of existing dwelling which will be located within Lagoon; ref. Article XXlll, Code. Location of Property: Section III; 910 Maple Lane, 75 feet of the bulkhead along D~-~n Section 100-239.4B of the Zoning Lot No. 61 at Cleaves Point, Greenport, NY; County Parcel ID 1000-35-5-26. The subject premises is substandard and is located in the R-40 Residential Zone District. 5. 7:50 p.m. Appl. No. 4227 - WILLIAM GASSER. This is a request for a variance based upon the Building Inspector's February 4, 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application for two identification signs, as exist on fence, which do not meet the setback requirement of 15 feet from Pa~je 3 - Notice of HeI~gs Southold Town Boar( oT Appeals Regular Meeting of April 6. 1994 all property lines, ref: Article XIX, Section 100-91(c), Article XVIII, Section 100-81-C(2a) of the Zoning Code. District: Hamlet Business. Zone b. 7:55 p.m. Appl. No. 4223 - DONALD ~REHM. This is a request for a variance based upon the ~uilding lnsp~-~tor's March ~, 19~q Notice of Disapproval con~er~ing a building ))emit application for a deck addition pr .~!~ within 75 f~t of the bulkhead along Dawn Lagoon; ref. Article XXIII, Section 100-219.4B of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: lOlO Maple Lane, Greenport, NY; Lot No. 60 at Cleaves Point, Section III; County Parcel ID 10OO-35-5-27. The subject premises is substandard and is located in the R-hO Zone District. 7- 8:00 p.m. Appl. No. 4226 - THOMAS AND JOAN KELLY. This is a request for a variance based upon the Building Inspector's Marc~ 10, l~h Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application to locate a storage building within 75 feet of the bulkhead along Horseshoe Cove at Cutchogue Harbor; ref. Article XIII, Section 100-239.4B of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: Cutchogue, NY; County acres. 1050 West Cove Road, at Nassau Point, Parcel ID 1000-111-5-1 containing 1.54 Southold Is Regular Meeting of April 6. 199& 8. 8:05 p.m. Appi. No. ~22~ - THOMAS AND ROBY GLUCKMAN. This is an application, with amendments, concerning property known as 1350 West Cove Road, Nassau Point, Cutchogue, NY; County Parcel ID 1000-111-5-2, requesting: a) a variance based upon the Building Inspector's February 23, 199q Notice Of Disapproval concerning a building perait application to alter an existing garage uith a£tarbed guest unit, which will include an expansion of the guest unit by more than 50 percent of its present size; ref. Article XXIV, Section 100-241 of the Zoning Code; and b) application to construct an fence aclosure, which will yard or required front yard; and Section a variance based upon the Building Inspector's 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit inground pool, pool house, deck and not be located in the required rear ref. Article III, Section 100-33 100-33C of the Zoning Code; and c) a variance based upon the Building Inspector's Marchl4, 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application to construct an inground pool, pool house, deck and fence enclosure, a portion of which is proposed within 75 feet of the bulkhead along Horseshoe Cove; ref. Article XXlII, Section 100-239.hB of the Zoning Code. - H s Page 5 Notice of Southold Town Board peals Regular Meeting of April 6. 1994 9- 8:15 p.m. Appl. No. q225 - RICHARD AND DOLORES PRINCIPI. This is a request for a variance based upon the Building Inspector's March 2, 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application to relocate a dwelling structure within 100 feet of the L.I. Sound bluff; ref. Article XXlII, Section 1OO-239.4A-1 of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: Lot #2 shown on the 1985 t~ap of Blue Horizous. Section ; also known as 4&rd) 81ue Horizon*Bluffs Road. Peconic. NY; County Parcel ID 1000-74-1-35.52. 10. 8:20 p.m. Appl. No. 4228 - VICTOR and GAlL RERISI~ as contract vendees. (Owner: Doris E. Schwartz). This is a request for a variance based upon the Building Inspector's March 15, 1994 Notice of Disapproval concerning a building permit application to locate a dwelling, the northerly portion of which will be within 75 feet of the bulkhead near Gull Pond; ref. Article XXIII, Section 1OO~239.4B of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: Lot No. 34 and part of 33 on the Map of Section Two at Cleaves Point, filed Map No. 3521; also known as 800 S~ug Harbor Road, Greenport/East Marion, NY; County Parcel ID 1000-35-5-37. 11. 8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 4229 - FRANK R. ZALESKI. This is a request for ZBA review and determination confirming and recognizing this vacant lot as exists with nonconforming Southold eals Regular Meeting of April 6. 199~ area, width and depth; ref.: Article XXIV, Section 100-2q~ of the Zoning Code. Location of Property: Lot #11 on the 1965 Filed Map of Oeep Hole Creek Estates; also known as 1100 Theresa Drive, Mattituck, NY; County Parcel ID 1000-115-13-15. Zone District: R-40 Residential. The Board of Appeals will at said time and place hear any and all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in the above matters. Written comments may also be submitted prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. Each hearing will not start before the times designated above, tf you wish to review the files or need to request more information, please do not hesitate to call 765-1809 or visit our office. Dated: March 15, 1994. BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN By Linda Kowalski X TOW'N OF SOUTIIOI.D BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOW'N CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTIIOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL To Williaa Gasser 2383 5t;h At/Esot; .......... ,' i~b' ~6i~'' ~i779 Rofi/dfi4o~' ' .......... PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated . for pe~it to E~CT ~0 SI~S Location of Property 640 LO~ ~ h33,3 ~o[ ....................... County Tax Map No. 1000 Section . .. 140 Block Date February 4, 94 MATTITUCK, NEW YOR~ ~ ~3~ ...... ' · r 16 Hamlet Subdivision ................. Filed Map No .......... is returned herewith and disapproved on thc ~l[owing grounds TI~ SIGNS SHALL BE SET BACK NOT LESS THAN 15 owR~ LX~S. '" ' ................ ~ ........ ....CBAPT. 100-91 ~ (2) I~FgR TO CBAPT. 100-SI C (2) (a) ACTION REQUIRED BY THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS. Lot No ................ FEET FROH ALL STREET AND. RV 1/80 RECEIVED MAR 1 4 1994 Sguthold Town Clerk TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEff YORK APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR DATE TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 1, (We) American Armourea Foundatio~ 2383 5t~ Avenue . Nome of Appellant Street and Number ................... E.9.akQnkQ~ .................................................. Municipality ...... N~.~...Y~k,...HEREBY APPEAL TO State THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON APPLICATION FOR PERMIT NO ..................................... DATED ...................................................... . WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO ( ) (x) Name of Applicant for permit of 2383 5th Avenue Ronkonkoma, New York Street and Number Municipality State PERMIT TO USE PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY PERMIT to maintain 2 signs 1. LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY Love Lane Kattituck HB Street /Hamlet / Use District on Zoning Mop District lO00 Section140Block 2 Lot 16 ,.. . ......................................... uurren: Owner William F. Gasser Map No. 'Lot No. Prior Owner George Penny Sr. 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section, Sub- section and Paragraph of the Zoning Ordinance by nurgber. Do not quote the Ordinance.) Article ly Section I~O-q( tjx /. Ioo-~l ~-;~-~'] 3. TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check appropriate box) ( ) A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map ( ) A VARIANCE due to lack of access (State of New York Town Low Chap. 6:2 Cons. LaWs Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 () 4. PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous appeal (has) (has not) been made with respect to this decision 6f the Building Inspector or with respect to this property, Such appeal was ( ) request for a special permit [ ) request for o variance and was made in Appea! No ................................. Dated .................. t .......... · ........................................ REASON FOR APPEAL ( ) A Variance to Section 280A Subsection 3 ( ) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance (X) A Variance is requested {or the reason that the above proper~y width will no~ allow · for conformingtto ground sign regulations Form (Continue~ on other side) REASON FOR APPEAL Continued 1. STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practical difficultiesor unneces- saw HARDSHtP because The ground sign regulations would deny this non-profit museum the signage that is neccessary to inform tourist of the museum entrance and to alleviate a~y traffic problems that might occur if signag9 is not allowed.~ 2. The hardship created is UNIQUE and is not shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in this use district because All other properties that exist in a HB or commercial environment in the immediate vzcinlty fortunately are not confined to a narrow width df property · s~ch as ou~s~ 3. The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE DlbiKICT because The signs in question are of--the type that are subdued in color, attract.lye in d~sign, non-obtrusive in size and currently placed where they do not inte~fer with drivers observation of the street, on coming traffic or . pe~istra~ns They also d@ not obstruct cars entering or exi~ing · nearby driveways. STATE OF NEW YORK ) ) ss COUNTY OF ) Signature Sworn to this ............. .~.- ............................. day o, .................. 19 ~// , /~/(~Z .................................. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY"RECORD CARD .)09- 09-~,--- E STREET VILLAGE DIST., SUB. , , ACR. FORMER OWNER S W TYPE OF BUILDING RES. ~ S~S/' VL. FARM CO~. CB. , MICS. Mkt. Value ~N D IMP. TOTAL DATE R~RKS Tilloble FRONTAGE ON ~ATER M..~o.~.~ gE,TH . House Plot BULKH~D Totol COLOR TRIM M. Bldg. Extension Extension Extension Porch Porch Breezeway Garage Patio O.B. Total Foundation 3asement ~xt. Walls Fire Place TYPe Roof Dormer Both Floors Interior Finish Heat Rooms 1st Floor Recreation Room Rooms 2nd Floor Driveway inette APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dirdzio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Lydia A. Tortora BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD REPLY TO MEMORANDUM Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 TO: FROM: DATE: Thomas Wickham, r~/f/~c~ Supervisor Jerry Goehringer, ZBA Chai August 21, 1995 SUBJECT: Your Memo of August 17, 1995 - Code Enforcement Existence of Tank Museum Use In response to your August 17, 1995 memo, please bc aware that the status of the variance determinations rendered on February 8, 1995 - based upon the action of the Building Inspector, remains unchanged in its wording and effect. Apparently the August 9, 1995 letter referred to from Attorneys Ongioni and Borrelli is inferring that enforcement be made of all zonin~ regulations while their appeal of the ZBA decision is pending in court. The ZOning code indicates that outdoor storage is not permitted in the HB zone. Is there a procedure presently established by the Town Board or Town Attorney on how enforcement of town matters through, the Town Attorney's Office and enforcing officers would be establEshed - particularly when court litigation is pending? The only procedure that we were aware of is whether the applicant has pursued all permits and the Town usually would discuss a time limitation to obtain those permits (ref. prior Town litigation. ). It is recommended that the Town Board establish a policy or procedure in this regard. Since the Board of Appeals does not have jurisdiction on enforcement issues and this matter is in court litigation, the question raised by the attorneys litigating the ZBA should be considered by the Town Attorney, and possibly determine with the Town Board on how the Town wishes to establish its procedures and policy under these circumstances. Any enforcement or decision made will not affect the outcome of determinations made. cc: Town Investigator Town Attorney APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Lydia A. Tortora BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Sour. hold Town Hall 53095 Main Road EO. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 July 19, 1995 Mrs. Karen A. Gasser Amem'ean Armoured Foundation, Inc. 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonlroma, NY 11779 Re: Your Letter of July 6, 1995 Dear M~s. Gasser: Your inquiry letter dated July 6, 1995 was reviewed by the Members of the Board of Appeals, and the Board Members have taken the position that, under the circumstancas, no action be taken. Therefore, variance determinations #4260, 4261 and 4262 as filed on February 8, 1995, remain as each stands, (without prejudice). Very truly yours, BOARD OF APPEALS By: Gerard P. Goehringer Chai~-mnn THOMAS H. WICKHAM SUPERVISOR Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NewYork 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1889 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Zoning Board of Appeals Thomas Wickham, Supervisor Tank Museum August17,1995 Attached you will find communications from the attorneys for Mr. Ammirati in Greenport regarding the tank museum. Since they are looking for enforcement of the Zoning Board rulings, I refer the correspondence to you. Please review the issue and advise the Town Investigator how you wold like the matter addressed. Irbw Attachment cc: Town Attorney Town Investigator MARIE ONGIONI CARMELA L BORRELL[ ONGIONI & BORRELLI ATTORNEYS AT LAW 403 FRONT STREET · P.O.BOX 562 GREENPORT, NEW YORK 11944-0562 TEL. (516) 477-2048 , FAX (516) 477-8919 258 PANTIGO ROAD EAST HAMPTON. NY 11937 TEL (516) 324-8282 FAX (510) 324-8283 August 9, 1995 Mr. Thomas Wickham, Supervisor Town of Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Code Enforcement Dear Tom: As I expected, the Gasser's representation to you that they would contact either my client or myself by Tuesday, August 8th to discuss their non-compliance with the Zoning Board of Appeals decision and a possible remedy, was false. As I indicated during our meeting on Monday, the Gassers have continuallyused similar strategies to delay compliance in the past. It has been our experience that they advise the Town (through whatever agency or person is seeking compliance with any one of the numerous violations they have had in 14 years) that "the information is forthcoming", "the phone call will be made", "the papers are being prepared", that "something will happen shortly" on ad infinitum in an attempt to stall. None of which, of course, ever comes to fruition until and unless they are compelled comply under a threat of sanctions. It has been obvious to us over the past six months that the Gassers had no intention of complying with the ZBA decision as they have moved at least three large additional tanks onto the property since the decision was rendered six months ago (one in fact within the past two weeks) when in fact the decision would require them to remove many of the tanks from the site. We delayed taking action because the request came specifically from you. However, based on our experience with this issue of never ending non-compliance and the obvious misinformation you were given, please be advised that unless the Town takes immediate steps to enforce the Zoning Board of Appeals decision for the outside storage of motorized tanks only in the 14' x 185' strip along the railway lot line, we will have no alternative but to commence an action against both the Gassers and the Town of Southold for damages (based on a private and public nuisance among other things). My clients have waited more than seven years for the Town of Southold to enforce its own laws. We have abided by all the rules in our challenges of the Gassers' illegal operations only to be met by non-enforcement or more appropriately by some elected officials' view of the "politics'~ of the situation. In fact, the ZBA decision itself was an a clever attempt to permit the unpermitted (the outside storage of museum artifacts). I am sure that I do not have to tell you that not all decisions are popular, especially in an election year, but nonetheless, they must be made. It is simply ludicrous to have elected officials condoning by inaction an abuse of the laws which govern the community. To allow such disregard of the law is to encourage future disregard by others which unfortunately may not be limited to the zoning regulations. Consider the speeder who causes an accident, or the vandal who destroys private property, or the Cross Sound ferry operator who encourages and fosters disobedience with the parking regulations. Are they all to be ignored? Is non-enforcement the rule of the day? Does the Orient citizenry deserve more compliance in Orient with the Town's laws than my clients do in Mattituck? We expect to see enforcement before I leave for vacation next week or we will have no alternative but to proceed with our remedies. VeW truly yours, ONGIONI & BORRELLI clb/ns By: Carmela L. Borrelti cc: Frank & Diane Ammirati By Fax and Mai} ammirati:litigate.ltr American Armoured Foundation, Inc. A.A.F. ~ $~h Avenu~ Mailing Adress 2383 5th Ave., R onkonkoma, NY 11779 (516) 588-0033 Museum: Love Lane Mattltuck, NY August 7, 1995 Carmella L. Borre!li, Esq. 403 Front Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944-0562 Re: Possible purchase of Ammiratti property Dear Ms. Borrelli: On January 17, 1995 you advised our lawyer that your client, Frank and Diane A~iratti, would be interested in selling his property to us. On February 13, 1995 we sent you a letter concerning this matter, stating we would be willing to go into negotiations for the purchase of this property and we requested the selling price of this property. Unfortunately we never received a reply. In a recent newspaper article, Mr. Ammiratti was quoted as saying he would be willing to sell his property to us. Once again we are requesting an asking price and the opportunity to inspect the site with an independent appraiser at a time that would be convenient to all parties. The selling price that we seek relates only to the real property only, and not to any business activity with which it might be concerned. We await your earliest reply. Sincerely, j · and Mrs. William Gasser 2383 5th Avenue Ronkonkoma, N.Y. 11779 TRnk ~nd Ordnnnce War Memorial Museum ONGIONI & BORRELLI ATTOI~NEYS AT LAW C 0 P Y August 9, 1995 Mr. & Mrs William Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, New York 1 ] 779 Re: American Armoured Foundation - Tank Museum Dear Mr. & Mrs Gasser: I am in receipt of your letter of August 8th. Contrary. to your assertions, l did respond to your attorney's February 13th letter by letter dated February 21, t995. Another cop3, of that letter is enclosed The proposed purchase price is as it was in that letter In further response to your letter of August 8th, my client cannot divest the property's value from the value of their business or the rental income it produces. The proposed selling price represents what the property and its zoning are worth under the circumstances. An independent appraisal that takes only the land into consideration without factoring in the unusual circumstances involved in this matter is rather pointless. Unfortunately, it is much too late to engage in extended negotiations. Please contact me on or before Monday, August 14th with a response to our offer. For your information, we have advised the Town of Southold that a resolution to this matter must be achieved by next week or it is our intention to seek redress from both you and the Town. Your letter has not altered our timetable because in our view it is but another attempt to stall enforcement of the code violations. The fact that you continue to bring new units on to the property when the equipment that was already present cannot be accommodated within the area defined by the Zoning Board of Appeals is convincing proof of your planned non-compliance Very truly yours, ONGIONI & BORRELLI~ enc Carmela I, Borrelli. ccl Mr Tom Wickham, Supervisor (w/o enc) Frank & Diane Ammirati (w/o enc.) ammirati:final.ltr August 7, 1995 Carmella L. Borrelli, Esq. 403 Front Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944-0562 Re: Possible purchase of Ammiratti property Dear Ms. Borrelli: On January 17, 1995 you advised our lawyer that your client, Frank and Diane Ammiratti, would be interested in selling his property to us. On February 13, 1995 we sent you a letter concerning this matter, stating we would be willing to go into negotiations for the purchase of this property and we requested the selling price of this property. Unfortunately we never received a reply. In a recent newspaper article, Mr. Ammiratti was quoted as saying he would be willing to sell his property to us. Once again we are requesting an asking price and the opportunity to inspect the site with an independent appraiser at a time that would be convenient to all Darties. The selling price that we seek relates only to the real property only, and not to any business activity with which it might be concerned. We await your earliest reply. Sincerely, /-~ / Mr?'afid Mrs. William Gasser 2383 5th Avenue Ronkonkoma, N.Y. 11779 ,~:~PEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goe~inger, Chairman Serge Doyen. Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Lydia A. Tor~ora BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN' OF SOUTHOLD Sourhold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Soutlaold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765- t 809 July 19, 1995 Mrs. Karen A. Gasser American Armoured Foundation, Inc. 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 Re: Yottr Letter of July 6, 1995 Dear Mrs. Gasser: Your inquiry letter dated July 6, 1995 was reviewed by the Members of the Board of Appeals, and the Board Members have taken the position that, under the circnm-~tances, no action be taken. Therefore, valqance determinations 14260, 4261 and 4262 as filed on February 8, 1995, remain as each stands, (without p~ejudice). Very truly yours, BO~D OF APPEALS By: Gerard P. Goehr/n~o'er Chmi~,mnn THOMAS II. WICKHAM SUPERVISOR Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, N'ewYork 11971 Fsx (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1889 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Zoning Board of Appeals Thomas Wickham, Supervisor Tank Museum August17,1995 Attached you will find communications from the attorneys for Mr. Ammirati in Greenport regarding the tank museum. Since they are looking for enforcement of the Zoning Board rulings, I refer the correspondence to you. Please review the issue and advise the Town Investigator how you wold like the matter addressed. /rbw Attachment cc: Town Attorney Town Investigator ONGIONI & BORRELLI ATTORNEYS AT L~W 403 FRONT STRE~ . P.O.BOX 562 288 PANTIGO ROAD EAST HAMPTON. NY 1 1937 TEL (516) 324-8282 FAX (516) 324-8283 August 9, 1995 Mr. Thomas Wickham, Supervisor Town of Southold Town Hall Main Koad Southold, New York 11971 Re: Code Enforcement Dear Tom: As I expected, the Gasser's representation to you that they would contact either my client or myself by Tuesday, August 8th to discuss their non-compliance with the Zoning Board of Appeais decision and a possible remedy, was false. As I indicated during our meeting on Monday, the Gassers have continuallyused similar strategies to delay compliance in the past. It has been our experience that they advise the Town (through whatever agency or person is seeking compliance with any one of the numerous violations they have had in 14 years) that "the information is forthcoming", "the phone call will be made", "the papers are being prepared", that "something will happen shortly" on ad infinitum in an attempt to stall. None of which, of course, ever comes to fruition until and unless they are compelled comply under a threat of sanctions. It has been obvious to us over the past six months that the Gassers had no intention of complying with the ZBA decision as they have moved at least three large additional tanks onto the propertT' since the decision was rendered six months ago (one in fact within the past two weeks) when in fact the decision would require them to remove many of the tanks from the site. We delayed taking action because the request came specifically from you. However, based on our experience with this issue of never ending non-compliance and the obvious misinformation you were g/yen, please be advised that unless the Town takes immediate steps to enforce the Zoning Board of Appeals decision for the outside storage of motorized tanks only in the 14' x 185' strip along the railway lot line, we will have no alternative but to commence an action against both the Gassers and the Town of Southold for damages (based on a private and public nuisance among other things). My clients have waited more than seven years for the Town of Southold to enforce its own laws. We have abided by all the rules in our challenges of the Gassers' illegal operations only to be met by non-enforcement or more appropriately by some elected officials' view of the "politics" of the situation. In fact, the ZBA decision itself was an a clever attempt to permit the unpermitted (the outside storage of museum artifacts). I am sure that I do not have to tell you that not all decisions are popular, especially in an election year, but nonetheless, they must be made. It is simply ludicrous to have elected officials condoning by inaction an abuse of the laws which govern the community. To allow such disregard of the law is to encourage furore disregard by others which unfortunately may not be limited to the zoning regulations. Consider the speeder who causes an accident, or the vandal who destroys private property, or the Cross Sound ferry operator who encourages and fosters disobedience with the parking regulations. Are they all to be ignored? Is non-enforcement the rule of the day? Does the Orient citizenry deserve more compliance in Orient with the Town's laws than my clients do in Mattituck? We expect to see enforcement before I leave for vacation next week or we will have no alternative but to proceed with our remedies. Very, truly yours, ONGIONI & BORRELLI clb/ns By: CarmelaL. Borrelli cc: Frank & Diane Ammirati By Fax and Mai} ammirati:litigate.ltr American Armoured Foundation, Inc. A.A.F. Mailing Adress 2383 5th Ave., Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 (516) 588-0033 Museum: Love Lane Mattltuck, NY August 7, 1995 Bo .... Il, Esq. Carmella L. ~] ' 403 Front Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944-0562 Re: Possible purchase of Ammiratti property Dear Ms. Borrelli: On January 17, 1995 you advised our lawyer that your client, Frank and Diane Armniratti, would be interested in selling his property to us. On February 13, 1995 we sent you a letter concerning this matter, stating we would be willing to go into negotiations for the purchase of this property and we requested the selling price of this property. Unfortunately we never received a reply. In a recent newspaper article, Mr. Ammiratti was quoted as saying he would be willing to sell his property to us. Once again we are requesting an asking price and the opportunity to inspect the site with an independent appraiser at a time that would be convenient to all parties. The selling price that we seek relates only to the real property only, and not to any business activity with which it might be concerned. We await your earliest reply. Sincerely, M~.