Action pending on Wein café, mooring and McMansion rule

Marc Wein told the Town Board Friday that in order to provide the 20 parking spaces required to convert his café into a code-compliant office, “I’d have to tear down the building.”

The fate of the Center luncheonette, the first rental mooring inyears and an unexpectedly controversial definition of a zoning termwere all subject to Town Board public hearings on Friday, February19.

The board has yet to act on these three proposals and continuedto discuss them at Tuesday’s Town Board work session.

LUNCHEONETTE TO OFFICE SPACE

“Parking is the issue, Town Supervisor Jim Dougherty said abouta special permit for Marc Wein to convert his Center luncheonetteproperty (formerly known as Tom’s, Carol’s, Nevel’s, Getty’s andmore recently the Osprey Caf and John’s Grill) into office space.There was little public comment on the plan during Friday’shearing.

Town code requires a special permit for any change of use of aB-1 zone property. The luncheonette is not allowed in the B-1 zone- it is a nonconforming business that predates the code. Officespace is allowed by the code but to comply, 20 parking spaces mustbe provided unless the Town Board waives part of the parkingrequirement.

Mr. Wein proposed establishing four on-site parking spaces (eachmeasuring 6 by 20 feet) – three along the side of the businessbuilding and one at the north end of the driveway. Three on-streetparking spaces would also be used for the business for a total of 7of the 20 required spaces.

Mr. Wein announced Friday that he received a letter from theShelter Island Presbyterian Church stating that he could no longeruse the church’s west parking lot. Church elders have asked Mr.Wein, the school and other businesses to stop using the lot due toinsurance and maintenance costs carried by the church alone.

Because delivery trucks for the caf unloaded in the church lot,the loss of access to it “makes it far more difficult for anyrestaurant to exist, he said.

Mr. Wein said that he plans to rent the apartment above thestore, which would also require some parking.

“I’m hoping that the board will see that we are minimizing apreexisting nonconforming condition, Mr. Wein added. Technically,the luncheonette requires 26 parking spaces, he noted in hisapplication.

“Are you willing to have this limited to use as a real estateoffice? Town Attorney Laury Dowd asked.

“It will be an office, Mr. Wein replied. “I don’t know whatcould happen in 10 years.

In response to a letter sent to the Town Board by Randy Osofsky,Stephen Kessler and their family asking the board to hold off ongranting the permit in hopes of finding buyers for theluncheonette, Mr. Wein said, “If they have any interest whatsoeverin buying the business, I will sell it to them. The Osofsky/Kesslerletter was the only opposition to the permit.

“One of the concerns is that we hate to lose the restaurant andby law you wouldn’t be able to convert it back, board member GlennWaddington said, as new nonconforming businesses will not bepermitted. Mr. Wein added that the Suffolk County Health Departmentwill not issue food service permits to a nonconforming eatery thathas ceased to operate for more than one year.

“Maybe if we give you the ability to turn it back, that will adda comfort factor, Mr. Waddington suggested.

At Tuesday’s work session, the discussion continued with boardmembers indicating satisfaction with the parking plan. CouncilmanEd Brown asked Mr. Wein about any interest in the luncheonettesince Friday.

“Not this time, he responded. This is Mr. Wein’s second permitapplication. The same plan went to a contested public hearing inJuly 2007, after which Mr. Wein secured a lease with John Michalakto operate the property as John’s Grill. It closed on June 20,2009.

“I promise I will report to the board any positive activity, Mr.Wein said.

From the audience, Paul Shepherd asked if the luncheonette wasto be “forever out of my life?

Mr. Wein said that if the town can somehow preserve an optionfor the property to revert to a luncheonette in the future, hewould not object.

WAIFE RENTAL MOORING

Former Town Supervisors Al Kilb and Gerry Siller spoke out infavor of Bert Waife’s application for a new rental mooring permit,purportedly the first formal rental mooring request in years, whileCouncilman Peter Reich supported a Waterways Management AdvisoryCouncil recommendation to refrain from issuing any new rentalmooring permits and to consider a temporary moratorium on rentalmoorings while the mooring code is revised.

Town code has little to say about rental moorings. It is definedas “a mooring that is rented by a boatyard, marina, yacht club orcommercial entity to whom the mooring is registered with the town.The code stipulates that rental moorings cannot be conveyed to anew owner without Town Board approval but it includes no othercriteria for permitting or operating these moorings.

