HomeMy WebLinkAboutLL 2004 #26 ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE
TOWN CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
i~L~RRL~GE OFFICER
RECORDS I~L-kNAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (631) 765-6145
Telephone (631) 765-1800
southoldtown,northfork.net
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 890 OF 2004
WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
ON DECEMBER 14, 2004:
WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold on the 30th
day of November, 2004, a Local Laxv entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Stop Signs on
Eli,iah's Lane", and
WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid
Local Law at which time all interested persons were given the opportunity to be heard, now
therefore be it
RESOLVED that the Togrn Board of the Togrn of Southold hereby enacts the following Local
Law:
LOCAL LAW NO. 26 -2004
A Local Lag, entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Stop Signs on Eliiah's Lane".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose - Traffic moving uninterrupted at a high rate of speed along Elijah's Lane in
Mattituck has resulted in a safety concern for the residents in that area, as well as for traffic
moving along the cross streets. Accordingly, in order to maintain public safety it is
necessary to install stop signage along Elijah's Lane at the intersection of Tabor Road.
II. Chapter 92 of the Vehicle and Traffic Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as
follows:
§ 92-30. Stop intersections ~vith stop signs.
The following highway intersections are hereby designated as stop intersections and stop
signs shall be erected as follows:
Stoo Sign on Direction of Travel At Inter- Locatio.
Section With (hamlet)
Elijah's Lane South Tabor Road Mattituck
Eliiah's Lane North Tabor Road Mattituck
Tabor Road East
Elijah's Lane Mattituck
IlL
SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by
any court o£ competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of
this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the pan so decided to be unconstitutional or
invalid.
EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary o£State as
provided by law.
Elizabeth A. Neville
Southold Town Clerk
STATE OF NEW YORK
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
4 I STATE STREET
ALBANY, NY I 2E~3 I-OOO ~
GEORGE E. PATAKI
January 7, 2005
RANDY A. DANIELS
Town of Southold
Office of the Town Clerk
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
PO Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971
RE: Town of Southold, Local Law 23, 24, 25, & 26, 2004, filed on 11312005
To Whom It May Concern:
The above referenced material was received and filed by this office as indicated.
Additional local law filing forms will be forwarded upon request.
Sincerely,
Linda Lasch
Principal Clerk
State Records & Law Bureau
(518) 474-2755
LL:cb
Local Law Filing
NEW YORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE
41 STATE STREET~ ALBANY, NY 12231
(Use this form to file a local law with the Secretary of State.)
Text of law should be given as amended. Do not include matter being eliminated and do not use
italics or underlining to indicate new matter.
Town of
SOUTHOLD
LOCAL LAW NO. 2(0 - 2004
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Stop Signs on Eliiah's Lane".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
Purpose - Traffic moving uninterrupted at a high rate of speed along Elijah's Lane in Mattituck has
resulted in a safety concern for the residents in that area, as well as for traffic moving along the cross
streets. Accordingly, in order to maintain public safety it is necessary to install stop signage along Elijah's
Lane at the intersection of Tabor Road.
II. Chapter 92 of the Vehicle and Traffic Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 92-30. Stop intersections with stop signs.
The following highway intersections are hereby designated as stop intersections and stop signs shall be erected
as follows:
Stop Sign on
Direction of Travel At Inter- Location
Section With (hamlet)
Elijah's Lane South Tabor Road Mattituclc
Elijah's Lane North Tabor Road Mattituck
Tabor Road East Elijah's Lane Matfituck
(If additional space is needed, attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.)
DOS-2391Re, 1199) (1)
III. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of
competent .jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this laxv as a whole or any part
thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Laxv shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law'.
(2)
(Complete the certification in the paragraph that applies to the filing of this local law and
strike out that which is not applicable.)
1. (Final adoption by local legislative body only.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. 26 of 20 04 of the
~(Toxvn) 6ld4xq~g~) of SOUTHOLD was duly passed by the
TOWN BOARD on December 14 ~ 20 04 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or repassage after disapproval by the Elective
Chief Executive Officer*.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20
of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the
on 20 , and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed after
disapproval) by the and was deemed duly adopted on 20
in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. '
3. (Final adoption by referendum.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20
of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the
on 20 , and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed after
disapproval) by the on 20 . Such local law was submitted
to the people by reason ofa (mandatory)(permissive) referendum, and received the affirmative vote of a majority of
the qualified electors voting thereon at the (general)(special)(annual) election held on 20 , in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid petition was filed requesting
referendum.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 of the
(Count5,)(City)(Town)(Village). of was duly passed by the
on 20 __ , and was (approved)(not approved) (repassed after
disapproval) by the on 20 Such local law was subject to
permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of 20 , in
accordance with the applicable provisions of law.
