Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting - May 14, 2026: Multiple Variance Applications Granted
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Zoning Board of Appeals Meeting
Date: May 14, 2026
The Town of Huntington Zoning Board of Appeals held a regular meeting, during which seven public hearings were conducted and three other business items were addressed. All applications for relief were granted unanimously, with one vote contingent on a separate legal determination regarding access.
Public Comments & Testimony
- No members of the public spoke during any of the public hearings. The Board Chair asked for public comment on each application and, observing none, proceeded to motions.
Discussion Items
1. Public Hearing #23679 – 95 Hartman Hill Road, Huntington (Anthony M. LaPinta)
- Applicant sought relief to legalize an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) of 1,075 square feet (town code maximum 650 sq ft) in an R-80 zone. The ADU is located above a garage on a secluded flag lot surrounded by Suffolk County parkland. The accessory apartment hearing officer previously found the unit would not cause traffic congestion or impact property values. Attorney Michael McCarthy argued the space is larger due to room sizes, not additional rooms. The Board granted the variance.
2. Public Hearing #23681 – 0 Orient Avenue, Northport (Walter Morris / WDP Construction)
- Applicant requested a lot area variance to build a single-family home on an undersized lot. The property originally had 22,573 sq ft; after acquiring adjacent land from a neighbor, the lot increased to 37,608 sq ft (still below the one-acre R-40 requirement). The Board noted the revised application reduced the deficiency substantially and that no setback variances were needed. The Board granted the variance, incorporating prior expert testimony by reference.
3. Public Hearing #23653 – 73 East Shore Road, Halesite (David and Kelly Lucas)
- Applicant sought a variance to construct retaining walls to create a two-car parking area in front of the house. The property sits on the water side of East Shore Road with a steep grade; no driveway is possible. Many neighboring homes have similar pull-off areas. The Board granted the variance.
4. Public Hearing #23612 – 11 Reinhart Court, Melville (Anna Sferrazza)
- Applicant requested side and front yard relief to legalize an existing one-story rear addition and cellar entrance (setback 3.5 ft where 25 ft required) and to construct a new front portico (7 ft x 6.7 ft). The house is non-conforming with skewed setbacks. The Board granted the variance, with the condition that the portico not be further enclosed.
5. Public Hearing #23680 – 4 Weinmann Boulevard, Melville (Kyle and Jami Krug)
- Applicant sought side, rear, front, and combined side yard variances to construct one-story additions on both sides and a second-story addition. The lot is 17,740 sq ft in an R-40 zone (requires 1 acre). The existing house is non-conforming. The Board granted the variances.
6. Public Hearing #23652 – 49 Chateau Drive, Melville (Sondhi Holdings NY LLC)
- Applicant requested lot area, front yard, retaining wall, and building footprint in hillside area relief to enlarge an existing house from 2,100 sq ft to 3,100 sq ft and install retaining walls. The property is substandard (40,000 sq ft) and non-conforming. The applicant plans to sell the property after improvements. A letter expressing concern about possible subdivision was received, but the lot cannot be subdivided. The Board granted the variances.
7. Public Hearing #23659 – 460 East Jericho Turnpike, Huntington Station (Emuna 3 LLC / Get 3 Realty LLC)
- Applicant requested a Special Use Permit and Business Depth Extension under Section 198-110(C)(1) to construct a 13,009 sq ft medical office building on three tax lots (approx. 2 acres) split-zoned C6/R-10. No area or parking variances are needed. A traffic study showed no undue congestion. The Board granted the application, including a negative declaration under SEQRA, and noted that site plan review will occur before the Planning Board, which can address screening for adjacent residential properties.
Other Business
- Extension of Prior Grant (Application #2347): The Board granted a time extension for a previously approved project due to delays at the Building Department and Suffolk County. The fee was paid.
