HomeMy WebLinkAboutZBA-01/03/2013 Hearing 1
RECEIVE®
1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS JAN 2 2 2013
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: STATE OF NEW YORK
2 -------------------------------------------S RDOFAPPEALS
3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
4
5 ----------'--------------------------------- X
6
7 Southold Town Hall
Southold, New York
8
9 January 3 , 2013
10 : 45 A. M.
10
11
12 Board Members Present :
13 LESLIE KANES WEISMAN - Chairperson/Member
14 GERARD GOEHRINGER - Member
15 JAMES DINIZIO, JR. - Member
16 KENNETH SCHNEIDER - Member
17 GEORGE HORNING - Member
18
19 VICKI TOTH - Secretary
20 JENNIFER ANDALORO - Assistant Town Attorney
21
22
23 Jessica DiLallo
Court Reporter
24 P . O . Box 984
Holbrook, New York 11741
? 25 ( 631 ) -338-1409
2
1
2 INDEX OF HEARINGS
3
4
5 Hearing: Page :
6
7 Thomas Spurge, #6615 3-10
8 Mariusz Jachimowicz, #6612 10-17
9 New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, Inc .
10 And Robin ' s Island Holdings, LLC #6616 17-85
11 New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, Inc . #6617 17-85
12 Peter and Diane Mollica, #6618 85-94
13 Betty Hermann, #6614 94-104
14 Michael J. Hirschhorn, #6619 104-114
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 3
1 HEARING #6615 - THOMAS SPURGE
r
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thomas Spurge,
3 #6615 . Request for variance from Article
4 XXIII Section 280-124 and the Building
5 Inspector ' s October 12 , 2012 Notice of
6 Disapproval based on application for
7 building permit for additions and
8 alterations to existing single family
9 dwelling : 1) less than the code required
10 minimum rear yard setback of 35 feet,
11 located at : 3145 Manhanset Avenue in
12 Greenport .
13 Is there somebody here to represent
14 that application?
15 MS . MARTIN : Good morning .
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Good morning.
17 Could you state your name, please, for the
18 record?
19 MS . MARTIN : Amy Martin, from the firm
20 of Robert I . Brown Architect and
21 Fairweather Design Associates, representing
22 Thomas Spurge, the applicant . This is a
23 request to put a second-story on a
24 pre-nonconforming setback where the house
25 is 10 . 2 inches closer to the rear property
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 4
1 line already, and we ' re not changing the
2 footprint in any way shape or form. We
3 just wanted a second-story to it . There
4 are -- it ' s the same as other houses in the
5 neighborhood. These are mostly
6 nonconforming lots, and that ' s the only
7 reason we ' re before you, because this is an
8 increase of a nonconforming lot . The
9 highest -- the second-story to the highest
10 point under the ease, is 17 foot 7 inches .
11 Where it ' s currently, I believe, about 8
12 foot something on the ground floor .
13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. Let ' s see
14 if the Board has anything . Is there
15 anything else you want to say, Amy?
16 MS . MARTIN: I don ' t think so . It ' s
17 pretty straight forward. The Spurge ' s own
18 the property most effected behind it, which
19 is going to be their retirement home, and
20 they just want to make it large enough to
21 enjoy. Eventually, I guess, use the
22 property that they currently own behind it
23 as place to put friends when they come to
24 visit . They just bought this house
25 recently and it wouldn ' t be going on the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 5
1 market or anything. It ' s for something
r
2 that they want to live in. .
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. George,
4 any questions?
5 MEMBER HORNING: Okay. Looking at the
6 site plan measurements for setbacks of the
7 rear yard versus the survey that we have,
8 the survey gives distances of 24 foot 7
9 inches, 24 foot 8 inches on the other
10 corner . And then you have 24 . 10 , what is
11 the most accurate distance would you say?
12 MS . MARTIN: I guess, I am not sure I
13 have the survey with me .
14 MEMBER HORNING : You mentioned just a
15 10 foot 2 inch discrepancy. So it may be a
16 little bit more than that?
17 MS . MARTIN : I guess we have to go by
18 the survey. I am not sure --
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well, the Notice
20 of Disapproval actually refers to the site
21 plan . It ' s closer to 24 . 10 feet setback as
22 opposed to the code required 35 foot .
23 MS . MARTIN : George, do you have the
24 date of the survey and the surveyor?
25 MEMBER HORNING: August 30th --
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 6
1 MS . MARTIN : Then I am assuming that
2 our drawer ' s made an error on that and it
3 would be what the survey says . Unless the
4 second-story is recessed that iota of two
5 inches or so .
6 MEMBER HORNING: It doesn ' t seem like
7 it would be on the diagram though . Did you
8 submit both of these documents to the
9 Building Department?
10 MS . MARTIN: Yes .
11 MEMBER HORNING: What is the
12 foundation consist of?
13 MS . MARTIN : It ' s a brick foundation .
14 MEMBER HORNING: Is there a basement?
15 Crawl space?
16 MS . MARTIN: Yes, there is a basement .
17 MEMBER HORNING : And just out of
18 curiosity, I noticed that what would be the
19 northwest corner there, with the neighbor
20 seeming to be very close proximity to --
21 like he had a wood pile or something? Does
22 he have to walk on your property?
23 MS . MARTIN : It ' s Tom' s property. The
24 wood pile is on the applicant ' s property.
25 MEMBER HORNING : And that ' s the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 7
1 applicant ' s wood pile you ' re saying?
2 MS . MARTIN : I believe so . Yes .
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Ken, any
4 questions?
5 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Just the
6 discrepancies between the survey and the
7 site plan for the rear yard setback. Looks
8 like the smallest setback on the survey is
9 24 . 7 feet . I am going to assume that is
10 what the proposed site plan is looking for
11 also?
12 MS . MARTIN: I will very happily
13 submit the property site plan revised, you
14 know, to the survey, if that turns out to
15 be what
16 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: It ' s a technical
17 issue .
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think we can
19 handle that internally.
20 MS . MARTIN.: It ' s 24 foot 10 inches
21 and they averaged it out to 10 inches
22 rather than the . 7 .
23 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I have no further
24 questions .
25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Gerry?
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 8
1 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Did you say the
2 applicant purchased additional property in
3 the rear?
4 MS . MARTIN : No, he owns it . His wife
5 owns the lot behind the home . The
6 adjoining lot where they currently have a
7 summer home .
8 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: In the site plan
9 where you calculated the lot coverage at
10 18 . 9, was that on the site or did that
11 include the lot in the back also?
12 MS . MARTIN : No, no . That is just the
13 site .
14 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: So the only
15 addition to this property is the garage?
16 MS . MARTIN: The garage with a living
17 space above . The additional lot coverage
18 is just the garage, ' which as you can see
19 just north of the, residence .
20 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: This is a pretty
21 small lot .
22 MS . MARTIN : It was subdivided in the
23 60 ' s for whatever . That was previous .
24 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Believe it or not,
25 it was one of the first ones that I sat on
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 9
1 in the 1980 ' s when they actually built the
2 house, if I am not mistaken . I think one
3 of the particular questions at that time
4 was, are you going to exceed lot coverage
5 and he said absolutely not . That was one
6 of the issues that I had. Thank you .
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Jim?
8 MEMBER DINIZIO : No questions .
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I have no
10 further questions .
11 Is there anyone in the audience who
12 would like to address this application?
13 (No Response . )
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Hearing no
15 further comments , I will make a motion to
16 close the hearing and reserve decision to a
17 later date .
18 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Seconded by
20 Gerry.
21 All in favor?
22 MEMBER DINIZIO : Aye .
23 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
24 MEMBER HORNING: Aye .
25 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 10
1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye .
2 (See Minutes for Resolution . )
3 *******************************************
4 HEARING #6612 - MARIUSZ JACHIMOWICZ
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next
6 application before the Board is for Mariusz
7 Jachimowicz . Please correct me if I
8 mispronounced your name, #6612 . Request
9 for variances from Article XXIII Code
10 Section 280-123 and the Building
11 Inspector ' s November 9, 2012 Notice of
12 Disapproval based on am application for
13 building permit for "as built"
14 alteration/addition to an existing dwelling
15 at; 1) a nonconforming building containing
16 a nonconforming use shall not be enlarged,
17 reconstructed, structurally altered or
18 moved, unless the use of such building is
19 changed to a conforming. use, the "as built"
20 structure is considered a second dwelling
21 on the property, located at : 9395 Main
22 Road in Mattituck.
23 Good morning .
24 MR. DANTES : Good morning . My name is
25 Eric Dantes , and I represent
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 11
1 Mr . Jachimowicz and his wife --
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Would you please
3 spell your name for the record?
,4 MR. DANTES : D-A-N-T-E-S .
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you . What
6 would you like to tell us?
7 MR. DANTES : It ' s basically a property
8 that was setup in the 1950 ' s . It was setup
9 as a three family property, and then one of
10 the houses burned down. So now it ' s a two
11 family property with two separate dwellings
12 on it . And Mr . Jachimowicz would like to
13 renovate the rear dwelling and he needs a
14 variance to do that because it ' s a
15 nonconforming property, and his renovations
16 consist of adding a 12X4 closet onto the
17 existing bedroom, and it * would add 48
18 square feet to the rear of the dwelling,
19 which is about 1 , 000 square feet .
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : How did the
21 construction plans come to the Building
22 Department ' s attention?
23 MR. DANTES : Mr . Jachimowicz --
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Went in for a
25 - building permit?
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting , 12
1 MR. DANTES : Went in for a permit,
2 yes .
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there a
4 building permit?
5 MR. DANTES : No .
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : So you were
7 given a Notice of Disapproval --
8 MR. DANTES : Yes .
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We all did site
10 inspection so it ' s clear that some progress
11 has been made on the alterations . That ' s
12 fine . I just wanted to clarify what the
13 circumstances were . Let ' s see what the
14 Board has to say about this . This property
15 does have a Pre-CO?
16 MR. DANTES : Yes . Two Pre-CO ' s . One
17 for each dwelling . I can give you a copy
18 of that, if you would like?
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I think we have
20 them in our file . Let ' s see if Ken has any
21 questions?
22 MEMBER_ SCHNEIDER: Who is doing the
23 work?
24 MR. DANTES : Mr . Jachimowicz is . He
25 is doing it himself . He does have a --
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 13
1 licensed electrician to do the electrical
2 work and plumbing .
3 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: I have no further
4 questions at this time . I can pass it to
5 another Board member .
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Why don ' t we go
7 down the line . George?
8 MEMBER HORNING : I am curious about
9 past history. You briefly alluded to a
10 fire . And I see that there was a building
11 permit issued for construction from after
12 fire damage . Which building are we talking
13 about?
14 MR. DANTES : If you go to the tax map .
15 The only thing that I really know about it
16 is , if you go to the tax map that you have
17 here, you can see that there are three
18 structures on it, and there is a big "X" on
19 one of the structures .
20 MEMBER HORNING : No, I don ' t believe
21 that we have that .
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No, we don ' t
23 have that .
24 MR. DANTES : I have that in here . I
25 don ' t think that it has existed in the last
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 14
1 20 years, the first structure . He is not
2 asking to rebuild that .
3 MEMBER HORNING: The building permit
4 issued was never acted upon then?
5 MR. DANTES : I honestly don ' t know.
6 He just bought the property in August of
7 this year . Last year, 2012 . So I don ' t
8 know that much.
9 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: When the sale of
10 the property was issued, it would have
11 indicated that there were three structures
12 on this property and there are not three
13 structures on this property. To your
14 applicants knowledge, there was never a
15 third structure that your applicant was
16 purchasing?
17 MR. DANTES : No .
18 MEMBER HORNING : Is there a crawl
19 space under this building?
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Sir, if you are
21 going to answer questions , you ' re going to
22 have to come to the microphone, because we
23 record this , as we ' re required by law to
24 do .
25 State your name, please .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 15
1 MR. JACHIMOWICZ : Mariusz Jachimowicz .
2 20 percent of the house is the basement and
3 the rest of crawl space .
4 MEMBER HORNING : And how do you access
5 the basement?
6 MR. JACHIMOWICZ : From outside .
7 MEMBER HORNING: I walked around it
8 earlier --
9 MR. JACHIMOWICZ : The entry is covered
10 by tarp .
11 MEMBER HORNING : Okay. And all of
12 these, let ' s call them structural
13 alterations were put on without a building
14 permit; is that correct?
15 MR. DANTES : Yes . Well, his intent
16 was to repair the building . What happened
17 was, while he was doing it -- it ended up
18 being a derelict building when you got into
19 it and one thing led to another .
20 MEMBER HORNING : He enlarged the size
21 of it .
22 MR. DANTES : The building?
23 MEMBER HORNING : Yes .
24 MR. DANTES : 48 square feet .
25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Otherwise, you
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 16
1 are before us because there is an
2 enlargement of the nonconformity. Had it
3 been repaired in place and in kind, it
4 might have been available to have a
5 building permit as of right, in kind and
6 replacement .
