Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-06/10/2002PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman RICHARD CAGGIANO WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR P.O. Box 1179 Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES Present were: June 10, 2002 6:00 p.m. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Richard Caggiano, Member William Cremers, Member Kenneth Edwards, Member George Ritchie Latham, Jr., Member Valerie Scopaz, AICP, Town Planner Mark Terry, Sr. Environmental Planner Scott Hughes, Sr. Environmental Planner Victor L' Eplattenier, Senior Planner Chairman Orlowski: Good evening. I would like to call this meeting to order. First order of business is for the Board to set Monday, July 6, 2002 at 6:00 p.m. at Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board Meeting. Mr. Cag.qiano: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Aves.' Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Orlowski - 6:00 p.m. - Satur Farms - This proposed site plan is for a new 4,100 sq. ft. barn & a 1,105 sq. ft. roofed canopy equipment storage area on a 1.83 acre parcel in an A-C Zone located at 3705 AIvah's Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-101-2- 24.5 Southold Town Planning Board Page Two June 10,2002 I will ask if there are any comments on this proposed site plan? John Lademann: I am here representing my wife, Joan Lademann. My wife, Joan - I am representing her because she recently had by-pass surgery and could not be here tonight .... (inaudible) the house across the street from Satur farms for five years and she is concerned with the trucks coming up to the new building. It is bad enough now when they park on the road. They have tractor-trailers parked on the road. They load and unload them with a tractor with a scoop on the front .... (inaudible) serious accident here. Not only that, lines of people trying to pull out into the traffic. They are using Alvah's Lane as a loading area. Furthermore, there is already a deep indentation on the grass. They said they can ride on her lawn, that they can go in ten or twelve feet. We confronted the man across the street who has this farm and he said that he has a right to go ten to twelve feet up on our grass. We told him he can't and so he called us a bunch of "f" morons. My wife tried to explain to him that this was always a farming community and people got along with the farmers and there were no problems before but it seems that these people with their greenhouses on the property which is next to this property which is the farmland rights we sold - they have illegal greenhouses up there and now they put a reefer truck up there which is running twenty-four hours a day with a diesel engine and the fumes are terrible. So, it is all right in New York City if you want to put a truck or trailer and double park and unload it but that does not go out here. They should have the building set back further and be able to get tractor-trailers into the farm and not use Alvah's Lane as a loading area. Also, there is a tenant house on the existing 1.8 acres which is used as a tenant house and it is still being used as a tenant house and the ZBA said that they could not use it as a tenant house when they got the C.O. for their house but it is still being used at the back part as a tenant house. People sleep in there. That's all I have to say right now. Thank you. Chairman Orlowski: Any other comments on this site plan? Unidentified Speaker: Hi, folks. I just have something from one of the neighbors who couldn't be here tonight and would like this letter entered: To: Southold Town Planning Board Josh Horton, Supervisor, Southold Town Re: Satur Farms, Alvah's Lane, Cutchogue My name is Barney Ovisinak, I reside at 5800 Alvah's, Cutchogue. I am sorry I can't attend this meeting because I will be out of state. want this to go on record to the Planning Board and also to the Town of Southold. My wife and I have lived in Southold Town all our lives. I have farmed in the Town of Southold since the late 40's and still am involved in same. We bought our house in 1971 and still reside at the same address. During all this time, all the homeowners on Alvah's Lane have all kept their houses and property clean, maintained and proud of same. Southold Town Planning Board Page Three June 10,2002 Satur Farms disgraces our property values with offensive garbage containers which draw rats, mice, and other animals, offensive structures, filthy road conditions, mud, dust, etc. The harassment, persistent harassment of the views and vistas to all of the homeowners on Alvah's Lane, especially to our dear friends, Pat and Jim McNamara, is a total disgrace to all. There is also a very hazardous condition on AIvah's Lane and Satur Farm's, tractor- trailers park on the road (Town Road) for off-loading of various materials. This constitutes a dangerous condition to pedestrians, cyclists and motorists from on-coming traffic. This is not New York City! I am calling on the Planning Board to plan for an entrance and exit on Satur Farms for these tractor-trailers and other vehicles. If nothing can be enacted for entrance and exit, I have no other resource than to say if someone gets hurt or dies due to this, the Town of Southold and Planning Board shall be liable. We also have a drainage problem just north of Satur Farms. If there is a building put up in or near the greenhouses, there must be drainage put in to compensate for the loss of soil. The houses just to the north of Satur Farms on the west side of the Town Road will bear the brunt of any large storms. This could cause heavy damage to property and houses for which you, the Board and the Town of Southold, shall be held responsible. Thank You, Barney Ovisinak P.S.: This is a complaint and shall be addressed as such. Please make copies for your records and also copies for the Supervisor's Office. Pat McNamara: I live across the road. My main concern was the loading and unloading. With the new driveway that they're putting in, will these tractor-trailers be able to go in and around? Is there an exit and an entrance on the plans? Chairman Orlowski: It shows on the plans. Ms. McNamara: So they will be able to go in and out? Chairman Orlowski: Yes. Ms. McNamara: What's going to happen with the existing greenhouse that they have on their site - on their property? That will have to be moved then or taken down? Chairman Orlowski: The one that's on their site? Ms. McNamara: Yes. Southold Town Planninq Board Page Four June 10,2002 Chairman Orlowski: Yes. Ms. McNamara: O.K. Well, that pretty much says it all. Chairman Orlowski: Any other comments? Abigail Wickham, Esq.: I would just like to speak on behalf of the applicants. I believe that many of the concerns that were expressed by the neighbor are addressed by the fact that they will be using - building this barn, such things as loading, traffic etc. Some of the items that he mentioned are within the jurisdiction of the Farm Act and this has historically been a farm that had a barn up at the front which is existing and that is why ...(inaudible) suspect that this effectively will alleviate any of...(inaudible). Chairman Orlowski: Any other comments on this site plan? (There were none.) Any questions from the Board? Hearing no questions, I will entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Cremers: So moved. Mr. Caq.qiano: Second. Chairman Odowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Does the Board have any pleasure? Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I will offer the following: WHEREAS, Pauline Satur and Eberhard Mueller are the owners of the property known and designated as Satur Farms, located at 3705 Alvah's Lane in Cutchogue; and WHEREAS, this site plan is for a barn and covered equipment area; and WHEREAS, this site plan was certified by the Building Department on June 10, 2002; and WHEREAS, the Town Engineer has reviewed the drainage calculations and the Planning Board has accepted his recommendation for approval; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself lead agency and issued a Negative Declaration on May 13, 2002; and $outhold Town Planninq Board Page Five June 10,2002 WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said Satur Farms application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on May 13, 2002; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant final approval on the surveys, dated February 1,2002 and last revised April 10, 2002, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys subject to a one year review from date of building permit. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Chairman Orlowski: 6:05 p.m. - Baxter Sound Estates - This proposed minor subdivision is for 2 lots on 4.65 acres. The property is located on Oregon Road, west of Bridge Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-72-2-2.1 I will ask if there are any comments on this proposed subdivision. Kathleen Galla.qher: My name is Kathleen Gallagher and my family is here: my father, Michael Gallagher, and my mother, Doris, who owns the property. Other family members are present: my sisters, Patricia and Barbara and my husband Richard and my nephew Brian. We have owned this property for five generations. It was purchased by my grandparents in 1940. At this time, my dad was twenty-two years old. We have lived there for sixty-two years. It is located on top of an approximately seventy-five foot bluff overlooking Long Island Sound. In 1940, at the time of purchase, the house was approximately twenty-four feet from the edge of the cliff. The property was much bigger than now as it is today. In 1954, the house had to be moved back because of severe erosion caused by a severe hurricane. It was very dangerous at that time because there were only one or two feet at the edge where the house was. We have an aerial photo of the house before it was moved back. This was moved back a hundred feet from the edge of the cliff. As you can see, we have a real disaster there. This was the existing root cellar that was in the back by the kitchen. So, the house was moved back a hundred feet from the edge of the cliff. It was moved back and placed on top of cement blocks, as you can see in the picture there, rather than on top of the foundation so as not to disturb the sandy or clay soil that was beneath it. The remainder of the root cellar is shown in the photo, which was originally located at the back of the house under the Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Six June 10,2002 kitchen. The remainder of the cellar has recently protruded through the cliff and it is causing us a major concern. We are trying to ...(inaudible) that may cause any more erosion. Since the house was moved back in 1954 to present, we have lost a considerable amount footage. Approximately 48 feet remain after they moved back a 100 feet. This has been through natural erosion. It seems that we were losing about a foot a year. Our major concern regarding this property erosion and environmental issues are concerning the development on either side of us. We are concerned that if we have a blow-out effect on the cliff similar to the one that occurred on the Domaleski properties, which is still not corrected and I have pictures of the blowout. These are pictures from last August. It's still not corrected. We have researched environmental issues regarding other properties of people who live near us. We came across a report issued by ...(inaudible) on the Merke (sp.?) property which confirms the ...