* Elective Chief Executive Officer means or Includes the chief executive officer of a county elected on a count5,- wide
basis or, If there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor of a city or village, or the supervisor of
a to'~xffl *.*.there such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or ordinances.
(3)
5. (City local la~v concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.)
I hereby certit), that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20
of the City of having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of
section (36)(37) of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified
electors of such city voting thereon at the (special)(general) election held on 20
became operative.
6. (County.' local law concerning adoption of Charter.)
I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No of 20
of the County of State of New York, having been submitted to the electors
at the General Election of November 20 , pursuant to subdivisions 5 and 7 of section 33 of the
Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote ora majority of the qualified electors of the cities of
said county as a unit and a majority of the qualified electors of the tox~,ms of said county considered as a unit voting at said
general election, became operative.
(If an), other authorized form of final adoption has been followed, please provide an appropriate certification.)
I further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same is a
correct transcript therefrom and of the whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in the manner indicated
in paragraph 1 , above.
of the~ountv legislative body. C~,. Town 6r Village Clerk
or officer designated b~ local legtslative B-ody
Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk
(Seal) Date:
__December 22, 2004
(Certification to be executed by Count), Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or
other authorized attorney of locality.)
STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK
I, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law contains the correct text and
have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law alm~~ //(~
s
igpamre [ ~
Pa~rlcia A. Finnegan~[[~
Title
that all proper proceedings
~T~m~ Attorney
Town of
SOUTHOLD
Date:
(4)
December 22, 2004
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
PUBLIC HEARING
December 14, 2004
5:00 P.M.
HEARING ON "A LOCAL LAW IN RELATION TO AMENDMENTS TO THE SITE PLAN
APPROVAL LAW."
Present:
Supervisor Joshua Y. Horton
Justice Louisa P. Evans
Councilman John M. Romanelli
Councilman Thomas H. Wickham
Councilman Daniel C. Ross
Councilman William P. Edwards
Town Clerk Elizabeth A. Neville
Town Attorney Patricia A. Finnegan
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that there has been presented to the
Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 16th day of November, 2004
a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Site Plan Approval Law"
and
NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a
public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold,
New York, on the 14th of December, 2004 at 5:00 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be
given an opportunity to be heard.
The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Site Plan
Approval Law" reads as follows:
LOCAL LAW NO. 2004
A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to the Site Plan Approval Law".
BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows:
I. Purpose - In order to increase efficiencv in the processing of site plan applications, by
requiring increased coordination between the planning and building departments in the initial
review stages of applications and the determination of compliance with zoning regulations, it is
necessary to implelnent certain procedural amendments to the review process. Furthermore, in
order to expedite the review of certain so-called "as built" and agricultural applications, where the
public safety and welfare do not require a protracted review, the Planning Board shall be vested
with discretion to waive the public hearing requirement and technical submission standards.
II.Chapter 100 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows:
§ 100-253. Approval of site plan required.
A After the filing of an application for a building pemfit, the Building inspector shall make a
determination as to whether a site plan or an anmndment thereto is required, and this written
December 14, 2004 2
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
determination shall be forwarded to the Planning Department for comment. The Planning
Department must provide written comments on this determination to the Building Inspector within
five business days, or be deemed to have waived the opportunity to comment. After review of
comments, or after the time period for comment has elapsed, the Building Inspector shall issue a
final determination to the applicant, which shall in no event be more than 15 business days from
the filing of the application. Such determination shall also include a xvritten decision as to xvhether
the proposed use is permitted and whether a special exception is required from the Zoning Board of
Appeals. No building permit shall be issued for any structure or building for which use a site plan
is required pursuant to this Chapter 100, until, if required, an approved site development plan or
approved amendment of any such plan has been secured by the applicant from the Planning Board
and presented to the Building Inspector, along with all necessary approvals and permits as may be
required by other public agencies. [Amended 5-15-1995 by L.L. No. 8-1995; 3-9-2004 by L.L. No.
8-2004] '
§ 100-254. Review procedure.
A Pre-submission conference. Prior to the submission ora site development plan, the applicant or his
agent shall meet xvith the Planning Board or its representative. The purpose of such conference
shall be to discuss proposed uses or development plan elements that shall be submitted to the
Planning Board in order for said Board to determine conformity with the provisions and intent of
this Article. Said meeting shall take place within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of written
request therefor.