7 Jim, do you have any questions?
8 MEMBER DINIZIO : No ., I just want to
9 clear one thing. There is three
10 structures . There is a shed on this
11 property . There is not three principal
12 structures . There is a small accessory
13 shed.
14 MR. DANTES : I believe there is .
15 MEMBER DINIZIO : I just wanted to be
16 clear on that for the record, that there
17 was not only two structures on the
18 property. That ' s all I have .
19 MR. DANTES : Okay.
20 MEMBER DINIZIO : So two principal
21 structures .
22 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Is there any
23 attempt, sir, to utilize any part of this
24 basement area for habitable space?
25 MR. DANTES : No, it ' s going to be a
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 17
1 basement .
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone
3 else in the audience who would like to
4 address this application?
5 (No Response . )
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Hearing no
7 further comments, I will make a motion to
8 close this hearing and reserve decision to
9 a later date .
10 Is there a second?
11 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
12 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
13 MEMBER DINIZIO: Aye .
14 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
15 MEMBER HORNING: Aye .
16 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye .
18 (See Minutes for Resolution . )
19 ****** ************************************
20 HEARING #6616 - NEW SUFFOLK WATERFRONT
21 FUND, INC . AND ROBIN ' S ISLAND - HEARING
22 #6617 - NEW SUFFOLK WATERFRONT FUND, INC .
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next
24 application before the Board is for New
25 Suffolk Waterfront Fund Incorporated and
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 18
1 Robin ' s Island Holdings , LLC . That is
2 application #6616 . We have another
3 application . I am going to open both of
4 them simultaneously. We can address that
5 way together or separately. I will read
6 them both into the record. The first
7 application, #6616 . Request for variances
8 from Article XIII Code Section 280-56 and
9 the Building Inspector ' s September 18 , 2012
10 Notice of Disapproval based on an
11 application for a permit for a minor
12 subdivision at; 1 ) lot size less than the
13 code required 80 , 000 square feet per Bulk
14 Schedule in MII District, 2 ) lot size less
15 than the code required 160 , 000 square feet
16 for the proposed second use, located at :
17 650 and 380 First Street, corner of Jackson
18 Street, Main Street, adjacent to Cutchogue
19 Harbor in New Suffolk. The next
20 application is #6617 , which is a request
21 for Special Exception per Article XIII
22 Section 280-55 (B) l to operate a restaurant
23 in a Marine II District, located at : 650
24 First Street, corner Jackson Street, Main
25 Street . Adjacent to Cutchogue Harbor in
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 19
1 New Suffolk.
2 Is there someone here to represent
3 this application, Gail?
4 MS . WICKHAM: Good morning .
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I 'm sorry, you
6 know, you have to state your name --
7 MS . WICKHAM: Sure . My name is
8 Abigail Wickham and I at 13015 Main Road,
9 Mattituck, New York, representing the
10 applicant . I would like to advise the
11 Board that we have here today, Barbara
12 Schnitzler who is the Chair of the New
13 Suffolk Waterfront Fund Board. Valerie
14 Marvin who is representing Robin ' s Island
15 Holding . Martin Reed who has been doing
16 the survey work, and also Joe Fischetti who
17 is an engineer that has been consulting
18 with us on the project . As well as a
19 number of Board members from the Waterfront
20 Fund and other interested parties . So
21 we ' re going to try and go through some
22 brief presentations without going to
23 reiterate everything that is already in the
24 application. And then I am sure the Board
25 will have some questions . We have all
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 20
1 these people here to hopefully answer them.
2 I am really excited to be here today. This
3 is what I consider, the third phase of a
4 multi phase project . The first was the
5 acquisition of the project from Peconic
6 Land Trust, who in turn had acquired it
7 from active commercial development after
8 many years of attempting to focus on what
9 could be preserved from that prime piece of
10 property. The second phase following the
11 acquisition was the evaluation and
12 development of a concept plan, once the
13 Waterfront Fund had a chance to actually
14 own and be on the property for a while . To
15 figure out what would be an attractive
16 usable and financially viable project in
17 order to go forward. Now, we ' re
18 commencing. Having done that, commencing
19 an approval stage for the land as a result
20 of the contracted Robin ' s Island Holdings
21 acquisition of approximately one acre .
22 Accompanied by a large scale preservation
23 of that property through a conservation
24 easement held by Peconic Land Trust, which
25 I will describe a little bit later on .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 21
1 That will be on parcel two . And a
2 conservation easement that is in the works
3 through New York State Parks for a bulk of
4 parcel one to keep that area open and park
5 like . The resubdivision that we appear
6 before you today is to realign the
7 properties and to also confirm the uses
8 that have historically been predominant on
9 this property on parcel one in order to
10 enable it to retain economic viability and
11 historical usage after the acre is
12 transferred to Robin ' s ' Island Holding. The
13 fourth phase will be the site plan phase
14 and that is where the determination of the
15 actual location of the building, the
16 layout, the site improvement will be
17 developed and formalized. That is in the
18 beginning stages now, but we will
19 undoubtedly be back here and certainly to
20 the Planning Board with the details of that
21 ultimate site plan. And then finally phase
22 five will be actually constructing and
23 doing the work. We ' re are working on that
24 now. All of those five , phases, as you can
25 imagine, require constant fundraising .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 22
1 They have a phenomenal group that has been
2 doing it . The aspect of the fundraising of
3 this phase three involved, is taking the
4 funds from the purchase of that one acre
5 from Robin ' s Island and the New York State
6 Conservation easement grant in order to pay
7 down -- payoff the acquisition loan that
8 was incurred in order to acquire the
9 property and also to start the development
10 process . Robin ' s Island Holdings has
11 supported the efforts of the community to
12 make this project happen, and we think that
13 it will produce a result that will meet the
14 goals of New Suffolk community. It will
15 provide public access to the waterfront,
16 provide public parking, which is severely
17 needed in this area, and essentially
18 provide, not just to New Suffolk, to the
19 Town, a tremendous facility. So let me
20 address specifics as to the variances and
21 the request for the special exception .
22 There are two variances , as you mentioned.
23 The Robin ' s Island Holdings parcel would be
24 increased 3 . 42 times up to 68 , 808 square
25 feet . Oddly that is not quite big enough
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 23
1 under MII . So we are here on a rather odd
Y
2 application . To let you tell us that ' s
3 okay even though it ' s not 80 , 000 square
4 feet . And then the second variance is to
5 restore two primary uses on less than
6 160, 000 square feet, which is the area that
7 will remain on parcel one after the
8 transfer of the one acre to Robin ' s Island
9 Holdings . That will be an area over a
10 little over 100 , 000 square feet . So those
11 two properties have to go hand in hand, as
12 well as confirmation of Special Exception
13 that we have requested to allow the
14 restaurant usage to be resumed.
15 Financially, the Waterfront Fund is not in
16 a position to proceed with the actual site
17 plan elements and the construction details .
18 So we ' re asking you to look at our
19 conceptual plan and come back at a further
20 time for relief on an actual site plan
21 details , but we think that the actual types
22 of the uses and the way that they fit into
23 this property, we hope you will be able to
24 consider favorably. On Variance #1 , where
25 we have less than 80 , 000 square feet, the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 24
1 conservation easement, which I will give
2 you an outline of it at the end of the
3 hearing, will restrict the ability to use
4 most of that property for structures . It ' s
5 going to create great privacy for Robin ' s
6 Island Holdings . It ' s going to allow them
7 to solve an overflow parking problem in New
8 Suffolk, as parking is very important . And
9 it also will preserve open space . The
10 variance as I said, is kind of contorted as
11 I said, because we ' re asking to increase
12 the size of the parcel three or four, but
13 still it ' s not quite big enough . We hope
14 you will consider that favorably under the
15 code . I just wanted to give you a rough
16 idea of what uses will be allowed on the --
17 on the Robin ' s Island Holdings portion of
18 the increased acre . It will allow for, low
19 profile maritime grasslands with associated
20 plantings . I will hand this into you so
21 you don ' t have to all write it down . Low
22 profile perimeter fencing . Landscaping,
23 which will be designed and maintained so
24 it ' s not to substantially interfere with
25 scenic values of the property which further
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 25
1 the visual aim of protecting the Peconic
2 Bay view shed . Their considering a low
3 profile ( In Audible) like they have on
4 their adjoining property on the beach side .
5 The only improvement, if you will, will be
6 a small shed or a building that is going to
7 be attached to the Robin ' s Island Holdings
8 building to hold boat storage . That will
9 probably be seasonal boat storage and a
10 permeable parking area . Both of those are
11 shown on your maps . The Planning Board has
12 asked us to remove the boat shed from the
13 map because it ' s not actually been built
14 yet, but this is an conceptual idea of what
15 it would look like . They may change the
16 size or the configuration of it slightly
17 but that ' s just to give you an idea of what
18 would be on that property and that ' s it .
19 That we think is a huge, huge benefit to
20 New Suffolk as a result of that agreement .
21 The second variance is for the two primary
22 uses of the marina and the restaurant .
23 Really is not asking anything different
24 than what is already there, and has been
25 there for many, many years . I would like
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 26
1 to mention that given the property size,
2 those two primary uses and what they ' re
3 going to demand of the property will
4 automatically eliminate from that property
5 any other uses that could come in under an
6 MII Zone, which are pretty intensive .
7 Those would be things like large boat
8 storage racks , which is one thing that got
9 this property to where it is in the first
10 place . Ferry terminal, big commercial
11 restaurants, hotels and motels and fish
12 processing plants . If you have a marina-
13 and a restaurant on this property, you ' re
14 not going to be able to have any of those
15 other things . We think this proposal is
16 much less obnoxious then what could be
17 there . Second, each use will be moderately
18 sized and in keeping with the property and
19 is going to go through site plan and all
20 the other reviews that is -- that we must
21 proceed with . The marina is approximately
22 24 slips in size . That size is going to be
23 dictated by the size of the lot . You are
24 not going to see the size of a marina like
25 New Suffolk Shipyard. It ' s a very small
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 27
1 marina . It ' s important to maintain the
2 marina usage historically and for access
3 and transient dockage, but it does provide
4 because of the limited number of slips very
5 limited income and it ' s largely seasonal
6 income . This past year they brought in
7 $21 , 000 . 00 . They will be upgrading the
8 docks and making more usable, but in the
9 long run, they ' re not going to see a huge
10 amount of income from 24 slips . That is
11 why some of the prior proposals on this
12 property proposed big boat storage sheds
13 and all these other things that would go
14 with a marina . New Suffolk Waterfront Fund
15 does not want to do that . They want to
16 keep the restaurant as a modest usage and
17 the code considers that a primary usage so
18 that is why we ' re here for you today. So
19 as far as the restaurant, I just want to
20 ask who in this room doesn ' t wish they
21 could still get a burger at the Galley
22 House? And I hope that that would be
23 enough to get you to grant this project all
24 together, but assuming it ' s not, the use
25 has historically followed this property and
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 28
1 the Board ' s vision for the restaurant use
2 is really all cafe . The word, "cafe"
3 doesn ' t really appear in the code . That is
4 really the scale that they ' re looking at .
5 It ' s really going to be a small operation
6 that can provide a community gathering
7 place . A simple meal, somebody that has
8 the ability to come in from the beach,
9 while they ' re boating or just visiting, and
10 provide a necessary income for the
11 Waterfront, so they can sustain the
12 property. The engineer has advised us that
13 based on the size of the property, 118
14 seats are available with a sanitary
15 capacity of that property. The prior
16 restaurant had 95 seats . And with
17 limitations of parking and food service and
18 with Suffolk County Health Department
19 review, we really don ' t know what the full
20 number will be . That is something that
21 will come back at the site plan stage .
22 That will involve Health Department and
23 Planning Board input . And also the
24 restaurant building will be moved back and
25 if it ' s not 75 feet from the bulkhead, you
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 29
1 will be seeing us again on that, but we
2 have to go through that as we go through.
3 The other thing that I would like to
4 mention is that the proposed site intensity
5 of this place, property is probably
6 significantly less than any other property
7 in New Suffolk because those are -- very
8 many of them are wall to wall . So this is
9 really going to have a lot of open space .
10 A lot of parking and it will adjoin the
11 Robin ' s Island acre, which will be largely
12 open . I would also like to remind the
13 Board that both of these two uses existed
14 for many, many years side by side on this
15 property and really just on the north side
16 of Main Street part of the property because
17 the acre that is going to Robin ' s Island
18 Holding really wasn ' t the restaurant marina
19 except for large boat storage, which really
20 isn ' t going to be happening. And also when
21 those uses were there for many years you
22 were dealing with miserable parking lots,
23 boats all over the place . You also had
24 marinas servicing storage . A lot of things
25 going on . So this is going to be much more
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 30
1 modest . Much more contained and I don ' t
2 think dual primary use of marina and
3 restaurant will be at all out of place
4 here . As far as the Special Exception,
5 which you have also opened up, I am not
6 going to repeat all the tedious language I
7 have put in the application, which I tried
8 to track from the code as to what you need
9 to find and I don ' t want to repeat what I
10 just said, but much of the prior discussion
11 does apply to the Special Exception . So at
12 this point, I would prefer to move on and
13 have Barbara say a few words and then see
14 what questions you might have .
