Good evening, everyone, and welcome to the Zoning Board of Appeals for the town of Huntington for the meeting of July 23rd, 2026.

Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance to our flag.

My Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.

The United States.

Please be seated.

Minutes for July 16th, 2023.

I've been through them.

Unless someone has a uh correction, deletion, or addition to make, I'll entertain a motion to accept the minutes for July 16th, 2023.

I'll make that motion, Mr.

Chairman.

Mr.

McGrath on the motion.

Mr.

Castagno, on the second all in favor.

Any opposed, minutes are accepted.

Uh Dawn, I'd like to know if all the appropriate affidavits for the postings and publications to give us jurisdiction for the hearings tonight have been properly filed.

Thank you very much.

Okay, the order for the hearings tonight will be as follows.

23728 has been withdrawn.

If it uh comes back, it'll have to be republished.

The first one on the calendar will be 23727.

That's uh 175 East Carver Street, 23687 45 East Main Street, 2373 Annondale Drive in Huntington, uh 237256 Green Land Drive, Huntington Station, 23718 39 Prospect Street.

Well, the applicant, well, at a representative of the applicant for 23727, 175 Carver Street, please address the board.

Good evening, Chairman Judge Asher and members of the board for the appellant, Tom Babate, ABB, ATE.

I'm an attorney with offices at 88 Sunnyside Boulevard in Plainview.

And tonight's appeal seeks to take a building within the heart of Huntington Village and convert it to mixed use.

The subject premises is 175 West Carver Street.

It's the parcel located on the northeast corner of West Carver and New Street, and it possesses nearly six tenths of an acre of lot area, and it's wholly within the C6 General Business District zone.

In fact, it abuts and is surrounded but by uh uses that are not only zone C6 but used commercially.

Indeed, across the street, the entirety of the uh of West Carver Street opposite the subject is both zone C6 and used for C6 commercial purposes.

The building on site was erected circa 1938, and it served as the Huntington Post Office.

When the post office vacated, it was occupied for decades by Gunnerman and Gunnerman insurance agents.

And in fact, that's how most of us think of the site and refer to the site, the Gunderman Building.

It was purchased in 2023 by my client John Pacey, who's here with me this evening, very nattily attired, I might add.

And John is a lifelong Huntington resident.

He's a prominent member of our community, and for that reason, he's aware of the importance that this structure has to the downtown area.

Although it's not historic, John recognizes that it forms an integral part of the fabric of Huntington Village.

Consequently, his plan is not to demolish the building, but merely to keep it intact and go upwards.

The plan is mixed use.

So commercial on the first floor with apartments above.

And in this case, the plan is for eight apartments, all one bedroom units.

Moreover, it will only be two stories in height and will only reach a maximum height of 34 and a half feet, which is below the maximum which we permit within the C6 zoning district.

As part of his desire to maintain this building in terms of the fabric of the downtown area, he retained the talents of our project architect, Martin Pisante.

And what Mr.

Pisante has done with the Plum, I might add, is to design a building where he's taking the existing structure and really rehabilitating it.

Yes, we're going up.

What he has done, and Mr.

Weeder, his renderings are attached to the uh the last revised site plan.

I think it's the third to last entry of the attachments on the portal.

And what he's looking to do there, and what you'll see that he's doing, he's replacing the existing windows with which the building is currently outfitted and replacing them with smaller windows that are also operational windows.

From a zoning perspective, not only is mixed use permitted as of right in this zoning district under 198A22 of our code, but of paramount importance for the consideration of this appeal this evening is this.

We do not need a parking variance.

Under the section that I just cited, in conjunction with section 198-47, we are required to provide for all contemplated uses on site 35 parking stalls.

Mr.

Pisati has drawn the site plan such that we're providing 36 parking stalls.

So we're overparked for the parcel.

So what brings us here this evening?

What brings us here is this rather obtuse provision, if I may say so, of our code 198-48D, which prohibits parking within five feet of a lot line.

I call it obtuse because, as I put in my summary statement, I can't divine a purpose behind it, especially in Huntington Village, where most parcels are developed in derogation of that requirement.

Indeed, it's a requirement or it's a prescription, if you will, that this board has varied.