B Site devel°pment plan- Nine (9) copies of the site development plan application and any related
information as defined during the resubmission conference shall be submitted to the Planning
Board within four (4) months of the resubmission conference. If a site development plan
application is not submitted within four (4) months following a pre-submission conference, another
conference may be required by the Planning Board.
(l) Within ten (10) business days of receipt of the application, the Planning Board shall
deternfine whether to accept, reject or request revision of the application.
(2) If the Planning Board determines said application to be acceptable but in need of revision, it
shall notif.v the applicant, in writing, wherein said application is deficient within thirty (30)
alendar ......... days.
(3) Within the thirty (30) calendar day period from receipt of the application, the following
shall also take place: the site plan reviewer (or other delegate of the Planning Board) shall
hold a joint meetin~ with a representative of the Building Department authorized to review
building plans, for the purpose of making a joint recommendation as to ~vhether the sir:
plan application complies with all applicable zoning regulations or whether an,/variance.~
are required from the Zonin~ Board of Appeals; that recommendation shall be forwarded to
the Buildin~ Inspector, who shall either endorse or revise that recommendation; and in thc
event the Building Inspector's zoning determination indicates that a variance is required,
the site plan reviexver (or other delegate of the Plannin~ Board) shall so inform thc
applicant; and in the event the applicant wishes to proceed with the application a:;
submitted, the Building Inspector shall issue a notice of disapproval at that time. This
procedure shall also apply to any amendments to the site plan application.
(4) In the case of a variance or special exception application requiring site plan approval,
the site development plan application shall be subjected to preliminary reviexv and
written comments by the Planning Board within sixty (60) days of such request by the
Board of Appeals.
December 14, 2004
Public Heating--Site Plan Amendments
3
(a) In no case may the Planning Board grant site plan approval prior to the
issuance of a special exception by the Zoning Board of Appeals, if such is required.
(b) Before the Planning Board can approve any application for the amendment
ora use or structure for which a special exception was granted, the applicant must
obtain permission from the Zoning Board of Appeals to expand or otherwise alter or
change either the use or the structure.
(5) The Planning Board may vary or waive parking requirements, provided that such
change xvill not have a detrimental effect on the public health, safety or general
xvelfare and will not have the effect of nullifying the intent and provision of the
Zoning Code.
(a) The Platming Board may allow or require landscaping to be installed in
place of specified parking spaces.
(b) On any site for which the Planning Board grants approval for less than the
required number of spaces for that use, the Planning Board shall have the right to
review the parking requirements again ifa change of use is proposed.
(6) Review of a new site plan for a lot on which an approved site plan akeady exists
shall not proceed until the approved plan is withdrawn by the applicant.
C When the Planning Board determines said application to be acceptable, it shall, within ten (10)
business days of such determination, distribute said application and documentation to the town,
county and state agencies having jurisdiction, for their comment. Such referral shall include a
referral to the Architectural Review Committee. The Architectural Review Committee shall make a
written recommendation to the Planning Board on the site plan within ten (10) business days of
receipt of the referral. If the Committee fails to make a recommendation xvithin this time period,
the project shall proceed to the Planning Board for consideration without Committee view.
[Amended 5-15-1995 by L.L. No. 7-1995]
D Upon receipt and review of xvritten connnents from each of the agencies to which the proposed site
plan was distributed, the Planning Board shall, within a reasonable period of time, not to exceed
thirty (30) days, deterufine whether to require revisions to the proposed plan.
E No decision on the application shall be made until the State Environmental Quality Review ActFN
process is completed.
F After the Planning Board has determined that the proposed site plan is suitable for approval, it
shall:
(1)
(2)
Forward the plan to the Building Inspector for final review and certification.
For~vard the plan to the Fire Commissioner of the fire district within which the site is
located for a determination as to whether'a fire well is needed and, if so, its location.
(3) Notify the applicant, in writing, to make an application for the appropriate curb cut permits.
(4) Submit the proposed site plan to the Suffolk County Planning Commission in accordance
with the provision of the Suffolk County Charter, if necessary.
G Upon receipt of the Building Inspector's certification, the Fire Commissioner's response, the curb
cut permits and the comments of the Suffolk County Planning Commission, the Planning Board
shall place the site plan on the agenda of the next regularly scheduled public meeting.
H The Plmming Board shall hold a public hearing to consider the application. Notice shall be
provided pursuant to Chapter 58. [Amended 12-27-1995 by L.L. No. 25-1995FN.]