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Before we do
16 this, I would like to enter some letters .
17 We just received the LWRP recommendations
18 from our coordinator and I would like the
19 record to reflect the fact that with regard
20 to the Special Exception is considered
21 exempt -- this particular one refers to the
22 subdivision . They' re under two separate
23 application numbers . The point is , it ' s
24 just been received and it ' s considered
25 exempt with regard to the lot line change
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 31
1 and with regard to the restaurant use, it
2 is considered consistent with the goals of
3 the LWRP . I have copies . for your records .
4 MS . WICKHAM: Thank you .
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I would also
6 like to enter into the record comments that
7 we received from the Planning Board. If
8 you don ' t have any copies , I have them, if
9 you want to approach .
10 MS . WICKHAM: I have .
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : This is the LWRP
12 and that you don ' t have . And this is for
13 local determination from Suffolk County for
14 your file . I just want the audience to
15 know what some comments were . I am going
16 to summarize from the Planning Board. This
17 is a letter dated December 18th . We sent
18 this to them for their recommendation .
19 They in general, support this proposal
20 although they don ' t normally support the
21 idea of creating a nonconforming sizes . In
22 this case, I am paraphrasing but it is a
23 quote, "the proposal minimizes development
24 potential of the subject property, protects
25 public access to the water and will
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 32
1 preserve the water view shed through the
2 conversation easements placed over key
3 areas of the property. . . " I am omitting
4 some stuff . These goals are consistent
5 with the Town ' s comprehensive plan . So I
6 want you to be aware of their comments .
7 Also we have received, and I am sure we
8 will have more comments from the audience,
9 two letters of support from some of your
10 neighbor ' s, no doubt . One is from Joe
11 McKay and basically reiterating the fact
12 that the restaurant use is fairly essential
13 to your plans for sustaining the
14 development of this property. It also
15 clear that it ' s a very collaborative and
16 creative way that you have approached
17 packaging these very complicated elements .
18 It will not only create opportunity for
19 preservation for the future and today, but
20 will also require some sort of ongoing
21 sustained income, and in order to continue
22 with your plan . I should just let you know
23 that this Board will want to entertain the
24 Special Exception permit because I know you
25 need the reassurance that that is going to
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 33
1 be in place . But we will likely have to
2 condition it to site plan approval should
3 this be granted. And in addition to that,
4 subject to any further variance relief you
5 may require once you determine where this
6 Galley is actually to be located and
7 whether or not you ' re going to expand it or
8 leave it at the same size . That would be
9 an expansion of a nonconforming use . The
10 other letter that we received from Jim
11 Braslow, an e-mail from Julie Saul . The
12 only concern was for parking . These are
13 issues that I am sure you are all concerned
14 with with regard to traffic impacts and so
15 on. It ' s a small hamlet . Small hamlet
16 center. Those are all things that will be
17 resolved with site plan review . I just
18 want to make you aware of that .
19 Barbara, if you would, please .
20 MS . SCHNITZLER: Hi, I am Barbara
21 Schnitzler, 220 Old Harbor Road, New
22 Suffolk. I am the Chair of the Waterfront
23 Fund. Just a few comments . For the last
24 five or six years this organization and our
25 community and our extensive list of
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 34
1 volunteers , there are over 500 donors, have
1/
2 raised $1 . 6 million dollars towards the
3 purchase of this property. We have done
4 extensive community outreach to figure out
5 what people are interested in seeing on the
6 property. We feel very confident because
7 the restaurant has always come up as the
8 number one thing that everybody wants to
9 see .back on this property. We know that it
10 will encourage the vitality. The property
11 is morbid at the moment . Especially since
12 Sandy. And we know that our community, our
13 donors, over two-third ' s of the property
14 owners in New Suffolk have financially
15 contributed to this project . So we know we
16 have done our homework. We have had two to
17 five community meetings every year . The
18 Land Trust taught us how to do that and
19 then we taught ourselves . We send out
20 newsletters . We have a bulletin board, we
21 have a Facebook, website . So we have tried
22 to be transparent . We have listened to the
23 public and we feel that our site plan
24 reflects the publics wishes . We can ' t
25 continue to solicit money at the rate that
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 35
1 we ' re been doing it . We have been really
2 lucky so far. We have had very generous
3 donors . We just can ' t expect people to
4 just keep giving us money at the same rate,
5 and that is why we ' re trying to make this
6 property self sustaining. We have some
7 time constraints . The Small Business
8 Administration came out after Sandy for
9 damage . They have -- they denied our
10 application for a long term low interest
11 loan, because they said our mortgage is too
12 heavy and we could never pay it back. Both
13 the mortgage and the loan. So we want to
14 get this mortgage situated and cleared up,
15 which we can do with the sale of this
16 property, and the money from the State
17 grant . So time is really of the essence in
18 your decision . I also dug up out of my
19 files the previous plan for this property,
20 and this is really what got everybody
21 mobilized to buy this property and preserve
22 it . It is a landmark. We want to preserve
23 it . We ' re preserving the three buildings .
24 We want to renovate them and reuse them.
25 The south -- and I don ' t have a copy. I
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 36
1 can make you one, if you ' re interested.
2 The south side of this site plan for this
3 original plan was parking for 106 cars .
4 The north side was parking for 77 cars, and
5 153 shrink wrapped boats . So that is what
6 it was going to be and now we ' re going to
7 give you an idea of what it can be with
8 your help . We hope it will . Thank you .
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you very
10 much. Would the Board like to ask some
11 questions or hear more from the audience?
12 George?
13 MEMBER HORNING : Briefly, ma ' am, the
14 last speaker . Could you briefly take us
15 through this process? You mentioned
16 Peconic Land Trust and now this
17 organization, the New Suffolk Waterfront
18 Fund and explain to us the status of both
19 of those entities? I am a member of the
20 Town, but I am not a member of New Suffolk.
21 MS . SCHNITZLER: It ' s complicated.
22 About six years we formed a non-profit, New
23 Suffolk Waterfront Fund, non-profit 501C3 .
24 The land trust also is . When this bid
25 proposal came up for the boat rack, our
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 37
1 community -- and it was really an out
2 growth of the civic association, people
3 started to say that we have to organize in
4 some way. We hired the Peconic Land Trust,
5 actually, to advise us, and they helped us
6 through the process . They negotiated the
7 sale with the previous owner and they also
8 used their revolving fund to pay for the
9 property initially. And part of the deal
10 with the revolving fund is that you can
11 only have that money for three years . So
12 after three years, which was two years ago,
13 the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund became the
14 owner of the property. We paid them off
15 but we didn ' t have the money still, even
16 though we had been fundraising, and we had
17 a loan from a place called Conservation
18 Fund. Another non-profit . They now hold
19 our mortgage, and we ' re hoping to pay them
20 off now. So the Land Trust is out of the
21 picture for us now, although they will be
22 involved in the easement on the south piece
23 of the property. They will be the
24 organization that oversees that easement .
25 They helped us get on our way, but they' re
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 38
1 not involved with us anymore . We operate
2 -- we have a Board of 15 and we operate --
3 we just do our own thing.
4 MEMBER HORNING : Is it fair to say
5 that then the owner/operator of the boat
6 marina and restaurant is going to be a
7 non-profit corporation geared with a
8 conversation aspect to it?
9 MS . SCHNITZLER: You know, we haven ' t
10 really figured it out yet . We might lease
11 out . None of us know how to run a
12 restaurant, nor do we want to learn. We
13 don ' t know how to run a marina . So I think
14 there will be some leases involved. Lots
15 of people are interested in running this
16 restaurant . Informally people have come to
17 us, but we don ' t have the restaurant use
18 presently. So we were unable really to
19 pursue that . The marina needs a lot of
20 repair . We do have somebody on our Board
21 who is very knowledgeable . Most of us are
22 not . So we ' re not really sure how that
23 will be . But we know that the Waterfront
24 Fund will be involved.
25 MEMBER HORNING: Okay. One other
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 39
1 question . Hours of operation of the
2 restaurant, do you have any idea? You say
3 you ' re going to lease out the operation
4 probably. Are they going to operate
5 seasonally, year round? Do you have any
6 idea?
7 MS . SCHNITZLER: We do have a lot of
8 ideas and it ' s our idea to stay very
9 involved. We haven ' t worked for the last
10 five or six years to make this happen to
11 hand it over to somebody who might develop
12 it in a way that we don ' t want it
13 developed. Gail mentioned the septic
14 calculations would allow 118 seats . We
15 have no intention of having a restaurant
16 that big . We see it -- and if you look at
17 the architectural schematic, you can see
18 that we kept the initial Galley Ho . What
19 is left of it . Because it ' s a landmark, we
20 want to renovate it as it is . And we think
21 that could be a year round operation. Our
22 community would like a destination for the
23 winter . Even if it ' s just breakfast and
24 lunch, which we think it might be . We want
25 to keep the Galley Ho up and running. The
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 40
1 way the design is done . It ' s just that
2 there is an additional building, which can
3 be closed off . That could just be open in
4 the summer . We can have a more efficient
5 building by shutting down part of it
6 seasonally. We would like to have
7 something that runs year round. We see a
8 lot more transient dockage as a possibility
9 once we have a food concern going there .
10 We think a lot of the food will be
11 take-out . There is a beach . People can
12 walk on the beach. People can come on
13 their boats . People can bike from Town.
14 Th-ere is picnic tables there, a deck. It ' s
15 a great location . There is very few places
16 where you can eat on the water . The reason
17 I got into this project is because I just
18 want to sit at the picnic table, eat a hot
19 dog and look at the water . Simple things
20 are hard to come by and that is simply what
21 we ' re trying to do .
22 MEMBER HORNING: Okay. And one final
23 question . The Southold Town Fire
24 Inspector, we have a copy of a document,
25 have you seen that?
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 41
1 MS . SCHNITZLER: I haven ' t seen that .
2 Recently?
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: It ' s dated
4 12/26/12 . We think we should just enter
5 into the record, most of them are going to
6 be resolved -- actually probably Joe is
7 going to answer most of , the questions .
8 They don ' t necessarily send it to you but
9 we make sure that you get it . We received
10 it December 26th and there were some
11 concerns . Bob Fisher is the Fire Marshal,
12 and this has to do with the Special
13 Exception permit for the restaurant use .
14 And he just went to take a look at the
15 condition that the Galley Ho was in and we
16 all have of course, most of us know the
17 property very well . Gail has already
18 answered some questions . The first
19 question, will the building be moved? And
20 the answer is , of course, yes . To where,
21 we ' re not sure . The second, is the
22 existing structure viable? Perhaps Joe can
23 address that, or whoever you wish can
24 address it .
25 MS . SCHNITZLER: Joe can address it .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 42
-- 1 I can address it . Joe feels that it ' s
2 substantially intact and we stabilize it .
3 We ' re going to move it . We ' re going to
4 leave it on cribs for a while until we
5 establish where it ' s going to go . And Joe
p
6 feels confident that it will remain
7 standing .
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let ' s do this .
9 Since we do have an expert engineer here .
10 Let ' s let him enter into the record his
11 opinion.
12 MR. FISCHETTI : Good morning. My name
13 is Joseph Fischetti . I am a civil engineer
14 within the Town. Three days after Hurricane
15 Sandy, Barbara asked me to come out and
16 look at Galley Ho building . The rear
17 . portion of the foundation had been washed
18 out, but the structure was pretty much
19 sound the way that it was . There was no
20 change in the structure that was there .
21 When we discussed the building as it was, I
22 said that it needed to be stabilized and
23 seeing that they were going -- in essence,
24 when analyzing, we were going to lift this
25 building and try and move it out of the B
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 43
1 Zones that it ' s in now . That would cause
" 2 us to raise it too high . So we would move
3 it out of the B Zone into the AE Zone, and
4 I said, let ' s just stabilize it and lift it
5 and keep it on the cribs and keep it
6 stabile until we had a chance to physically
7 do the renovations . And that is the
8 direction that we ' re taking now . It looks
9 worse than it is , but it is stabile and
10 sound.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you, Joe .
12 MS . SCHNITZLER: We would have already
13 moved it but the gas company had to cut the
14 gas lines and they just did that last week.
15 Now I am waiting for confirmation in
16 writing. We already have our contracts with
17 the building moving company. We do expect
18 it to happen soon .
