Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-115.-3-9 F ~ '- .... '-. Zoning Board of Appeals (wriLlen c~mments within 60 days of request) Board of Trustees I SITE PUN Presub missIOn conference (within 30 days of wriLlen request) Complete application received (within 4 months of presub. conference) Applical10n reviewed at work session (within 10 davs of receipt) ~ o Applicant advised of necessarv revisions (within 30 days of review) Revised sub mission received Lead Agency Coordination SEQRA determination I g REFERRED TO: C> / - .. - "'" zl- o~ Cl tJ,J I- -< U o .....l <I:;:; .... ..: .. 0- ....w Ifl-O::: --< ~::J <0 ....:IV> 0- ~ I- "., Ifl - :c z I- - RECEIVED: Building Department (certification) . Suffolk County Department of Planning 1)epartment of Transportation -State Department of Transportation - County Suffolk County Dept. of Health Fire Commissioners I / Draft Covenants and Restrictions Filed Covenants and Restrictions ~Landscape plan/ Lighting plan Curb Cut approval ~ Heallh approvat ... /' ,.. /" Drainage plan Reviewed by Engineer Approval of site plan' -with conditions Endorsement of site plan ~ ...... .. ...""..... Certificate of Occupancy inspection - ..., ,/., I...... dne year review I:;:;,': leK I ~@ r;ootICl ~~ f'W'llro;(1 ~~ '3 - f1 ~.7J- ~~c.- lo-I'i~1)-- GJ~ f'W'llCl ~~ lOiJ f;w'llr.::;;lc:1 ~ ~ e:!! 1'OO'llr;;;;l ~~ r;z;mr:::::l ~E.J f'W'Ur;;;;l ~E.J Sent: 12. - 'i;~'j' I--. Reccived.{:2 .-.:< <7-IJ..... Ne>J'If ((tcp I~'I~ I~.'I~ [.iOO'Llr.::l ~~ [.iOO'Llr.::l ~~ fNij1Jr;;;;-) -~~ l~llEJ (:iW'l]r.::l ~~ [.iOO'Llr;;:l ~~ -- I="~ ---"-- '. , \ ," t I I ! l'; , .., /' /- ( ( kK > ..: --- SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK --------------------------------------x TARTAN OIL CORP., I;S--J- r Petitioner, -against- BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, STIPULATION OF SETTLEMEN'r Respondent. Index No. 88-10700 --------------------------------------x SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK --------------------------------------x TARTAN OIL CORP., Petitioner, -against- Index No. 88-10701 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, Respondent. --------------------------------------x IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the petitioner Tartan Oil Corp. (hereinafter Tartan) and the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southo1d, (hereinafter the Zoning Board), that the above Article 78 proceedings are settled upon the following terms and conditions: 1. Tartan shall apply to the Southold Planning Board for site plan approval, which site plan, if granted, will be conditioned upon Tartan's obtaining the variances and special exemption permits recited hereinbelow. -1- ( r , 2. Upon the grant of conditional site plan approval, Tartan shall apply to the Zoning Board for a variance for placement of the canopy, as an accessory structure, in the front yard for a variance of the height requirements applicable to the canopy. 3. Simultaneously with the hearings on the Zoning variance applications set forth in paragraph 2 above' the Board shall reopen the previous variance application fo' the convenience store and the special exception application for self-service and full-service gasoline sales, both of which had been denied without prejudice. In the event site plan approval and the variances set forth in paragraph 2 above are obtained by the petitioner, then the convenience store variance and special exemption applications will be I granted subject to the following conditions: ~ food service to be limited to packaged items, plus the heating of previously prepared foods, all for off-premises consumption; b) no alcoholic beverages to be sold before 5:00 p.m. on all days when school is in session; ~) all lighting at rear of property be shielded from adjoining residential property, in addition to all site plan requirements set by the Planning Board; 4. Upon Tartan's obtaining and complying with the approvals set forth above, the Building Inspector would -2- . "..::':.;~':5f:;?