Notwithstanding this requirement, with respect to applications involving modifications to existing
structures with no substantial change to the existing footprint, where the Planning Board
determines that such modifications or any change in use will not require significant changes to
December 14, 2004 4
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
existing maior site design features, as well as applications involving uses strictly related to
agriculture (but exceptin~ retail winery operations), the Plmming Board shall have the discretion to
waive the public hearing requirement and may act on such application by filed resolution at a duly
noticed public work session.
I Prior to the Planning Board's endorsement of the site plan, the applicant must sign a statement
placed on the site plan indicating his/her knowledge and acceptance of the conditions of approval.
J Amendments to an existing site plan may be acted upon in the same manner as a new site plan.
K A guaranty of performance may be required for all public improvements as part of the conditions
of approval. Such guaranty shall be based on a listing of required site improvements in accordance
with Chapter Al06 of this Code.
L Within ten (10) days of final approval, a copy of the endorsed site plan shall be sent to:
(1) The Building Department.
(2) The Town Engineer.
(3) The Town Trustees, when applicable.
(4) The Highxvay Department.
(5) The Zoning Board of Appeals, when applicable.
M The Planning Board shall have the right to deny the proposed site plan for lack of compliance with
the provisions of the Town Code. The Planning Board shall notifv the applicant, in writing, within
ten (10) days of such determination, of the reasons for such denial.
§ 100-256. Application requirements; fees.
A Submission of a complete site plan application shall consist of:
(1) A completed site plan application form.
(2) The site plan reviexv fee, as specified in Subsection B below.
(3) A completed environmental assessment form.
(4) Nine copies of the site plan.
(5) Four copies of a property survey, certified by a licensed land surveyor.
B Fees. [Amended 3-27-2001 by L.L. No. 7-2001]
(1) The application fee for a new site plan shall be $300 per acre or any fraction of an acre
thereof, plus $0.05 per square foot of building area.
(2) The application fee for a revised site plan shall be $300, plus $0.05 per square foot of
building area.
C Standards. Site plan design shall include the following items: (1) Technical data:
a The lot, block and section number of the property, taken from the latest tax records.
b The nan~e and address of the landowner on record:
[l] The names and addresses of adjoining landowners.
[2] The name and address of the applicant, if not the same as the landowner.
c The name and address of the person, firm or organization preparing the map, sealed
with the applicable New York State license seal and signature.
d Date, graphic scale and North point, whether true or magnetic; if magnetic, show the
date of reading.
e A survey prepared by a licensed surveyor or civil engineer. The site plan may reference
a land surveyor's map or base reference map. All distances shall be in feet and
hundredths of a foot. All angles shall be given to the nearest ten (10) seconds or closer.
The error of closure shall not exceed one (1) in ten thousand (10,000).
December 14, 2004
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
f The locations, names and widths of all rights-of-way xvithin five hundred (500) feet of
property lines. If none exist within five hundred (500) feet of the subject property,
indicate the distance to the nearest intersection with a public street.
g A separate key map showing location and owners of all adjoining lands within five
hundred (500) feet, as shown on the latest tax records, at a scale of one (1) inch equals
one hundred (l 00) feet.
h The location, width and purpose of all existing and proposed easements, setbacks,
reservations and areas dedicated to public use within or adjoining the property.
A complete outline of other existing easements, deed restrictions or covenants applying
to the property.
j Existing zoning, including zone lines and dimensions.
k Site plans drawn at the scale of one (1) inch equals twenty (20) feet. If all required
information cannot be shown clearly on one (1) plan, the information should be
separated as follows:
[l] Alignunent and schedule plan.
[2] Grading and drainage.
[3] kandscaping.
[4] Other, e.g., site utilities.
(2) Natural features:
a Existing contours xvith intervals of two (2) feet or less, referred to mean sea level as per
United States Geological Survey datum.
b Boundaries of any areas subject to flooding or stormwater overflows, tidal bays,
saltwater marshes, beaches and all freshwater bodies, including wetlands and
intermittent strean~s, perimeter boundaries of shoreline bluffs, dunes and beaches.
c The location of existing natural features, including but not limited to natural drainage
swales, watercourses, wooded areas and wetlands, as defined by the New York State
Department of Enviromnental Conservation and the Board of Trustees of Southold
Toxvn, marshes, ponds, dunes, bluffs, beaches, kettle holes, escarpments, wildlife
habitats, flood hazard areas, erosion-prone areas and trees of six (6) inches in diameter
at a point three (3) feet above the trunk base.
d The location of any existing cultural and historical features within five hundred (500)
feet of the property boundaries.