~ and ~rs. willia~ Gasser 2383 5th Avenue Ronkonkoma, N.Y. 11779 Tank and Ordnance War Memorial Museum ONGIONI & BORRELLI C 0 P Y August 9, 1995 Mr. & Mrs. William Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, New York 11779 Re: American Armoured Foundation - Tank Museum Dear Mr. & Mrs Gasser: I am in receipt of your letter of August 8th. Contrary to your assertions, I did respond to your attorney's February 13th letter by letter dated February 21, 1995. Another copy of that letter is enclosed. The proposed purchase price is as it was in that letter. In further response to your letter of August 8th, my client cannot divest the property's value from the value of their business or the rental income it produces. The proposed selling price represents what the property and its zoning are worth under the circumstances. An independent appraisal that takes only the land into consideration without factoring in the unusual circumstances involved in this matter is rather pointless. Unfortunately, it is much too late to engage in extended negotiations. Please contact me on or before Monday, August 14th with a response to our offer. For your information, we have advised the Town of Southold that a resolution to this matter must be achieved by next week or it is our intention to seek redress from both you and the Town. Your letter has not altered our timetable because in our view it is but another attempt to stall enforcement of the code violations. The fact that you continue to bring new units on to the property when the equipment that was already present cannot be accommodated within the area defined by the Zoning Board of Appeals is convincing proof of your planned non-compEance. Very truly yours, clb/ns By: enc Carmeta L. Borrelli. cc: Mr Tom Wickham, Supervisor (w/o enc.) Frank & Diane Ammirati (w/o eric.) ammirati:final.ltr August 7, 1995 Carmella L. Borrelli, Esq. 403 Front Street Greenport, N.Y. 11944-0562 Re: Possible purchase of Ammiratti property Dear Ms. Borrelli: On January 17, 1995 you advised our lawyer that your client, Frank and Diane Ammiratti, would be interested in selling his property to us. On February 13, 1995 we sent you a letter concerning this matter, stating we would be willing to go into negotiations for the purchase of this property and we requested the selling price of this property. Unfortunately we never received a reply. In a recent newspaper article, Mr. Ammira~ti was quoted as saying he would be willing to sell his property to us. Once again we are requesting an asking price and the opportunity to inspect the site with an independent appraiser at a time that would be convenient to all parties. The selling price that we seek relates only to the real property only, and not to any business activity with which it might be concerned. We await your earliest reply. Sincerely, ~--~ / ~ a~nd M~r s~. ~Wi~~s e r 2383 5th Avenue Ronkonkoma, N.Y. 11779 DECLARATION OF COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS THIS DECLARATION, made the day of September, 1993, by WILLIAM F. GASSER, President of American Armoured Foundation, Inc., with a business address of 2383 Fifth Avenue, Ronkonkoma, New York 11779, declarants~. WHEREAS, declarant is the owner of certain real property situated in Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York with Suffolk County Tax Map Designation (SCTM) 1000-10`0-2-16, commonly known as the "Tank Museum" and more particularly described below: ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, with the buildings and improvements hereon erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York which is bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the corner formed by the intersection of the northeasterly side of Love Lane with the northwesterly side of property of the Long Island Railroad Company and from said point of beginning; RUNNING THENCE northwesterly along the northeast- erly side of Love Lane North 35 degrees 17 minutes D~0 seconds West 50 feet; RUNNING THENCE along the land now or formerly of MacMillian North 0`5 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds East 187.60` feet; RUNNING THENCE along the land now or formerly of MacMillian and Hawkins North 35 degrees 17 minutes 0`0 seconds West 336.23 feet to the northeasterly side of Middle Road; RUNNING THENCE northeasterly along the southeast- 'erly side of Middle Road, North 55 degrees 02 minutes 20 seconds East 60.00 feet; RUNNING THENCE South 35 degrees 17 minutes 0`0 seconds East along the land now or formerly of Wines 375.72 feet to land of the Long Island Railroad Company; RUNNING THENCE along land of the Long Island Railroad Company South 0,5 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds West 20`8.50 feet to the corner aforesaid the point or place of BEGINNING. WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that rezoning of the subject premises to a Hamlet Business represents an upzoning and will result in a .less intense use of same and is in conformity with continuous properties and, WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that the use of the premises as a museum in a Light Industry zone is not a permitted use and, WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that the intended use of the premises as a museum with certain safeguards is not offensive and, north~west of the subject premises and shall, if possible, vegetative type. WHEREAS, the Town Board determined that there is sufficient off- premises parking available to possible patrons of the museum and that on- premises parking will not be required for the intended use. WHEREAS, for and in consideration of the granting by the Town Board of the Town of Southold on September 21, 1993 of a change of zone from Ligl;t Industrial ("LI") and Residential Office {"RO") to Hamlet Business ("HB") to declarant, William F. Gasser and the American Armoured Fuundation, Inc., the Town Board of the Town of Southold has required that the within declaration be recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's office and, WHEREAS, declarants have considered the foregoing demand and determined that based upon the limited nature of the intended use as a museum will be in the best interests of the declarants and the community, NOW, THEREFORE. THE DECLARANTS WlTNESSETH: 1. The gun tower, presently located near the Love Lane entrance to the subject premises and depicted on the survey prepared by Roderick Van Tuyl, P.C., as amended September 9, 1991, a copy of which is annexed hereto, is to be moved to a point not closer than the one hundred feet from the' Love Lane entrance. 2. The premises shall be accessible to the public and for repairs, to the extent necessary only during the following hours of operation: Monday through Friday 9:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. and Saturday and Sunday 10:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. In addition, the premises shall be accessible on Monday and Thursday evenings from 6:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M., strictly for the purpose of accommodating veterans' groups, Boy Scouts and other such organizations. 3. All exterior lighting shall be shielded to the property, directed away from contiguous property owners, and shall be of such a type as to minimize glare. 4. The premises shall be screened to the property existing to the be of a natural 5. The change of zone application shall not in any way be I/ considered as the granting of any variance necessary to the proposed use. 1/ 6. Declarants, for the purpose of carrying out the intentions above expressed does hereby make known, admit, publish, covenant and agree that the said premises herein described shall hereinafter be subject to the above-stated covenants which shall run with the land and be binding upon all purchasers and holders of said premises, their heirs, executors, legal representatives, distributees, successors, assigns and that these covenants and restrictions can be modified only at the request of the then owner of the premises with the approval of the majority plus one of the Town Board of the Town of Southold or its successor body, after a public hearing. Adjoining property uwne~s shall be entitled to notice of such public hearing, but their consent to such modification shall not be required. IN WITNESS WNEREOF, the declarants have hereunto set their hand and seal the day and year above written. AMERICAN ARMOURED FOUNDATION, INC. BY: WILLIAM F. GASSER, President STATE OF NEW YORK) SS.: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) On the day of September, 1993, before me personally came WILLIAM F. GASSER, to me known, who, being by me duly sworn, did depose and say that he resides at 2383 5th Avenue, Ronkonkoma, New York 11779; that he is the President of American Armoured Foundation, Inc., the corporation described in and which executed the foregoing instrument; that he knows the seal of said corporation that the seal affixed to said instrument is such corporate seal; that it was so affixed by order of the Board of Directors of said ~orporation, and that he signed his name thereto by like order. Notary Public JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1801 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEQR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance Determination of Significance Lead Agency: Address: Date: Town Board of the Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 October 6, 1992 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617, of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared. Title of Action: SEQR Status: Project Description: SCTM Number: Location: William F. Gasser and the American Armoured Foundation, Inc Mattituck, New York Type I Action The project which is the subject of this Determination, involves a propo,s, ed change of zone of 0.737 acres from Light. Industrial' ,L,.I" a,,nd Residential Office "RO" to Hamlet Business HB. District 1000 - Section 140 - Block 02 -Lot 16 The site is located on the east side of Love Lane, north of the Long Island Railroad with frontage on C.R. 48, Mattituck, New York. Page I of 2 Gasser Change of Zone SEQR Determination Reasons Supporting This Determination: This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of significance contained in 6 N YCRR Part 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and II, and the following specific reasons: 1) 2) 4) 5) The project has been evaluated through a Long EAF Part III which discusses in detail environmental and planning aspects of the project. The subject parcel does not exhibit environmental sensitivity in the traditional sense. Review of the Long EAF Part I as well as field inspection indicates that the site is suited for controlled development for the following reasons; soils are conducive to leaching, topography is flat, there is no significant vegetation, wetlands or wildlife habitat on site. 3) The proposed zoning would not generate a significant influx of people or traffic as compared to present zoning, nor would noise, aesthetic or visual resources be significantly adversely impacted. Land use and zoning issues are a local as opposed to a regional consideration, and measures are available to reduce impact upon the community. The use would be subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board if the zoning is changed to "HB" in accordance with Chapter 100-9lA. of the Southold Town Code. For Further Information: Contact Person: Address: Phone No.: Judith Terry, Town Clerk Town Board of the Town of Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold (516) 765-1801 Copies of this Notice Sent to: Commissioner-Department of Environmental Conservation Regional Office-New York State the Department of Environmental Conservation Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Building Department Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Department of Planning NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island Daniel C. Ross, Esq. Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board Page 2 of 2 LONG ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM PARTS I, II AND III Project: William F. Gasser and the American Armoured Foundation, Inc. (Change of Zone) Love Lane Mattituck, New York Prepared For: Prepared By: Town Board of the Town of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Cramer. Voorhis & Associates, Inc. 54 North Country Road Miller Place, New York 11764 Date: September 16, 1992 CRAMER. VOORHIS &;ASSOCIATES E N VI RO N M E N TAt"-U _Aj~.D,,P.,EA~;~N G CONSULTANTS ~ V#// \~\~\ LONG ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 1II EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE O._EF IMPACTS PROJECT William Gasser and the American Armoured Foundation, Inc. (Change of Zone) Mattituck, New York LOCATION The site of the subject application is located on Love Lane, on the north side of the Long Island Railroad, in Mattituck New York. APPLICANT Mr. William Gasser and the American Armoured Foundation, Inc. 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, New York 11779 DATE September 15, 1992 INTRODUCTION The proposed project and the environmental character of the project site is described in detail within the Long Environmental Assessment Form (LEAF) Part I. The LEAF Part II, evaluates the project impacts and their magnitude. This section of the LEAF is intended to provide additional information on the importance of the impacts of the proposed project on the environment, in order to form the basis for the adoption of a determination of significance. The LEAF Part III is prepared if one or more impacts are considered as being potentially large, as identified in the LEAF Part II. In the case of the proposed project, anticipated impacts are considered small to moderate, however, in order to provide the Town Board of the Town of Southold with additional information pertinent to this project for the consideration in making a determination of significance, th~s Part III narrative has been completed for several small to moderate impacts, identified in the Long Environmental Assessment Form Part II. This Part III addresses in detail the environmental and planning issues which are relevant to the subject application. CRAMER, VOORHIS &'f,.ASSOCIATES E N VI RO N M E N TA .~--¢~N~D,,P, I.~]J~[N G CONSULTANTS Page 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS William Gasser Change of Zone~ Long Environmental Assessment Form Impact on Growth and Character of Community * Theproposed action will conflict with officially adoptedplans orgoals. * Theproposed action willset an importantprecedentforfutureprojects. The proposed action involves a request for a change of zoning from the Town Board of the Town of Southold for the continued operation of the American Armoured Museum, Inc. Although the action is a request for a chan~e of zoning and must be considered in the context of use allowed by the requested zoning, ~t is important to understand the present use and history of the site with regard to evaluation of impacts. The project involves a split-zoned parcel of 0.797 acres. The northern part of the site with frontage on C.R. 48 comprises approximately 9,000 square feet of land and is zoned Residential Office. The remainder of the site (23,109 square feet) has frontage on Love Lane, is adjacent the Long Island Railroad tracks (LIRR) and is zoned Light Industrial. There is a 54 by 120 foot corrugated metal building and an 8 x 8 foot tower, tanks and gravel parking, located on the Light Industrial zoned portion of the site. . .Th.e present zoning of the site requires minimu_m, lot ,a, reas of 40,000 square feet for the LI Light Industrial and 40,000 square feet for the RO Residential Office zoning. The -O Res~dentmt Office Dmtnct is intended to protect the land values of residential property on Main Road and allow non-residential uses within its confines as envisioned in the .Tow. n. of Southold Master Plan Update Background Studies. The "LI" Light Industrial zoning ~s ~ntended to provide ,afl opportunity for business and industrial uses on smaller lots than tho,s,e .,a, ppropriate under LIO Light Industrial Park/Planned office ark" It is noted that the LI d~smct also prohibits the museum use of the site. The requested zoning, "HB" Hamlet Business, requires a minimum lot area of 20,000 square feet with minimum side yards of 25 feet. This zoning district would allow for museums and libraries as permitted uses within the district, and such uses are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board. With regard to existing use and zoning it is noted that the site has been operating in violation of the current zoning classification, and the owner was notified of this s~tuation in 1988 by the Ordinance Inspector. At that time the site was zoned "A" Residential/Agricultural and ..... C Industrial. The present "LI" zoning of the south part of the site prohibits the museum; however, this use is permitted under the "RO" Residential Office district if approved by a Special Exception of the Zoning Board of Appeals. Therefore, the site is operating without approval as a museum and the tower exceeds the 18 foot maximum height for an accessory structure. Review of the zoning map and field investigation of the a,,rea i,,ndicates that the requested zoning will cause an intrusion into a residential area ( RO Residential Office district) to the west and east of the northern portion of the site. In addition, review of the Master Plan Background Studies for the Hamlet study -Mattituck, finds that the "LI" portion of the site is shown to be Hamlet Business and the present "RO" part of the site is proposed CRAMER, VOORHIS &;~,'~SOC ATES E N VI R O N MEN TAL'NAND,.RI.~;~IIN G CONSULTANTS Page 3 William Gasser Change of Zone Long Environmental Assessment Form to remain Residential Office. The change of zone for the "LI" Light Industrial part of the site to "HB" Hamlet Business is not expected to have a significant impact upon the community. The change of industrial zoning to hamlet business is recognized as a natural extension of the existing Love Lane Business area. The change of zone will allow for the continuation of the museum in an area where it was previously prohibited and as a result would not compromise the zoning integrity of the community. If the overall parcel were rezoned to "HB", the business district would intrude into the "RO" zone. The "RO" zone adjacent the site contains residential dwellings in conformance with zoning, therefore, the location of business uses in this area would cauge potential land use conflict. If a full change of zone for the subject parcel ~s granted, the goals of RO Residential Office zoning designation of the subject site would not be realized. Thus, the Hamlet Business zoning in the "RO" Residential Office portion of the site is out of character with adjacent land use and is expected to cause an impact on the immediately surrounding community, as well as the area. The action, if approved, would set a precedent for other future actions, thereby undermining the integrity of the zoning patterns in this section of the Town. This precedent may promote the expansion of the Love Lane Business District from County Road 48 to Sound Avenue. This possible expansion would not conform to the intention of the "RO" zoning or the Master Plan for providing a transition area between the business and low-density residential and limited nonresidential development along major roads. It is also noted that if the change of zone is granted the museum would still not conform completely with zoning. The Hamlet Business zoning states that "all uses permitted in the 'HB' Hamlet Business district, including the display and sale of merchandise and the storage of all property, except living plants, shrubs and trees, shall be confined to fully enclosed building on the premises", thus the outdoor storag, e of the tanks would not be permitted under the requested zoning. If the zone change Is granted, the use would be subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board. CONCLUSION The Long EAF Part II, is intended to consider the impact, then determine available mitigation as well as the importance of the impact, based upon certain criteria. Specific impacts considered above involve issues of Impact on the Community. This discussion results in the conclusion that the impact is related to planning and zoning issues. The subject parcel does not exhibit environmental sensitivity in the traditional sense. Review of the Long EAF Part I as well as field inspection indicates that the site is suited for controlled development for the following reasons; soils are conducive to leach ng, topography is flat, ther. e is no significant vegetation, wetlands or wildlife habitat on site. Likewise, the proposed zoning would not generate a significant influx of people or traffic as compared to present zoning, nor would noise, aesthetic or visual resources be significantly adversely impacted. Therefore, issues reduce to land use and zoning, and local community impacts as welt as precedent. Issues regarding zoning are complex, involving change to community character, divergences from land use plans and precedent setting nature of an action. Based upon the CRAMER, VOORHIS &:ASSOCIATES ENVlRONMENTAiL.%~._==~ P~NING CONSULTANTS Page 4 William Gasser Change of Zone Long Environmental Assessment Form discussion included in the appropriate section above, there is a recognized small intrusion into a residential area as well as some recognized precedent set as a result of this action. The duration of this impact is considered permanent for the purpose of this discussion; however, it is noted that the action could be reversed through future zordng changes. The impact can be controlled through site plan review utilizing setbacks, buffering, and other l.and use control techniques with regard to the development on the site as well as adjacent sites. Further control can be applied to reduce the precedent by making this zoning petition a unique case based upon all of the facts and other specific considerations by the Town Board. The impact is considered to be local as opposed to regional. This Long EAF is intended to provide the Town Board with sufficient information to determine the environmental significance of this action, and provide a basis for decision on the project. Given the relatively small scope of issues, and the available information concerning impacts, the project does not warrant the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement. The consideration of a change of zoning is a legislative decision of the Town Board. It is recommended that a Negative Declaration be adopted for this action based on the information contained herein. Subsequently, the Town Board may consider the petition, site condition, environmental review, testimony, and other matters of record, and render a decision on the proposed action. It is recommended that the decision contain reasonable measures to minimize environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable, as outlined herein. CRAMER, VOORHIS &"/ASSOCIATES E N VI R O N M E N TAL~--~D__ ;:1~ I~,~tN G CONSULTANTS · ~ V;,lll ,,~ Page FORM NO. 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. Certificate Of Occupancy No .... i[3.0.639 ....... Date ..... A.u.g.us.t..2.0 ' 198.! THIS CERTIFIES ' that the building ............................ Location of Property 640 Love Lane, 5300 County Rd. 48 Mattituck, N.Y. l~ouse No. Stre~ ~ ............................ 'County Tax Map No. 1000 Section 1/~ 0 Hamlet ............ Block 2 16 Subdivision ............................... Filed Mai> No ......... Lot No. . conforms substantially to Requirements £or a CommercSal Bu±ldJ. ng BuJ. lt Prior the 4~ppl~¢io ~ -for- ~il~in~ -P,~ ~.i1- 4~ r-et-ot'~ r-e-t:iht d -i~ -thi~ q>ff4 eo-d-aled- - - ..... ~e?[i£~..ca[e oF Occupancy ~ p.r.~ [. ~2 ........ 195.7. pursuant to wnica'~'niJdSng rcrnnri~o- 7. 10639 guguet 20 ...................... dated .......................... 81 · 19..., was issued, aud conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which tiffs certificate is issued is ......... , Storage Building C - Zone The certificate is issued to .. G. L. ~enny ~nc. of the aforesaid building. ¢ow. er.~e~d~[~r~',.~: {{ .................... Suffolk County Deparhuent of llealth Approval N / R U De WRITERS CE VIFIC^ rE .......................................... .... ................... Rev. 1/81 Building Inspector APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Lydia A. Tortora BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1809 July 19, 1995 Mrs. Karen A. Gasser American Armoured Foundation, Inc. 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 Re: Your Letter of July 6, 1995 Dear Mrs. Gasser: Your inquiry letter dated July 6, 1995 was reviewed by the Members of the Board of Appeals, and the Board Members have taken the position that, under the circumstances, no action be taken. Therefore, variance determinations #4260, 4261 and 4262 as tided on February 8, 1995, remain as each stands, (without prejudice). Very truly yours, BOARD OF APPEALS By: Gerard P. Goahrin~r Chnipmnn Armoured Foundation, Inc. A.A.F. N.Y. 1177~ Mailing Adress 2383 5th Ave., Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 (516) 588-0033 Museum: Love lane Mettituck, NY July 6, 1995 Southold Town Hall Mr. Gerard P. Goehringer, Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1179 Southold, N.Y. 11971 Chairman Attention: Mr. Gerard Goehringer, Chairman ZBA Dear Mr. Goehringer, Please consider this a formal request for an extension of time on the determination made by the Zoning Board of _Appeals on February 8th, 1995. This determination requires the removal of 75% of the museum collection, that is being displayed at the Love Lane property know as the Tank Museum, by August 6th of this year. We feel this extension of time is necessary and not unrealistic due to the fact that there is a lawsuit pending concerning this determination and this requested extension will give us the opportunity to explore options that have come to our attention during discussions with various regulatory boards of the Town of Southold. I would like to thank you for your time and consideration in the matter of this requested extension and are in hopes that this extension will be granted. ? ? Sincerely, ./ ~aren A. Gasser CC: Tom Wickham, Supervisor Ruth Oliva, Town Board member Lauren Dowd, Town Attorney Rober~ Kassner, Planning Board Gary Fish, Building Department Tank and Ordnance War Memorial Museum DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING OCOUNTY OF SUFFOLK ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE STEPHEN M. JONES. A.I.C.P. DIRECTOR OF PLANNING May 23, 1994 Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the following application(s) which have been referred to the Suffolk County Planning Co~,ission are considered to be a matter for local determination. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. Applicant(s) Municipal File Number(s) Bidwell, Robert E. Ricco/Puls, Donna & Thomas ~Gasser, William Boukas, Alex & Afrodite Boukas, Alex & Afrodite Sher, Claude Pellegrini, Robert 4203 4217 4227 4230 4231 4233 4237 Very truly yours, Stephen M. Jones Director of Planning GGN:mb S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner H. LEE DENNISON BUILDING · (516) 853-5192 FAX (516) 853-4044 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman -Richard C. Wilton Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Pursuant to Ai~ticle ~ of the Suffolk County ~strative Code, The Board of ~ppeals of the ~ of Southold, New York, hereby refers the following to the Suffolk County Planning Cc~ssion: X Variance from the Zoning Code, Article XIX , Section lO0-gl(c) XVlII 100-81-C (2a) .. Variance from Determination of Southold Town Building Inspector Special Exception, Article , Section ~Special Permit Appeal No: 4227 Applicant: WILLIAM GASSER Location of Affected Land: G40 Love Lane, snd County Tax Map Item No.: 1000-140_2_1G Within 500 feet of: 5400 C.R. 48, Mattituck, NY Town or Village Boundary Line Body of Water (Bay, Sound or Estuary) x State or County Road, Parkway, Highway, Thruway Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State or Federally Owned Land Boundary of Existing or Proposed County, State or Federal Park or other Recreation Area Comments: signs, 15 feet Existing or Proposed Right-of-Way of any Stream or Drainage Channel Owned by the County or for which the County has.established Channel Lines, or __ Within One Mile of a Nuclear Power Plant Within One Mile of an Airport Applicant is requesting permission.to as exist on fence, which do not meet b~ve-two identification the setback requirement of Copies Dated: jdr of Town file and related documents enclosed for your ~;~ /~' 1994 review. APPEALS BOARD MEMBEP, S Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF $OUTHOLD May 11. 1994 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Mr. and Mrs. William Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma. NY 11779 Re: Appl. No. q227 - Setback for Sign along Love,Lane and Sign along C.R. ~18 Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gasser: Enclosed please find a copy of the Board's Findings and, Determination rendered at our May.q. 1994 Recjular Meeting. Please be sure to return to the Planning Board and:the Building Inspector. to determine the need for other permits or agency actions.in,this project and submission of additional documentation which may be required under their pending reviews. For your convenience, we have furnished the Building Department and the Planning Board Offices with copies of: this determination for their permanent recerdkeeping and update, Also, .we have transmitted a copy .of your file to the Suffolk. County Department of Planning in accordance with the Suffolk County Administrative Code rules and regulations pertaining to projects located within 500 feet of a County highway, Once we .have.received their written response, we wild forward a copy-to you for your-pemanent file, Very truly yours. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN Enclosure cc: (With copies of this, determination to: ) Town Building Inspectors' Office Southold Planning Board Office Laury Dowd. Town Attorney Suffolk County Department of Planning P~ge 5 - Appl. No. 4227~1t Application of WILLIAM~SER Decision Rendered May u,, 1994 RESOLVED, to GRANT the relief requested for the location of an on-premises advertising sign posted on the fence as situated less than 15 feet from the property lines - one being at the easterly side of Love Lane, and the other at the southerly side of County Road 48, as exists, with the following understanding: a) final approval to be obtained from the Southold Town Planning Board under the site plan regulations; b) approval, does not expire from the N~Y.S. Department of Transportation pertaining to Sections 88 and 52 of the Highway Law~ c) a fence permit to be obtained from the Southold Town Building Department; d) referral in accordance with the Administrative-Code,to the Suffolk County Planning Commission - this project is located within 500 feet of a County Highway; e) this determination shall not preclude application by the owners or an aggrieved party for different relief, filed in accordance with the requirements of New York Town Law, Section 267; f) compliance with all other sign and zoning regulations. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Doyen, Dinizio, Wilton, Villa and Coehringer. This resolution was duly adopted. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER/ CHAIRMAN DATE ,~'_/// Town Clerk, Town of Southold W _j W 0 ,! APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gersrd R Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD O~ ~P~ TO~ OF SOU~OLD May 11. 