~1:':~l!i~." ~O J...lle U...PpJ:OpJ:J.a~e oeJ:"-J.fica"-e of "",.:?. "::'j.~~ ........,~~".,.,--..",...' ~ ~ .,. ell&hOIl'J...d ~';;:~~~;n'~y.::";;';'~~: j 5. Both proceedings shall be discontinued without costs or disbursements to either party and this stipulation can be submitted by either party to a Justice of this court to have it "so ordered" without further notice to the other party. Either party can file this stipulation without further notice to the other party. 6. See rider annexed heretO. Dated: october 12.-( 1989 " . ~.72J Jw./-..dj~' ...L_.L~ SMITH, FINJ<ELSTE-~" l.\JNDBERGO ISLER and YAJ<ABOSJ<I Attorneys for Respondent Office & P.o. Address 456 Griffing Avenue P.O. Box 389 Riverhead, New York (516) 727-4100 So ordered this day - of , 1989. J. s. c. .,~c;. . BARRY T LLERING, pre ~dent of Tartan Oil corp. a--wX~ LEVINE & ROBINSON, P.C. Attorneys for petitioner Office & P.O. AddresS 50 Charles Lindbergh Blvd. Mitchel Field, NY 11553 (516) 794-6900 -3- ,",.---~--~. T_ r T~ ,81-' r \P> 0 H 0 . 'rt 0 ' o I ~'- ~ ~ i ~. I \1 t ~ \,f i i \, - " \1 I"~ I ,I , \ ; \ - i , I I ( Rider to Stipulation 6. It is agreed and understood that all prior proceedings between the parties remain open until the Planning Board and Board of Appeals render final decision herein, and that if Tartan chooses to challenge any such final decision. no statute of limitation or res judicata defense will be raised by such Board as to those prior proceedings. Dated: /~/ GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals / . , -7. '--?7u. '12..- ..d-z., <.. " ./ SMITH, FINKELSTEIN, LUNDBE ISLER and YAKABOSKI Attorneys for Respondent 456 Griffing Avenue P.O. Box 389 Riverhead, New York (516) 727-4100 "R,,,, '> _ BARRY T LLERING, P ldent of Tarian Oil Corp. /~ LEV~oi.Q.;r~" P,C Attorneys for Petition~r Office & P.O. Address 50 Charles Lindbergh Blvd. Mitchel Field, New York 11553 (516) 794-6900 ') ~I ,I- rj'-<- / y...u;,. -<-'-'-'- A -y edT' cc_ / (l\ - "-~, . / 1.-1 '-- . S-~. ~.~ U;;9 ~)L ~,,"'>c~' I. gj-J..Ld-j '1- ILL/. 7f' '7 I J..(~(.k1.. / - /"'6~~. /.L~.u d-ea.L<.~)- PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS -('</.oJ.,. Z~<9 Bennelt Orlowski. Jr., Chairman c~~r ) George Rilchie Lalham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards scan L. HARRIS Supervisor Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Soulhold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 February 20, 1992 William D. Moore Suite 3 Clause Commons Main Road Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Tartan Oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM* 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: The Planning Board has received your letter of January 31, 1992, containing a traffic study and one copy of a site plan. The Board will get an estimate from its consultant to review the study and you will be informed of the charge. This fee must be paid before the Board can continue with its review. The site plan is incomplete; a copy of the Board's letter to you of June 8, 1990, is enclosed for your guidance. A Long Environmental Assessment Form and a copy of the deed to the property is required to complete your application. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. Very truly yours, ---:7. //./ /'~ r;Y1f.JU,Ift- M'Y!O)/,}/tl...(_ ' v ~ Bennett Orlowski, Jr. ~ '~JI Chairman cc: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman, Zoning Board of Appeals Victor Lessard, Principal BUilding Inspector L~--- . "~~ l.~. Q~"'';\..... ..~y~ ~~ == . "i Cl :z li "en ,.,,'1 '\ ~. ~fj ~ 4'", iJ"v ~"OJ. + ~"S-c:l ~~ /J I /./ /~(.,- r jJ P6 '/C/Df t';;;;~k( :~ THOMAS H. WICKHAM Supervisor . LAURY L. DOWD Town Attorney Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1889 Fax (516) 765-1823 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM TO: ZONING BOARD BUILDING DEPARTMENT PLANNING BOARD FROM: RE: DATE: TOWN ATTORNEY CONVENIENCE STORES ACCESSORY TO GAS STATIONS JULY 27, 1995 The question has been asked whether gas stations can have convenience stores as an accessory use. Attached is a recent case out of our judicial district that holds that convenience stores are a valid accessory use unless the ordinance specifically provides otherwise. Do you think Southold's ordinance needs to be amended as suggested in the case, or is the Code adequate as is? Please let the Code Committee know if you have any suggestions. Attachment r- TOJrfl & & n ['fj m r~' inil "nil ,/ U L JUL 2 8 1995// L ~- ~ .:;~'~:;~ ,I :-lOW TOWN -i '_AhNlj.~G BOARD ~ .. .., '24 "-': " ';.;, , '",.;,-, NEWYORK LA' i...'-:'-.'.J., ,~-.._.. ,--;,,{'.;..-~.....; , ::""'~':,';;:rJ . C'. ..():.... . "IJ"~:; ~D'T'.'T"\I . '" . .:' .' :'~.l. -"].J..' _\:_.. _, I fi !t>}:'i,-:::~~_:?;t~;:~\.". i"v, '; ',' " ":r.c . _ . , . t-~'''''~"\'' r,-' , ....~:::)1'~.. ntence store products 'Could.be found In . .. . ,. close to one-thlrd of all stations selling" Se. Cb....tz.'d.;d.... u. d.'. fciatDe.'p". artinent~\~S!~~e~~~~~:~~~':oW;rJ..:~ . . "".'-\-,.","', "....'-.'.'. ,"", """,' . ,.., -, ".....-". '-, Inthl.ln.tance,therecordrenectsaref~ . " . ",.,.' ." : ....... . '. . . erence fo the VllIlIge of Lynbrook'szonlng XU..,. i..r,tlkt."li)ll',';:;..' " ~,'" -: .. '. ordlnancedennltlonof"accessoryuse'~ , <,' "~"r ,:1. ~l ',..,,"1 '1,01; .fr,' ; ,~;t-. wu~~tlitloD'alIYbased.MQfe.pedncaJ1y:' .:whleffiWhUeslmnartotheNewYOrkCI~ , ",<.,' :"NASSAU"", ,,' petltloner'..xpert FteclertckWood co _, ordln.nce;doesnot.ppeartoeltherln- '.. .. .'. . ,i',' '.. ceded Inte;.lla;th.tpetltlonerneti.lr ~ .dude or,exdude. gasoline service station. COUNT~"'''' ~ ;'"' I ve I , J The peUttoner allO contends that around ',f.1'..;.I" 7\-\ :...., (5"~ percent return on Ih Investment. 1. the comer from the premises, at the inter~ I ' '". , ,....... < . ,. . .' 1 .. Whl e Its return baa .pparently dlmlnfjhed section of Merrick Road .nd Earle Avenue , . _.......ttll~ '; '1 significantly lit recent 190, peUtloner has within the village there II a Shell station ed . , . ;: i' ., .. eo: not established thallt cannot yl.ld . rea- [ ., . 2 . :il.I}1"t'I~I~!fJ. t:r...,',., !,: sonableretumatpresent ',.' ,thathoUJel'afullretailconvenlencestore ., ,. U' .", ., . Llk~'" th D__~' ' .Iong with the service statlon. 1 " III ~RE~E COURT ". eri ...,se. e ~u s concerns .bout al- . If. municipality does not Intend lor. dls -". ," II" J . > ~; I, .) t ng the essential character of the neigh.. convenience store to be considered as an rec Jpedce MeCaIti-e~~'ll :~...~ ' "J '~r~,'l' :"1H . . boll rhood_~d an boverll pn~~tnl sifi~tion of traf. ,! accessory use to an automotive service sta- SWE ,,' . ~,- . '" [hi:1"~~'':''::' J'J< ' cweren:llona e. eu oners . 