HomeMy WebLinkAbout3552MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 $~3LITt, q~LD, L.I.. N.Y.
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Appeal No. 3552
Application ~ated August 27, ]986
TO: Stephen R, Angel, Esq.- [Appellant(s)]
a~ Attorn'ey_fo~ JOHN'SENKO
Esseks, Hefter_~ Asgel
108:East Main Street, Bo~"279
Riverhead; NY 11901
At a Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals held on ~eb~uary 5, 1~87,
the above appeal was considered, and the action indicated below was taken
on your [ ] Request for Variance Due to Lack of Access to Property
New York Town Law, Section 280-a
[ ] Request for Special Exception under the Zoning Ordinance
Article , Section
[X] Request for Variance to the Zoning Ordinance
Article VII, Section 100-?0 and
Article Vt, Section 100-62(B)
[ ] Request for
Application of JOHN SENKO for a Variance to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article_.VII, Section~-lO~n~ Article VI, Section 100-62(B), for
permission to establish ~hopping center use in this "B-I" General
Business Zoning District with insufficient lot area at 49295 Mai~
Road (a/k/a Ackerly Pond Lane), Southold, NY; County Tax Map Dis-
trict 1000, SectiQn 70, Block 07, Lot O1, containing 30,084 sq. ft.
WHEREAS, public hearings were held on October 2, t986, Octo-
ber 22, 1986, November 20, ~.986, December 11, 1986, and concluded
on January 8, 1987, in the Matter of the Application of JOHN
SENKO under Appeal No. 3552; and
WHEREAS, at ~aid hearing all those who desired to be heard
were heard and their testimony recorded; and
WHEREAS, the board has carefully considered all testimony and
documentation submitted concerning.this applicatisn; .and
WHEREAS, the board members h~ve personally viewed and are
familiar with the premises ~n question, its present zoning, and
the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, the board made the following findings of fact:
1. The premises in question is located along the north
(northwest)' side of the Main Road (State Route 25), and along
the south (southwest) side of Ackerly Pond Lane, in the
Hamlet of Southold, Town of Southold~ further identified
on the Suffolk County Tax Maps as District lOOO, Section 70,
Block 7, Lot 1.
2. ~y this application, appellant requests a Variance
from the requirements of Article VI~. Section 100-62, for
permission to establish shopping-center use for multiple retail
or office business on a 9arqgl Qf land havin§ an insufficient
.(CONTINUED ON FAGE TWO)
DATED: February 5, 1987.
For~ ZB4 (~ev, t2/81)
CHAIRMAN, SOUTHOLD TOWN ZONING BOARD
~- APPEALS
Page 2 Appeal No. 3552
Matter of JOHN.iSENKO
Decision Rendered February 5,
1987
lot area of 30,084 sq. ft., or .69 of an acre. The subject
premises is a corner lot as defined by Section lO0-13 o~ the
Zoning Code.
3. The subject premises is located in the "B-l" General
Business Zoning District and is improved with: (a)_.one
l½ -story building containing a floor area of 816± sq.
ft. situated a distance of 14.8 f~et from its closest point
from the southwest corner o~ the.premises, and (b) 24,4'
x 16.3' accessory one-story frame._garage. The accessory garage
structure is to be removed..entirely. The existing 1½-s~ory .
frame structure would be used for.~!professional oK busines~
office" use only, as regulated by the zoning provisions.
4. PropoSed in addi{ion to the use of the existing
1½~story ~ra~e structure for "professional or business office~'
use is ~ 3000 sq. ft. two,story building ~ith multiple r~tail'
and/or office u~es, t500 total..floor ar~a on eac~ floor of
which 130Q maximum i~ for office_or retail sales a~ea. The
total ~ffice area propQsed f~r the existing 1½-story ~rame
structure is 700 sq. ~t. The setbacks of the ~ew building
will be a minimum Q~ 55 feet from ~each property line ~long
the Main Road and Ackerly Pond Eane. The number_of pa~ki~g
spaces provided for the~e~.uses is 24, and the entrance an~
exit ~riveways'wi~l be only along Ackerly Pond Lane (a/k/a
Lower~Road),.and not along the Main Road.._It i~the
recommendation of this Board that the number of parking
spaces be increased to 42, to provide parking ~or the
handicapped in addition to the.regular parking sp~aces required.
5. 'Article VI, Section 100~2, Subsection B,' (and
Articl~ VII, Se. ction 100~70, ~ub~ection A(1)[d~), requires
a minimum lot area of..one acre, or ~3,560 sq, ft. fo~ a
"building or combination of buildings containi'~g.retail
stores, mercantile establishments, Qffices, banks and
financial institutions, commonly kno~Q as shopping centers."
6. It is noted ~hat exi~ing off of Ack~rly! Pond Lane
onto the Main Road is very difficult ~nd is part!y~due to
the angles of the highway in both ~he east and wei~t directions.
This b~rd has recommended a "One-Way Street" at !~his inter-
section prohibiting exitfng o~f the south end of iAckerly PoQd
Lane to ~.he Town H~.ghway Department (see our let_t!er da~d
October 29, 1986, aQ.d response to us dated No~embier 14, 1986).
This board dQes not have jurisdiction over the town or s~ate
roads in question, but will continue to urge "no exiting" at
this inte~sectios.
7. The amount of relief requested by this application
is 13,476 sq. ft., or 20% of the Kequirements. It ~s the
opiDion of this b~ard that ~he relief requested is not sub-
stantial ~nder the circumstances. I~ is_however the posit~on
of this_board that limitations a~e necessary at this time
concerning the poin% of access (only along ~ckerty Pond
Lane as s~own) ~nd for..the number O~ business use~ and
occupancies, iAny increase in the number of business uses
and occupancies would be prohibited without this Variance.
In considerin§ this appeal, the board also finds an~
determines: (a) that the variation is not ~ubs~antial in
relation to the requirements; (~) there will be no effect,
Page 3 Appeal No. 3552
Matter of J.OHN SENKO
Decision Rendered February 5, 1987
if the variance is allowed~ of'increased population density~
(C) there will be hQ.substantial change ~n the character of
the neighborhood or substantial detriment to adjoining proper-
ties; (d) the difficulty cann.ot be obviated by a method
other than a variance; (e) the circumstances Qf the property
are unique; (f) in view of the manner in which the diffi-
culties.arose and in considering all the above factors,
the interests of justice will be served by allowing a
variance as conditionally noted below~
Accordingly, on ~otion by Mr, Goehringer, seconded
by Mr. Grigonis,_it was
RESO~VED, to GRANT a variance for permission to
establish multiple uses on this 30,0~4 sq. ft. parcel in
this "B-l" General Business Zoning District..und~r Appeal
No. 3552 in the Matter of the Appl]ication of JOHN SENKO,
permitting the construction of a 3,000 sq. ft.~ twO-story
building as shown on Site Plan dated August ll, 1986
prepared by Garrett A. Strap.g, Architect, for~a maximum
of five of~iQe or retail uses, SUBJECT'TO THE FOLLOWING
CONDITIONS:
~. ~No access shall be permitted along Route 25.
Egres~_and ingress' shall, be only along A~kenly Pond Lane
(not ~loser than l~O f~et from_the.~.cocner). _Such egress
and ingress must be wi_de enough to be suitable for ~ruck
deliveries, etc
2. All existing signs (affixed to building~ etc.)
shall be removed. Only one wal]_~ign and only o~e ground
sign shall be permitt~ on the ~entire premis~ (as
regulate~..by Section 100~62).
3. Minimum 12" by 24" sign shall be placed upon
the premises along the southerly area.~near the Main Road
to read "NO PARKING."
4, Evergreen screening (shrubbery) shall be placed
upon th~ premises along the ~.outherly acea near the Main
Road, commencing at the southwest cQrner and extending a
distance of 100 feet, at a minimum height of three feet.
Such screening shall be maintained at all times.
5. Sit~ Plan-approval by the Planning Board (with
recommended 42 ~arking spaces)~ Which~ust include the
following as regulated by Section lO0-112(K)[1 & 2] of
the Zoning Code:
Screening from adjoining residential lot
with a substantial wall, ~ence O[ thick hedge, not l~ss
than three feet n~? m~e ~han eight feet in height.~.
6. Not more than one professional or busi~'ness office
in the existing l~-story frame building, and no retail~
unless applica~io.n.for re-.consideriation is filed and
approved by both the Planning Board and the B~ard of ~ppeals.
7. ~ot more tha~ five-office or retail uses in the
proposed 3,000 sq. ft. building~ ~unless an application for
Page 4 - Appeal No. 3552
Matter of JOHN~SENKO
Decision Rendered February
5, 1987
re-consideration is filed and approved by both the Planning
Board and Board of Appeals.
8. Any future expansion and new construction must be
approved by the Board of Appeals and the Planning Board by
formal appl.ication (prior tO e~pansion or construction).
Vote-of the Board: Ayes: Messrs. Goehrin§er, Grigonis,
Doyen, Douglass and Sawicki... This ~esolution was duly adopted.
February _20, 1987
lk
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN,
Law and the Code of the Town
hearings will be held by the
the So~thold Town Hall, 'Main
Meeting commencing
and as follows:
pursuant to Section 267 of the Town
of Southold, the following public
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS as
Road, Southol~d~ NY at a Regular
at~7:30 p,m. on WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 22, 1986
7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 3538 - Reconvene Hearing - JEFFREY
BETTANCOURT.
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3464 TED DOWD. Variances to the
Zoning Ordinance, -Articles III, Section 1-00-31, and XI, Section
100-11'9.2 for permission to locate new si-ngl-e-family dwelling:
(~a) with an insufficient frontyard setbac~ '~b) with an
insufficient sideyard setback, ~(c) with an insufficient rear-
yard'setback, ' (d) with total-lot coverage in excess of
maximum-permitted 20%;(e).with insufficient setback from
tidal wetlands. Location of Property: '350 Rabbit Lane, East
Marion; County Tax Map
7~~.'45 p.m. Appeal
7:50 p.m. A~eal
Parcel No. 1000-31-18-8.
No. 3552 ~ jOHN :sEN~o (by G. Stran
No. 3567 ~ T~'OM'~';~C'~HA~. ' Variance "to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-119.2 for permission
to construct addition to dwelling within 75 feet of wetlands.'and
highwater mark along the Wes~Side of West Creek Avenue~
Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-]03-13-10,
7:55 p.m, Appeal No. 3563 :'RITA F.' GLEDICH. Variances
to the Zoning Ordinance, Articles III, Section 100-31, Bulk
Schedule, and XI, Section 100-119.2, for permiss'ion to construct
dpen deck and dwelling addi'tions with: (a) total lot coverage
in excess of maximum-permitted 20% of lot area, and (b) an
insufficient setback from tidal wetlands and high~ater mark
along Eugene's Creek, at the East Side of Oak Street, Cutchogue, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-136-1-46.
8:05 p.m. Appeal No. 3550 JOSEPH AND LINDA SCHOENSTEIN.
Variances to ~he Zoning Ordinance, Arti-cles: (a) VI, Section
100-60 for permission to expand nonconforming use of welding
business in this "B-Light Business" Zoning District; (b) XI,
Section 100-119.2(B) for permission to construct new building
Page 2 - Notice of Hearings
Regular Meeting - October 22, 1986
Southold Town Board of Appeals
and expand nonconforming welding business use within 75 feet of
wetlands area, at premises located along the south side of Main
Road, Greenport, NY; County Tax Map Parcels No. 1000-53-2-12~ 132
15.1 (15); Lots 172, 173, 174, Peconic Ba~ Estates Map No~ 658, and
Map No. 1124 as Amended.
The Board of Appeals will hear at said time and place all
persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each of the
above hearings. Written comments may also be submitted prior to
the conclusion of the subject hearing. ~For more information,
please call 765-1809.
Dated: October 2, 1986.
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD
TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
GERARD P, GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski, B~ard Secretary
~opies to the following on or about 10/9/86:
Mr. J. Bettanc~ur~, 417 West 21st Street, NY, NY lOOll
Mr. T. Dowd, Box 282, Rabbit Lane, East Marion, NY I1939
Mrs. Harriett Moor, 34-20 83rd St., Jackson Heights, NY t1372
Mr. G.A. Strang, Agent for John
Mr. J. Wickham, Agent for Thomas Wickham,
Mrs. Rita F.-~ledich, 83 Algonquin Avenue,
S.R. Angel, Esq., for the ~pplicants, Box
J.K. McLaughlin, Esq.,
Senko~ Box 1412,'So~thol'd,'NY 1!971
Main Road, Cutchog~e, NY 1i93~
Massapequa, NY 11758
279, 108 E. ~ain St, RiYerhead
~repnesenting opposition), 828 Front St, Greenport
Suffolk Times~ Inc.
L.I. Traveler-Watchman, Inc.
Town Clerk Bulletin Board
ZBA Dfftc~ Bulletin Board
ZBA Individual Files
ZBA Members
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN~ pursuant to Section 267 of the Town
Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following public
hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARDOF APPEALS at
the Southold Town Hall, Main Roads Southold, NY at.a Regular
Meeting commencing at'7:30 p,m. on THURSDAY, 'NOVEMBER 20~ 1986
~and as follows: ....
7:35 p.m. Appeal No,'3573 ~ MARGARET AND JOSEPH BEST.
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance~ Arti'cte III, Section 100'32
for permission to locate accessory garage structure in the
frontyard area at premises located on the south side of a
private right-of-way extending off the east side of Camp Mineola
Road, Mattituck, ~NY; County Tax-Map Parcel No. 1000~123-06-17,'
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3571 z MARGARET AND JOSEPH BEST.
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100Zt19.2
for permission to cohstruct addition at-the southerly side of
existing dwelling with insufficient setback from the'-bulkhead
along tidal water area and insufficient setback from the rear
property line at premises located on the south side of a private
right-of-way extending off the east side of Camp Mineola Road,
Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-123-06-17.
7:45 p.m. Appeal No.- 3568 ~ STAMATIOS AND ALENI RAPANAKIS.
Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, to es%abli~h 6ne
accessory apartment in the.existing dwelling structure in
accordance wf~ch the requirements of Article III, Section lO0-30(B)
subsection [15]. Location of Property: 2030 Boisseau Avenue,
Southold, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 55, Block 6,
Lot 40.
7:50 p.m. Appeal No. ~569 - BOATMEN'S HARBOR MARINA.
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-119~2
for permission to construct addition to existing dwelling with
an insufficient setback from existing bulkhead. Location of
Property: 3350 West Creek Avenue, Cutchog~e, NY; County Tax
Map District 1000, Section 1t0, Block Ol, Lot 12.
7:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3572 - MICHAEL AND JOYCE MATTES. Special
Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-30-
(B)[16] for permission to establish "Bed and Breakfast Use," "an
owner-occupied building, other than a hotel, where lodging and
breakfast is provided for not more than six casual, transient
roomers, and renting of not more than three rooms. Location of
Property: 50 Luthers Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map
District 1000, Section 113, Block 03, Lot 7.
8:00 p.m. Appeal No. 3565 - FRANK FIELD REALTY INC.
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-3
Page 2 Notice of Hearings
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Regula~ Meeting - November 2Q, 1986
for permission to establish two-family dwelling use on a parcel
of land containing less than 160,000 sq. ft~~ in area, 270 ft.
lot width, 400 ft. lot depth, ~nd With i~sufficient frontyard,-
sideyard, and rearyard setbacks. Location of Property: 320 Linnett
Street, Greenport, NY~ Map of Greenport Driving Park ~369, Lots
#71 and ~72; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 48, Block
8~05 p~m.. Appeal No. 3566-S'E. 'FRANK FIELD REALTY INC. Special
Exception.to the Zo]ning Ordinance, Article'~III,-'Section lO0-30(B)
for permission to establish two-family use at premises referred to
as 320 Linnett Street, Greenport; NY; Map of Greenport Driving
Park #369, Lots ~71 and"#72; County Tax Map D~strict 1000, Section
48, Block 2~ Lot 36.1.
8:10 p.m. Appeal No. 3570-SE.~ ~PAUL HENRY. Special Exception
to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III,'~Section t00-30(B)~6] for
permission to establish "Bed and Breakfast Use~" "an owner-occupied
building, other than a hotel, where lodging and breakfast is
provided for not more than six casual, transient roomers, and
renting of not more than six casual,"transient roomers, and renting
of not more than three rooms. Location of Property: 50 Luthers
Road, Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 113,
Block 03, Lot 7.
8:15 p.m. Appeal No, 3576 - BARBARA D. SCHRIEVER. Appli~cation
to withdraw V~ariance conditionally approved under Appeal No: 3393
on September 26, 1985, and to reinstate in full the 1969 Variance
conditionally approved under Appeal No. 1260, permitting the use
of a 5,600 sq. ft. existing building for storage and repair of
contractor's machinery and equipment. Location of Property:
West Side of Tabor Road, Orientl NY; County Tax Map Di'strict 1000,
Section 18, Block 05, Lot 12. "B-light" Business Zoning Distric~q~
8:20 p.m. Appeal No. 3552 JOHN SENKO. Reconvene hea~ing
concerning Variance for shopping center use in this B-1 General
Business Zoning District containing 30,084 sq. ft, in lot area.
Location of Property: Intersection of Ackerly Pond Lane and North
Side of Main Road, Southold; County Tax Map DJ'strict 1000, Section
70, Block 7, Lot 1.
8:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3574 Z'DR. JOHN LORETO. Variance to
the Zoning-Ordinance, Article III, Sections 100-30 and 100~32,
and Article XI, Section 100~119.2, for permission to construct
P'age 3 - Notice of Hearings
SouthOld Town Board of Appeals
Regular Meeting November 20,
1 986
storage building with an insufficient setback from bluff along
Long Island Sound for storage'purposes accessory and incidental
to the existing dwelling adjacent--to th~se premises. Location
of Properties: Lots ~3 and #2, Map of Vista Bluff #5060;
North Side of Glen Court, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map District
1000, Section 83, 'Block 1~ Lotsi9 and 8.
8:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3562 ~ ANA G~ STILLO. Variances:
(1) to the-Zoning.Ordinance, Article ~I, Section 100~31, for
approval of insufficient lot area, Width'and depth-of three
parcels in-this pending Minor Subdivision, and (2) to New York
Town Law, Section 280-~ for approval of access over private~-
right-of-way extending from the north side of Main Road to the
premises in question, bocation of Property: At the north end
of private right-of-way (i~onglands--of-B. Brokaw), North Side
of Main Road, Orient, NY; County Tax Map District lO00, Section
14, Block 2, Lot 26, containing 3.2 acres total.
9:05 p.m. Appeal No. 3519 STEVEN SANDERS & ANO. Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for approval
of insufficient lot area, width and setbacks in this pending
set-off division of land. Location of Property: Private ~
Right-6f-way located-off the north side-of'Bay View Avenue,
Mattituck, NY; County Tax Map District 1000, Section 106,
Block 06, Lot 36.
The Boa[d of Appeals will hear at said time and place all
persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each of the
above hearings. Written comments may also be submitted prior
to the conclusion of the subject hearing. For more information,
please call 765-1809.
Dated: November 3, 1986.
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN
BQARD OF A~PEALS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski, Board Secretary
ATTENTION NEWSPAPERS: Please publish'THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 1986
and forward 13 ~ffidavits of publication on or before Novembec 17,
to: Board of Appeals, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971.
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVE~, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town
Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following public
hearings will be held by the SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS at
the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY at a Regular
Meeting on Thursday, DecemDer~.ll, ~986,..at the followfng times:
7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 3216 EUGENE DAVISON. Variance
the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section lO0~30(A)[1] for
permission to establish second dwelling unit upon 9.8± acre
parcel over existing horse stable. Location of Property:
South Side of Sound Avenue, Mattituck, NY; Lot #4, Minor
Subdivision of Strawberry Fields, which received Sketch Plan
approval July 8, 1985 by the Town Planning Board; County Tax
Map Parcel No. 1000-t21~-3-5 (containing 12.6& acres).
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3577 FRANK AND DELORES DAVIES.
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Sec.tion 100-32
for permission to replace accessory shed in th~:north sideyard
area at 2285 Pine Tree Road, Cutchogue, NY; Lot #15, Map of
Nassau Farms filed March 28, 1935; County Tax Map Parcel
No. 1000-104-3-2.
~0
7:45 p.m. Appeal No. 3578 - ARTHUR ESSLINGER. Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-119.2 for
permission to locate accessory storage shed within 75 feet of
existing bulk h~-ad and wetlands area at 1515 Arshamomaq. ue Avenue~
So~thold, NY; Lot #21~ Map of Beixedon Estates; County Tax
Map Oarcel No. 1000-66-3-11.
7:50 p.m.
Appeal No. 3579 - CHARLES AND SANDRA BLAKE.
Variance for Approval of Access pursuant to New Yor~ Town
Law, Section 280-a from the east side of South Harbor lane
along Old Woods Path (Private Road #10), to premises known
and referred to as 695 Old Woods Path, Southold, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-8'7-1-23.7.
7:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3580 - NICHOLAS BABALIS. Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 100-31 for
permission to construct new dwelling with insufficient northerly
side yard and insufficient total sideyards at 3360 Rocky Point-
Road, East Marion, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-2.l-04-09.
8:00 p.m. Appeal No. 3572 : MICHAEL AND JOYCE MATTES~
Special Exception-Bed and Breakfast (reces:sed from-ll/20~86).
Page 2 - Notice of Hearings
Seuthold Town Board of Appea~s
Regular Meeting December li~
1986
8:10 p.m. Appeal No. 3557 - ROBERT G. EGAN. Variance to
amend Conditional Approval Rendered 11/3/86 under Appeal No~ 3557
to allow reconstruction of dwelling with insufficient setbacks
upon foundation as exists at 5 and 12 feet, rather than 7 and 12
feet, at 330 Knoll Circle, East Marion, N¥~ ~'Map of Section Twos
Gardiners Bay Estates,~' Subdivision Lots 27 and part of 28; County
lax Map District 1000, Section 37, Block 5, Lot
8:15 Appeal No. 3552 - SENKO. Variance for ~
p.m.
JO___HN
shopping center use in this B-1 General Business Zone with
30,084 sq. ft. Of lot area (recessed from 11/20/86)~
The :Board of Appeals will hear at said time and place all
persons or repre~entatiyes degiring to be heard in each of the
above hearings. Written comments may also be submitted prior~
to the conclusion of the ~ubject hearing. For more information,
please call 765-1809.
Dated: November 20, 1986.