(inaudible) of the bluff. It seems that any type of construction or excavation on the top of the bluff will definitely cause irrefutable damage to the cliff. We also found research done by a geologist, Goldman, on the Lupton property in Riverhead and it notes that there is a fault existing along the Long Island Sound cliffs and it occurs between the clay and the sand. We are deeply concerned that the proposed plans including foundations and pools being built on the north side of the home or any other land clearing or anything up there may cause more major disturbance to this very unstable area. If a proper environmental study including hydrology surveys is not done before this project is started, the damages caused to our property could be considerable. We have no objections to development on either property as long as we are guaranteed that development will not harm the little piece that we have - the property or the cliff. You know we have Oscar Metz' decision to protect the ...(inaudible) bluff with a bulkhead, but we also must protect the property bluff. We ask that proper testing be completed to find out how we can do that. Vegetation on either side of us protects our home from the wind and sand that we get blasted with and more erosion and since we are in a lower lying area than them, we anticipate run-off that may also make more of everything hazardous to me. We need a covenant or something in place to assure that possible damages to the bluff lot will be protected. You know, maybe more ...(inaudible) or other existing measures that could be taken that they are not going to end up with a blow-out like you have at this time. Mr. Lark is our attorney and he's here. I don't know - does anybody else have - did you want to see - my husband took pictures today of our bluff and you can see where rain damage because someone from - Mr. Baxter hired someone to come up and clear out the land and they went all the way up to the bluff and every time we get rain or anything on both sides of us it just runs down. In the fall of last year, the property was cleared on the east side of us and also on the west side. And now the west side has been cleared again all the way up to the bluff. It has caused much more erosion because there is no plant life on either side. My father has established some growth on the cliff in front of us and we are trying to protect that. We would appreciate anything you can do. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa,qe Seven June 10,2002 Ms. Scopaz: If you have the pictures, that would be good. Unidentified Speaker: Do you want to see these pictures? I just took these two hours ago just to show you trees being taken down on the east side and west side ...(inaudible) the property. You will see the foundation of the original house in the center there. That is - those pictures will be on the east side and you will see a bulkhead which has a pool above it and with even a bulkhead you will see the wash-out of the - this is on the east side of the property - just from the trees being removed from the house. Chairman Orlowski: State your name for the record. Richard Stuber: I am the son-in-law. My name is Richard Stuber. My wife is Kathleen. Richard Lark, Esq.: Hi, my name is Richard Lark, Main Road, Cutchogue. I just recently, when the applicants got notice that there was going to be a Public Hearing tonight which they properly got notice from the attorney for Mr. Baxter, they asked what could be done. As you can see, the Gallagher family, Mr. Gallagher is 83 here and he has been there since 1940. He has no opposition to putting in a subdivision. As you know from your application, they are in the middle of a horseshoe-type property there. They are like the void in the horseshoe - a lot on either side of them. They have no objection to this being developed. In fact, there are certain advantages to them if it is developed - mainly electricity which they do not have there. Hopefully, electricity will be brought to the land. But this problem that is raised to you is not a new problem up there. You have in your own Town records here a lot of information on this. Right to the east, maybe a thousand yards or so, you have the Mary Murphy application, which was ZBA Number 4609, tax lot 1000-73-2, lot 33 where the Board of Appeals was very much concerned. They were citing a house there. It was very much the same type of environment except that it was a lot closer. You didn't have the depth of property there, but they were concerned with the stabilization and they have the Soil and Water Conservation Reports, the DEC, also from private engineers and, curiously enough, when you look at that application you will see the Gallagher property to the extreme west - that's the property on it - so they did quite an extensive survey and testing as to see what could been done and it's been fairly clear that that whole area - the bluff - is very active. It is alive; it moves. The old surveyors will tell you it comes back about two feet a year on an average. She referred to the Domaleski subdivision which is to the west of Duck Pond right opposite - there use to be a road called Glen Court there - by the old Lupton property, for some of you that have lived here long enough. There was a two lot subdivision and, of course, we have all the rules and regulations of a hundred feet and all that other. Well, it did not work. They put up two huge mansions there with swimming pools in the front and, sixteen months to the day when they did that, there was a huge blow-out that you see in the picture and it is still there today. It has not been repaired in any way, shape, or form so you have a live laboratory of what will happen when you fool around with Mother Nature on the bluff up there. You have the weight and everything else - the pools and the homes and everything else; it is there to be seen. The problem with that area is when the glaciers left, as the soil people will tell you, they left not only a lot of rocks and boulders but there are huge clay deposits mixed with sand and it Southold Town Planning Board Pa_qe Ei_qht June 10,2002 causes an unstable condition so that when it's denuded on the top and the normal ground water is not absorbed by the vegetation and it goes down and sits on top these huge clay lenses and then builds up hydrologic pressure and the sand does not offer much resistance, you achieve these huge blow-outs on the bluff and that's basically what has happened. I was not aware, until I viewed it, that they had clear-cutted a lot of the property on both sides - Baxter has. So, the main concern here is that, from what I understand from the record, you did a Negative Declaration on October 16, 1989. This is 2002. In 1989, we were not to smart. We have learned a lot since then. I am asking you to seriously consider to rescind that Negative Declaration and go to the SEQRA because I don't think that that determination for this final hearing will stand the test of a Court determination and I think, ultimately, could be held and that it be annulled because to require a Negative Declaration, your Lead Agency, which you have declared yourself to be, there will be no environmental effect or that the identified environmental effects will not be significant. Well, that's just not the case here. You have the two cases that I just gave you plus the fact that the people have been here. They have moved their house back in 1954 a hundred feet and now they only have about forty-eight feet remaining and, if you go there, you can see the existing foundation of the house protruding some fifteen, twenty feet below the top of the current bluff, just sticking out there waiting for something to happen. Something has got to be done there. There is no question and I do not see how the negative environmental, negative impact - Negative Declaration, rather- could be upheld. Furthermore, to require a Positive Declaration, you only have to find one at least one significant environmental effect and here the instability of the bluff speaks for itself and, unless proper measures are taken as to where you would have your building envelope, what you would do for run-off, how far back - you can't just say the hundred foot rule would apply. I don't know that one hundred feet would be any good. It could be sixty feet. I am not trying to determine. That's why you have to get some expert and that is why you need an Impact Statement. I think that we have proper testing to tell you where you could site a house safely and what type of foundation that you would have to put in. They have done that on the south side because a lot of cases you cannot put in a full basement, as we know that, historically, you have to do it either on some type of piling or spiles or things of that nature just because of the impact that it would have on the soil beneath it, especially when you are involved with those clay lenses and everything. So, you do have a drainage problem and you do have an erosion and possible flooding problem. Erosion is clear-cut. Just go there on any windy day and you can watch it happen before your eyes. The interesting thing is the property to the east in the aerials that he took, I mean the photos that he took today - immediately to the east on the Baxter property - since they have been allowed clearing on there, you can see the riblets already starting because the vegetation, they tell me, that is on their property, the Gallagher property, existed across the face of both properties, all three properties, if you would, and it is no longer there on either side. There is a good reason for it. It was sixteen months almost to the day that, on the Domaleski subdivision that was put in - those two big, huge homes put in by Signature Homes - it blew out. It will be an effect there if it is not done properly. I am not saying where. They are not against where there Southold Town Plannin.q Board Page Nine June 10,2002 should be houses there, but I think you are going to need a more positive statement decided, because it won't cut it with the Building Department because if they go by the hundred foot set-back, they will just put it wherever they want to put it and so on and so forth. I think that any conditions of these subdivisions that you are aware and on notice especially with that Negative Declaration you've done, 1 think there could be some severe problems on the Town's part so, I urge you to reconsider that. I didn't say oppose it. They are not opposed to it but to reconsider it so that protection could be done. They have a significant environmental problem themselves there, what to do with that foundation overhanging the bluff. The DEC just shakes their head and walks away. Nobody wants to do - they have been trying to get some experts to tell them what to do as to what would cause the least harm. And, apparently, what is going to have to be done there, and they are not going to be happy with, and they are not going to be happy with me saying it, is that the toe will probably have to be protected by a bulkhead all the way across, fortunately or unfortunately, and then the angle of repose will have to probably be set back, probably mechanically, so that it can be stabilized forevermore because when you look at it from the toe, it goes up on what looks like the angle - the proper angle should be - then, all of a sudden, it goes from like a 30 °or 45° angle to about an 80° angle. So, you know that's not the natural situation and, when you look at the soil conditions there, it's just going to get worse and worse. So, something is really going to have to done and it will probably take a cooperative effort with the Baxters and the Gallaghers together doing it to preserve, not only what they have, but what he wants so he can market some substantial homes there and everybody can get along in peace. All I am urging you is just to reconsider your Negative Declaration and see whether or not we shouldn't get some kind of environmental study there as to what would be the best way to handle that. It is going to cost everybody some money, and I realize that, but in the long run I think everybody, especially the Town, will be well served if it is done properly. I have nothing further. Chairman Orlowski: Thank you. Any other comments on this subdivision? Abigail Wickham, Esq.: I am Abigail Wickham of Mattituck representing the applicant, Baxter Properties. Let me first say that, at this final hearing on the subdivision, I don't know that it is appropriate at this time to raise a SEQRA issue but since it has been raised as a concern, I would like to address it. I will also say that both Mr. Baxter and I have, over the past twelve or so years since this project has been before you in various forms ...