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I am just going
20 to let you, because I want the audience to
21 be completely aware of the comments here .
22 They don ' t need to be addressed today. They
23 will be in future . Under another comment
24 from Bob Fisher was under some conditions
25 indicated on the proposal, is there enough
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 44
1 water supply to support possible fire
2 sprinklers? Again, that is a life safety
3 code issue . When you get to building
4 permits, you will be addressing that .
5 Location of the building on the lot, will
6 have an effect on prior public safety
7 concerns . Again, site plan review will take
8 you through those and make sure that those
9 conditions are met . More information will
10 be necessary for final determination . That
11 is fairly obvious . And finally, I have no
12 serious objections at this point, which
13 works out for you. I am glad to hear that .
14 We like full disclosure at these public
15 hearings . So everyone is brought up to
16 date with the same information. We don ' t
17 have any other things that we received that
18 you should know about . At this point, are
19 there questions from the Board or do we
20 want to hear more from the audience?
21 MEMBER DINIZIO : I would like to have
22 more discussion about the parking, you
23 know, the marina, the restaurant, add up to
24 the amount of spaces that will be on this
25 property. And what would be available for
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 45
1 the public?
2 MS . WICKHAM: The first thing that I
3 want to do is answer a little bit more on
4 George ' s question and the Board should be
5 aware of . The Peconic Land Trust does have
6 a right of refusal on this property. So if
7 the Waterfront Fund were to decide to sell
8 the property, the Peconic Land Trust would
9 step in and make sure that it went to the
10 right type of entity in that regard. Now,
11 with respect to the parking. Parking is
12 proposed to be maintained along First
13 Street, " where it is now, and also developed
14 a parking area inside, up against Captain
15 Marty ' s building . They haven ' t actually
16 scaled it out or done the numbers in terms
17 of site plan. So all of the parking is
18 going to have to be addressed in terms of
19 the site plan . The New York State
20 Conservation easement does require public
21 access . The easement that is shown on your
22 map has not been finally approved yet . We
23 hope that we ' re very close . They ' re working
24 on it right now. They require a segment of
25 public parking. So there will be public
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 46
1 parking on this property. We found that
i
2 there is a lot of overflow parking from the
3 Town beach that comes down here . You know,
4 there is parking issues in New Suffolk and
5 that has been something that has been
6 discussed in all these community meetings
7 and discussed with the public . So
8 definitely parking is going to have to be
9 maximized and made as good as it can.
10 MEMBER DINIZIO : I think what I am
11 looking for, you suggested a couple of
12 uses , the marina and the restaurant .
13 Assuming that they both are successful --
14 MS . WICKHAM: Yes .
15 MEMBER DINIZIO : Is there enough
16 parking left for public parking?
17 MS . WICKHAM: There has to be public
18 parking made available .
19 MEMBER DINIZIO: I realize that there
20 has to be .
21 MS . WICKHAM: Well, when we get to the
22 site plan phase the Planning Board is going
23 to require that we do that . One thing that ,
24 I may mention, to the extent that there is
25 transient dockage, and that is going to be
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 47
1 an important aspect of this project and the
2 marina, those people will not be bringing
3 cars . They will be coming by boat . So to
4 the extent that the marina has transient
5 dockage, I don ' t know how the code works
6 with that, but logically, if you come by
7 boat, you don ' t need to bring a car . So
8 there are also a lot of people in New
9 Suffolk who come there by bicycle or what
10 not . So I am not saying that that doesn ' t
11 mean that we don ' t need to have that much
12 parking, but it does mitigate it to some
13 extent, and the demands for parking .
14 MEMBER DINIZIO : But you feel that
15 there is going to be enough parking?
16 MS . WICKHAM: Yeah. When there was a
17 marina and a restaurant there before they
18 had enough parking on the site . It was sort
19 of that gravely lot in the middle . Now
20 it ' s going to be shifted.
21 MEMBER DINIZIO: Because we did get a
22 letter of concern about that .
23 MS . WICKHAM: Just to give you a
24 description of it now, there is parking
25 along the front that we ' re going to have to
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 48
1 speak to the Town about maintaining .
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Gail, could you
3 go back to the mic? We just want to make
4 sure we ' re picking you up on the recorder .
5 MS . WICKHAM: There are 40 spaces
6 there . So all the way from First Street
7 back to where the marina accessory building
8 is , will be two lanes of parking on either
9 side of the center aisle . So there will be
10 parking along the front . And Robin ' s Island
11 Holdings, all of their overflow parking
12 will now be able to be contained on their
13 site . So they will not be going over into
14 the public parking areas .
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well, the onset.
16 density is going to be for us to determine
17 what the capacity for the restaurant is .
18 MS . WICKHAM: Correct .
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Of course and so
20 on .
21 MS . WICKHAM: That ' s correct .
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I would think
23 that this issue can be resolved -through
24 site plan approval successfully. They
25 really understand those codes and what is
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 49
1 required for various uses . It is a concern .
2 I am sure it ' s a greater concern to you --
3 MS . WICKHAM: It is .
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You live there . I
5 am sure you are not looking for adverse
6 impact on the quality of your own life and
7 the creation of additional traffic . You are
8 making something available not just for the
9 residents of New Suffolk but for the
10 Southold Town . One doesn ' t know how to
11 predict the intensity of that use but like
12 most beaches and amenities , one would
13 assume that one would come to the Galley Ho
14 and enjoy the beach. That needs to be
15 resolved through site plan.
16 Did you have any more questions, Jim?
17 MEMBER DINIZIO : Yes . The building
18 itself, I read an article that you are
19 going to be moving that . And the placement
20 of it, has that been finalized? Will that
21 need variances also?
22 MS . WICKHAM: Well, as I mentioned
23 before and Barbara mentioned, it will be
24 moved. It will be moved back from the
25 bulkhead. And the attempt is going to get
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 50
1 it out of the B Zone and into the AE Zone .
2 I don ' t know without scaling it out and
3 figuring everything out, whether it will 75
4 feet away or somewhat less . As I mentioned
5 before, we might have to come back here for
6 a variance to ask that you consider
7 something from what -- from what this point
8 is , 15-20 feet -- 18 feet . So it would be
9 more than 18 feet and much closer to 75
10 feet . I can ' t say again . We ' re not in a
11 point to have been able to developed a full
12 blown site plan. We have discussed it with
13 the Building Inspector . We have had
14 several meetings with Mr . Verity and trying
15 to get a handle on all the different
16 requirements . It is quite possible that we
17 will need a further variance . We didn ' t --
18 let me just mention, there are two reasons
19 why we didn ' t do that . One is the amount of
20 money and time it takes to get to the point
21 where we can actually produce a site plan,
22 is considerable . And Number Two, Robin ' s
23 Island Holdings is very interested in
24 moving forward with this process without us
25 waiting through where the parking is going
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 51
1 to be and all those other details . And as
2 Barbara mentioned, time is important in
3 terms of funding and reducing that
4 mortgage . And until we can close with
5 Robin ' s Island Holdings , we ' re not going to
6 reduce the mortgage .
7 MEMBER DINIZIO : Again, my concern is
8 that we ' re going to approve something --
9 MS . WICKHAM: Well, it ' s going to have
10 to be subject to any further approvals as
11 Leslie mentioned earlier . And if we can ' t
12 get a site plan approval without another
13 variance then implicitly, we won ' t .
14 MEMBER DINIZIO: Right . That ' s my
15 concern.
16 MS . WICKHAM: I understand that .
17 MEMBER DINIZIO : You know, if you can ' t
18 be definitive about where that restaurant
19 is going to be placed, which is something
20 in all variances . We ' re very definitive on
21 surveys and --
22 MS . WICKHAM: I understand.
23 MEMBER DINIZIO : It doesn ' t appear
24 we ' re going to have that . That ' s going to
25 be sticky.
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 52
1 MS . WICKHAM: Let me just say this,
2 there is room on the property to put the
3 building all the way back. The contention
4 is how much open space in the middle do you
5 want to preserve and you know, you have a
6 park area there and you want parking. So
7 that ' s going to be the balancing that we ' re
8 going to have to evaluate in terms of
9 getting the site plan to you and then
10 adjudicate it . So there is a lot of
11 conceptual ideas that come in, in terms of
12 balancing that, because yeah, you can plunk
13 the restaurant right down the middle of the
14 property and then the closer you get it to
15 the street, the more you impact the views .
16 The more you use up the land that is now
17 used for community gathering and all kinds
18 of activities that the Waterfront is so
19 great about promoting. We don ' t have a
20 definitive answer, but as you can see,
21 everything is looked at very carefully with
22 a great deal of scrutiny and a great deal
23 of forethought .
24 MEMBER DINIZIO : But the picnic table
25 is where you ' re going to eat the hog dog
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 53
1 at --
2 MS . WICKHAM: Yeah .
3 MEMBER DINIZIO : That is not part of
4 the restaurant?
5 MS . WICKHAM: No . That ' s where we ' re
6 at right now.
7 MEMBER DINIZIO : You know, again, we ' re
8 going to need to be consistent in our
9 decision . I mean, you gave me something to
10 bite on there . You have a concept . You
11 want to follow through with that concept .
12 We can ' t grant a variance based on a
13 concept . You have to have something
14 definitive and drawn out --
15 MS . WICKHAM: We ' re not asking --
16 we ' re asking you to allow two uses and
17 we ' re asking you for a Special Exception to
18 allow a restaurant . How big that restaurant
19 is going to be, that ' s a whole other
20 application and we understand that . And I
21 think my papers say that just in case there
22 is any questions . We fully understand that
23 there is another level of approval . We
24 would love to do it all today but we can ' t .
25 MEMBER DINIZIO : So we can make that a
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 54
1 condition?
2 MS . WICKHAM: Yes .
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It ' s clear that
4 the reason here is financial . That you
5 need some insurance going forward that
6 certain things will be in place before you
7 can finalize other things . Otherwise, Jim,
8 is absolutely right . One of the questions
9 that I had was where is this going to be
10 located? Will it require an additional
11 variance, and you have answered that to my
12 satisfaction, Gail . You are not at that
13 point yet, and that you would be back
14 before us, if you need to . And we will
15 have to condition things based on that . So
16 it ' s very clear that that use is dependant
17 upon exactly where it ' s going to be
18 located, conforming or not . I actually had
19 a question about the marina accessory here .
20 Is that intended to be moved or is that
21 going to stay where it is?
22 MS . WICKHAM: The plan for that
23 building is to leave it where it is . It ' s
24 been there for many years . It doesn ' t need
25 extensive renovations as I understand it
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 55
1 but it ' s -- it ' s going to be used for
2 people using the marina ordinarily. To have
3 a place to be . Lockers and things like
4 that .
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Marina office?
6 MS . WICKHAM: Yes .
7 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : What ' s with the
8 barn storage on the property?
9 MS . WICKHAM: The barn is a very old
10 barn. It is going to be maintained as
11 storage, because you can ' t ever have
12 property without storage . There has been no
13 plans to develop that into anything but
14 storage . They keep garden equipment in it
15 now. They thought they could have movies
16 and show that off that type of thing . Put a
17 sheet up
18 MS . SCHNITZLER: Two of the three
19 buildings are ( In Audible) listed and the
20 property has been landmarked. I am very
21 embarrassed to say that I did not know that
22 until I talked to Jim Graph yesterday. I
23 was a landmark Commissioner for six years
24 and I knew that it was all eligible but I
25 didn ' t know it was a local landmark. So we
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 56
1 will do everything to preserve those
2 buildings and make them appropriately,
3 adaptively to keep them.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Ken, did you have
5 any questions that you wanted to make?
6 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No .
7 MS . GRANT : My name is Lauren Grant
8 and I live at 2980 ( In Audible) Road in New
9 Suffolk. And I just wanted to address
10 Mr . Dinizio ' s issues on parking. In New
11 Suffolk, it ' s been an ongoing problem with
12 the public beach now. It ' s so popular with
13 people coming all over the city to come and
14 use the beach . The e-mail that you received
15 probably addresses that as well, because
16 people who probably don ' t want to use the
17 public parking lot go along all the side
18 streets in New Suffolk. So that is a
19 condition that is being addressed by the
20 New Suffolk Civic Association, as past
21 president of the New Suffolk Civic
22 Association . There is correspondence galore
23 between myself and the supervisor at the
24 time . Scott has been wonderful in working
25 with us and trying to make -- he has put up
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 57
1 dozens of parking signs to try and
2 designate to park where in New Suffolk. We
3 have many people who come and park on the
4 streets and then walk to the beach. So I
5 know having spoken to Ms . Saul about that,
6 that is a great concern of hers . The Civic
7 Association is also trying to work with her
8 and other residents in the area who have
9 ongoing problems with parking on homes . As
10 far as the Waterfront is concerned, they
11 have been very consciousness and helped
12 with this ongoing problem in trying to
13 create a parking lot that is next to
14 Captain Marty ' s, which really holds a lot
15 of people . We also work with Legend ' s and
16 helping them work with their parking . So
17 it ' s a very strong issue that is very
18 prevalent. on everyone ' s mind. I just wanted
19 to let you know that it ' s very, very much
20 on everybody' s mind. And the Civic
21 Association as well, is constantly trying
22 to work on it and improve it . Thank you .
