Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-03/12/2001PLANNING BOA_~D ME1V/BERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES March 12, 2001 6:00 p.m. Present were: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Richard Caggiano William J. Cremers Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Craig Turner, Planner Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Mr. Orlowski: Good evening. I'd like to call this meeting to order. The first order of business is for the Board to set Monday, April 16, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board Meeting. Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Ca,q.qiano: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Two March 12, 2001 PUBLIC HEARINGS Subdivisions: Mr. Orlowski: 6:00 p,m, - Reynold Blum at Southold - This proposal is to set off a 1.84 acre parcel from a 63.99 acre parcel, The remaining parcel of 62.15 acres has had Development Rights sold to Suffolk County. The property is located on the north side of the intersection of Main Road (State Route 25) and Lower Road in Southold. SCTM#1000-69-5-18.1 & 18.2 Are there any comments or questions on this set-off? Reynold Blum, Peconic: I'm the owner of the subject premises. I just want to reiterate that what we are doing here is setting off the Development Rights portion from the portion that has the Development Rights intact so that it lines up with the Tax Maps accordingly. I have the receipts of the mailing for you. Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments or questions on this set-off? Hearing none, are there any questions from the. Board? (There were none.) Hearing no further questions or comments, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:07 p.m.) Does the Board have any pleasure? Mr. Ca,q,qiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposal is to set-off a 1.84 acre parcel from a 63.99 acre parcel; and WHEREAS, there is no development impact because of an existing house on the smaller parcel and the Development Rights sale on the whole of the larger parcel; and WHEREAS, conditional sketch plan approval was granted on November 13, 2000, and all of the conditions have been met; and $outhold Town Planning Board Page Three March 12, 2001 WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, did an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action, made a determination of non-significance, and granted a Negative Declaration on November 13, 2000; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on March 12, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the surveys, dated November 28, 2000, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys subject to fulfillment of the following condition. This condition must be met within six (6) months of the resolution: 1. The issue regarding the unapproved merger forming the current Development Rights parcel must be resolved to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and any other applicable agencies. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: 6:05 p.m. - Deerfield Farm - This proposed lot line change and minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 7.362 acres. The property is located on the northwest corner of Main Bayview Road and Jacobs Lane in Southold. SCTM#1000-88-1-1 & 2 Does anyone here have a comment on this minor subdivision? Tom McCarthy: Good evening. I'm the applicant and one of the principals. We have Certified Mail receipts and Affidavit of Posting. Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments on this sUbdivision? Hearing none, are there any questions from the Board? (There were none.) Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Four March 12, 2001 Hearing no questions, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Ca.q,qiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:10 p.m.) Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposal is for a clustered minor subdivision of 4 lots on 7.362 acres, along with a lot line change of 24,780 square feet; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has allowed the applicant to place a restriction on obtaining Certificates of Occupancy Until the required street trees are planted, in place of a performance guarantee; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board will allow the construction of accessory structures in the front yard portion of Lot 3, between the building envelope and Main Bayview Road, provided that all necessary approvals from the Zoning Board of Appeals and Building Department are received; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, did an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action, made a determination of non-significance, and granted a Negative Declaration on June 28, '1999; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on March 12, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant final approval and endorse the final surveys, dated July 28, 1999. Mr. Ca,q,qiano: Second the motion. Southold Town Plannin,q Board Page Five March 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Site Plans: Mr. Orlowski: 6:10 p.m. - Mullen Motors - This proposed site plan is for a new parking lot and enhancements to an existing parking lot. The property is located on Locust Lane in Southold. SCTM#1000-62-3-11, 19, 22.1 & 24.1 Does anyone have any comments on this site plan? Hearing none, are there any questions from the Board? (There were none.) Since there are no questions, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Caaaiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:13 p.m.) Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for Mullen Motors, is for a new parking lot and enhancements to an existing parking lot; and WHEREAS, Mullen Realty LP is the owner of the property known and designated as Mullen Motors, Route 25, Southold, SCTM#1000-62-3-11, 19, 22.1 & 24.1; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on December 27, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this action isa Type II Action and not subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617; and Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Six March 12, 2001 WHEREAS, this site plan, last revised January 18, 2001, was certified by the Building Inspector °n March 8, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; 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 authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys, dated January 18, 2001, subject to a one year review from date of building permit. Mr. Ca,q,qiano: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: 6:15 p.m. - Peconic Bay Winery -This proposed site plan is for a 10,515 square foot tasting building on 27.031 acres located on Route 25 in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-103-1-19.11 & 19.2 Are there any comments or questions on this proposed site plan? Robert Lurid: Good evening. I'm the architect for the project. I have the Affidavit of Posting and the certified mailing receipts, Mr. Odowski: Are there any other comments on this site plan? Hearing none, are there any questions from the Board? (There were none.) Since there are no further questions, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Ca,q,qiano: So move, Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Southold Town Plannir~,q Board Pa,qe Seven March 12, 2001 Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:16 p.m.) Mr. Ca.q.qiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for the Peconic Bay Winery, is to construct a 10,515 square foot winery building; and WHEREAS, Lavcor Agricultural is the owner of the Property known and designated as Peconic Bay Winery, Route 25, Cutchogue, SCTM#1000-103-1-19.2 & 19.11; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on September 22, 2000; 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 March 12, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a building width variance on December 7, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee has approved the elevation drawings on February 27, 2001; and WHEREAS, this site plan, dated .January 31, 2001, was certified by the Building Inspector on March 8, 2001; and WHEREAS, the applicant hereby agrees and understands that if the site plan which receives stamped Health Department approval differs in any way from the proposed conditional site plan on which the Planning Board held a public hearing and voted on, then the Planning Board has the right and option, if the change is material to any of the issues properly before the Planning Board, to hold a public hearing on this "revised" site plan application and review its conditional approval; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2001 the applicant signed a statement agreeing not to object to a new public hearing and Planning Board review of the revised application; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore $outhold Town Planning Board Page Eight March 12, 2001 RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the surveys, dated January 31, 2001, subject to fulfillment of the following condition. This condition must be met within six (6) months of the resolution: 1. Review by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Odowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: Mr. Orlowski: Cross Sound Ferry - This proposed new site plan is to amend the June 6, 1995 site plan for the Cross Sound Ferry Company Terminal. The subject site encompasses three parcels located on the west and east sides of SR 25 at its eastern- most terminus in Orient. SCTM#1000-15-9-10.1 and 11.1 and 15.1 This hearing is held open from the previous meeting and it's also going to be held open again because we have not yet completed the SEQRA Review. I will not close this hearing tonight. I will leave it open. Anyone wishing to make some new comments to us or talk to us about it are welcome to now. I have to apologize; we're missing two members tonight. They are away so we're short some members but we're here to listen. Freddie Wachsber,qer, Southold Citizens for Safe Roads: We have asked Steven Schneider of Schneider Engineering to review the Traffic Study and I would like to ask him to make some statements and he has some questions, i didn't give him a lot of time to look at the document. He's had them for a few daYs so we're glad that the hearing is going to be kept open additionally because there is material still not'submitted that we will need to review. With your permission, after he makes his presentation, I would like to make a statement. Thanks. Steven Schneider, Schneider Engineering, 356 Middle Country Road, Coram, NY: Gentlemen, I'd like to give you my C.V. for your records. Very briefly, I am a licensed professional engineer for thirty-one years right now, doing traffic engineering. I have a degree from Ohio State UniversitY - Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering and a Masters from Polytechnic Institute of New York in Traffic and Transportation Engineering and I have been an expert witness in front of almost all of the Boards in Nassau and Suffolk Counties and my C.V. will give you that information as well. Southold Town Planning Board Page Nine March 12, 2001 As was mentioned earlier, I've had just a little