(3) Existing building structures and utilities:
a The locations, dimensions and outlines of all buildings, as defined in § 100-13 of this
chapter, and all uses of the site.
b Paved areas, including parking areas, sidewalks and vehicular access bet~veen the site
and public streets.
c The locations, dimensions, grades and flow directions of any existing culverts,
xvaterlines or sewage disposal systems, as well as other underground and aboveground
utility poles and utility lines within and adjacent to the property.
d The location and use of all buildings and structures, including curb cuts, within two
hundred (200) feet of the boundary of the subject property.
(4) Proposed construction:
a The location of proposed buildings or structural improvements, indicating setbacks
from all property lines and horizontal distances from existing structures.
December 14, 2004
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
b The location and design of all uses not requiring structures, such as off-street parking
and loading areas and pedestrian circulation.
c The location, direction, power level and time of use for any proposed outdoor lighting
or public-address systems.
d The locating and plans for any outdoor signs must be in accordance with applicable sign
regulations.
e The location and details of aprons, curbs, sidewalks, fencing (type and location),
grading, including existing and proposed topography with two-foot contours [on site
and two hundred (200) feet beyond the property line] and spot elevations for buildings
and all structures, drainage calculations, details of drainage structures and watershed
areas, where applicable.
f Grading and drainage plans shall be based upon site stormwater retention, in
conformance with Chapter Al08, Highway Specifications.
g The location and listing of landscaping, buffering and street tree plans, including type,
material, size, quantity and location.
h The location of water and sewer mains, electrical service, cablevision and telephone
installations, ground transformers, fire well and fire hydrants and/or any alternate means
of water supply and sexvage disposal and treatment.
i Building elevations for all facades and floor plans showing the proposed use of floor
D No~rithstanding the foregoing, the Planning Board shall have the discretion to waive an,/or all of
the requirements of this ~ 100-256, for those applications involving modifications to existing
structures with no substantial change to the existin~ footprint, xvhere the Planning Board
determines that such modifications or any change in use xvill not require significant changes to
existing maior site design features, as well as applications involving uses strictly related h,
agriculture (but exceptin~ retail winery operations), if it determines such requirements are not
necessary to protect and maintain the public health, safety, or welfare and to further the objectives
set forth in §100-252.
III. SEVERABILITY
If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this laxv as a whole or
any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by
law.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: We have several, well, first I have notices that this has appeared as a
legal in the local newspaper and it has appeared on the Town Clerk's bulletin board outside there.
Here is an e-mail message from Judi and Chuck Mogul on this subject: "Dear Supervisor Itorton and
Members of the Town Board, I am concerned that the proposed local law jeopardizes public process.
The law, if enacted as drafted, would give the Planning Board discretion to grant site plan waivers by
resolution at a work session, where the public the has no opportunity for input, instead of at a Planning
Board meeting, where the public has the opportunity to comment. Public testimony often reveals
information that the Planning Board is not aware of and may influence Planning Board decision. In
addition, the proposed law does not five the Planning Board ample time to evaluate and respond to
determinations by the Building Department as to the need for a site plan or site plan waiver on specific
December 14, 2004
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
projects. I urge you to address these concerns in the proposed local laxv before it is enacted." A letter
from the Suffolk County Department of Planning, that basically says that this law is considered to be a
matter of local determination as there is no apparent, significant county-wide impact. The decision of
local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. A memo from the
Planning Board of the Town of Southold, dated December 6, 2004. "The Planning Board's comments
on the above noted legislation have been requested prior to the public hearing that will be held on
December 14th. Specifically, the legislation will revise the site plan ordinance to allow the Planning
Board to exercise judgment as to whether some or all of the required elements of a formal site plan
application may be waived. The goal is to permit the Planning Board to tailor the intensity of review
to the proposed action, particularly in the following instances: where the public safety and welfare
issues do not require a protracted review; when the proposed action will take place on a site that
already has site plan approval; or when the proposed action involves agricultural structures (other than
wineries.) Attached is a copy of a draft set of policies that the Planning Board would use in conducting
its review of site plan applications. This amendment is intended to give the Board legal authority to
exercise judgment as to the necessary level of review needed for minor adjustments to existing
development, while ensuring the business owner receives written approval for his or her proposed
construction prior to receiving a building permit and certificate of occupancy. The Planning Board
has the following comment: the xvording of Section 100-259.1E should be clarified to state that all
decisions by the Planning Board to waive specific elements of a site plan or review shall be done by
resolution at a scheduled and advertised public meeting." And there follow a draft of the Planning
Board criteria or policy for reviewing site plans. Now', what else do we have? And Mr. Supelwisor, I
believe that is all that we have in this file.
