By Chris Mellides and Carl Corry
The Huntington Zoning Board of Appeals has put off two proposals that would add a total of 32 new apartments just north of Main Street in Huntington village.
In the larger proposal, property owner Hookshank LLC is looking to convert and expand an indoor sports complex behind Albert’s Mandarin Gourmet on New York Avenue into a mixed-use building that would include 20 apartments and retail.
The plan, which would expand the retail area by 3,670 square feet, seeks a special-use permit to park in a municipal lot and permission to convert the current Ultimate Sports Complex for retail use. It also needs a variance to park within 5 feet of a property line.
The apartments would be placed on the second and third floors, above the combined retail space, and would not go over the restaurant, said Bob Reikert, the town’s deputy director of planning.
A second proposal calls for a three-story building with 12 apartments at 30 Stewart Ave., the northeast corner of Stewart Avenue and Gerard Street. The first floor would have retail and office space, while the second and third floors would consist of apartments with rooftop access. The lot is currently largely empty.
Applicant Jeff and Stevens Holding Corp. is seeking a special-use permit to use a municipal parking lot.
Reikert said before the Nov. 5 town zoning board meeting that site plan currently has 23 parking spaces, but the property owner is in talks to purchase land owned by the town that it currently uses, which could be used for the required number of parking spaces.
There was some discussion about the overall development in the downtown area.
Chairman Christopher Modelewski questioned whether parking needs for the new proposal could be properly satisfied considering that apartments are currently being erected just north of the proposed development at a former ice house on Stewart Avenue. He also brought up complaints by some that the zoning board could be “destroying” downtown Huntington by granting variances.
John Breslin, a real estate attorney, testified that he felt the zoning board’s actions to bring a mixture of development to the area has been positive.
Both proposals were tabled without further comment.