(inaudible) Mr. Gallagher and, not once until tonight, have we had any indication that you have any concerns whatsoever about the project. But, again, we will try to answer their concerns. First of all, oh and thirdly, Mr. Baxter did not authorize any clearing whatsoever on that property other than paths to get into the property to the test well on Lot Two. I would be glad to take a look at those pictures and I will see that there is nothing further that does occur but that was apparently done by a contractor who was not authorized to do that work. The only work that was authorized was what was necessary to get back there to make approvals for the property. The environmental issues are raised by a property that is a summer home. It does not have electricity and is a lot closer even now than anything within the proposed Southold Town Planninq Board Page Ten June 10,2002 envelope. I do believe we've met all the set-backs of the coastal erosion. As Mr. Lark mentioned, given a configuration of the lot, environmentally, we have two water frontages and I am not sure that there would be any other alternative to develop it other than to pull it back beyond what is allowed by the codes that are designed to try and recognize some of the concerns about bluff erosion. On this particular block, if we notice with contours, the slope does come fairly level and then downward from the bluff. I don't believe there is a slope that goes down towards the bluff on an even basis. Lot One, which is the westerly lot, has a very wide area - 224 feet so you're not jamming a house onto a narrow lot on that lot. The other thing I would like to mention is that there will be, probably both in this proceeding as well as in the covenants that have already been recorded, as was as in the building permits for the individual lots reviewed by the environmental agencies, the Health Department, provisions for such things as containing run-off and that type of thing that might be of concern - issues about how the front lawn or bluff side of the lawn can be maintained or managed in terms or erosion control because. No one is going to be more concerned about maintaining that bluff stability than the people who are going to live up there and have a house up there. So, I don't think it is appropriate at this point to revisit SEQRA where you have two single-family homes on two pieces of property which just happen to be connected by a point with a strip at the rear. I would suggest that there is not an environmental impact by virtue of that. I would like to, if I could, briefly address some of the other issues I gave to the Board - some proposed covenants and liber maintenance which, again, would benefit Mr. Gallagher as well as the utilities that would come up there at the applicants expense. If there are any questions about that, I would be glad to answer them. I don't know that we have heard from the Town Engineer on the revised bond and, if that is the case, I would ask that, if you are going to make any action tonight, that that be a condition of the resolution - that we retain that and we will see what we can do to get Mr. Richter to provide ...(inaudible). If you have any other questions, I would be glad to try to answer them. Mr. ? is here tonight with some additional maps. Chairman Orlowski: Any other comments on this subdivision? Unidentified Speaker: There are some outstanding items. That is, the approved bond estimate by the Town Engineer. I also did a site inspection and there was a clearing outside the building envelope, specifically to the mouth of the bluff. There are C and Rs on the property that ...(inaudible) clearing just to the ...(inaudible) of a home, little ...(inaudible) because we don't know exactly what the home is proposed. There is concern with erosion. The soil is conducive to high amounts of ...(inaudible) sand, depending on the type of bluff. That being said, there are some outstanding issues. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. Southold Town Planning Board Page Eleven June 10,2002 Abigail Wickham, Esq.: I think the bond estimate we are looking for is lower than the one previously considered. Chairman Orlowski: Well, ~ think this Board will probably go out and take a look and see what's actually been done over there. I am going to entertain a motion to hold this hearing open. Mr. Cremers: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded to hold this hearing open. Any questions on the motion? All those if favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: Chairman Orlowski: Ann Marie Goerler Revocable Living Trust - This proposal is for both a set-off and a lot line change. The proposed set-off is to set off an 80,000 sq. ft. parcel from an approximately 38.7 acre parcel on which the development rights have been purchased by the Town of Southold on 36.39501 acres. The proposed lot line change is to subtract 21,597 sq. ft. from the 38.7 acre parcel and to add it to an adjacent 1.641 acre parcel. The parcels are located on the southwest corner of Cox's Lane & the LIRR Property in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-96-3-3.1 & 4.1 Chairman Orlowski: I believe we still don't have everything. Am I right, Mark? On this, we are going hold this hearing open also. Mark Terry: That's correct, the signed maps from the Department of Health. Chairman Orlowski: Would anyone here like to make a comment on this set-off? Hearing none, I would like to entertain a motion to hold this hearing open. Mr. Edwards: So moved. Mr. Cremers: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. $outhold Town Planninq Board Page Twelve June 10,2002 Chairman Orlowski: Grace's Place - This proposed site plan is to construct a 7,000 sq. ft. nursery school facility on a 4.6 acre parcel. The property is located on CR 48 in Peconic. SCTM#1000-74-4-4.7 & 4.8 The hearing is held open. Would anyone like to make any comments right now? Jeffrey Sharkie (sp.?): Good evening. My name is Jeffrey Sharkie (sp.?) from Mineola. 1 represent Florence Wicks who is the owner of Wick's farm which is to the north of the subject premises, across Route 48. I have been in contact with Jim Matthews, the attorney for the applicant. We have discussed our differences with the plan that, as it turns out, there aren't differences. Mr. Matthews has agreed to put certain covenants on the use of the property which will satisfy the objections of Mrs. Wicks. I would like to hand out the letter from Mr. Matthews containing those covenants and, subject to those covenants, we have no objection to the application. Thank you. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. Any other comments? Jim Matthews: Good evening, Members of the Board. My name is Jim Matthews and I would like to reiterate, in regards to those comments, that's true. This matter regarding the use was before the Zoning Board of Appeals as you know, and a decision granting the special use permit was made July 19, 2001. We have been faithfully defining all the local requirements and the county requirements. I think everything is in order at this time. There were concerns raised to us and I dealt with Mr. O'Brien of the Sharkie (sp.?) firm and, although I believe it would have been more appropriate in the use stage, we voluntarily agreed to these covenants and to the ...(inaudible) concerns that were had. If I might read these covenants - would that be an appropriate thing? Chairman Orlowski: Go ahead. Jim Matthews: 1.) The use of subject premises is limited childcare, early development, childhood development for pre-kindergarten children only. 2.) The premises shall not be used after seven p.m. except for parent meetings, no more than four times per month, consisting of no more than fifteen persons including staff and parents for each meeting. 3.) The use of the premises is limited to early childhood development childcare only, consistent with the July 19, 2001 decision of the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold, Application Number 4969, and that same shall not be used for a gathering place for farm workers or a hiring hall. 4.) The premises shall be improve by one-stow building only and there will be no further expansion of the building or reuse of subject premises - subject property. 5.) Any lighting on the subject premises shall be designed in such a manner so that the source of lighting cannot be seen from adjacent properties or roadways and the lighting itself shall be designed in such a manner so as not to stray from the subject property onto adjoining properties and roadways. 6.) Any landscaping on subject premises shall be continuingly maintained and replaced whenever the same becomes necessary. 7.) The aforesaid restrictions shall constitute restricted covenants that shall run with the land and shall be recorded in Suffolk County Clerk's Office and Southold Town Planning Board Page Thirteen June 10,2002 are enforceable either by the Town or surrounding property owners. I want to emphasis that this is something that we worked out with representatives of the community, a voluntary matter so that do so to emphasize enforceability. It has not been imposed on us. It states the facts; it's true and we are willing to do so to alleviate some concerns that may have been ...(inaudible). I am available for any questions that you may have. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. Any other comments on this application? Charles Hydell: I have the place next door to the North Fork Wood Design. I ...(inaudible) but this is the first that I have heard about this - someone body stuck this in my mailbox. I did not get a certified letter. I live across the street, too, and any time I have dealt with the Zoning Board, I have had to send certified letters out to each of the neighbors, Town of Riverhead and this is how I found out about it. And I'm also concerned that, with the existing business I have there, is that when somebody else comes along, they always want to change the business there or they want to have the other business that can something to fulfill their needs, like the zoning of my property. What I looking - several times, the vineyards, they spray their pesticides and I have to bring my men inside because it's so - I mean, it is a lot and it comes all the way out to my yard and it really smells and I'm just thinking this for a daycare center, too. I think you should take that into consideration. And another thing, with a daycare - I live across the street, too - and in the summertime the traffic is really bad over there. I mean, if you lived there, you would hear the cars squeaking and jamming on their brakes all the time because of that gas station. Another entrance over there, I think, would be dangerous. When my two kids or three kids that get on the school bus at least once a week on the left hand side, they are on the right hand side - when they have the flashing lights up, the cars pass by any way. They don't stop. They are going about seventy miles an hour and, if you ever go on that North Road, they really move. It is a very dangerous situation. Anybody coming into that gas station - there is almost an accident everyday. And like I said, I am just concerned where I did not get a certified letter. I live across the street and I also have the business. If I knew more, I probably would have tried to speak up more. Like I said, I only found this in my mailbox yesterday. Chairman Odowski: O.K. Thank you. Any other comments? John Bokina: Yes. My name is John Bokina. I live on 280 Henry's Lane, Peconic, right off of 48 and I am against this Grace's Daycare Center because the traffic is horrendous over there and there is going to be a lot of people getting hurt, killed or whatever. Every time the ferry boat comes through, I can't even get out of driveway. Charlie is right about the spraying. When they spray the grapes, I can smell it from my house. So, it is very dangerous. It is a dangerous situation that is going to happen up there. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. Thank you. Any other comments? Southold Town Planninq Board PaRe Fourteen June 10,2002 John Haupt (?): The decision of the issues - two other issues that I think have not been addressed here and one is that by doing this daycare, it will make the area very attractive to people to come and eventually - and no one can convince me that eventually after daycare, the education process does not stop there. You will have the kindergarten, first grade, second grade, third grade. I talked to the Superintendent in Greenport. He has a tremendous amount of influx of Spanish people. I am not against the Spanish people or any other kind of person relocating. My concern is that - has anybody contacted the school districts and asked what type of impact will come about as a result of people relocating in the district because, fortunately or unfortunately, we have to provide services and if you look at any people complain about school district budgets going sky high and paying too much taxes, Town taxes and district taxes. One of the things you can look at, is very readily recognizable, is the fact that the special improvements in the educational services have to be improved and in this particular case you are definitely going to have an increase in your Special Ed. Programs and your improvement programs if you make an area attractive enough so that people will come and relocate. And no one can convince me that, after a while, with the housing problems - I don't care what it is - they are going to come and relocate and the school districts are going to feel that burden and my question is: Is anybody from this particular Grace's Place - or anybody - have they contacted the school districts? Have they asked them what type of services are they eventually required of them? And that's going to happen. Thank you. Joe Vecki (?): I live on Henry's Lane and I, for one, never received any type of notice that this was going to take place. The other thing is, whose bright idea is it to put a daycare center and a school on a four lane highway? Are they going to put a - what do you call it - a yellow light to slow the traffic down to thirty miles an hour? It's ridiculous. I mean, you've got the railroad in the back; you've got the vineyard spraying; you've got four lanes of traffic and, boy, it's getting worse and worse every year. It's unbelievable. And there are so many other areas that you could put that in. Why would you put it on a highway like that? Like you said about the gas station, that is one bad place. I wish I had known that was going up at first - I would have protested the hell out of it because it is hell getting out of my street, trying to make a turn especially in the summertime on the weekends. It's unbelievable. I mean, you guys just go up there on a Friday afternoon or during the week. The traffic is getting bad and these people don't do fifty-five; they do seventy. It's the dumb, dumbest idea I ever heard of to put a daycare center on a four mane highway. That's all I've got to say. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. Any other comments? Evelyn Feavel: Hi. My name is Evelyn Feavel. I am twenty-seven years old. I just have been living my whole life in Southold Town. My husband and I got married about four years ago. We have been trying for two years to have children. My objection to this is, mike everyone is saying, is that it is a very, very unsafe place for a daycare. I live on Henry's Lane and I see children playing right where North Road Wood Design is. They have a piece of property there and I see the children playing in the back yard all the time. That's dangerous. Now, he has a fenced-in yard. How are you going to kept the Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Fifteen June 10,2002 children in this daycare away from this traffic? I mean, you can only do so much, right? Now, another thing - it's for the farm workers and agricultural based, o.k.? What about the rest of the Town? You know, I mean, I have girlfriends that have to bring children to work with them because they can't afford daycare but these people are getting it free on this and you know and I just think it is a very unfair situation. I can't afford the taxes now as it this and I just built a brand new house, alright. My husband and I are relocating because we can't afford to live in the Town of Southold. The taxes are going to go through the roof because the State is going to stop funding this and we're going to have to pay. And that's all I have to say. Chairman Orlowski: Thank you. John Stankewicz: Hi. My name is John Stankewicz. I live in Peconic. A couple of people have asked this question: Who is actually behind Grace's Place being built in Peconic? Who started this, Mr. Orlowski? Chairman Orlowski: Not me. John Stankewicz: No, I am asking you. Chairman Odowski: You will have to ask Mr. Murphy back there. John Stankewicz: Mr. Murphy, who actually designed Grace's Place? Frank Murphy: Agri-Business Child Development. Mr. Stankewicz: (to Mr. Murphy) Question: Is this for Southold residents only or is it for Southold and Riverhead residents only. Chairman Orlowski: You've got to address the Board. John Stankewicz: I'm sorry. AIright. My questions are: Is this for Iow income only and what constitutes Iow income only - people that don't want to work on the books? Chairman Orlowski: My understanding, from asking Mr. Murphy that question last month, it is laborers that work out here and I don't know if they are considered Iow income. They work out here somewhere. John Stankewicz: Is this for Southold residents only? Chairman Orlowski: No. John Stankewicz: It's for Suffolk County. So, what happens - like other people have expressed - when the funding is pulled out? Who will be responsible for this? Chairman Orlowski: I have no idea. $outhold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Sixteen June 10,2002 Mr. Stankewicz: You have no idea. O.K. The people that are low income, are they Iow income because - what is the minimum wage now? $5.15 times 40 is going be like $10,000. Are they these people - is this for people that are being paid on the books or is this for people who are legal or illegal? Unidentified Speaker: Can I bring something for you that may help you answer the question that comes from Governor Pataski's website and it announces facilities for children of farm workers and this is a document that comes from the State of New York and indicates I underlined what income levels we are talking about? Chairman Orlowski: Four to nine thousand dollars. Unidentified Speaker: Do you know anybody that makes four thousand dollars working full time on a farm? Ninety dollars a week? Who's going to govern this? Before we even get into the safety issue, who's going to govern this and is this going to get stuck back on Southold Town expense. I mean or is this somebody that is going to be the governing - Chairman Orlowski: Well, you know, a lot of questions we can't answer. We are here to listen. This Board is strictly looking at a site plan. The Zoning Board of Appeals has granted them the use and we have to look at it that way. And we are looking only at the building, who goes in it, and what they do in it and, you know, the use is supposed to be allowed. That is the way we are looking at it. The people that go in there and what they make and all the other stuff is nothing that we can address here. Unidentified Speaker: O.K. My problem is with what happens, as other people say, when later on if any funding is taken out of it and are we going to be stuck with Southold Town taking care of this entire massive structure which could develop into other things, such as starts off as pre-k as Mr. Haupt says, later on it eventually goes to maybe a kindergarten program - all these other ones. There are a lot of safety issues involved. There are also a lot of tax issues involved. That is just my concern. Why did Riverhead turn it down and maybe they had some of these same concerns, you know. There should be some legislation involved before we approve anything to make sure that we are not stuck with this burden five years later on down the road. Chairman Orlowski: Those are good questions and we cannot address them here. We are strictly looking at the site plan. Unidentified Speaker: But before we have site approval, we should have some sort of guarantees that somebody is going to be responsible for this before it says, o.k., well Southold Town, we had it now, all the sudden, it is yours. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. Geor.qe Viola: Good evening. My name is George Viola. I live on Henry's Lane. Basically, I am here tonight because there wasn't due notice, I feel, given to local Southold Town Planninq Board Page Seventeen June 10,2002 residents. Basically, my concern is partly because - I can give you an example - I work for Suffolk County over at the County Center in Riverhead. We have a methadone clinic over there and, basically, that was only supposed to be for the local people to come and get their medication and leave. There were certain covenants put in there. Now, what has happen is they were told that some of the other health clinics have closed down their methadone units - Patchogue, Coram - and told to come out to Riverhead and now what you have is a centralized methadone clinic. And I am afraid that - it was touched on just before - that you may not have a local daycare center. It may be opened up and you may be see Jamesport, Aquebogue - that type of thing. People coming in. Second thing is - I feel that if there is a need for this, the people that use it should be documented. Also, the area employees who hire the people who work for them, they should bear the burden. It should be the employers that have to fund this in total and be reassessed as such. If they hire the people, then they need to be on record as supporting the funding for this and there should be no burden on the Town revenue. Thanks. Chairman Orlowski: Any other comments? Gary Remple: Good evening. My name is Gary Remple. One thing that keeps on coming through my mind about Grace's Place Nursery School is where is the benefit and why? And we know all the community will not be able to benefit from this. Only migrant workers will be able to use it. You are going to have children traveling one hours, two hours roundtrip to Grace's Place. As somebody mentioned before, what happens to the Working Joe here in Southold? What happens to the single parent - you know, for people who are trying to make it? Somebody that might work in a restaurant - they don't qualify for this. They are not allowed to go. Now, I keep on being told there is a need for it. If you look into the Head Start Daycare in Southold, you don't have ten, twenty, thirty openings. You have fifty-two openings. You can also go to Riverhead Head Start. There are openings there. There are openings in Grace's Place. I believe this is for seventy-two people. Now, I question if you are telling me that there is a need for this and that there, you know, that this has to happen, then why are there all these vacancies. Why do you have fifty-two vacancies? If there were a need for it, these vacancies would be filled already. These would be completely filled. So, this is really nothing but a duplication of services with taxpayers