199~ Town Hall, 5~095 Main Road P.O. ~ 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Carmella L. Borrelli. Esq. Ongioni ~ Borrelli. Esqs. q03 Front 'Street P.O. Box 562 Greenport. NY 119Zlq-0562 Re: Your Letter of May 6. 199~ - Pending Site Plan SCTM ~1000-1~0-2-16 (William Gasser) Dear Ms. Borrelli: We are in. receipt of your letter dated May q. 199& which was not received until tw.o days after {May 6. 199~) the Zoning Board's determination pertaining to the sign setback application (copy enclosed for your convenience). As part of the Board's review, the applicant is required to meet all other zoning regulations and the area variance determination pertaining to the signs does not preclude an application for different relief by either the property owners or an aggrieved party (Town Law; Section 267). There are legitimate issues of. concern in your letter. Although we would like to be of assistance, these issues are not properly before the Board of Appeals as required by New York Town Law. Section 267. and these are issues which are presently under review by the enforcing department of the Town and the Planning Board pursuant to previous correspondence forwarded by,you (to the Town Board. Town Attorney and Building Department). It does appear that further reviews and application will be necessary by Mr. Gasser with reference to the tBwer structure if the structure is to be over 18 feet in height. Section 100-236 as referred to in your second paragraph is restrictive upon residential zone districts. however, it may also be necessary for the museum's displays and attractions to be located in an enclosed building in the Hamlet-Business Zone District (effective on or about January 10. 1989). All of these items are site plan elements before the Planning Board at this time under its pending site-plan reviews together with the Building Department once the plan has been referred to the Building Inspector {if it has already~ not been done so. } We do agree that the conditions of the Change of Zone -d~age 2 - May 11. 199a,~ To: Carmella Borelli. El!r. Re: Letter of May 6. 199~ American Amoured Foundation approval by the Town Board must also be met. Until such time as a formal application is properly made by-either the property owner or an aggrieved party pursuant to New York Town Law. Section 267. pertainir~j to appeals, variances, or interpretations; and based upon a written dete~minat~o~ made. by the Building Inspector. the Board oft Appeals without proper jurisdi~-tian. Enclosure cc: Z)/' CHAIRMAN Building Inspector Gary Fish Planning Board Office Supervisor and Town, Board Town Attorney Mr. William Gasser MARIE ONGIONI CARMELA L. BORRELLI ONGIONI & BORRELLI ATTORNEYS AT LAW 403 F~NT STREET ' P,O.BOX 562 TEL.(516) 477-204B . FAX(516)477-8919, ~' '~-~' L~ ~---~ ~ I~Jll~ May 4, 1994 288 PANTIGO ROAD HAMPTON, NY 11937 TEL (516) 324-8282 FAX (516) 324-8283 Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: Proposed Site Plan for American Amoured Foundation SCTM# 1000-140-2-16 Dear Mr. Goehringer: I have reviewed Mr. Fish's memo to the Board dated April 26, 1994 regarding the above property. Mr. Fish gives a rather lengthy discussion of what constitutes the rear yard of the applicant's inverted "L" shaped parcel which has frontage on two streets. However, the height restriction of 18' is not addressed although originally mentioned as a criteria to be met. According to the code the "gun tower", an accessory structure, must not exceed 18' and must also meet the set-back requirements from any lot line no matter what constitutes the rear of the parcel. The change of zone, additionally, further restricts the location of the tower to at least 100' from Love Lane. Thus, the tower, if it exceeds 18' and if it is less than the requisite feet from the side yard must seek a variance. It must, however, be at least 100' from Love Lane. Mr. Fish's memo, erroneously, interprets the war machines on display on the property as "storage" and it is his opinion that such storage is not addressed in the code for the Hamlet Business district. (See sec. 100-236 re outside storage in residential district) The war machines are not stored. They are an integral part of the museum's displays and attractions and as such must be enclosed in a building as is stated in the code. The fact that the exhibits must be enclosed in a building has been stated by the town's own consultants. (see Exhibit 7 attached to memorandum in opposition). Mr. Fish's memo to you enclosed a copy of the Planning Board's letter of January 21, 1994. I call this Board's attention to item "3" which is a reiteration of a condition placed on this property when the zone change was issued. Photographs taken by my client at 2 p.m. on the date of the hearing clearly indicate that the screening is not complete. A review of the tape of the hearing will reveal that Mrs. Gasser stated they were finished with the screening and all that would be done had been done. The incomplete screening violates another condition of the zone change and adds but another violation of the requirements that are not being met by this applicant nor for which they are seeking relief. I trust this Board will examine the height and setback requirements of the code regarding the tower, will interpret for itself what the displayed war machines constitute, which is certainly not storage, and what full screening as a condition of the zone change really means. I thank you for your continued time and consideration of this matter. CLB:ar cc: Gary J. Fish, Building Inspector Planning Board Town Board Town Attorney Very truly yours, ONGIONI & BORRELLI Carmela L. Borrelli PUBLIC ttEARING BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTItOLD April 6, 1994 Present : (7:30 p. m. Hearings Commenced) ttON. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman 'SERGE DOYEN, Member JAMES DINIZiO, JR., Member ROBERT A. VILLA, Member RICIIARD C. WILTON, Member LINDA I(OWALSI(I, Clerk-Assistant to Board INDEX APPLN.# APPLICANT PAGEP. 4221 4218 4220 4222 4227 4223 4226 4224 4225 4228 4229 ARTHUR BURNS ......................... 3-4 JOHN E. STRIPP AND JUDITH D. STRIPP.. 4-7 JOHN E. STRIPP AND JUDITH D. STRIPP.. 7-19 CINDY BENEDETTO ...................... 19-23 WILLIAM GASSER ....................... 23-34 DONALD BREH~ ......................... 34-40 THOMAS AND JOAN KELLY ................ 40-44 THOMAS AND ROBY GLUCKNAN ............ 44-57 RICHARD AND DOLORES PRINCIPI ......... 57-68 VICTOR AND GAIL RERISI ............... 68-80 FRANK R. ZALESKI ..................... 80-84 Page 23 Regular Meetiug ef Ap)'il 6, 1994 Southold Town Board of Appeals MEMBER VILLA: I'm getting myself confused. This just ail existing deck there now. BOARD CLERK: There's three of them down there really. MEMBER VILLA: Right, so then this one doesn't have a plan or anything else, they just have the addition and then its a concrete MR. CtIAIRMAN: Patio. MEMBER VILLA: Patio MR. CItAiRMAN: l~ight. MEMBER VILLA: OK, no I don't have any objeetion to that. MR. CI1AIRMAN: Does anyone want to offer a resolution? I'll offer tho resolutio,~. Granted as applied. MEMBER VILLA: Second. MR. CIIAiRMAN: All in favor. MEMBERS: Aye. MR. CItAIRMAN: ltave a lovely evening. MR. CIIAIRMAN: ON, the next al)peal is on behalf of WILLIAM 7:50 p.~SSER. It is appeal number 4227. OK, the legal notice reads as follows: Upon application the applicant 4227 is a request for a variance based upon the Building Inspector's February 4, 1994 Notice of Disapproval concernh~g a building perafit application for two identification signs, as they exist and to my knowledge the size of the signs are withia eonfm'mity it is the actual placement of those signs where they exis! which is before us and I have a copy of the Suffolk County Tax Map concerning this and the surrounding properties in the area. Mi'.' Gasser would you like to be heard? MR. GASSER: Page 24 Regular Meeting of April 6, 1994 Southold Town Boat'd of Appeals MR. CttA1RMAN: OK, ri'bank you. Itow are you today Mrs. Gasser? MRS. GASSER: Good evening. I'm Karen Gasser speaking on behalf of the Directors of the American Armored Foundation and William Gasser tile property owner. The application is before you this evening shows the mnseum has presently two signs, one on Love Lane and one on North Road. These signs ave 6 feet by 3-1/2 feet subdued in color and the museum feels tlmsc signs are in harmony with the surround- ing area. As stated on our application p~'esent property lines do not allow the musemn to cenform to the required sign code setbacks. Therefore, we ave making application to this boa~d for variances so that the signs in question can be brought into compliance with town code. I have some pictu~'es that I would like to submit to the board. MR. CIIAIRMAN: Surely. Thank you very much. MRS. GASSER: These sigas show the other 16 signs that are presently, these pbotogvaplm show the other 16 signs that are presently on Love Lane. As you can see all but two of the Love Lane signs are approximately the stone square footage and coloring as the museum signs. Except for one sign all the Love Lane signs including the museum sign run pa~'allel to the street. All the signs have a 9 to 10 foot setback from the street not property line and all but one does not meet the side p~'operty except that. Of the 17 signs that are presently on Love Lane there is no sign that can conform to the sign code. Evell though we do not conform to lhis code tile nmsoum feels that the sign confomns the surrounding chat~acter of the street in size, color and plae. emtmt.~ The signs do not obstruct vision of the pedestrians or drivers and the signs enhance the museum*s front Page 25 Regular Meeting of April G, 199.t Southold Town Board of Al)peals entrance, all of wlfich l'm sure you will agree are i[nportant factors to consider along with the code in this or ally application. As not only members of this board or business men as well you gentlemen know the importauce of signs to any business. These signs are ultimate extremely important to this non profit organization in helping us to inform not only the local people but also the tens of thousands of tourists that visit the museum in the North Fork every year. We ask that this board grant the museum this variance so that we cau maiutain these valuable signs and at the same time be in compliauce with town code. If you will have an y questions I would be happy to answt~r tltcm. MR. CIIAIRMAN: I live in Mattituck so I'm perfectly well aware of the SigllS alld l~lll aware of thc lll[ISOUlll~ I've bocll there several times, false alarms with thc Fire Department. I don't have any particular objections to the signs, I dou't think that there offensive as you mentioned. That's just my opinion. I'll opcu it up for any discussion anybody may have. [ apologize Rich that I have not been calling when you have been asking. MEMBER WILTON: I have no problem with the signs. MR. CHAIRMAN: Bob, Jim? MEMBER WILTON: Dues this iuclude the sandwich sign too or just the signs on the fence, right? MRS. GASSER: Just thc sign on the fence. MEMBER WILTON: OK. I have no other questious. MEMBER VII,LA: flow are-all the other --- wheu your on 48. You have other sigas hanging on the feace? Page 26 Regular Meeting of April 6, 1994 Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. GASSER: They also arc going to be removed. MEMBER VILLA: They are going to be removed. OK, because to me they didu't look too good. MRS. GASSER: No. MEMBER VILLA: Now, there is also a question I think the sign ordinance allows one siga per property right? MR. CtlAIRMAN: 1 think it allows two. BOARD CLERK: I have a copy of it in the file regulation. Yeah, you want me to put it? Jast leave it there. This is the regulation Bob talking about signs and rural two streets, so that there are normally bound to have more than one sigu. MR. CHAIRMAN and other voices discussing tile matte~'. MR. CHAIRMAN: OK, auy other questions of Mrs. Gasser? MEMBER VILLA: No, I dou't have any questions. MR. CtlAIRMAN: Anybody else like to speak in favor of this applicatiou? Thank you Mfs. Gasser. OK, auybody like to speak against the application? MS BORELLI: Ongioni aud Borelli I'll returu these for Diane and Frank Amoratti who are tile neighbors to the applicant. MR. CIIAIRMAN: Thank you. MS. BORELLI: We do not believe that the applicant here has met the code r~quircments aad that is part of our objection to the requested variance in that we think that this applicant call use the code requirements, there is ample lot space to place the sign tile requisite 15 feet £rom i'he lot lines. We also beli6ve that the pictures you see are signs that were probably approved during the Page 27 Regular Meeting of April 6, 1994 Southold Towu Board of Appeals site 1)lan process or at some poiat received approval these signs have been improper and illt~gal since about 1982. The applicant is before this board simply because the question came up when there in front of tile Planning Board the site plan review because this site also doesn't have sit plan approval never having gotten it. The brief contains a history of the site which shows that this applicant purchased the property ia 1981 and actnally came to this board in 1980 prior to purchase trying to find out whether a museum was a proper use for the site at that time. This board told tile applicant that he couldn't give advice, they had to be here for an application, however, it was not permitted use at that time, it has never been a permitted use. It was granted, the applicant was granted a zone change in September of 93, over our objections, to which we strenuously objecled aad that during that approval process tile Town Board decision that grm~ted the zone change specifically makes note that the zone change should not be considered as the granting of an variances and that lira applicant still had to get the variances for the various illegalities at the site. The environmental consultant noted in the papers submitted to the Town Board that even if the zone change was graatcd, which it was grauted, this site still would not be in complitmce with the zoning code. The Planning Board objected to the zone ellangt~ ell the basis that it was considered spot zoning, at least in the l'hmning Board's opiniou, ltowever, the zone change was grunted and the applicant has now come before you to ask for a variance for si~us. It is our position that this applicant cannot ask for piece meal variances. This site has at least four Page 28 Regular Mceting of April 6, 1994 Southold Town Board of Appeals violations of tile code. It has tile sign violation of the code, it has the tower that is in violation of the height requirements and setback requirements because even although the Town Board told them they had to move it 100 feet, the Town Board does not have the authority to grant the variance from the code, that tower docs not have a building permit and it violates tile code. The site also is a-museum and uuder the code a moscum must be in a totally housed building and this is not, the equipment is out on tile service where you can see it outside of, tile major portion of it is outside. It is our position that they cannot come and ask for a variance or sign when there are uumcrous vi~lutions of the code. We have requested the enforcement officer to enforce the code, a copy of our last letter to them asking them is one of the exhibits aud there has been no enforcement. BOARD CLERK: They haven't received it yet. I checked with them this moruing, they dou't have any, there is no violatious of record. I checked oil that too today, just so you'll know. MS. BOItELLI: Tile last letter that I wrote just yesterday they don't have. There is ail exhibit itl there that there is a letter that was written iii October of 1993, itemizing the violatious, tile environmental consultant's report to the Town Board, listed what tile violations were, so my client has bt, eh complaining siuce 1988 (loud riuging noise). So tile origiaal record of the complaint in 1988 of the tower at least. We feel that the segmenting of a request is an attempt to meet tile statu~'ory requiremeuts by saying that they are asking for a minimal variance, but maybe the sign is a minimal Page 29 Regular Meeting of April 6, 199.1 Southold Town Board of Al)peals variance when you think of everything else that violates the code. But by segmcntb~g tbcit' attempting to get in little pieces what they really should be asking for all itt one request. My brief gives a history of this site and iix fact attaches as an exhibit the brief that we submitted to the Town Board in opposition to tile request for a zone change. It shows you that this applicant came before this board itl 1980 to ask advice and never came back when they opened it improper use. They went, they submitted very very late a request for site plan approval after they were pushed by the Planning Board for site plait approval. They were told to come to this board for an application for a variance from the tower, they submitted an application, it was vetumicd by this board because it was incomplete and they ltcver cat~c back with a second application. Tile Planning Board is never going to be able to gl'ant site plan approval on this site because at some point they are going to say its not just your signs, its your tower, its your museum, because they don't meet the code. BOARD CLERK: I think wi; have a letter fx'om tile Plamfing Board in the file. Right? MR. C[tAIRMAN: I don't know, I bare look at it. BOARD CLEI~I,:: OK. MS. BORELLI: By tht~ pl.ocx~ss of piece meal application this applicant bas been iii Ol)('ratiou since 1981, all itl violation of the code. This is 1994. That's 13 yt~ars o[' illegal Ol)m.ation and 13 years of violations of the code wi[~ impunity and all we are asking is that somebody enforce the (;ode. That somebody say you can't do this Page 30 Regular Meeting of Aln'il 6, 1994 Soutbold Town Boat'd ~f Al)peals because it violates tile code you have to come before the proper tribunal attd ask for the proper relief all at the same time. MR. CtlAiRMAN: Carmcla you didn't discuss this with the Town Attoraey at all, right? MS. BORELLI: No, I didn't. I had discussed it with Mr. Arnoff previously and in fact it was flarvey who forced this applicant to go to the Town Boat'd. My brief says that in essmme of Mr. Arnoff's letter said "enough is enough" attd that's exactly what his letter said. His letter said "You come before the Board and ask for a zone change or we're going to do something about it", and that's simply because it was delaying tactic after delaying tactic. In fact, my client brought me photogt'apbs tonight the Town Board's granting of a zone ehat~ge ol~c of the conditions of the zone change was that they serceu the lot liitc with a fcnciag bctwecu their property and my elieut's property. Th/~ Town Board said prefer'ably vegetation. They did not do vcgctatim~. They did those slats that go in atxd out of the frame and as you can sec that has never been completed so they are in violation even of the cm~ditions uuder which they were suppose to get the zone change. You can see that this is the side view. So they haven't even done the screening that they were suppose to do in order to get to fulfill thc condition of the zone change. I can offer those. This is just anotht, r picture of tile sign. My let[er that Linda was re£crring to is a letter that I wrote yesterday addressed to the Town Board, Complaining Board, the Building Department Enforcemeltt Officer again" with a copy to this board asking that somebody do something becaase is going ou some too long. Page 31 Regular Meeting of April 6, 199,1 Southold Town Board of Appeals MRS. KOWALSI':: ] gu~,ss I should just mention that I spoke with Gary Fish today, I put a m~mo in the record and he says that the applicants are working with the Bnilding Department, there are not violations outstanding and that they do expect to get sit plan approval very shortly. The Zmfing Board is next. I'm just letting you be aware of that, that he said there are no violations. MS. BORELLI: OK. Tht~['e is a letter in the file that is an exhibit here which is a letter from the Building Department that says there are existing violations and that the only reason they haven't cited them or issued summonst~s is to allow them to come before the proper tribunal to seek varianc~s. BOARD CLERK: Right, but that was a buildiug inspector that's no longer here and I think the Gassers have done a lot since that letter and maybe they s.hould r~ally briag everybody up to date. MS. BORELLI: I met with Gary Fish and Building Department, he has told me that the dirt~ctitm that the Town Building Department wants us to take, I have met with Mr. Kassner from the Platmiug Board, we are presently doing site plan approval. This variance is just one of the stipalations that a~t~ b~,ing asked by Plamfing Board. That is why we are here tonight so we can set that up, so we can go into the Plamdng Board and we caa finish this and get it all lined up and get the site plan approval that is necessary. We are meeting every condition that tht~ l'hmning Board is asking us to meet and we are doing it on a rc~gular basis. As far as the screening of the fence is done. ' Page 32 Regular Meeting of Apl'il 6, 1994 Southold Town Boat'd ef Appeals MRS. GASSER: I don't know where they got those pictures but if you go down Love Lane right now the screening has been done and it will be continued on the other side per Planning Board recommendation. MR. CHAIRMAN: OK. i don't, you know, I understand there's frustrations oil both sides here and there is no question about it. You understand what tile attorney is requesting here. She is saying that you're dealing with a segmentation in reference going to a procednt'e of if lllet'e are additional variances needed instead of requiring them all at one time. She's saying that you're doing one at a time. OK? BOARD CLERK: They c. ould be done separately. MRS. GASSER: We tu'e being told that there are no varianee~ other variances needed. BOARD CLERK: That's exactly what I was told today too. MR. CIIAIRMAN: Unfm'tunatcly the town attorney had to go, had something else pressing tonight and that's why we let her go. MRS. GASSER: The tower is the question. It has been moved and it has been nlovcd more thaa 100 feet. It was moved from tile front corner piece to the back col'lief. MR. CIIAIRMAN: This is thc lower? MRS. GASSER: This is tile tower. It was also tnt down to go under tile 18 fot~t limit so we don'! lleed a wlrianc, e for that anymore. MR. CIIAIRMAN'.. Right, OK. MRS. GASSER: We al'c screening ill, we have only a 50 foot width of properly. You ean't put trees ill there and still have something to display. Mi'. Arum'ertl has trees on his property that screen. Page 33 Regular Mct~ting (~1' Apl'il 6, 199.1 Soutbold Town Bout'd of Al)peals Unfortunately a lot of tltose tcees have died and he has had to cut thegn down. If those trees were still there it would even screen more and we were there since 1981. My. Amoretti has moved in since 85. MR. CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Is three something else you would like to add? MS. BORELLI: Mr. Gocbvingev we would really appreciate a fovmal request from tim Z~ming Board Appeal to the Building Depart~nent with regard to uny potential violations at this site because the code specifically says tlmt a tllttscttlll lllttst be iu a total enclosed building tlmt has bceu noted by everyoue through this entire process. Environmental Consultmds before the Town Board, the Planning Board. In fart I spoke to Russell Kassnep just before he went away on vacation alid be said "I don't cape where that tower is~ the Town Board didn't have the right to grant thetn a variance, it is an accessory building alld it needs something". I lllcall I said that to him the day he was lt~aving 1~ go on to wtcation. MR. CIIAIRMAN: Yott mcan Robert Kassnee? MS. BORELLI: Yes, I'm som'y. MR. CttA1RMAN: That ah'ight. You bad me going there fop a minute. MS. BORELLI: Tlmy, tbt~y, I would just like an official request f~om this board of the Building Dt~pavtmm~t to inquire into the matters that have been notvd by evt~cyone, all along the line including people that have been bitted by the town to look into this matter because I am ltot convinced that tbct'e a~'e not violatimis based upon the towus own recto'ds. If you go tl~rougb the records, your files, the files of the Building Dcpactmcat, thc files of the Planning Departmeut, the Page 3,t Regular Meeting of April 6, 1994 Soutbold Town Board of Appeals files of the Town Board, they are replete with the violations. That's all Pal asking and that if this applicant requires more than one variance tlmt tlmy uot do it they way they are doing it now. They come before you aud ask for everything all. at once. MR. CIIAIRMAN: OK, thauk you. MS. BORELLI: Thank you. MR. CIIAIRMAN: Anybody else would like to speak either for or against on this applicatim~? I see no hands. I'll make a lnotion closing thc hearing reserving decisiou until later. MEMBER VILLA: Second. MR. CHAIRMAN: All in favor. MEMBERS: Aye. MR. CIIAIRMAN: Tlmuk you very much everybody for coming in. 8:30 P.M. MR. CIIAIRMAN: The next appeal is in behalf of Donald B rebm. BOARD CLERK: (Question to Member Villa) You're saying no on that vote then? MEMBER VILLA: 1 tbiok we ought to --- MR. CHAIRMAN: Well tlmt doesn't mcan we can't write a letter to the town attorney and ask her opinion, which I unfortunately ilmdvcrtcntly let bcr go tonight, you know which we could have had au opiniou at that p,fint, I mcan I dou't waut put the person on a spot appt~at'ing, you km~w what I'm saying. MEMBER VILLA: You'rt~ point was well taken and I think if we before we can vote, befot'e I vo~e ou something like that I would like an answer from the Building Dt~partment. ONGIONI & BORRHI 11 I LJ I, ly 1, lq94 Gary Fir~!l Buildinq r nspector Town ot! !~>uthold P,O. Box I 1'79 Southotd, NY 1197] RE: Z_ B_A _ ~'_a~r i__fl n q~_ S_CT~.# _1000 }40-.2_716 My t;le on the above matter reflectr; +h;lf os Hay ]6, ]994 Bob Kassne~ ,~quested additional data from ~ho ':~;ers and additionally advised ~hem where certain structures were r ~qu[red to be under the code. Hy last conversation with you ~nd~,:a~ed you were aware of several , iolations at this site, had spok~,~, ~o Bob Kassner and that the mppl ;r'ant would be given a rpasonabl~ ~ i,,,, w]~ h~n wh~r:h to take I ,,,,,-l.r] appreciate your advising the ,:t .~lu~ of this matter and what, i~ ,any, progress has beau }lad in t,~ iuq]aq this site into comp].i a,,,' qith the yours, (]LB: a r cc:Rob;,] I G. Gera, d p. Kassner, Planning Depa~fl!en~ GoehrJnqer, Zonil](] Board MARIE ONGIONI CARMELA L. BORRELLI ONGIONI & BORRELLI ATTORNEYS AT LAW 403 FRONT STREET ' P.O,8OX 562 GREENPORT, NEW YORK 11944-0562 TEL, (516) 477-2048 · FAX (515) 477-8919 Il i 288 PANTIGO ROAD ;' E~HAMPTON. NY 11937 May 4, 1994 Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: Proposed Site Plan for American Amoured Foundation SCTM# 1000-140-2-16 Dear Mr. Goehringer: I have reviewed Mr. Fish's memo to the Board dated April 26, 1994 regarding the above property. Mr. Fish gives a rather lengthy discussion of what constitutes the rear yard of the applicant's inverted "L" shaped parcel which has frontage on two streets. However, the height restriction of 18' is not addressed although originally mentioned as a criteria to be met. According to the code the "gun tower", an accessory structure, must not exceed 18' and must also meet the set-back requirements from any lot line no matter what constitutes the rear of the parcel. The change of zone, additionally, further restricts the location of the tower to at least 100' from Love Lane. Thus, the tower, if it exceeds 18' and if it is less than the requisite feet from the side yard must seek a variance. It must, however, be at least 100' from Love Lane. Mr. Fish's memo, erroneously, interprets the war machines on display on the property as "storage" and it is his opinion that such storage is not addressed in the code for the Hamlet Business district. (See sec. 100-236 re outside storage in residential district) The war machines are not stored. They are an integral part of the museum's displays and attractions and as such must be enclosed in a building as is stated in the code. The fact that the exhibits must be enclosed in a building has been stated by the town's own consultants. (see Exhibit 7 attached to memorandum in opposition). Mr. Fish's memo to you enclosed a copy of the Planning Board's letter of January 21, 1994. I call this Board's attention to item "3" which is a reiteration of a condition placed on this property when the zone change was issued. Photographs taken by my client at 2 p.m. on the date of the hearing clearly indicate that the screening is not complete. A review of the tape of the hearing will reveal that Mrs. Gasser stated they were finished with the screening and all that would be done had been done. The incomplete screening violates another condition of the zone change and adds but another violation of the requirements that are not being met by this applicant nor for which they are seeking relief. I trust this Board will examine the height and setback requirements of the code regarding the tower, will interpret for itself what the displayed war machines constitute, which is certainly not storage, and what full screening as a condition of the zone change really means. I thank you for your continued time and consideration of this matter. CLB:ar cc: Gary J. Fish, Building Inspector Planning Board Town Board Town Attorney Very truly yours, ONGIONI & BORRELLI Carmela L. Borrelli PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. Ward, Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Bennett Odowski, Jr. Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Town Hal 53095 Ma n Road ....... P: O; Box 1179 Southold, NewYork 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Richard G. Ward, Chairman ~//~ Planning Board comments on actions before the Board of Appeals May 4, 1994 Following are the Boards comments on actions before your Board: Appl. No. 4232 - Thomas Palmer and Joan Gibbs The Board has no objections to this lot line change as no new lots will be created. Appl. No. 4231 & 4230SE - Alex and Afrodite Boukas The Board has no objection to this proposed site plan as it is the intention of the code to permit this use in this zone by special Exception. Appl. No. 42035E - Robert E. Bidwell The Board is in general agreement with the proposed site plan subject to the applicant's satisfaction of details. Appl. No. 4237 Robert Pelligrini The Board has no objection to the proposed kitchen for private use. An amended floor plan should be submitted to this Board for the record file. Appl. No 4227 - William Gasser Since the security fence will partly obscure the sign from public view, the Board has no objections to the variance request. The Board recommends that the sign not be lighted. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, NewYo~k 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1802 OFFICE OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Board of Appeals Gary J. Fish, Building Inspector April 26, 1994 Response to memo from ZBA dated 4/7/94. Regarding William Gasser/ American Armored Foundation, Inc. 1000-140-2-16 (HB Zone) Regarding your recent request for a confirmation of outstanding issues that exist at the William Gasser/Armored Foundation, Inc. I submit the following: There are a number of changes recommended by the Planning Board, to be made to the site plan and are listed in the attached letter. The letter was sent to Mr. & Mrs. Gasser and is dated 1/21/94. Regarding the tower location and height, it is required to be in the rear yardand meet all requirements ofan accessory building as set forth in Article IX Chapt. 100-91C.(1) Considering the unique shape of this lot, there is a question as to what is the front yard. I see the lot as having two front yards and the tower would be required to be moved to be in compliance. I am almost compelled to request an interpretation from the Board regarding this matter and may in the future. As far as the use of the property goes, a museum is clearly a permitted use in a HB District. Article IX Chapter 100-91 A.(17) It is subject to site plan approval however, and the Gasser's are fully aware of this and have assured me that they will make every effort to comply with any and all recommendations fromthe Planning Board regarding their site plan. The Town Board approved the Zone change from a LI and RO to a HB District on Sept. 21, 1993. The State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) process, as requested by the Town Board, was successfully completed and a negative declaration was adopted. In regards to outside storage, I cannot find anywhere in the Town Code, under Hamlet Business, where it restricts outside storage. The Town Code does however, address this issue in the residential districts. As you are well aware, there is a dissapproval now pending for two signs. The application was disapproved because the signs are too close to the road and do not meet the required set back. I spoke with Mrs. Gasser by phone on 4/25/94, and she indicated to me at that time that she is diligently pursuing a resolve to this whole matter. She has been in contact with the Health Dept. a number of times and is submitting a revised site plan to the Planning Dept. by the end of the week. The Building Dept. is monitoring the progress of this project, as we do all other projects of this nature and is well aware of the outstanding issues. I trust this memo clarifies most, if not all of the issues in question. I look forward to any future correspondence from the ZBA. Sincerely yours, Gary J. Fish, BUILDING INSPECTOR CC: Mr. and Mrs. William Gasser Carmela Borrelli, Esq. (repr. Mr. and Mrs. ~anmirati) PLASHING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. Ward, Chairman George Rltchie Latham, Jr. Bennett Orlowskl, Jr. Mark $. McDonald Kenneth L, Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 I {'"'t ~ r~.~[ , :. ~ /~, I 'lb~ Halj, 53095 Main Road ,.~_ · : ~ ,.c~ - B~G. DE~ :~:~;~-' T0~ OF S0~OLD P.O. ~x 1179 ~u~, N~ York 11971 P~G BO~ OFFICE F= isis)7~- lS23 ~ OF SO--OLD January 21, 1994 Mr. & Mrs. William F. Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 RE: Proposed Site Plan for American Amoured Foundation N/Ec LIRR Right of Way & Love Lane, Mattituck Zoning Hamlet Business (}LB) SCTM~ 1000-140-2-16 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Gasser: The Planning Board has reviewed the conditions contained in the Town Board's rezoning decision and reviewed the Site Plan dated September 9, 1991. The following changes must be made before the Board can proceed with its review: 1. The scale of the plan must be 1" = 20' 2. The height and type of fence must be shown. 3. Screening must be placed between the museum property line and the residential properties to the north east and the northwest and to the Hamlet Density property to the northwest. 4. The tower must be moved to a point not closer than one hundred feet from the Love Lane entrance and shown on the plan. 5. Handicapped Space and paved surface must be accessible to building. 6. Parking calculations and a notation regarding accessibility of public parking must be shown on the plan. 7. Zone must be indicated. 8. Percent landscaped and percent lot coverage must be shown on the plan. 9. Key map showing the location and owners of all adjoining lands within five hundred (500) feet, as shown on the latest tax records, at a scale of one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet. 10. Any proposed outdoor lighting must be shown. This lighting must indicate type and wattage and must be shielded to the premises. ~/ 11. Ground signs must be twenty-five (25) feet from each ,~/ rear side property line and fifteen line. (.15) feet from the front and/or ~J addition to the above, Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval must be obtained before any possible final approval· If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. be~t ~. Kassner Site PIan Reviewer ONGIONI & BORREI,LI 288 PANTIGO r~OAP EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937 TEL (516) 324-82~2 13, 1.994 Bob Kassner Plsnnirlg Department Town Hell ~s~n Road ~;outho]d¢ N.Y. 11971 Re: Application for Site Plan Approval American Armoured Foundation Inc. By now you have received a copy of my letter of April 7, 1994 Le(jazd~ng Mr. Gasser's application for a ,,ariance for signs. At the ZBA hearing I stated there were nnmerous other ,,'iolet],ms of the code and that a request for a variance for one rio 1. ation was segmentation and should not be permitted. I requested that the ZBA make official inquiry of the enforcement officer regarding other violations. The ZBA has now made that request. (copy of their receut memo attached). It is our position that this site violates the requirements of the zoning code and that certainly site plan approval cannot be granted while such violations exist. The tower does not meet height a~]d set back requirements despite its movement to comply with one of the Town Board's conditions for granting a zone change. The site has not met another condition of that approval in that the fencing between the site and my clients property has not been completely shielded. In addition, under the code a museum must be wholly enclosed whereas there is war machinery in open view t. hzouqhout the site. It is respectfully requested that thi~ Board demand compliance the code before the app]ication ]~ pr'~cessed any further. Very t r'uly yours, ONGION[ & BORRELLI Carmela B. Borrelli CLB/dms (C: Zoning Board of Appeals Town Board Town Attorney Building Department Att: Enforcement Officer Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD General Info for the File DATE: April 14. 1994 RE: Property of William Gasser SCTM #1000-140~2-16 Appeal of Disapproval by B.I. Gary Fish dated 2/4/94 For Approval of Setbacks of Two Existing Signs Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 On April 6, 1994 there was a public hearing held, and concluded, on an Appeal concerning the setbacks of two signs. Upon learning of claims as to possible,noncompliance on the above proper~ty from Carmella Borelli, Esq, we~immediately sent a memo to the Building Inspector (Cary Fish), a copy of which is attached. We have requested that he confirm, in writing, the status of the property in relation to all regulations of the Code of the Town of Southotd; Carmella Borelli. Esq. has appeared before sever.al Boards previously in behalf of the neighboring.property owners (Amarattl) and has also requested a review by the Building Department. Town Attorney. and now the Town Board of the property status in relation to alleged violations. B.I. Gary Fish confirmed that he will respond to our April 7, 1994 memo hopefully by the end of this week. The application pending before the Board of Appeals is strictly an appeal of a Notice of Disapproval from the Building Inspector concerning sign setbacks. and it was our understanding that Mr. and Mrs. Gasser are proceeding with the Planning Board under a pending site plan application and proceeding with the Building Department for appropriate permits. Bob Kassner has asked that the ZBA proceed with the sign variance, before the P.B. finalizes the site plan, At this point in time, there is no other appeal properly before the Board of Appeals and we do recommend that the Building Inspector update or otherwise note the status of those previous claims of noncompliance dating back to 1990 or 1991. (Apparently, Vinny Wiezoryck was the inspector earlier, and now Gary is the officer-in-charge of this project.) APPEALS B OA_KD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOV(N OF SOUTHOLD MFMO Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 'TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Gary Fish, Building Inspector April 7, 1994 Pending Project - William Gasser/American Armored Foundation; Inc. 1000-140-2-16 (HB Zone) At our public hearing held last evening, concerns were raised as to whether or not all other elements of the zoning code, pertaining to the site plan in the above project (pending before the Planning Board) will or will not require modifications to conform, or perhaps a certification may have been requested at some point in time. It has been brought to our attention that there may be outstanding issues -- see prior communications by the Building Department and the Planning Board Chairman pertaining to past issues (such as the tower, location, tower height, screenlng~ outside storage, use as a museum, etc.) while it was still pending a zone change before the Town Board. We have received a copy of a letter from the Plannin9 Board addressed to the applicant concerning an informal, planning review and to add certain items to the site plan. However, we do not know whether or not a more recent review was done, or more recent letter is of record from the Buildin9 Inspector, concerning an update of the newest plan before the Plannin9 Board since the change of zone by the Town Board in September 1993. The Board of Appeals is requesting that the Building Inspector provide a confirmation of any other outstanding issues and, if none, how they have been resolved. If there are outstanding issues that will need to conform to code, please provide us with a written'list. Attached is a copy of the survey furnished under the variance application for two fence signs. You may wish to obtain the plan on file with the Planning Board as well. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in updating this project. cc: Mr. and Mrs. William Gasser Carmela Borrelli, Esq. (repr. Mr. and Mrs. Ammirati) TOWN OF SOUTIIOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE SOUTIIOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL Willia~ Gasser 2383 5th AVENUE ' '-'' '~,~c~G~oi.~',' i&b' ~&~ ..... PLEASETAKE NOTICE that your application dated . J~Y 28, 1994 E~CT ~0 SI~S for pe~it to ... .................................... . ..... ~i ropertv .. 640 LO~ ~ ~I~CK, Loca onofP - Hous;~o[ ........................................ · .. . County Tax Map No. 1000 Section .. 140 Stree[ 16 H~mler ............ Block ..... ~ ....... Lot ............ Subdivision ................. Filed Map No ............ . ............. Lot No ' is returncd herewilh and disapprovcd on the following grounds ............................... ~'~ SIGNS S~LL BE SET ~CK NOT LESS ......... ........ OPgR~ LI S~ ............................ ; ............ ' ' · . -C~. 100-91 C (2) ~FER TO C~. 100-81 C (2) (a) .. ACTION ~UIEB B~ ~E ZONING BO~ las / ~Y J. FISH Date . February 6, 1-94 RV 1/80 ONGIONI & BORRELLI 288 PANTIGO ~OAD EAST HAMPTON. NY ! 1937 TEL (516] 324-B282 FAX (516) 324-8283 April 7, 1994 Laury Dowd, Esq. RECEI~D Town Attorney Town Hall APR 8 1994 Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 ~I~w,~ Re: ZBA Application of American Armoured Found~qB Dear Ms. Dowd: Last night I appeared in opposition to the above application on behalf of the next door neighbors, Diane and Frank Ammirati. The history of this site is contained in my memo to the Town Board submitted in opposition to the applicants' request for a change of zone (granted 9/93)(See Exhibit 3 & 3A attached to ZBA memo). My opposition last night was two fold: first that the applicant has not met the statutory requirements for a variance and second that other variances are required for other code violations and the segmentation being attempted was improper (copy of opposition memo enclosed). During the course of the hearing the ZBA's secretary/assistant advised that she spoke to the Building Inspector who had advised that no ~ther violations exist at the site. I requested that Mr. Goehringer make official inquiry of the Building Inspector on this subject. A perusal of my memos and a review of the voluminous files for this site maintained by the ZBA, Planning Department and Town Board will, I am sure, reveal to you that there are indeed code violations present that require variances. Those violations have been acknowledged by the Building Inspector (see Exhibit 5 attached to the ZBA memo), by the Planning Department (see Exhibits 6 & 8 attached to the ZBA memo), by the Town's consultants (see Exhibit 7 attached to the ZBA memo), by the Town Board (see Exhibit 1 attached to the ZBA memo). The changing of Building Inspector's has not changed the code. It exists now as it did in the past with regard to the violations noted by the above entities. In the past this applicant enjoyed somewhat favored treatment. It is our hope t '~,~ctfut]y '(' ', °'~ ~ .t ~ n%' ~: ~f f!ce review this matter. I am certain that my contentions will be sustained. My clients ask nothing more than this applicant comply wit}] the law and if non-compliance is found that the appropriate penalties be imposed or the proper remediation be sought. Very truly yours, ONGIONJ & BORRELLI Carmela L. Borrelli CLB/dms enc. cc: Zoo]lng Board of Appeals (w/o enc.) Plal]ning Board (w/o enc. ) Town Board (w/o enc. ) MARIE ONGIONI CARMELA L. BORRELLI ONGIONI & BORRELLI ATTORNEYS AT LAW 403 FRONT STREET . P.O.BOX 562 GREENPORT. NEW YORK 11944~1562 TEL. (516)477-2048 · FAX(516)477-8919 288 PANTIGO ROAD EAST HAMPTON. NY 11937 TEL (516) 324-8282 FAX (516) 324-8283 April 5, 1994 Town Board Planning Board Building Dept-Enforcement Officer Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 RECeiVED APR 8 1994 Southold T~.~ clo,k Re: American Armoured Foundation, Inc. "Tank Museum" SCTM #1000-140-2-16 Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed please find a copy of my clients' memo in opposition to the application of the above entity pending before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Please note that the applicant continues to violate the zoning code and the conditions of the zone change granted in 1993. It is respectfully requested that appropriate action be taken with regard to these violations. Very truly yours, ONGIONI & BORRELLI Carmela L. Borrelli CLB/dms cc: Zoning Board of Appeals STATE OF NEW YORK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In The Matter Of The Petition of William F. Gasser and the American Amoured Foundation, Inc., For a variance from Article IX, Section 100-91 C 2 (100-81-C-2-a) of the Southold Town Zoning Code MEMORANDUM OF DIANE AND FRANK AMMIP, ATI IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE STATEMENT OF FACTS This property received a zone change from the Town Board on September 22, 1993 (Exhibit 1) which decision specifically states at item #5 that: "The change of zone shall not in any way be considered at[s] the granting of any variance necessary to the proposed use." The above comment by the Town Board was apparently made because of the prolongedl, improper use of the site and the applicants history of a total disregard for the Town's zoning code. In fact, the application for a zone change was made because the then Town Attorney said "enough is enough" as a result of the stalling tactics of this applicant which had gone on much too long (Exhibit 2). A short synopsis of the history of this site follows: It was purchased in September 1981. Prior to the purchase the applicant sought guidance from the ZBA as to the uses available at the site. Mr. Gasser advised at the meeting that his hobby was lin excess of ten years armoured vehicles and he was interested in converting the existing storage building to a museum. This Board rightfully advised it could not render an opinion without an application. The intended use as voiced to the ZBA in 1980 prior to active purchase was not permitted under the zoning code. Thus, this applicant even prior to his purchase had every intention of creating an illegal use and it is now 1994 some 14 years later and the illegalities have not been remedied. In 1988 a complaint regarding the then recently installed gun tower prompted a memo from the Building Inspector in January 1989 which noted some of the existing violations. None of those violations, some seven years after observance by the Building Inspector despite their continued existence have resulted in fines and all go unremedied. In 1989 the Planning Department determined a site plan was required but an application was not submitted until 1991. That application is still pending and the instant application is a result of discussions with the Planning Department. In fact in August 1991 Mr. Gasser was advised by the Planning Department that ZBA action was required for the gun tower but to date no request for a variance has been filed. February 1992 but it was returned as of return read in part An application was filed in incomplete. The ZBA's letter "...copy of the Certificate of Preexisting Use and supporting documentation making reference and certifying the ~non-conforming use' under which the application is requested..." Applicant obviously had on that occasion as applicant did with the Planning Department (See Exhibit ) claimed existence from a period that pre-existed code requirements. Applicant never reapplied to this Board until the instant application for a variance for signs. POINT I AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE FOR ONE VIOLATION OF THE CODE CANNOT BE GRANTED WHEN MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS EXIST. A COMPREHENSIVE APPLICATION SEEKING A VARIANCE FOR ALL VIOLATIONS MUST BE MADE. A detailed history of this site is contained in opponents memoranda submitted in opposition to the Petition for a Zone Change (Exhibit 3 and 3A). Suffice it to say that this applicant has used and abused the application process before the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Town Board to continue to operate without the proper authority. The illegalities have been called to the attention of the Town's enforcement officer on more than one occasion but as of this date no summons has been issued and the applicant continues to operate in defiance of the code. The undersigned's most recent letter of complaint is attached (Exhibit 4). The Building Inspector's office found violations of the code as early as January 9, 1989. The Building Inspector stated at that time that no order to remedy was issued in order to give "the museum an opportunity to follow the normal process to clear up the violations (Exhibit 5). It is now five (5) years later and this site has still not remedied its violations and yet it continues in use without sanction from the Town of Southold. Despite the zone change: 1. The site does not have site plan approval and the application has meandered In fact, it cannot receive site existing violations which require 2. The gun tower does its way through the process since 1981. plan approval because of the ZBA action. not have a building permit and violates the height and setback requirements of the code. The Town Board's order to relocate the Tower at least 100' from the Love Lane entrance (See Exhibit 1) has not instilled that Tower with legitimacy as the Town Board has no authority to grant a variance from the code's requirements. A location 100' from the Love Lane entrance does not make it the requisite feet from the lot line, nor does it make it shorter than 18' nor is the decision a substitute for the non-existent building permit. 3. The museum is not fully enclosed in a building as is required under the code but rather has war equipment throughout the site for public viewing. The unhoused equipment is the museum's prime focal point. (See Exhibits 3 and 4). It is in essence what makes the museum a museum, albeit an unhoused museum in violation of code requirements. This applicant seeks approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals for two signs which also do not meet code requirements. However, even if this application were granted this site fails to have the requisite authority to continue its use. By piece meal application, delayed over years, this applicant has flagrantly violated the code and more importantly has done so with impunity. If this Board grants the requested relief and the applicant reappears before the Planning Board, that Board cannot act because additional violations exist (See Exhibit 4). On behalf of the opponents, I have asked that a summons be issued for each violation thus mandating that the applicant appear before this Board seeking all the relief that is required to legitimize the operation (See Exhibit 4). This Board cannot grant the requested variance for one violation when this site has multiple violations. To do so is to condemn the Board, the applicant and the opponents to continued appearances as one facet of a multi-faceted problem is pursued while the remainder wait their turn. The applicant's strategy of piece-meal pursuit of the requisite permits has allowed this illegal use to continue for years with impunity. The tactics of this applicant are a flagrant misuse of the system. The request for a zone change was opposed by the Planning Board (Exhibit 6) as they considered the indiscriminate realignment of land as constituting spot zoning. The Town's environmental consultant noted that even with the zone change the site would not be in conformity with the code (Exhibit 7). However, the zone change was granted (See Exhibit 1) with the aforementioned caveat regarding violations (See page 1 herein) but the applicant seeks now only to obtain a variance for signs conveniently ignoring all other violations. In November, 1992 I argued before the Town Board that the applicant had shown a complete disregard for the law and yet had avoided penalty. That scenario continues with this application. This Board cannot grant this variance which addresses but one minor violation of the code while the applicant continues to operate with many major violations of the code. In 1991 the Town Planner wrote a memo to the file (Exhibit 8) which concludes: "In any case, the Planning Board cannot proceed with site plan approval without the Zoning Board of Appeals' review of the situation. At the least, the property owner must apply for a building permit for the tower. The existence of any other violations or non-conformities must be determined by the Building Department". POINT II THE VARIANCE TO CONTINUE THE EXISTING SIGNS SHOULD BE DENIED The instant application which seeks to legitimize two signs attached to the fence which faces Love Lane in Mattituck is but another inappropriate step taken by the applicant in an-attempt to give a semblance of legitimacy to an illegal use. The application for a variance (Exhibit 9) states that the variance is requested because the property width will not allow for conforming set-backs. The applicant advises that the zoning code creates a hardship because it will not allow the applicant to advise tourists of the entrance and alleviate traffic problems. The applicant further claims uniqueness on the basis that all other properties existing in HB are not confined to such a narrow width. The applicant completes his application by advising that the variance would not change the character of the district because of the sign's subdued color and design. This is probably applicant's only statement with which we partially agree as the proposed sign in comparison to the deployed tanks and other war machines will certainly not change the character of the district. The character of this district changed in 1981 when the applicant began his illegal use. This property is oddly shaped having frontage on Middle Road (Route 48) and Love Lane. It is 50' wide on Love Lane running back almost 250' and then at a right angle about 375' to Middle Road (Route 48) where it widens to 60'. (See Exhibit 10) Section 100-81-C (2) provides: "Signs, subject to the following requirements: (a) Freestanding or ground signs: where building is set back twenty-five (25) feet or more from the street, one (1) sign, single-or double- faced, not more than eighteen (18) square feet, the lower edge of which shall be not less than four (4) feet above the ground, unless attached to a wall or fence, and the upper edge of which shall not extend more than fifteen (15) feet above the ground, which sign shall be set back not less than fifteen (15) feet from all street and property lines and shall advertise only the business conducted on the premises. As used in this subsection, the word "premises" shall mean all contiguous property in common ownership. As can be seen from the property survey (See Exhibit 10) it is not impossible for applicant to comply.with the code. A sign at this site can be placed 15' still be visible from the inconvenient for applicant since installation in June, from side and front property lines and roadway and entrance. It is merely to move a sign that has been illegal 19812. The fact that displayed tanks and other war machines might interfere with the 15' requirement is a self-imposed hardship. The applicant also fails to note that under the applicable section of the code only one sign is permitted which sign should be not more than 18 square feet in size and placed in such a manner 2See Exhibit 10 where applicant's response to the question "The month and year that the sign was placed on the property must be provided" was "6/ /81" that it is not less than 4' above the ground. There are two (2) existing signs much in excess of 18 square feet and they are placed only 26" above the ground (See Exhibit 9). Thus, the applicant really seeks a variance from the set-back, size and height above ground requirements of the code. Historically, this applicant never reveals all the facts at one time causing confusion and obfuscation all of which has allowed this illegal use to continue for more than 13 years. At one point this applicant attempted to obscure his illegality by claiming to be a pre-existing non- conforming use (See Statement of Facts and Exhibit 11) but the astute review of the history of this property by Board ~embers put that tactic to rest (See Statement of Facts and Exhibit 12). POINT III THE APPLICANT HAS NOT MET HIS BURDEN UNDER SECTION 267-b OF THE TOWN LAW Section 267-b 3(b) of the Town Law sets forth the factors a ZBA must weigh in making a determination on a request for an area variance. The essence of the factors to be considered are: -whether an undesirable change will be provided in the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties; -whether the benefit can be achieved by some other feasible method. -whether the variance is substantial. -whether the variance will have an adverse effect on physical or environmental conditions of the area. -whether the difficulty encountered is self created. Subsection (c) cautions the ZBA to "grant the minimum variance it shall deem necessary and adequate". By submitting a request for a variance for signs and ignoring the remaining violations of the code, the undersigned believes the applicant is seeking to minimize the perceived relief requested and thus comply with the statutory requirements. A sign is unlikely to present an undesirable change or have an adverse effect on the environment. This variance if coupled with the others that are required would make it very difficult for the applicant to meet the statutory requirement. However, by seeking only a variance for signs the applicant attempts to secure a positive decision. The relief requested has been minimized by ignoring the other code violations that require ZBA action. In fact, this applicant has not completed the screening required by the Town Board when it granted the zone change and thus applicant violates a condition of the zone change, in addition to several code violations. The benefits of the sign can be achieved by a conforming sign especially since an obstructions to compliance are self-created. CONCLUSION: It is time that some Board in the Town of Southold said "enough". It is time some Board demand and mandate that this applicant comply with the law (See Exhibit 13). The applicant purchased the property in 1981. He commenced an illegal use and he has reaped the economic rewards of that use to the detriment of his neighbors for some 13 years while he has toyed with the legal structure and made a mockery of zoning laws. The application should be denied ordered to submit a request for relief violation within a stated period of time closure. Dated: March 30, 1994 Greenport, N.Y. and applicant should be encompassing all code or face penalty and/or Respectfully submitted Ongioni & Borrelli Attorneys for Opponents Diane and Frank Ammirati APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 7~5-1809 BOARD OF APPEAI~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMO Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Gary Fish. Building Inspector April 7. 