TOWN ATTORNEY FINNEGAN: If I could just make one comment on the Planning Board's
recommendations. They said 'the wording of 100-259-1E' and I believe it actually refers to 256-D.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Okay, that xvill be noted for the record. Thank you. At this point, we open
the floor to the public to address the Town Board. Yes, Ms. Schroeder.
GWYNN SCHROEDER: Good eveniug. Gwynn Schroeder, North Fork Environmental Council. I
know that this legislation is going to do a lot of good things. It is going to streamline stuff, it is going
to foster better conmmnication between the Planning Department and the Building Department. I
think it is great that the Building Department is going to have to make a determination and send it on to
Planning for their input. We do bare a couple of concerns that you are giving the Building Department
30 days to respond to an applicant but you are only giving the Planning Board five days to respond to
the Building Department. And generally if you meant for the Planning staff to make these
recommendations or determinations, that is one thing. We would hope that you were encouraging the
Planning Board to have input as to these determinations by the Building Department. And I know that
they meet on a weekly basis and but often they often don't have a quorum or they miss there meeting,
ten days doesn't seem like an unreasonable length of time to give the Planning Board to respond to the
Building Department. The other thing we had sort of concerns about it, it's all about public process
and public input and we are glad to see that, we hadn't seen the Planning Board's memo that the
resolution granting a waiver does not take place at a work session, that it is a noticed public heating so,
I mean, oftentimes, neighbors and people have knowledge that the Planning Board doesn't have at
their fingertips and I think it is really, really important that there is an opportunity for the public to be
involved in this process. I know this is something that the Planning Board was doing a couple of years
December 14, 2004 8
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
ago until it was discovered that the Town code did not support that action, so other than those two
minor changes. Thanks.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Thank you, Gwyrm. Those are two good recommendations. Would
anybody else care to address the Board? Yes, Mr. Nickles.
JOHN NICKLES, JR.: Good evening to the Board. John Nickles, Southold. I am also a director of
the Southold Business Alliance. For years the business community has been struggling under a
subjective site plan laxv that has never defined change of intensity of use. The Town Board took a step
in the right direction when they re-instated the site plan determination power back to the Building
Inspector, who is required by New York State law, that was the power that had been given to the
Planning Board. Hoxvever, that part of the law, change of intensity of use, that actually triggers the
need for site plan approval has never been codified and this legislation, all though well intended,
doesn't address that. We believe that there should be a list of things that is codified that the applicant
will know xvill trigger site plan. More importantly, there should also be a list of things that do not
trigger site plan and I think that is a weakness in this code in regard to those two points. It is a step in
the right direction to require that the Building Inspector have to notify the applicant in writing, whether
or not the proposed use is allowed in the code and whether or not a special exception or variance xvill
be required from the Zoning Board of Appeals and it definitely should be known at the outset and that
is good that you have that in here. This is something that should have always been required, to prevent
the occurrence of so many 1 lth hour mistakes, when site plan approval was imminent. It is one of
those things that has really kicked a lot of business people around during the site plan reviexv that must
be fixed. I believe that the coordinated review process, coordinated reviexv process as proposed at the
outset of the site plan process, when it is required, is another step in the right direction. It should not be
an opportunity to reverse a previous determination that favored the applicant. We recognize the
fallible nature of people but something must be done to further ensure that the applicant never has to
go backwards in the process, unless it is the applicant who makes a change to the application that
causes it. We would support the creation of a building permit flow chart. It would be a chart that
would tell an applicant exactly the steps required to obtain a building permit or site plan approval. A
corresponding form, with a checklist of items to be completed would provide the applicant with a
written document that would be signed off on each step of the way, either by the building inspector or
the site plan reviewer. Right now, no system of accountability exists that an applicant can rely upon,
except a court of law. Creating a better paper trail that the applicant can rely upon would make for a
more productive and efficient permit process and prevent most regulatory mistakes. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Thank you, Mr. Nickles. Are there other comments from the floor in
regard to this? Yes, Mr. VanBourgondien.