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD
TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski, Board Secretary
Copies to the following on-or 'about 12/t/86:
Mr. Eugene Dav~son, Box 248-A, RD #1, Sound Ave, Mattituck, NY ii952
Mr. and Mrs. Frank Davies, ll3 Lone Oak Path, Cutchogue, NY 1~935
Mr. Arthur Esslinger, Box 1~2~ ~outhold, NY 11971
Mr. and Mrs. Charles Blake, 695 Old Woods Pa{h Southold NY 11971
Mrs. P.C. Moore, Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq.,' Main Road, Southol~, NY 11971
as Agent/Attorney for Nicholas Babalis
Mr. and Mrs. Michael Mattes, 50 Luthers Road, Box 831, Mattituck, NY i1952
Mr. and Mrs. Donald Shaw, Breakwater Road, Mattituck, NY 11952
Mr. Garrett A. Strang, Architect, for R.G. Egan, Box 1~2, Southoid !197i
Stephen R. Angel, Esq. (for Senko), Box 279~ Riverhea~, NY llgO1
Daniel C. Ross,. Esq., Box 1424, Mattituck, NY 11952
Suffolk T?mes (personal delivery 12/2/86)
L.I. Traveler (personal delivery 12/2/86)
Town Clerk Bulletin Board
Z.B.A. Office Bulletin Board
Building Department
Board Members
Individual ZBA Files
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267 of the Town
Law and the Code of the Town of Southold, the following public
hearings wilt be held by the Southold Town Board of Appeals at
the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, NY at a Regular
Meeting on THURSDAY, JANUARY 8, 1987 at the following times:
7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 3587 - ROBERT AND EILEEN M, JOHNSON.
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-119.2
for permission to construct addition to existing dwelling with
an insufficient setback from tidal water area at premises known
as 430 Corey Creek Road, Southold, NY; District lO00, Section
87, Block 5, Lot 3.
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3594 - ANNE C. MASON. Variance to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article XI, Section 100-119.2 for permission
to construct deck addition to existing dwelling with an insuffi-
cient setback from tidal wetland area at premises known as 1250
Lupron Point, Mattituck~ NY~ District 10002 Section 115, Block
II, Lot 12.
7:45 p.m. Appeal No. 3585SE - ALVIN AND PATRICIA COMBS.
Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section
lO0-30(B) for permission to establish "Bed and Breakfast Use,
an Owner-Occupied Building, other than a hotel,where lodging
and breakfast is provided for not more than six casual,
transient roomers, and renting of not more than three rooms."
Location of Property: 2500 Peconic Lane,; Peconic, NY; County
Tax Map Parc6~No. 1000-74-03-24.2.
7:50 p.m. Appeal No. 3588SE ' MARY O. MOONEY-GETOFF.
Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section
lO0,30(B) for permission tO establish "Bed and Breakfast Use,
an Owner-Occupied Building, other than a hotel, where lodging
and breakfast is provided for not more than six casual,
transient roomers, and renting of not more than three rooms."
Location of Property: 1475 Waterview Drive, Southold, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-78-007-20.
7:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3591 PAUL STOUTENBURGH, JR.
Variance to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section
t00-32 for permission to locate accessory windmill towelr
in excess of maximum-permitted 18 feet height requirement,
at 4015 Skunk Lane, Cutchogue, NY; County Tax Map Parcel
No. 1000-98-1-6.
Page 2 , Notice of Hearings
Regular Meeting of January 8, 1987
Southold Town Board of Appeals
8:00 p.m. Appeal No. 3583 ~ FREDERICK AND HELEN HRZBOK.
Variances to the Zoning Ordinance, Articles: (1) iii, Section
100-31 for insufficient southerly side yard and total side
yards, and (2) XI, 'Section 100-119.2 for insufficient setback
from existing bulkhead along Arshamomaque Pond, for this
proposal to construct garage addition to existing dwelling,
at 90 Carole Road, Southold, NY; County Tax Map Parcel
No. 1000-52-2-4.
8:05 p~m. Appeal No. 3461 ~ HELMUT HASS. Variances to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article VII, Sections: (1) lO0-71, Bulk
Schedule, for insufficient lot area and lot width; (2)
lO0-70(A) establishing existing residential use as principal
use of proposed southerly parcel; (3) lO0-70(A) and 100-71
for approval of insufficient livable-floor area in the existing
dwelling use of proposed northerly parcel. Zoning District:
"B-l" General Business. Location of Property: 35350 County
Road 48, Peconic, NY; County Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-69-04-2.1.
~ 8:10 Appeal No.
p.m.
recessed from December ll, 1986).
center use in this "B-I" General
sq. ft. lot area.
3552 - JOHN SENKO. (Hearing "~
Variance for shopping-
Business Zone with 30,084
8:30 p.m. Appeal No. 3572SE - MICHAEL AND JOYCE MATTES.
(Hearing recessed from December ll, 1986). Special Exception
for Bed and Breakfast in existing building.
8:45 p.m. Appeal No. 3584SE - DONALD AND JOANNE RITTER.
Special Exception to the Zoning Ordinance, Article III~
Section lO0~30(B) (100-31) for permission to convert existing
one-family dwelling to a two-family dwelling. Location of
Property: 2585 Peconic Lane, Peconic, NY; County Tax Map
Parcel No. 1000-74-03-20.
The Board of Appeals will hear at said time and place
all persons or representatives desiring to be heard in each
of the above hearings. Written comments may also be submitted
prior to the conclusion of the subject hearing. For more
information, please call 765-1809.
Dated: December ll, 1986.
BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN
BOARD OF APPEALS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski, Board Secretary
Page 3 - Mailing List
Public Hearings January 8, 1987
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Copies by ma~:l to the following on or about 12/19/86:
Mr. and Mrs. Robert E. Johnson, 40-24 208th St., Bayside, NY 11361
Bob Koch & Son, for Anne C. Mason
Woodcliff Drive, Mattituck, NY 11952
Mrs. Anne C. Mason, 709 Vivienda West Blvd,
Venice, FL 33595
Mr. and Mrs, Alvin Combs, 2500 Peconic Lane, Peconic, NY 11958
Mrs. Mary J. Mooney-Getoff, Box 377, Southold, NY 11971
Mr. Paul Stoutenburgh, 4015 Skunk Lane, Cutchogue, NY 11935
Mrs. ?.C. Moore, Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq., Main Road, Southold, NY 11971
for Mr. and Mrs. Frederick Hribok
Samuel J. Glickman, Esq., ll4 Main Street, Greenport, NY 11944 '
for Mr. Helmut Hass
J. Kevin McLaughlin, Esq., 828 Front Street, Box 803, Greenport, NY 11944
for Mr. and Mrs. Donald Ritter
Stephen R. Angel, Esq., 108 E. Main St, Box 279, Riverhead, NY ll901
Daniel C. Ross, Esq., Main Road, Box 1424, Mattituck, NY 11952
Mr. Garrett A. Strang, R.A., Box 14t2, Southold, NY 11971
Barbara L. Coughlin, Esq., McNulty, Dipietro & Haefeli
130 Ostrander Avenue, Riverhead, NY 11901 for Mr. and Mrs. Mattes
Mr. and Mrs. Douglass Shaw, Breakwater Road, Mattituck, NY 11952
Mr. and Mrs. Henry Haan, 340 Breakwater Road, Mattituck, NY 11952
Mr. and Mrs. Michael Mattes, 50 Luther Road, Box 831, Mattituck 11952
Z.B.A. Members
Posted on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board 12/19/86
Z.B.A. Office Bulletin Board 12/19/86
Building Department 12/19/86
Suffolk Times 12/22/86
L.I. Traveler 12/22/86
' ' FORM NO. 3 ~
TOWN OF SOUTIrlOLD
BUILDING DEPARTMENT
TOWN CLERK'S OFFICE
SOUTHOLD, N.Y.
NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL
Date
~.~...~... ~ ~...~. ~
.~./.¢.<~ ........................
~ ~'~'''' "q' "¥"~' ~:'~' ~ ~"' r~ "
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that your application dated .. ~...ddt...'~. i .~..~ .... , 19, ~
~ous~ No. t Street Ham/et
County ~ax ~ap ~o. ~ooo sectio. .... m~ ~ ....mo~ .....m~ .....~t ...9. ~ ........
Subdivision ................. Filed Map No ................. Lot No ..................
is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds .O~T-~.' .~.....~....~ .¢-~.
,.~.:. ~.:.~>...~..~~.)~...~ .~.. ~...~.~. ~.~
........ : .............
Building Inspector
Rv 1/80
Examined ............. ., ................. ,
Approved ........................................ , 19 ........ Permit No. ~' / ~O -/ ~
S
Application No ............................
INSTRUCTiONS
aH This application must be compbtely filled in by typewriter or in ink und submitted in duplicate to the ~uitding
~nspector.
~ b. Pbt plan showing ~ocation of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or pub!it streets or
~freas, and giving o detailed description of Jcl/out of property must be drawn on the diagram which is part of ~'his application.
c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced b~fore issuance of Building Permit.
d. Upon epprova~ of this appJication, the J~piJding Inspector,v~4H issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such permit
shaft be kept on the premises av~ibbie for inspection throughout ~he pr~ress of the work.
:~. No building s~[I be occupied or used ~n whale or ~ part for any purpose whatever until a Ce~ificat~ of Occupancy
~all hove been granted by the Building Insp~tor.
~ APPLICATION IS H.EREBY ~DE to the Building Deportme~t for the issuance of a B~itdi~g Permit pursuant to the
~lding Zone Ordinance of the To~ of Southo[d, Suffolk County, New York, end other applicable Lows, Ordi~nces or
~ulahons, for the con.truct~on of bu,,dmgs, add,t~ons or aJteratmns, or for rem~vd, or demolmon, es hereto described.
~e.opp~Jc~nt agrees to comply w~th o[] applicable lows, ordinances, building code, housing code, and regulations.
Za~renee Li~so ~r
(Signature cf applicant, or nome, if o corporation)
(Address of applicant)
irate whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder.
............................................. ~r~e~. ..... 1~i~¢t e.~. ...........................................................................................................
qome of owner of premises . _~...~5~..~[~ .....................................................................................................
f:~opp[icont is a co,orate, s~gnature of duly authorized officer.
(Name and titb of corporate officer)
1. L~ation of land on which proposed work will be done. Map No.: ...... ~ ....................... Lot No.: ..... ~ ...........
Street a~d Number ......... ~..~.~o~..~.A~k~..~..~.~..~er..~ ....... ~ ............
S~te ex~st~ng use and occupancy o~ p~emises and infended use and occupancy o~ propos~ const~ct~om
b. ~ntended use and ~cup~n;,' ,.~eD~.O~..~,..~-~O~...~G,.~e~.~.~.--~o~...~~.~
4~
Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building ~ ................. Addition ...... ~f, ...... Alteration ...2:~ ..........
Repair .................. Removal .................. Demolition .................. Other Work (Describe) ........................................
Estimated Co~ .................... 't(~'(}(~)'"~' .................... J-ee (to be paid on fi!ing this application)
If dwetllng, number of dwe~lling units ....~:~1~ .............. Number of dwelling units on each floor ............................
If garage, number of cars .............................................................................................................................................
If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use ...... ~.~..,
Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front ...... ~,~ ................Rear ........... ~; ................ Depth .... .~ ...........
Neight ........................ Number of S~orles ..U~L~. ..................................... V .................................................................
Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front .................................... Rear ............................
Depth ................................Height ............................ Number of Stories ................................
Dimensions of entire new construction: Front ........... 6 ...................... Rear ....... ~ .................. Depth ..~0 .................
Height .................... Number of Stories ............ ~ ..................................................................................................
Size of lot: Front ........ ~?~. ......... Rear ....... ~.(m~ ..................... Depth .......... ~:.~.~ ..............
Dote of Purchase ........................................................Name of Former Owner ..... ~..~....~.g.~.:~. ................................
Zone or use district in which premises are situated ...... ,.m.j[~?...~].~.~ ...........................................................................
Does proposed construction violate any zoning Jaw~ ordinance or regulation? ......... ~ ..............................................
Neme of Owner of premises .~..~.~.M..~..?. ...................... Address ....~...~.~.~..h...O.,[[...~.. ..................... Phone No .....................
Name of Architect ...................................................... Address ............................................ Phone No .....................
Name of Contractor ...~ ....................................... Address ........ .~..~t.g.~,.~.. ................Phone No .....................
PLOT DIAGRAM
J Locete clearJ~ and distinctly ail buildings, whether existing or proposed, and indicate alt set-b~ck dimensions from
!Lc~Pe~ lines. Give street and bJock number or description according to deed, and show street names and indicate
;l'efl~er inter,or or corner Jot.
tj TE OF NEW YORK.
NTY OF .~$.~;[f}~. .............
................................... [~J~'~D~t~_.~s~f~ .................. ~,.being duly sworn, deposes and says that he is the appdcanf
(Name of individual signing application)
nemed~ He is the .................................. ~',l~e~. ..... b~'l'~kd~ ......................... .......... [~ .............................................
(Contractor, agent, corporate officer, etc.)
s~id owner or owners, and Js duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and fiJe
that all statements contained in this application are true to the best of his knowledge and beJief; and.
work wilJ be performed in the manner set forth in the appJicafion filed therewffh.
~rn to before me this
............ 26 ~9..V..~..
~dZABETH ANN
~]OTARY PUBLIC, Sta,'~ of
~g. 52-8125850,
~erm E,'(pire$ March 30,
York
(Signature of ap~
RECEIVED
AUG ~? 1986 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW 'YORK
Tm~,~r, ~'~['FS~-IAh~I~OM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR
APPEAL NO.
DATE ,~_ug..:....2...6. L,. _1..9., .8. 6
TO THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, N. Y.
l, (~) G.~.a..r.~.r.~e.~.t..t.~~~.A.~:~~~.s.~.t..r"a.~~n'~~~~.f..°.~.r.~~..s..e.~.n..k..°..~~f ...... .................................
Nome of Appellont Street and Number
............ i; .......... .S.,.o..u..,t:~.o..,];.G.. ........................................................ .N...e..w....~.°...r..k...HEREBY APPEAL TO
Municipality State
THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS FROM THE DECISION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR ON
APPLICATION DATED: 8/26/86FOR: Construction of New Building
WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED TO
, )
(X)
Nome of Applicant for permit
of
,, .5..4..,6..5...5.,, .M...a..$. ,n..,, .R..o. a 4 ...................... .s.p...q .%% .o...~.~., .............. ~..e..w. ,,..Y..o., .r..k. ...........
Street and Number Municipality State
PEF. MIT TO USE
PERMIT FOR OCCUPANCY
PER~IT TO BUILD
1 LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY "~`c~/~..~A.1~A~:~s~'A..q..~e.~.~:~f~.9.~.~A:"~.~t~.11~.°~.~` "B-1"
Street and 5~let Zone
OWNER(S): John Senko
Moo No. Lot No.
DATE PURCHASED: .....................
2 PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE APPEALED (Indicate the Article Section. Sub-
section aha Paragrapn of the Zoning Ordinance by number. Do not quote the Ordinance.)
Article VII , Section 100-70 (reference section 100-62 B)
(X)
TYPE OF APPEAL Appeal is made herewith for
A VARIANCE to the Zoning Ordinance or Zoning Map
A VARIANCE due to lack of access State of New York Town Law Chap. 62 Cons. Laws
Art. 16 Sec, 280A Subsection 3
4 PREVIOUS APPEAL A previous appeal (J~k(has not) been made with respect to this decision
of the Building Inspector or with respect to this property.
Such appeal was ( ] request for e special germit
! ) request for a variance
and was made in Appeal No ................................. Dated ......................................................................
REASON FOR APPEAL
) A Variance tO Section 280A Subsection 3
×) A Variance to the Zoning Ordinance
)
~s requested fo~ the reason that we would like to Construct a new 2600 sq. ft.
building in addition to the already existing 1100 sq. ft. bldg.
on the lot which is inadequate in area by stipulation 100-62 B
of the zoning code.
Fon~ ZB1 (Continue on other side)
REASON FOR APPEAL Continued
1 STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ORDINANCE would produce practicaldifficultiesorunneces-
ser~ HARDSHIPbecause
It would prohibit further development of a non-
conforming ( to section 100-62 B only ) use which is presensiy
under utilized. This is due solely to the definition of
"Shopping Center ". The proposed building meets all other
requirements of the zoning code.
The extent of the proposed expansion is minimal in comparison
to the size of the proper~y with the existing and proposed buildings
occupying only 8% % of the property.
2 The harasnpcreatedis UNIQUE andisnotsnarea by all prope~ies alike in the immediate
v,c,n,~, of this propedy aha in this use district because The properties in the
immediate vicinity are either fully developed at this time
or are of a lot area which is in compliance with the zoning.
3 The Variance would observe the spirit of the Ordinance and WOULD NOT CHANGE
ZHARACTER OF THE DISTRICT because The existing use of the property
as being retail sales by more than one tennant is already
established. The new building,by nature of its size, will
not add significantly to the number of retail/office
establishments in the area. It will in fact be compatible to
the existing and proposed uses in the area.
THE
STATE OF NEW YORK )
) ss
COU NiTY OF Suffolk )
Signature
Sworn to this ....................... ..~..,~ ......... day of .................
............ .........
Notary Public
/
OWNER
STREET
PROPerTY RECORD CARD
VILLAGE SUB. LOT
~ES.
LAND
IMP.
VL FARM
TOTAL - DATE
REMARKS
AGE
NEW NORMAL
FARM Acre
Tillable
Woodland
Meadowland
House Plot
Total
BUILDING CONDITION
BELOW ABOVE
Value Per Value
Acre
FRONTAGE ON
FRONTAGE ON ROAD
DEPTH
BULKHEAD
DOCK
COLOR
/vi. Bldg,
F~tension
Extension
Extension
Porch
Porch
~reezeway
g~rage
Patio
/o × F:
/4~ b
Total
Foundation
Basement
Ext Walls
ire Place
Both.
Interior Fihish
Heat
Rooms ]st Floo~- ·
Recreation Room
200
Rooms 2nd Floo~
Driveway
Dinette
LR.
DR.
BR; '
FIN. B
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE 18 HEREBY. GIV-
EN, pursuant to Section 267 of
the Town Law and the Code of
the Town of Southold, thc
foliowin$ public ~!ngs Will lag
held by the Southold Town
Board of Appeals at the
Southold Town Hall, Main
Road, Southold, NY at a
Regular Meeting on THURS-
DAY, JANUARY 8s
following time~:.
7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 3587-
ROBERT AND EILEEN M.
JOHb/~ON. Variance to tile
~inanee, Article XI,
Section 100-119.2 for permission
to construct addition to existing
dwelling with an in.sufficient ret.
back from tidal water area at
premises known as 430 Corey
Creek Road, Soulhold, NY;
District 1000, Section 87, Block
5, Lot 3. ·
7:40 p,m~ Appeal No. 3594-
ANNE C. MASON. Variance to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article
XI, Section 100-119.2 for per-
mission to con~truct deck addi-
tion to existing dwelling with an.
insufficient setback from tidal
wetland area at premises known
as 1250 Lupron Point, Mat-
tituck, NY; District 1000, Sec-
tion 115, Block 11, Lot 12.
7:45 p.m. Appeai NO.3585SE-
~I-VIN AND PATRICIA
.COMBS. Spedni Exception to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article
111, Section 100-30(B) for pers*s
mission to establish "Bed and
Breakfast Use, an Owner.
Occupied Building, other than
a hotel, where lodging and
breakfast is provided for not
more than six casual, transient
roomers, and renting of not
more than three rooms:' Loca-
tion of Property: 2500 Peconic
Lane, Peconic, NY; County Tax
Map Parcel No.
1000-74-03-24.2..
7:50 p.m. Appeal No. 3588SE-
MARY J. MOONEY-GETOFE
Special Exception to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article 111, Section
100-30(B) for permission to
establish "Bed and Breakfast
Usc, an Owner-Occupied
Building, other than a hotel,'
where lodging and breakfast is.
provided for nod more than six
casual, transient roomers, and
renting of nbt more than three
rooms:' Location of Property:
1475 Waterview Drive,-
Southold, NY; County 'lhx Map'
Parcel No. 1000-78-007-20.
7:55 p.m. Appeal No, 3591-
PAUL STOUTENBURGH~ JR,
Variance to the Zoning Or-
dinance, Article IlL Section
100-32 for permission to locate
accessory windmill tower in e~-
cess of maximum-permitted lg
feet height requirement, at 4015'
Skunk Lane, Cutchogue, NY;'
County Tax Map Parcel No..
1000-98-1-6.
8:00 p.m. Appeal No. 3583-~'
FREDERICK AND HELEN
HRIBOK. Variances to the Zon-
mg']~-O"rd~'auce,.Articie$: (1) Ill,'
Section 100-31 for il~ufficient
Southerly ~icl¢ .~
side yards, nad (2) XI, S~tion '
100-119.2 for inguiTi~"m setb~k
from eaisting b~alkhead_abng
Arshamomaque Pond, for this,
proposal to construct ~qr~e ad-
dition to exlstihg dwelling, at 90
Carole Road. Southold, NY~
County T~x Map Parcel No.
1000-52-2-4.
rYbF SUFFOLK
ss:
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 '~ 9/
day of~ /~/~?e':~.~/.~_ , 19 °1~
Sworn to before me this
..................... day of
Notary Public
BARBARA FOi?.BES
Not,,ry Jk.[I! , Stute of New York
8:05 p.m. Appeal No. 3461.
HELMUT HASS. Variances to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article
VlI~ Sections: (I) 100-71, Bulk
Schedule, for insufficient lot.
area and lot width; (2) 100-70(A)
establishing existing residential'
use as principal u~ of propos-
ed southerly parcel;
100-?0(A) and 100-71 for ap-
proval of insufficient livable*
floor area la the existing dwelb
lng use of proposed northerly
parcel. Zoning District: "B-I"
General Business. Location of
Property: 35350 County Road,
48, Peconic, NY; County Tax
,,,~ap Pm'cci No. 1000-69-04-2.L~x
8:10 p.m. Appeal No. 3552-
JOHN SENKO. (Hearing
recessed from December 11~-
1986). Variance for s,,hopping-
center use in this "B-I General
Business Zone with 30,084 sq. ft.
lot area.
8:30 p.m. AppealNo.3572SEdZ'
MICHAEL AND JOYCE
MAi-t't~. (Hear~g recessed'
from December 11, 1986~.
, Special Exeepiion for Bed and'
Breakfast in existing building.
8:45 p.m,' Appeal NO. 3584SE-
DONALD AND JOANNE
RITTL:R. Special,Exeeption to
'the Zonin~ Ordinance, Article
Ill, Section 100-30(B) (100-31)
'for permission to convert ex-
isting one-family dwelling to a
two-family dwelling, Location
of Property: 2585 Peconic Lan~
' Peconic, NY; County Tax. Map
Parcel No. 1000../74-03-20.