1994 Pending Project - William Gasser/American Armored Foundation~ Inc. 1000-140-2-16 (HB Zone) At our public hearing held last evening, concerns were raised as to whether or not all other elements of the zoning code pertaining to the site plan in the above project (pending before the Planning Board) will or will not require modifications to conform, or perhaps.a certification may have been requested at some point in time, It has been brought to our attention that there may be outstanding issues -- see prior communications by the Building Department and the Planning Board Chairman pertaining to past issues (such as the tower location, tower height, screening~ outside storage, use as a museum, etc,) while it was still pending a zone change before the Town Board. We have received a copy of a letter from the Planning Board addressed to the applicant concerning an informal, planning revie~ and to add certain items to the site plan. However. we do not know whether er not a more recent review was done, or more recent letter is of record from the Building Inspector. concerning an update of the newest plan before the Planning Board since the change of zone by the Town Board in September 1993. The Board of Appeals is requesting that the Building Inspector provide a confirmation of any other outstanding issues and. if none, how they have been resolved. If there are outstanding issues that will need to conform to code, please provide us with a written' list. Attached is a copy of the survey furnished under the variance application for two fence signs, You may wish to obtain the plan on file with the Planning Board as well. Thank you for your anticipated cooperation in updating this project. cc: Mr. and Mrs. William Gasser Carmela Borrelli. Esq. (repr. Mr. and Mrs. Ammirati) ? PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. Ward, Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 I 8 1994 March 16, 1994 Mr. & Mrs. William F. Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 RE: Proposed Site Plan for American Armored Foundation N/Ec LIRR Right of Way & Love Lane, Mattituck Zoning Hamlet Business (HB) SCTM# 1000-140-2-16 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Gasser: This letter will amend our letter to you of January 21, 1994, in which the set back for signs was incorrectly indicated. Ground signs shall be set back not less fifteen (15) feet from all street and property lines. In addition to the above, Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval must be obtained before any possible final approval. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. Si4~er. elv,, / KoDert G. Kassner Site Plan Reviewer cc: Gerrard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Board of Appeals January 31, 1994 STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HauPPaUgE, N.Y. 11788 JOHN C. EGAN American Armored Foundation, 2383 5th Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 Attention: William F. Gasser, Director Dear Mr. Gasser: This letter is in response to your January 27, 1994 letter requesting our review of your two fence-mounted on-premise signs. We have examined the sign locations as shown on your survey dated December 23, 1993, and as depicted in your sketch and photos attached to your January 27, 1994 letter. Please be advised that these signs are in conformance with Sections 52 and 88 of the Highway Law. Thank you for consulting with us in this matter. Very ~truly yours, CLIFFORD WINTER Sr. Right of Way Agent MARIE ONGIONI CARMELA L. BORRELLI ONGIONI & BORRELLI AITOI'~NEYS AT LAW Town Board Planning Board Building Dept-Enforcement Officer Town Hall Main Road Southold, N.Y. 11971 April 5, 1994 288 PANTIC-O ROAD EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937 TEL (516) 324-8282 FAX (516) 324-8283 Re: American Armou~ed Foundation, Inc. "Tank Museum" SCTM #1000-140-2-16 Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed please find a copy Of my clients' memo in opposition to the application of the above entity pending before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Please note that the applicant continues to violate the zoning code and the conditions of the zone change granted in 1993. It is respectfully requested that appropriate action be taken with reqard to these violations. Very truly yours, ONGION[ & BORRELLI ,,' ( / Carmela L. Borrelli CLB/dms cc: Zoning Board of Appeals APPEALS BOARD IVIEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 6. 1994 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Ongioni ~; Borrelli. Esqs. qO3 Front Street P.O. Box 562 Greenport. NY 119qq-0562 Re: Copy of Correspondence Addressed to Other Town Departments American Armoured Foundation. Inc. 1000-1qO-2-16 Ladies: Our office has received a copy of~ correspondence from your office. postmarked yesterday afternoon - the original of,, which apparently-is in the process of being sent to the Town Board or Planning Board or Building Department. This copydid not have an enclosure. If you would like the Zoning Board of-Appeals-to receive.a copy-of your client's memo referred therein, or other information, it must be presented to our office at or before the hearing scheduled for this evening. It is requested that a copy be forwarded by-your ,office to the owners of the above-mentioned property. The variance before the Board. as you know. pertains to a Notice of Disapproval issued concerning reduced setbacks of two on-premises advertising signs~ Very truly yours. Fax Transmission 477-8919 11:05 a.m. 11/6/9q Linda Kowalski. Clerk ................................................................................ TRAMSMISSIOM RESULT REPORT ....... ~ ............ (APR 86 '94 10:18AM) ................ ~ SOUND TOWN HALL 518 ?G5 18Z3 .................................................................................................................................................................................. (AUTO) ..................... DATE START REMOTE TERMINAL TIME RE- MODE TOTAL PERSONAL LABEL FILE TIME IDENTIFICATION SULTS PAGES MO. APR 06 10:I?AM ~.m?-. 5164~8919 00'4?" OK S 01 002 ~:!7 ~.~, E)ECM >)REDUCTION S)STAMDARD M)MEMORY C)CONFIDEMTIAL ~)BATCH D)DETAIL $)TRANSFER F)FIME P)POLLING APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 6. 199~ Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Ongioni g Borrelli. Esqs. q4}3 Front Street P.O. Box 562 Greenport, NY 119qq-0S62 Re: Copy of Correspondence Addressed to Other Town Departw~ts American Armoured Foundation. Inc. 1000-1qg-2-16 Ladies: Our office has received a copy of correspondence from your office, postmarked yesterday afternoon - the original of~ whic~ apparently,is in the process of being sent to the Town Board er Plenning Beard or Building Department. This copy.did not have an enclosure. If you would like the Zoning Board of, Appeals,to receive a copy of your client's memo referred therein~ or other informstiou, it must be presented to our office at or before the hearing scheduled for this evening. It is requested that a copy be forwarded by,your,office to the owners of the above-mentioned property. The variamce before the Beard. as you know. pertains to a Notice of Disapproval issued concerning reduced setbacks of two on-premises advertisin~ signs, Very truly yours. Fax Transmission ~77-8919 11:05 a.m. Linda Kowalski. Clerk MAR~E ON~IONI CAr,!MELA L BORRELU ONGIONI & BORRE! JL1 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 403 FRONT STREET · P,O,BOX 562 288 PANTIGO ROAD EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937 TEL (516) 324-8282 FAX (516) 324-$283 Apr'J1 '~, 1994 Town Board Planning Board Building Dept-Enforcement Officer Town }Ia~l Main Road Southo]d, N.Y. 11971 Ret American Armoufed Fo~ndation, Inc. "Tank Museum" ~TM.#~l~09~0-~16 Dear Si~:/Madam: Enclosed please fi. nd a copy of my cl ants' memo in opposition to the application of the above entity pending before the Zoning Board of Appeals. Please note that the applicant continues to violate the zoning code and the conditions of the zone chanqe granted in 1993. It is respectfully requested that apDropriate action be taken with reqard to these violations. Very tru]y yours, CLB/dms cc: Zoning Board of Appeals PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. Ward, Chah-rnan George R/tehie Latham, Jr. Bennett Orlowsl~, Jr, Mark $. McDonald Kenneth L, Edwards Telephone (516] 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD January 21, 1994 Mr. & Mrs. William F. Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 RE: Proposed Site Plan for American AmOUred Foundation N/Ec LIRR Right of Way & Love Lane, Mattituck Zoning Hamlet Business (HB) SCTM~ 1000-140-2-16 Dear Mr. & Mrs. Gasser: SCOTT L. HARP2S Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765 o 1823 The Planning Board has reviewed the conditions contained in the ~own Board's rezoning decision and reviewed the Site Plan dated September 9, 1991. The following changes must be made before the Board can proceed with its review: 1. The scale of the plan must be 1" = 20'. 2. The height and type of fence must be shown. 3. Screening must be placed between the museum property line and the residential properties to the north east and the northwest and to the Hamlet Density property to the northwest. 4. The tower must be moved to a point not closer than one hundred feet from the Love Lane entrance and shown on the plan. 5. Handicapped space and paved surface must be accessible to building. 6. Parking calculations and a notation regarding' accessibility of public parking must be shown on plan. the 7. Zone must be indicated. 8. Percent landscaped and percent lot coverage must be shown on the plan. 9. Key map showing the location and owners of all adjoining lands within five hundred (500) feet, as shown on the latest tax records, at a scale of one (1) inch equals one hundred (100) feet. 10. Any proposed outdoor lighting must be shown. This 1.ighting must indicate type and wattage and must be snielded to the premises.~ ,/ 11. Ground signs must be t~n~~ feet from each ~~ 'rS~ad~ pl~era~yd ]f.~nfete. en (.15)feet from the front and/or In addition to the above, Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval must be obtained before any possible final approval. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. ~R~b'e~t,~. Kassner Site PIan Reviewer § 100-81 SOUTHOLD CODE § 100-81 (1) Any special exception use as set forth in and regulated by § 100-3lB of the Agricultural-Conservation District, except wineries are not required to be in connection with a vineyard. [Amended 8-1-89 by L.L. No. 15-1989] C. [Amended 5-9-89 by L.L. No. 6-1989] Aecessory uses. The following uses are permitted as accessory uses and, except for residential accessory uses and signs, which are governed by Article XX, are subject to site plan review: (1) Any accessory use as set forth in and~regulated by § 100- 31C(1) through (8) of the AgricUltural-Conservation District, and subject to the conditions set forth in § 100- 33 thereof. (2) Signs, subject to the following requirements: (a) Freestanding or ground signs: where the building is set back twenty-five (25) feet or more from the street, one (1) sign, single- or double.faced, not more than eighteen (18) square feet, the lower edge of which shall be not less than four (4) feet above the ground, unless attached to a wall or fence, and the upper edge of which shall not extend more than fifteen (15) feet above the ground, which sign shall bo set back not less than fifteen (15) feet from all street and property lines and shall advertise only the business conducted on the premises. As used in this subsection, the word "premises" shall mean all contiguous property in common ownership. (b) Wall signs: one (1) sign attached to or incorporated in each building wall on a public street and advertising only the business conducted in such building, provided that such sign does not: [1] Exceed one (1) square foot in total area for each horizontal foot of such wall. [2] Exceed in width one hundred percent (100%) of the horizontal measurement of such wall. 10074 ~o- 2~- s9 JUDITll T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER OFFICE OF TIlE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town tlall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box I i 79 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765- 181)1 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON SEPTEMBER 21, 1993: WHEREAS, William F. Gasser and The American Armoured Foundation, Inc., by petition filed May 27, 1992, applied to the Town Board of the Town of Southold for a change of zone on certain property located on the northeasterly side of Love Lane, Mattituck, from Light Industrial District ("LI") and Residential Office District ("RO") to Hamlet Business District ("HB"); and WHEREAS, the said petition was referred to the Southold Town Planning Board and Suffolk-County Department of Planning for official recommendations and reports; and WHEREAS~ the Town Board, pursuant to due notice, held a public hearing thereon on the 10th day of November, 1992, at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that William F. Gasser and The American Armoured Foundation, Inc. be and hereby is granted the relief demanded in said petition subject to the execution the Suffolk County Clerk's Office of the following Declaration of Restrictions which are hereby made a part of the Town Board's and record in Covenants and decision: WHEREAS, Foundation, York declarant (Willaim F. Gasser, President of American Ai'moured Inc., with business address of 2383 Fifth Avenue, Ronkonkoma, New 11779) is the Owner of certain real property situated in Mattituck, Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, with Suffolk County Tax Map Designation (SCTM) 1000-140-2-16, commonly known as the "Tank Museum" and more particularly described as follows: Aq. that certai~ pl,,~,.._ ,-i,~c,~r ........ nr parcel ~f land.. with the buildings and improvements thereon erected, situate, lying and being at Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, which is bourlded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the corner formed by the intersection of the northeasterly side of Love Lane with the northwesterly side of property of the Long Island Rail Road Company and from said point of beginning; running thence northwesterly along the northeasterly side of Love Lane, North 35 degrees 17 minutes 40 seconds West 50 feet; running thence along the land now or formerly MacMillian and Hawkins North 45 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds East 187.64 feet; running thence along the land now or formerly of MacMillian and Hawkins North 35 degrees 17 minutes q0 seconds West 336.23 feet to the northeasterly side of Middle Road; running thence northeasterly along the southeasterly side of Middle Road, North 55 degrees 02 minutes 20 seconds East 60.00 feet; running thence South 35 degrees 17 minutes 40 seconds East along the land now or formerly of Wines 375.72 feet to land of the Long Island Rail Road Company; runni.ng thence along land of the Long Islancl Rail Road Company South 45 degrees 05 minutes 00 seconds West 2118.50 feet to the corner aforesaid and point or place of Beginning. WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold has determined that rezoning of the subject premises to Hamlet B,Isiness District represents an upzoning and will result in a less intense use of same and is in conformity with continuous properties; and WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that the use of the premises as a Light Industrial District is not a permitted use; and WHEREAS, the Town Board has determined that the intended use of the premises as a museum with certain safeguards is not offensive; and WHERE^S, the Town Board determined that there is sufficient off-premises parking available to possible patrons of the museum and that on-premises parking will not be required for the intended use; and WHEREAS, for and in consideration of the granting by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, on September 21, 1993, of a change of zone from Light Industrial ("LI") District and Residential Office ("RO") District to Hamlet Business ("HB") District to declarant, William F. Gasser and the American Armoured Foundation, Inc., the Town Board of the Town of SoiJthold has required that the within declaration be recorded in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office; and WHEREAS, declarants have considered the foregoing demand and determined that based' upon the limited nature of the intended use as a museum will be in the best interests of the declarants and the community; NOW, THEREFORE, THE DECLARANTS WITNESSETH: 1. The gun tower, presently located near the Love Lane entrance to the subject premises and depicted on the survey prepared by Roderick Van Tuyl, P.C., as amended September 9, 1991, a copy of which is annexed hereto, is to be moved to a point not closer than one hundred (100) feet from the Love Lane entrance. 2. The premises shall be accessible to the public and for repairs, to the extent necessary only during the following hours of operation: Monday through Friday 9:00 A.M. to 5;00 P.M., and Saturday and Sunday 10:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M; In addition, the premises shall be accessible on Monday and Thursday evenings from 6:00 P.M. to 9:00 P.M. strictly for tile purpose of accommodating veterans' groups, Boy Scouts and other such organizations. 3. All exterior lighting shall be shielded to the property, directed away from contiguous property owners, and shall be of such a type as to minimize glare. 4. The premises shall be screened to the property existing to the northwest of the subject premises and shall, if possible, be of a natural vegetative type. 5. The change of zone shall not in any way be considered at the granting of any variance necessary to the proposed use. 6. Declarants, for the purpose of carrying out the intentions above expressed, does hereby make known, admit, publish, covenant and agree that the said premises herein described shall hereinafter be subject to the above- stated covenants which shall run with the land be binding upon all purchasers and holders of said premises, their heirs, executors, legal representatives, distributees, successors, assigns and that these covenants and restrictions can be modified only at the request of the then owner of the premises with the approval of the majority plus one of the Town Board of the Town of Southold or its successor body, after a public hearing. Adjoining property owners shall be entitled to notice of such public hearing, but their consent to such modification shall not be reqtdred. Southold Town Clerk September 22, 1993 APPE~T-~ BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 22. 199q Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Seuthold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 Mr. and Mrs, William F. Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma. NY 11779 Re: Appl. No. q227 - Variance for Two Signs.{Existing on Fence) Dear Mr. and Mrs. Gasser: Please find attached a copy of the Notice of. Hearing. as corrected. for publication in this~week's newspaper. Last week's publication unfortunately did. not include the location and identificatiort of; the property. The date. place and time of the hearing, remain~the same. Very truly yours. Enclosure Linda Kowalski, Clerk Board of- Appeals APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard R Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. Ja~s Diuizio, Jr. t~bert A. Villa Ri~h,~i C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 ~{ain l~oad P.O. Box Southold, New Y~rk 11971 Fax (516) 76,'-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 March 17. 1994 Dear Applicant(s): We are in receipt of.~f~u~c recent application and would, like to confirm th;t your application has bue~-, advertised in the Long Island. Traveler-Watchm~ln and Times-Review newspapers for a public hearing to be held on WEDNESDAY. APRIL 6. 199~. A copy of the Legal:Notice is attached wit',~ further details:for your information. Your proposed project will ~e further considered and the I:~erty view~ by the Board Members within :he next several days. °lease remember that you or your representative must appear at the hear ng ~ answer possible inquiries. If you are unable.to attend, someone,who familiar with your property and =ircumstances (such as a relative, friend or ~tt~rney) may appear in your behalf. Additlonal~ time will be made availa for you in the event you feel v¢,.'- presentation will be lengthy. P[ease feel free to call us ~t ...,:- ,~me if you have questions, or if you wo[~l~i' !ike to add information, oncernin9 your application. Yours very truly. Linda Kowalski Clerk. Board o~. Appeals APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wiltnn Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD NOTICE OF HEARING Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 NOTICE 15 HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of Southold; that the following application will be held for a public hearing, in addition to those previously advertised, before the Southold Town Board-of. Appeals, Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, NY on WEDNESDAY, APRIL 6, 199[[: #5. 7:50 p.m. Variance request, of two on-premises County Road [[8, 1000-140-2-16. Correction Dated 3/21/94. Appl. No. 4227 - WILLIAM GASSER. This is a ref. Section 100-91(C), for insufficient setbacks identification signs at 6[[0 Love Lane. and 5300 Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN~ SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS (516) 765-1809 COUNTY OF SUFFOLK $S: STATE OF NEW YORK Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman once each week for ..................... .~. .... weeks successively, commencing on the .......... .//..~.. ~ ..... day of ...... Sworn to before me this ........... .~..'~. ......day of ......... ..... ,9 ~tOuthold, that the followinl public heat~ will be hetd by [~-80 ResidentiaL ',~, , f Notary Public bulkhead ' 'along ::Dawn Lagoon; rtt'. Article XXIII. ~8ection 100-239. 4B of the Zonh~ Code Lo<3fion of ' C~eaves Point, Section Ill; 910 ~Property: Lot No..61 at · Maple Lane, (3reenport, NY; County ~ax Map Pastel ID ~1000,35r~-26. The .subject a request for a variance based ~ Lo~tio~0f Pro~ty: . the nolthedF ixmlm~ o f which 1~0-~.t9.4B Of th~ Zon~n8 , .cg~ P~ filed Map No~ Harbo~ Rmd. Oteen~ off East End ~oad, .....E~ers Island, Ny; Count~ ID 1000-7-2-9.."~', ,4K 7:45 P-m. AppL Nek 4222' 1050 9&st Cove Road, Namu Point, Cut~ NY;, ~OMAS 'A~D ROBY :o~.~' ticle' XXIII, Section 100-239.4A-1 of the Zonln8 Cod~ Location of Property:. :' ~ i0. 8.'20 p.mP AppL N~ fR~RISI, as oonhl~t vmdeet ~Th~ Is a request for a vadan~ ibased vlPOn,the Buildlas In- I,- NOTICE ]$ HEREBY GIVEN; \\ pmeuant to ~ection 267 of the Town Law and the Code of the Town of h~e°aU~.h°~d, following public' that the ings will bo held by the $OUTNOLD TOWN BOARD OF .,Jo~5 suaJn Road, $oothold, New York 11971, on WEDNRSDA¥, APRIL ~, 1994. commencing at the · ~ P. ARTHUR BUi.Ma, ~,Thh" ~"'"' '='] is~ request[ 1994 N~co of I~;;q~ Buik~ns Inspe~x concernin~a -ing permit application f~f fencing[ PU:nd the existing teonii-onec~ located in a front yard~ rof. krtinle XXIIL Section 100-231 of the Zoning : ,.Code. Location of Property:, iprivate Road #13, Mattituck~ NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000- ~ 105:1-4. Zone District: R-80 2. 7:32 p.m. ~ppl, No. 4218 JOHN K. STRIPp and JUDITH D. · I'RIPP. (Continuation from March 2, !~94). Proposed dwelling with rc- duecd front yard Setback from I~vate' Road o~rf East End Road, Fishers ls- 3. 7:40 p.m. Appl, No. 4220 -- JOHN E. ST_ RIPP and JUDITH D. STRIPP. This i~ a ~luest #era v~ ~:~ ante based upon the*'BuiMing InsPCC~ tot's Fcbruar 4 Notice Of ~?~YLin~c~'loeure in a front ~ !o~ion; -. f~"Artjclc lll. Sectish ~00-~2 of'th~' ~' Zoning Code. Location 0f Property: Ead Road, ; C Parcel iD : I000-7-2-9. ,~-quest for & variance Imscd upon thc ~ Building Inspector's Mar~h 4. ]994 ~: ~otice of Disapproval-~on~ni~# a building permit application for an .:~ddition. at the .reai~ ~.existing - ~dwclling which will he ~ within ' 75 feet of the bulkhead along Dawn "~goon; re#. Article XXI[I, Section 100-239.4B of the Zoning Code, Lo- cation of Property: Lot No, 6] Cleaves Point, Section III; 910 Maple -Lane, Ot~onport, NY; County Parcel ~ID 1000-35-$-26, The subject premis- :. es is substandard and is located in the """~ 7:50 p.m=Appl. No. 4'2~¥ WILLI&M GASSER. This ts'h rc~ '~ ~-~lUCSt for a variance based UPOn thc , ~ Building lmpector's Pobrua~ 4. ~ Notice of Disupprov. a.~ ~=~ment of 15 feet from all property hnes. · fo#: Article XIX, Section 100-91(c), ~A~cle XVIIL Section 100-81-~(2a) of thc Zoning Code· Zone'District: Hamlet Bus,ness. "~!~.> '~ ' - 6. 7:55 p.m. AppL No. 4223 DONALD BREHM. This i~ a reque~ fcc a v~anco based upon the Bdild~ng ~ Inspector's March 4, 1994 Notice of ~inapprowl eoncerning~ &'building'= !t~,rmtt apptieaflon for a deck addition XXIII. Section 100-239.4B of the ~onlng Code. Location of Property: · - ~1010 Maple Lane. Omenpofl. NY; Lot iNo. 60 at Cleavcs Point. Section 1010 ~aple Lone. Oreenport. NY; ,.~ ',~County Pnmel ID 1000-35-5-27. The ~&;_'subjcct p~emises is mtmandard ~ is ~'~ 'lecated iff the R-40 Zofle ~suict. '~ ~ ~'~ 7, 8:00 p.m, Appl. No. ~' is a rcqucs! fro' a va~ianco.hesed upon ' '"' the Building inspector's March 10, 1994 Notice of DisapprGvnl con-~ ; ceming a building permit npptichtio~ ~-~ iceatc a storage building within 75 ~feet of the bulkhead alon~ Horseshoe ~'~,~CIC XIII, Section 100-239.4B of the :~ ~ Zoning Code. Lo~ation of Propem/: ~.1~ 1000-1 I1-$-I .containing 1.54 ~. 8:oJ ~.rc. ~pl. No. 4224 'THOMAS and ROBY · I'ATE OF NI~ORK) ) SS: ~of Mattituck, in ~tid County, being duly sworn, says that he/she Is Principal Clerk of THE SUIclcOLK TIMF-~, & 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 regular- ly pul~lished in said Newspaper once each week for ,/ weeks sueeessivciy, ~pmnencing on the '~ .day of ~0~ 19~=. Principal Clerk ~worn to before me ',-hi~ Ie NO. 52-4685242. SLI~I]U~ COUN1Y COMMISSION EXPffiES AUGUST 3L NOTP=E IS HEREBY GIVEN, put- snare to Se~°n 267 of ~he Town ~w ~ C~T~of~ .~ f~ a ~bl~ ~ng. in ~ ~ly ~ ~f~ ~athold Town Board of Ap~ Town Hall, 53095 Main R~ ~outhold, NY on WEDNESD~W~ · ~, 7:50 p~m. Appl. No. 4227 ~ ~ :WILLIAM GASSEg. This ~ Valance ~quesL ~f. Section I~ 91(C), f~ i~t ~l~ of m Mailituck. NY: ~ouniy Tax ~ ~el No. 1~1~2-16~ C~ ~ ~1~. GERARD P. ~HRIN~ CHAIRMAN: STATE OF NI~ .ORK) } SS: ~ .~T~r oF su~ou~ /'IS~/~L. IA~.~ of Mattituek, in said County, being duly sworn, eeys that he/she is Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK ?IMPS, 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 nnnexed is a printed copy, bna been regular- ly pu¥ished in said Ne~,spaper once each week for 8 weeks successively, commenc~~ on the__2 day of CHRISTINA VOLINSKI Notary Public. State of New No. 5004884 Qualified in Suffolk County 9(/ . Principal Clerk ,E,<~mmission Expires No,vember ~, .orn COUNTY OF SUFFOLK SS: STATE OF NEW YORK TOWN, OF; SOIY4'HOI~D N~I~ ~ H~I~ ~ NOTICE IS ~EBY ;GIVEN, ~t ~ ~n ;267 of the~ Code of i~ ~: of Sou~ ~t.~',foH0~g app~on ~ ~ ~:f0~ a~ ~o~' p~ ~v~, ~fo~ ~e ;~d.~ · ~ ofAp~ ~, cient ~.: on- 640 Love County NY; County 'l No. Correction Dam 3/~1Z94. GERARD P. C~'E] ~,It~IGER CHAIRMANninG ~E~OLD" TOWN Eb~ ~ ~OF ix~/~ ~/,~, Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, says that she is the Editor, of THE LONG ISLAND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public newspaper printed at Southold, in Suffolk County; and that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in said Long Island Traveler-Watchman once each week for ..................... /. .... weeks successively, commencing on the ......... .,~...fi". i~ ...... of .... , Sworn to before me this ..................... day of ......... Notary Public BARBARA A, SCHNEIDER !% 4.~ Qua~ffi~d ~: Suffolk COu~y Commission Exgires Copies to the following 3/15/94: Times-Review Newspaper (fax transmission) L.I. Traveler-Watchman (hand-delivered 3/15) Copies to ZBA Members with copies of file documents Newsday (Courtesy Copy for Government Watch Section) Original Posted on Town Clerk Bulletin Board (in Lobby) Town Clerk (for distribution to TB & TA) Buildin9 Inspector's Office Planning Board Office Applicant or Agent noted as follows: Mr. John Carraway (for Arthur Burns) Mattituck, NY 11952-O293 John Bertani Builder, 1380 Oakwood Drive Southold, NY 11971 Inc. (for Benedetto and Brehm appls.) Mr. and Mrs. William Gasser 2383 Fifth Avenue Ronkonkoma, NY 11779 Mr. and Mrs. Donald Brehm Box 585, East Marion, NY 11939-0585 Samuel and Steelman 25235 Main Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 (for Thomas Kelly) Mr. David Kapell (for Thomas Gluckman) Box 463, Greenport, NY 11944-0463 Mr. Richard Principi Box 495, Amagansett, NY 11930 Mr. and Mrs. Victor 9 Cat Hollow Road Bayville, NY 11709 Rerisi William D. Moore, Esq. 315 Westphalia Avenue Mattituck, NY 11952-0023 Stephen L. Ham III, Esq. 45 Hampton Road Southampton, NY 11968 (for John and Judith Stripp) Mr. John Thatcher (Re: John and Judith Stripp appl.) F.I. Nature Conse'rvancy, P.O. Box 132 Green Village, NJ 07935-0132 APPF_~ T .