money. Southold prides itself on being an anti-biased community. That's one of the reasons that brought me here. You see the signs as you are driving through, what the policies are that they are anti-biased. Well, how do you allow a school that is discriminatory and forced to segregation. Does Southold want to be a nursery - a hatchery for such prejudice? Once again, I have to ask you - where is the benefit? Well, I can tell you some people who will benefit - the broker, person selling the real estate, person selling the land, the construction firm, services such as the people that are going to supply the materials. I mean this is quite contrary to the benefits that Grace's Place presented to us - nursery school for children. $outhold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Eighteen June 10,2002 Now, when you introduce a project, whether you are me, Gary Remple, an ex-Town Supervisor - however it is - you have a set of town codes and laws to be followed. You have rules. You just can't exercise things at your own discretion. I am going to reference Town Code Chapter Fifty-Eight which is on Notice of Public Hearings. From the inception, Grace's Place has had blatant disregard of these rules. Some of these rules are that you have to communicate. You have various forms to communicate. One of them is a certified letter being sent to properties that abut. Well, at the Board of Appeals Meeting back in last July, there were several residents that did not receive certified letters. The Long Island Rail Road did not receive a certified letter. The LIRR continues not to receive a certified letter, even from the Planning Board. I have never received a letter for the last two years. Another responsibility is that a sign needs to be displayed - a legal notice. Well, the last sign was placed in the weeds. It was dwarfed by the wee,ds. If it wasn't dwarfed by the fact that Route 48 is such a busy thoroughfare, the weeds did it in. Another responsibility is that it be put in a public newspaper under Legal Notices. Look in the last few weeks - there is nothing in there. How are people supposed to be informed? How are people supposed to come down? There is a reason for these laws. There are checks and balances. They are here to protect everyone so that everyone can be informed - so that the public knows what is going on. Everybody in this room should realize how urban sprawl is upon us. You don't want to pull up your shade one day and, because they did not follow Code Forty-Eight, find out that they are building a MacDonalds and see the golden arches there. Once again, Grace's Place has mostly violated Chapter Fifty-Eight Notice Code Public Hearings. I would like to talk a minute - I know a lot of people have talked about location. I have a principal friend and she experienced a fire in a school - a horrific experience. I'd just like to ask - where would these children go? They have four directions to go: they can go to Route 48 with the sixty-five mile an hour traffic; they can go west - the agricultural land where they can possibly be spraying pesticides that day or maybe they can go to the railroad tracks. The Town of Southold, several years ago, was looking into building - not building - occupying a school with children right here, right behind us on Traveler's Street and you set a precedent by saying no, we don't want our children there; let's not put them there. You had another instance on Young's Avenue where you wanted to put a school - no, let's not put them there; railroad tracks are unsafe. Railroad tracks are unsafe for our children. Well, are these children of any less value now? Is their safety any less? You know, it is not just Southold that feels that railroads are unsafe. There are several government agencies such as the Federal Railroad Administration and I would like to just read a small excerpt. It is long but just to demonstrate some of the dangers. Ironically, this letter is entitled "Children and Railroad Tracks Don't Mix": "People of all ages are fascinated with trains. We have all seen small children's delight at playing choo choo and we have all been captivated by the colorful cars of passing freight or passenger trains at one time or another. Unfortunately though, this fondness and familiarity, along with the desire to shortcut across tracks rather than to use public crossings, can often lead to children who walk and play near our railroad tracks where risk of serious injury or death can occur. Tragically, in the past ten years, eight hundred and forty-four children under the age of sixteen were killed. Two thousand eight hundred and sixty-four children were injured on railroad tracks. Children falsely Southold Town Planninq Board Page Nineteen June 10, 2002 assume that an oncoming train be able to get out of the way like a car." You know a car can make a left and a right. They can't and it could go on - I don't want to read the whole article but, basically, you have a Town decision - safety issue - setting the precedent, realizing that railroad tracks are unsafe for children. You have the Federal Railroad Administration realizing this - I mean, they published several letters - publications - given to schools, given to parents. I mean, I don't know how you can possibly think of putting this near a railroad when you have your own Town, you have government agencies telling you railroads are no good. Railroads and children are no good. You have one more choice: they can go to the east. They can run to the gasoline station. Well, Grace's Place violates Code 100-101 that says no gasoline service or repair shops or similar businesses are to be located within three hundred feet of a church, a public school, a library, a hospital, an orphanage or restaurant. Violate your own Code. Interesting!y enough, that gas station I am talking about - they were busted for selling tobacco to minors and there is a Southold Code and which, by the way, they have a sign up advertising tobacco. Obviously, nobody bothered to look. Tobacco advertising: no tobacco advertising within one thousand feet of a child daycare center. I know many people in this room share the same sentiments as I do for Grace's Place. It is an unsafe location. It is a duplication of services. You have fifty-two openings right here in Southold. It provides for segregation in our schools. It is discriminatory. The project violates Southold Town Code and past practice decisions of the Town. At the very least, it should be sent back to the Board of Appeals or theTown should provide a complete Cease and Desist on the entire project. Thank you. Chairman Orlowski: Anyone else? John Skabry: My name is John Skabry I live also on Henry's Lane in Peconic and 1 would like to thank the Board for allowing me to speak tonight - Chairman Orlowski and other Board Members. Serious business is before us tonight, Gentlemen and Ladies. We are talking about seventy-six babies tonight; we are not talking about the dirt and the ground. We are talking about the most precious natural resource that this Town has. We are talking here about infants from six weeks to pre-kindergarten age. Mr. Remple discussed the fire. There is no city water available nor the Suffolk County Water Authority going to grant city water. That's in their file. You cannot establish a sprinkler system without public water supply. The Suffolk County Water Authority, in their file and the file in front of you tonight, discusses the nitrates that are in the water. You cannot drink - and infants should never wash - in nitrate water. We are talking about a gas station that is one hundred feet from this center. We have to discuss M.T.B.F. (?) which is the antipollution ingredient that the Federal Government has forced us to put in gasoline which is insidiously poisoning our water supply as we speak. It does not degrade. Gasoline fumes and M.T.B.E. is vented into the atmosphere from that gas station. There is no way to fill up a gas tank, catch the evaporating vapors and not put them into the atmosphere unless you carry them away in a pressurized Southold Town Planning Board Page Twenty June 10, 2002 vessel. That is not being done. When they fill those tanks, the air which is in the tanks is expelled and put into the atmosphere. We're talking about putting infants six weeks old into that atmosphere. Mr. Remple talked about a fire. Even if there were a sprinkler system in the building, I want us all to remember Hulse's Gas Station - and some of us can - the explosion in Greenport. That was across the street from Sunrise Bus Company. It is still not in business anymore. I can remember that accident. I can remember when Fireman McMaskaski (sp.?) was terribly burned in a liquid propane gas tank explosion on the LIRR tracks when that car blew up on West Main Street in Riverhead. He was a Riverhead fireman from Aquebogue. That explosion you could see in Connecticut. That was a railroad car full of liquefied petroleum natural gas - exploded about 1969. Recently, we all in this room can remember the Hess tanker accident in Mattituck at the Hess Gas Station. We can remember evacuating everybody all the way up Legion Street, down Bay Avenue, all the way to Peconic Bay Boulevard for fear that that tanker was going to explode. That was in Mattituck. Gentlemen, before us tonight are serious decisions. When our heads hits the pillow tonight, all of us have to find a reason to go to sleep. Can we take seventy-six babies with twenty-five employees - that their statistics say they are going to have - out of that building in a fire? Where would we go? Which child would we choose? Twenty-five people trying to pick up seventy-six babies and the children that can speak can't spes~k the same language as the people that are working there. What do we do with the two that we carry outside? Visualize it. People are going to be disgusted by the statement that 1 am thinking of - the smell of burning babies will be on our conscience if we approve this project should an accident occur. We would take those two children and put outside in a fungicide and pesticide, near the railroad tracks, on the highway or across the highway or into the gas station that is on fire. Those are the choices that you have. I tried to get information on Grace's Place from their headquarters in Syracuse. I spoke with Lydia Torres (?sp.) up there two weeks ago - three weeks ago. I believe she is the Program Director. I asked for information - the Annual Report. I could get nothing from them. I found out that the Freedom of Information Act does not work with a private, not- for-profit, it's called a not-for-profit. They have a seven million dollar annual budget. More than four million dollars are in salaries. I have to go to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the New York State Department of Agriculture, the New York Department of Social Services and the Head Start Program to get the information that 1 need through the Freedom of Information Act to find out who is paying for what and what the history of their organization is. Prior to our protesting this, and my name becoming mud with them, we could get some information and I have a 1999 Annual Report. That is the latest one that I have. My father used to say never bring your car to some gas station where the owner is not there. These people are in Syracuse. Sworn officials of this Town Government have approached them in Syracuse and were told to get in touch with Frank Murphy if they need any information. At the Building Department in our Town, simultaneously in May of 2001, they - Grace's Place - applied for a ZBA Variance and Building Permit and Planning Board Site Plan Approval. So, the Building Department has been working on their Building Permit. Those fellows - an associate of mine, a $outhold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Twenty-One June 10,2002 friend of mine - he works there. He told me they were trying