Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Port Jefferson board holds legal‑use hearing for 124/126 East Main; neighbors raise encroachment concerns
Summary
Owners of 124/126 East Main sought variances to legalize two undersized retail units and a small lower-level apartment. Staff flagged missing survey and plan discrepancies tied to a 1990 CEU and a building-permit review; neighbors say a newly installed gate, walkway and AC equipment encroach on adjacent property. The board held the hearing open for updated surveys and inspections.
The zoning board heard an application July 24 to legalize existing retail space and a lower-level apartment at 124/126 East Main Street, a mixed-use building in Port Jefferson's Central Commercial (C-1) district.
Amy DeVito, the applicant's agent, described the property history: the owner bought the building in 2023 and performed interior and storefront work. DeVito said the site has a 1990 Certificate of Existing Use (CEU) that acknowledges two commercial storefronts and two lower-level apartments, but that the CEU does not list square footages. The application requests variances to validate current retail tenant spaces (299 sq ft and 447 sq ft) and a lower-level apartment of about 318 sq ft where the code requires larger minimums.
Staff and applicant said records were inconsistent. Planning staff and the building department noted that the CEU language and archived plans do not explicitly record unit dimensions and that current in‑building plans on file differ from on-site conditions. A separate building-permit review also found renovation work that one inspector considered to exceed the 50% threshold under the New York State building code, which triggered a requirement to bring the structure into current code compliance.
Neighbor concerns and encroachment: several neighbors and the tenant/owner of a bakery at 128 East Main said a gate, brick walkway and AC equipment installed near the rear of 124/126 appear to sit on or impede 128's property. The bakery owner provided photographs and asked the board to require clarity in the survey and resolution with Danford's (the manager referenced in testimony). Applicant Richard Albano said he intends to work with Danford's and to remedy problems; he also said much of his work was cosmetic and intended to preserve historic character.
Outcome and next steps: with property-boundary questions, the board agreed to hold the hearing open until Sept. 25 to allow staff and the applicant to inspect the site, obtain a current as-built survey and pursue discussions with neighboring property owners. No variances were granted that evening.