~l B OA_RD MEMBEP, S Gerard E Goehringer, Chairman Sor~ Doyen, Jr. Jam~ Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wilton Telephone (516) 765-1809 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD. Tewn Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 S,E.Q.R.A. ~"IPE II ACTION DECLkRATION March 14, 1994 Appeal No. 4227 Project/Applicants: William Gasser County Tax Map No. 1000- 140-2-16 Location of Project: 640 Love Lane & CR 48, Mattituak, NY Relief Requested/Jurisdiction Before This Board in this Project: Two identification signs, as exists on fence, which do not meet the the setback requirement of 15 feet from all property lines This Notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environlnental Quality Review Act of the EnviroIu~ental Conservation Law and Local Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold. An Environmental Assessment (Short) Form has been submitted; however, Section 617.13 of 6 NYCRR Part 616, and Section 8-0113 of the Environmental Conservation Law, this variance application falls under the ~ I1 classification as established by law. Further, this Depart~ent may not be an involved agency under SEQRA {Section 617.13(a) as amended February 14, 1990}. Although this action is classified as ~e II for this variance application under SEQRA {specifically 617.13, 616.3(j), and 617.2(jj)}, this determination shall have no affect upon any other agency's interest or SEQRA determination as an involved agency. For further information, please contact the Office of the Board of Appeals, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971 at (516) 765-1809. Original posted on Town Clerk Bulletin Board, Town Hall Copies to applicant or his agent and individual board merabers. Copy placed in ZBA project file for record purposes. me JUDITH T. TERRY TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1801 OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Zoning Board of Appeals Office of the Town Clerk March 14, 1994 ZONING APPEAL APPL. NO. 4227 - AMERICAN ARMOURED FOUNDATION (Wm. F. Gasser) Transmitted herewith is ZONING APPEAL APPL. NO. 4227 - AMERICAN ARMOURED FOUNDATION together with the Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department, a note on an envelope to Linda from Karen, a copy of the Sign Application from the Zoning Board of Appeals, a copy of a letter dated January 31, 1994 from the State of New York Department of Transportation, copies of pictures of signs, the Short Environmental Assessment form, the Zoning Board of Appeals' Questionnaire, the Notices to Adjacent Property Owners, pictures of signs and location, and a Survey Map of Property. Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk £OARD O? AF~-gAL~ '1'O';: N HALL ROAD - S.R. 25 $OUTttOLD, N.Y,..l1971 Minimum considerations for sign applications: This is a preliminary review of your sign inquiry. The following information is necessary in the initial review. You must submit all of the following information before filing an application concerning an existing sign: Is this property located within 500 feet of County or State road or highway? YES (Yes or No). If yes, proof is necessary to show that the N.Y.S. Department of Transportation in Hauppauge has received and approved a permit under Highway Laws, Section 88; See attached letter Copy of previous sign'permit issued by the Building Department, or copy of Notice of Disapproval dated within the last 60 days from ~he Building Inspector -- if you do not have a previous sign permit, you will need to file a sign permit application with the Building Inspector in order to obtain a Notice of Disapproval; A previous sign approval was obtained from the Board of Appeals by Special Exception to advertise (please fill in); If you sign has been erected for more than 35 years, please submit proof; Has this sign ever been altered: to change the wording YES (Yes or No). to change the size of the sign NN (Yes or No). to be in a different location on the property NO or removed for the purposes of painting NO {Yes or No to each of the above.} ..... ~ {x} /{x} Please submit a copy of the owner's written consent. The month and year that the sign was placed on the property must be provided: 6/ / 81 / {x} ~{x} The exact wording of the sign must be provided: American Armoured Foundation. Inc. Tank and Ordnance War Memorial Museum Love Lane, Matt~tu~k. N.Y. Open Sundays llam-4pm ~ener~l Adm~nn $5.00 Mailing Address: 2383 5th Avenue Ronkonkoma,NY The dimensions of the sign must be provided: 6' length by 1" width by 3.6~ height. Also clearance from ground to bottom of sign: Also total height of sign from ground: 5'8" 11779 Location of the sign must be provided on a sketch, with setbacks to other buildings and two nearest property lines. If sign is located on a building, please indicate which section of the building: front wall; roof; side wall other. 516)588-0033 Current photograph of the sign is required with the above information. Have you or any member of your family been contacted by the Building Department concerning noncompliance with any provision of the zoning code for this sign or any existing structures? NQ (Yes or No) If yes, please explain briefly: We contacted buildin~ dept. ~r~sent~y q~n~ ~h~. ~ ~lan approval -planninq board requires permi~ Qr v~r~m~ F~ ~h~o ~igns before site plan review can proceed 5/11/931k 617.21 Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I--PROJECT INFORMATION (To be comDleted by ADDlicant or Proiect sponsor) k. kouc ko.~/ m~l~. ~oc~[ £,~,. Z') SEQR 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: ?. AMOUNT O~= I.AND AFFECTED; 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LANO USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? [] Residential ~llleustrial ~ommetcial 10, DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL. OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY PROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAl_ STATE OR LOCAt t? [~ NO If yes, list agency(s) 2-o~;~'1 ~i[3oo. r& o~c 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION Wtt. L EXISTING PERMit/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? · II Ihe action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete lJ~e Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER 1 'iContinued on reverse % side) The N.y.S' Environmental Quality Review Act reguires submission (a) ~a order to answer the qusstion~ in this short EAF it is assumed that the prepare.r will use currently available information COncerning the project and ~e likely impacts of the action. It is not expected that additional studies, research or Other investigations will be undertaken. (b) If any question has been answered Yes the project may be sig- nificant and completed Environmental Assessment Form is necessary. (c} If all questions have been answered No it is likely that the project is not significant. ~ (d} ~nvironmental Assessment 1. Will project result in a large physical change to the project Site or Physically'alter more than 10'acres of land? ' ___Yes ~No 8. WAll project have a major effect On visual char- envircamental area by a looll agency? .___Yes ~ No 10. WilI project have a m~jor effect on existing or ~ 12. Will project regularly cause objectionable odors, project~. ~ /7 - . r~ng the.. QUESTIC~IAIRE · FOR FILI~G WITH YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION A. Please disclose the names of ~ the owner(s) and any other individuals (and entities) having a financial interest in the subject premises and a description of their interests: (Separate sheet may be attached. ) ~r B. Is the sUnjec~ premises lis~ee on the real estate market sa e or being shown to prospective buyers? { } Yes C. Are ther~ ~upo~al= ~D ~nge~ alter l~d { } Yes {~} No D. 1. Are there any areas which con~ain wetland grasses? 2. Are the wetland ~eas shown on the map s~mitted with this application? ~/~ 3. Is the property bul~eaaed between the wetlands area and the upland building area? ~/~ 4. '.If your property contains we=lan=s or pond areas, have you contacted the Office of the Town Trustees for its dete~ination of jurisdiction? ~/~ E. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of .proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? ~/~ (If not applic~le, state "N.A.") F. Are th~ any patios, concrete barriers, ~ulkheads or fe=~ which e~t ~d are not ~h~ ~ ~s survey map that you ~a s~mitting? .~o~ If none exist, please state "none." G. Do you have any construction taking place at this time concerning your premises? ~om~. If yes, please submit.a copy of your building pe~it and map as approved by the Building Depar~ent. If none, please state. H. Do you or any co-owner als~ own other ].and close to this parcel? ~o If yes, please explain where or submit copies of deeds. I. Please list present ,use or operations proposed use ~ ~ rne 3/87, 10/901k '- conducted at this and § 97-13 WETLANDS § 97-13 TOWN -- The Town of Sourhold. TRUSTEEs __ The Board of Trustees of {:he Town of Sou=hotd. [Added 6-5q~4 by L.L. No. 6-1984} W'E ~-7..A~kFDS [Amended 8-26-76 by L.L. No. 2-1976; 85 by_r, T, Nu. 6,-198sl: -;'Z:.'..,~,,..:, ~.V ~I'DAL WETLANDS: (I) Ail lands generally covered or intermittently cov- ered w/th. or which border on, tidal waters, or lands lying beneath tidal waters, which at mean low tide are covered by tidal waters m a maximum depth five (5) feet. including but not limited to banks, · bogs. salt marsh, swamps, meadows, fiats or ocher low lying lands subject to tidal action; (2) All banks, bogs, meadows, fiats and tidal marsh subject to such tides and upon which grows or may grow some or any of the/ollowing: salt. hay, black grass, saltworts, sea lavender, tall cordgrass, high bush, cattails, groundseL marshmallow and low (3) All land immediatelyudjacenrto a tidal wetland as defined in Subsection Al2) and lying within Seven- ty-five (75) feet landward of the most landward edge of such a tidal wetland. lq. FRESHWATER WETLANDS: (I) "Freshwater wetlands" as defined in Articie 24. tlc 1, § 2.:-0107, Subdivisions l(a) to l(d) inclusive, of the Environmental Conservation Law of the State of New York: and (2) All land immediately adjacent to a "freshwater wet- land." as defined in Subsection B(1) and lying with- in seventy-five (75) feet lai,dward of the most land- ward edge of a "freshwater wetland." - - - 9705 ~ - ~-s. ss STATE OF NEW YORK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In The Matter Of The Petition of William F. Gasser and the American Armoured Foundation, Inc., For a variance from Article IX, Section 100-91 C 2 (100-81-C-2-a) of the Southold Town Zoning Code MEMORANDUM OF DIANE AND FRANK AMMIRATI IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE STATEMENT OF FACTS This property received a zone change from the Town Board on September 22, 1993 (Exhibit 1) which decision specifically states at item 95 that: "The change of zone shall not in any way be considered at[s] the granting of any variance necessary to the proposed use." The above comment by the Town Board was apparently made because of the prolongedl, improper use of the site and the applicants history of a total disregard for the Town's zoning code. In fact, the application for a zone change was made because the then Town Attorney said "enough is enough" as a result of the stalling tactics of this applicant which had gone on much too long (Exhibit 2). A short synopsis of the history of this site follows: It was purchased in September 1981. Prior to the purchase the applicant sought guidance from the ZBA as to the uses available at the site. Mr. Gasser advised at the meeting that his hobby was lin excess of ten years armoured vehicles and he was interested in converting the existing storage building to a museum. This Board rightfully advised it could not render an opinion without an application. The intended use as voiced to the ZBA in 1980 prior to active purchase was not permitted under the zoning code. Thus, this applicant even prior to his purchase had every intention of creating an illegal use and it is now 1994 some 14 years later and the illegalities have not been remedied. In 1988 a complaint regarding the then recently installed gun tower prompted a memo from the Building Inspector in January 1989 which noted some of the existing violations. None of those violations, some seven years after observance by the Building Inspector despite their continued existence have resulted in fines and all go unremedied. In 1989 the Planning Department determined a site plan was required but an application was not submitted until 1991. That application is still pending and the instant application is a result of discussions with the Planning Department. In fact in August 1991 Mr. Gasser was advised by the Planning Department that ZBA action was required for the gun tower but to date no request for a variance has been filed. An application was filed in February 1992 but it was returned as incomplete. The ZBA's letter of return read in part "...copy of the Certificate of Preexisting Use and supporting documentation making reference and certifying the ~non-conforming use' under which the application is requested...". Applicant obviously had on that occasion as applicant did with the Planning Department (See Exhibit ~ ) claimed existence from a period that pre-existed code requirements. Applicant never reapplied to this Board until the instant application for a variance for signs. POINT AN APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE FOR ONE VIOLATION OF THE CODE CANNOT BE GRANTED WHEN MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS EXIST. A COMPREHENSIVE APPLICATION SEEKING A VARIANCE FOR ALL VIOLATIONS MUST BE MADE. A detailed history of this site is contained in opponents memoranda submitted in opposition to the Petition for a Zone Change (Exhibit 3 and 3A). Suffice it to say that this applicant has used and abused the application process before the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Appeals and the Town Board to continue to operate without the proper authority. The illegalities have been called to the attention of the Town's enforcement officer on more than one occasion but as of this date no summons has been issued and the applicant continues to operate in defiance of the code. The undersigned's most recent letter of complaint is attached (Exhibit 4). The Building Inspector's office found violations of the code as early as January 9, 1989. The Building Inspector stated at that time that no order to remedy was issued in order to give "the museum an opportunity to follow the normal process to clear up the violations (Exhibit 5). It is now five (5) years later and this site has still not remedied its violations and yet it continues in use without change: 1. sanction from the Town of Southold. Despite the zone The site does not have site plan approval and the application has meandered its way through the process since 1981. In fact, it cannot receive site plan approval because of the existing violations which require ZBA action. 2. The gun tower does not have a building permit and violates the height and setback requirements of the code. The Town Board's order to relocate the Tower at least 100' from the Love Lane entrance (See Exhibit 1) has not instilled that Tower with legitimacy as the Town Board has no authority to grant a variance from the code's requirements. A location 100' from the Love Lane entrance does not make it the requisite feet from the lot line, nor does it make it shorter than 18' nor is the decision a substitute for the non-existent building permit. 3. The museum is not fully enclosed in a building as is required under the code but rather has war equipment throughout the site for public viewing. The unhoused equipment is the museum's prime focal point. (See Exhibits 3 and 4). It is in essence what makes the museum a museum, albeit an unhoused museum in violation of code requirements. This applicant seeks approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals for two signs which also do not meet code requirements. However, even if this application were granted this site fails to have the requisite authority to continue its use. By piece meal application, delayed over years, this applicant has flagrantly violated the code and more importantly has done so with impunity. If this Board grants the requested relief and the applicant reappears before the Planning Board, that Board cannot act because additional violations exist (See Exhibit 4). On behalf of the opponents, I have asked that a summons be issued for each violation thus mandating that the applicant appear before this Board seeking all the relief that is required to legitimize the operation (See Exhibit 4). This Board cannot grant the requested variance for one violation when this site has multiple violations. To do so is to condemn the Board, the applicant and the opponents to continued appearances as one facet of a multi-faceted problem is pursued while the remainder wait their turn. The applicant's strategy of piece-meal pursuit of the requisite permits has allowed this illegal use to continue for years with impunity. The tactics of this applicant are a flagrant misuse of the system. The request for a zone change was opposed by the Planning Board (Exhibit 6) as they considered the indiscriminate realignment of land as constituting spot zoning. The Town's environmental consultant noted that even with the zone change the site would not be in conformity with the code (Exhibit 7). However, the zone change was granted (See Exhibit 1) with the aforementioned caveat regarding violations (See page 1 herein) but the applicant seeks now only to obtain a variance for signs conveniently ignoring all other violations. In November, 1992 I argued before the Town Board that the applicant had shown a complete disregard for the law and yet had avoided penalty. That scenario continues with this application. This Board cannot grant this variance which addresses but one minor violation of the code while the applicant continues to operate with many major violations of the code. In 1991 the Town Planner wrote a memo to the file (Exhibit 8) which concludes: "In any case, the Planning Board cannot proceed with site plan approval without the Zoning Board of Appeals' review of the situation. At the least, the property owner must apply for a building permit for the tower. The existence of any other violations or non-conformities must be determined by the Building Department". POINT II THE VARIANCE TO CONTINUE THE EXISTING SIGNS SHOULD BE DENIED The instant application which seeks to legitimize two signs attached to the fence which faces Love Lane in Mattituck is but another inappropriate step taken by the applicant in an attempt to give a semblance of legitimacy to an illegal use. The application for a variance (Exhibit 9) states that the variance is requested because the property width will not allow for conforming set-backs. The applicant advises that the zoning code creates a hardship because it will not allow the applicant to advise tourists of the entrance and alleviate traffic problems. The applicant further claims uniqueness on the basis that all other properties existing in HB are not confined to such a narrow width. The applicant completes his application by advising that the variance would not change the character of the district because of the sign's subdued color and design. This is probably applicant's only statement with which we partially agree as the proposed sign in comparison to the deployed tanks and other war machines will certainly not change the character of the district. The character of this district changed in 1981 when the applicant began his illegal use. This property is oddly shaped having frontage on Middle (Route 48) and Love Lane. almost 250' and then at a (Route 48) where it widens Section 100-81-C (2) provides: following requirements: Road It is 50' wide on Love Lane running back right angle about 375' to Middle Road to 60' (See Exhibit 10) "Signs, subject to the As can be seen from the property survey (See Exhibit 10) it is not impossible for applicant to comply with the code. A sign at this site can be placed 15' from side and front property lines and still be visible from the roadway and entrance. It is merely inconvenient for applicant to move a sign that has been illegal since installation in June, 19812. The fact that displayed tanks and other war machines might interfere with the 15' requirement is a self-imposed hardship. The applicant also fails to note that under the applicable section of the code only one sign is permitted which sign should be not more than 18 square feet in size and placed in such a manner 2See Exhibit 10 where applicant's response to the question "The month and year that the sign was placed on the property must be provided" was "6/ /81" (a) Freestanding or ground signs: where building is set back twenty-five (25) feet or more from the street, one (1) sign, single-or double- faced, not more than eighteen (18) square feet, the lower edge of which shall be not less than four (4) feet above the ground, unless attached to a wall or fence, and the upper edge of which shall not extend more than fifteen (15) feet above the ground, which sign shall be set back not less than fifteen (15) feet from all street and property lines and shall advertise only the business conducted on the premises. As used in this subsection, the word "premises" shall mean all contiguous property in common ownership. that it is not less than 4' above the ground. There are two (2) existing signs much in excess of 18 square feet and they are placed only 26" above the ground (See Exhibit 9). Thus, the applicant really seeks a variance from the set-back, size and height above ground requirements of the code. Historically, this applicant never reveals all the facts at one time causing confusion and obfuscation all of which has allowed this illegal use to continue for more than 13 years. At one point this applicant attempted to obscure his illegality by claiming to be a pre-existing non- conforming use (See Statement of Facts and Exhibit 11) but the astute review of the history of this property by Board members put that tactic to rest (See Statement of Facts and Exhibit 12). POINT III THE APPLICANT HAS NOT MET HIS BURDEN UNDER SECTION 267-b OF THE TOWN LAW Section 267-b 3(b) of the Town Law sets forth the factors a ZBA must weigh in making a determination on a request for an area variance. The essence of the factors to be considered are: -whether an undesirable change will be provided in the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties; -whether the benefit can be achieved by some other feasible method. -whether the variance is substantial. -whether the variance will have an adverse effect on physical or environmental conditions of the area. -whether the difficulty encountered is self created. Subsection (c cautions the ZBA to "grant the minimum variance it shall deem necessary and adequate". By submitting a request for a variance for signs and ignoring the remaining violations of the code, the undersigned believes the applicant is seeking to minimize the perceived relief requested and thus comply with the statutory requirements. A sign is unlikely to present an undesirable change or have an adverse effect on the environment. This variance if coupled with the others that are required would make it very difficult for the applicant to meet the statutory requirement. However, by seeking only a variance for signs the applicant attempts to secure a positive decision. The relief requested has been minimized by ignoring the other code violations that require ZBA action. In fact, this applicant has not completed the screening required by the Town Board when it granted the zone change and thus applicant violates a condition of the zone change, in addition to several code violations. The benefits of the sign can be achieved by a conforming sign especially since an obstructions to compliance are self-created. CONCLUSION: It is time that some Board in the Town of Southold said "enough". It is time some Board demand and mandate that this applicant comply with the law (See Exhibit 13). The applicant purchased the property in 1981. He commenced an illegal use and he has reaped the economic rewards of that use to the detriment of his neighbors for some 13 years while he has toyed with the legal structure and made a mockery of zoning laws. The application should be denied and applicant should be ordered to submit a request for relief encompassing all code violation within a stated period of time or face penalty and/or closure. Dated: March 30, 1994 Greenport, N.Y. Respectfully submitted Ongioni & Borrelli Attorneys for Opponents Diane and Frank Ammirati ~XHIBIT 1 P.O. Box 1170 , ~::l:th:,hl, New York i IO?1 l:nx (fil6) 76~; Tills iS TO CERTIFY i)lAi' TIiE FoLLQWlt4 ~bsoLUI'ION ~AS ADOPTED SOUTIIOLD TOWN BOARb Ail- ^ REGU~Aif. MI~IEtItklG I1~:1._[) OM S~:i~TEJ~IBER WltEREAS, William F. Gasser and The American Armoured Foundation, Inc., by petition filed May 27, 1992, applied to the Town Roard of the Town of Southold for a change of zone on certain property located oh the i).:'th~asterly side of Love Lane, Mattltuck, from Light Industrial District ("LI") and Residential Office District ("RO") to Hamlet Bustness District ("I-IB"): and WtlERE/~S, the said petltlofl was referred to the South<:ld Town Planning Board ahd Suffolk County Department of Planning for official rec()mmendations and reports; and WlIEREAS: the Town Board, pursuant to due notice, held a public hearing thereon on the 10th day of November, 1992, at which time all interested persons were given an opportUnlty to be heard; now, therefore, be It RESOLVED that William F. Gasser and The American Armoured Foundation, lac. be and het:eby Is granted the relief demanded In said petition subject to the execution the SUffolk County Clerk's Office of the following Declaration of Restrictions whlch are hereby made a part of the Town Board's and record in Covenants and decision: WtlEREAS, Foundation, York t 1779) of SoUthold, declarant (Wlllalm F. Gasser, Preshlent of American Ai'moured Inc., with business address of 2383 Fiftl~ Avenue, Ronkonkoma, blew is the owner of certain real property situated In Mattltuck, Town Suffolk CoUnty, New York~ with Suffolk County Tax Map DeslgnaHon (SCTM! I000-t~0-2-16, commonly known as th(? "Tank MUseum" and more particularly described as follows: Al! that certal. ~m~t piece or parcel of land, ~th the t)~llldlngs and haprovement~ {hereOt~ er-ctl,-~,'' ~lhmnte, lying and being at Mattltuck. Town of Southold, Cou,,ty of Suffolk ;.,d State of New York, which Is bounded and described as follows: Beginning at a point on the corner formed by the Intersection of the northeasterly side of Love Lane with the northwesterly side Of property Of the Long Island Rail Road Company and from said point of beglnnlng; running thence northwesterly along the northeasterly stde of Love Lane, North 35 degrees 17 minutes q0 seconds West 50 feet; running thence along the land now or formeHy MacMIIIlan and Hawktns North ~5 degrees 0S ~lnule'~ 00 seconds East 187.6~ feet; run,lng theHc~ along the land now or f6rmErly 0f MacMIIIlan and Hawkins Horth 35 degrees 17 minutes ~0 seconds West 336.~J feet to hortheasterly Side of Middle Road; rUhnlng thence northeasterly along southeasterly side of Middle Road, North 55 degrees 02 minutes 20 seconds'East 60.00 feet; running thenc~ South 35 degrees t7 tab,utes fl0 seconds East along the la~d n~w or formeHy of Wines 375.72 feet to land of the Long Island Rail Road Conu?,,y; runni?g thenco along h.]d Of the ~ ~.g IslanH Pail Road Company South ~5 H~,ees 05 minutes 00 secor~d~ W~st )tl~.~t fo(.~ to lh~ ('or~er aforesaid and point .~ 141ace of Begir. H.g. WHEREAS, the Town Board of the To:vt1 o~f SoUth,)Id has determined that t'ezonlng of the subject premises to Hamlet Bnslnes~ District represents an upzohlng and wtll result in a Jess intense use of santo and is h~ conformity with conHnUoUs properties; and WHEEEAs, the Town Board has deter~lHed that the use of the premises as a Llqh~ Industrial Dlstrlc{ Is not a perml~tOd Use; and W~EEEAs, the TowH ~oard has determined ~hat the Intended ~se of the premises as a museum with ce~al~ safeguards Is ho~ ~ffensive; and WUEEEAs, the Town Board de~ermlned ~hat there Is sufficient o~remlses parking available ~o pdsslbte pa~ron~ of ~e ~Useum and [hat on-* rem ~e~ERS, for and i~ consideration of ~& granting by the Town Board O~ ToW~ of SoUthold, oH september 2t, 1g~3, of n chan tndus~rla ("LI'*I Dtstr~, --d h ,. ~.,. __ ge of zone [ro~ Lloh~ Busl~ . .' ~ '~ o.u ~es~oentlal office ("RO") DiStrict [ ~ ess (HB) DIs~Hct to declarant, William F. Gasser arid the ArmoOred FoundaHon~ Inc., the Town ~O~rd of the TowH of Sml~hold has reqOired that the Wlthth declaraHon be P&corded In the Suf[olk County Clerk,s Office; and WHEREAs, declardh[s have ~onsldered the .[0regoin9 demand and determlHed bas&d'upon the limited nature of ~he InteHded Use as a museum will be In ~he bes~ Interests of the decla~ah~s ahd the commOHl~y: NOW, T~EREFORE, TU~ DEC~AflTS WlTh~SSETII: t. The gun ~O~er, presently ocated ftear the Love Lane entranc~ ~o subject premises ahd depicted oh the survey pr~ )ared by Roderlck Va~ TUyI, P.C., as a~nended September 9, t991, a cu~y of which Is annexed here be. mbved to a point ho~ closer ~han one hUhdre ~nn~ t-_, · .... ,~O' entrance. .d ~.,.