bit of time to review the documents but I'd like to just go very briefly over some of my major comments as a professional engineer. First, on the EAF there is a Snack Bar to the east of the site. The re-grade of a lot to prevent ponding and potholes was mentioned that should be done but there was no mention of any of the drainage or run-off in the report and I thought that was part of the items that should have been in the EAF Report. The terminal building well exceeded the allowable limits of Trichloroethine by more than 100%. You may be aware of some of these comments but, again, you've got to understand where I'm coming from today. There's no mention in the report of any traffic generator or any traffic being generated by the ferries where obviously there is quite a number of additional people being generated by the new ferry. There is no mention about the increased demand on the services. The details on the run-off are vague. The narrative mentions loose gravel pavements. The Raynor site plan, which is the one I think you have that was received a month or so ago, shows a different type of a pavement that was being used - actually a compacted stone blend of two inches was being used instead of the loose gravel that was mentioned in the EAF. So there are some discrepancies in the EAF as well. There are no drainage calculations in the EAF. No mention of existing or proposed parking totals in the EAF that should have been in here. I was able to review the Nelson and Pope comments and the one glaring item that was not reviewed by your traffic engineer, I believe it was your traffic engineer for the Town, was the parking issue. There was absolutely no mention of the parking issue in the Traffic and Safety Study and that should have been a major item discussed in there, especially when it was discussed originally in 1995: Just moving on to the Raynor site plan, in the site plan there are absolutely no spaces shown on the Snack Bar Property. One does not know how many spaces they can fit in there. The aisle widths, etc.; the space widths, etc. None of that was shown. No drainage, parking or sanitary calculations are on the site plan. No illustration of how parking was to be laid out on either the Snack Bar Lot or the restricted parking area to the east. Dunn Engineering's Report was the next item I reviewed. Machine counts were taken on midweek - not on weekends. The ferry traffic versus the background traffic that was discussed in his report, he had mentioned that they claimed minimal impact of the new facility with the new amount of vehicles - in this case, ferries going to the site. Dunn Engineering's charts, Figure 2-7, show that the ferry traffic is significant when compaq'ed to the background volume traffic, several times exceeding 50% and often exceeding 20% or more'. In my mind, that is a significant difference. Table 12 in his report refutes the earlier assertion that the traffic generated by the ferry is minimal. They indicate clearly that there will be a 30% weekday increase, a 20% Saturday increase and an 18% Sunday increase. None of these percentages are minimal. I tried to understand the parking that is either required or on site. According to Mr. Dunn's report, they indicated that there were 345 spaces on site. I did not catch any of those. I caught the 69 for the west on site but absolutely none were shown to the east of the facility or to the east of Route 25. I believe in his earlier report he had 155 spaces, but in the latest report he Southold Town Planning Board Page Ten March 12, 2001 shows 345 spaces on-site 'parking. I did not see any plans that indicated that. Again, I may have missed it because I'm only involved in the project for a few days. Basically, based on the Positive Declaration that you had in September of 1996 where parking demand is a major impact, I don't believe that Nelson and Pope, in their study, actually reviewed significantly or sufficiently enough, that parking issue. Especially when you decided in 1996 that it was a major concern to the Town. Dunn Engineering claims that the ferry-generated traffic is minimal compared to actual traffic. Dunn's figures and tables, in his report, show that anywhere from 5-50% would be increased due to the new ferry and the average was approximately 25%. Again, a major increase. The site plan calls for the parking lot to use a compacted stone blend pavement. I · mentioned that earlier. This type of pavement behaves almost like asphalt. The EAF Narrative states differently - that the pavement will be a loose stone which will generate significantly less run-off. Either way, there are no drainage calculations on the site plan. If compacted stone blend is used, a better grading plan will be necessary to prevent the run-off into the Bay. They are not allowed to have the run-off going into the Bay, as you understand. So it's very critical that a drainage plan be completed by the applicant. I would also like to note - aS I understand it, they used a 2.1 passenger per vehicle for the high-speed ferry to be in place and I'm just rounding the numbers off. They have somewhere around 700 people using the ferry over 3 successive hours which would be at 8:00 in the morning, 10:00 and 12:00 noon. Obviously, all those people will have to park their cars at the site, go to Connecticut and do what they've got to do and then come back. If they've got 700 vehicles and they divide that by the 2.1 persons per vehicle, I think that's where they come up with the 345 spaces that are required, realizing that is only for the new high-speed ferry. It's not for the existing ferry that is being used today. I was out