The Board of Appeals v~ill
hear at said time and place all
persons or representatives desir-
ing to be heard in each of the
above hearings. Written com-
ments may also be submitted
to the conclusion of th~
prior
subject hearing. For more intor:
motion, please call 765-1809.'
Dated: December 11, 1986'
BY ORDER OF THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN
BOARD OF APPEALS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,
CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowaiski,
Board Secretary
1%12/25/86(6)
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 119'71
TELEPHONE (5161 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
¢,£RARO P GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONI$, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, .IR.
~OBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time and date
of the public hearing concerning your recent application is
a copy of the Legal Notice as published in the L.I. Traveler-
Watchman, Inc. and Suffolk Weekly Times, Inc.
Someone should appear in your behalf during the public
hearing in the event thdre are questions from board members
or persons in the audience. Please be assured that your
public hearing will not start before the time allotted in
the Legal Notice.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call
our office, 765-1809.
Yours_ very ~/~./~__ ~
GERARD P. 'GOEHR~NGER ~r
CHAIRMAN
Enclosure
Linda .Kowalski
Secretary and
Board Clerk
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- BTATE ROAD 2..~ SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11~J'71
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARO
MEMBERS
OERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIDONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI
February 23, 1987
Mr. Garrett A. Strang,
Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
R.Ao
Re: Appeal No. 3552 John Senko (Variance)
Dear Garrett:
This letter will clarify Condition No. 1 of this
Board's decision rendered February 5, 1987 in the above
matter to mean:
'~No access other than that shown on the August ll,
1986 ~ite plan prepared by Garrett A. Strang, and con-
sidered by this Board, along Ackerly Pond Lane which
scales out at 120 feet from the corner (and not closer
than that shown). Such e§ress and ingress must be wide
enough for all truck deliveries, fire trucks, etc."
It was brought to our attention by you that the
170 ft. figure shown on the site plan is not the distance
of the curb. It is not the intent of this Board to
re-locate this accesss and 120 feet is the proper distance.
We hope that this will suffice for the record.
Yours very truly,
lk
CC:
Stephen R. Angel, Esq.
Daniel C. Ross, Esq.
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER
CHAIRMAN
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH B. SAWlCKI
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- BTATE ROAD 25 50UTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
March 3, 1987
Stephen R. Angel, Esq.
Esseks, Hefter & Angel
108 East Main Street, Box 279
Riverhead, NY ll901
Re: Appeal No. 3552 John Senko (Variance)
Dear Mr. Angel:
Transmitted herewith for your records and perusal
is a copy of recent correspondence received from the
Suffolk County Department of Planning pursuant to our
referral under the requirements of the Suffolk County
Charter.
Yours very truly,
Enclosure
Copies to:
Mr. Garrett A. Strang,
Daniel C. Ross, Esq.
R,Ao
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER
CHAIRMAN
By Linda Kowalski
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
Michael A. LoGrande
SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE
360-5513
LEE E. KOPPELNIAN
February 28, 1987
Town of Southold
Zoning Board of Appeals
Applicant: 3ohn Senko
Mun. File No.: 3552
S.C.P.D. File No.: SD-87-4
Gentlemen:
Pursuant to the requirements of Sections 1323 to 1332 of the Suffolk County
Charter, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the
Suffolk County Planning Co~mmission is considered to be a matter for local deter-
mination. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either
an approval or disapproval.
Comments: With the understanding that all vehicular access will be via Ackerly
Pond Lane at least 120 ft. from the Rte. 25/Ackerly Pond Land intersection.
Very truly yours,
Lee E. Koppelman
Director of Planning
GGN:mb
S/s Gerald G. Newman
Chief Planner
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 2S SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. llg?l
[ELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, .JR.
ROBERT J, DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI
February 20, 1987
Stephen R. Angel, Esq.
Esseks, Hefter & Angel
108 East Main Street,
Riverhead, NY ll90t
Box 279
Re: Appeal No. 3552 - John Senko (Variance)
Dear Mr. Angel:
Attached hereto is a copy of the official findings and
determination recently rendered by the Board of Appeals in
the above matter.
~lease be sure to return to the Planning Board con-
cerning finalization of the pending site plan, and to
the Building Department for other documents as may be
applicable.
Copies of this determination are also being forwarded
to the Planning Board, Suffolk County Planning Commission
and Building Department for their files.
Yours very truly,
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER
CHAIRMAN
Enclosure By Linda
Copy of Decision to:
Daniel C. Ross, Esq.
Mr. Donald Spates
Building Department
Planning Board
Suffolk County Planning Commission
Kowalski
SO~HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEAL~--~
MATTER OF JOHN SENKO
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 11, 1986, PUBLIC HEARING
9:30 p.m. Appeal No. 3552 - Public Hearing commenced in the
Matter of JOHN SENKO. (Recessed from 11/20) Shopping-center
use in this "B-I" General Business Zone containing 30,084 sq.
ft. in lot area. Intersection of W/s Ackerly Pond Lane and
N/s Main Road, Southold.
The Chairman reconvened the hearing. (The legal notice and
application were read during the initial hearing.)
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We'll ask Mr. Angel if there's anything
would like to say briefly°
Iv[R/ ANGEL: We don't really have very much to add to what was
presented before hand. We've discussed the chairman's sugges-
tion that the front parcel be considered for affordable housing.
Not. the front parcel. The front building be considered for af-
fordable housing° And with all due respect, we disagree with
your opinion. And I think the rationale for that was expressed
in a letter to the Board from Mr. Strang. And we're here of
course if you want to discuss that further. Mr. Strang is here
again. Mr. Senko is here again and so am I. We of course would
be willing to discuss it with you°
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have no idea what the Board intends to
impose, if anything. I know that we're not particularly happy
with changing the subjectwith the access on Route 25 and we may
avoid that problem c0ucbed within any decision of the Board° I
have not discussed this application with anybody or any of my
Board members or any of our immediate Board members to either
my right or my left. And so I have no idea how they feel other
than what we had previously discussed.
MR. ANGEL: Let me point out without .... I didn't mean to in-
terrup you but I'll reitera~ what I said before. As far as the
access goes, the plan was submitted with an emergency access,
emergency vehicle only on Route 25. We are not whetted to that.
And as far as we're concerned, the application is one to approve
the existing structures and the multiple use within the existing
structures. As far as traffic is concerned, we will certainly
abide by any determinations of the Board° Our plan for traffic
is you don't represent it to be the best possible. Also, was
that reviewed by the Planning Board?
MR. G. STRANG ~ It was initially reviewed by the Planning
Board and referred to the Zoning Board of Appeals. They have
not taken any action on that.
MR. ANGEL; And we were discussing that briefly before hand the
few minutes that we waited outside (among other.things) includ-
ing philosophical questions, sports and the weather. But it's
a difficult, perhaps it's a difficult question there and we're on
a state road and part of the problem, the Board could take this
position.and the Board could take a position for example, that
Page 2 - December 11, 1986
Public Hearing - J~ Senko
Southold Town Boar~Sf Appeals
MR. ANGEL (continued)
you approve access to emergency vehicles and we show it on the
plan. And it's virtually a possibility that the state could
disagree with that. But it is thelong way of saying that we
are open to any suggestions on traffic certainly from this
Board, the Planning Board and ultimately from the State De-
partment of Transportation.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I thank you. We'll see what develops.
Dan do you have anything?
MR. DAN ROSS : T0 assert without repeating our prior comments
and also an opportunity if there's been any written testimony
submitted.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Only a letter from Mr. Strang. While
he's reading that, I'll direct one other question to you and
that is; do you have any other specific suggestion as to use
of the existing building on the site other than what it is
used for now?
MR. ANGEL: Other than commercial retail and other than this
specific use?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Commercial retail.
MR. ANGEL: They're saying potential professional use but I
think it lends itself too well to that. Do you (to G. Strang)?
MR. STRANG : I don't see that there's a serious problem
with the potential to have it leased by a tenant of professional or
business use other than retail° But again we don't know what
the market is and what the interest would beo
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: As we said essentially, we want to
screen that to the best of our ability for the sole purpose
of avoiding people stopping on the highway and walking onto
the property as they do in the sun~ner, (they don't specifically
do it at this time). I observed the property four times since
the last hearing and I've not seen anybody park on the highway.
But during the s~m~er months, to gain access to the ice cream
parlor, I have seen as many as 3 or 4 cars (and also 4 cars in
the parking lot) parked on the highway. And that's what we're
essentially attempting to do away with. Not specifically to
decrease the owners rental aspects of the building but to try
and curtail so much activity from the street onto the property.
MR. ANGEL: When we w~re here last time, we took into considera-
tion your suggestion about affordable housing and we understood
the motive for that. It was some extent differently than it
appears. It seems to us that you had a two-fold motive. One
was to resolve the planning problem of cars parking along the
front because the commercial use of that front structure and
also to add another unit of affordable housing in the community.
Page 3 - December 11, 1986
Public Hearing - J~n Senko
Southold Town BoarVof Appeals
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: If it could be done.
MR. ANGEL: Now we didn't pick up on that first goal of yours.
We just thought that you were talking about affordable housing
for the aspect of affordable housing. We hadn't considered the
problem that you see with the building. We just went out and
tried to brainstorm in 5 minutes to see how we could address
that problem along the street. And to be honest with you, we
have not come up with anything. I want to say two things about
that. One; if you have any thought that you'd care or any of
the other Board members have any thoughts about how that could
be resolved, let us know. Garrett is going to be going on vaca-
tion in a little while but I'd like to be able to address this
concern either in a plan or a letter from him or in a letter
from me within a short period of time as we can between now and
the next meeting so that we can give you some other alterna-
tives if at all possible.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Why don't we just close the hearing pend-
ing the receipt of a letter and we'll say within 7 days ....
MR. ANGEL~ Give me more time.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER~ You need more time°
MR. ANGEL: Give me as much time as you can give and reasonably
have a chance to get it before the Board given the fact that they
might want to comment on it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Well then why don't we .... You want to
recess it?
MR. ANGEL: I wouldn't mind having...
MEMBER SAWICKI : I'd rather not recess it. I'd rather close
the hearing pending and make sure everybody gets copies o
MR. ANGEL~ No problem with copies. You just tell meo Give me
as much time as you can. If it's only 7 days, I'll take 7 days.
If you can give me more time, give me more time. When is your
next meeting?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: January 8th.
MEMBER SAWICKI : There's no problem with giving Counsel
more time' is the~e,Jem~y?
MR. ANGEL: Then I'll sen~ it out to him on the 14th day the
same day I send it out to you if I wait that extra 14 or the
full working days.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We should give you after Christmas to do ito
Say the 28th. We'll give you until the 28th. Is that alright
with you? You have until the meeting to respond -- the 8th, ok.
We would not make a decision before the 8th anyway because we
wouldn't reconvene until that time anyway.
Page 4 - December 11, 1986
Public Hearing - J~D Senko
Southold Town Boar~of Appeals
MR. ANGEL: And if anybody on the Board has any suggestions
now before you close the hearing.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: My only suggestion is what I had ....
And to be perfectly honest with you, is what Mr. Strang
said and that is; that there is definitely a certain feel-
ing that the structure itself would not particularly lend
itself for any type of housing because of its proximity to
the road° But I would tend to think that it would be an
excellent spot for professional office use. I really do and
I think it would behoove you to deal with it on that particu-
lar basis because of the nature of the fact that it does have
some visibility. But at the same time, the visibility is not
the high traffic problem that we have with having a retail
business in there, and everything can be contained within
that specific parking plan.~ I mean it could be adopted and
modified. You see that lends itself to a problem if you have
to modify a plan and we close the hearing and this is what I
am saying° If they intend to modify the plan in some way,
then we have the hearing closed. Then we have to have another
hearing to re-open it. We really should recess. I think we
should recess.
MR. ANGEL: I don't know what we're going to come up with. It
may not be another plan modification but it's theoretically pos-
sible because we just haven't given it any consideration yet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ok° Let's do that° We'll recess until
the 8th and then...
MR. ANGEL: You'll hear from us by the 28th. As usual, on the
28th at 5 o'clock some messenger will come flying into Linda's
office.trying to catch her on the way out.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much and we're sorry to
bring you back out again Mr. Senko and have a happy holiday.
Hearing no further comment,~'ll make a motion recessing the
hearing until 0anuary 8, ]987.
All in favor - aye.
THURSDAY~
HOLD TOWN BOARD OF APP~S
MATTER OF JOHN SENKO
NOVEMBER 20, 1986~ PUBLIC }IEARING
9:00 p.m. Appeal No. 3552 - Public Hearing con~nenced in the
Matter of JOHN SENKO. Shopping-center use in this "B-i" Gene-
ral Business Zone containing 30,084 sq. ft. in lot area. In-
tersection of W/s of Ackerly Pond Lane and N/s Main Road,
Southold. (Reconvened from 10/2)
The Chairman read the legal notice and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I had read the legal notice at the last
hearing and we had opened the hearing and we had taken.a signifi-
cant amount of testimony from both the applicant's architect and
from the community. And we'll start by opening the hearing and
asking Mr. Angel what he would like to say.
MR. ANGEL. We're the applicant. I wasn't here last time as you
probably .... Well, I was here last time requesting an adjournment.
I wasn't here the first time when testimony and evidence was pre-
sented to your Board. As I see it, this is an application that
started before the Planning Board. The application... Do you
have a copy of the site plan, proposed elevations? If you don't,
I've got it here. Mr. Strang, the applicant's architect, began
this application before the Planning Board as I understand it.
And the Planning Board looked at the plan and~interpre~ed that
there was a provision in the z0,e ordinance. I believe it's sec-
tion 100-62 which defines shopping centers and imposes certain
conditions on shopping centers, and interpretated, this par-
ticular site plan and elevation to be a shopping center in the
code and suggested the application come before you. I believe
the application was passed before Mr. Lessard who gave a pro
former denial and we're here. The application itself as the
use comtemplated whidh is general business and possibly office
space, is clearly permitted. The property is located in the
"B-i" general business zone. I believe that the application
itself except for this here interpretation for involving this
section that defines shopping center, is conforming° There's
enough parking. It doesn't exceed the square footage° The
difficulty is that if you consider this type of application to
be a "shopping center", the provisions contained in 100-62 would
require among other things, a minimum acre area° This is 30
thousand square feet. I think that you probably .called him
initially to file the application. And If I thought about the
application before I prepared it, I would have asked for relief
alternatively both as a variance and or an interpretation. I
read your ordinance and it's not clear in my mind that this par-
ticular configuration of stores should be considered a shopping
center under your ordinance° If you look at section 100-62, the
definition includes words to the effect that shopping center or
certain groups I guess of stores and offices that are quite
commonly known as shopping centers require all those different
provisions including the one acre area. Now I'm not to sure
that this in my mind, at least look at this elevation and this
Page 2 - November , 1986
Public Hearing Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mit. ANGEL (continued)
perhaps plan, is what is comtemplated when they were referring
to the ordinance provisions to what is cormnonly known as a shop-
ping center. I particularly, when I think of a shopping center,
I think of Bohack type shopping center. Not one free standing
building like this with a small shop right in the road. Now,
obviously there's a difficulty or a practical difficulty caused
by this interpretation. The difficulty is that it appears as if
you can't have multiple retail or office uses on a lot unless the
lot meets the area requirements of a shopping center.even though
these uses are permitted in the "B-I" general zone. Now what's
the purpose of that? I'm not sure. And I believe that your
Master Plan doea not have this relatively unusual distinction be-
tween normal business uses and shopping center uses. I've combed
through the Master Plan. I didn't see it. I believe Mr. Strang
asked Mr. Emilito, your Planner Dick Emilito confirmed that there
is no separate designation now in the "B-i" general business zone
under the Master Plan to distinguish between regular "B-i" use
and shopping center uses. So as you wouldn't get into the dif-~
ficulty we're here with today. Another point to be made besides
the Master Plan point is that appears to be created, the shopping
center configurations which appears to control the number of uses
on the property. As I interpret it, I maybe wrong because I don't
have as much familiarity as you do. It can be interpretted to re-
quire that when you have multiple uses on a particular piece of
retail or business property, you become a shopping center. That
would be most restrictive. Not the most restrictive. The tremen-
dous interpretation and perhaps that's the interpretation the Plan-
ning Board used when it ki~ked it ov~rtto~the Zoning.Board o~f Ap-
peals in this case. I don't see the policy behind that. I'll give
you an example. The fact that you have one business use on a 30
thousand square foot parcel, that business use could ~e a convenience
store, a deli, a 7-11. It could generate an enormous amount of
business. On the other hand, you could have a very expensive
boutique and an architects office. Architects don't have a lot of
trouble. They don't have clients all the time. The same business
type permitted somewhat when divided into several could result in
substantially less dense use or heavy use than one type of retail
use that's permitted under this ordinance. Perhaps that's~the rea-
son why the Master Plan doesn't have the distinction that's in the
code. I understand from speaking with Mr. Strang which~was h~re
last time, that there was some opposition. And the fact that there
was opposition, one of the people who was here in opposition, led
me to comb through some of your old files which is always an in-
teresting experience° And I believe one of the persons who was
here in opposition was (Mr.) Dr. S~ tkin who owns the property im-
mediately to the east on the other side of Ackerly Pond Lane or
Ackerly Pond Drive. And Dr. S10tkin made an application to your
Board in 1982 where he requested a use variance to change the resi-
dential use of this particular piece of property to a business for a
medical professional office° Something that would be permitted in
"B-I" general business zone. And in fact, he had a use variance
application. The property at the time was owned by Mrs. Lathamo
And your Board granted the variance and it granted the variance
Page 3 - November~, 1986
Public Hearing - ~hn Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mit. ANGEL (continued)
which was attempt to a rezoning of residential to commercial
property in large part because of the existance of businesses
around ito What Mr. Senko wants to do in this application is
put in a permitted business use on this particular piece of
property. He doesn't want to do anything dramati~ or perhaps
in fact more dramatic than what Dr. S~ tkin did. It maybe
have not been in fact dramatic, but it was dramatic by zoning.
A use variance, as you know, is a very unusual type relief.
So we have an interesting situation here where this Board in
the past 4 years ago because of the existance of traffic for
businesses in the area, granted the use variance. Now today,
part of the argument against the application even though per-
mitted, is that there is traffic. So you're being asked to
deny the application for the same reasons that you granted a
prior application. It's sort of a logical conundrum and it
points out (I believe) the lack of merit in opposition to the
application and also the lnszgnificance of it. At least from
a zoning or planning viewpoint. It really won't change things
dramatically. The property is properly zoned "B-i" general
business. I believe the proposed Master Plan map continues
it in that particular zone. We are seeking permitted uses
and nothing is really going to change. The only thing is that
there is a difficulty created because of this interpretation
of shopping center which is in my opinion a distinction without
a difference° Mr. Senko is here. Mr. Strang is here. I should
call Mr. Strang up because he is the one that had the conversa-
tion with Dick Emilito. And I also want him to comment on the
general practice when you construct business property. You con-
~truct the such as Mr. Senko is interested in construct-
ing, as to not limit yourself to one particular tenant. When you
build a building like this, it may become because of the market-
place, may have 2 or 3 tenants that want to have space in there.
On the other hand, Mr. Senko could build this building and find
out a good tenant comes for the whole thing. It could be one
use after the fact, though it is designed primarily for retail
space on the bottom and office space on the top.
MR. STRANG: To address the issue that was brought up with re-
spect to my conversation with Mr. Emilito, the Planning Consul-
tant for the town, given the fact that we were thrown into this
situation of the definition of a shopping center and being aware
of the fact that there is a change in the code in the making with
regard to the Master Plan, I felt it important as well as possibly
beneficial to look at the Master Plan and the proposed zoning and
see what ramifications may come of that with regard to shopping
centers° And I was unable as Mr. Angel was unable to find any
reference to specific methods with respect to shopping centers,
a definition of shopping centers as in the business zone. It
Page 4 - November , 1986
Public Hearing - Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mit. STRANG: (continued)
prompted me to question the Planning Consultant, Mro Emilito,
as to how that was addressed° And his response to me was that
the whole section (100-62) has been deleted from the code and
replaced by another section totally unrelated. And that any
reference to shopping center uses (so to speak) are referred
to in the general code by each business distinction° That's
a multiple tenancy (if you will) as can exist in any of the
business districts provided it meets all that the conditions
that we have been thrown into in this particular case under
present zone use business to be phased out in the shortcoming,
hopefully soon to be adopted Master Plan and revised code. To
comment a little further on the use of the building. The build-
ing we're ]0oki,§ at 15 not 10 thousand square feet of building or
20 thousand square feet of building. We have a small propor-
tionate and in scale at the site building proposed. It can es-
sentially, it is small enough that it could house a single ten-
and, being only 26 hundred square feet total. A tenant who may
have a need for that type of facility or for that much space
could certainly use it as a single occupancy. By the same token,
when designing commercial space, one allows buildings in the
flexibility to partition it off in any reasonable amount of
rental spaces. There are some tenancies that request or I
shouldn't say request but require 800 square feet and some 1,000.
Some 1,200 and some as much as 2,600 which we have presented
here. So the building has taken that into consideration and is
adaptable to occupy or house a single tenant~ or several tenants°
But again with the restriction of 2,600 square feet, we're cer-
tainly not going to have 20 tenants in there° It's just not
going to happen. We're looking at a relatively small unit here°
Also I would like to call to the Board's attention the fact that
the development of the lot is only 8% lot coverage. Certainly
8% lot coverage is not by any means a dramatic development to
the property° And I think if you look at the type of partition
that we've made, it is my clients intention to do something there
that's going to be an asset to the town. It certainly would.
It exists on the site. It's underdeveloped and it could use some
improvement and I think that the Board really couldn't deny the
fact that what we propose here is certainly an improvement to the
site.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you°
MR. ANGEL: Unless you have any further questions or questions
of Mr. Senko, we just assume sit down at this point.