~ .~ ~rom [ne LOVe La~e 2. The premlses,,~hall be accessible ~0 the public and for repairs; ~o the ex~eh~ necessary bhly during ~he rollowlhU hours of operation: MoP, da ~hrou P.M; In addltloH~ [he premlses shall be accessible on Monday and ThUrsday evenings from 6:00 P.M. to g:00 P.M. s[rtc[ly for the purpose of accomm~daHng ve~ePa~s~ 9roups, ~py Scouts and other s0ch r ' 0 gan~zatlons. 3. All extertoP Ilgh[lng shall be shielded to the property, directed away from conttgOoos r)roper~y O~hers, and shall b~ of such a type as to mlntmiz~ glare. q. The premises Shdll be screened t~ [he property existing to the ho~khwes~ of the subject premises and shall, tf possible, be of a natural vegetative ~ype. 5. The change of Zone shall hot In ahy way be considered ~t the gPanHhg of any variance necessdPy to the proposed use. 6. beclarants, ~oP the pO~pose of caPrylncl out the Intentions above expressed, does hereby mare khown, adml~ pubJi~ ~, covenant and a Ye t e, ald pram?es , e elh described shall h relnafte,-be sub'--* '- s[a[eo covenants WhIcH shall rU~ With ~:~, ~u me aoove- ~he land i)e binding upon all pOPchasers and holders of sdtd premises, ~helr helps, execcltors, legal represe~[aHves, dlstrlbbtees, successorS; assigns dnd that ~hese covenants and ~estrlc~lbhs can be modified only ak [he reqUes~ of [he [h~f] owner of the premises wl~h ~he approval of the mdJoyi~y plus onb bf ~he TOWH Board of the Town of Sodlhold Its successor body, after a pobllc healing. Adjoining properly owners ~hall entitled ~o notice 0f such public hearing, bu~ [heir consent to such modlflcaHoH shall hot be required: / september · rlte T )WN A'I"I'()itNI~ m, prlt ~7, 19~7 9m~lel C. Ros~, Egq. Wlckham, Wlcklmm F, Bressler Main Road P.O. Box ll12q Mat~ltuck. NY 11952 Re: American ArmotWed FoundaJlot~, Dear Mr. Ross: h~c. .~(:(~rt' L ltAlmls Sttpervl.~of- Reference your letter to me of Apt:Il 22. 19q), he ndvtsed thnt ~ bev,. ~e property. I canhot see the va dlty of yoUI' proc~stn9 any matters bef0ke the PlannlnU ~oard or th~ Zohln~ ~oar~ until ~ha{ maitre- ls resolved. Of cdUkse, I~ you feel otlmrwlse, you Rte tree to makb wtmtever appltcaHons you dee~ appropriate. FIHally, I mull s{ress to you that I cmtho{ .-,it hlly by and allow a knowfl Illegal Use to cnntln~ wl[htn ~e Town. ~oHseqtmntly, I must have fro~ you firm, blhdlng time ~P~me Wltl]ln which I can aHUclpale ~ completed appllca{Iofl a zone chang, or wha{eve~ other applicable kbllef yOtl choose to ~uP~tle Or ~ shall have hO alternative bU{ {o {aRe other step~ to prntect the Interes~ O~ Lhls I do not wish by {his letter to Imply elthm my offtce~s rejectlort of your cllehts activities, bu~ me~b.ly thy pr~ent Inte~pretattoH O~ ~he ~ctlvlLles which are belh~ ~onducted o~ the subject p~ l^A:mt Zoning Rrmrd of Appeals STATE OF UEW TOWN OF SOUTtlOLD William F. Oas.~er and Tile Amor]can Armour,.d FoundaEJ. on, Inc., For an Arn,~ndmenk t:o {:he .~ouEhold Town Zoulng code ~Ind {:he Soukbold ~.~ITXON FOR CH~(~/ OF ~.OHE STATEMENT OF F~CT~ which n zone ch~Mge ts .ought on Sept~mb,.r 'I, lo,1 from g.orge b. OpponenE~ request kh~E ~own Board Homber george I,. Pe~tly~ IV who signed ~he de~d conveying ~he prnpnrFy Eo nppl{canE ~ecU~e h~mself from ahy p~r~ ~. ~he del~.~ernt'~o,,~, dl~cus~ton~ at,d/or dect.tnu wtkh re~ard Eo Ehe ~tttlo,,. property Into a "mu,~eum". lie was advtnod that tl)o Board could not render an opinion wt. khou~ an actual appl l-at'ton. (Se~ ~xhibt~ 2). A certificate of occupancy ]~ued ~o G. I,. Penny, Inc. on August 20, 19~1 , undoubtedly a requirement of th~ sale to Mr. Gasser, ind~catns that building on ~he property ~n located on that portion of the property zoned "C". (See Exh]btt 3). That portion of the parcel which was previously zoned "c" }~ rmrrenfly zoned "LI" and the port,on fronting on the County Road 4n ~n currently zoned "PO". estate agent and purchased from a p~rty vn~y familiar w~th SoUthold Town's ~on]ng laws, that he wnm h]m~el[ nwaro that the n~ to which pormttted use under fhe he intended to put the property was not a existing code. At some pqint after purchase, th~ applicant began placing armored weapons at the site and des]gnatod tile parcel as a "Tank Museum". Signs to that effect have been orocted on the two major roadwayn leading to Mattituck. At no time since tire purchase of in 1981 was the use for whl~,h the parcel has and is been a p~rmitted use under tiro zontn~ code of Southold the parcel being u~od Town. In tile the exFrome Fall of 1988, Mr. Gasser tn~talled a "gun tower" at front end of that portion of thn parcel which fronts on Love l,ane. on Septomber 20, in vio]ation of required. (See A complaint was made to tho llutlding Department and 1988 Mr. Gasser was infor'm~,d by letter ti)at he was the zoning cod6 alid that' ~{te plan approval wa~ Exhibit 4}. Mr. Gas~n~ 'n attorney responded by letter Fo the Planntnq Board requemti.q advice am to whether the tower located on a parcel b~{ng ~sed fo~ nn Improper um~ r~gu{red ~ite plan approval. (Se~ Exhibit 5). A report by the Building Inspec]-or to the Planning Department d~?,d Jmmmry 9, ]989 gives a full history of the site and includes tbn fo}]ow~ng.. "The BUilding Department has bo~n recelv}ng complaint,g concerl~Jng the munoum r~gard{ng parking and trespamSi~g on ad j~,~n~ng property... "When...investigated...found v~o!at~ons to the code .... "The first is that the tower w~n installed without first obtaining a Bulld{ng Perm{t... "The second {s tha't part of tho property on county Road 48 is zoned 'A' Pe~ld~nf{al/Agricultura] and ~s being used ~ a bu~e~s capacity whereby equ~pmen~ "The ~h~rd ~s ~haf site planning or approval wa~ hever obtained to have a museum, on Nov. 20, ]980 Mr. Gasser bad an ~nformal d~scu~ot~ with the Z.B.A. but never submit%ed a formal application.,, (See Exhibit 6). On February 17, 1989 the Plann~t~g Bonrd deters[tied that a sire plan w~n necessary and the Bu~ld~nq ]n~pnctor was asked fo ~o inform th~ applicator and, ~n fact, Mr. G~or,s attorney was cop~ed o~ the ~nternal memo. (See Exh{b~ 7). There appear~ to be a ~wo year gap ~n th~ f~]es of all Town departments w~h regard ~o th~s m~ter and from ]989 ~o ]991 Mr. Gasser wa~ allowed ~o col]t~,ue ~he ~l~ega] ~nd Improper use w~hout d~s~urbance, w~hout f~ne and w~thoU~ be]n,~ r~qu~red to comply w~h the Town's code. {lowever, il", February, In~1 Mr. Gammer was asked to submit an application for a ~tte pla~, (gee Exhibit R). Mr. Gasser'~ new a~torneys requested a Waive, ba~od on the fac~ 3 and ~ imprope~ for Board that an application was expect, ed wlt'htn 30 days or the matter would h,-, turned over ~o ~he Ordln~ [~-~l~or~For f~r not'Ion. 'rhnk leaker r'al]~ ~o ~r. ~n~er'n n~o~t~y~' nF~t~f:tol~ ~h~ fac~ ~ll~ desp~t~ improper operation for ~el~ y~nr~ Hr. Gassor had been ~nformnd In ~he page that site pla;l approval wa~ requl, red. (See Exh~bl t 10). llowever, lack of si~e pin,, npprovnl was and ts bu~ one of the irregularities a.~socta~ed wtth this site. I~l AugUst, 1991 Mr. Gasser was tnfotmod by the Platm[ng Board [hat bls amended s~te plaRs had been r~vt~wed and that the Board had ~n~pected ~he proper~y. He was a]~o ~dvised ~ha~ the Planning s{ructure (the gun tower) a~ ~t was [~, v~olat]on of the se~ back requir~monts. Th~s was but one of ~he I,n[~ropr]ettes of th~s (See E~hJbit 11). Mr. Gasser did not r:nok di~approval from the un~il ~ome four months later (Exhibit 12) and did not file hi~ application wi~h ~he ZBA until FebrUary, ~992 (Exhibit 13) ~ome mo~hs after he was advised ~o do so by the Planning Board. Februar~ 25, 1992 Mr. ~a~serJs appl~ca~t<,~ to ~he Zo;lJll~ Board of Appeals was returned ~o hl~ attorney becn,,~e t~ was incomple~e (See Exhib.[t ~4). P~r~tcular a~ten~to~ should b~ given ~o item (b) 4 the ZMA'~ letter of return which reads: "copy o[ the Certificate O[ ['r~st]ng Use and ~upporting documentation m~kJT~q r~feret~ce and certifying ~he 'nom-co;lform{~g u~,, u~]der which th~s application ~ requested...,, Apparently, applican~ had cla{med to I~ a pre-existlmg non- conform];~q use. The mubjec~ use, as the "~ank museum" came im~o e~]~n~r-m o*]]y after Mr. Gasser purchased the proper~y amd it Was not a [)~rm~kted ume under ~he J~lformal co~lference had by Mr. Ga~er ,~,d th~ ZRA prior ~o hi~ Tb~ application for a var~a~ce wa~ ~nunr reviewed a~]d s[~e Plan approval was never pursued. ~a~}~r, ~ [~ay, 1992 Hr. Ga~er Th~ a~pl~ca~'s FT~].I E~vJro~meD~al A~e~sm~t form an~wer~ qUem~io~ based on ~he fac~ thai ~he "Ta~,I: Museum" already a~ the ~tte. (See Town Clerk'~ fi[e} . Thus, appltcar~ has infereIlt}ally s~a~ed that ~here will ~ ~,,~ ~},a~ge bo the area, no increase tn ~raff~c or parking, no dis~u~ba,~ce ~he area, etc. Such ~atemeI~ts mu~( bo v]ow~d ]~ the co~ltex~ of ~he fact that Mr. Gasser has bee~ oDeratl,,9 In violatto~l of ~he code for ben years. If applicant were most c~rhatnly the answers to the quns%{~n~ would be dtffereet. For e~mmple: 1. Mr. Gammer om page 6 of ~h~ EAF mtmtem there wlll be physical change ~o the project s~te. Th]~ {~ %h~ came because Mr. Gasser has already improperly placed arm~r~d vehicles on display a~ ~he ~}te and has improperly erected a qua tower. If this parcel be no ~ffect on ~he nemthet}c remo~tcom ,~f the area. llere ~h~s can only be considered mt1 accurat, ~tomeDt Jn ] ~ght of the for ~en ~ears. If Mr. Gasser were ~ropom],,q to commence be devastating ~o ~he surroul~d]mg I% ts respectfully submitted ~hat th~ entire application must be viewed ~, ~he context of wha~ has oc,mrr~d with th~s parcel. code pr'tot to purchasing lt. tie began ht~: Improper activities and only after numerous complaints was pre,mn ~ brought to bear on to comply with the Town code. Mr. Gas~er was flrst notlfted that some action wa~ required tn 19~8. }lc ha~ continued to stall for four years and only now ha~ sought to <}un{-tfy kb, existence of fhe tank museum after tls fact by applying [,,~ a change of zone. In fact, t t wa~ only at the Insistence of tho Town Attorney by i~fter this Bonrd. (See Exhibit It should Nlso be noted that the T~wn's consultant Cramer, Voorhis & Associates in rev~ewin~ ~he nppl~cank'm EAF (~ee Town Pa~ 3 - appl ~.CnDk mkm~ed ~hn~ ~ho maximum veh~culmr ~rips q~n~ra~ed p~r hour were "minimal" h.~ Cram~r skates they are he,weeD 1 and 5. Page 2 - applicant m~8~ed ~hat ~he ackioD coOid be descrJbm~ as a zone change but Cramer mor~ accurately mka~em entire story by noting ~hak the si%e hn~ bonn tn violation of the code m~nce the early lg80'~. Page 4 - applicant stated ~hat Do area~ wo~ld be d]~tur~,d and cramer correctly Doted th~n in the case b~cause that the st~ ha~ a~ready be~n improperly Page 5 - applica~t stated OD[y n~te plan approval would be required bu~ Cramer correctly adds that even if a zone change si~e will Deed no~ only m}te plan approval the Zon].ng Board of App~n[n because it will still and tire lib district. consistent with the and Cramer correctly is graDted the vartarlc~,s from not conform to the requirements of the ct)de Page 5 - applicaDt stated [he nlto wan recommoDded U~e~ In the local land time plang notes that is not tire case. Rather, It- I~ at complete odds with offic}nlly adopted plan~ or goals. 7 POINT_Il - TIlB SONB CII~N~E X9 NOT IN CONFORHITY WITH THB PL~d~ ~D CONSTITUTE8 8POT Th~ Plannin~ Board of [he Town o[ f~m*thold has r~viewed ~he pe~ m~ for a zone change ahd ha~ ~ubmt tied ~ ts written opposition. (see Town Clerk's file). Th~ ]~tt~r d~ted AugUst 18, 1992 addressed ~o fhe Town Clerk reJtetatom the history of s~e ~ g~ven above i~ ~he S~a~emen~ of F'act~ and not~ tha~ ~he site ha.~ been operating in violation of H.~ code since 1981 and that the applicant was informed in lgRa that he was ~n violation of the code. The site was In violation r)f the old Town code and is in viola~ton of the new Town cad,. The Planwtng Board accuraf~ly slates that "the reques[ b~f,~re the Town, }f gra~ted, could be considered spot zoning Unle~n mtpporf, ed by an in-depth stt~dy o[ the ~oninq pa~tern in ~hts bu~lne~ district". The e~vJrot.n.ntal review bu~ ~ appearm ~hat th~ Board Ilmw york case law supports letter from the Planning Board. zoning regulations must be comprelmn~ive plan. the stn~-~mm~tn made i. the above According to Town t,aw Section 263 adopted in conformity w~th a The section ~t~t~n: "Such [zoning] regulations shall b. made in accordance with a comprehensive pta,...t~[~ ~], made with reasonable consideratio,,, g. as to the character of the district and its p~m~l]ar suitability for particular uses, and with a v]r.w ~o con~ervtng the value of bu~ldings and encouraging fh~ most appropriate Use of land throughout The Town of Southold previously m~d.rtook a comprehensive review nf land Use and devised a plan to develop the existinq area. In fact, the musettm was operating ~n Vio]n~on of the existing code when th~ ~ew ~as~er Pla~ w3~ adopted an4 yo~ th~ planner~, who were Tho anti~hes~ %o a comprehens~v, pint, ~ "spot zo~}~q" which s~rrouTvllng area, for ~}le beT~eflt of th~ r~r of ~uch proper~y and to ~he detrimen~ of other owners. ~dgers v. Tarrytown (1951), 302 N.Y. ]15; Adirondack Park Age~y v. 'ron-Da-La~As~gci~.Cg.~ (1978, 3rd Dept.) 401 N.Y.S. 2d 903, app. dl~. 45 ;;.Y. 2d 834: Dexter v. Town Boa~, (1971) 326 N.Y.S. 2d 205, rov'd on other ground~ 339 TI.Y.S. 2d 428, la'er app. 35] N.Y.S. 2d 217, r~v'd on other grounds 365 N.Y.S. 2d 506. The court's have mpn~Iflcally held tha~ if a a compr~hensive plan. ~v~ne v. Oy~_~er ~lay (]964) 259 N.Y.S. 2d 247. While ~ ha~ been held tha~ ~ .is ~,,,t Jnval.[d as spot zoning a public beneft~ in zo~e cha;lges des{g~rt primarily to permit a single owner to e~tablish a particdlar u~,n. ~n%~yers v. Oyster Bay (1957) 169 N.¥.S. 2d g§9~ Delig_~_isch v. G[eenb_~_r~[h (1954) 135 N.Y.S. 2d 220: Evanns v. GunD (1940) ~q ~;.¥.S. 2d 368, af['d 29 N.Y.S. 2d 150~ Smith v. Board of App~a_!s. This is exactly what is being a~ked by Mr. Gasser. The Board's aFtention is called to the matter of Jackson & Perkins co. v. Martin (1963) 240 N.Y.S. 2d 190 where an ordina~ce enacted solely to br',,~f~t mobile home cour~ which had been established ~ vig~k!on nf a, existing ordihance was held to be invalid becaus~ It bennftt~d the ow~ers Of such courts to the de~rtmet~t of owners of a,)}nc~n{~ laird and wa~ not enacted ].n accordance wi~h a comprehe,nive pla~. Spot zonin~ occurs when a chamge i~ o~h,r ~han par~ nfa well considered comprehensive plaD which is in~end~d to p,~mote the general welfare of %he communi~y, go~A~r~ v._3nqo_rPpratnd vil.lage__gf Flowe~ 439 N.V.S. 2d 326, 52 N.Y. 2d 594 (~): Augenblick v. Town of Cor~,dt, 480 N.Y.S. 2d 232 (2d Dept. CONCLUSION that wa~, applicant purchased the property with knowledge of the zoning law. He thereafter pro,'oecled to establish a use not permitted by tile code an(! ,'onttnued to violate the both the set back and complete disregard for applicant come9 before code by erecting a gun tower that viola~n height requirements. Applicant has shown a the law and yet h~s avoided penalty. [l,~w, the Town Board a~d seeks to undo the plan~ of established planners by altoring the zoning of only his property, a single parcel in the heart of MattitUck, a portion of whlch is bordered by the residential district. In order to leglt|mize this site applicant does not seek to ~ring it it, to compliance with the ]aw but father seeks to change ~:he law. According to {-h~, Town's own cot~sultan~, Cramer, Voorhls & Associates ltl their r~pnr~ of smptember 1~, 1992 ~he prml)omed action will conflict wi~h officially adopted plans or goals for ~he Town of Southold a{ld ~vo}~ more importantly ~he proposad action ~.I!~_s_9~.~D_ tm~gr~ant precedent_for future pr~gctm. The repor~ clearly {]o~em thai iho ~o zone ad}ace~ ~o ~hat port,on of ~be parcel fronting on ('~ 4~ contains residential dwellings in conformity wi~h zont~ and "tb~ location of bUginess Uses in that area would cause po~en~ia] land use conflict". The pa~er},~ {n this section of the Town" a~l ~l,~ "oxpansion would .ok conform to ~he infertile, of ~he Ma~ter pIan". Fil~all. y, C~amer museum wou]d mt~ll., not co~form comp}o~ o I y w] th } ~S new zoDi~g designation. In addition to the varimn~on fhat are required for se~ back and height violation~ for ~he gun tower, the HB dis~ric~ provide~ tha~ all permitted times must b~ confined ~o a fully enclose~] building on ~he site. Thus, the moat visual aspect of Mr. Gasser's museum - ~he ~anks and other mach}nery which are displayed grantir~q of a zone change. Even tf Mt. Gasser could or would enclose the tanks and other machine~y nnw o~t d]mplay by erecttnq a building, could he do so and meet t-},o ~tdeyard requirements and/or lot coveraqe requirements? I~ ]s hiqh]¥ unlikely tha~ the applicant would or could in view of the v~r¥ nature and size of the di~played equipment. In fact, the app]~nt previously opposed 1] closed fencing around this property which was recommended by the Planning Board during the abandoned si. to plan process because it would htnder stght of klm machinery from ~h~ roadway. ~k khe appt]can~ a~empked ko avoid comp~ 1ante wtkb the Planning Board'm decision by m~ati~g that federa} law pre-empted local law a~d the Planning ~oard could not order him to }ngta]] screening. llowever, that po~t~on was quickly w~.thdtnwn ~m there ~s no federa] property. Th~m Board, ~f ~k grants ~h~ zone ~h~nge w~ll be taklng only ~he f]rmk s~ep necemsary to ]eg~m]z~ %:h~m m~tm for mveu w~h zone change a~ least ~hree variances and perhaps more wottld be required from ~he Zoning Board of ~ppem~ ~n add}kJon ~o slte plan approvm] from . ~he Planning Board. Th~ro cmn be no beaker definition of spo~ zoning ~hmn chanq~nq ~he zen{hq of one parcel [o ben~f~k one owner whose um~ was ~m~%-~u~-md {n v}o~m~om code mhd who would requ~re multiple further actions by new zont,,q designation. The Dated: *;reenport, ]Iew York ;lovember lo, ]092 applicat~on nhould be denied. AdJacel~ Pr~porty Owners ]2 STAT~ OF NEW YOP~K TOWN OF SOUTHOLD In ~he Ma==er of =he Pe=i=ion of William. ~. Gasser an~ The American Pot an Amendmen= =o =he Sou~hold Town Zoning Code and =he To~rr. Zoning Map for =he Tow~ of Sou=hold, Suffolk Coun=y, New York. F~MORAL~UM OF DIANE- AN~ FRANK AMF~BAT2 IN OPPOSITION TO THE PETITION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE MARIE ONGIONI, ESQ. *, Opponen=s ~15 ~ron~ S=ree~ areenpo~, ~ 11944 516-477--2048 EXHIBIT 3A STATE OF NEW YoRK TOWN OF SOUT}{OLD In the Matter of ~:he Petition William F. Gasser and The American Armoured Foundation, Inc., For an Amendment %0 the SoUtbold Town Zoning code and the Southold Town Zoning [{ap for the Town of Sottthoid, suffolk county, New York. FI~K ~iP~T! I~ OPPOSiTiON TO ~TION FOR CH~ OF ~ONE response was not November 19, i992. Gasser was given Tb~ Petitioner, William Gasser has rn~ponded to obJectants' opposinq paper~'by affidavit dated November 17, ]992. However, ~he filed with the offic~ of the Town clerk Ontil At the Public }leafing reqardtng this mattek, Mr. Utltil November 17, lgnp to fJ]e his respondinq request that the ~espol~ding affidavit b~ roturned to Mr. Gasser as Untimely filed. In the event, however, that the response, objectants submit their sees fit to consider as follows: The entire conten~s of Mr. Gasser'~ affidavit (particularly paragraphs numbered 2, 3, 4, 5, a~d ~) ~volve around the single violation of the zoning against-, him by the Town, was cons{~tent with the code, and, stnc~ :~t]on wa~q never ~ken thls meant the Tow;, lind determined hi~ Use zoning regula~]onn. That premise ignores some very basic leg~tl concepts. First, assUmin~ arguendo that Mt. Gn~s~r dld not know }tls Use was ~mpro~)~r, lgnorat~ce of ~he law ~ nevo~ boen an excus~ for v~olm~ton nnd has never been, and ~m I~o~ t~w, n de[ease ~o an ~lle~al act. Second, and more ]mpor~ahkly, a party gains no ve~ed ~yp~ of ~pproval from one of ~he m~hy Tow~, Boards before whom he has appearod for a.y o~]e of him curreht v],,laFlons, that approval would be null and void because the properfy ]s not zoned for ~he Use ~o whlcb ~ ham ~ee. pu~ by the a~pltcm,t. For example, if Gas~er had sough% and obtained a butldJt,q a permt~ from Bulld~ng Department for the gun tower witho,,t having f~rst a var~a.cn from %he ZBA, he would have .o vo~ted right ~n allowing it ~ remain bec~Us~ the permit would have boeu illegally have ho v~sted ~h~ to maintain ~he ~un t~w~r because the tls~ illegal. In p~ragraph ~8 itl te~po~se ~o objecta~,ts' s~atemen~ kha~ Gass~P apparently claimed before ~he ZBA to be a pre-exlst~ng co~forminq use, Mr. Gasser ~a~es ~ha~ "neithnr ] nor my a~to~ney made such a claim ~o the ZBA". A~ached h~reto am Exh~blt 1 ~ a copy of Mr. Oam~er,m Appeal from ~he Hu]]d~ng d~sapprov:,l which clearly ~ate~ ~l,e mppI {r';H,I~ ~oc~{on~ from which Bo~rd'~ {nforma~{ou S~c~{on 100-241 of ~ho zen{hq cod~ {~ cap~{on~d "lion-Conforming Uses" and subsec~Joh h pvt-tnine ~o the enlar~emen~ ~r. Gas~er's s~a~ement tha~ "neither I n,,r my Rttorney made such a claim to the 3BA'i{s erroneous. In the fltlR] analysis, the of a non-conforming use is a non-{~aue a~ t~. ~elates ~o the ma~te~ before th{~ Boar~ ~ecause ~he museum c~m~ Into existence after ~r. ~a~ser'~ purchase and it was a~ that tlm~ not R permitted ase {~ rema{n~ today. Paragraph {11 of Nr. Gas~r's re~ponr=~ mRke~ ~ssumpt}ons ~ha~ are not ~t]ppor~ed by the record or ~he lnw. ~r. ~asser state~ ~ha~ ~he ',z~A aoes not w~nt to be involved tit]{' {1 th~ {}~e matter beEore ~h{~ BoRra {s resolvea". In fac~, ~he zu~ camm~_~ be involved ~he e'us~ mat~er before this board {~ re~lved" because the s~a~utorv authority {s limited. The ZDA {~ not a legislative body, I~ could not, an~ canno~, m~ke l~{ ~hnt {~ and hR~ bee~ an illegal ,me a~ Nr. Gasser,'~ proper~y. Nr. Gasser addit~onally in p~r~q~ph ~11 counters the opposition papers With regard ~o ~h~ ~{te plan by stat{ng tha~ ~he "record reflects my ~ite plan ap~l{cat{<~n {s pending and I am pursu~n~._~t by my application to ~his BoRed". (Emphasis added). S{~e p].~n approval before ~he Plan~Jhg Ronrd canno~ be pursOea a request for a zohe change ~o ~h{~ Hoa~<{. The fRct that ~he pla~ reqt{e~t has never been w{~hdra~h doP~ not connote tha~ {~ 4'pe~ain~". The ma~er of ~l~e ~lan ~pp~o~o{ wou]~ not come The Planning Board unless: (1) this Board grants a zone change and thereafter (2) the ZBA gra~s vartal,ce~ from, at the very least, the set back and height reqUtremP,,t~ of the code an~ ~he requirements ~ha% ~ museum be ~o~dlly enclosed in a building. Mr. Gasser ~n paragraph ~12 of h~s r~[,onse contends that ~he Planning Board ~ ~ memorandum ~o ~he Towt, Clerk regardt, n~ hi~ application ca,no% be construed a~ o~pos{~l~n to h~ request. ~. Gamser bolieves ~ha~ ~he Planuing Board ",,~r~]y suggested EhaE a m~u~y of the zo~g pa~Eern .of ~h~ MaE~uck bu~Jnes~ di~%~c~ would be necessary before %h~ [Pl~,tnq[ Board could rende~ an opinion". At~ached as Exhibik 2 is the Planning ~oard's memo of reiterates the h~s~ory of ~hJs Si%e a,,d its many and va~ed before the Town, i~ granted, could b~ col~sld~red spot zoning ~less opposition ~o ~he granting of the appIt~atton, comprehe~sive planning J.s ~h~ oflly legi%ima~e baflJ~ f~,r zoning enactme,%s or application could subject the Towtl ~o possible litigation based on spo~ zoning. That statemen~ can o%~ly bo ~o~,ntrued a~ opposi~ion ~o ~he petition sihce to infer the contrary is to beltev~ the Planning Board approves of nn ncr that vlnlnte~ the law and is making much a recommondation to tills De~p~[e Protestations to [he contrary, that th~ applicant purchased the property e×istinq zoning law, otherwise why was Hr. it is opponel~ts belief with knowledge o[ the Gasser seeking advice from thr, ZBA. After purchase |t~ proce~dr,1 i-r~ ~n~nh|lnh a tlge that was not r~rmitted by the code and contll~u~ t~ violate the code to date. A;)plicant has found that t.t i-~ po~bl~ to avoid compliance by claiming ignorance after the fact. Th~g applicant bas shown a complete disregar~ for the law and the ]mi)roper uses contthUe exlst w~thout fine or penalty despite multiple violations o[ the zoning code. The application before thi.~ board seeks to change the zoning of one parcel at which an illegal ,,ne has been established for no other reason than it already ext~tn. According to this Board's own consultant cramer, Voorh~s & Annoc}ate.~, the proposed action will conflict with officially adop~?d plans or goals for the Tow~l of gouthold ~hd probably even more ~mportantly the proposed action w.t[l set aM i~ortant precedent l~,r f.UtUre~ro)e_c_ts. The publicity that h~s unfortunately ~o]]owed th!s request will UndoUbtedly accompany any decision by th~n Board. If this Board approven the zone change, it will be signa~l}ng present and future residents of the Town that the way to c~,cumve;]t the code merely do as one plea.~e.~ and there~[ter nook approval o~ the basis of prior The app]Jca~:ton be[ore tht~ Board should b,~ denied. Respect:fully ~AR ! F, OtlG toil [ Attorney for Frmmk amd D~ame By: Carmela L. Borre~} EXHIBIT 4 25, 1993 Enforcement Officer Building Department Town }{all Main Ro~d Southol,~, NY 11977 REt American Armored Found;~;ion Love LaneL__M@ttituck SCTM ~ 1000-140-2-16_ Dear Sir/[4adam: As you are probably aware, the owner of tile above captioned parcel was granted a zone change by the Tawr~ Board on September 22, 1993 f~om Reslden~ial Office District and Light Industrial District ~o Hamlet Busines~ District. However, donpl, te this zone change, i~s use and/or s~ructures are still in wiolation of the Zoning code. ]u fact, the Board's decision speciflcaI]y states at ~5 (see a~ache,J) thah the zone change shall not be construed as granktng a varla.ca to ~he property owner. Th~ record clearly indicates that des[~i te the zone change ~hts property continues in violation of the co~le as follows: ]. A mOseum, although permitted in Hamlet Business District, musk be tn a fully enclosed bu~],~ng which requlremenk Is not met ~ "tanks" end other weaponry are ;~resent outside the only butldinq on the property. 2. Structures must meet height- n,d -,et back requirements, neither' of which are met for the gun towo, mud/or the building at the sit~,. 3. The zone change decision requires screening which does not as yet exist. This property bas existed in v]o]a%,~n of the law for more khan ten years. The zone cilange app]~c~ ion was made whe~ the property owner's attorney was advised by '}lc Town Attorney that violations wlthouk action to remed~ at~ would no ]onger be tolerated. However, the application for n zol~e change is only one of many applications this site must pur~ue ~n order to achieve legality under the zoning code. On behalf of my cllent I hereby demand ~hat action be taken to enfo~'~ the code and ~;hat Very t~ul¥ yours, ONGION1 ~ BORRELLI CLB~ar Encl cc: Tow~ I~oard Town Attorney Suffolk Times ('; mpla I,. Borrelll EXHIBIT 5 Benne%~t Orlowski, Jr., Cha)rmat! Sou[bald Town Planning Board Re: American Armoured Foundation SV:'I.'M fi1000-140-2-!t5 6,10 Love Lane, Hat[it lek, [I.Y. Dear Hr. Orlowski: [ have receive4 a copy of you[ ?ulinq, dr~ted 12/20J81~, I also read a copy of the let~e~ l:~nm Hr. John Harcln dated needed. 'l'hJs l~ter t.s a clarification *,l why I requested the museum to find out about site plann]nq. The Building Department has beeT, receiving comE' concerning the museum regarding parking and trespass adjoining property. 'dilen I [aves[].gated the compJaint [ found violc Code of the Town o[ Sou[haiti. The firs~ is that ~ho tower wa~ ~n~tnl. led wi. th( obl-n~n[ng a Building Pert,~t. The second is that part of the Utnperty on Cou ;~,med "A" Pe~t dnnttal/Aqr].ctlJ tHr~ I hilt] ] s be] ng The third }s that .-,Itc planning ,,t apprc~va], wa obtained to have a m%lseum. On Nov. 20, Jgg(} Mr. Gas informal discussion with the Z.B.A. hut never subm] appl [cation. EXHIBIT 6 PI,ANNING BOARD Bcnncl! OHowsM. h . ('h~irmnn George Ritchie Imlh:mL Richard G. Wind Mark S. Kennelh l.. l'clephone (516~ 7e,q I';~R PI,ANNING BOARI) TOWN OF SOLITII()I.I~ SCOTT I.. IIARRIS Supervisor Town Ilall. 53095 Main R,ad P.O. Box 1179 Soulhold. New York lie/TI Fax (~;16l 765-1R23 -~ngn..~t iR, 1. q92 Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town Hall SoUthold, New York 11971 Re.' Petition of William F. Oa~.qor and The American Armoured Foundation, Inc. fo} a change of zone ftr,m r.~ght Industrial & R~midential Office to llam 1. et Business SCTH B 1000-140-2-16 Dear Mrs. Terry; At its public meeting on August 17, Board adopted the following report: 1992, the Planning The Planning Board has kevtewed the petition of WiJ. liam F. Gasser and The American Armoured Foundation; Inc. for a change of zone and offers the following obnervakions and suggestions: DESCRIPTION The subject parcel lsa spli~--z{mod parcel of 32, 109 square feet in area. Approximately 6~ by 150 feet or 9;000 square feet of the property ig Zoned Residential Office~ The remainder; 23, 109 square feet tn zoned Light Industrial. The 54 by 120 foot corrugated meta~ buildin~ on the property lies within the LI zone, as does the 8 by 8 foot towe~. HISTORY [as can be reconstructed from our records) It appea~s from the records at our disposal, that since it~ inception, (in either 1980 or 1981), this mUsec~n has been opetatlng in violation of the Code. In 1988, ~he property ow~e~ was notified by the ordinance Inspector that he was in violation of the Zoning Code. At that time, part of the property that is now zoned for Residential Office was zoned "A" Residential/Agricultural. The part of the property that is now zoned Light Industrial was zoned "C" ~ndustrial. A copy of the prio~ zoning map is attached for your convenience. The violations on the site ur~d{,r the old Code were as fo]]ows: The property owner had not obtained approval for a mlseum. {Unless there was a spec] f;ic ru].ing or official interpretation of the Zoning Board ¢~f Appeals that stated otherwise, a museum was not aR a]lo%.:ed use in either of th¢~se two zoMing districts. } Also, %he tower had been installed without a building permit. And, lts height {20 to 25 feet) exceeded the eighteen fo,,t permitted for accessory structures. In 1989, the Town adopted a new Zoning Code and Map. Under that Code, the museum is not a permitted use within the LI zone. But, it is permitted within the Re zone by Special Exception from the Zoning Bo.