Mr. Waife, who operates a ground tackle business, is requestinga rental mooring 900 feet east-northeast of the nearest mooring inthe Smith Cove mooring field, which he intends to rent to a clientwith a catamaran.

Mr. Reich reviewed the history of rental moorings on ShelterIsland during the hearing and he and WMAC Chairman John Needhamanswered Reporter questions about the moorings on Tuesday. Currentrental moorings predate the 1987 town regulation establishingrental moorings. These rental moorings are permitted to Jack’sMarine, Coecles Harbor Marina, Piccozzi’s/Dering Harbor Marina, theShelter Island Yacht Club and the Ram’s Head Inn, according to Mr.Reich.

That grandfathering of the existing commercial moorings closedthe door on new rental moorings, at least that was Mr. Needham’simpression. But the town code imposes no restrictions on commercialentities wanting a new rental mooring.

Over the years, people seeking rental moorings were headed offby Town Board members before a formal application was made, Mr.Reich said. The most recent application was that of the Wrightfamily, who sought 10 rental moorings in West Neck waters in the1990s, he said. The request was denied and the board imposed twomoratoriums to make changes to the code but never set criteria fornew rental moorings.

At the hearing, Mr. Reich supported a WMAC recommendation thatrental moorings should be serviced by a shoreside business offeringat least some of the following facilities: parking, dinghy docks,trash, head/showers, fuel and pump-outs. They also suggested thatmoorings should be consolidated, positioned 100 to 125 feet apart,not the 900 feet proposed by Mr. Waife. At the hearing, Mr. Needhamcommented that rental mooring users need shore facilities or atleast somewhere they can go for assistance.

The WMAC recommended that the board grant Mr. Waife a private(not a rental) mooring located closer to the mooring field. Privatemoorings are issued for a specific boat; proof of boat registrationis filed with the mooring permit.

Mr. Waife rejected this suggestion on Friday but on Tuesday saidthat he was willing to relocate the mooring closer to the field butnot as a private mooring. “It’s got to be a rental because I don’thave the registration to make it a private mooring.

His request was endorsed by Mr. Kilb on Friday: “He should beentitled to this use. Shelter Island has a lot of small-time boatrepair businesses. It can’t possibly hurt anything.

Mr. Siller commented, “If it’s a rental mooring, and you knowit’s a rental mooring, let him have it as a rental mooring.

By the end of Tuesday’s discussion, board members indicatedsupport for the relocated rental mooring but also suggested thatrevisions to the code are a future priority.

SFLA DEFINITION HITS A SNAG

A simple change in the definition of square foot living area(SFLA) became complicated during a public hearing on an amendmentto the zoning code.

Special permit applications for houses over 8,500 square feet,commonly referred to as McMansions, have become a source offrustration to the Town Board. Town code currently exemptsunfinished basements from total SFLA, allowing houses to be builtright up to the 8,500 square-foot threshold without requiring apermit. Several owners of such houses applied for a permit tofinish basements after the primary construction. As a result, theTown Board could not mitigate the overall construction of the houseas part of the special permit process.

The board has proposed changing the definition of SFLA toinclude unfinished basements.

While the change was intended to impact the special permit forlarge houses only, the definition of “Square Foot Living Area isincluded in the opening section of the zoning code, raisingquestions from former Supervisor Kilb and Planning Board memberEmory Breiner as to a broader application of the term.

“I know what it’s trying to solve, Mr. Breiner said, “Myquestion is how it is going to be applied. Would it be applied to asmaller house?

“It would be totally irrelevant for any house that does nottrigger the 8,500 square feet, Town Supervisor Jim Doughertysaid.

“Irrelevant now, Mr. Breiner replied, but if a new ComprehensivePlan leads to more house size restrictions, would it be relevant inthe future, he asked.

“That problem isn’t before us now, Mr. Dougherty said.

To avoid a broader application of the term, Mr. Kilb suggestedthat the definition be written so that it is specific to specialpermits.

Several in attendance – including Mr. Reich, PatriciaShillingburg and Edie Landeck – suggested that the town includeattics or accessory building space as well as unfinished basementsin the total SFLA to get a better handle on oversized houses.

Mr. Shepherd questioned why the board was changing thedefinition.

A finished basement can add a third more people to a house, Mr.Reich said, which will have impacts. “It’s the aquifer, Mr. Brownsaid.

“Death by a thousand cuts – that’s what we’re trying to avoid,Mr. Dougherty commented. “That’s happening right before oureyes.