CHAIrmAN GOEHRINGER: We had asked or I had asked Mro Senko to
confer with counsel. And in order to relay the message that I
have, I had certain, this is my personal opinion, feelings about
the application after the first visit to the site. The second
visit however, brought additional feelings° I have no personal
objection to the 2,600 square foot building° I do however, would
like to know what you plan on doing with the present 1,100 square
foot building which I assume is shown here as 700 square feet°
Page 5 - November , 1986
Public Hearing - Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: (continued)
This is the existing house which is only a duplex type of
business possibly non-conforming or whatever the case might
be. And is there some what of discontinuing the business use
of that particular house either by changing the conformity of
the size of the building? I certainly don't want you to re-
move it from the site. I think in my opinion and I have not
discussed this with the Board, I would not like to see it go be-
cause it's residentiality and being rented as one of the af-
fordable units that we have in the area° But as you know,
there's a matter of concern. The gentleman to my left has men-
tioned the (in the audience this is) concern of the cars in
that particular area, the parking problems alongside the road
and so on and so forth° ~'think as much of a discontinuance
so that could exist with this building and the open area of
visibility to that building, I think would lend itself a much
better situation to the community. And then I'll address the
issue of ingress and egress°
MRo STRANG: Well I think that's what the original idea was°
Correct me if I'm wrong. Was to maintain that business use
of the property° It may be to clean it up a little bit but
I believe that the parking and square footage of retail area
increases that building in all parking computations° So the
plan, for example, the required parking spaces added the nec-
cessary spaces for the square footage of the floor area of
the existing building that's close to the road° I don't think
that there was any thought about creating that into a different
type of use than it is today° I'm not saying that we can't
think about it now but it was not discussed with meo It's a
brand new idea°
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That's right. That was the reason why
I asked Mr. Senko to come in. Certainly I could have relayed
that to this gentleman here and then it could have been bounced
back and forth and I don't want to clearly state that that has
to be done right at this particular moment or any determination
has to be done concerning it. Is that building 1,100 square
feet or is it 700 square feet?
MR. STRANG: The footprint of the building is 1,100 square feet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That includes the porch.
MR. STRANG: Including the porch. When we do our computations
for parking, it's based on net retail or useable floor area
which is 1,700 square feet.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right. Ok. Do you want to talk about
that situation and we'll either recess and we'll of course con-
tinue the hearing here? I know there are people in the audience
that still want to speak.
Page 6 - November~, 1986
Public Hearing - ~n Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. ANGEL: We should discuss it because it come out of the blue.
MR. STRANG: I'd like to just hold up (by the way) for your
record, a copy of the determination that I referred to before
to Dr. S10tkin. It's dated May 6, 1982. I'd like to make it
part of the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just ask a question? The 8% lot
coverage that you were referring to Mro Strang, encompasses the
entire 2,600 square foot plus the house?
MR. STRANG: Yes sir.
CHAIRM_A~ GOEHRINGER: I'm referring to his house. We know there
is a non-conforming duplex business type of use at this particu-
lar area. I think an antique shop.
MR. STRANG: Yes. It includes all structures on site as included
in the lot coverage.
CHAIRMAN STRANG: We'll go on now and ask if there's anybody else
who would like to speak in favor of the application. Is there any-
body who would like to speak against? Kindly state your name again.
MR. SPATES. I have some prepared comments and I'd like to say a
few other things too. My name is Donald Spates~and I've addressed
this Board before and I have a copy of the comments which I made at
the last public meeting to consider the request for variance to
Main Road and Ackerly Pond Lane in Southold. I'd like to submit
these to you becuase I think it was a little confusing at the last
meeting. At the end of these comments "I ask the Board not to al-
low the repetition of such commercial disasters such as the con-
venience store east of town to reoccur now". I wish to clarify
the situation to which I made that unclear reference in my com-
ments. The 7-11 store located on Main Road on the east end of
town is in effect a mirror image of the problems facing the proper-
ty under consideration tonight. The town asked for the side road
to be used entry and exit for the 7-11 parking lot in an attempt
to elleviate the obvious hazards of trying that same entry and exit
from Main Road. This is just what is being proposed now for the
property at the corner of Main Road and Ackerly Pond Aane. It will
not work. It will not work on the east side of town. The idea of
an entrance be maintained on Main Road for use of emergency vehicles
only is not valid and certainly does not address itself to the real
problems at hand which is just normal vehicular traffic. There is
no way to prohibit the use of such an entrance by any who would wish
to use it. And experience again at the 7-11 store suggests, in fact
guarantees that the Main Road entrance will be a more preferred means
to enter and exit the property° Probably the most thought provoking
idea concerning the similar location is that the Southold Town Police
in spite of their deligence, have found that the Route 25 at the 7-11
property is impossible to keep clear of illegally parked vehicles
and that the site has already produced numerous motor vehicle acci-
dents. Please do not allow these similar conditions to repeat them-
selves at the other end of town° Please do not grant this variance.
I urge this Board to consider not the good intent of the applicants
Page 7 - November~. 1986
Public Hearing -Mn Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. SPATES (continued)
and rhetoric which we have all displayed but rather the
facts as they appear to USo The dangerous nature of the
intersection and the inability of anyone to regulate the
traffic patterns of two drivers° The similiarity with
another location on the other side of town and the inabili-
ty to control that other situation. The many other factors
which have not surface because of the lack of available time
to pursue this matter, such as drainage problem possibilities
in the area which has now caused the town establishing a sump
in the area and that the fact that the area in question drains
directly into Jockey Creek° And reactions of those who have
not read the legal notice and thus have not come into share
the reactions of having residential Ackerly Pond Lane turned
into a main thoroughfare. I have not read the regulations re-
garding definitions and uses of shopping centers and I probably
wouldn't understand it if I did. So I can't cor~nent on that.
It seems to me though that for a lay person, any multiple use
in business terms be considered in some way a shopping center°
Certainly not something as extensive as we have in Cutchogue
but even mini shopping center if you will. The size of the
building with the nature of business these days, get down into
boutiquey type of stores means that the tenancy there could be
quite substantial° 800 square feet is by no means an average
business rental space any more° It's lowering every day. And
I believe that the stores in Greenport across the street from
Snargate, I don't know the name of the shopping development
there, indicate that small stores are what is coming out here°
This means a lot more traffic° Working under this law is I.
guess what we're.doing° I don't know ab6ut Mr° Emilito and the
Master Plan. But I would think that the decision is made under
the existing law and not under what would be perhaps coming in
in an unofficial comment°
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: That's correct°
MR. SPATES: As far as Dro S~ tkin goes, I happen to be a patient
of his partner, Mr. Simon, Dr° Simon° And I've been in his office
many times and he has a sign in the office warning his patients as
they exit his parking lot not to go down onto Main Road because
of the danger there but to take Ackerly Pond north to North Road°
I think that's an indication of not only the concern but the ob-
vious danger that he feels is there regardless of the fact that
he received a variance or something in order to establish his
office there° Finally, We're talking about technicalities it
seems with the use and appearance of an attorney in the room° I
think that basically the technicality is the objection that I
originally had and that I'd like to stress° And that was that
the property, in my opinion, is grossly undersized. It's not
by a matter of a few percentage points and I think that's the
main part that the Board should consider. Thank you.
~age 8 - November~. 1986
Public Hearing -~5n Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. Yes. Just state your name
for the record.
MR. ROSS: Wickham, Wickham, and Bressler~for John Schalner in
opposition. Mr. Schalner owns the property to the immediate
west of the subject parcel. First I just want to reveiw the
arguments I made at the first meeting with regard to the his-
torical nature of the area and the traffic problems and most
important I think there is the question that there's no hard-
ship been shown, no economic hardship has been shown. But the
important question that was raised by Mr. Angel is the purpose
of the code and the definition of shopping center. I think the
purpose is rather clear. And the purpose is to prevent multiple
business uses on less than an acre which seems a reasonable ap-
proach considering this plan and the nature of the community.
As far as a definition of shopping center, it may be difficult
to define. But when we see one, you know what it is. And on 3/4
of an acre, you have over 30 parking spots and multiple business
use, retail use, that's a shopping center. And the Planning
Board sent it here because they did ~ interpretate it as a shop-
ping center. They defined it as a shopping center because it is
one. At the first hearing there was some testimony as to the
number of units, the number of retail units, the number of busi-
ness units° It's not too clear how many units are being proposed
now. I believe at the first hearing it was somewhere between 6
and 8. Correct me if I'm wrong° That sounds like a shopping
center. That's all.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir.
like to say in rebuttal?
Is there anything you'd
MR. ANGEL: Two things. I'd like to have the Board's permis-
sion to ask Mr. Spates a few questions.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I don't know if Mr. Spates wants to an-
swer any questions.
MR. ANGEL: It's up to you. You can ask him to answer them.
I would request some information.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Most of the stuff he said though is a mat-
ter of opinion. We can ask.
MRo ANGEL: I'd like to know where Mro Spates wants this business
because I have a belief that he's right in the area there.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I would ask him that question, k~ere do
you run yourT~business~sir?
MR. SPATES: I am the owner of Harts Hardware which is located
adjacently across the corner from the property in question.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Do you mind answering these questions?
Page 9 - November 1986
Public Hearing - Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mit. SPATES: No.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What else would you like to ask him?
MR. ANGEL: Ok. So that's a hardware store across the street
on the Main Road and you're in business.
MR. SPATES: Yes°
MR. ANGEL: And you sell things° Not one line of products?
SPATES: I beg your pardon.
MR. ANGEL: A line of products right?
P~. SPATES: A grouping of products°
b~o ANGEL: All,if it is hardware? People come to your store
in cars right?
SPATES: Yes°
bR. ~kNGEL: From the Main Road right?
bR. SPATES: I'm on the corner alsoo They come from Main Road°
I also have the entrance and exit onto Jockey Creek Drive°
b~ ANGEL: So it's similiar to this property in that you have
2 accesses onto Main Road? One from Main Road, one from the
side street°
MRo SPATES: It is to a degree, yes°
MR. ANGEL: And people enter and exit off those 2 streets? Is
that correct?
SPATES: Yes that's correct°
MR° ~GEL: Thank you.
C~\IR!~IAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much sir°
1.~. ANGEL: My rebuttal is an attempt to put this thing in per-
spective and I don't want to beat around the bush. There are 2
people here who don't want this property used for business pur-
poses. That's what I hear. They talked about technicalities
and it's true. I mentioned technicalities° I interpretate the
shopping center provision in a technical fashion so as to allow
you to, on an interpretation without proving there's a hardship,
to allow the application. But the reality is, as you very well
know, the hardship is the necessity of perhaps destroying the
building and coming in with one commercial building. It may be
more expensive to do that. It's self evident. That. Mr. Senko
Page 10 - November~, 1986
Public Hearing - J~ Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Mit. ANGEL: (continued)
can do as a right. This is in the B-1 zone. He can put a busi-
ness use on this property. We're not seeking anything dramatic.
He can come in there, put in a business use. If the Planning
Board denies him a business use when he's done the necessary land-
scaping, the necessary parking spaces, designed it in accordance
with code and zoning ordinance, if he wants to hire me, I can com-
pell the Planning Board to approve it because it's permitted sub-
ject to site plan approval.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Can I just ask you a question? I don't mean
to destroy your train of thought. You're referring to the destruc-
tion of the dwelling that presently exists on that property?
MR. ANGEL: Well yes. This interpretation that we're talking about
has to do with the number of uses. Isn't that correct?
CHAIR/TAN GOEHRINGER: That is correct.
MR. ANGEL: So what would happen if we either added onto that par-
ticular building and made it into one use and tried to add to it
in such a fashion so as not to increase the non-conformity or we
just simply take a bulldozer in there. It costs us more money.
We're going to put up more space and build one building. We can't
do that under your code? We can't use that area for parking? I
mean it's business property no matter how you interpretate it even
with existence of the shopping center provision. If Mr. Senko wants
to come and put in a one use building without partitions, then he
goes to the Planning Board and the Planning Board looks at the site
plan. And then we go to Mro Lessard and show him a building without
partitions in it, we're going to get a building permit. I mean the
Planning Board may in connection with site plan approval, may move
access around in a certain way, but as you well know because you're
as familiar with it as I am, once you have a permitted use subject
to site plan, the only thing that can be done is impose reasonable
conditions. You can't zone a permitted use out of existence by de-
nying it. So what we have here is something that is not going to
change. What we're seeking is in following the tradition of the
normal area variance, we seek to avoid the necessity of replicating
space. We don't want to make it one use. I'm not even addressing
the issue of whether if we built the building and the existing struc-
ture there whether you could use it as one use. It wouldn't even
be a shopping center situation. But the reality is that it's per-
mitted and the denial of a variance may cause economic hardship to
my client but it won't change the reality. He may not do it, some-
body else will and somebody else will use it for a business purpose.
I just don't think it's in the cards. I think we're talking apples
and oranges here and that's my rebuttal. I think we have to come
back to reality and deal with this as a business property. The
variance doesn't change that essential character° And should the
Board deny the variance and should we be in a position where we
have to go out and spend extra money, we can always build one com-
mercial use that would be permitted under the code.
· age 11 - November 1986
Public Hearing - ~enko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. Mr. Ross would you like to
respond to that?
Mit. ROSS: Yes. I think that is the point. And it's not that use
but the number of uses that's at issue here. And to bring up the
fact that there are other businesses in the area, no. The question
here is how many uses are being proposed and we still haven't gotten
a definite answer on that. That's the key issue.
~. ANGEL: That's a problem. I can answer that question° I'm sure
that if somebody came to ~r. Senko and said I want to rent the new
building plus the old building and I'll pay you a really good price
for it or even a commercially reasonable price, we will have one use.
I mean, I can make that representation for him right now without even
talking to him because we discussed it. I think that the number of
uses in commercial spaces is generally dictated by the needs of the
economy. I mean~if there are a few people who come by and they only
want a 600 square foot store and nobody else is available, you put
in a partition for a 600 square fc~ot store and try to re~c the rest.
We don't know. We don't have a tenant for that new building. So
the answer is I don't know.
~. ROSS: l~at we have is a non-c~nforming use that's existing there
now and a request to expand on that non-conforming use.
b~. ANGEL: No. That's not true.
TR. ROSS: That's what the request is. That's what
is. And if the application is different than that,
filed as such.
the application
it should be
~. ANGEL: Well if I could add to that, we don't have a non-con-
forming use. We have a non-conforming structure that's being used
as a permitted use. It's in the "B-I" zone and there's business
in there.
Mit. ROSS: There's 2 businesses.
~. ANGEL: Sure. I don't see the distinction. I think retail use
is retail use.
ROSS: It might be a shopping center now.
~. ANGEL: If they define it as a shopping center, then we do and
we already have a shopping center and perhaps we can solve the prob-
lem since we're already there. But it's a permitted use, what's
there now. It's a non-conforming structure° It use to be an old
little house but it's used for a business purpose, 2 purposes or 3
business purposes. I just don't see the distinction between the num-
ber of business purposes°
CHAI~N GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Mr. Spates is there anything you
would like to add to this?
Page 12 - November~, 1986
· 'Public Hearing - J~ Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. SPATES. I wanted to submit to the Board a copy of today's
page 16 of Suffolk Times which details the fact that a Mr. Donald
B. Gross of Old Shipyard Lane in Southold died Sunday at SUNY
Stony Brook Hospital of injuries sustained in an automobile ac-
cident at the corner of Locust and Main Road where the 7-11 is
that I was referring to as being similiar to this application.
That's all.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Ok. I propose that, and I
know I get in trouble with my Board members, we recess to Decem-
ber llth and discuss, kick around the idea of what to do with
the existing retail unit. At that particular time or I'll ad-
dress the issue right now, that I'am opposed to the egress on
the Main Road. We can either address this at this particular
time or we can address ....
MR. ANGEL: I'd like to hear the feelings of the Board. That's
certainly proper concern which is reasonable.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Joe, how do you feel about that? Do you
object to the entry onto the Main Road? I'm talking about from-
the parking lot area ....
MR. SAWICKI: Yes.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER:
at this time?
.... which we presently really don't have
MR. SAWICKI: It's not too good especially in July.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have it just as an exit westbound only.
MR. ANGEL: Is it the Board's concensus that there should be no
exit off of 25 on this premise?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It's the Board's concensus since we are
all firemen probably and I will not answer for them. This is
probably about the first time that the Board, since the incep-
tion of my being on it, has ever been polled for anything. But
to be honest with you, we could live with, assuming we all were
in favor of this application, I have no idea how my fellow 4
Board members feel. I could live with a solid chain barrier of
which the chief of the Southold Fire Department would be given
a key.
MR. ANGEL: Garrett just suggested that to me.
CHAI~.~N GOEHRINGER: That is the only thing that I would be...
And it would be restrictively placed in caps within this de-
cision. Again my decision, my opinion. It does not necessari-
ly reflect the other 4 members. That if at any time that par-
ticular chain was opened, that the Building Inspector would then
have to serve a notice of violation to the present owner indicat-
ing that he is violating the terms and conditions of the variance.
..Page 13 - November i, 1986
Public Hearing - Jo~ Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. SENKO: Well it puts me in an awkward position° Because I
was being chastised for being out of town on a weeked a viola-
tion occured. I don't know the answer to it. I certainly don't
take this job on a 24 hour basis. I have other things to do with
my life and I just would not always be around.
MR. STRANG: We have no objection to doing something like that°
Some sort of structure. It doesn't have to be chain linko Some
sort of obstruction that would be acceptable to the Board would
not be a problem to our client. I would say to you that if you
put a chain across there with a lock and anything that resembles
a flame, the Fire Department would not like it. They'd go right
through it.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We're not only trying to protect the appli-
cant's chain. I have a question from Mrs. Spates.
MRS. SPATES: I'm not sure if it's a question or a statement. It's
a little of both. It occurs to me, I'm hearing some good arguments
from everybody including my husband. All of a sudden now you're
talking about shutting off any exit out of the parking lot onto
Main Road. That means all the exits have to be on Ackerly Pond and
a lot of people would then go up the Main Road that that's exactly
where the problem is. Locust down by 7-11 (at least in my opinion)
is a lot safer to come out of. It's not safe but it's a lot safer°
Ackerly Pond is not safe for all the reasons Don gave last time or
the time before. But it didn't include one big point. And I think
in all this that if you come down off of the west end of Main Road
into the village, you're coming down off of a hill and you're coming
around a curve. I know becuase I go to work that way and I come home
that way and I cross Ackerly Pond to Main Bayview 3 or 4 times a week
at least. It's very dangerous°
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: To answer your question Mrs. Spates, I had
written a letter, and I don't know if Mr. Angel had been given ~
copy of it, to the Superintendent of Highways in the Town of Southold
asking him if he was every considering making Ackerly Pond Road a one
way street, ingress only. And I did receive a latter back from him
on the 14th which he says due to the hardship of the residents who
live on Lara Road and particular during the winter months and that
he has no intentions of doing that. I will tell you however, this
Board is not a Board that does not specifically sit on it's morals
and I hate to bring up its past applications~ But we have had peo-
ple, we have required people to place within the roadbed put in park-
ing signs. It would not be out of the question in a situation like
this that we would ask of the Highway Superintendent to produce a
sign indicating no left turn coming out of Ackerly Pond Road. That
is not beyond our control. That's the only thing I can say in some
type of feeling toward what you're saying but we have done this be-
fore. We have required people not to park in front of their proper-
ty in Mattituck on what we consider to be a high risk area of Matti-
tuck Auto Parts. We have asked no parking and I'll give you the name
of the applicant, Mr. Strong° And that has worked out very nicely in
a high risk area. So I propose that we think about that use and that
we get back together for a short period of time on the llth and see if
we can close this hearing in an expeditious matter. I know that is
Page 14 - November~, 1986
Public Hearing - J~ Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: (continued)
not always the case but I want to close it at that particular
time giving me some idea as to what you will do or what you
can do with that one story framed building and we'll come back
if the Board has any objection to that. Hearing no further
comment, I'll make a motion recessing the hearing to the next
regularly scheduled meeting.
Ail in favor - aye.
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
MATTER OF JOHN SENKO
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 2, 1986 PUBLIC HEARING
8:09 p.m. Appeal No. 3552 - Public Hearing commenced in the
Matter of JOHN SENKO. Shopping center use in this B-1 General
Business Zone, containing 30,084 square feet in lot area.
49295 Main Road (at intersection with Ackerly Pond Lane),
Southold. Garrett Strang, agent.
The Chairman read the legal notice and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I have a copy of the survey dated August
8, 1986 indicating the building which is placed pretty much di-
rectly in the center of the property. Maybe a little more to-
wards the west, Surrounding parking areas and those parking areas
used in conjunction with the original building or the existing
building on the site. This property (again) is on the corner of
Ackerly Pond Lane and Main Road and I think it presently houses
an antique shop and an ice cream parlor. And I have a copy of
the Suffolk County Tax Map indicating this and surrounding proper-
ties in the area. Mr. Strang would you like to be heard?
MR. STRANG~ Thank you. Good evening. As the application states,
we're before the Board (basically) subsequent to a meeting we had
with the Planning Board in which it became apparent that the proper-
ty that is undersized and was to be considered a shopping center
is basically not undersized in that classification. The property
does meet all the other zoning criteria. However, one may pose a
definition of a shopping center in the excess of 40 thousand square
feet. Minimum lot area we don't have. In as much as there's only
30 thousand square feet presently there. The existing use that is
there I guess by some definition, would constitute shopping center
in as much as it's a multiple occupancy where there is more than
one tenant occupying the building. The existing building there
(as I~imentioned) is occupied by both an ice cream parlor and an
antique shop. The net area of that building is about 700 square
feet in that retail area and it's about a 1,100 square foot build-
ing. The remainder is service area and the like. What we're pro-
posing is a new structure in addition to this one that would be
detached, free standing nearby connected by sidewalks at the ex-
isting structure. Its total net retail space (if you will) or
useable space is; at this point, approximately 2,600 square feet
over 2 floors. Or 1,300 square feet per floor. The building that
we are proposing is essentially, if you want to get an idea of the
size, it's about the size of a residence. A relatively good size
residence. The size is to this building, the new building is; on
the first level is retail. On the second level is professional
office space. So I'm sure you're familiar with the site. It
does slope from west to the east or we will use that as a point
of orientation for the moment. Given that the Main Road is run-
ning eastwest, the high end would allow us to access the second
floor of the building to grade the lower end of the site to ac-
cess the lower level to the grade which does allow us therefore,
to have a two-story structure and the whole structure can be easily
Page 2 - October'S, 1986
Public Hearing of John Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. STRANG (Continued):
accessible. As I mentioned earlier, the lower level being here
towards retail, we anticipate maybe 2, at the most, 3 tenants
in that lower level. Just give the fact that we've only got
1,300 square feet or we're only commanding 1,300 square feet
of development. And on the second ~]oor, 1,300 square feet
again we anticipate 2 maybe 3 at the most, tenants. So in-
cluding the 2 tenants that are in the existing building if
they were to remain and I can't see where that building could
house any more than 2 tenants, it's just too small. More like-
ly than not, it may revert back to one tenant at some point in
time. We could have anywhere from 6 to a maximum 8 tenants in
that site. Certainly I don't envision this as a large shopping
center quote unquote, type of a project. Although it does fall
under that definition of zoning. As I'm sure you can see, the
size of the property and the building that's on it and the ten-
ants that are there are the limit of 2 tenants, really is an
under utilization of the property. And to not be allowed to
develop this property to its potential without over developing
it, would present financial hardship to my client. As I men-
tioned in the application, the property is compatible to with
the neighboring area. The fact that we have a marina across
the street, a hardware store across the street, a gas station
on the other corner. There's apparently a proposal for some
sort of a retail complex behind the gas station and there's a
a doctor's office or a doctor's suite across the street. We
feel that it's compatible with the area and we certainly feel
that the size and scale of the building is compatible to the
area. We're not trying to over develop. We've met all the other
criteria of the zoning as I mentioned earlier as far as setbacks,
lot coverage, parking criteria and the like. Other than that,
I don't have anything more to say. Any questions?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Is there any comment about the Planning
Board. And I realize this is not a total part of the applica-
tion. However, if the Zoning Board does grant you a relief re-
quest, then you can of course build this structure. So it's
not specifically putting the cart before the horse. Is there
any question that the Planning Board had concerning the egress
out onto the Main Road?