~rd of Appeals. However, the museum building, the tower and about 72% of the property are located within the [.I zone, not the Re zone. The tower height not only vie}ares the Code's restrictions on accessory structures, but it lies within the required front yard setback. In 1991, an application Was made for site plan approval. However, the Planning Boa,d was reguired to notify Mr. Gasser that it could not proceed with the application because he had not obta~,~ed the necessary variances from the Zoning Board of Appeals. (The Code specifically prohibits the Planning ~%oard from granting approval to site plans before the Zo~ing Board grants the necessary variances or special Exceptions.) In August of 1991, an memorandum was circulated among Town departments that while the use of the property as a museum was not allowed by the Code, the use had bee~ allowed to continue fo~ many years. On December 20, 1991, a Disapproval Notice was iss~ed which noted that the use is non-conforming. An application for variance~ was made by the applicnnt to the Zoning Board of Appeals in the spring of 1992. ~ March of 1992, the app}icant's attorney informed Us tba~ the Zoning Board had returned the application to him for ]ack of information. In April of 1992, the applicator '~: attorney requested the assistance of the Town Attorney's: office. In July~ 1992, this petition was made for a change of zone from Re and LI to Hamlet Business. CO}~CLUSIONS The Planning Board has reviewed thc old and new zoning maps for the Mattituck Business Dist~ict. The request before the Town, if granted, could be considered a spot zoning unless supported by an in-depth study of the zoning pattern in this business district. ' '- ~ ~.~ Board feels s~rongly that the zoning designat~ons of all lots in the ~mmediate business district bear closer scrutiny. consequently, we are asking ~o be a coordinating agency during the environmental review. Our recommendations as to the determination of environmental significance of this petition wi]] be sent to you after we have had an opportunity to review %he report of the Town Board's environmental consultant on this petition. If you could send us a copy of that report, it would be m~preciated. This Board will also undertake ~ts own study of the zeroing pattern in this area in cot~' ~ctlot~ with'the e~]vJronmental review. Bennett ©rlowski, Jr. Chairma,] E~cls. EXHIBIT 7 L()N(; ENVIIIONMI;iN'I'AI, ASSESSMENT F( )I~IXl PAICI'S I, !I AND III I', ,'l~m¥,d l?y: $'I Nnrlh ~ ',,lut~v Millc~ I%, .'. lqc(v Ynlk t1~61 I~()N(; Ii;Alt I~AII,i, III !.._ONe. ENVIRON_~_IFNI'A L/~R~Es;,qMI, r,' I' FORM - I'_A. R'_I; !1! ",Villi:un Gasser and tile Anlericml Armmlred I',-,.dalion. hie. ((. h:m~e of Zone) M:,uituck, New York LOC_ATI( ~N 'Ih,' die of tile suhj~'ct :~ ~plicatirm is located ~ ~ I ,,, ,. I :mc.. lit(, umth s~de o1' the I mm, Island P,~ Iroad, in khlllitnck New Yolk. API'LJ_CA NT klt \Villiam Gasser an(t lhe ,A,m¢'lioslll Arlllotlred [:tlnlldalion, [nc, 23~1 t Fifth Avenue Ibmhm~koma, New York 11779 !)A_I_;~ S¢lm'mher 15, 1q92 ! N~T_R_OJ I t :(: I'I_O__N · .! h ?!oposed project aud the envlrrmnlentnl chin:rater of the prolect site is describerl ~ oelqn v. ,t,m? the l/m~ Environmental Assessment F(, m {I EAF) 1~; rtl. 'f'he I~EAF Part-' 11, evama~o; fl~e projest Impacts and their magnittlde. 'lifts section of tile LEAF is intended to p~ovide .:~dditional. mfor.mation on the importance of the im mcts of the proposed project on tile em.'Trmm~enl, m order to form tile basis for the nd-pti,m of a determination o~ significan,',,. The I F, AF Part !I! is prepared if o e or more : , s u~ considered ;ts bein~ potentially f?rge, as identlficd in die I.EAF fart 11. In thc ,'a~e of the proposed,roi~e~ ~pt~c~patod Impacts are considered small lo moderale, ~Imv? Bored of th~ 'F?vn of Snmhotcl xvid~ additional iul.,,uafi, ~ l,C'~t mntSo tllis~e~t Ior the con,iderat,on m mai:rog a determmam. I~een completed for several sn?ll to moderale hnl?cls id,miffed in the l.ong Euvlronm?Inl ~ssessmen Form Part II. 'lhm Part II1 mhhesses m demll dw envhmmwnla[ ami planning ~ssues which me relevant to the subject nplfiicallon. CF:lAMER, VOOIl111~ &"',ASSOCIATES t!fIVIFIOI'IMEt41'AI;/,rlf~ ~I-~NNI~IG COflSIII I At,Il ,:,h/ / . ~ Hlhlm (;~rr (1range nf Znnc ENVI.R~)N ~ I F. NTAI. hnpnct m, ~ hm~lh and Clmrncler of Cmnmuntty * Th,' F~zy;osed action will conflict with ol]icial~s, tltfft~/~l,'t] phm.~ or ']'hr Woposed nction hwolve~.n reqHes~ fnr n cm,-,, of~or?ng from the Tmvn B(mrd of the ']'own rff Sou(hold for the cmltnlued r~perntJmt n[ fl., Antc~ W:ln Arnmured Nhlsetl111, Inc. A ti ~,m,h the ncti~ ' - · . contex~ ~r .,;.;...- ..... , ~n ~ a req,est for .~ c?nge of ~m.. ~ .I mus~ he consid ' , , ,- ...... ~ ~ ~wt:{I }y llle ~bques~ed 2~1t11111~ I ' . ~,, .... ,. ...... , . . . . ered In the ' ~ - ' · · ~ ~ , tl~nre~eetnflmM, ]~es~dentml ~)lhce ~he remal xlo~,,g n,..:,_ ,~. ,,,a .... nnd ~s zoned ~ne is mthu.em tl~e [ o-0 l¢~,,a'/~)::', '"~ ~'.'~ t~-~,~.ui,.??:u e ~?U h,s ~ronta e on Love g. ' ~ - ~'~ ome~,t,~nm~ ~g 1 ~ : ~ x~fom ~er, tnnksnndgrn~el pnrking, h.'med on the Llgbl hxl.~Iri:d z~,.ed portion .f Hr,, ~ite. ..... ?" lucsent zmfing .f the she re(luire~ minhn ~ . I ~ ..... r , tile LI I.iFI, hlduslr nl nnd 40 ~ 0 ~e :-- rE_. ~ .... L-;,;;,,,:y.~.~ o,~,./..t{uu sci(rare feet for "~-O' R~,'; h,.H. ~rr-- ~ _ . ' . .' I -.~ ~.t:~u -n ulu ~,,, ~c~l( e ] 11 Office zonin Th ...... :-,~'- .~,/.:,,,~,,,~c ~s~rlc~ m mtemwd I. protect th,, l'md vnlH ..... r.__ - ... g. e tile lowu ~,[ Stmfhold ~iaster l' an U ~, · o ~ . ~... . I~ ~nf.,ms as entlSloned I ~omr]g t~ mt, nded to provide :n o~o t ~ h, f( -~--.-:- ;.,, Ine ~.I L~ght Industrial ?m~?nse ll)mpraleunder 1.1()I.~ hllnd '~ , :,. ' ',:. : . , d: t tim "I 1' ,H~lrict n~ ....... ~,..:,_ ,, g . ,slrhd I ,uL~ I Imm. d -ffice ImrK" It is noted Thr ~,'quested zonJl~ "llll"lhun e 1~ s r-~ ....... squnre fee~ ', · · ~ , ...... . .,¥? ,~'~ 's; mi 111 II1 Iht nte~ of 20 000 . 1 rt I1 mt 1~ s ( e ), rug el Zh /eel. ! lng ;. . dis ricl wou d :11Jow for lllllSelllJlS :md Iii.aries ns pernlilled uses wJlhia lhe d s ~ r :md such uses nrc sub ecl Jo sile plan npprm :d I,v lite PI[IIIllJIu~ il.md. ' ' . . ~Vitlt trFmd Io exi~lhi.g use [i]l~l Zollin~, it is flOletJ fh:i JJl~ site h:t~ been t~ ~eratJll in v~olatlon el lbo current zoning clnss f c:llJo 1 : l(J lhe ( ~ ....... :r, ,' - -. 1988 by the ( )rtlhlnnce Inspector At t l:ll tJule lite site xx i~ 7 ~ tel / ' ~esJdenlJ;tlt/,Xt~rictdtllr[ll ~tl( "(7" In( licit: I '1 ~ ....... ,; ,, · ~ . . she urohihh, J~e mqs ....... ~ ....... ,-- .,.. , . ....I..~ HI ~ ~ ZrHllUg et tile south lmrt nf distr'icl ;f ~ ~ ~ : .... ~., .,/~-~.t-l, tn? line is perllllttcd unf cr tile ;;l(()" Re-;.l~..::-, .:,_ ~_ ":'1 I.'m e~ ?y n bpeom ~:.xceptmn nf lhe ZonJl ~ Il ~'lJ l nf A,,,.~.. _ ;~,.¥:,u[a~ UlllCe b,(u ~s oper:Hm[z wHile(il npprm'nJ :ts ~ lilt se Ill :111( the ~' )t , r - -- "?'~'"~'- ~nerelor~, Jl~J~Jlt for HiT ;IC'('CSSO~ SlrtlCJllre. ' ' ' t xc-ec.g ule I~ Jonl lll[tXl11111Ill Rc~iev. nftl?zoningm;l~:ndfieJdillVestgal° )flh~ 1lei ' , requested zmmm w cm se n,, ;,..,,.:....: .... -, ., , nchcates Ih:ti the , , .... ,n ,mmllon, rev~w ?f tile Mnsler Jq:m J~:~cJq;rf,lnd Sltl(l~es for lhe Il; ~ let ~lIlfJy -~l:tli~hfcJ;, finds llml lhe I,l per mn of tire site is ~;hnwn In be I [rllilJel lllISJIICSS :tltcI tile pre,rill 'l',( )' Imrt of Hie sile is proposed r-~'~V~nONMENrAq-~HP .~'~0 CO.SULrAr4TS r, ue a to rem:d, I',esiclenthd Oflice. .. . ' ' "II llamlet 'l'h(. change of zone fnr lhe L! l.~ght &ndustrml 1 -I -f the sue t? ..~ . Busine,;~ i'~ n,t expected to rove n si~nific:mt ~mp~cl up,,,, the cm,,m?n~ty, t ne c?~ge tndustri:d 7(ming to hamlet bus ~ ess]s ~ect~[mzed ns n ,:,mr,I ?lens?n of the ex~stmg Irene llu4nt,~s nrea The c range ofzo ~e will allow for tim c¢)ntmu:mtm of the museum m an ~rea wh,'~c ~i Was p~eviously p?ohibited and ns a result x' ,,d,l n¢,t c¢m~prm,ise the zon ng integrity ,,f ~t~e community. I{ ~l~e overall parcel were rezonod to "liB", the f,,,'du('ss (IJst~ict would intrude into the "RO" zt~,e. 'lhe "RO" zone adjacent the site contains tv. idential dwellings, in conformance with zoninv therefore, the lucat on of bnsiness uses in fi,is nren wmfld cause p¢~tentlal .land use cot 1 t,t I[ a full change of zone for the snbject lmr,'"l ~s gr,mted, the ~oa/s of RO . Res demi: ()trice zonin~ ~lesi~,nation nf the subject she would not be r?li?d. ~us, the tla~nle~ Eu.~iness zoning]n the;'RO" Re~identinl ¢)ffic, l,mtitm Cfi { ~e stte ~s out of character with adjru:ent land use and is expected'to cause an hnp:,~'l {m the immediately surrounding CO~IllIII~[V, IlS wet aS the ~rea J he iCIltlll if npprm'cd, wtmld set n precedem for other furore :u'fi.ns, thereby underm n ng lhe in~egrll~ ~ff lhe .-truing p ~tlerns in t ~ls sect on of the Town. 'J h~s precedent m:~v p.mlnte the exp:msltm ~[ th,~ J ~ve l.a.e Business District [rom ConlllV lh~ad d8 to Sound Avenne. 'Ibis p.ssible exp:m :i,m wmfid n(~t cmffmm to the intentJt.~ -f Ibc "R()" zoning m ll~e Mm;ler Plan fro- p.,' i,lh~g :~ ti:msitinn nrcn between the businec~ ~md low-density ~esid('mi:d :u~d limhed n.mc~ hi,,.lhd dexcl.pmcm ahmg mnj~r roads. 11 i~ nlso nolac th:~t ff the cha.ge -f zone ~ ~Jm.,,,t I ~c must till) x~t~ul}l still not . . conform cmnplete v wilh 7(ming. The Il:toilet [~usmc~;': ,,ming sl:~les lhnt illl uses perm~llea inlhe I H lhlmelBusmess Is ncl, c gt~t t 1 x Is, lc ~fmerch.mdmeandthe st~ ~ g~' ,~ :~ I pmpcrly, ex(epl livi~).~ phmls, shud)~ :md ~,-":. ~dl:dl he contim'd tn fully enclosed huilding (m the 1.em scs, t ~s he nutd(~(. ~1,-:u.,e -f ll~e t:mks x~(mld not be permiu,'d ,ruder the re( uested z(min~. If the z(me (.h:.,? ig ~ttntded. the use wmfid be subject -~ ':ile plan appr()vnl by the l'lmming ll()ard. CONCI tI~I()N '1 ,' I o lg EAF Pa~t 11, is line.deal lt~ COlmidc~ Ils,' hiqmcl, lhcl1 title.mine avmhtble mitig~uhm ns ~vell as the impmt:u~ce ~)f the impacl, hnc,:,l upm~ cerl:fin criteria. Specific impacts, ,nsldered abm e II1~ ()Ix e iss,es of hllJlIlCl (111 Iht' (. (llllnlllllt v. This (JlSCtlSSlOn resuJls m it COllCh SIt) 1 lJlat lhe rap. ct is reJaletl t, j~l:ulllill~ lltl(J zt;llillg isstles. sub ect l,:ucel does not exhibit envimnmeutal sens~ u,'l ~ ht the Ir:till imml sense. Revimv of the l.m:st VAF Part 1 as well :~ field inspecfinn indic:m"; dml the she is suited for controlled devel. ,m,-* ~ for.lhe foil.wi ~[, tensmls: s*~Jls are cm~(t,u i','c h~ lenchi.~h lop.~,.~nphy is rial. the~e : . s gn f c:llll ye ~-l:lll(m, wetl:H~ds or wihllih~ h:d,il:d {~n dh.. I.ikew*se, the proposed zoning '.x.uld not gener:de a signific:ml mlhtx nf pe-l,I,' ,. H:dl'ic :is cmnp:ued Io present zoning, u.r wmdd nolse, ~es I t c~r visual tesmuc,'~l,.' ,:hudfic:mdv ndve~scly impncted. Theretmc. i~sues reduce m hued use :md zmfi.g, and t,,, :,1 cmmmm~ly imp:tcls :IS well precedcm. CFIAMEFI, V~'~r )ill lIS ENVIROr4MEN ! 'd: Ar ID PEANNI~IC, COiiql. ll. I At ! 1 R ',.Vlllhm~ f'm;,~rr ( hnn[~e .¢lisc.s~..! i.ch.led m tho ;,~pj~rn ~ri:ue seclimt .hove, fl..r ix. rccnR dzed ;m:dl intrusim~ rolo a re~;id,'mial area as ~c I ns ~mne rec'ngnized l~reced,,m '~rt ;1~ a resnlt nf thi~ action. 'he durntinn ~f thi~ impact is cons dered permanent for fire purpose of l?s discussion; owever, il ix.noted that the acli(m.cotd~ he reversed fi.raft, fi~lur, e zomn~ elm ~es Impact cm~ h( cnntro ed thr?~h s~te p ~rev ew,fi itl. ~'lh ck ~ florins. :md oth r ~ites: lq.th.r control cnn hc nplflicd to reduce the precc t, t w m:ddn lhb xo.i~ ' ' Board. The impact is considered lo be Io~nl ns opp(~scd In ~c~imml. d ' ?ds l.m~g EAF is intended to prov de the Tmv Ibm~dwi?tsufhc~?tinformati0~to e~ermme the environmental sigmfica'nce nf lids nci n~. :md prowde n bas~s for decision lhe projecL (~iven Ihe rel~livelv small ~cope of issues. ~,.,I Ibc .vailahle information concernh~l impacts, lhe project-does nnt w:nranI tl~e prel,:unth.~ nf an Enviromnent~l Impact SI:~Ic'mc~t. The considerat mi of a chnnge of z~mim i~ ~ egisladve dec sion of Town l~nnr t. It s recommended I mt. Negative I)cchu:uinn he ndnpled for lids .etlon based (m th- ' formntlon COlll~dned herein. S,bseq.emk. dm 't'nwn ll(mrd tony consider the pelitioll. ~;Jfr c(mdJtiorl, ertvirnnmCnhll review, lcstinlnUv, :~,T,I nther re.tiers nf ,:ccord, and render :t ( .ci~;im~ nn the pr(~]~nsed [ c on. h is recnmme,.I. I I c dcci~ n cn ~tain crl^MEr'I, VO0~;~I tl~ &:~,,$$OCI^'IE~ ~!rlvFr~ONMENr^L. ^rlf~ ~Ij~NHI~G corls~ Ff l^Nl,q CRAMER, VOO 11115 &/~'~;SOCIATES ENVIRONMENTAL AND i=I~N{NG CONS LTANTS Ms. Judith 1. Terry, Tr'~wn ('lc'rE 53(}95 Main Ibmd P.(). B()x Il ?) S()uthold, Fh.v. York 11971 SEf '), Z 1"392 l)ear Judy: We Im~e cmnpleted rcvie~v of(ire :drove noted ch:m? .f 7m~e petition. c(mducl lira; ~(,viexv, we have riehl inspected lhe subject SllU, ICx ir'wed all(] correcled the l.ong EAF l':ul I, and prep:ued a I m~g EAF Parts fl ami 111 We have :llsn consulted ITtfornl~l itm suhmitted in cmmectim~ with ~e: pplicatim~, n: x~c. II as II~e zmfing cmle antl Master Plan tlpdale. Attacl]ed. please tirol the complch, d I mt~ EAF I'art 1, II ~ d 111, as well as a SI ~{ )1{ l)eterminntmn ~f Significance. ~s aiwa?;. Hw.;~ documenls are submillc, d Draft f. rm Im lhe ll~mrcls review and cm~sitleralmn. 1t is qm.~tc~tcd llml rite Bo:ud review these cl~wmm'.ts, altd if there are fmlher cm~sidernlim~s w,, ~,,.uld hel~leased. 1. mnend documents m cm~sult with the Il.md as m'cessary. hi ~ct ie~v .f the documenls, y.ti ~vill fi.d lh:d we :u ,' ~ccommc.ding :t Neg:Uive Declaratmn [.r this action, due to the fact lhal issues l. im:,, ik' i.v.he h~cal z{mihg consldera .ms. The site is m~t cm~sidered to be e lvlrOl Illth hi IV se.sidve. SI~()R does require cmY hteralJm~ of land use and zmfi.g issues, :~s writ :u; c;mmmuih, imp:wis, therefore, we have im'huled a section discussing these issues. In smn,.:uv, we feel ihat Ihe "liB" distrlcl IS sutled 1. d,,, I 1 porlloll of ~l~e s~le; hmvever he ch:myv ~d' Iht' "IU Y' Imrl of lib wou I I~ de Illh) R re~ de. I:d :uen ul :l Ii1111111{,1 w~H, h ctmhl imp:icl Ihe c~HlllllllllllV. In ~ddilion. lhb; change wouhl m~t be cm~msle t ~v Ih recmmm'n I:tll ~ s of rite ~l:~ler Upd:~t~, ~llltl wmtld set a precedem for furlher aclimt ~l'he h. mol o[ lhe z{me ch he mmmfi~r,,l through sitephm review ns ~c{ .ired trader ~ h:, ~l('r 100 {~ A as we s reslric ive c'e,.mtallls or huffe~s {m ~ ~e n.r~ ~ Imrl of Iht' sik.. ~ )ne mhlilimml imcresting f:tctor nmed :~q a result **f our ~eview, is that the requc,slc, d "1 II1" ~mti.g ~mhibil~ storage ami ~,.~hicls height u~ 18 fi'et, the~efl.'e, addilion:d mtMific'ntimm ~f the cmrent use lllay be necu';cnry Io provide c, mb. mnnce. further C¢lllllMt'lll~ }/(111 may I ix 7. I'h'a'~e c';dl il' yml Imxc :*m '1 u";d m'~. EXHIBIT 8 Minimum r:<m~;iderations for sign application::: {x} This is a preliminary review of your sign i,vlniry. The following information ts necessary i~l the initial review. YoU must submit all of the following info~mat~n before filing an applicatJ~m concerning an existing In this proper~y located withi~ 500 f~,eb oE County ~r S~nte road or highway? YES (Y~:' or Ho). If yes, pre,of ~s necessary to show that the H.Y.S. Department of Trnnsportation in Hauppauge ha~ received and .approved pc,mit under Highway Laws, Section gg; goo attached letter Cc)t,y of previous sign permit issued hy the [hlildinq Deuartment, or copy of Ho]ice .of Disapproval dated within th~ last 60 days from the Building inspector -- if you do not have a p~evious sign permit, you will need to fire a sign permit application with o~,lor to obtain a Notice of ,{x} {x} ---:- A previous sign approval was obtained from the Board of Appeals by SPecial Exception tO advertise (please fill in); If yoU sign has been erected for mo~, than 35 years, please submi~ proof; Ha ~ this sigh ever been altered: to change the Wording YES__ ..... (Yes or }lo). to change the size of ~ sign ..~_ (Yes or No). to be in a different location ~I, the property No or removed for ~he purposes of painting NO {Yes o~ No to each of the above.} Please subm~ a copy of the o~ner's written consent. The month an~ year that the sign war: placed on the property must be provided: 6/ / H1 The exact wording of the sign must be American Armoured Founda%tQB, In~'. Tanh and Ordflance War Memorial provided: 71779 (516)588-OO33 Museuffl_ 0 ~ a~t~tuck. ~:Y ...... np~n SUndays llam-4pm G~ner~J ~dmJ~s~DJ~ $5.00 Mai. ling Address: 2383 5th Avenue R~mkoqkoma,NY The dimensions of the sign mUst be provided: 6' length by 1" ~idth by .~3.6' ~,,h~!ght.. ..~ , A.s~i~Af~,i~e f~m g~0~n~.~o bOitom of sign: .._'~,,;";' l/v:nt].on of %h~_ stgfi must be provid,,,t on a sketch, with setbacks to O~her buildings AHd two nearest property ] t nos. I[ :~ign is located on a build~ng, please indicate which section of the building: f,-~nt wall; ~oof; side '..;all other. C,,rreht ~hotoqraph of the sign is ~-quired with the above j~) f ormatibh2 I?.,w~ you or any member of yoOr fami IT hcen eon]acted b7 the Building Department concerning noncompliance with ~ny provision of the zoning ~ode fc,] this sign ~r ]f yes, pl~se ex~lain bri~f].y: He con]at]ed butldin~ dept~[ Pr~.~;.,~utL~_..~nind ~br,, '~{~ plan approva'] - planninq ~ d r~ ' .~...,.,r__v~ianc~e f~r beforo ':~ L,, plan review'can 5/11/93]~ I~AR J 4 199,I Southold Town cletk TOWN OF SOUTItOLD, NEW APPEAL FROA4 OECI",if~II OF i]UILOIIIG ItlSP~'C'I'cR tO TIlE ZOflII'IG fiO.',F~[) (?r APPEALs, TOV,'tl OF SOUTIIOLO, ~l. Y. ' ............................. - ppellont ' ' ............................· ................... R.Q~QD~gm~ .................................................. State 7l~ ZONING BOARD Or APP~LS FROM THE D~CI]ION OF'TIlE ~Itll. Dl[IG I[ISPE~OR ON APDLIOtTIoN FOR PEt, MIT NO. .................................... DATED WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR OEHIED TO ..................................................... of Nome o~ ................................. Applicon~ for permit .... .. ( } PERMIT TO US~~;~''° ; ]?:'"~ ................. []~.ttJ¢o~omn, Neu York Munlci~all~ Slate ................... ( } PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY ('() PRRH[~ ~o mnln~a~n 2 ~Jgns 1. LOCATION OF THE PRoPER~ Bore ........................ ....;:..;...:.................................' Distrt 1000 iortl I 2 Lot 16 ~"~ ................... - E~t'~ ............. ~urrent ~ner Prior O~ne~ ce')~rm Penny S~. 2. PROVISION IS} OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APP~LEDte theon~. Section and Paragraph of t~e Zoning Ordinance by number. Do nof quol~ th~ Ordinance.) ~rticie ly Section 3. ~PE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for (please check ,]ppropriate box) ' ) A VARIANCE to th~ Zoning Ordi~nce or Zonln~ Art. 16 Sec. 280A Subsection 3 ' ) . AI'PF,^.I_ t lO. ~/, ~). ,-'~)'/ b,,\ I E PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous Opl~eol (has) (has not) been made with r-rr'ect to this deelsjotl f ~he Building InSpector or ~vith r~pect t~ this Property; ~ch cppeal was ( ) ,equ,,~t for a special p%~ ,- { ] reqtm~t for a vorian~i ~d was made In Appeal rhx ................................ Dated ...... RF-,XSON ton APF~,:,i'_ Variance .to the Znr~;ng Ordinance variance (Conhnue' on other side) _J EXHIBIT 11 ft:11 ¢'h 7, fqq! 'I'r;~,:~t of Sotll:holrt Sr~'~'hold Town llaTl 11911 l~e: . ~A~ me~ t.ca n~A_~mou i.r I F ounda t t 011_ [ 11(: .. I~l]_E~_e_[lll] We ate J:Jle ak~orney~ for Am~,t-i~.~ Armoured Foundat:~Oll Inc. and ~ritin9 to you itt respon~, ~, y~ur lettor of not: '~hatlged,tn over ~en years and t-.h ~P: until khe inception never been a problom in ~Otl~lec~o~ ~.~i['h t:ho us~ or the occupancy of ~he pramiSe~. AcC°rd~uq;Y, ~n l~qht of the EJI~ .' vm is recluested f,:, ~,. reason that /~nplicant v/i~h-s (:0 .ai,,I ,iu Jim tnur, r at: ~,~ clJJ'rmtu locat, ion. EXHIBIT 12 Gc,'.ge ~ ict. c Kenneth 'l'el¢l'dmne t~161 '/,~ lqlR I'I,ANNIN(; llljAltl) {llll:ll('l7, TOVvN (~t': SOU 111~ ~,1 l ~ CERTIFT F:D [.IAIL RETU~T t~ECEIPT REQUESTED March ?',, 1 SC()I'I L. IIArRI$ l.wn Ilall. 53005 Mai. P.t). lh',x 1170 ~.mtmld. New Y,ndc I lel?l Fnx {~161 765.1R23 Eric J. nre~sler Wickham, Wickham ~ Bressler, Hain P-:~4, P.O. Box 14P4 Hattit,~,!k, UY 11952 P. C. RE: K("II~!} 100(! 140-2-16 Dear {.Ir. Bressler: Th}r, letter is in reference to your I~'ter of Hatch 7, 1991, r~questtng a waiver of site plat! t,"P~r~mr-rlts for the above referenced property. You ~tate in yaur letter that l:be p,,'mi.o.r,~ liar. not changed i~ ten %,oars and ~hat there has never bo,,t~ a problem in connect)on with ~he use of the property. En,:losed tS a letter that was sent: ~" your cliet~t on ~eptemb,.r 20, 1988 reque~ttn~ co~plJ, nnc,. '.:it-h ntte plan and vartan?,, requirements. A m~t:e plan application was sent to Yr,ur c].]e~lt on February 4, 19gl . If t'he Planning Board tins not recoi..,,d l-he si.t~e plan, fee, and the applicntiotl within thirty rt;,y~ ~f tile da~e of letter, the matter wtl] be turI~ed over t,, the OrdJl~ance Inspect,~r for further action. is requesi, ~ %, the reoso,~ thor locatI, ~, EXHIBIT 13 MARIE ONGIONI CARMELA L BORRELLI ONGIONI & BORRF, 1,1J 288 PANTiGO ROAD EAST HAMPTON, NY 11937 TEL (516) 324 8282 EAX (516) 324 8283 April 5, 1994 Town Board Planninq Board Building Dept-Enforcement Officer Town Hall Main Road Southo]d, N.Y. 11971 Re: American Armou~ed Foundation, Inc. "Tank Museum" SCTM #1000-140-2-16 Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed please find a copy of my c]ients' memo in opposition to the application of the above entity pending before the Zoning Board of Appeals. P]ease note that tile applicant continues to violate the zoning code and the conditions of the zone chanqe granted in 1993. ]! is respectfnlly requested that appropriate action be taken with regard to these v~olations. Very truly yours, CLB/dms cc: Zoning Board of Appeals 049883 JUDITH T. TERRY, TOWN CLERK RECEIP'~ Town of Southold SouthoId, New York 11971 DATE Phone: 516 - 765 -1801 RECE,VEO0~: 5U~-~'. ~ ( ~. c~,--, r,g / [] CASH BY: BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOI_D In lhe Mailer or the Petition of : American Armoured Foundation, Inc.: : to the Board of Appeals of the Town of 5outhold TO: NOTICE TO ADJACE~IT PROPERTY OWNER See reverse for addresses and attached for proof of mailing YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: 1 Tha/at Le f th d - ~intentiono eun ersigned to petition the Boardof Appeals of the Town of $outhold to request a~(Special Exception) (Special Permit) (Other) [circle choice] ~ To allow siqnaqe on fences to remain at present locations '~ 1. ~ 2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des- cribed as follows: SCTM~ 100/140/2/16 J 3. Thattheproperty whichisthesub~ctofsuchPetitionislocatedinthefollowingzoningdistrict: Hamlet Business 4 Thath~suchPelition theundersignedwillrequestthefollowingrelief: oermisslon to maintain 2 signs - one on Love Lane entrance fence and one on North Road (RTE 48) fence $. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to tile relief sought by the under- signed are Article IX Section [ ] S t~on 280-A, New York Town Law for approval of access over right(s)-of-~way. 6. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will be filed in Ihe 5outhold Town Clerk's Office at Main Road, Southold, New York and you may then and there examine the same during regular office hours. (516) 765-1809. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the Board of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long Island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the · right to appear and be heard at such hearing. '~' · Dated: ' · ... American Armoured Foundation, 'I'nc. Petitioner Wm. Gasser, President 0wne~s'Names:_Wm. Gasser . Post Office Address 2383 Fifth Avenue 1~nkonkoma , NY 11779 Tel. No. ( 516 ) 588-0033 [Copy of sketch or plan showing proposal purposes,] to be attached for convenience I Gary & Gall Doroski PROOF OF MAltING OFNOTICF ATTACH CERTIFIED ,~L~IL RECEIPTS ADDRESS P.O. Box 780 Cutchogue, N.Y. 11935 Irene Wells Hawkins P.O. Box 218 Love Lane ,~ Mattituck, N..Y. 11952 Mr. & Mrs. Ammirati 730 Love Lane Mat~ituck, N.Y. 11952 Long Island Railroad / 755, 693 933 Rec.e. ipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail (See Reverse) Stre and No P , State and ZIP Code STATE OFNEW~ COUNTY OFSUFFOLK) Z 755 693 934 Receipt to~ '----.~ed Mail lance Coverage provided Isa for international Mail )elivered 1994 ~ Station .1 ~,N.Y. ;' 755 693 93~ Receipt for Certified Mail No Insurance Coverage F~ovided .~,A Do not use for International M~[~ Z 755 693 936 ~ Recej,.pt ~or . ~ffmd Matt · ~ Ce Coverage provide9 . residing at ~c~'.~ ~ "~ ~ t~ ~'~ '~- "-'~' , being duly sworn, deposes an~says that on the __~' day .... deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the re- verse side hereof, directed to each of the a§ove-named persons ,at the addresses set opposite their respective names; that the addresses set opposite the names of said persons are the addresses of said persons as shown on the current assessment roil of thc Town of Sou~hold; that said Notices were mailed at thc United States Post Of- fice at (certified) (registered) mail. Sworn to before me this day o~ /¥A~/?,A, , ~ , 19 ~/ ; that said Notices were mailed to ea~,xof said persons by · (this side does not have to be property 9wners.)' completed on form transmitted to adjoining _BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOI_D Jn Iht Mailer ol the Petition of Araer~icnn Armoured Foundation~ I_nc.~ to the Board of Appeals of the Town of 5outhold ...: TO: See NOTICE TO ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER reverse for addresses and attached for proof of mailing YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE: - ' hal' ' e intenti0n of the undersigned to petition the Boardof Appeals of the Town of Soothold 1.T~,r · ...... :-n% tS,ecialPermit) (other) [circle cho~.ce] to request a 4~_r~_an_~J'mpec'a' ~xL~l~,,~, , , ~ . ' To allow ~n a% r~ent ~~ '~ 2. That lhe property which ~s the subject of the Petition Js located adjacent to your property and J$ des- crJbed as follows: ~ SCTM~ 100/140/2/16 ~ 3. That the property which is the subject of such. Petition is located in the following zoning district: Hamlet Business ~ 4' That h~, such Petitlun, the undersigned will request the following relief: ~ermtss~ on . to maintain 2 signs ~ one on Love Lane entrance fence and one on ' North Road (RTE 48) fenc · roy slonS of the Southold Town Zoning Code appl cab e.to the relief sought by signed are Article -~ ~(~ Sectn. on / (3 ~) ~ 7'/ --' ~ . ' ' [ ] Section 280-/%, Hew York Town Law for approval of a~cess over r~gh:(s)-of-w~y. v da's from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will ' 6. That w~thm f~ e ¥ .... ,~ ~,_... v~b ~.,~ v u av then and there be filed in Ihe Southold Town Clerk's Off,ce at Mom Roao. >outnmo, ~c~,. .......om ~ . examine the same during regular office hours. (5].6) 765-].809. .. 7. That before the relief sought may be granted, a public hearing must be held on the matter by the 8o,~rd of Appeals; that a notice of such hearing must be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in the Suffolk Times and in the Long island Traveler-Mattituck Watchman, newspapers published in the Town of Southold and designated for the publication of such notices; that you or your representative have the ..,. right to appear and be heard at such hearing. ' :- . Dated: American Armoured Foundabion, 'I'nc. petitioner Wm. Gasser, President 0woods'Names: Wm. Gasser . PostOfflce Address 2383 Fifth Avenue gnnknnkoma. NY 11779 Tel. No. ( 516 ) 588-0033 Gary & Gall Doroski PROOF OF MAILINC, OF N(TTICF ATTACH CERTIFIED .MJ~IL RECEIPTS AODRESS P.O. Box 780 Cutchogue, N.Y. 11935 Irene Wells Hawkins Mr. & Mrs. Ammirati Long Island Railroad P.O. Box 218 Love Lane ,: Mattituck, N..Y. 11952 730 Love Lane Mat~ituck, N.Y. 11952 Jamaica Station Room 511 Jamaica, N.Y. 11400 C STATE OF NEW YORK ) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ; being duly sworn, deposes and says lhal on the ~ g{~- of ' ~ ~:~ ,19 ~ ,deponenlmailedatruecopyoflheNoticese~ forlhonthere- verse side hereof, direcled ~o each of the above-named persons Ot the addresses set opposile their r~pective names; lbat the addresses sel opposile Ihe names of said persons are ~he addresse~ of said persons as shown on the curre~ass~ssment~roll of Ihe Town of Soulhold; lhal said Notices were mailed at the Uniled Slates Pos~ Of- 'rice al L~e-)~ I ~ ' ;that said Nolices were mailed to each of said persons by · (certi~fied) (registered) mail. Sworn to before me this . · No. 4:4~9-sulhl,~C°untY Commission Expi~e~ NOV. 7, L9 APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard R Goehrin~er, Chairman Ser~e Doyen, Jr. James Diaizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Richard C. Wiltnn Telephone (516) 765-1809 Update for the File BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 4/6/94 3:15 p.m. - Building Inspector Gary Fish confirmed that Mr. and Mrs. Gasser have moved the tower structure which will not be located in a front yard. Also, he confirmed that the owners have been making every effort to comply with any other provision of law, and that it is expected that an updated Certificate of Occupancy for the museum would follow the processing of final site plan approval before the Planning Board. At this time the Planning Board has, by letter dated 1991. held the site plan in abeyance pending the outcome of the sign application. Also, please note that signs located on fences are normally permitted. (100-81C).