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you . Does
24 any other Board members have any questions?
25 Do you want to come forward?
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 58
1 MR. MAUL : Good morning. My name is
2 George Maul . I live at 375 First Street in
3 New Suffolk.
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Can you please
5 spell your name .
6 MR. MAUL : M-A-U-L . It ' s across the
7 street from the Robin ' s Island property and
8 from the property that we ' re talking about .
9 I am also the landlord for the New Suffolk
10 Post Office . I have been the landlord for
11 20 years . I am very concerned about
12 parking. When the Peconic Land Trust
13 originally brought this property, they held
14 a series of meetings at the schoolhouse for
15 the purpose of obtaining consensus of the
16 community about what the use of the
17 property should be . And there were
18 bulletin boards at the schoolhouse and
19 every one was given a dot -- every one in
20 the community was given a dot and asked to
21 put where they thought they should put it
22 in what they thought the property should
23 be . And some of the uses were park, open
24 space, restaurant, post office -- I don ' t
25 remember what the other ones were . I do
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 59
1 remember that the first two popular uses
2 were open space and park. And now I am
3 concerned because the property has passed
4 through the Waterfront Fund, and it appears
5 to me that they ' re trying to put all of the
6 uses on this one property. And I don ' t
7 understand how, if the purpose is
8 preservation, that all of these uses are
9 being brought in or more uses than just one
10 or two . And why those one or two were not
11 the originally asked for in the consensus
12 meeting in the community, which were open
13 space and park. Now I also- understand that
14 there are financial issues about the
15 property. And I have heard proposals about
16 it being a snack bar, which I think is
17 maybe reasonable . And now it ' s a proposal
18 for a restaurant . The proposals on this
19 property have changed over and over . And
20 over the past five years they continued to
21 ( In Audible) sideways and I would hope that
22 at some point, the Waterfront Fund would
23 come up with a real site plan and a real
24 set of uses so that the entire community
25 can get behind the issue and feel confident
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 60
1 about it . And I think the Board should
2 deny the Special Exception for a restaurant
3 until there is a site plan . I completely
4 support the subdivision and Robin' s Island
5 and what they want to do there . I think
6 that is wonderful . I think that everything
7 that Robin ' s Island has done in the
8 community area is wonderful . But I am
9 concerned about the restaurant . I am
10 concerned about the septic system. Not
11 because there is going to be one, but in
12 order to have a septic system, you know,
13 three feet above the groundwater, that
14 septic system has to come up higher . Now
15 where Robin ' s Island is now, they have
16 raised the property six feet, and if you
17 want to talk about a scenic vista, you
18 can ' t see any scenic vista when you raise
19 the property six feet to put septic system
20 underneath . And you stand up on the street
21 and you see dirt here . That is not a
22 scenic vista . You can ' t see the water
23 there . Now, I don ' t know what that means
24 in terms of a site plan for these
25 properties, but I think we need to see that
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 61
1 to see if there is any open space . If the
2 road is two feet lower than the property,
3 there is low profile fencing. We have to
4 know what this is and see what it is . View
5 shed? Now, there is a reason why the
6 process here involves sending registered
7 mail to people who live adjacent to this
8 property. That is because their lives and
9 concerns are immediately next to the
10 property and they ' re affected more by it
11 than the rest of the community is . And I
12 would hope that the Waterfront Fund would
13 take that into consideration also . You
14 know, when Hurricane Sandy comes and all of
15 the docks get ripped up and come across the
16 street, they wash into our property and we
17 spend two days picking up the dock from the
18 Galley Ho and putting it in the street so
19 that it could be taken away by the Town. So
20 these are, you know, issues that happen
21 immediately right there . In terms of
22 parking, please let me say that over the
23 past few years there are more people in
24 downtown New Suffolk. If it ' s going to be a
25 restaurant, does that also mean a catering
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 62
1 hall? What is the difference between those
2 two? I don ' t know . Are we going to have
3 weddings there? Are we going to have bands
4 on the beach? I don ' t know. I think we need
5 to have a plan here of what it ' s going to
6 be . As it is now, we have a boat ramp
7 there and trouble with parking now . On the
8 first day of clamming season at five
9 o ' clock in the morning, there is all
10 pick-up trucks that are coming in there .
11 There is parking for the post office . Okay.
12 When they have a 5K run, there is hundreds
13 of people there with cars . They don ' t bike
14 there . They come from Brooklyn and Queens .
15 Boats are dropped off there from Sayville .
16 So these are real issues that exist and I
17 would love to support the Waterfront Funds
18 ideas, but we need a real plan that really
19 works and then let ' s do it . But asking for
20 a special exception without a site plan, I
21 think is really wrong. I think it ' s wrong .
22 I support the subdivision . I support
23 Robin ' s Island for the property, but I
24 would ask that the Board deny the Special
25 Exception until we have a site plan . Thank
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 63
1 you.
2 MS . HARKOFF: Diane Harkoff, Legends
3 Restaurant, 435 First Street, New Suffolk.
4 Besides parking, one of my biggest concerns
5 is size of the septic system and how much
6 water it will displace being above ground.
7 We have all had to sandbag three times in
8 the past eight weeks . And flooding is a big
9 concern for us . Another concern is also the
10 cost for building this and the flood
11 insurance, the equipment . What happens if
12 it is not supporting the New Suffolk
13 Waterfront Fund? Then does that require
14 more fundraising? I know probably most
15 people, I am told, are opposed to this , but
16 I would like to see the taxes raised to
17 support this project rather than continued
18 fundraising . And does anyone know what the
19 height and length of this septic system
20 would be?
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That is not
22 information that we have .
23 MS . HARKOFF: I just feel and I heard
24 at one time that anything you put above
25 ground displaces more water and pushes it
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 64
1 towards the buildings on Front Street . I
2 also would be concerned about the cost of
3 landscaping on this property considering
4 how frequently it floods . And I think that
5 is it .
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Thank you . Is
7 there anyone else that wants to address the
8 Board?
9 MR. SKALLY : Hi, yes . Thomas Skally,
10 270 Third Street . I am only in the
11 neighborhood for a short time . I think the
12 parking might be able to help on one of the
13 side streets . You should be able -- if
14 Southold could allow that, it would allow
15 more parking on the street . Maybe that is
16 not part of the approval with this . And
17 with Legends, I think if they had a boat
18 tender service that would take people you
19 know, back and forth to their boats , it
20 would increase the revenue for the Town and
21 help Legends and help Summer Girl . It would
22 help Galley Ho . It would help everybody. I
23 think this is something that creates jobs
24 and keeps the taxes low, and I think based
25 on that and itself -- like the gentleman
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 65
1 was saying with the septic and the
2 drainage, I think the engineer might be
3 able to come up with that or maybe a
4 different type of septic system that are
5 more common in areas of Vermont . They would
6 probably not raise the property as high . So
7 maybe he might be able to shed some light
8 on it . Like everybody says, when you ' re
9 down at the beach or you ' re coming down
10 there -- and yeah, people do walk and do
11 ride their bicycles . In the winter time
12 it ' s a sleep community. In the summer time,
13 that ' s part of what New Suffolk is about on
14 Long Island. There is a North Fork and a
15 South Fork. That is where people come . They
16 want to have a good time . Without these
17 things it would make it boring out there .
18 Thank you.
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you . Please
20 come forward and state your name and spell
21 it for the record.
22 MR. ROUSSAN : Hi, Stephan Roussan, 415
23 Third Street, New Suffolk. R-O-U-S-S-A-N . I
24 just wanted to say a few things . The
25 concerns raised today are all perfectly
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 66
1 appropriate and legitimate for the
2 circumstances . Everyone has questions that
3 they would love to have answered as quickly
4 as possible . Certainly you can ' t have too
5 much clarity and you know, -I am certainly
6 very sympathetic to the properties that are
7 immediately adjacent to the waterfront,
8 because they ' re the most immediately
9 impacted. At the same time, I just want to
10 sort of remind everyone that in a process
11 like this, which is done entirely on a
12 volunteer basis by members of the community
13 who are giving up their selves and time and
14 sacrificing a great deal for this, it takes
15 time and you don ' t necessarily have the
16 clarity and answers that you want to say,
17 as if it were a corporate entity or
18 business entity that is coming in and, that
19 is well funded, with all the answers ahead
20 of time . I think we all have to allow for a
21 fluid process . You know, especially
22 considering what their fundraising concerns
23 are . You know, a year ago, this plan wasn ' t
24 really on the radar . And then you know, you
25 work the channels and you develop the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 67
1 relationship and something happens and you
2 get a break. The same thing with the
3 application for the grant from the State .
4 These are fantastic things that allow the
5 New Suffolk Waterfront Fund to really
6 secure it ' s own future and to have it ' s own
7 stake . To know that there is a long term
8 prospect by this without being put in debt
9 and worry about immediately selling it off .
10 So it is fluid. It is organic . It ' s very
11 frustrating but I think it ' s important to
12 recognize how hard these guys are working
13 and the fact that these guys are doing it
14 -- it ' s unfunded and funded by the people
15 who are supporting it and still managing to
16 really pull off what is a really
17 unbelievable accomplishment . And when you
18 contrast that with what might have happened
19 there, if it had not been stepped in or
20 garnered their support and not developed
21 the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, the future
22 of that property, what it might have been
23 and the impact of what it would have on all
24 of us , especially for the people, you know,
25 immediately across the street . I don ' t
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 68
1 think it ' s -- it ' s just a remarkable
2 difference to be in the position that we ' re
3 in now versus what it might have been . So I
4 want to commend the Waterfront Fund for
5 that, and just amazed on how many people
6 are working so hard on volunteer basis to
7 make that happen . So I would like to have
8 those answers too . Parking is a big issue
9 for me too . And some of the uses that are
10 being proposed are not necessarily the ones
11 that I put my dot next to at the highest of
12 the list . I do remember the restaurant
13 option. It wasn ' t what I was going for
14 myself, but I remember the restaurant
15 option being extremely popular and one of
16 the, most requested uses for the property .
17 It was not just park and open space . A lot
18 of people, you know, were saying, it ' s open
19 space now. It ' s boring . We want some life
20 and some activity down there . I heard much
21 more about the days of Galley Ho and having
22 a burger down there . You might have to go
23 back to the record and see what the voting
24 results actually were, but I am pretty sure
25 that the restaurant was at the top of the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 69
1 list , at least the top three . So I just
2 think that we have to be a little patient
3 and give these guys a pat on the back too .
4 To continue pressing . To continue asking .
5 To continue wanting clarity and wanting it
6 to come together, but I think we have to
7 give these guys a little bit of a break
8 too . Thanks .
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you .
10 MS . DINGLE : Susan Dingle, and I live
11 at 7400 New Suffolk Road. Just off of
12 Elizabeth Street, across the street from
13 the school . And my parents bought the house
14 in 1967 and were involved in the early days
15 of founding the New Suffolk Civic
16 Association . So we have always been
17 involved and always loved going down to the
18 Galley Ho, whether it be lunch time or last
19 at night or whatever . It was always fun,
20 but times have changed. As I am sitting
21 here, I of course, support the work of the
22 New Suffolk Waterfront Fund in really
23 rescuing this land for future use . I
24 totally acknowledge all their work often . I
25 was very moved when I heard George Maul
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 70
1 speak of his concerns, as someone who lives
2 on First Street . Times have changed. Never
3 before, I don ' t ever remember the Fire
4 Department coming through to evacuate New
5 Suffolk because of flooding and the danger
6 that was presented during Hurricane Sandy,
7 and I just wondered have we fully taken
8 into account the possibilities that are now
9 present that didn ' t exist before . The
10 flooding was kind of a theoretical . It
11 could be a flood zone . It wasn ' t actually a
12 flood zone . There was never any previous
13 experience of a dock being washed up as
14 George has described. Of course we all have
15 that dream of having that hot dog at the
16 Galley Ho and sitting on the picnic bench
17 and all of that, but I just really think
18 that we need to consider the fragility of
19 the environment to really, really consider
20 that .the Eco system of New Suffolk is
21 indeed fragile . The overburdening of our
22 community because of the popularity is
23 something that I think we really need to
24 take into account . And I just really wanted
25 to speak at, because I think in our
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 71
1 enthusiasm, and our love for our community,
2 that we may want to rush ahead and do
3 wonderful things, but I think that it ' s
4 important to take time and really consider
5 the implications of what really appears to
6 be a very changing climate that has
7 affected our delicate community. ' And so I
8 just wanted to express that in support of
9 those who are currently impacted that that
10 really is a flooding zone, and so I thank
11 you .