MR. STRANG: The Planning Board has expressed a concern about
the egress out onto the Main Road. So you can see from the
site plan, the main or principal ingress and egress is off of
Ackerly Pond Lane. The principal reason for that on the Main
Road was intended as an exit only, never to be an entrance.
An exit only directed either west bound direction as you can
not or would not be likely to cut across traffic in the east
bound direction. And purposely, that exit_ is also for ease
of emergency vehicle egress from the property. Given the na-
ture of the configuration of the site, if you had to bring a
fire truck or whatever in there, it would be a lot easier for
him to just pull right out onto the Main Road and go around
the block than it would be to try to back out of that site.
Page 3 - October'S, 1986
Public Hearing of John Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ok. Is there any indication on what type
of retail businesses would be placed within this structure?
MR. STRANG: There have been none. And as far as my client is
concerned, he hasn't even offered the premises for any sort of
rental at this point until he sees if it can be done. Based on
the fact that we now need the variance and secondly, we have to
contest the Planning Board's aspect of it. Again, we're looking
at the first floor of 1,300 square feet. We would be-lookiag at
small type of retail. Possibly a 700 square feet rental space
and a 500 foot square foot rental space. Nothing of a large type
of shop. It will be a small shop.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I never really asked this question. But
since we are getting closer and closer, I'll ask it. Do you
feel or have you seen the most recent map of the Master Plan?
And does this conform to the present zoning of that particular
plan?
MR. STHANG: I attempted to see the most recent Master Plan map
last week. But unfortunately it was not made public at that time.
In as much as the Town Board had not had an opportunity to see it.
As I understand it, unless there's been a change in this most re-
cent revision, it was proposed that that site of "B-I", general
business. Ori. Ikbelieve they're changing that designation of ,B-I"
to "B". But it was, under the former maps of the Master Plan,
still designated as business parcel.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: If there are any changes in that, would you
just let us know?
MR. STRANG: I certainly will.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much Mr..Strang. You an-
swered most of our questions. We'll see if the Board has any
towards the end of the hearing. Any Board members I should say.
Is there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this
application? Is there anybody who would like to speak against
the application? Ok. Can we start on this side of the room,
please. State your name for the record.
DONALD SPATES : My name is Donald Spates, and I'm the owner of
Harts Hardware located on Main Road across from the site in ques-
tion. My store is open 7 days a week, year around. Thus in the
last 5 plus years, I have become very familiar with the intersec-
tion where the variance is proposed. This intersection is (in my
opinion) very dangerous now and can not support additional high
traffic retail stores. Particularly when the property is not even
sufficiently sized to legally have these stores. I ask the Board
to note the following factors which I believe make the request for
a variance an unwise choice.
·
Page 4 - October 2, 1986
Public Hearing of John Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. SPATES (continued):
1. Main Road, Route 25, Crest Willow Hill just west of this
intersection, and because of this hill crest; a). traffic
travelling east on 25 has insufficient time to adequately see
the intersection and also see traffic and or obstacles at or
around that intersection, b). All other traffic from Ackerly
Pond Land and Bay View Road as well as Route 25 westbQund have
insufficient time to adequately observe the presence and speed
of that eastbound traffic.
2. Main Bay View Road enters RQute 25 at this intersection.
Main Bay View Road is the primary entrance and exit to Great
Hobneck, the.heavily populated are of Southold. My own home
is located on Main Bay View Road and I am familiar with the
great amount of traffic that it creates. Bay View Road enters
Route 25 at an extreme angle with only a yield sign for traffic
control. Drivers are in a difficult position to view the traf-
fic they are supposed to merge with on Route 25 in order for
them to continue east. A left turn is virtually a hairpin 180°
turn and is almost impossible. Turning almost 90° from there
brings one across two lanes of Route 25 to Ackerly Pond Lane.
This is the primary method one uses to .... "
TAPE ENDED
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I apologize for stopping you in the middle.
Ok. Go ahead.
MR. SPATES: This maneuver is dangerous in that':the driver has a
poor view of too many areas where traffic may appear.
3. Route 25 westbound is a fast and heavily travelled road which
curves to the right and rises up Willow Hill. · Drivers have a dif-
ficult time watching for cars exiting from Main Bay View Road and
either making that left turn to go west or attempting to cross 25.
Also exiting from Ackerly Pond Lane to make a left or right turn
ortrying to cross 25 to go into Main Bay View Road. Many times
cars are stopped on Route 25 westbound in order to make a left
turn onto Bay View Road. This presents an additional hazard for
all other traffic.
4. Worst of all is Ackerly Pond Lane itself; a small primarily
rural road which presents unique problems. Drivers seeking to
exit this road face the mirror image of the problems already de-
scribed, a). Much traffic on Route 25 making a right or west-
bound turn. The only logical choice. Many however, want to
cross Route 25 to Main Bay View Road or to make a left to go
eastbound on Route 25. b). The eastbound traffic coming over
the crest of Willow, making Route 25 very difficult to. see until
traffic is virtually upon oneself. And c); Traffic exiting
page 5 - October 11986
Public Hearing of~ohn Senko
$outhold Town Board of Appeals
MR. SPATES (Continued):
from Main Bay View usually just slows at the intersection be-
cause of the yield sign I mentioned. It does not stop and then
proceeds. One does not know if that car is going to enter Route
25 eastbound meaning no left turn possible from Ackerly Pond Lane.
Or if it is going to go across 25 onto ~ckerly Pond also meaning
no left turn from Ackerly Pond Lane. Or thirdly; if that car is
going to go left to enter Route 25 westbound precludirkg any turns
at all from Ackerly Pond Lane. If all this seems confusing to you,
it is. But is even more so to the driver who must face it. I ask
you to not add to the confusion which is there. Do not approve this
varience. With so many problems in this area, the additional traf-
fic would be unreasonable. To shift the cars onto Ackerly Pond Lane
is no solution. The only solution is not to allow a 2,600 square
foot retail store and office building on a piece of property which
it is never meant to hold. And a lot with 31% insufficient area
is not a small matter and the Board should consider any owner that
lacks 31% of the requirements should expect to be turned down. I
ask the Board not to allow the repetition of such commercial disas-
ters such as the convenience store east of town to reoccur now.
Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. The gentleman in the middle.
State your name for us.
MR. GREEN: I wasn't going to be quite that hard. I was going to
ask that with this permit or if it's possibly given, that the Board
stipulate that they leave a line of site open for the exit of Acker-
ly Pond Road traffic. That means that there could be no advertising
signs, no parking in the line of site of pedestrians, motor vehicles,
bicycles exiting Ackerly Pond Road.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Could you just state your name for the record
sir2
MR. GREEN: The name is Richard Green. I live on Oak Lawn Avenue.
CHAIRPL~N GOEHRINGER: Thank you very much. Anybody els~ bver here?
MR. ROSS: Dan Ross for John Schalner. That's the applicant's
neighbor to the west. In opposition to the application on three
bases. One is traffic which has been brought into the applica-
tion. As we heard tonight, the proposal is to increase from 2
to possibly 8 tenants on that parcel which would create a lot
more traffic in an already hazardous traffic pattern there. The
second reason is that I would urge the Board to consider the his-
toric nature of the area. Joyce Baers book, Historic HOmes, dis-
cusses 4 of the homes in that very immediate vicinity. Three of
which were built in the 1600'So Mr. Schalner's house was built
in the early 1700's. That's something that should be considered
in developing the area. The third most important matter is that
there has been no hardship shown here. It hasn't been shown that
the property is uneconomical to its use as it exists now. In as
Page 6 - October'S, 1986
Public Hearing of John Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. ROSS (Continued):
much as the code requires 1 acre for shopping centers, that does
not seem unreasonable and adds a nonconforming use as exists now
shouldn't be extended on the argument that it's under utilized.
On that basis, we urge the denial of the application. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you sir. Is there anybody else that
would like to speak against the application? Mr$.Stantonb~r.
Pardon me ma'am.
J0¥CE STANTON BE^R: I lived directly to the north. I don't now --
I own a piece of property directly to the north. I used to live
there. As it has been discussed, I think traffic probably is the
one biggest concern anybody who has a business in that area or
property in that area or lives in that area. I am not sure how
anyone could permit any sort of access onto the Main Road from
that piece of property and feel good about it if you've stopped
there for an ice cream cone or you've ever gotten gas across the
street. I think if the Board really consider this, they should
also consider shutting Ackerly Pond off to the Main Road and
making sure that all traffic moving in the other direction to the
North Road or something. It's not uncommon on a summers day to
sit there for 10 or 15 minutes. And then for you to take a shot
or decide to go the other direction coming out of that intersec-
tion. It was at its best when there was a light there. At least
you got your shot at it coming out of Ackerly Pond. Hopefully
we're not looking at going back to something like that. We have
enough street lights. I don't know. It's a lot that's been
there for quite a while and it's operated and I think it's operated
relatively well. It might be some consideration for some sort of
exception. But when we turn and talk about .... I haven't seen
the application. What sort of parking area are they going to de-
sign?
CHAIRM~AN GOEHRINGER: Why don't you take one of these and if any-
body else would like to look at it. Is there enough concern in
the audience? I assume there is that people would like to re-
cess for a couple of moments so you could look at this. Ok. I
will ask the Board to grant a 3 minute recess at this time. We
will put a copy of these down so you can look at them.
All in favor of recess - Hearing continued at 8:50 p.m.
ing a three-minute break q~e~he meeting.
CHAIR~N GOEHRINGER: Is there anybody else who would like to
speak against this application? Sir.
follow-
MR. GREEN: I'd also like to make another comment. Most of your
deliveries today come by trailer. Figure out how a trailer can
adequately pull up the road, come into that establishment and
deliver.
Page 7 - October W 1986
Public Hearing of John Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Sir. I'm sorry.
DR. SLOTKIN: I have the medical office across the street and
it's where my office is located. And again, I just want to ex-
press my concern about the traffic. If I'm not mistaken, when
we applied for our vari nce, the Board did request that we move
our access off of Ackerly Pond Lane and we've done that. And in
fact, we've encouraged our patients to try to avoid the Main Road.
My concern is with the excess traffic it would aggravate the al-
ready dangerous situation that exists at the corner.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. Peter. Just a little bit louder.
P575R $10UISNBURG: A brief comment. If you look at the plans, has
the Board seen an elevation to see how a piece of property with
such a change of topography is going to parallel park to that
property? I can understand the building having one entrance on
one side for the second floor and the other side of the first
floor. But it just appears as though on a piece of paper the
parking might be nice and orderly. But when we're changing it
on the place, I think it's got to be 15 feet (I think) from one
end to the other for that small of an area. Just to make some
sort of an elevation or some sort of a view particularly from
the corner, might be quite interesting.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Thank you. I was going to ask Mr. Strang
for a copy of plans of the building in hopes that they did in-
clude the elevation. Anyone else? Mr. Strang is there anything
else you'd like to say?
MR. STRANG: Yes I would. In response to your last comment about
plans of the building, as of this point, the plans have been done
in a very conceptual sketch from just taking up with a footprint
of the building. Given the fact that we~have various boards and
hurtles to get over, I've advised my client not to incur exten-
sive costs in designing the building which may not get necessarily
all of the approvals. So we really haven't gone too far. However,
the concept is to regrade the front area of that property to ac-
comodate the parking. There will be some topographic changes
which will be presented to the Planning Board at the next meeting.
And the elevation of the building (if you will) of the type of
design of the building again, is going to be compatible with the
historic nature of the Town of Southold. We're not going to do
a contemporary building. We're going to do a building which I
don't want to go so far as to say colonial will be very compati-
ble with the surrounding architecture of the area. Some of the
other points that were brought up this evening are very valid
and I certainly can sympathize with all of them. There is a defi-
nite traffic situation that exists. Whether this approval is
granted, the traffic problems are still going to exist. If it is
granted, it's not going to, ,in my opinion, make a significant dif-
ference in the traffic. I do agree with the fact that there will
be added cars entering Ackerly Pond and exiting Ackerly Pond.
Page
8 - Octobert 1986
Public Hearing of'John Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. STRANG (Continued):
again, we're not looking at a King Kullen type of shopping center
there or major strip store operation, that are going to have a tre-
mendous amount of cars in and out every minute. We're looking at
a smal~ complex. And again, the reason we did attempt to address
the traffic problem adding the one principal ingress or egress on
Ackerly Pond and limiting access to the Main Road was exit for
westbound only. Principally for emergency vehicles. Essentially
when we first got into this project, when we first sa~ down and
started talking about it, the traffic control device was there
and operational. It was (at that point in time) unbenounced to
me that that traffic control was temporary only because of the
detour on the Jockey Creek Bridge. I was under the impression
that that traffic light was a permanent fixture. Obvious]y, it's
now gone. I think, again regardless of whether this project pro-
ceeds or does not proceed, is a lot of other development
happening on the Main Road which is going to increase traffic.
The state will have to, at some point in time, address a traffic
control device at that intersection. I guess the point that I'm
getting at here is; this project is not going to have a signifi-
cant impact on the traffic one way or the other. And to preclude
this project from happening because the state hasn't addressed an
on going and present traffic situation, I think is unfair to the
owner of the property.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRiNGER: Before you sit down Mr. Strang, can I ask
you two things? Number 1; can we ask you please to submit to
us the elevation plans (so to speak) or what you intend to sub-
mit to the Planning Board at their next meeting. Secondly, can
you please ask either the agent which I realize you are an agent
for the owner, or the owner to be present at the next hearing~
So that we might ask him specific questions upon the use of the
existing building. And at that particular time, if the Board
sees fit, the Board will then close the hearing. I thank you
very very much. I thank all the people that have come in to-
night and spoken to us. We will go back and look at the proper-
ty in the interim. I'm recessing this hearing with the date of
October 22nd. It will be placed on that calender or roster.
And hearing no further questions, recessing the hearing to that
date.
Ail in favor - aye.
Transcribed from cassette tapes recorded during the hearing.
Nadia Moore
10/21/86
D
'LD
y
8outhold, N.Y. 11971
(516) 765-1988
September 3, 1986
Mr. Garrett Strang
Architect
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Site plan for
Mr. and Mrs. John Senko
Dear Mr. ~trang:
Please let this confirm the discussion of the Planning
Board, with regard to the above mentioned site plan, at the
August 25 meeting.
I{ was the consensus of the Board to conduct a field
inspection of the premises.
It was noted that Section 100-62 of the Town Code requires
a shopping center to have one acre of land, therefore, an
area variance for this proposal is required.
The Board also requested landscaping, building elevations,
and that consideration be given to eliminating the exit onto
Main Road.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact
our office.
L/cc: Board of Appeals
Very truly yours,
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR., CHAIRMAN
SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
By Diane M. Schultze, Secretary
NOTICE OF tIEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY
GIVEN, pursuant to Section 267
of the Town Law and the Code of
the Town of Seuthold, the follow~
lng public hearings will he held
by the Southoid Town Board
of Appeals at the Southold
Town ttall, Main Road, Seuth-
old, NY at a Regular Meeting on
TIIURSDAY, JANUARY 8,
1987 at the following time~:
7:35 p.m Appeal No. 3587 --
ROBERT AND EILEEN M:
JOtINSON. Variance to th~
Zoning Ordinance, Article XI';
Section 100-119.2 for permission
to construct addition to existing
dwclling with an insufficient
setback trom tidal water area at
premises known as 430 Corey
Creek Roe~ qouthold, NY; Dis:
trier 1000, ,e ~,~n 87, Block 5,
Lot 3.
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3594 v,
ANNE C MASON. Variance to~( ficient livable-floor area in the
the Zoning Ordinance, Article existing dwelling use of prop-
. osed northerly parcel. Zoning
Xl, Sectionl00-119.2forpermm' District: 'B-I" General Busi~
sion to construct deck addition to ness. Location of property:
existing dwelling with an insuf- 35350 County Road 48, Peconie,
ficient setback from tidal weV- NY; County Tax Map parcel No,
NY; District 1000, Section 115, ]/~OHN SENKO.(Hearmgreces'
~ Variance for shappmg center~
_. ALVIN AND PATRICIA ] use in this "B-l" General
S. S ecial Exception to ! ~s Zone with 30,084 sq. It. ~o~
coMn.i. Pordinonce, Art,cl~ {
the Zo . g 00-30(B) for permis~ k. --~'~a. m A~neal blo 3572Sg
III Section 1 . ~ ~,:~ r ....
si~'~ to estabhsh "Bed and .. MICHAEL AND JOYC[~
Breakfast Use, an Owner-Oc-
cupied Building, otber_t.han ,a
hotel, where lodging aaa areal-
fast is provided for not more
than six casual, transient room-
ers, and renting of not more than'
three rooms." Location of prop-
erty: 2500 Peconic Lane,
peoonic, NY; County Tax Map'
Parcel No. 1000-74-03-24.2.
7:50 p.m. Appeal No. 3588SE
MARY J. MOONEY°
~ETOFF. Special Exception to
the Zoning O ~inance, Article
III, Section 100-30(B) for permis~
sion to establish "Bed and
Breakfast Use, an Owner-O~*
cupied Building, other than s
hotel, where lodging and break-
fast is provided for not more
than six casual, transient room-
ers, and renting of not more than
three rooms." Location of Prop~
arty: 1475 Waterview Drive,
Southold, NY; County Tax Map
Parcel No. 1000-78-007-'20.
7:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3591 --
PAUL STOUTENBURGH,
JR. Variance to the Zoning Or:
dinance, Article III, Section 100~
32 for permission to locate acres-
sory windmill tower in excesS of
maximum-permitted 18 fee}
height requirement, at 4015
Skunk Lane, Cutehogue, NY;
County Tax Map parcel No.
1000-98-1-6:. _.~
8:00 p.m. ,~pponl No. 3583 --
FREDERICK AND HELEN
HRIBOR. Variance~ to the Zon-
lng Ordinance, Articles: il) IllJ'
Section 100-31 for insufficie'nl
southerly side yard and total
side yards, and (2) XI, SectiOn
100-119.2 for insufficient
back from existing hulkhead
along Arshamomaque Pond, for
this proposal to construct garag~
addition to existing dwelling,
90 Carole Road, Southold, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000-52-2-4.
8:05 p.m, Appeal No. 3461' --
HELMUT HASS, Variances to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article
VI1, Sections: (1) 100-71, Bulk
Schedule, for insufficient lot
area and lot width; (2) 100-70iA)
establishing existing residential
use as principal use of proposed
southerly parcel; (3) 100-70iA)
and 100-71 for approval ofin~uf-
MAqI~ES. (Hearing recessed
from December ll, 1986). Spec-
ial Exception for Bed and Break-
fast in existing building.
8:45 p.m. Appeal No. ~584SE
.. DONALD AND JOANNE
RIT'I~R. Special Exception to
the Zoning OrdinanCe, Articl~
III, Section 100-30(S) (100-31')
for permission to convert exist-
ing one-family dwelling to a two-
family dwelling. Location of
property: 2585 Peconic Lane,
peconic, NY; County Tax Map
parcel No. 1000-74-03-20.
The Board of Appeals will
hear at said time and place all
persons or repreSentatives desir-
ing to be heard in each of tho
above hearingm. Written co,n-
meats may also be submitted
prior to the conclusion of the
subject hearing. For more infor-
mation, please call 765-1809.
Dated: December 11, 1986.
BY ORDER OF
THE SOUTHOLD TOWN
BOARD OF APPEAI~
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,
CHAIRMAN
Linde Kowalsk{,
Board Secretary
2TD25-5458
ffrATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
of Greenport, in
said County, being duly sworn, says that be/she Is
Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly
Newspaper, published at Greenport, In the Town
of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New
York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is
a printed copy, has been regularly published in
said Newspaper once each week for ~no .
weeks successively, commencing on the 2 4
day of Dec 198 6 _
Sw°rn t° bef~this 19'--19.~-~ -. ~ ~:~
day of /~ 7~' ~ ' - UA~V ~ ~f~NAN
u:s t ebmar~9
~THOLD TOWN BOARD OF
MATTER OF JOHN SENKO
THURSDAY~ OCTOBER 22~ 1986 PUBLIC HEARING
7:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3552 - Public Hearing commenced in the
Matter of JOHN SENKO. Shopping center use in this "B-I" Gene-
ral Business Zone, containing 30,084 square feet in lot area.
49295 Main Road (at intersection with Ackerly Pond Lane),
Southold.
The Chairman read the legal notice and application for the record.
Mit. ANGEL: I have another question. In the minutes it talks
about an environmental impact at that property.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: What would you like to say about it% No¥
It's not necessary because it's a setback application. Can you
give us a letter asking for an adjournment?
MR. ANGEL: I don't have a letter prepared. I came here myself
requesting an adjournment. Mr. Senko came into my office the day
before yesterday and retained me and I have6't had time to prepare
and I respectifully request an adjournment. I understand that Mr.
Ross appeared here last time from Wickham, Wickham and Bressler.
I called his office and advised him and I advised him that I would
be making this application.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Ok. We'll take it under advisement. We'll
have to open the hearing anyway and see if there's anybody here
that would like to speak. Anybody object to the recessing of this
particular hearing~ This is the John Senko hearing from the prior
meeting of which Garrett Strang had represented the applicant who
was the architect. Yes sir.
MR. SPATES: Could I ask some questions regarding the recess?
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: If you use the mike and state your name again.
If we can answer them.