there this past Saturday which was a beautiful day in the winter - not at peak season - the lot to the west of the ferry was completely full. Not only was it full but Route 25, which is the one that extends towards the ferry, was also full as well as about, ! would say, 20-25 cars in the Snack Bar Parking Area. What it tells me is that not only do they have a problem of parking today without the high-speed ferry which is not in use right now, but you've got to add what the requirements are today, the 69 vehicles or whatever the parking space requirements are - I believe it's 69 right now - you've got to add that to the 345 to determine what their real requirements are going to be. So, we're talking about well over 400 parking spaces. I have not seen any plans that indicate how many parking spaces they can fit on any of the properties that they own in the area. I think that's very critical before any final decisions are made. I'd also like to note that even in Mr. Dunn's report, the monthly ferry counts in March is 40,000 passengers. 40,000 in March. In August, it's 180,000. So, seeing what was out there in March, was only a small percentage of the number of cars and/or people that will be using the facility. I'd also like to note that I have not seen any analysis of the split of the current ferries' cars versus walk-on passengers. I know many times out in Port Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Eleven March 12, 2001 Jefferson, and over here as well, I've seen them - I use the Port Jeff. Ferry quite often- and there's a lot of people walking on, as much as 50-75 depending on the time of year and day of the week as well. I think that also has to be taken into account. People are either dropped off or picked up, which is another issue. When ferries do come in and people have to be picked up at the ferry, where are those cars going to park? They can't park in the parking lot. The parking lot is already full. These are some of the major issue that I have. I only had, again, a few days to look at it but my major concerns are parking right now. And I've seen nothing in any of their reports that would clearly indicate to me that they've satisfied what they would be required t° have from a parking standpoint. I'd like to be able to get any other plans that may be submitted to the Town through the organization. I'd be more than happy to review it. Thank you very much for your time. Freddie Wachsber,qer, SCFSR: These hearings have gone on for so long and provoked so much discourse that I believe it is necessary to back up and state, first of all, what this issue is not about. First of all, it's not about transporting produce to New England. It began with the introduction of the passenger ferry by Cross Sound Ferry without having prepared a prior application and site plan to address the increased intensity of use and the need for parking as they should have done. Had they done so, this would have been resolved years ago without all this waste of time and money. New application or not, that's still what this is about and you, as a Planning Board, have not only the right but the responsibility to address that and to address the ten areas of potential negative impact that were identified by your consultants five years ago. In 1995, Judge Henry said "Our denial for the temporary restraining order and injunctive relief now should not be construed as carte blanche for defendant's unfettered expansion if it conflicts with the publiC good". The expansion of Cross Sound Ferry has indeed been unfettered and the extent of the conflict with the public good has yet to be analyzed. You, as members of the Planning Board, have the responsibility to conduct that analysis with a full and public Environmental Review. This is also not about whether Cross Sound Ferry donates to local charities or even whether it brings business to the Town, which is questionable. It is about State and Town Law. As we stated at the beginning of this action, Article 617.4(b)(10) of SEQRA Legislation requires a Type I Designation for any proposal involving more than 2.5 acres which is substantially contiguous to any publicly owned or operated parkland, as this is. And 617.14(g)(4) states that the potential impact on a critical environmental area must be evaluated in the determination of significance and this project is in the CEA and your consultant, in 1996, determined that the intensity of use generated by the passenger ferry could have a negative impact on the CEA. This is also not about philosophy. I don't know what Inter-Science's definition of philosophy is but, to us, the ferries, the cars, and the traffic are reality. However, there is much in Inter-Science's EAF Narrative that I would characterize as fantasy - Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Twelve March 12, 2001 extrapolations based on suppositions, based on virtually nothing at all. As the most significant example, the application by blandly claiming pre-existing nonconforming parking on the Snack Bar Parcel, ignores the legal necessity of' substantial evidence of use as a parking lot before 1959. Archival aerial photographs clearly show a vehicle- free farm field in 1955. There are no vehicles visible in 1969 or in 1980. There are a handful of cars in 1978 and 1988 which, if this were accepted as evidence of pre- existing parking, would mean that I could photograph my driveway during a Board Meeting and claim pre-existing use as a parking lot. On the contrary, I believe these photographs are substantial evidence of no prior use as a parking lot before 1996 when the Snack Bar Parcel begins to be used as such in violation