12 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You ' re welcome . I
13 just want to make a comment at this point .
14 Many of the concerns that you have raised,
15 all of them carefully thought through and
16 are certainly appreciated by this Board,
17 are beyond the purview of what is before
18 us . It is all a process . In order for you
19 to proceed with the site plan review phase,
20 where you will actually have an opportunity
21 to look at drainage, septic, the proper
22 placement of the restaurant structure,
23 whatever scale it turns out to be . Those
24 are things that happens at another phase .
25 We too are concerned with life safety and
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 72
1 parking and we heard your concerns in what
2 you ' re trying to do to address them. We
3 have also heard from the Board and also
4 from the members of the audience that the
5 vagueness at this point, where you ' re able
6 to pinpoint where that restaurant will be,
7 relative to environmental impact, parking
8 impact and so on, is somewhat of an issue .
9 This Board -- I actually think I would like
10 to poll the Board in order how to proceed.
11 We don ' t have to close the hearing today.
12 We can close it at our special meeting in
13 two weeks . Giving everyone an opportunity
14 to sit through what they heard and provide
15 whatever written, not verbal, but written
16 additional comments they would like to make
17 to this Board. We can close this hearing at
18 that time . That is for the application on
19 the area variance . With regard to the
20 Special Exception request for the
21 Waterfront, that can be handled a couple of
22 ways , and I am going to poll the Board in a
23 moment . We can also do the same, close it
24 at the Special Meeting or we can adjourn it
25 to an open date, which means that you can
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 73
1 come back without any additional costs . So
2 that you have more specifics and we can be
3 more informed on precisely what it is that
4 you ' re asking us to grant . So if you would
5 like to comment on that, fine, but the
6 Board has some options on how to proceed.
7 We can also close all of these hearings
8 right now, subject to any kind of comments
9 you want to make before that happens .
10 MS . WICKHAM: I don ' t have a problem
11 with the concept of adjourning it and
12 keeping the hearing open for another two
13 weeks . I think that if that helps the Board
14 and gets our hearing done today as people
15 digest their comments, that is fine . What I
16 do want to say that we ' re presented with a
17 wonderful opportunity here to move forward.
18 with Robin ' s Island Holdings , but in order
19 to do that, we have to know what is going
20 to happen to the rest of the property, and
21 without all of these applications
22 adjudicated, we ' re really not in a position
23 to do that . I don ' t know what will happen.
24 They have presented us with a wonderful
25 opportunity to move forward. No matter how
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 74
1 great of a plan that you present, some
2 people may have a problem with it . I think
3 all of the concerns here today can be
4 addressed, and if there are specifics that
5 need to be addressed when it .comes to the
6 actual construction of the restaurant and
7 the approvals of the restaurant , that is
8 all going to have to come out and be dealt
9 with at the appropriate time . I don ' t think
10 that the Special Exception needs to have
11 all of those site plans to determine
12 whether a restaurant, which has been here
13 for many, many years , can exist again with
14 a special exception . So I would like to ask
15 you not to adjourn that hearing anymore
16 than the two week process , if that is
17 possible .
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Whoever is the
19 best person qualified to answer this, from
20 a financial terms , Waterfront moving
21 forward with the plans , how, in your
22 opinion, essential is it to have a
23 determination on the restaurant special
24 exception, would a determination on the
25 area variances, would that allow you to
r
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 75
1 transfer properties to Robin ' s Holdings,
2 get that cash, and proceed with additional
3 plans , is that a possibility?
4 MS . WICKHAM: They 're all tied
5 together . Because if you have a ability to
6 have a restaurant and a marina together on
7 less than a sufficient area but you don ' t
8 have a special exception to reinstate the
9 restaurant, then we don ' t have both .
10 MEMBER HORNING: May I ask a question?
11 MS . WICKHAM: Sure .
12 MEMBER HORNING : Relating to the New
13 York State easement and the Nature Preserve
14 easement , it has been mentioned that both
15 of those easements require a certain amount
16 of parking, and nobody mentioned how much
17 or whatever . My question would be, those
18 easements , do they have any effect on the
19 total lot reserve --
20 MS . WICKHAM: No .
21 MEMBER HORNING: The square footage
22 required --
23 MS . WICKHAM: No . They do not impact
24 density, if that is what your question is .
25 MEMBER DINIZIO : What we want to know,
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 76
1 you have a marina and you have a restaurant
2 and then you have a park use and then you
3 have easements , with all of that total, do
4 you somehow exceed the amount that you
5 would need to provide for parking? See the
6 problem that I see? The dream is to have a
7 hamburger at the Galley Ho and I have done
8 that myself, but when I did that, Legends
9 wasn ' t there . You didn ' t --
10 MS . WICKHAM: We ' re not obligated to
11 provide parking for Legend ' s --
12 MEMBER DINIZIO : I agree with you 1000 .
13 MS . WICKHAM: -- we have done
14 everything as we can as Lauren Grant
15 mentioned to accommodate all those uses .
16 MEMBER DINIZIO : I agree with you 1000 .
17 MS . WICKHAM: But we will continue to
18 do so .
19 MEMBER DINIZIO : We ' re looking at
20 congestion . We ' re looking at planning . You
21 know, what existed when this restaurant
22 existed, doesn ' t exist any more . There are
23 things that took the place of Galley Ho .
24 There is a restaurant there that services
25 that area that was once serviced by the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 77
1 Galley Ho . Now, you ' re asking to do
2 another restaurant in that area .
3 MS . WICKHAM: It has always existed
4 and I don ' t think there is another
5 restaurant in town which has it ' s own
6 business , its own clientele . I don ' t think
7 that is a reason on what can happen on this
8 particular piece of property.
9 MEMBER DINIZIO : Only that you ' re
10 talking about land use . You once had a
11 restaurant there . You can only have a
12 restaurant there if you come before this
13 Board and ask for permission . Now, we ' re
14 looking at someone saying, if you raise the
15 land, you ' re going to flood my property --
16 MS . WICKHAM: Let me just address that .
17 Anything that happens with respect to the
18 sanitary system will be approved by Suffolk
19 County Health Department . And in fact, the
20 conceptual site plan that was presented to
21 you, there are some areas that the sanitary
22 system will have to be built up . That is
23 all going to be in accordance with Suffolk
24 County Health Department .
25 MEMBER DINIZIO : Okay. Fine . We ' re
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 78
1 having a hearing on the restaurant, I think
2 it ' s at least appropriate or a person
3 coming into this town to see what that is
4 going to look like on a map --
5 MS . WICKHAM: That is what the site
6 plan is for .
7 MEMBER DINIZIO : I agree . Where is it?
8 MS . WICKHAM: We have given you a
9 conceptual site plan . The actual site plan,
10 with the architectural review and all those
11 things will have to happen at the site plan
12 stage .
13 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Let me just
14 request something . I know that you know
15 this . This Board and we have members on
16 here who have been on and off for over 35
17 years , the Board does not, has not,
18 approved uses based on a concept . They are
19 always site specific . The code gives us
20 some latitude -- but what I would actually
21 like to do is recess for ten minutes
22 because I want to make sure that we get
23 this right and see what our .legal authority
24 is . And I would like to confer and go into
25 Executive Session with the Town Attorney
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 79
- 1 and the Board, and it shouldn ' t take long,
2 ten or fifteen minutes . I apologize to the
3 other applicants that need to be heard. We
4 will get to you as soon as we can, but this
5 is a complicated issue . It ' s a double
6 application and it ' s important, and we know
7 that . We want to get it right .
8 MS . WICKHAM: That ' s fine .
9 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: So I am going to
10 make a motion to go into Executive Session .
11 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
12 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
13 MEMBER DINIZIO : Aye .
14 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
15 MEMBER HORNING : Aye .
16 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye .
18 (Whereupon, the meeting entered
19 Executive Session . )
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : -- make a motion
21 to close the hearing on the area variances
22 for the lot line change . We don ' t feel,
23 unless somebody in the audience wants to
24 object to this, that there is any
25 additional testimony that is necessary for
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 80
1 any additional comments that we need. So
2 that is that . With regard to the Special
3 Exception permit application for the
4 restaurant . We ' re going to adjourn that to
5 the February meeting in order to accomplish
6 the following . We ' re going to request that
7 you submit to the Board a specific site
8 plan . It can be exactly the one that is in
9 front of us now. Right, "as built" , exactly
10 where it is . We would need to have the
11 septic plan located on this survey and we
12 would need to have parking located on this
13 plan . We will then be in a position to
14 evaluate approval of something specific .
15 We ' re aware that your plans will change . We
16 know that you will go to many site plan
17 approval, but this will allow us to do
18 something that the Board has jurisdiction
19 over, which is to grant the use of a
20 restaurant on the parcel as determined with
21 regard to the lot line change . The
22 restaurant would have been distinguished
23 because it has not been a continuos use . We
24 then would be in a position because we will
25 have an "as built" plan with additional
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 81
1 information to grant or deny based on
2 something specific . If you need more time
3 than February, we will adjourn from
4 February to March. We ' re hopeful that
5 given your timeframe you will be able to
6 get this done within that time . If you need
7 to come back to us, you will just come back
8 to us with amended plans . You know, once
9 you go through site plan approval, the
10 Planning Board. The Planning Board, if the
11 plans change, you just come back before the
12 Board with those plans and we can proceed
13 from there . That will allow us to not hold
14 you up and to look at these things and all
15 the applications simultaneously. Do you
16 have any questions?
17 MR. SKALLY : I have one question .
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : State your name .
19 MR. SKALLY: Thomas Skally. In the
20 beginning of this meeting, it was told that
21 there were time constraints as far as
22 getting the low interest loan. What
23 timeframe is that?
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : We have --
25 MR. SKALLY : From what they were saying
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 82
1 for their financing --
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Their financing?
3 MR. SKALLY: Yes . If this is approved
4 in a timely manner, that money would be
5 available to the community?
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Here is what the
7 Board ' s legal obligations are, the Board
8 will make a determination. They have 62
9 days from the date of the closing of the
10 hearing to make a determination in writing .
11 We more often than not make a determination
12 within two weeks from today. We have a
13 special meeting two weeks after the regular
14 meeting, and we have draft decisions
15 written . We do our very best to get it done
16 then . It ' s not always possible . It depends
17 on how complicated. If it ' s not possible to
18 be done, it will be done one month from now
19 at the next regular meeting. We will
20 deliberate and then do a draft . We ' re
21 talking now about the lot line change . With
22 regard to the special exception, if you
23 have the information you need for the
24 February hearing, we may have questions on
25 it . There may be some additional comments
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 83
1 that some of you would like to make . It
2 won ' t be as nearly long of a hearing as it
3 today, and then we can adjudicate in the
4 same way. We can even have a draft prepared
5 for that very same day of the hearing and
6 make a decision the same date . It depends
7 on how fast you all act to get us that
8 information. I can ' t answer your question
9 as to the New Suffolk Waterfront Fund.
10 Maybe Barbara can . So would you like to
11 answer it publicly or privately?
12 MS . SCHNITZLER: We can do it
13 privately.
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Any other
15 questions or comments from the Board?
16 (No Response . )
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anything from the
18 audience?
19 (No Response . )
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Hearing no
21 further questions or comments, I am going
22 to make a motion to close Application #6616
23 and reserving decision for a later date .
24 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor?
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 84
1 MEMBER DINIZIO : Aye .
2 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
3 MEMBER HORNING: Aye .
4 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye .
6 That was for the lot line change .
7 Now, I am going to make a motion to
8 adjourn application #6617 , request for the
9 Special Exception use brought by New
10 Suffolk Waterfront and adjourn it to the
11 February regular meeting, which is on
12 February 7th at 10 : 00 a .m. And you ' re clear
13 that the adjournment is based upon the
14 receipt of "as built" site plan showing
15 septic and elevations for the septic, as
16 well as parking .
17 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
18 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Seconded by
19 Gerry.
20 All in favor?
21 MEMBER DINIZIO : Aye .
22 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
23 MEMBER HORNING: Aye .
24 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 85
1 ( See Minutes for Resolution . )
2 *******************************************
3 HEARING #6618 - PETER AND DIANE MOLLICA
4 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
5 application before the Board is for Peter
6 and Diane Mollica, #6618 . Request for
7 variance from Article III Code Section
8 280-15 and the Building Inspector ' s
9 December 3 , 2012 Notice of Disapproval
10 based on an application for building permit
11 for an accessory in-ground swimming at : 1 )
12 accessory in-ground swimming pool is
13 proposed in a location other than the code
14 required rear yard, located at : 50 Schooner
15 Drive, corner Anchor Lane, in Southold.
16 MS . MOLLICA: Hi .
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Hi .