Mit. SPATES: My name is Donald Spates and I'd like to ask some ques-
tions about the request to recess. I'd like to know if anyone was
allowed to ask for a recess on the Z.B.A.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: It h~a been the policy of this Board to grant
(normally) one recess. The purpose of the recess was a recess that,
(how can I say this) it was requested by us at the last meetzng be-
cause I had questions of the applicant of which his agent could
not answer. And it was brought to my attention,.I believe it was
this morning, that when Mr. ~ngel came down to our office, he in-
dicated to us that it was the first time that he had been reviewing
the file. And since he was representing another party tonight at
this hearing on another matter, that he did not have time to pre-
pare for it. So in my opinion, I would recommend to the Board that
we grant him one recess because now this is a recess that they're
requesting.
Page 2 - October 2~, 1986
Public Hearing oi~hn Senko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. SPATES: So you'll reschedule it now if it's granted. Thank
you.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Right° Is there anybody else that would
like to speak concerning the Senko hearing prior to granting of
a recess if the Board so desires? Hearing no further comment,
I'll make a motion recessing the hearing to the next regularly
scheduled hearing approximate date sir is November 20°
Ail in favor - aye°
Nadia Moore
LAW OFFICES
WICKHAM, WICKHAM & BRESSLEF~, p.c.
MAIN ROAD, PO BOX I424
MATtITUCK LONG ISLAND
NEW YORK I~952
516-298-8353
February 2, 1987
Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals
Town Hall - Main Road
Southold, NY 11971
Att: Ms. Linda Kowalski
Secretary
Re: Senko Application
Dear Linda:
We would appreciate receiving a copy of any decision
rendered by the Board in connection with the above-referenced
application.
We have enclosed a stamped, self-addressed envelope for
your convenience in forwarding a copy of the decision to us.
DCR:emu
encl.
JANE ANN R, KRATZ
E$$EKS, HEFTER & ANGEL
COUNSELORS AT LAW
P, O. BOX 279
RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901
(5~6) 369-1700
January 6, 1987
WATER MILL OFFICE
MONTAU K HIGHWAY
P. O. BOX 570
WATER MILL, N.Y. I 1978
(516) 726-6633
ALAN D. OSHRIN
OF COUNSEL
Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman
Zoning Board of Appeals
Town of Southold
Main Road - State Road 25
Southold, New York 11971
Re: Application of Senko, Main Road and Ackerly Pond Lane,
Southold, New York
Dear Mr. Geohringer and Members of the Board:
At the last meeting of the Zoning Board, you suggested that our
client John Senko consider limiting the use of the existing
structure located at the southwestern corner of his property. As
I understood it, this suggestion was motivated by a concern on the
part of the Zoning Board that the current use of a portion of this
structure as an ice cream parlor can cause traffic problems. You
have seen people stopping on Main Road to buy ice cream. This
activity can extend into the evening during the summer.
After careful consideration, our client would be willing to
covenant that this existing structure could only be used for
"professional offices and business offices". These uses are
permitted in the proposed residential office "RO" district of the
master plan. In this regard, I refer you to proposed section
100-71B(2). We chose to limit the use to "professional offices
and business offices" because these terms are used in the
proposed master plan and will have clear meaning in the future.
In our opinion, by limiting the existing structure as set forth
above, you will accomplish the result which I believe you intend.
Neither a professional office use nor a business office use will
generate the type of traffic and vehicle stopping on Main Road
that an ice cream parlor or antique store currently generate.
Finally, I want to make it clear that the limitation on use
Page Two
January 6, 1987
proposed above would apply only to the existing frame structure
located in the southwest corner of the property. Any new
construction would be limited only by applicable provisions of the
zoning ordinance.
If you have any questions or need any additional information, do
not hesitate to contact me.
SRA:mg
xc: Daniel C. Ross
GARRETT A. STRANG
ARCHITECT
November
MAIN ROAD, P. O. BOX 14t2
$OUTHOLD, NEW YORK 1 19'71
1986
Gerald Goehringer, Chairman
Southold Board of Appeals
Main Road
$outhold, New York 11971
Re: Proposed Office/Retail Complex, Main Road and
Ackerly Pond Lane, Southold, New York
Dear Mr. Goehringer and Members of the Board:
I wish to go on record in response to your recent suggestion
to Mr. John Senko, that he give consideration to the con-
version of the existing building housing "Lickety Split
Ice Cream", to a residential unit.
Its use as a possible affordable housing unit, although
meritorious, is impractical, inasmuch as affordable housing
is primarily geared to young families. Given the size and
location of the lot, there is neither privacy n~radequate
room for young children to play. There is no proper access
to the property, since any link with the Main Road is undesirable
in this location. The activity generated by the existing, sur-
rounding businesses would not be compatible with a mixed use, as
suggested.
It is my understanding that the Board has, in the recent past,
granted a change of use for the Slotkin property, from Residential
to Business, predicated on the existence of other businesses in
the immediate area. The $1otkin parcel lies to the immediate east
of the Senko parcel.
I trust that the Board will agree that this type of conversion,
ie., business to residence, is not in keeping with the proposed
Master Plan, nor is it in the best interests of my client.
GAS/b
cc: J. Senko
S. Angel,
Esq.
Very truly yours,
Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
·
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN November 20, 1 986
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR. S,E.Q.RoA.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI NEGATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non-Significance
APPEAL NO.: 3552
PROJECT NAME: JOHN SENK0
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing
regulations pertaining to Article 8 of the N.Y.S. Environmental
Quality Review Act of the Environmental Conservation Law and Local
Law #44-4 of the Town of Southold.
This board determines
cant adverse effect on the
below.
the within project not to have a signifi-
environment for the reasons indicated
Please take further notice that this declaration should not be
considered a determination made for any other department or agency
which may also have an application pending for the same or similar
project.
TYPE OF ACTION: [ ! Type II [×] Unlisted [ ]
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION: ~h0ppin9 center use in this
Genera] Business Zone c0ntainin§ 30,0~4 sq. ft. in ]0t area.
LOCATION OF PROJECT: Town of Southold,
particularly known as: 49295 Main Road (at
Ackerly Pond Lane), Southold, New York.
County of Suffolk, more
intersection with
REASON(S) SUPPORTING THIS DETEP~INATION:
(1) An Environmental Assessment in the short form has been
submitted which indicates that no significant adverse effects to
the environment are likely to occur should this project be imple-
mented as planned;
(2) This is an application concerning multiple uses on the
premises and is not directly related to new construction.
(3) The premises is not located near or bordering wetlands.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT: Linda Kowals~i, Secretary,
Southold Town Board of Appeals,.Town Hall, Southold, NY 11971; tel. 516-
765-1809 or 1802.
Copies of this notice sent to the applicant or his agent and posted
on the Town Clerk Bulletin Board.
]k
RAYMOND L. JACOBS
Superintendent
Highway Department
Town of Southold
Peconic Lane
Peconic, N.Y. 11958
November 14, 1986
Tel. 765-3140
· 734-5211
Mr. Gerard P. Goehringer
Chairman, Boa~of Appeals
Town of Southold
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971
Re: South End of Ackerly Pond Lane
(Main Road Intersection)
Dear Chairman Goehringer:
I have made a survey of the above subject, in regards to the
concern of the traffic situation from the stop sign at this
intersection and the exiting.
This road is a flooding road and I feel that the residents
on this road should be able to exit (as they have for years)
on to the Main Road. I feel that closing off this exit
would be a h~r~shi_p on the residents involved. During the
winter months Lower Road also becomes a problem with the
filling in of snow as does Ackerly Pond Lane.
At this time, I do not recommend a "One-Way Street" at this
intersection.
Very truly_yours,
RAYMOND IA. JACOBS
Sup't of Highways
Southold Town Board of
Appeals
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAW[CKI
INTERDEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Superintendent of
Board of Appeals
October 29, 1986
South
Highways Raymond Jacobs
Jerry Goehringer, Chairman
End of Ackerly Pond Lane (Main R6ad Intersection)
We have an application pending concerning premises located at
the westerly side of Ackerly Pond Lane (and the north side of
Main Road), at Southold, for multiple business uses.
One of the concerns of the board is the traffic situation from
the stop sign at this intersection and exiting.
What would the possibilities be to request this southerly
section of Ackerly Pond Lane be modified to a "One-Way Street"
from the point along the north side of the Main Road to Lower
Road, a distance of approximately 300 feet~ for entrance only?
Your recommendations in this matter will greatly be appreciated.
Enclosure (Site Plan)
lk
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- STAT[ ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
September 24, 1986
Mr. Charles Brigham, P.E.
Suffolk County Department of Health
County Center.
Riverhead, NY llgO1
Re: Appeal No. ~552 - John Senko
Proposed Shopping Center
W/s Ackerly ~ond Lane and N/s Main Road, Southold
Dear M~ Brigham:'
We have an application pending for a variance
in which the applicant proposes a new two-story
office building (incl. retail sales) with a total
floor area of 3,300: l. TOO'for the existing structure
and 1500 for the new structure as shown on the attached
site plan dated August 1, 1986, prepared by Garrett A.
Strang.
The Board would like to know whether this matter
is presently being reviewed under APticle 6, if
applicable,~and ~ ~bu.would be able to submit
your preliminary comments as to the availability
Qf sufficient water, effects of sewer ~ystems, etc.
which we could include in our consideration of
this variance.
Your assistance and time is greatly appreciated.
Yours very truiy,
lk
Enclosures
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER
CHAIRMAN
By Linda Kowalski
S_OUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPE~S
MATTER OF JOHN SENKO
THURSDAY, JANUARY 8, 1987, PUBLIC HEARING
8:15 p.m. Appeal No. 3552 ~ Public Hearing co~mLLenced in the
Matter of JOHN SENKO. Shopping center use on 30,084 square
foot parcel zoned "B-I". N/s Main Road and W/s Ackerly Pond
Land, Southold. (Recessed from last Regular Meeting as requested)
The Chairman read the legal notice and application for the record.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: We have a request from an applicant's at-
torney present. He has another meeting on the south shore which
he must attend and it is not the opening of the hearing. It is
the continuation of a hearing. So we will complete this hearing
very expeditiously. So we'll open it for Mr. Senko and we'll ask
Mr. Angel. It's not that we don't know you Mr. Angel.
MR. ANGEL: For the applicant, Mr. John Senko. As you know, this
has been (I think) the third time that I've appeared and the last
time I appeared the~e was some suggestion from the Board to con-
sider limiting the use of an.existing structure on the southwest-
erly side of the lot. You identified a problem that had become
apparent especially in the summer months, with an ice cream par-
lor operating there and the cars parking along the street. What
we have done is we have written you a letter which I want to iden-
tify just in breif for public comment, that indicates that our
client, Mr. Senko would be willing to voluntarily covenant that
the use of that existing structure on the southwesterly side of
the property would be used for professional offices and/or busi-
ness offices. And we pose that particular designation because
that is a term that is used in the residence office district of
the proposed Master Plan and I felt that it would be a term that
would have some meaning to the town rather than try to draft a
particular type of use, we could use something with its indepen-
dant meaning.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: I like something a little more tripe, in
parenthesis~ no retail[
MR. ANGEL: I don't think that's objectionable. We discussed
that and he understood business and professional offices not to
include retail sales. I assume that's what they ~eant.
CHAIRMAN GOEHRINGER: Was there anymore dialogue concerning the
egress in the area along the Main Road and egress from the park-
ing lot?
MR. ANGEL: None whatsoever. Our position has been (and Mr.
Strange is here) that I think that it was originally designed
only with an emergency egress on Main Road with all the traffic
coming in from the side, Ackerly Pond Lane. But as we indicated
when this issue came up a couple of times in the past, if there's
a better mind on the Board or if anybody else has, if theresa
difference of opinion or you want us to do it any differently, we
have no objection to changing it. Did you discuss it with our
people before we did it?
~a,.g¥ 2 - January 8
~ Public Hearing - J¢ ;enko
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MR. STRANGE: No it hasn't been discussed with the five people
but from a point or a sense of planning, it made good sense for
the vehicular access, emergency vehicular or egress rather than
acess to have an easier way to leave the site then trying to back
around the odd configuration of the site.
blR. ANGEL: We discussed blocking that off with some sort of ato
piece of equipment that the fire department would have access
and we certainly would agree to that also. And I also pointed
out last time that to some extent, whatever we decide upon, that
would be determined maybe by the Stat~ D.O.T. which mlso has a
say in whatever we do.
C~IP~t~N GEOHRINGER: Do you have to... Excuse me. I'm sorry.
Do you have...
MR. ANGEL: You have to make application if you want an emergency
curb cut.
cHAIR~N GOEHRINGER: Ok. We thank you for coming in. We'll see
if there's any other discussion concerning this application. Is
there anybody else who would like to speak in favor of this appli-
cation? This is the John Senko application at the corner of Ackerly
Pond Road and blain State Highway, Route 25. Is there anybody who
would like to speak against this application. Ok. Hearing no fur-
ther comment, I'll make a motion closing the hearing reserving de-
cision until later.
All in f~vor - Aye.
Southold Town Board of Appeals
MAIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 2~5 SOUTHOLO, L.I., N.Y. 11971
TELEPHONE (516) 766-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWICKI
Pursuant to Article XIII of the Suffolk County Charter, the
Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold, New York, hereby refers
the following to the Suffolk County Planning Commission:
×× Variance from the Zoning Code, Article vii, Section 100-70 and
Article VI, Section 100-62(B)
Variance from Determination of Southold Town Building Inspector
Special Exception, Article , Section
Special Permit
Appeal,No.: 3552 Applicant: John Senko
Location of Affected Land: 49295 Main Rd., Southold,
County Tax Map Item No.: 1000- 70-07-01
Within 500 feet of:
Town or Village Boundary Line
NY
Body of Water (Bay, Sound or Estuary)
XX 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
or
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,
Within One Mile of a Nuclear Power Plant
Within One Mile of An Airport.
COMMENTS: Applicant is requesting permission to establish shoppinq center
Use in th~s "R-I" ~n~r~] R]~n~q~ ~n~9 with insufficient lot area
Copies of Town file and
Dated: Februa.ry 24, 1987
related
documents enclosed for your review.
Secretary, Board of Appeals
My name is Donald Spates, I am the owner of Harts Hardware located
on ~ain Road across from the site in question.
My store is open seven days a week year round, thus in the last
5 plus years I have become very familiar with the intersection where
the variance is proposed.
This intersection is, in my opinion, very dangerous now and cannot
support additional burdens placed upon it by squeezing in additional
high traffic retail stores. Particularly when the property is not
of sufficient size to legally have those stores.
I ask the board to note the following factors which I believe make
the request for varience an unwise choice:
1- Main Road Route 25 crests Willow Hill just west of this
intersection - because of this hillcrest:
a. traffic traveling East on Rt 25 has insufficient time
to adequately see the intersection, and other traffic and/or
obstructions at or around that intersection.
b. all other traffic from Akerly Pond La, Bayview Rd,
as well as Route 25 Westbound - have insufficient time to adequately
observe the presence and speed of the Eastbound traffic.
2- Main Bayview Rd enters Route 25 at this intersection.
Main Bayview Rd is the primary entrance and exit for Great Hog Neck
- a heavily populated area of Southold. My own home is located on
Main Bayview Rd and I am familiar with the great amount of traffic
it carries. Bayview Rd enters Route 25 at an extreme angle with only
a "Yield" sign for traffic control. Drivers are in a difficult
position to view the traffic they are supposed to merge with on
Route 25 in order to travel East. A left turn is virtually a
hairpin 180° turn and is almost impossible.
Turning almost 90° brings one across two lanes of Route 25 to
Akerly Pond Lane, this is the primary method one uses to reach
Route 48 - North R~. this manuever is dangerous in that the
driver has a poor view of too many areas where traffic may
appear.
3- Route 25 Westbound is a fast and heavily travelled road
which curves to the right and rises up Willow Hill. Drivers
have a difficult time watching for cars exiting:
a. Main Bayview Rd - and either making a left turn to
go West on Route 25 or attempting to cross Route 25 to Akerly
Pond Lane.
b. Akerly Pond Lane to make either a left of right turn
onto Route 25 or perhaps try to cross Route 25 to enter Main
Bayview Rd.
Many times cars are stopped on Route 25 Westbound in order to
make the left turn to Bayview Rd, this presents an additional
hazzard for all other traffic.
4- Worst of all is Akerly Pond Lane, a small primarily rural
road which presents unique problems. Drivers seeking to exit
this road face the mirror image of the problems already described.
a. Much traffic on Route 25 makes a ~ght of Westbound
turn, the only logical choice~ many however, want to cross
Route 25 to Main Bayview Rd or - to go left or Eastbound on Route
b. The Eastbound traffic coming over the crest of Willow
Hill makes Route 25 very difficult to see until traffic is
virtually upon ones self.
c. Traffic exiting from Main Bayview usually just slows
at the intersection ( It does not Stop) and then proceeds.
25.
One does not know if they are:
1. going to enter Route 25 Eastbound -meaning no
from Akerly Pond La
or 2. going across Route 25 to Akerly - also meaning no
from Akerly Pond La.
or 3. going left to enter Route
any turns at all from Akerly Pond La.
left
left
25 Westbound - precluding
If all this seems confusing to you it is~ but it is even more so
for the driver who must face it. I ask you to not add to the
confusion which is there, do not approve this variance.
With so many problems in this area, the additional traffic would
be unreasonable. To shift the cars onto Akerly Pond La is no
solution . The only solution is to not allow a 2600 square foot
retail store and office building on a piece of property which it
was never meant to hold. A lot with 31% insufficient area is not
a small matter and the board should consider that an owner who
who lacks 31% of the requirements should expect to be turned down.
I ask the board to not allow the repitition of such commercial
disasters such as the convience store East of town to reoccure now.
Thank you,
Donald Spates
Southold Town Board of Appeals
~AIN ROAD- STATE ROAD 25 SOUTHOLD, L.I.. N.Y. 119'71
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH H. SAWlCKI
TO WHOM IT MAY~CONCERN:
Concerning your recent application filed with our office, please
find enclosed a copy of the Legal Notice as published in the local and
official newspapers of the Town of Southold, to wit, the Suffolk Times
and the L.I. Traveler-Watchman indicating the date and time of your
public hearing.
Please have someone appear in your behalf at the time specified
in the event there are questions brought up during the public hear-
ing and in order to prevent any delay in tl~e p,'ocessing of your
application.
If you have any questions, or If you would like to review your
file prior to the hearing, please do not hesitate to either stop by our
office at the Southold Town Hall, or by calling our secretary, Linda
Kowalski, at 765-1809 (or, if no answer, 765-1802).
Yours very truly,
Ik
Enclosure
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER
CHAIRMAN
NOTICE IS H~R~B¥ OIV-,
EN, purmlmt to Section 267 of
th~ Tmvn Law ~md th~ Code of
th~ ~ of
held by th~ ~
~~OF~
at ~ ~u~oM ~n H~,
~ M~ ~ ~,.
in~ at the foH~ ~:
7:~5 p.m. A~ N~ 321~
~on ~ ~h ~
~ of ~ ~
Side of ~ ~ ~-
tituck, ~; ~t N~ 4, ~
Subdivision of Strawberry
the ~n Plnpo~ ~;~
1~i21-3-~ (~n~
7:~ ~, Ap~ No, 35~- ~
tion 1~32 for ~ulon to
~pl~ ~ ~,~ ~e :
No. 15, Map of N~u ~ '
Tax Map P~QI ~ N~ ] gO~ ~ ~. ~
7:45 ~ Ap~ N~ ~ ].~;. ~ II/~/~ A~
ARTHUR ESSLIN~R ~ ~
v~ m the ~nl~ ~. ' ,~~~m-
1~-11~.2 for ~r~on; .to ~ 5 md 12 fro, mth~ th~ 7
within 75 feet of ~iStinl~, t,~~"~of~-
bulk~ ~ ~ ~ it ~
1515 ~o~ A~
CHA~L~ AND ~D~' '~ ~P~ ~ ~ in this
~ ~t m ~ ~rk =~ ~ ~i n. of lot ~ (~.
the e~t side of ~u~ H~r ',, ~ ~' o*f Ap~ ~
~e ~ Old~ ~t~ ~ ~,~7 h~ at ~d ~e ~d p~ ~
(Private ~ad N~' 10), ~'~
p~ml~ known ~d mfer~ m ~ ~ m ~ h~ in ~ of ~e
as 695 Old Woods Path~ 4)' P~ ~ W~t~n ~m-~
~mhold, NY; ~unty ~ Map , ~M my abo ~ sUbmit~
~cel N~ 1~87-1-23.7. , ~ pdot m the ~nclusion of the
7:55 p.m. ~M No. 35~ ' Subj~h~.~r mo~infor-
NICHOLAS BABALIS. ~ ': .~on,:pl~ 765-18~.
V~an~ to the ~ning Or- , pa~:: ~mr ~, 1986
din~ ~ticle I11, ~on BY ORDER OF~E
1~31 for ~i~ion to ~on- .~ = ~OLD ~
struct n~ d~lHng with insuf- ' BOARD OF ~PEA~q
ficient no~herly ~de ~d ~d ~ ' OE~RD P. ~EHRINGER,
insuffi~ent m~ ~ds at ~q ~, CHAIRMAN
33~ ~ky ~t R~, ~t Lin~ Kow~ski,
M~on, ~; ~ty ~ M~'. ~ Boa~ S~re~
~el N~ 1~21~. ~ IT-12/4/86(49)
8:~ p.m. Ap~ N~ 3572-
MICHAEL AND JOYCE
~ S~M ~pfion-
~ ~d B~kf~t (~d
from II/~/86) ,,,
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
SS:
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 T, raveler-Watchman
once each week for .........................../ weeks
successively, commencing on the ......................
day~ of ./>~ ¢,,,~.,~ ,19 ~:
Sworn to before me this '9/~
.................... day of
...... . .~.'~. f.~'-' ~- 19 ~A
Notary Public
BARBARA FORBES
Notary Public, State of Ne.v York
No. 480(1316
Qaalificd in Suffolk County
Comrni.,'.,;ion Expires~ 3 / 19
NOT1CE OF H',~ARING~
NOTICE IS HERES~I~
GIVEN, pursuant to Section ~
of the Town Law and the C~e of
th~ Town of.~u~old the follow-
ing public Sea,rigs will ~ held
~ ~bo ~OLD ~WN
BO~D OF APPEA~ at the
7:35 p.m. Ap~l No. 3216 -
EUGE~ DAVI~N. Vari-
an~ ~ ~ ~ning O~inan~,
ond dwelling unit u~n 9.8~
a~ ~1 over existi~ ho~
~u& 8~ ~ ~nd Arena,
Mattituck, NY; ~t ~, Minor
Field, which ~i~ 6kerb
PI~ approval July 8, 1~ by
~e Town Planning ~a~;
County Tax Map P~e]
1~-121~ (mn~ining 12.6~
a~sL
~:40 p.m. A~al No. ~77
FRANK ~D
DAVlE~ Va~a~ ~ the ~-
ing O~inan~. Article III, ~
lion 1~32 for ~mi~ion ~
place a~ ~h~ in the no~
sideya~ a~a at 2~ Pine ~
, .~ad, Cu~bo~e, NY; ~t
Map of Na~u Farms
Ma~h 28, 1935; County
Map Pa~[ No.