to work around the sprinkler system. He told me there is no Suffolk County water or hydrant there. The high nitrates I found out about myself. Other people have talked about the daycare centers that are in the town now. Fifty-two openings in Church of the Open Door in Southold - half of them are Hispanic, Latinos. And they are involved in agriculture. If this daycare opens in the place where they want to open it, I predict that that daycare center will close down because the majority of their people will move to this one. When that happens - because they are closer to the farm belt - when that happens and their employers, which are the people that run Agri-business - whatever it's called - will demand that they go to this center. When that happens, there will be no daycare centers for the other working people in this community - for the people that are not involved in agriculture. Then we will have serious problems. Presently, migrant farm workers get free pharmacy, medical, and dental at the daycare centers that they go to now. There is a sliding scale on how much you pay. If you are in the income brackets that the government talked about - $4,000 - $9,000 dollars a year - you would pay nothing if you went to the Church of the Open Door or the Perry unit in Greenport. I want to touch on taxes a little bit. I don't know if it is your purview or not. San Simeon, which was run by the Lutheran Church in Greenport, five years ago was turned over to a not-for-profit organization. At that time, the Town placed taxes on them - property taxes on the property. San Simeon fought it for five years and won the case in Court. They paid the taxes during the five years. They won the case in Court. Peconic Landing, also a not-for-profit, as a result of that case, has agreed with the Town to pay, in lieu of taxes, a fee. Graces's Place is in the same position. It is a not-for-profit, fully funded. They are not going to pay a tax. Why didn't someone in Town approach them about the tax when they were given the approvals? Maggie Evans is the director of this organization. She is a CPA from Schenectady, New York. In that document that I gave you, there is a print-out on a News Review article. They first wanted to establish in Riverhead, but the Riverhead Town Board declined having them in their community. The report says that the First Baptist Church, who wanted to join with them to build this daycare center in Riverhead, that Maggie Evans says that we had an age difference in our children. I am going to tell you that that is an out and out lie. Reverend Coverdale - Charles Coverdale - and I went to high school together. We wore the same black and orange shirt. I talked to him last month for more than an hour. We are ex-neighbors. He told me that he wanted to join with them. He offered them property in back of his building. He said I want to build a daycare center and I want to join with you. They said we will build our own daycare center. We will build it where we want to build it and we will control it. It is not you fault at all what we are talking about here. I am talking about what happened prior to this but we have to understand how we got this far and why we got this far and why no one in th the room was made aware of this. On July the 12 2000, the Riverhead Town Board turned down the application of Grace's Place to build in Southold Town Planninq Board Pa,qe Twenty-Two June 10,2002 Riverhead. On May the 24th of 2001, they applied for a Zoning Board of Appeals in Southold Special Exception. On May 24t~2001, they applied for, simultaneously, Zoning Board of Appeals Special Exception, a site plan for Planning Board approval and a Building Permit. On July 12th 2001, they held a final hearing at the Zoning of Appeals. I can tell you that that sign that they may have put up on the road was not prominent. It should have been prominent. The law says it must be prominently posted. It must have been behind weeds. I didn't see it myself but others have told me they saw it. They saw something behind the weeds. On July 19th 2001, they got an approval for this. Frank Murphy presented the case to the Zoning Board of Appeals and they got an approval. That's less than seven weeks from application to approval. It just so happens when I got the transcript of their final hearing, the first half of the first page is the last case that the Zoning Board of Appeals was listening to. That applicant was waiting two and one-half years - he was waiting two and one-half years to get a Building Permit. This one went through in seven weeks. I am not saying that there is - I am just saying that there was a rush, I am not trying to allude that there was any kind of collusion and I mean that. It was just a rush and there was an oversight on the items that are coming out today and the more items that are coming out as we look into this program. Gary already touched on the money that can be made off this project. We are all adults here. We know what money can be made on the project. Gentleman and Ladies, we need some time. We need some time to sit back and find out about M.T.B. and gasoline. We need some time to look at a location. I am asking for time we are talking about seventy-six babies here. We are not talking about the beautiful environment that we live in. We are talking about our most valuable natural resource - our children. On December 18th in 1972, in the rain, I was coming home from work - two kids were hit on the highway less than a quarter of a mile from this intersection. I can remember every drop of rain and everything that I ate, everything that I did, every step that I took. I can still see their faces looking at me. Me and a Suffolk County Park Ranger, Bob, from down the road. We didn't have a rescue squad then. DeFriest had an ambulance service. We couldn't wait for them. They were both hit by a car going about sixty-five miles an hour and they were both riding on the same bicycle and it was the dark of night about - it was dark anyway. Both kids died a quarter of a mile from there. I can remember it like it was yesterday. I don't want anybody to be in that position - the position that I have been in since that happened. People around normally know what I do - I work with Boy Scouts. I am a Merit Badge Counselor. Twenty-five years I have been a Scouter - Scout Master, Troop Committe,e, so forth. Presently, on Friday nights at the library of Southold, I counsel the Pre- Citizenship Badges and the Communication Merit Badge. There are a couple others - Family Life. I deal with youth all the time. I don't want to ride up to the highway and I don't want to get in to it too much about that but we talked about citizenship and what it means to come to a meeting and this is my first public meeting and I am sorry - the last final hearing on this last month was my first one but I send them down here to listen to your meetings all the time. Southold Town Planning Board Pa.qe Twenty-Three June 10, 2002 I want to read to you from my favorite author. Her name is Shirley Chism. She was an American politician - a U.S. Representative from our state from 1969 to 1983. She was a black woman. She has sought an end to the Vietnam War and advocated educational and social reforms. Shirley was a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives. She wrote a book. It was called "Unbought and Unbossed", published in 1970. She said in the book and I will quote it: "The difference between dejour and defacto segregation is the difference between open forthright bigotry and the shamed-faced kind that works through the unwritten agreements between real estate dealers, school officials and local politicians." We are not part of that. I don't ever want to see Southold part of that. If this center opens, we will have a segregated school. I am asking that tonight, right now, the requirements to build a school - I mean a daycare center - with seventy-six babies in it are much less stringent than they are to build a public school. I was not aware of that until this started coming in front of me. They are much less stringent than building a public school and we are talking about babies that can't listen. I am asking for time. I asking for more deliberation by the Board and I thank you very much for allowing me to speak to you tonight. Chairman Orlowski: All right. As far as time is, we are going to hold this hearing open. We are going to hold this hearing open for a couple of reasons. I know you have stated a lot of emotional reasons. Sometimes we can't address those. We have questions on distance from the gas station. We are going to ask the Building Department to give us an interpretation. We have questions on access. We also have questions on use. So, we are going to ask the Building Department for an interpretation. There were other things brought up tonight that I want the Board to look into. Right now, I am going to entertain a motion to hold this hearing open. Is there anyone else who wants to speak now? Or if not, next month we will be here again. Lori Kalinke: My name is Lori Kalinke, I was here at the last meeting and I want to let you know that I am here again because I am opposed to this. I don't know if I can present this to you at this time. This is a petition that I had gone around with and people have signed that they are opposed to it. You are going to take it tonight? Chairman Orlowski: Yes. Lori Kalinke: I just want to say that I am located on Henry's Lane very close to where they are talking about this center to be built, that I am affected by it in a great deal because my children - I am a mom - I am a working parent and I am unable to use this service and I feel that it is not fair to a working parent like myself because I don't fall in this income bracket, that I would be able to use such a daycare center such as this. The sign that they had originally posted, which I saw which was hidden way back in the woods, stated that it was for a nursery school. Now, a nursery school and a daycare center are not the same thing so I am a bit confused in exactly what they are calling it. They say they are calling it an agri-daycare center but there is a difference so, if you are letting people know that it is a daycare center or if it is a nursery school, according to Childcare Counsel there is quite a difference because a nursery school is geared for $outhold Town Planning Board Page Twenty-Four June 10,2002 older children like three and four-year-olds. Its' staff that they have do not go thru criminal searches, they have time slots that they only operate usually at a three hour time slot, whereas, a daycare center, they don't have to follow curriculum. Their hours of operation usually run from six a.m. to six p.m. The ages are usually six weeks to twelve years. The center does have to be licensed through New York State and they have to follow a whole great deal of guidelines before. My aware that they have applied for this license as of April 5th - they applied for a daycare since then. They say that it could take anywhere from six months to one year to receive this. I would just like to know what exactly this is going to be - is it a daycare center or is it a nursery school? Because if it is, then you are definitely talking about two separate issues. Also, I don't feel it is a safe location. I have children that live on Henry's Lane and I would never - I mean, we ride our bicycles - not to the end of the block and I would never want my son or daughter to cross that highway because it is dangerous and we have a railroad track behind there; we have a Route 48 location. It's just not safe. I don't feel any children, whether it is mine or someone else's, should be in this type of location. It is not an open facility to all local residents. I mean, myself, have had to find daycare elsewhere. I travel an hour and a half every day to work and my childcare is up west because I am not able to