18 MS . MOLLICA: I am Diane Mollica .
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Okay. Just so
20 you ' re aware, all the Board members have
21 been out to visit your property.
22 MS . MOLLICA: Okay.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : To see what the
24 neighborhood looks like . To see the
25 proposed location exactly.
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 86
1 MS . MOLLICA: Okay.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there
3 something that you would like to tell us?
4 The proposed pool is along the side of the
5 house with a 22 side yard setback and 11
6 feet to the road, and a proposed fence .
7 MS . MOLLICA: It ' s really actually very
8 simple . I don ' t have a backyard. I live on
9 the corner . So if everybody visited, you
10 will know that I have two side yards and a
11 front yard. My backyard is very narrow and
12 I have several cesspools back there as
13 well . So there is no ideal place for it .
14 The best place would be on the side of the
15 house where I am proposing . There is ample
16 space . I have moved the garage door, so I
17 can take out that driveway and put the
18 proposed pool there . The only thing that I
19 would like to say in reference to the sign,
20 I had two signs posted. We were away from
21 the holiday and we had a snow storm and
22 several different storms , and I could not
23 put back the sign . I brought you evidence
24 so you can see that I tried and being that
25 it was a holiday. I got really upset when
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 87
1 the gentleman came today and I didn ' t have
2 my sign, but I would suggest that they
3 laminate the sign, because I didn ' t -- I
4 tried to put saran wrap on it and nothing
5 worked. At one time, it was completely
6 posted for the entire length . So if you
7 have any questions for me, I think it ' s
8 kind of clear .
9 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: How high is the
10 fence?
11 MS . MOLLICA: I don ' t have a fence .
12 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: The fence around
13 the pool?
14 MS . MOLLICA: I have to put a fence
15 around the pool . I have not gone into that
16 yet because I have not researched it . I
17 understand that there is a certain height
18 that you need for the pool . So that was my
19 understanding that I would do whatever is
20 required, and I have not gotten that far . I
21 am taking it one step at a time .
22 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: You will be
23 required by code to put up a minimum four
24 foot fence, since you ' re in the front yard.
25 MS . MOLLICA: That ' s fine .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 88
1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You might want to
2 consider installing some evergreen
3 screening --
4 MS . MOLLICA: Absolutely. I would want
5 that .
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : I am not sure how
7 your neighbors --
8 MS . MOLLICA: I looked into that if I
9 put the hedge before or after the fence, at
10 four feet and because of the distance from
11 my house, I could still see the view. So I
12 will just have to do what I have to do and
13 I will keep it at four feet .
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Jim, any
15 questions?
16 MEMBER DINIZIO : Any reason why you
17 can ' t move it closer to your house?
18 MS . MOLLICA: Move the pool closer to
19 the house? Well, I have a deck and the
20 deck has always been there . It ' s a concrete
21 deck, and it ' s ten feet away from that . If
22 I put it any closer, you will walk off the
23 deck and into the pool . So I would havb -to
24 take away that deck that is already part of
25 my house . And I enjoy the deck, and I am
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 89
1 going to use it as part of the outdoor
2 area .
3 MEMBER DINIZIO : What about your
4 cesspools?
5 MS . MOLLICA: The cesspools are in the
6 back of the house .
7 MEMBER DINIZIO : You live on a
8 peninsula; right? Your cesspools are in the
9 back --
10 MS . MOLLICA: The back of the house
11 which is Anchor Lane .
12 MEMBER DINIZIO : So I see a drain there
13 and a well, there is cesspools in that
14 area?
15 MS . MOLLICA: Yes . It ' s in the back of
16 the house . So if you came in the front door
17 of my house and just go straight through,
18 it ' s in the back of the house .
19 MEMBER DINIZIO : The driveway is on the
20 side of your house?
21 MS . MOLLICA: I 'm sorry if this is
22 confusing. The old driveway is on the side
23 of the house. That is where I am proposing
24 to put the pool . The new driveway --
25 MEMBER DINIZIO : That is on the front?
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 90
1 MS . MOLLICA: The front of the house .
2 I moved that .
3 MEMBER DINIZIO : That is what you
4 consider the front of your house?
5 MS . MOLLICA: Yes .
6 MEMBER DINIZIO : If I walk through your
7 front door and straight into your house,
8 that is where your cesspools are?
9 MS . MOLLICA: Exactly .
10 MEMBER DINIZIO : That wouldn ' t be the
11 drywell for your pool?
12 MS . MOLLICA: No, because I would put
13 the drywell in a different area .
14 MEMBER DINIZIO : And the deck, the
15 concrete pad, it has been --
16 MS . MOLLICA: I don ' t know. The
17 previous owner put it there . When I went to
18 the Town to get my survey, it was already
19 on the survey. So I didn ' t change -- I took
20 down a glass enclosure, which was the sun
21 room and kept the concrete slab, so I could
22 just make an outdoor patio .
23 MEMBER DINIZIO : So there are no plans
24 to recover that?
25 MS . MOLLICA: No, I didn ' t like that .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 91
1 MEMBER DINIZIO : Okay. And the
2 driveway where the pool is going, that is
3 all going to be removed and plant grass?
4 MS . MOLLICA: Yes, I will plant grass
5 and I will do a walk way and put a chair or
6 something like that .
7 MEMBER DINIZIO : How much decking are
8 you going to have around the pool?
9 MS . MOLLICA: I guess about ten feet,
10 but not all the way around because I won ' t
11 have the room to go all the way around.
12 Probably three feet in the area where I
13 don ' t have space . I do have space, I will
14 do ten feet .
15 MEMBER DINIZIO : So that will be ten
16 feet between Schooner Drive?
17 MS . MOLLICA: Yes . Schooner Drive side
18 and the street . So all along the street . Do
19 you have a survey?
20 MEMBER DINIZIO : Yes . How do we treat
21 the three feet around the pool and should
22 that be subject to the variance? That ' s
23 eleven feet from the pool .
24 MS . MOLLICA: I 'm sorry?
25 MEMBER DINIZIO : It ' s eleven feet from
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 92
1 the property line to the pool, and you want
2 to go three feet on that side just so you
3 can walk around?
4 MS . MOLLICA: So when you step out of
5 the pool you don ' t step onto the grass .
6 MEMBER DINIZIO: Would that be cement
7 or would that be wood?
8 MS . MOLLICA: No, I was actually going
9 to put blue stone .
10 MEMBER DINIZIO : Put blue stone and
11 just lay that on the ground?
12 MS . MOLLICA: Yes . Well, I would have
13 it properly installed.
14 MEMBER DINIZIO : So there wouldn ' t be
15 cement underneath it?
16 MS . MOLLICA: Something there just so
17 the blue stone won ' t move . Nothing won ' t
18 grow in between it .
19 MEMBER DINIZIO : Good luck with that
20 blue stone .
21 MS . MOLLICA: It ' s a fortune .
22 MEMBER DINIZIO : Okay. I think that is
23 all I have .
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Gerry?
25 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I really don ' t have
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 93
1 anything. She doesn ' t have any other place
2 to put it .
3 MS . MOLLICA: Thank you .
4 MEMBER HORNING : How many residences
5 are up there on that Schooner Drive?
6 MS . MOLLICA: There are two other
7 houses than mine .
8 MEMBER HORNING: Just two?
9 MS . MOLLICA: Just two . That is a
10 dead-end street . There is three, past my
11 house there is two, but across there is
12 one . So that ' s three .
13 MEMBER HORNING : So you have
14 approximately three different neighbors
15 driving their vehicles in and out what
16 turns out to be a dead-end.
17 MS . MOLLICA: I am not sure if this
18 matters to you, but those people don ' t live
19 there . That is their second homes .
20 MEMBER HORNING : Okay. They could live
21 there?
22 MS . MOLLICA: Yeah .
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Anybody else?
24 Ken?
25 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No questions .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 94
1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone
2 in the audience that wishes to address this
3 application?
4 (No Response . )
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Hearing no
6 further questions, I will make a motion to
7 close this hearing and reserve decision to
8 a later date .
9 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : All in favor?
11 MEMBER DINIZIO : Aye .
12 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
13 MEMBER HORNING: Aye .
14 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye .
16 ( See Minutes for Resolution . )
17 ***************************************** *
18 HEARING #6614 - BETTY HERMANN
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : The next
20 application before the Board is for Betty
21 Hermann, #6614 . Applicant requests a
22 Special Exception under Article III,
23 Section 280-13B ( 13) . The applicant is the
24 owner requesting authorization to establish
25 an accessory apartment in an accessory
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 95
1 structure, located at : 305 North Bayview
2 Road, Extension Southold, New York.
3 MR. LEONARD : Good afternoon . Robert
4 Leonard, L-E-O-N-A-R-D. Agent for the
5 applicant .
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Thank you . We
7 have just received -- a number of us went
8 out and did a site inspection of the
9 property for the proposed accessory. We got
10 a letter of support from the neighbor .
11 Everyone has a copy of that . Now, we just
12 found out from the Building Inspector that
13 the livable floor area is 600 square feet .
14 That ' s fine . The code requires -- permits
15 rather a maximum of 750 . However, with the
16 proposed attached deck, it ' s like 300
17 square feet, that now, because it ' s not
18 livable space but it ' s the size of the
19 structure --
20 MR. LEONARD : Okay.
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It ' s now becoming
22 900 square feet . That would require one or
23 two things . Either reducing it, removing
24 it, making it smaller. Using pavers instead
25 of the wood deck, because then that doesn ' t
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 96
l count, or asking for an area variance .
2 Those are the options . We just found this
3 out .
4 MR. LEONARD: So the deck would be
5 considered livable area?
6 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No it ' s not . It ' s
7 the square footage of the overall
8 structure . Not apartment . Structure code
9 permits a maximum of 750 square feet, based
10 on the size of your lot .
11 MR. LEONARD: So it ' s 750 total?
12 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes .
13 MR. LEONARD: With the deck?
14 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No, it ' s 900 .
15 MR. LEONARD: 150 feet has to come off
16 the deck?
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes . Or if you
18 put it at grade, not a wooden deck, then it
19 doesn ' t count at all .
20 MR. LEONARD: Part of the reason for
21 the deck is the elevation change . It ' s
22 going to be two steps up into the
23 apartment, and we really didn ' t want to
24 have the steps right on the building. I am
25 not totally against scaling down the deck.
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 97
1 With that variance, can we handle that
2 through this Board? What would be necessary
3 for an area variance? Do we have to 'start
4 over again?
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: No, we do have
6 the right to grant a small area variance as
c
7 part of a Special Exception permit
8 application . We have done it once before .
9 MR. LEONARD : Originally my plans were
10 to square the deck with a window in the
11 front . That was another set of plans . I
12 don ' t know if that would shorten it up 150
13 square feet exactly, but we squared up the
14 deck with the building really just for
15 architectural and aesthetics . I would
16 prefer to keep it that way, if we could
17 arrange it that way, but I don ' t want to
18 prolong my building permit ' s and everything
19 else . Some of you know me, I am a seasonal
20 guy and I kind of wanted to get this done
21 in my off season . So if necessary, I will
22 cut the deck down if we can do something
23 here today. I would like to do that .
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : While the Board
25 can, I guess the Board can provide
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 98
1 alternative relief to it ' s projected size,
2 and say you can have a maximum of "X" . And
3 then you can design how you want to have
4 it . You can cut it back this way. We don ' t
5 need to be designing it for you but we can
6 provide an alternative to the proposed
7 30X10 .
8 MR. LEONARD : I have no problems
9 scaling it down to whatever you all decide .
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Another way to do
11 it would be to have it at grade and then
12 step down. That is entirely up to you .
13 Patios don ' t count .
14 MR. LEONARD: Right .
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : It doesn ' t count
16 as square footage . You can put an upper
17 decking and lower patio . That is entirely
18 up to you. That ' s just some information for
19 you.
20 MR. LEONARD: As far as I am
21 concerned, if it ' s an issue then the deck
22 gets much smaller to conform to the square
23 footage .
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Gerry,
25 questions?
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 99
1 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: This is a very
2 unique application and I only began to
3 realize the uniqueness of it when I came
4 out to see you . This particular building is
5 well set back to the rear of the property
6 and you have no access to it . For fire and
7 emergency purposes, you need to put a
8 driveway in .
9 MR. LEONARD : Absolutely. We actually
10 got it painted out in the lawn and after
11 your departure, I was working on it when --
12 MEMBER HORNING: I saw it .
13 MR. LEONARD: Of course it ' s going to
14 be nonpermeable . We want to do a blend.
15 We ' re not sure if we ' re going to go with --
. 16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You mean
17 permeable, not nonpermeable?
18 MR. LEONARD : Correct . Sorry, yes .
19 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: It has to be more
20 than tire tracks .