7:45 p.m. Ap~al No. 3578
~THUR E~NGER. Va~-
A~icle Xl. ~on 1~119.~ for
STATE OFNEWYORK )
) SS:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK )
Carol SgarlaCa of Greenport, in
said County, being duly sworn, says that he/she is
Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly
Newspaper, published at Greenport, in the Town
of Southold. County of Suffolk and State of New
York, and that the Notice of which the annexed Is
a printed copy, has been regularly published In
9aid Newspaper once each week for one
weeks successively, commencing on the
deyof Dec 19 86
., .8:10 p.m. Appea| No. 3,557 -
"'ROBERT G. EGAN. Varianc~
' ~ amend Conditiona~ Approval
~Rendered 11/3/86 under Appeal
No. 3557 to allow r~canatruction
of dwelling with insumcient set-
backl~ upon foundation us exists
at 5 and 12 feet, rather than 7
and .12 feet, at 330 Knoll Circle,
!~'F-.~st Marion, NY; "Map of S~_,c-
t on Two, Gardiners Bay Ka-
Prlncips~ Clerk
be~l/~thls 1~0
/~./(._~.~ N~A~[U~UC:
~ Term Expires Februar~l~
permi~ion te locate acce~ory , tales," Subdivision Lots 27 and
siorage shed within 75 feet of part uf2{~; County Tax Map Dis-
existing bulkhead and wetlands trict 1000, Section 37. Block 5,
area at 1515 Arshamomaque
Avenue, Seuthold, NY; Lot #3l.
Map of Beixedon Eatatoa;/
County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000-66-3-11.
7:50 p,m, Appeal No. 3579 -
CHARLES AND 8ANDRA
BLAKE. Variance for Approval
of Access pursuant to New York
Town Law, Section 280-a from
the east aide of South Harbor
Lane along Old Woods Path IPri-
vate Road #10l, to premisea~
known and referred to as 695
Old Woods Path, Southo{d. NY;
. County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000-87-1-23.7,
7:55 p.m. Appoa} No. 3580 -
NICHOLAS BABAIJS. Vari-
ance to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article Ill, Section 100-31 for
dwelling with insul]]cient north-
eriy ~idu yard and insufficient
total sideyards at 3360 Rocky
Point Road, East Marion, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000.21-04.09.
8:00 pm. Appeal No. 3572 -
MICHAEL AND JOYCE
MATTES. Special Exception-
Be4 and Breakihst ~rece~ed
from 11120/86).
~t 12.
/ JOItN SENKO. Variance
Th Board of Appl,als wil!
.-\
in{( to be heard in eacl~ af the ~
'rim S()UTHOLD
TOWN BOARD
OF APPEALS
GERARD P. GOEIIRINGER,
CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski,
Board of Secretary
, ITD4-5446 '
Southold Town Board of Appeals
I~AIN RDAD- BTATE EDAD 2.5 SDUTHDLD, L.I., N.Y. 119'71
TELEPHONE (516) 765-1809
APPEALS BOARD
MEMBERS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, CHAIRMAN
CHARLES GRIGONI$, JR.
SERGE DOYEN, JR.
ROBERT J. DOUGLASS
JOSEPH B. SAWICKI
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
Enclosed herewith as confirmation of the time and date
of the public hearing concerning your recent application is
a copy of the Legal Notice as published in the L.I. Traveler-
Watchman, Inc. and Suffolk Weekly Times, Inc.
Someone should appear in your behalf during the public
hearing in the event the're are questions from board members
or persons in the audience. Please be assured that your
public hearing will not start before the time allotted in
the Legal Notice.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call
our office, 765-1809.
Yours very .t~ulv_~, .. ~
G~ERARD P."GOEHR~NGER '~
CHAIRMAN
Enclosure
Linda .Kowalski
Secretary and Board Clerk
Page 4 Notice of Hearings (Notification List)
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Regular Meeting - November 20, 1986
Copies to the following 11/6/86:
Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Best, Camp Mineola Road, Box 609, Mattituck, NY 11952
Mr. and Mrs. Stamatio Rapanakis, North Bayview Road, Southold, NY 11971
Mr. Dennis Ketcham, Manager, Boatmen's Harbor
Cutchogue, NY 11935
Mr. and Mrs. Michael Mattes, 50 Luthers Road,
(P.O. Box 831)
Marina, 3350 West Creek
Mattituck, NY 11952
Ave.,
Frank A. Field Realty, Inc., Box 631, Greenport, NY 11944
Mr. and Mrs. Paul Henry, 236 North Road, Box S, Greenport, NY 11944
Charles R. Cuddy, Esq., Attorney for Mrs. B.D. Schriever
Esseks, Hefter, Cuddy & Angel, Box 279, Riverhead, NY 11901
Stephen R. Angel, Esq., Attorney for Mr. J. Senko
Esseks, Hefter, Cuddy & Angel, Box 279, Riverhead, NY 11901
Dr. and Mrs. John Loreto, Box 41, Cutchogue, NY 11935
Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq., Attn: Mrs. P.C. Moore~'Attorney for A. Stillo
Main Road, Southold, NY 11971
for Sanders
Rudolph H. Bruer, Esq., Att~: Mrs. P.C. Moore, Attorney
and Schwartz, Main Road, Southold, NY 11971.
Town Clerk Bulletin Board
Z.B.A. Office Bulletin Board
Building Department
Z.B.A. Individual Files
Z.B.A. Board Members
Personal Deli-very - Suffolk Times and L.I. Traveler-Watchman
' ~CE .' IS HERBBY
GIY~I~N+ p~muant to Sect~n 267
of tl~e Twn tar, v and the C~xle of
t~ To~ ~ follow-
ing public h6a~n~ ~11 ~ held
by the ~OLD ~
BOARD OF APPEA~ at t~
~thold Town Hall, M~in ~d,
~th~d, NY at ~.~lar ~t-
WEDNESDAY, ~BER ~
7~ p.m. A~al No. 35~ -
~ne Hea~nR - JEF-
TED ~. V~an~ ~ the
ce~ of maximum-~rmit~
hack from tidal wetlands. ~a-
~ne, ~t M~n; ~unty Tax
j7:45 p.m. A~l No. 3~52 -~
OHN SENKO thy G. Strange. }
~OM~ ~C~. Vari-
un~ ~ the ~ning O~inance,
~ d~lling within75 f~t of wet-
permitt4~l~ of lot area; md
Ibl an i~ient aellm~t, from
tidal weTI'EMla an~ highwater
mark along Eugene's Creek, at
the East Side of Oak Stn~t,
(jutchogee~ NY; County Tax
Map Parcel IVo. 1000-136-1~16.
8:05 p.m. Appeal No. 3550-
JOSEPH AND LINDA
SCHOENSTEIN. Variances to
the Zoning Ordinance, Article~:
iai VI, Section 100-60 for per-
miasinn to expand nonconform-
ing use of welding busine~s.~n
thi.~ "B-Light Rusine~' Zoning
District; Ibl XI. Section 100-
119.ViBi for permi.~ion to con-
struct new building and expand
nom~n forming welding bt~ine~
use within 75 feet of wetlands
arA. a, at premises located along
the ~)uth side of Main Road,
Grc~enport. N Y; County Tax Map
Parcels No. 1000-53-2-12, t3,
15.1 115~; LoL~ 172, 173, 174,
Peomic Bay Estates Map No.
~58, and Map No. 1124 ~
Amended.
The Bd~rd of Appeals will
bear at said time and place all
lng te be heard in each of the
abeve hearings. Written c~m-
ment.~ may a[~) be submitted
prior to the c~mclusion of the
subject hearing. For more infor-
mation, pi%ease call 7{L5-1809.
Dated: Octobe.r 2, 1986.
BY ORDER OF
THE SOUTHOLD
TOWN BOARD
· TATE OF NEW YORK )
) ~:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK )
Carol Sqatlata of Greenport, in
hid County, being duly ~worn, nays that he/~he i.
Pflncipal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly
Newspaper, published at Greenport, in the Town
of Southold, County of Suffolk end State of N~w
York, end that the Notice of which the annexed in
a printed copy, has been regularly published in
said Newspaper once each week for one
OF APPEALS ~ . -, -
weeks succensively, commencing on the 16
dayof Oct __ 19 86
Sworn to b
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIV-
EN, pursuant to Sgction 267 of
the Town Law and the Code of
the Town of Southold, the
following p~blic hearings will be
held by the SOUTHOLD
TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS
at the Southold Town Hall,
Mllin Ro~d, Southold, NY at a
Regular Meeting commencing at
7:30 p.m. on WEDNESDAY,
OCTOBI~R, 22,1986 ~nd 'as
follows: ~
7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 3538-
Reconvene Hearing- JEFFREY
BETTANCOURT.
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3464-
TED DOWD. Variances to the
Zoning Ordinance, Article III,
Section 100-31, and XI, Section
100-119.2 for permission to
locate new single-family dwell-
ing: (al with an insufficient fron-
tyard setback, (b) with an insuf-
ficient sideyard setback, (c) with
an insufficient matyard setback,
(d) with total lot coverage in ex-
cess of maximum-permitted
20%, (¢) with insufficient set-
back from tidal wetlands. Loca-
tion of Property: 350 Rabbit
Lane, East Marion; County Tax
Map Parcel No. 1000-31-18-8.
7:45 p.m. Appeal No. 3552-
JOHN SENKO (by G. Strang).
7:50 p.m. Appeal No. 3567-
THOMAS WICKHAM.
Variance tO; 'the Zoning Or-
dinance, .Article XI, Section
100-119.2 for permission to con-
stru~t .~lddition to dwelling
withill 75 feet of wetlands and
high~ ~nark along the West
Side of ~st Creek Avenue, Cut-
chogue, NY; County 'I?ax Map
Pareel No. 1000:-103-13-10.
7:5~5. p.m. Appeal No. 3563-
RITA F. GLEDICH. Variances
to the Zoning Ordinance, Ar-
ticles 111, Section 100-31, Bulk
Schedule, and XI, ~ection
100-119.2, for permissiofi'to con-
struct open deck and dwelling
additions with: (a) total lot
coverage in excess of maximum
pbrmitted'20% of lot ar6a, and
(b) an insufficient setbackfrom
tidal 'wetlands and~ highWat~r
mark alon~ El~gencai creek, at.
the EastS'Me of Oak street,
Cutchogt~e, NY; Coun{~ q'ax
Map Pasdifl NO. 1000-136-1~.
8:05 p.m. Appear N0. 3550-
JOSEPH AND LtNDA:
SCHOENSTEIN. Vasi~nces to
the Zoning OrdinaS~¢.~ ~Arti¢les:
(a) vI~ S~tion toO~,~t ~r-
mission t° egpand noii~
ing use of Wqding business,in
this "B-Light Business" zoning
District; (b) XI, Section
100-119.2(B) for permission to
construct new building and ex-
pand nonconforming welding
business use within 75 feet of
wetlands area, at premises
located along the south side of
Main Road, Greenport, NY;
County Tax Map ParcelsNo.
1000~53-2-12, 13, 15.1 (15); Lots
172, 173, 174, Peconic Bay
Estates Map No. 658, and Map
No. 1124 as Amended.
The Board of Appeals will
hear at said time and place all
persons or representatives desir-
ing to be heard in each of the
above hearings. Written com-
ments may also be submitted
prior to the conclusion of the
subject hearing. For more infor-
mation, please call 765-1809.
Dated: October 2, 1986.
BY ORDER OF THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN
BOARD OF APPEALS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,
CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski,
Board Secretary
IT-10/16/86(52)
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
ss:
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;
a~d 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 ........ ' .............
4.':!
Sworn to before me this .......... <"~ .... day ol
Notary Public
B.',R ['; ~ i~/~
Legals
existing building for storage and
~ repv r contractor's machinery
and ~uipment. Location of
Property: West Side of Tabor
NOTICE OF HEARINGS Road, Orient, NY; County Tax s:
Map District, 1000, Section 18,
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIV- Block 05, Lot 12. "B-Light"
Business Zoning District. '~
EN, pursuant to Section 267 of /~' 8:20 p.m. Appeal No 3552-~,
the Town Law and the Code of /J_OHN SENKO Rec~nvene/ ul,/ sworn, says that she is the
the Town of Southold, the [ h-~arin~c~ Variance for/ AND TRAVELER-WATCHMAN,
following public hearings will be . . .
held by the ~ / ghe°nPeP~:~ cel~utesrinUeSsesln ~h°iSniBn-lg~ at $outhold, in Suffolk County;
WN BOARD OF APPEALS
at ttie ==e~~, kx District containing 30,084 sq. ft.\ h the annexed is a printed copy',
) in lot area. Location of Proper- / L()n~ s and Traveler War 'h
MainRegularRoad,MeetingSOUthold,commencingNY atata j ty: Intersection of Ackerly Pond ~ ~; / c man
7:30 p.m. on THURSDAY, / Lane and North Side of Main ) .................... weeks
/ Road, Southold, NY; County . ;.
foII6ws:NOVEMBER 20~ t986hnd as ~ Tax Map District, 1000, Section 1 the ; '
7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 3573- ' 70, Block 7, Lot 1. ' .....................
M R T AND JO EPH 8:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3574-
BEST. Variance to the Zoning ~HN LORETO. Variance
Or611lance, Article III, Section to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti-
100-32 for permission to locate cie ltl, Sections 100-30 and
accessory garage structure in the 100-32, and Article XI, Section
frontyard area at premises 100-119.2, for permission to
located on the south side of a construct storage building
private right-of-way extending with an insufficient set-back
off the east side of Camp from bluff along Long Island :
Mineola Road, Mattituck, NY; Sound for storage purposes ac-
County Tax Map Parcel No. cessory and incidental to the ex- · ...... ........... d,~y o f
1000-123-06-17. isting dwelling adjacent to these
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3571- premises. Location of Proper-
MARGARET AND JOSEPH ties: Lots No. 3 and No. 2, Map
B,I~T. Variance to the Zoning of Vista Bluff No. 5060;
Ordinance, Article XI, Section North Side of Glen Court, Cut-
100-119.2 for permission to con- chogue, NY; County Tax Map
struct addition at the southerly District, 1000, Section 83, Block
side of existing dwelling with in- 1, Lots 9 and 8.
sufficient setback from the 8:55 Appeal No. 3562- ANA
bulkhead along tidal water area G. STILLO. Variances: (1) to the
and insufficient setback from Zoning Ordinance, Article Ill,
Section 100-31, for approval of
the rear property line at
premises located on the south insufficient lot area, width and
sideofaprivateright-of-wayex- depth of three parcels in this
tending off the east side of pending Minor Subdivision, and
Camp Mineola Road, Mat- (2) to New York Town Law, Sec-
tituck, NY; County Tax Map tion 280-a for approval of access
Parcel No. 1000-123-06-17. over private right-of-way exten-
T:45 p.m. Appeal No. 3568- ding from the north side of
$_T_AMATIOS AND ALENI Main Road to the premises in
RAPANAKtS. Special Excep- question. Location of Property:
tiontothe Zoning Ordinance, to At' the north end of private
establish one accessory apart- right-of-way (along landsof B.
ment in the existing dwelling Brokaw), North Side of Main
structure in accordance with the Road, Orient, NY; County Tax
requirements of Article ltl, Sec- Map District, 1000, Section 14,
tion 100-30(B) subsection [151. Block 2, LOt 26, containing 3.2
Location of Property: 2030 acres total.
Boisseau Avenue, Southold, NY; 9:05 p.m. Appeal No. 3519-
County Tax Map District, 1000, STEVEN SANDERS & ANO.
Section 55, Block 6, LOt 40. Variance to the Zoning Or-
7:50 p.m. Appeal No. 3569- dinance, Article Ill, Section
BOATMEN'S HAR_B~OR_ 100-31 for approval of insuffi-
MARINa~.Variance to theZon- cient lot area, width and set-
lng Ordinance, Article XI, Sec- backs in this pending set-off
tion 100-119.2 for permission to division of land. Location of
construct addition to existing Property: Private Right-of-Way
dwelling with an insufficient set- located off the north side of Bay
back from existing bulkhead. View Avenue, Mattituck, NY;
Location of Property: 3350 West County Tax Map District, 1000,
Creek Avenue, Cutchogue, NY; Section 106, Block 06, Lot 36.
County Tax Map District i000, The Board of Appeals will
Section 110, Block 01, Lot 12. hear at said time and place all
7:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3572- persons or representatives desir-
MICHAEL AND JOYCE ing to be heard in each of the
MATTES. Special Exception to above hearings. Written com-
the Zoning Ordinance, Article ments may also be submitted
Ill, Section 100-30-(B)[16] for prior to the conclusion of the
permission to establish "Bed subject hearing. For more infor-
and Breakfast Use," "an owner- mation, please call 765-1809.
occupied building, other than a Dated: November 3, 1986
hotel, where lodging and BY ORDER OF THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN
breakfast is provided for not
more than six casual, transient BOARD OF APPEALS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,
roomers, and renting of not
more than three rooms:'Loca-
tion of Property: 50 Luthers
Road, Mattituck, NY; County
Tax Map District, 1000, Section
113, Block 03, Lot 7.
8:00 p.m. Appeal No. 3565-
FRANK FIELD REALTY INC.
Variance to the Zoning Or-
dinance, Article Ill, Section
100-3 for permission to establish
two-family dwelling use on a
parcel of land containing less
than 160,000 sq. ft. in area, 270
ft. lot width, 400 ft. lot depth,
and with insufficient frontyard,
sideyard, and rearyard setbacks.
Location of Property: 320 Lin-
nett Street, Greenport, NY; Map
of Greenport Driving Park No.
369, Lots No. 71 and No. 72;
County Tax Map District 1000,
Section 48, Block 2, Lot 36.1.
8:05 p.m. Appeal No.
3566-SE. FRANK FIELD
REALTY INC. Special Excep-
tion to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article 111, Section 100-30 (B)for
permission to establish two-
family use at premises referred
to as 320 Linnett Street, Green-
port, NY; Map of Greenport
Driving Park No. 369, Lots No.
7l and 72; County Tax Map
District, 1000, Section 48, Block
2, Lot 36.1.
8:10 p.m. Appeal No.
3570-SE- PAUL HENRY.
Special Exception to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article 11I, Section
100-30(B)[16] for permission to
e~tablish "Bed and Breakfast
Use," "an owner-occupied
CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski,
Board Secretary
IT-11/13/86(1)
~ry Public
Legal Notices
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE IS ItEREBY
{lIVEN. pursuant to Section 267
lhe T~wn of Soulhohl, the hdlow
lng public hearings will be beld
by the SOUTHOLD TOWN
BOARD OF APPEALS at the
S. uthold Town Hail, Main Road.
~outhold, NY at a Regular Meel-
THURSDAY. NOVEMBER
20, 1986 and as follows:
7:35 pm. Appeal No 3573
MARGARET AND dOSEPH
BEST. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article 1II, Section
100-32 for permission to locate
the frontyard area at premmes
located on the south side ola pri-
vate right o£way extending off
the east side of Camp Mineola
Road, Mattituck, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel No. 1000-123-
08-17.
7:40 pm. Appeal No. 3571 -
MARGARET AND JOSEPH
REST. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article XI, Section
100-119.2 for permission to con-
struct addition at the southerly
side of existing dwelling with in-
sufficient setback from the bulk-
head along tidaI water area and
insufficient setback from the
rear property line at premises lo-
cated on the south side of a pm-
rate right-of-way extending off
the east side of Camp Mineola
Road, Mattituck, NY: County
Tax Map Parcel No 1000-123-
BOATMEN'S HARBOR MA-
RINA. Variance to the Zoning
MICHAEL AND JOYCE
MATTES. Special Exception to
where lodging and breakfast is
FRANK FIELD REALTY
· JOHN SENKO. Reconvene
shopping center use in lhis tl l
General Business Zoning Dis ,
Lane and North Side ~]f' Main
Road. Southold; County Tax
8, Block 2, Lot 36 1 Block 7, Lot 1.
8:11) p.m Appeal No. 3570-SE ~
PAUL HENRY. Special Ex- 8:40 p.m. Appeal No. 35T4_-J
ception to the Zoning Ordinance, DR. JOHN LORETO. Vari
Article III, Section 100-30~Bi[
for permission to establish "Bed
and Breakfast Use," "an owner-
occupied building, other than a
hotel, where lodging and break-
tiist is provided for not more
than six casual, transient room~
ers, and renting of not more than
three rooms" Location of Prop-
erty: 236 f68555 C R. 48/ North
Road, at intersection with
McCann Lane, Greenport, NY;
County Tax Map District 1000,
Section 033, Block 05, Lot 13 1.
8:15 pm Appeal No 3576
BARBARA D. SCHRIEVER.
Application to withdraw Vari-
ance conditionally approved
under Appeal No. 3393 on Sep-
tember 26, 1985, and to
ante to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article III, Sections 100-30 and
100-32, and Article XI, Section
100-1 i92, for permissmn to con-
struct storage building with an
insufficient setback from bluff
along Long Island Sound fbr
storage purlx~ses accessory and
incidental to the existing dwell
lng adjacent to these premises
Location of Properties: Lots #3
and #2, Map of Vista Bluff
#5060; North Side of Glen
Court, Cutchogue, NY; County
Tax Map District 1000, Section
83, Block 1,Lots9 and g.
8:55 p.m Appeal No. 3562
ANA G. STILLO. Variances:
~1 ! to the Zoning Ordinam;e. Ar-
ticle III. Section 100-31, for ap-
The Board of Appeals will
BY ORDER OF
BOARD OF APPEALS
CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski,
STATE OFNEWYORK )
) SS:
COUNTY OFSUFFOLK )
Carol Sgarlata ofGroonport, in
said County, being duly sworn, says that ho/she is
Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly
Newspaper, published at Greenport. in the Town
of Southold. County of Suffolk and State of New
York, and that the Notice of which the annexed ia
a printed copy, has been regularly published in
one
said Newspaper once each week for
weeks successively, commenCing on tho l 3
day of ...,~.nh~ 19 $~
Principal Clerk
Sworn to bo~o.r.R/me this
day
JUDITIt T TERRY
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
August 27, 1986
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 728
Southold, New York 11971
TELEPHONE
(516) 765-1801
To: Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals
From: Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk
Transmitted herewith is Zoning Appeal No. 3552 application of Garrett A. Strang
for John Senko for a variance. Also included is Notice to Adjacent Property
Owners; Short Environmental Assessment Form; letter relative to NYS Tidal Wet-
lands Lane Use; Notice of Disapproval from the Building Department; Topo-
graphical survey; and site plan.