BOB VANBOURGONDIEN: Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. It has come to the Agricultural
Advisory Committee....Bob VanBourgondien, thank you, Joan. We have a question regarding the
phrase 'retail winery' in Section 100-254 Review procedure and Section 100-256, application
requirements. Chris Baiz has brought it to our attention that the phrase 'retail winery' uses mixed
terms which are opposite one another. A winery is a production aspect, it usually consists of a tank
room, barrel room and case storage. A retail component would be a tasting room where retail sales are
made. So the concern is, if one were building a winery only, a production building, that person should
be afforded the agricultural site plan review process.
December 14, 2004 9
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Okay.
MR. VANBOURGONDIEN: We would like you possibly to tweak that or make that a policy note as
we move forward.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Okay.
MR. VANBOURGONDIEN: Othenvise, we think that is a great step in the right direction.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Thank you, Mr. VanBourgondien. Would anybody else care to address the
Board? Yes, Mrs. Moore.
PATRICIA MOORE: Good evening, Patricia Moore, 51020 Main Road, Southold. I am a practicing
attorney here in Southold and I do a significant amount of site plan work before the Planning Board
here in this town. And ! think this is a wonderful first step and I hope you will adopt it. There is
always time to tweak it but there really needs to be the adoption of the legislation that will allow for
the waiver provisions. There was a time when site plans could, at least as a policy, were waived when
you had an existing use that required very little, if any, modifications to the site. Most times you
would have somebody come before the Planning Board and say, 'If I did this, this and this to address
concerns that I know you would otherwise have, would you waive the site plan?' And there was, up to
maybe two or three years ago, four years ago, there was that process in place. I was hoping that that
provision would be in this code. You haven't gone quite that far but at least providing for shortly after
an application, a waiver process that enables both the Planning Board and even the Building
Department to take into consideration elements that are common sense and our problem with the code
is, it is in a black and white world and most times the legislative bodies, the agencies that are
reviewing it, are afraid to use a little bit of common sense because of the fear of neighbor opposition or
complaints or second guessing ....
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Or litigation.
MS. MOORE: ...or litigation and them are multiple reasons yes, but this at least codifies the
legislative process and as the Planning Board referral or the comments that were made to you through
this process, they do apply certain standards and to the extent that there is some second guessing, it
does give the public the opportunity to review the elements that were reviewed. This is a very good
step, this is a xvonderful step and as far as the time to respond, it should be noted that as a practioner, I
'know that the Building Department makes that, we made that first application to the Building
Department, they then, because they have 10 days, they actually communicate internally with the
Planning Board and other agencies, other Boards of the town. So as far as the time frame goes,
extending the time frame only hurts the applicant because the first 10 days is sitting at the Building
Department waiting for a response and the next five days is the response from the Planning Board,
there is already inter-office communication and I have seen that there has been a lot more of that going
on, xvhich is, you know, a credit to this Board and a credit to the Board, the Chairman's that are on the
Boards, that there is an attempt to coordinate inside the walls of Town Hall before it goes to the outside
world, and I think that is a very good step as well. So between administrative, the administrative
process and the legislative process, maybe we can get through site plans in less time than the standard,
December 14, 2004
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
10
xvhich I advise clients is close to six months and years, in other instances. So, I really hope that you
will proceed in this path. Thank you.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Pat, I just had one question in regard to ....
MS. IvlOORE: Sure.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: .... could you explain again your point on the timeframe? The last point
you made?
MS. MOORE: Well, I think Gwyrm mentioned that there is a timeframe and I don't have the code in
front of me but I, the initial timeframe that gives the Building Department a chance to review it and
places that timeframe I think she mentioned 10 days and I don't recall it off the top of my head; right
now when you come into the Building Department, you make an application, you come in as a
property owner and you want to do something on your site, whether it is an existing business or a
proposed business, you come to the Building Department first. You make a building permit
application, which you anticipate will be a notice of disapproval that identifies the issues, whether it is
Zoning Board, site plan, whatever. Before the Building Department gives that notice, they will have
made a determination that is also based on other Boards, whether it is the Zoning Board from prior
opinions or the Planning Board through their history of the file, there may be an amendment to a site
plan that is the only thing that is needed when there are other site plans on record. That is actually
occurring within those 10 days because of staff meetings and because of inter-office communication.
That has already taken place. I hope that that will continue because that is imperative to not having the
mistakes as John pointed out, when the Building Department gives back a notice of disapproval and
says everything is fine and all of a sudden, you are at the end of the process and someone points out,
'well, gee, the Zoning Board has interpreted and so and so decision that this use is not a use allowed
unless you do this, this and that'. So it is internal in the first 10 days. We have to put a timeframe on
the Planning Board but, my idea would be that it would be running concurrently, rather than an extra
five days but, I am more interested in having you adopt the legislation rather than txveaking it
indefinitely. I want to see it on the books and then, through practice and maybe more coordination we
can reduce the timeframes or even narrow the scope of some of the review. So.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Thank you for your points. Are there other comments on this public
hearing? Yes, ma'am.