21 MR. LEONARD: Which is what we ' re
22 looking at now . The width of the gates that
23 go into the backyard to go into a parking
24 area back there . We also want to have a
25 driveway. We also don ' t want to go too far
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 100
1 not knowing what we can and can ' t do
2 without it . - If I can -- if we can ' t make it
3 an accessory apartment, it is still an
4 accessory building, and we ' re still going
5 to put the driveway in to get back there .
6 Just use it for other purposes . The
7 driveway is a concern for us also and we
8 plan on putting it in .
9 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: What I do not have
10 from you is a parking plan to put the
11 driveway in .
12 MR. LEONARD : Okay.
13 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: So we need to have
14 a parking plan for -- I want to say at
15 least two cars . One car for the house and
16 one two cars --
17 MR. LEONARD: A parking plan also for
18 the house or just for the accessory place?
19 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You just need to
20 show three parking spaces on the property .
21 MR. LEONARD: Well, I have a two-car
22 driveway coming into the home .
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : That is not the
24 issue .
25 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: The car is
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 101
1 eventually going to go out through the
2 building; correct? So where is the
3 parking --
4 MR. LEONARD : Are you saying that we
5 have to have a driveway going into the back
6 of the house?
7 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: For fire and
8 emergency purposes, there is no way for any
9 emergency vehicle to get to that building
10 in the back, without a driveway.
11 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You have to have
12 access because life safety issues .
13 MR. LEONARD: Okay. We ' re not talking
14 about a 20 foot wide --
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : No .
16 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: No .
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Just a normal
18 driveway.
19 MEMBER HORNING : Plus you have to show
20 us where the parking would be for the
21 accessory apartment .
22 MR. LEONARD : Okay. You need a survey
23 plan or a hand sketch is good enough?
24 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: You can write it
25 right on here .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 102
1 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : You can scale it
2 right here .
3 MR. LEONARD: Anything else that we
4 need?
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Well, let ' s just
6 go over a couple of facts that address the
7 actual proposal . The proposal is for your
8 grandson?
9 MR. LEONARD: Correct, my son .
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: We have an
11 affidavit indicating that that is the case .
12 I am just putting this into the public
13 record that drivers license and phone bills
14 have been submitted for proof of occupancy.
15 And that the owner will reside in the
16 dwelling, Ms . Hermann. And pretty much
17 meets the accessory apartment requirements .
18 I would like to commend you as doing this
19 as a proposal and not after the fact . I
20 think that this is the first accessory
21 apartment that is not an "as built"
22 apartment that has come into us . It ' s kind
23 of nice for the Board that somebody is
24 thinking proactively that somebody wants to
25 do this .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 103
1 Ken, do you have any questions?
2 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: No questions .
3 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Now, I didn ' t see
4 the driveway. Is it on the Cedar Lane side
5 of the house?
6 MR. LEONARD: Yes , it ' s on that side
7 of the house .
8 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: So you are going to
9 give me this plan back as soon as possible
10 showing the driveway to the building in the
11 rear .
12 MR. LEONARD: Very good.
13 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: As quickly as you
14 can .
15 MR. LEONARD: I will have it tomorrow,
16 maybe even this afternoon .
17 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Is there anyone
18 else in the audience who wishes to address
19 this application?
20 (No Response . )
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. I am going
22 to make a motion to close this hearing and
23 reserve decision, subject to receipt of
24 notations on the existing survey of the
25 proposed driveway, from the street to the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 104
1 proposed accessory apartment . The parking
2 for three vehicles on the subject property
3 and a scaled down deck. As long as you ' re
4 doing that, you might as well propose to us
5 what you think the minimum that is
6 feasible --
7 MR. LEONARD : Very good.
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : And then we will
9 decide whether that is agreeable or whether
10 we want it smaller or what . Since you ' re
11 doing this anyway, we might as well give
12 you an opportunity to tell us what you
13 think is feasible .
14 Is there a second on that motion?
15 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: There is a second.
16 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
17 MEMBER DINIZIO : Aye .
18 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
19 MEMBER HORNING: Aye .
20 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
21 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Aye .
22 (See Minutes for Resolution . )
23 *******************************************
24 HEARING #6619 - MICHAEL J. HIRSCHHORN
25 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: The next
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 105
1 application before the Board is ,for Michael
2 J. Hirschhorn, #6619 . Request for variances
3 from Article XXIII Section 280-122A and the
4 Building Inspector ' s December 4 , 2012
5 Notice of Disapproval based on an
6 application for building permit for
7 additions and alterations to an existing
8 dwelling at : 1 ) a nonconforming building
9 containing a conforming use shall not be
10 enlarged, reconstructed or structurally
11 altered or moved, provided such action does
12 not create any new nonconformance or
13 increase the degree of nonconformance .
14 Pursuant to the interpretation of Walz
15 ( 5039 ) such alterations will thus
16 constitute an increase in the degree of
17 nonconformance : (A) less than the minimum
18 side yard setback of 10 feet, (b) less than
19 the minimum combined side yard setbacks of
20 25 feet, located at : 280 Sound Avenue,
21 adjacent to Long Island Sound, Peconic .
22 MR. LAIRD : James Laird, Suffolk
23 Environmental for the applicant .
24 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: I just want the
25 record to reflect that we have just
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 106
1 recently received the recommendations from
2 the LWRP coordinator and indicating that
3 your proposed action is exempt .
4 MR. LAIRD: The subject property is
5 very narrow, very long . It ' s only 50 feet
6 wide and the existing house is preexisting
7 nonconforming and it ' s 28 . 6 feet wide . That
8 leaves a total side yard of --
9 nonconforming side yard. The second floor
10 addition is why we ' re here . The applicant
11 has requested a variance because in the
12 installation of a variance of the addition,
13 the roof surrounding the addition will be
14 altered. The addition itself is conforming
15 and it conforms to the setback and is a
16 very unsubstantial addition . Because we ' re
17 altering the roof structure around the
18 addition, it triggered a variance . The
19 only reason is that it needs a variance is
20 because of three feet of roof on the other
21 side . The roof will be reconstructed and it
22 will add a different look. It will yield
23 more ceiling living area directly
24 underneath the addition . The ceiling will
25 not be changed throughout the rest of the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 107
1 house . It will only be changed directly
2 underneath the addition . It is -- it won ' t
3 damage the character of the neighborhood
4 because frankly it is an aesthetic upgrade
5 to the area . That ' s the jist of it . It ' s
6 not particularly huge variance . It ' s a
7 marginal variance at most . And almost all
8 of the encouraging will be into the side
9 yard.
10 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. Ken, would
11 you like to ask some questions?
12 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Yes . First looking
13 at your variance reasons, if you want to
14 get that sheet out . I understand it ' s a new
15 second story, to be admissible in the side
16 yard setbacks , but this area -- the side
17 yard will be temporary in nature . Are you
18 speaking to the construction of the unit?
19 MR. LAIRD: Initially the plan was to
20 keep the roof grade and now it is to raise
21 the roof grade marginally. So all the
22 construction will be taken out when we ' re
23 finished with construction except for the
24 two feet of new roof .
25 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Are you talking to
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 108
1 the contractors equipment?
2 MR. LAIRD : Yes .
3 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay. Any lawful
4 addition to the dwelling will require an
5 area variance because of the small side
6 yards . Well, could you construct that
7 second-story without those encouragements
8 into the side yard?
9 MR. LAIRD: Any addition to that would
10 require roof renovation. It ' s not a
11 particular new house and because they want
12 to make the living space under the addition
13 more habitable, the roof has to be raised
14 by two feet by a couple of feet to allow
15 for higher ceilings .
16 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: So let ' s go with
17 that . So the purpose is to increase the
18 ceiling height of the first floor in that
19 area?
20 MR. LAIRD: Yes . And the railings that
21 you see are --
22 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: What is the height
23 of those railings?
24 MR. LAIRD : The height of the railings
25 is two feet . It ' s really for decoration.
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 109
1 It ' s just to hide the roofing .
2 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: You said the alleged
3 difficulty has been self-created. You
4 answered, no .
5 MR. LAIRD: Because the applicant
6 purchased this house a couple of years ago
7 and is what -- it was preexisting
8 nonconforming .
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Okay, but what he
10 wants to do, his hardship is self-created
11 because he wants to raise his roof?
12 MR. ANDERSON : Bruce Anderson, Suffolk
13 Environmental . I just want to make a couple
14 of things clear . We ' re talking about
15 altering a roof or ceiling height . We ' re
16 talking simply within the footprint of the
17 second floor. Not the entire house . The
18 remaining roof structure stays the same .
19 We ' re not pulling the entire roof off this
20 house . What we ' re doing is putting a
21 second-story on the water side of the house
22 that is 600 square feet of the house . There
23 would always be some modification to that
24 roof, even though the second floor is
25 conforming with respect to side yard,
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 110
1 because the first floor has to support the
2 second. Having said that, the applicant
3 has also said, since I am putting the
4 second floor on and I have to take this
5 roof off, why not simply make the first
6 floor ceiling height be ten feet instead of
7 eight feet, just under where I am putting
8 the addition . Whether it ' s eight feet or
9 ten feet, I am still modifying that section
10 of roof within the required side yard, if
11 that helps .
12 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: That helps . The
13 question was it self-created, my opinion it
14 is self-created.
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Which does not
16 preclude the granting of it .
17 MR. ANDERSON : I think if I had an
18 eight feet ceiling height, I would still be
19 before this Board?
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Yes .
21 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Whether it be a few
22 inches or whatever.
23 MR. ANDERSON : Two feet .
24 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Your plans, we need
25 to have some type of indication of what is
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 111
1 what . Like a sheet number, who ' s it drawn
2 by and dated. So when we write a decision,
3 we reference a drawing and plans and
4 surveys that are specific to our decision
5 making.
6 MR. LAIRD: I just supplied the plans
7 on a very hasty notice because of some
8 confusion .
9 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: The original
10 application did not have an elevation
11 showing the pertinent -- let me see, is
12 ' that the north view? Yes, north view. To
13 show what is going on. But anyway, you know
14 like the normal drawings . What the scale
15 is . Who it was drawn by.. The date and
16 sheet number . You know the deal .
17 MR. LAIRD: Yes .
18 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: That ' s all I have to
19 say right now.
20 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: George?
21 MEMBER HORNING: The stairway to the
22 cellar, the foundation and how big it is ,
23 does it cover the whole building, the
24 cellar?
25 MR. LAIRD: Yes .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 112
1 MEMBER HORNING: And is it walkable
2 height? You walk down the stairs and what
3 do you have, about a seven foot ceiling
4 down there?
5 MR. LAIRD : Yep .
6 MEMBER HORNING: Are you aware of any
7 variances granted to neighboring properties
8 in that neighborhood, such as right next
9 door? They have new construction going on
10 there, that would be just to the east . Did
11 you do any research in the neighborhood as
12 to what variances were granted? For side
13 yard setbacks for example?
14 MR. LAIRD: I didn ' t research variances
15 granted. I did research the neighborhood
16 and I did notice the new construction of
17 the houses and stuff like that and this
18 would be in keeping with the neighborhood.
19 MEMBER HORNING: If you gave us some
20 information regarding that, you would be
21 surprised to find that there had been
22 variances granted for your reasons and that
23 would benefit your application to submit
24 that type of information . That would be
25 addressing the character of the
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 113
1 neighborhood.
2 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Gerry?
3 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: I don ' t have any
4 particular questions regarding this plan .
5 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Jim?
6 MEMBER DINIZIO : I don ' t have any
7 questions .
8 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Okay. Since there
9 is no one else in the audience, unless you
10 want to say something else, Bruce?
11 MR. ANDERSON : Yes . We would like
12 about two weeks to provide the additional
13 information regarding other variances and
14 also to provide a title block .
15 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN : Sure . I am going
16 to make a motion to close subject to
17 receipt of exactly that, a set of dated
18 architectural plans, the usual stuff and
19 perhaps other information regarding side
20 yard variances in that neighborhood .
21 Is there a second?
22 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Second.
23 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: All in favor?
24 MEMBER DINIZIO : Aye .
25 MEMBER GOEHRINGER: Aye .
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting 114
1 MEMBER HORNING: Aye .
2 MEMBER SCHNEIDER: Aye .
3 CHAIRPERSON WEISMAN: Aye .
4 (See Minutes for Resolution. )
5 *********** *******************************
6 (Whereupon, the January 3, 2013
7 Regular Meeting concluded. )
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
January 3, 2013 Regular Meeting - 115
1
2 C E R T I F I C A T I O N
3
4
5 I, Jessica DiLallo, certify that the
6 foregoing transcript of tape recorded Public
7 Hearings was prepared using required electronic
8 transcription equipment and is a true and accurate
9 record of the Hearings .
10
11
12 S i g n a t I'
13 essica DiLallo
14
15 Jessica DiLallo
Court Reporter
16 PO Box 984
Holbrook-, New York 11741
17
18 Date : January 15, 2013
19
20
21
22
23