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
BOARD OF APPEALS, TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
:
In the Matter of the Petition of :
Garrett A. Stran~ for Senko :
:
to the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold :
TO:
NOTICE
TO
ADJACENT
PROPERTY OWNER
Mr. John J. Chaloner
27 Washington Square
New York, N.Y. 10011
YOU ARE HEREBY GIVEN NOTICE:
1. That it is the intention of the undersigned to petition the Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold
to request a (Variance) (~i~![~t[:I(~#:~) (:~RI~I~) ~ [circle choice]
2. That the property which is the subject of the Petition is located adjacent to your property and is des-
cribed as follows: Tax Map # 1000 - 070-07-01
South West corner of the intersection of Bowery La. (aka Ackerly
Pond Lane) with New York State Rt. 25 (aka Main Road) Southold
3. Thattheproperty whichisthesubjectofsuchPetitionislocatedinthefollowingzoningdistrict:
" B-I" General Business
4. ThatbysuchPetition, theundersigned wiUrequestthefollowingrelief:
Reduction in the required Lot Area
$. That the provisions of the Southold Town Zoning Code applicable to the relief sought by the underq
signedare Article VII Section 100-70 (reference sect. 100-62 B)
6. That within five days from the date hereof, a written Petition requesting the relief specified above will
be filed in the Southold 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, ne~vspapers 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: Aug. 26, 1986
Petitioner: Garrett A. Strang, R.A.
Post Office Address
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, New York 11971
NAME
pROOF OF MAILING OF NOTICF
AT,TACH CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS
ADDRESS
Mr. John J. Chaloner
27 Washington Sq.
New York, N.Y. 10011
US. POSTAL SERVICE
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Garrett A. Strang~ R.A.
P.O. Box 1412
Southold, N.Y. 11971
Mr. John Chaloner
27 Washington Square
New York, N.Y. 10011
STATE OF NEW YORK )
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK )
SS.:
Garrett A. Strang .. residing at Main Road, Mattituck N.Y.
~ being duly sworn, deposes and says that on the 26thday
of ~.m~- ,19 86 , deponent mailed a true copy of the Notice set forth on the re-
verse side here0[, directed to each of the above-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 roll of the Town of Southold; that said Notices were mailed at the United States Post Of-
fice at Southold ; that said Notices were mailed to each of said persons by
(certified) ~:ll~-~i~rjt~ mail. ~~~
Sworn to before me this ,~ 7
day of ~:-'-~..~, ,19 ~
Notary Public
7
~f
7:35 p.m. Appeal No. 3559 -
LEONARDUS AND MARIE
VANOUDENALLEN. Vari-
ance to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article HI, Section 100-31 for
permission to construct addition
to dwelling with an insufficient
frontyard setback, at 230
Sailor's Lone, Cutchogue, NY;
District 1000, Section 111, Block
14, Lot 07.
7:40 p.m. Appeal No. 3555 -
SHIRLEY HOMAN. Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance~ Article
III, Section 100-31 for permis-
sion to construct addition to
dwelling with an insuffi~iont
rearyard setback, at 160 Smith
Drive, Peconic, NY; District
1000, Section 98, Block 3, Lot 38.
7:45 p.m. Appeal No. 3554 -
NORMAN AND KAREN
REICH. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article IIL Section
100-31 for permission to con-
struct dwelling with an insuffi-
cisnt rearyard setback, at 1809
Right-of-Way offthe East Side of
Rocky Point Road, Bast Marion,
NY; District 1000, Section 31,
Block 3, Part of Lot 10; Kimon
and Retzos Minor Subdivision
#81, Lot #2.
7:50 p.m. Appeal No. 3547 -
JOSEPH AND CATHERINE
RIEMER. Variance to the Zon-
ing Ordinance, Article 111, Sec-
tion 100-31, Bulk Schedule for
approval of insufficient lot area,
width and depth of two parcels
known and referred to as Lots
· #96, 97, 98 and half of 99 at
peconic Bay Estates, Map
#1124, and identified on the
County Tax Maps as District
1000~ Section 53, Block 4, Lot 32.
7:55 p.m. Appeal No. 3503 -
GEORGE D. DAMIEN. Vari-
ance requesting confirmation of
Building Inspector's actions and
prior Z.B.A. Decision Rendered
under Appeal No. 949 of 911166,
recognizing two separate build-
ing lots, having insufficient
area, width and depth as re-
quired by Article II1, Section
100-31, Bulk Schedule of the
Zoning Code. Location of Prop.
arty: Comers of Jackson, Fifth
and Main Streets, New Suffolk,
NY; County Tax Map District
1000, Section 17, Black 9, Lot 12.
8:00 p.m. Appeal No. 3484 -
pHILIP AND ELLEN BEL-
LOMO. Variance to the Zoning
Ordinance, Article X1, Section
100-119.2(C) for permission to
construct addition at rear of
dwelling with an insufficient
setback from wetlands along
Great Pond, at 7455 Seundview
Avenue, Seuthold, NY; County
'Tax Map District 1000, Section
59, Block 6, Lot 8.
f8:05 p.m. Appeal NO..3552 -~
[JOHN SENKO, Variance to the
[ Zoning Ordinance, Article VII,
~ Section 100-70, and Article VI,.
~ Section 100-62(BL for permis-
~ sion to establish shoppingcenter
· use in this "B-I' General Busi-
~ ness Zoning District with insuf-
] ficient lot area at 49295 Main
] Road a/Ica Ack,fly Pond Lone),
~ Southold. NY: County Tax Map
~ District 1000, Section 70, Black
~ 07, Lot 01, containing 30,084±
8:10 p.m. Appeal No. 3553 -
EUGENE BOZZO. Variances
to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti-
cles: ~1) XI, Section 100-119.2 for
permission to construct dwelling
with an insufficient setback
from wetlands/tidal water along
Great Peconic Bay; ~21 III, Sec-
tion 100-32 to relocate accessory
garage building in the frontyard
area; (3) Ill, Section 100-31,
Bulk Schedule, to constract with
lot coverage of all structures in
excess of maximum-permitted
20-psrcent. Location of Property:
South Side of Camp Mineola
Road, Mattituck; County Tax
Map District 1000, Section 123,
Block 6, LOt 27.
8:15 p.m. Appeal No. 3557 -
ROBERT EGAN. Variances to
the Zoning Ordinance, Articles:
¢1) II1, Section 100-31 to recon-
struct dwelling with insufficient
total sideyards, insufficient
(northwesterly) side yard, and
insufficient front yard; (2) XI,
Section 100-~119.2(B) for petrols-
sion to construct addition and re-
construct dwelling within 75
feet of tidal wetlancts along
Spring Pond, Orient Harbor. Lo*
cation of Property: 330 Knoll
Circle, East Marion, NY; "Map
of Section Two, Gardiners Bay
Estates," Subdivision Lots 27
and part of 28; County Tax Map
District 1000, Section 37, Block
5, LOt 12.
8:25 p.m. Appl. No. 3487-SE -
CHURCH OF THE OPEN
DOOR. Special Exception to the
Zoning Ordinance, Article II!,
SectiOn 100-30(B){2] for permis-
sion to construct and establish
House of Worship with related
religious activities on a five-acre
tract of land referred to ss Lot
#3, Minor Subdivision of Salva-
tore Catapano, which received
Sketch-Plan Approval 4114186
by the Town Planning Board.
Location of Property: West Side
of Main Bayview Read, Seuth-
oldF NY; County Tax Map Dis-
trict 1000, Section 69, Block 6,
Part of Lots 8 and 2. (Current
Owners: S. and J. Catapano).
8:45 p.m. Appeal No. 3560 -
EDMUND AND JOAN PRES-
SLER. Appeal from Building In-
spector Notice of Disapproval
dated 1/?.J86 and ZBA Action
#3463 dated 5/6/86, and Vari-
ance to the Zoning Ordinance,
Article VII, Section 100-71, Bulk
Schedule and Article VH, Sec-
tion 100-70(A)i 1 I(d) for permis-
sion to establish a second retail/
business use in conjunction with
existing nonconforming two-
family dwelling and antique-
sales business use on this parcel
of 68,912 sq. f~. in area and 95.44
ft. lot width. Location of prop-
erty: "B-I" General Business
Zoning District, North Side of
Main Road, Seuthold, NY;
County Tax Map Parcel No.
1000-63-3-26.
The Board of Appeals will
hear at said time and place all
persons or representatives de,ir-
lng to be heard in each of the
above hearings. Written com-
meats 'may also be submitted
prior to the conclusion of the
subject hearing. For more infor-
mation, please call 765-1809.
Dated: September 11,'1986.
~ BY ORDER OF
THE SOUTHOLD
TOWN-BOARD OF
APPEALS
GERARD P. GOEHRINGER,
CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowalski,
ITS25-5362
STATE OF NEW YORK ) ~\
) S8:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK )
~-h~r~ ~ R~nr~ r~h.~ of Greenport, in
aald Gounty, baing duly aworn, saya that ha/aha la
Principal Clark of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a Weekly
Newapapar, publiahad at Greenport, in tha Town
of $outhold, County of Suffolk and State of New
York, and that tha Notice of which tha annaxad la
a printad ¢op¥, haa baen r®gularly publlahad In
said Newspaper once each week for 1
weeks 8ucceealvely, commencing on the 25
dayof ~p~]a~ 19 ~
/ -' I~rlncip/al Clark '
Sworn to before me this
day o,
M~R¥ K. DEGHJ~N
NOIkRY PUBLIC, ,State ot New Ye~k
NOTICE OF HEARINGS
NOTICE IS HEREBY
GIVEN, pursuant to Section
267 of theTown Law and the
Code of the Town of Southold,
the following public hearings
will be held by the SOUTHOLD
TOWN BOARD OF AP-
PEALS at the Southold Town
Hall, Main Road, Southold,
NY at a Regular Meeting com-
mencing at 7:30 p.m. on
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 2,
1986 and as follows:
7:35 p.m. Appeal No.
3559-LEONARDUS AND
MARIE VANOUDEN-
ALLEN. Variance to the Zon-
ing Ordinance, Article III, Sec-
tion 100-31 for permission to
construct addition to dwelling
with an insufficient frontyard
setback; at 230 Sailor's Lane,
Cutchogue, N.Y.; District 1000,
Section 111, Block 14, Lot 07.
7:40 p.m. Appeal No.
3555-SHIRLEY HOMAN.
Variance to the Zoning Or-
dinance, Article Ill, Section
100-31 for permission to con-
struct addition to dwelling with
an insufficient remyard setback,
at 160 Smith Drive, Peconic,
NY; District 1000, Section 98,
Block 3, Lot 38.
7:45 p.m. Appeal No.
3554-NORMAN AND KAREN
REICH. 'aafi?aqce te the Zoning
Ordinance, Article 111, Section
100-31 for permission to con-
struct dwelling with an insuffi-
cient rear yard setback, at 1809
County Tax Maps as District
1000, Section 53, Block 4, Lot
32.
7:55 p.m. Appeal No.
3503-GEORGE D. DAMIEN.
Variance requesting confirma-
tion of Building Inspector's ac-
tions and prior Z.B.A. Decision
Rendered underAppealNo. 949
of 9/I/66, recognizing two
separate building lots, having
insufficient area, width and
depth as required by Article Ill,
Section 100-3 l, Bulk Scheduling
of Zoning Code. Location of
Property: Corners of Jackson,
Fifth and Main Streets, New
Suffolk, NY; County Tax Map
District 1000, Section 17, Block
9, Lot 12.
8:00 p.m. Appeal No.
3484-PHILIP AND ELLEN
BELLOMO. Variance to the
Zoning Ordinance, Article XI,
Section 100-119.2(C) for per-
mission to construct addition at
rear of dwelling with an insuf-
ficient setback from wetlands
along Great Pond, at 7455
Soundview Avenue, Southold,
NY; County Tax Map District
1000, Sec6nn 59. Block 6, lot
8.
8:05 p.m. Appeal No.
3552-JOHN SENKO. Variance
to the Zoning Ordinance, Arti-
~t.~f-W~a,¥ off tbe Eas, t S de ~le VII Sec,~iOO 100-70, an4 Ar -
Kimon and Retzos Minor Sub- General Business Zoning
division No. 81, Lot No. 2.
7:50 p.m. Appeal No.
3547-JOSEPIn AND
CATHERINE RIEMER.
Variance to the Zoning Or-
dinance, Article Ill, Section
100-31, Bulk Schedule for ap-
proval of insufficient lot area,
width and depth of two parcels
known and referred to as Lots
No. 96, 97, 98 and half of 99 at
Peconic Bay Estates, Map No.
1124, and identified on thc
District with insufficient lot area
at 49295 Main Road (a/k/a
Ackerly Pond Lane), Southold,
NY; County Tax Map District
1000, Section 70, Block 07, Lot
01, containing 30,084+ sq. ft.
8:10 p.m. Appeal No.
3553-EUGENE BOZZO.
Variances to the Zoning Or-
dinance, Articles: (1) XI, Sec-
tion 100-119.2 for permission to
construct dwelling with an in-
sufficient setback from
wetlands/tidal water along
Great Peconic Bay; (2) 111, Sec-
tion 100-32 to relocate accessory
garage building in the frontyard
area; (3) Ill, Section
Bulk Schedule, to construct
with lot coverage of all struc-
tures in excess of maximum-
permitted 20 percent. Location
of Property: South Side of
Camp Mineola Road, Mat-
tituck; County Tax Map District
1000, Section 123, Block 6, Lot
27.
8:15 p.m. Appeal No.
3557-ROBERT EGAN.
Variances to the Zoning Or-
dinance, Articles (1) III, Section
100-31 to reconstruct dwelling
with insufficient total sideyards,
insufficient (northwesterly) side
yard, and insufficient front
yard; (2) XI, Section
100-119.2(B) for permission to
construct addition and
reconstruct dwelling within 75
feet of tidal wetlands along
Spring Pond, Orient Harbor.
Location of Property: 330 Knoll
Circle, East Marion, NY; "Map
of Section Two, Gardiners Bay
Estates." Subdivision Lots 27
and part of 28; County Tax
Map District 1000, Section 37,
Block 5, Lot 12.
8:25 p.m. Appl. No.
3487-SE-CHURCH OF THE
OPEN DOOR. Special excep-
tion to the Zonbig Ordinance,
Article 111, Section 100-30(B)[2]
for permission to construct and
establish House of Worship
wish related religious activities
on a five-acre tract of land
referred to as Lot No. 3, Minor
Subdivision of Salvatore
Catapano, which received
Sketch-Plan Approval 4/14/86
by the Town Planning Board.
Location of Property: West
Side of Main Bayview Road,
Southold, NY; County Tax
Map District 1000, Section 69,
Block 6, Part of Lots 8 and 2.
(Current Owners: S. and J.
Catapano).
8:45 p.m. Appeat No.
3560-EDMUND AND JOAN
PRESSLER. Appeal from
Building Inspector Notice of
Disapproval dated 1/2/86 and
ZBA Action No. 3463 dated
5/6/86, and Variance to the
Zonihg Ordinance, Article VII,
Section 100-71, Bulk Schedule
and Article V/l, Section
100-70(A)[l](d) for permission
to establish a second
retail/business use in conjuoc-
!ion with existing nonconform-
ing two-family dwelling and
antique-sales business use on
this parcel of 68,912 sq. fl. in
area and 95.44 ft. lot width.
Location of Property: "B-I"
General Business Zoning
District, North Side of Main
Road, Southold, NY; County
Tax Map Parcel No.
10~)-63-3-26.
The Board of Appeals will
bear at said time and place all
persons or representatives desir-
ing to be heard in each of the
above hearings. Written com-
ments may also be s~l~mit!e~
prior to the conclusion of the
subj.ect hearing. For moran for-
matron, please call 765-1809.
Dated: S~ptemb~r I 1, 1986.
BY ORDER OF THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN
BOARD OF APPEALS
GERARD p. GOEHRINGER,
CHAIRMAN
Linda Kowaiski,
Board Secretary
l T-9/25/86(16)
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
SS:
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 T~veler-Watchman
once each week for ........................... weeks
successively, commencing on the .......... .~.~ ..~. .....
day~~' '~(:~' ' i" 19 ' 'ff:~'~' ' ~ ~
Sworn to before me this '~' day of
............. ,19c~
Notary Public
BARBARA FORBES
Notary Public, State of New York
No. 4806846
Qualified in Suffolk County
Commission Expires~. 3/ 19 ~F
SHORT ENVIRONTv[EI'{TAL ASSESSMENT FORM
(a) In order to answer the questions in this short EAF is is essumod that the
preparer will use currently available lnfor~ation concerning the project and tho
likely ~mpacts of the action. I~ Is no~ e~ec~ed t~t additional s~udies, research
or other investigations w~l be ~dertaken,
(b) If any question has been answered Yes the project ~y be si~ican~ and a
ccmpleted Enviro~en~al Assessmen~ Fo~ is necessa~/.
(c) If all questions ~ve been answered Ho it Is l~ely t~t this project
(d) ~vi~om~en=al Assessment
1. W~i project res~ in a large physical cb3nse
to =h~oPrOJect si~e or physicall~ alter more
~ acres o~ la~d? ~ . . . . . . , . . . · Yes X No
2. W~i there be a ~Jor change to any ~ique or
unusual land fo~ fo~d on the site? . . · · ,, Yes X'
]. Will project al=er or ~ve a large effect on
an ex2s=~g body of water? . . . . . . . . . . Yes X
&, W~i 9roJec~ have a potentially large ~ on
~o,~d~er quality? ' · ' · · · · · · · · ., Yes X No
5. W~i pro~ect si~ificantly effect dra~a{e ~
on adJacen~ sites? ' ' ' · · · · · · · · Yes ~ No
6. Will ~ro~ect affect any =~eatened or endangered
plan% or anal s~ecies? , . . . . , . , · · Yes X No
7. ~1 proJec~ res~z in a major adverse effect on
air quality? ' · ' · · , · · · · · Yes X No
8. W~I project have a =a Jot effect on visuel c~
acter of the co~uni~y or scenic views or
kn~ ~o be ~portan~ ~o ~he co.unity? · · · Yes X No
9, Will ~ro~ect adversely ~pact any si~e or
urm of historic, pre-2istoric~ or paleon~olo{2cal
iaportance or any site desi~a~ed as a criZical
env~rO~en~l area by a local a~ency? · · · -- Yes X No
10, W~I project have a ~or effect on exis~E or
future recreational oppor~ities2
· · · Yes X No
11. Will project result in ~Jor traffic problems or
cause a m Jot effec~ to existing transportation
~ys%e~? ' · · · · · · , · · · · Yes. X No
12. Wi11 project reg~arly cause objectionable ~ors,
noise, {late, vibration, or electrical
ance as a res~ of ~he project's operation? . , Yes .,,X No
1], Will proJec~ have any impact on public health or
safety? · · · , · · · · · · · · Yes X No
Will project ~ffect the ex2s~in6 co.unity by
directly causing a growth in uermanent
tlon of more than 5 percen~ o~er a on.year
pe.iod o~ have a major negative effect on
character of =he co~.~un~ty sr neighborhood?, .
15, Is there publ~rOV~cernln~
PR£PAR'rR'$ S,IGi'IATURE: /~~
the project?
TITLE:
Yes X No
Yes X No
Architect
REPR~SE:{TI~;6: Johq Senko-Owner' DATE.' Aug. 26 ~ 1986
9/L/78
Aug. 26, 1986 -
(Today~ s
To:
Southo!d Town Board of Appeals
Main Road
Sou~hold, NY 11971
Appeal Application of Garrett A. Strang,for Senko
Location of Property: Main Rd. & Ackerl .Pond La.
Southold New York
Dear Sirs:
.In reference to the New York State Tidal Wetlands fiend-Us
ReGulations, 6 NYCRR, Part 661, and Article 25 of the £.le:.; York
$~aue. Environmental Conservation Law, please be advised tha~ t~
subjec~ property i,n the wi."hin appeal application:
' (please check uno box)'
[ ] }l~,! be located .within 300 fee~. of tidal wetlands
hc%.;ever, constructed along the water-lyin~ edco
of this prope~-ty '= .
z~ a bulkhead in very good
condition and at least 100 feet in,'lengtk.~
I ] ~a,! b'e 'located within 300 feet of tidal wetlands.
ho:.~ever, constructed along the watcr-lying edge
of this proper:y is a bul:-:head in need of (minor)
(major) reoairs, and appr~ximate!y ~
length. ' fee~ in
-(x ]
not appear to
May be located within 300 feet. of tidal wetlands;
however, constructed along the water-lying edge
of this property is a bulkhead less than 100 fee=
in length.
May be located %.;ithin 300 feet of ' "
tlda! wetlands;
and there is no bulkhead or cun~-~,~ %~a;~ e:~is~n
'on the premises. '--- --
Is not locat~2d within 300 feet of
to the best of my knowlud~3e.,
[~ tarred items
fail withi:~ the
tidal wetlands
(*} indicate your property doe~
jurisdiction of thu N.Y.s' D.E.C.
Sincerely I/ours, ~ ·
~:OTE: If proposed project falls %;it'~kin D.E.C. jurisdi'ction,
approval must be received an~J Submit~6d to our office before
your a.~plication can be scheduled fo£ a public hearing.
pON ~
96'
~o ~' ~ . '~ ' ---~ TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY
~ , ~ ~ FOR
~o. ~ ~' ' ' AT SOUTHOLD
~ ~-~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
~.o~ SUFFOLK COUNTY , N.Y.
? u.. SCA~E I" = ~0'
~ . 3~ JUNE 5 , 1986
- ' JULY 21, 1986
~ N.Y.S. LIC. NO1 49668 *
~./e~,: .-~ AREA= 3Q 08'4 SQ.~ /~ ' ~'~"~ '"~
~ ELEVATIONS ARE REFERENCED
/~'~ ~4~ TO AN ASSUMED DATUM.
, SURVEYORS ~ ENGINEERS , P. C.
/
{ 516) 765 - 50~0
P.O. BOX 909
MAIN ROAD
S OUTHOLD , N.Y. 11971
86 - 304
U.';% ,~j/ i %',,
<4 /, ~rI ~
I]ARRETT A. ~'r/RAN~i
er¢=httect
Matin R~a~l P. 0, Box 141~l Southold N.Y. 11971
516 - 765 - 5455