PAT MACNAMARA: Good evening, my name is Pat MacNamara and I live on Alvah's Lane in
Cutchogue. Can I approach the bench to give some pictures?
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Absolutely.
MS. MACNAMARA: Ireally don't understand this waive review for construction of buildings strictly
related to agriculture. What does that exactly mean?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: The Planning Board has a rather rigorous set of procedures and
policies for reviewing all applications for commercial buildings. That regards drainage, parking for
retail use, the safety of the public for coming and going and all of those things have to be reviewed
December 14, 2004
Public Hearing--Site Plan Amendments
11
carefully, so that when the structure is built, it conforms with all of those site plan requirements. If a
barn is put up that doesn't have public access and it doesn't have a retail component and the public
constantly using it; is it necessary to provide all of those design policies, all of those design questions;
to have them reviewed and put into the system? This law xvill give the Planning Board the discretion
of how many of those criteria should be used on agricultural structures. It doesn't xvaive them all. It
doesn't say that agricultural structures ride free. It says that the Planning Board will decide on a case
by case basis which of the criteria, of the full site plan review process would be applied in the case of
agricultural structures.
MS. MACNAMARA: Okay. Noxv, as far as the pictures that I have shown you, the trailers. What do
you say about that? Is that a structure or ....
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: Well, let me say this, I believe this issue is before another Board of the
Town at this time and I am not sure that it would be appropriate for me to comment on it while it's
basically in litigation.
MS. MCNAMARA: Because all I have to say is the noise from these refrigeration units, right offthe
side of the road is incredible and I can say that none of you would put up with it or live with it. It is
affecting our health and our welfare.
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: You would have an opportunity, under this la,v, to make that comment
to the Planning Board, as it reviews an application of this nature.
MS. MCNAMARA: Okay. And we will be told when that is coming up?
COUNCILMAN WICKHAM: I don't think that that, I have no idea about that particular application
but in general, agricultural applications that come before the Board, you and other members of the
public would have an opportunity to comment on possible difficulties of this nature.
SUPERVISOR HORTON: Thank you, Mrs. McNamara. Would anybody else care to address the
Board on this public hearing? (No response) We will close this hearing.
Ehzabeth A. Ne~
Southold Town Clerk
#7246
STATE OF NEW YORK)
)SS:
COUNTY OF SUFFOLK)
Joan Ann Weber of Mattituck, in said county, being duly
sworn, says that he/she is Principal clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly
newspaper, published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk
and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed
copy, has been regularly published in said Newspaper once each week for
1 weeks, successively, commencing on the 2nd day of
December ,2004.
" Principal Clerk
Sworn to before me this ~
2004
CHRISTINA VOLINSKI
NOTARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK
NO. Cll-VO6105050
Qualified In Suffolk County
Commission I~xpires February 28, 2008
day of ~ ~
LEGAL NOTICE
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEA~ING
NOTICE IS HEREBY OFteN that
there has bee~ p~esented to the Town
Board of the Town of Southold, Suffo~
County, New York on the 30n day of
November, 2004, a Local Lay, entitled
"A Lo~al Law in Relation to Stop
Signs on Efljah's Lane", a~d
NOTICE IS FURTHER GIVEN
that the Town Board of the Town of
the aforesaid Local Law at the
Southold Town Hall. g3095 Main
Road. Southold New York on the
14tha dav of December. 200d at g:0g
n.m.. at which time all interested per-
sons will be given an opportunity to be
heard.
Il. Chapter 92 of the Vehicle and
Traffic Code of thc To,~ n of Southo[d is
hereby amended as follows:
· § 92-30. Stop intersections with stop
The following highway intersections
IH. SEVERABILITY
ff any clause, sentence, paragraph,
section, or paxt of this Local Law shall
be adjudged by any cou~ of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment
shall not affect the validity of this law ~
a whole or any part thereof other than
the part so decided to be unconstitufion-
al or invalid.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This Local Law shall take effect
immediately upon filing with the
Secretary of State as provided by law.
Dated: November 30, 2004
BY ORDER OF THE TOWN BOARD
OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Elizabeth Neville
Town Clerk