'al th Id" I dl"th pit< " .~..." , "-~;'.r' appllcaUorHo reVerie and annul respon:" l ,uon, en cons erauon 0 8~en nil e . , ZO ING BOARD OF'APP,EALS OF THE VIL. dent's JulY 30, 1992 detemiln.tlon (Index " zoning ordinance to provide .CceslOry suc hAGE OF L YNBROOK-Th Cardl al" '. No. 23855/92) Is therefore denied use In the contex! of automotive service len . lh 7.! e -;s , ..~ue J th ' Art) . ,station mu.t relate directly to the care and cop to be determined In Ii zonlrig m.tter \ . n e comp.nlon de 78 proceeding,. malntenance of.utomobll.... (Id. @771) h concerns wheth.r the oP'lUtlcln 01 . lOtall , . (Index .No. 15033/94) petltloner seeks per-) should be given fun convenience stor.e 1* an ~~elS9ry Ule to a. misllon for the retail sale ot good. and 'I' I In the absenc~ of contrary authority .or . 'gasoltn"etvlc~ ltAtlon,.lt ~ ,that " ltierchan<!fje, otherwise referred to as .' , from the Appell.te Division, Second De. COl " .lhls Is . matit 9' ~rs~ ImP!oi!slon.ln th~ convenlenc~ store, Ivlthln the bUUdlng iii It parlinenL this Court Is therefore com. sta '. Second DeJ>8l1!nent"!ld !he ont,: appe)I.le" now extits on the ~~ ~~~t ~nlargtng: . pelled to follow the decision of the Appel- zal determlli""on on thIS .peclfl~lsau~ W<IIIld ~e building.,> ;.', , " '.' 'j I.t. Division. First Departmenlln ExXon. tur .ppeat to be !tOm the First Deparlll1ent "-,, It contends that the proposed retall) Accordingly con.fjtent with lhat deter. z.1 (Exxon v, Board QI Standard. an!! Appe.ls, "..... use quallfleS.s. normal and custom~ mln.tlOn. thfj ;"'tter (Index No. 15033/94) reI 128 AD2d 289, 515 NYS2d 768. Iv, 10 .pp.. ,ory.legal.C~lOry use to the exJatlng gas- r Is rem.nded to the respondent Zoning be den. 10 NY2d 614, 524 NVS2d 678. 519 . oilnestAtlon. . . ',. : I vlc NE2d'622;dn'Mond 151 AD2d 438; 542 . The Board's Aprll28,I994 denlOrc\lUl~' Bo.rd of Appeals of the V1l1l1ge of Lyn. NYS2d 639}: Lianno ApPelif tclth~ Court' subsequent .ppllcatlon (Indelli No45033/". ' brook for spedllc nndlngs of fact as to der fA ....1. was de led (15 NY2d 703) ; ,. . 94) which as noled does not itmllil.' 1lJI" l";twheth~r petltloner T.rtan 011 Corpor.- 10 f A ,C? P..- ~ l . . j . 7~~:'... .tl1lon's proposed ule qualifies as an acce.. ,stat '..' Thus. petltloner . applications pursu.nt ellp.n.lon or .Iteratlon 0' the sl~J:wu pH"" eory use.. denned bY l'elpondents' zoning by I . ,.: to CPLR Art..78.tO reverse and annul re'. m.rlly premlsed.tipon the lact tliiI jietI- '. ordinance together with wh.tever reason- do r " spondent Zoning BOard of Appeojs' .~u!y. tloner has .lIegedlY Viol.ted s~rOl'of the (', 'able condltlons II deems .pproprl.te for 10 b . 3(l. 1992 Ind,April27. 1994,delOrmln.tJons ~ondltl~nslmposed by the DeCembi!t21, - , 'the health ...ety and general welf.re of Ins' as arblgary and taprldoda, and tefated.....' 1987 specl.1 exceptlon permll(e.g,;rear ,/'.' c' ,,.' lIel. Ii determined asl\el1!ina/ter'phMlIed.. . ogre.. not always dOsed when not In use 't.; the c~m,munlty. ,', Petltlollt!t,lttheclWtletbl..pan:elollm- . lor deliveries and"'e.o(non:.utomotlve t,!, ",;,~, .... .', proWd'real\YJ_tect:onth.nortlUldeof '.'. ret.ted.ltems)..ltfjlncumbentuponre. . .""t.....--.......,.. --. . 'd SOnrlse lflgh~ln ,Lyltbrooki N~Y!lr.k"';.i .pondents 10 si.tataln their i1.termiDatlon :,):1.. ..,..J<RoWn. and.d..lgna. ted.oll the N....u.;.;.r.'