fit into a center out here that might be available. I don't fit into that income bracket. They say that these - it's too expensive and it is not - there is not much in daycare around here. Well, that is true but it is too expensive for us the working parents, but they are getting it for free now and they just don't feel that is fair. I work very hard. I just want to say that I am opposed to it and if you can just reconsider this location for the center, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you. Betty Constantine: Hi. My name is Betty Constantine. I was not able to go out as much as I wanted to to get this petition signed but I did get some names and I made copies for everyone that is on the Board. I do want to say I am opposed to this daycare's location. I am not opposed to the program. I have made many phone calls trying to get to the bottom of it to find out where these children are coming from. Frank Murphy, at the last meeting, had said that he had done a survey which I cannot find anywhere at the Town Hall. I called Agri-business itself; I called Grace's Place and I have not been able to come up with this survey. I called Pat Acampora; she said she didn't know about a survey. She said she did feel that it was needed in Suffolk County. I have to speak to the farmers. I do agree that it is needed in Suffolk County. I don't think the location for it - is on the North Road, in Peconic, next to a busy gas station which has many safety issues. I am concerned about the Fire Department. During the day when these children are in this facility, do we have enough firemen in the Town, not working, to provide services if something were to happen? I moved off of the North Road three years ago because I thought it was an unsafe place to raise my child, Joey. When I moved off the North Road, I had been petrified of the North Road and when we moved into South Woods, I took him for a walk down the block - and he was only seven years old - and he said mom, this is so scary. I said what do you mean - he said, I am walking on the road. I petrified him of it because it is a death zone - that road. People do not stop for school buses. I called Ty Cochran almost once a week and he was very good about it. I have to say he was excellent. He always sends a police car. He would pull people over. They $outhold Town Planninq Board Page Twenty-Five June 10,2002 just fly down there and they have no regard. Once they get off of Sound Avenue and they hit Mattituck, they just fly until they get to wherever they want to go and vise visa and I just feel that this is a very unsafe location and I hope that you turn it down. Chairman Orlowski: Any other comments? Margaret Skabry: My name is Margaret Skabry. I live on Henry's Lane and I don't think that this is needed and don't think that it belongs in anybody's community and I really truly want to believe that the Zoning Board of Appeals was sold a bill of goods. I don't think that they realize that if it walks like a duck, it sounds like a duck, quacks like a duck - it's a duck. They were told it was a tower or something. They had no idea what they were getting into. You look through the minutes of that Zoning Board meeting, you are going to see no questions were answered directly that were asked and that they were going under the wrong impression what they had because if it wasn't that, then I don't think they are very nice people putting something like that up on the highway. We just had our first grandchild. I don't care where these people came from. If it is their babies, they don't belong up there. I hope you are smart enough - and I know you are - and caring enough, to either influence ...(inaudible) or take a good, long look at it and realize that this does not belong in the Town and get rid of it once and for all. I hate to see that we have to have lawyers like Grace's Place has and stuff come in here. I want to feel like we can still be represented fairly in this Town and that I am not going to be sold out by the Zoning Board of Appeals. Thank you. Chairman Orlowski: Any other comments? Betty Constantine: My name is Betty Constantine again. I forgot to tell you that I had called North Fork Head Start and I spoke to Linda Gates and she said she had fifty-two openings as of January 18th and she provides full services for the Hispanic community. Plus they have medical screening and dental screening and they get vouchers through the County that they can obtain these services. Also, I called the Robert Perry Daycare Center. They take babies from six weeks old. They only have a few openings at this moment. She said if this opens to this Hispanic farm community, she will lose over half of her children of the Hispanic farm community to Grace's Place. So, now we're jeopardizing another program that worked very hard to rebuild itself. I don't know whether you are familiar with ...(inaudible) but they really worked hard trying to rebuild themselves and when they were almost ready to close, they asked me to go around, because they know that I know some farm people, and find migrant workers because there were grants available and they could get free funding for the children and I went around and I found one child at that time in Southold that needed these services. So, I don't think the children that they are building the daycare center for are really in Southold Township. I think they are really coming from Brookhaven, Riverhead, Center Moriches, where there are larger farms so they have large amounts of migrant workers. So, I am very concerned about that. Chairman Orlowski: Thank you. Anyone else? $outhold Town Planning Board Page Twenty-Six June 10,2002 Evelyn Feavel: Hi. My name is Evelyn Feavel, again. I forgot to mention one thing. I don't understand the reasoning for building another building for a daycare or nursery school when we have several schools that are not in use anymore. I mean you have the Laurel Elementary School that just closed the kindergarten there which is not occupied at all. You have the elementary school on Peconic Lane. You have the Cutchogue East School which is not being used anymore. Why can't we accommodate these schools? Why do we have to go and build more? Why not use the schools we have instead of going ahead and breaking ground - what do you want? Another brand new school? Why not use what we've got? Why waste all that money to build when we've already have something there? Chairman Orlowski: I can't answer that. I have asked that question myself and the answer was that it is new construction only. I don't know why. I can't answer that. Gary Remple: Hi. I am Gary Remple. A while back, I contacted Agri-business and they sent me whatever available pictures they had of the schools and some of them aren't new construction; some of them are like the school in Laurel. So, they have been placed in older schools. Just to let you know that. Chairman Orlowski: Anyone else? Again, I am going to hold this hearing open until we get some interpretations from the Building Department in regard to that gas station and nursery school/daycare center interpretation and maybe we can get some other questions answered in between. Pleasure of the Board? Mr. Cremers: I would like to make a motion to keep the hearing open. Mr. Caggiano: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Chairman Orlowski: Robert $chreiber - This minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 47.4 acres. Development Rights will be sold on 32.27 acres. The property is located on the north side of Oregon Road, west of Alvah's Lane in Mattituck. SCTM#1000-95-1-4 Does anybody want to make any comments on the hearing that is open? (No one wished to be heard.) I will entertain a motion to hold this hearing open. Mr. Cremers: So moved. Southold Town Plannin.q Board Page Twenty-Seven June 10,2002 Mr. Caqqiano: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Chairman Orlowski: Nextel Communications - This proposed site plan amendment is to affix a new wireless antenna to an existing monopole and install a related equipment shelter on 1.05 acres of property located on the north side of CR 48,750' west of Cox's Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-96-1-19.1 will entertain a motion to hold this hearing open. Mr. Cremers: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Chairman Orlowski: Riverhead Building Supply Corp. - This proposed site plan is to demolish existing buildings & construct a 14,100 sq. ft. retail/warehouse & one 23,660 sq. ft. warehouse & a 5,000 sq. ft. warehouse. The property is located on the south side of NYS Rt. 25, 557' west of 9th St. in Greenport. SCTM#1000-46-1-1 & 2.1 Does anyone here have any comments? We never it finished it up, Pat. Patricia Moore, Esq.: Riverhead Building Supply received a variance - three issues that were addressed: one was whether the original variance still applied to this application for the site plan that you were ready to approve in February. The Zoning Board said yes, that the original decision still held and that this is not a significant deviation because it would not be applicable. The other issue was whether the sixty foot rule applies to the rear building and it does not. The Zoning Board again said no, that application was not necessary in reading the clear language of the word in which the sixty foot rule does not apply to a rear building. And, finally, a parking setback regulation Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Twenty-Eight June 10,2002 that actually appears in their original decision which the Board felt really shouldn't have been put in there to begin with with regard to the original decision adopted. They leave it, essentially, to the Planning Board on the placement of parking from a right-of-way which is the appropriate way, the way it's historically been applied by this Board - that the variance, again, is not necessary - that the ...(inaudible) So, at this point, we're ready to move forward with the site plan. We have Health Department. My clients are ready to make an application for a Building Permit. Unfortunately, we took a detour ...(inaudible). Chairman Orlowski: Victor, do you have any comments on this? Mr. L'Eplattenier: We met with the Building Department today. They are getting a certification ready. We will have a Special Meeting the minute we can. The rest of the technical stuff is in place. Chairman Orlowski: Is that o.k.? We can do - Patricia Moore, Esq.: I think you have to close your hearing. I think Valerie pointed that out, that your hearing has to be closed so that if you do have a Special Meeting, you can make a decision at that meeting. Is that what your advice was at the time? Ms. Scopaz: Usually the Board closes the hearing first but that is an option that you can consider - whether you want to close it tonight or hold it open. It's up to you. Chairman Orlowski: We can close the hearing and make the decision at any time. We just want to get the rest of the stuff together which we didn't have time to do today. Ms. Moore: Yes, I understand. If you wouldn't mind putting it on as soon as possible for the actual decision - I hope you will have everything and the Building Department will have everything. Chairman Orlowski: It sounds like we do. Ms. Moore: O.K. Chairman Orlowski: Are there any other comments on this site plan? Mr. L'Eplattenier: There has to be a lot merger. That's going to come out of the Building Department certification memo. That process goes on so that when we do have the final vote, it's set. Ms. Moore: Right. Unfortunately, I didn't represent Riverhead Building Supply when they acquired the property. I know that they put the property in the same name but 1'11 check with their corporate attorney and found out to see whether or not they actually did a deed that takes the circumference of the two parcels as one deed. If it hasn't been done, we can certainly have that done. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Twenty-Nine June 10,2002 Chairman Orlowski: Do that right away- Ms. Moore: Yes, we'll do that. That's my problem. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. If there are no further comments, I'll entertain a motion to close this hearing. Mr. Caqaiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Chairman Orlowski: Island Health Project, Inc. - This proposed lot line change is to merge a 10,890 sq. f. parcel, SCTM#1000-9-2-6.2, with a 12,565 sq. ft. parcel, SCTM#1000-9-2-8, creating a 23,455 sq. fi. parcel. The properties are located at the north corner of Oriental Avenue and Crescent Avenue on Fishers Island. We still have received nothing from anyone. Patricia Moores, Esq.: I can just brief you on where we are. We are trying to deal with the objecting neighbor who is Windham Resources. We were trying to settle this in such a way- or resolve this in such a way- because they've placed objections before this Board. We don't believe they have merits but, on the other hand, we do want to resolve it amicably. They have expressed a desire to make an application for a change of zone for Hamlet Density for their piece. We agreed that we would do a joint application for a change of zone that would be RO - Residential Office. That is adequate for our need and would allow the permitted use that we already have in place. We already have a pre-existing, non-conforming use in the Residential. We were recommending that it be RO application. They want HB. I don't know whether or not we can agree. The best we may accomplish is to agree to disagree. We would not make a joint application at that point. We would make an application as we think as appropriate for our parcel and let them decide whether it's appropriate for their parcel. Those applications will probably go back to you for a recommendation. We think that they should withdraw their objection and, therefore, we withdraw our application at that point. Unfortunately, the communication between lawyers - myself and the other attorney - and he has to then refer to his clients - we know that we disagree on one concept which is which zoning designation to be comfortable with and, beyond that, we haven't gotten much further. So, it's incumbent upon me to send him a letter saying we're not going to join with you Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Thirty June 10,2002 on the HB application but we still think that we should settle the case with the Planning Board so that we can resolve the lot merger application because we think, as a matter of law, that the lots have merged. That's as much as I can tell you. It's been a difficult process. Chairman Orlowski: So, you don't mind if we keep the hearing open? Ms. Moore: I don't mind. Chairman Odowski: Then, I make a motion to keep it open. Mr. Cremers: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Odowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Sketch Determinations: Chairman Orlowski: Wolf - This proposal is to set-off a 2 acre improved lot form a 24.40 acre parcel in the A-C zoning district. The residual acreage (22.40 acres) will be perpetually preserved with the Peconic Land Trust. The property is located on Main Bayview Road, opposite Rambler Road in Southold. SCTM# 1000-88-1-11 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to set off a 2.00 acre improved lot, located within the A-C Zoning District, from a 24.40 acre parcel; and WHEREAS, the residual 22.40 acres will be perpetually preserved; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, do an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action.. The Planning Board establishes itself as lead agency, and as lead agency, makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration. Mr. Latham: Second. $outhold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Thirty-One June 10,2002 Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Odowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Cremers: In addition- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch plan approval on the maps dated May 17, 2002. Mr. Latham: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor?. Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Chairman Orlowski: Bruce Isaacs - This proposal is to cluster set-off a 1.37 acre improved lot from a 7.32 acre parcel located in the A-C zoning district. The property is located on the north corner of Alvah's Lane and the Long Island Railroad. SCTM# 1000-101-02-19 What is the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Caqqiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, the applicant proposes to cluster set off a 1.37 acre improved lot, located within the A-C Zoning District, from a 7.32 acre parcel with access from Alvah's Lane in Cutchogue; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, do an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action. The Planning Board establishes itself as lead agency, and as lead agency, makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor?. Southold Town Planninq Board Page Thirty-Two June 10, 2002 Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Odowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Caggiano: Further- BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch plan approval on the maps dated March 6, 2002. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Sketch Extensions: Chairman Orlowski: George & John Starkie - This proposal is to set off a 1.94 acre lot with an existing house from an 18.76 acre lot. The property is located north of the Main Road, between Cox's Lane & Depot Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-96-3-2 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposal is to set-off a 1.94-acre lot with an existing house from a 18.76-acre lot, north of the Main Road between Cox's Lane and Depot Lane in Cutchogue; and WHEREAS, the Sale of Development Rights is proposed on the remaining 16.82 acres of property; and WHEREAS, the $outhold Town Planning Board granted sketch plan approval to the subdivision map, dated March 9, 2001, on May 14, 2001; and WHEREAS, a retroactive extension was granted by the Southold Town Planning Board on December 10, 2001; and WHEREAS, another request for an extension was received on May 14, 2002; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Planning Board extends sketch approval for this set-off retroactively from May 14, 2002 to November 14, 2002. Mr. Latham: Second. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Thirty-Three June 10,2002 Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Bond Determinations: Chairman Orlowski: Baxter Sound Estates - This proposed minor subdivision is for 2 lots on 4.65 acres. The property is located on Oregon Road, west of Bridge Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-72-2-2.1 Mr. Ca.q.qiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS the Cutchogue Fire District has released the applicant from a fire well requirement; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board accept the revised bond estimate in the amount of $60,425.00, dated June 4, 2002, as determined by the Town Engineer and recommends same to the Town Board. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion' carries. Mr. Ca.q.qiano: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board recommends acceptance of the administration fee of $3,625.00 as determined by the Town Engineer and recommends same to the Town Board. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Oriowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Thirty-Four June 10,2002 MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES, SET OFF APPLICATIONS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Lead Agency Coordination: Chairman Orlowski: Paradise Isles - This proposed, amended minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 30.619 acres located on the north side of Island View Lane; 234.18 feet west of Bayshore Road and on the south side of August Lane in Greenport. SCTM#1000-53-6- 46.2 and 57-2-1.1 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, the Planning Board has determined that the scope of proposed development as previously submitted has changed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has requested that the applicant revise the Long Environmental Assessment Form submitted on December 26, 1996 to incorporate the changes; and WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted a revised Long Environmental Assessment form dated May 20, 2002; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency initiate the SEQR coordination process for this amended, unlisted action. Mr. Latham: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Ms. Scopaz: There's a question from the floor. Patricia Moore, Esq.: I understand what you're doing but I've asked that you place the matter on for a public hearing. This is a minor subdivision. SEQRA intended to be a coordinated act. Given the consideration of the moratorium, given consideration of all other factors that were discussed at today's meeting, I would ask that you place this on for a public hearing for the July calendar. If we waited a full thirty days, we have the next hearing date on July 8th. We have thirty days to receive comments - that will bring it to July 10th. So, we're going to miss the normally scheduled public hearing date unless you, obviously, you have a hearing calendar. So, I would ask that we have the hearing start on July 8th and we can have it open and continue. At least we'll know that we're not Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Thirty-Five June 10,2002 going to be facing the moratorium as well as other legislative actions that right now the Board is considering. Mr. Cremers: That would be 6:10 p.m. then, on July 8th, Ms. Moore: Thank you. That's fine. Chairman Orlowski: O.K. We'll note that as part of the resolution: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, July 8, 2002, at 6:00 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps, dated December 16, 1997, and last revised on May 14, 2002. Mr. Latham: Second. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Determinations: Chairman Orlowski: Bayview Overlook at Southold - This proposed major subdivision is for 9 lots on 24 acres located on the north side of North Bayview Road, east of Reydon Drive in Southold. SCTM#1000-79-5-20.6 & 20.7 Mr. Caq.qiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposal is to subdivide a 16.04 acre parcel into 7 single family lots; and WHEREAS, prior to issuing any approvals for the proposed subdivision, the Planning Board is requiring that the application be subject to SEQRA review; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board adopts the Environmental Assessment Review Report for Bayview Overlook, dated April 25, 2002, prepared by Nelson Pope and Voorhis, LLC; therefore BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Part 617, Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, establishes itself as lead agency, and as lead agency has determined that the proposed action may have a significant impact on the environment and adopts a Positive Declaration for the proposed action. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Thirty-Six June 10,2002 Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. ~ have nothing left on my agenda. If anybody would like to put anything on the record, you have two seconds. We're going to adjourn and go into a Work Session. Everybody else can stay here while the Blue Ribbon Commission meets. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Mr. Ca.qgiano: So moved. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Chairman Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Chairman Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Carol Kalin Secretary Bennett Orlowsk~, Jr, Chair"man Barbara Rudder APR t7 2003