of Cross Sound Ferry's approved site plan. I'm assuming you have copies of these photographs. If not, I'll be happy to give you copies. This is also not about drains and railroad ties, as Inter-Science would have us believe - although drainage must be a component. It is about the cars, the parking, the traffic, the impact on our environment and quality of life. The preliminary presentation at Greenp:)rt High School of the North Fork Traffic Needs Assessment Data .included the information that during the summer more than 50% of the traffic on the road is using the North Fork as a bridge between New England and western Long Island. There is only one method of getting to New England and the increase in traffic is a reality. Let's just look at weekday counts of vehicles between Orient Point and Narrow River Road conducted by the DOT. The September weekday in 1992, the estimated daily average was 2,500. On an April weekday - April, mind you - in 1998 it was 3,500. That's an increase of almost 50% and not even in high season. The only significant event between 1992 and 1998 was the introduction of the high-speed ferry. Finally, What this is really about is planning. Of course, businesses plan for the future. But, where is the Town's planning? Since the construction of the new facility at Orient Point in 1986, the size of boats and numbers of ferry trips have grown exponentially. There has been no planning as to how and whether to accommodate this growth of traffic. As the site plan was never enforced, it determined no limits. This Planning Board had the opportunity five years ago to come to grips with this problem and make determinations that could enable you to plan for the future, but you let the opportunity slip away. Now, there is much lost time and, therefore, the passenger ferry is a reality and we know it's not likely to go away. But, there is still the future and inevitable efforts at future expansion to consider and you still have the responsibility to do that. It's probably the most important, most significant question that's in front of this Board. We realize that'it is a difficult responsibility, involving difficult decisions. But you, the members of the Planning Board, have chosen to accept this responsibility and we, the citizens of Southold Town, are dependent on you to do this. No one else can. It is your responsibility to grapple with this issue: the potential conflict with the public good - with a complete analysis and public scrutiny of the operation and its impact on the environment and the quality of life of your citizens. Where could unfettered expansion lead? Ultimately, to widening the road, paving over family cemeteries and front yards, turning Southold Town into a traffic corridor. Only your decisions can keep that from happening. I urge you not to turn your back on Southold citizens again. To quote the Southold Town Planning Board Page Thirteen March 12, 2001 immortal words of Elizabeth Taylor as Cleopatra as she and Antony are about to flee before the arrival of the Roman legions - "better too late than never". Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Are there any other comments? Joan E,qan: Very good, Freddie. I spoke before you at the last meeting and you probably can't tell me right off the top whether you looked into any of the suggestions that I had made. I think it was rather strange that I didn't receive notice of this meeting until, ~ believe, last Saturday's mail - maybe Friday - which did not give the average person who works - fortunately I'm retired, right at home so my time is a little bit more free - but there are many citizens in the Town of Southold who have to work, take care of their children, blah, blah, blah and so you don't have a very good rePresentation. I did take the time and effort, at my expense, to call the New York State Police, the Southold Police and the Riverhead Police to hopefully have them here, hopefully as representatives, to give you - as I had suggested to you at the last meeting that you look into. I don't think you probably can answer that question to me now but if it hasn't been done, it should be done. I hate to repeat myself but we have a very, very serious problem. I would also like to know whether you took the opportunity to look into some kind of parking in the State Park where the Orient Point Inn used to be where nobody seems to go. I think it's very beautiful but right now I think it's fairly useless. And I think I further suggested that you build a walk bridge across. I further looked into and spoke to the head of the New York State Police in Hampton Bays with regard to putting the motorcycles on the road. That may or may not be viable by insurance but I think a few units can be posted there during times. I don't think you've done your homework. As ~ told you, I'm a eucharistic minister in the Catholic Church and I will continue to pray for you that you get some insight - get out there yourself. Walk the walk and talk the talk. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Thank you. Are there any other comments? Eric Bressler, Esq., Southold Citizens For Safe Roads: Mr. Chairman, Members of the Board: I'll be brief. I think it's apparent from the comments from the engineer tonight, Mr. Schneider, who had only a day or two to look at the submissions to the Board, that there are serious problems here. The first thing that is evident is that the Positive Declaration, which was properly made five years ago, is unchanged and there is no fact before the Board which would indicate that there should be a change. There's no reason for a change and the submissions to the Board, which had holes big enough that you could drive trucks through, add nothing to the half-baked application that's before the Board. He had only two days and he found problems with every single document. These people haven't told you how many spaces there are going to be; they haven't told you the configuration; they haven't told you what the surface composition is going to be. The EAF is defective; the Traffic Study is defective; the map is defective - every single piece of paper. You guys have them in front of you. You can look at them. You can see what he said is so. This Board cannot consider doing anything unless and until it has before it all of the facts that it needs in order to make an informed decision and that includes at a minimum of consideration of everything that's going on down at that parcel. Don't Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Fourteen March 12, 2001 mistake what Southold Citizens for Safe Roads is doing as simple opposition to anything - to progress, to whatever project wants to be carried on down there. That is not the case. What this group stands for and what I'm urging you to support is responsible planning, growth and limitations down there consistent with the safety, health and welfare of the community and this is not what you're getting. You're getting, as I said before, half-baked plans or holes. That's not what this Board deserves and not what the Town deserves and I think the Board should insist that a competent and fully environmentally sound plan is put before you for your consideration. We are hopeful that in the future that the ferry will come to the table with these things and work with us instead of against us. I think the latest submission is evidence that they have not yet reached that point but we are hopeful that they will do so. But in the interim, we urge this Board to fulfill its mandate and its responsibility and deny the ferry the unfettered right to expand without considering the health, safety and welfare. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Are there any other comments? Gwen Schroeder, North Fork Environmental Council: I just want to endorse the comments that were made by Southold Citizens and their engineer. I'm not a traffic engineer but when I looked at that site plan, it was evident to me that there were big gaps in it. At the last hearing, representatives from Cross Sound Ferry stated that they didn't want to pave that area and we believe that to be true. It shouldn't be paved but they have to give us some numbers. They can't just leave it blank. When I read the Traffic Study, it was so counter-intuitive to what most of us know to be true - that this is an impactful - I mean this is the most intense use in a Marine II Zone in the Town and it deserves to be carefully looked at. I have to say that I'm a frequent customer of Cross Sound Ferry. My daughter goes to school in Amherst so three or four times a year I appreciate that ! get there safely. It's a clean boat. I've taken some other boats and it's taught me to appreciate their operation but it's been said so many times before, it's not a popularity contest or how good they run their business - it's about the law and SEQRA and NFEC just encourages you to do a Full Environmental Review. Thanks. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Robert Young: I live on Route 48, past the Sunset Motel. We've been there about eighteen years now and we've spent a lot of time getting in and out of our driveway; spent a lot of time working on the landscaping at the front of the property. Over the last five years it's really frightening to be able to stand out there and watch these huge trailer trucks practically blow you down as you're standing alongside the highway, if you're walking alongside the highway, if you're bicycling alongside the highway. There are going to be fatalities on this highway as a result of the increase - not only the increase in traffic but the increase in the size of the trucks that are now using that ferry. We find it very difficult in crossing the road, turning into our driveway, to even find a way, a spot of getting into the driveway at some point as the traffic from the ferry is passing. When this project across the road is completed with its thirty some houses, it's going to be incredible. The people will not be able to get out of that project - that development - as well. The speed of these trucks is incredible. The wind pressure you get from just Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Fifteen March 12, 2001 standing up and cleaning up the front of the property will knock you down. ~ urge you to look much more carefully at the safety, not only at the parking but the safety of the highway as well. I've lost some very good friends up in the Southold area. ~ can see that happening again and again as a result of what's happening to traffic. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any more comments? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to hold this hearing open. Mr. Ca.q,qiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. O.K. Thank you for your comments. See you next month. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Final Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: F.I.D.C.O. Club Lots - These lot line changes are to change the layout of 10 existing lots which are shown on the Fishers Island Development'Corporation Subdivision which was approved by the Planning Board on September 9, 1991. The result of the lot line changes will be a reduction in the number of lots from 10 lots to 8 buildable lots and 1 non-buildable wetland lot which will be retained by FIDCO. The property is located on the northeast corner of Peninsula Road and East End Road on Fishers Island. SCTM#1000-10-5-(12.10-12.12) Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, Fishers Island Development Corporation (FIDCO) is the owner of the property known and designated as SCTM#1000-10-5-12. 