- Vote on Application #23635 – Oheka Castle (CON Property Owners LLC): The Board voted on area variances and interpretive relief for a multifamily residential building (95 condominium units) with underground parking. The Board granted:
- Interpretive relief that the Town Board’s 2023 approval and SEQRA review (as upheld by Judge Hudson) covered site plan and steep slope issues; the Zoning Board deferred to that determination.
- Area variance for building and parking lot setback from the eastern property line (10 ft where 50 ft required) and from the southern property line (10 ft where 50 ft required).
- Area variance for retaining walls (5 ft height, 0 ft from residential property line where 10 ft required). All approvals are contingent on the applicant securing access through Eastgate Drive, a matter before the courts.
Key Outcomes
- All seven public hearing applications were granted unanimously with no votes opposed.
- The extension for application #2347 was granted.
- The Oheka Castle application (#23635) was granted with two area variances and interpretive relief, conditioned on Eastgate Drive access.
- The next meeting is scheduled for May 28, 2026; no meeting on May 21.
Meeting Transcript
Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the zoning board of appeals for the town of Huntington for the meeting of May 14th, 2026. Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance to our flag. I plan the leading suit of the United States of America. Please be seated, everyone. The minutes for May 7th will be handled on May 28th. Dawn, are all the appropriate postings and publications done with the appropriate affidavits filed to give us jurisdiction for the hearings tonight? They are. Okay. The order for the hearings tonight will be as follows. 23679, that's 95 Hartman Hill Road. 23681. That is the address on that one. Oh, it's Orient Avenue. That's it. Orient Avenue. Uh Zero Orient Avenue. That's uh a new hearing for one we've heard before where the where it was withdrawn. That will be number two. Uh 23653, 73 East Shore Road. And hail site. 23612, 11 Reinhardt Court in Melville, 236804, Wineman Boulevard in Melville, 23652. Um, 49 Chateau also in Melville, right around the corner from Wineman Boulevard. And finally, 23659, 460 and up for Jericho Turnpike. Okay, well, the applicant or the representative of the applicant for 23679, 95 Hartman Hill Road address the board. Good evening, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. Uh my name is Michael McCarthy. I'm an attorney with offices at 444 New York Avenue. And I'm here this evening on behalf of uh Anthony La Pinta, the owner of the property, which is located at 95 Hartman Hill Road. Mr. Chairman, as the images that um Mr. Weeder are displaying on the screen reflect, um the property is a flag lot. It's located in the town of Huntington's R80 zone, which requires minimum land area of two acres. And um, if Mr. Weeder zooms out, you can tell that uh Mr. La Pinta's property is virtually surrounded by the Suffolk County uh park. Um the application before the board this evening is for permission to increase the size of an accessory dwelling unit. Now, under the Huntington Town Code, an accessory dwelling unit uh cannot exceed 650 square feet. Here, uh the house is quite grand, um, it's secluded, and he's got bonus space above the garage. Um, and we're asking for relief to maintain the accessory dwelling unit at 1,075 square feet. We appreciate that that's a little bit larger than what the uh town code permits, but the circumstances here are a little bit unique in the sense that um because he's in the R80 zone, properties are much bigger, he's secluded from other people. It really is uh you know a very, very private home, and um it would be very, very difficult to kind of uh chop up the space, so to speak, to make the uh the apartment smaller. It's not that there's more rooms, it's not that there's more um amenities, it's just that because of the size of the of the space, the room is just actually bigger. So if you look at the floor plan that we provided, again, and these this these images are indicating, it's not that he's asking for for more of the space, it's just that the space that's there is larger. Now you should know that Mr. Le Pinta uh, with the help of his expediter, made an application to the accessory apartment uh bureau, and uh in fact the hearing was held by uh um Mr. Ed Nickowitz, who you know sits as the um as the individual who reviews applications. Um the hearing officer, uh Mr. Nickowitz, he he issued a decision on December 8, 2025, and I put a copy of that in my requested relief summary. He specifically concluded, uh, Mr.
openpublica.com