8 & (12.10-12.12), located on the northeast corner of Peninsula Road and East End Road on Fishers Island; and $outhold Town Planning Board Pa.qe Sixteen March 12, 2001 WHEREAS, the applicant desired to change the original lot layout approved by the Planning Board on September 9, 1991, because of wetlands located on the southwestern portion of the property; and WHEREAS, the proposal reduces the number of buildable lots from ten to eight; and WHEREAS, conditional final approval was granted on January 26, 1998, and all of the conditions have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board endorse the final surveys dated December 26, 2000. Mr. Ca.q.qiano: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: North Bayview Associates - This minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 15.973 acres located on North Bayview Road in Southold. SCTM#1000-79-8-12 Mr. CaQqiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, the proposed minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 15.973 acres; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on February 12, 2001; and WHEREAS, all requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant final approval to the surveys dated November 16, 2000, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. $outhold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Seventeen March 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Sketch Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Ralph & Catherine Caselnova - This proposed minor subdivision is for 2 lots on 15.68 acres. Development Rights have been sold to Suffolk County on 11.32 acres. The property is located on the north side of State Route 25 in Orient. SCTM#1000-18-3-9.8 & 9.9 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposed subdivision is for 2 lots on 15.68 acres on the north side of Main Road (State Route 25), east of Platt Road in Orient; and WHEREAS, Development Rights have been sold to Suffolk County on 11.32 acres of the property; and WHEREAS, a variance from the Zoning Board of Appeals (Appl. No. 4889) was received on December 7, 2000 for undersized Lot 2; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch plan approval to the subdivision map, dated May 31, 2000. Mr. Ca.q.qiano: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Cremers: In addition: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board start the lead agency coordination process on this unlisted action. Mr. Ca.q,qiano: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Southold Town Planning Board Page Ei,qhteen March 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Review of Reports: Mr. Orlowski: Paradise Isles - This proposed 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 Southold. SCTM#1000-53-6-46.2 and 57-2-1.1 Mr. Ca,q,q ano Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: RESOLVED, that the SouthOld Town Planning Board adopt the Engineer's Report, dated January 24, 2001, with the clarification that all of the items have been addressed by the Planning Board. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. SITE PLANS Set Hearings: Mr. Orlowski: Orient by the Sea Marina - This proposed site plan is for the construction of an 800 sq. ft. restroom and storage facility. The property is located on State Route 25 in Orient. SCTM#1000-15-9-8 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this action is a Type II Action and not subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (Article 8), Part 617. Mr. Ca,qgiano: Second. Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Nineteen March 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Cremers: in addition: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, April 16, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated March 1, 2001. Mr. Ca.q.qiano: Second. Mr. Orlowskh Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. SITE PLANS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Lead Agency Coordination: Mr. Orlowski: Tidy Car (William Penney !11) - This proposed site plan is for an 8,645 sq. ft, storage addition to an existing building. The property is located on CR 48 in Southold. SCTM#1000-55-5-2.2 Mr. Ca.q.qiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board start the lead agency coordination process on this unlisted action. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Southold Town Planning Board Page Twenty March 12, 2001 APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the October 2, 2000 minutes. Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Ca.a.aiano: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the October 23, 2000 minutes. Mr. Ca.q.qiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries~ Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the November 13, 2000 minutes. Mr. Caa.aiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Southold Town planning Board Page Twenty-One March 12, 2001 That's the end of the agenda. If anybody else would like to have something put on th,a record, they may. If not, we're going to adjourn into a Work Session. I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Mr. Ca,q,qiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers. Mr. 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 Orlow~ki, Jr."~, ~l~;i~,~an RECEIVED / f . '