. ,..by speclDc 1.c:tuOlllndl. ngsln. lI>.e. .. dlplnls,I.. '. S' .; COdn~ LUid ihd:rd: Mtp.. section 11..::.. tr.tl.. record,...; "'t,, ::". ":NII',,'. ." ":'" . ,,- .. Blnek ~j Lot 7, The PremiseS m 11TegularIYj'I'" Vel. unoted.. bec:aitae the code i!xpress" sh.ped, with... 97'. frontage on SUnriie '," .;' I Y prohibits gasoline servlcestatlons In c , 'Hlghw.y,'.n 82'teIr.lot line;' 111' ....tem ,.),. comm.rclall)' zoned dlitr!w, thl. m.tter . ,.' '. depth and .117',4lastemdeptfuThe 10,000 ,".'.ltiore.ceut.tety InVoI_:..ti.e ""riince" :,' .' sq.lllot I. niori!.conlliionly known and de" rath.r thatI l'kl*llif exception permit. <,; t . scribed as 330.,<<0 SunriseJ;llghw.y; LY.n' . ...".. ,The vm....code. reportedly defines an '. , . b~~; ;.~rr:~~ ~ui~t~~~~~~. . ' ~rdi~::~3:~t..,":.t'~~~: t:::t~:f:l~~n'. ; . d.Uy zoned dlsttld ind hnpt'ove,l'W1th. '...0 or bUilding and on'th. same lot with . ' .. _ U n '11 con.lstlng 01. such prindpal use or building." It might . .... one-.tory maliOnry.bulldln.g. (.. pproxlm.. te- Well be ratlon.lly .rgued th.t I.he sale of . Iy 450 sq. ll),lwo .cannpy (24' by 64:) coy- automotive ltem.lslnddental.nd .ubor. .' ered,lslancl.,~.ntli"'lilg.f~ur.lndlvldii.il :. . dlnale to 111. oper.tl~n of.a gasoline ser- : gasoline pump.; To, the JUt or north 01 t.~e . vtcestAtlon but the convey.nce of conve. . . premises I' i Loni/Island Riilh".d. right of nlence storellems (e.g., sn.cks and . w.y oVer whiCh. June 29, J 948 "sement bever.ges) I. not. similar to the decision 01 . was granted..The,....ment does iiot how- the Appell.te Dlvtslon, Third Dep.rtment. . ever; sped~ly .allow.for the passage of th.t .the rental of trucks .nd traller~ was . . gasoline delIVerY trucks; AlternativelY the' not .n .cc..sory use to . gasoline service . delivery truclili are requlredt. bac.k o~t '. station use (VI1I.ge of W.ter.f.ord v, O'Bri- onto Sunrise Hlghw.y, .. heavtly It.VeIl"" en, 39 AD2d 490). ' roadway. The'parcel hai been t1ted contln'- ' Howeveri In an imp6rtant2:onlng decJ'- uously Ii . servlce.laUon lin~ 1938 tnd sion of concern to all municipalities ccnstltutea a legal non~con'onning u.e.. . throughout the .tate. the Flrst Department In early 1987, petltloner .pplled for'.u- . In Exxon Corp. v. Board Of Standard. .nd . tI>orl~on to ~ the existlne " ., Appeal~ o/the City. of New York. supra. re- AmoCcl.llAtlon llhd eiett. .....r.te conve. Yer~~d .1Id1llnlllfed the.denlal.ofExxon's . , . " 'n\ene.lt.ore.atlhO Slte;.ThO'.PPllc.lIdli. ';'. '.:' appllcitldH fcl.lftcorI>o.' '. t.te a co..venlenc'~ '. _ w." c1enled on May 2t, 198~. Petllloh~I'.I",' 'I store Into. ~~Ine aWlo'ri fatllt!!'. Exxon, . "." .PPlled. alid. .*!iI!!hialtdthe' d..t \o.a~II'h.h.d.PPlled to t.he Board. Of.S.I.~d..rdS -.,da.' ", V~~Ie.nc., \s!!1 I n.c ..,21 ,Appe.I..o(the,CI .0fN...,ror~lotper' i"I' '.' . ., con c tie I nun ah Ie 1 , ~'!ll:\ 'j"8U10 parti. 8ec~lJSorlel. .upplle. 'lfld re,- Ihal ~ .nack Ihop or convenience store at,d.llutomoUve IhHnl."W8I grtlnted ,sub- W8lI not an !;ccE!llJory ule to l gAIOIIrIf! le,,- ~ -,~,'lect.tolhree,(:o.ndltlohi(thatIlIlRa,lollne vlcest8t1on, . ","': 'fj' i ,.deilverl.s1ie made between 10,00 p.M. ind AIlet Epon Inltlaled.n Artld. 78 p..o.; \ ( ~,A.M., rio slor. hOurs between I tdIo P/.M. ceedlng, Sped.1 T.rm .n~uiled the deler. " .nd 6,00 A.M, .n~ thit.the te.r .gr... or , Inln.Uon of Ihe Bo.rd. The Bo.rd 01 Stan. . " l delivery lrucki be dolled when nolln uBe), dardfl ippealed. ,_:, , A.noled, lIe.plte lhe f.ct Ih.t re.pori. " After reviewing the fliets, t.h~ Appellal~ d.nls' code expr~..ly l"o~lblts sa,ollno Dlvl.lon remanded Ihe niolter b.ck 10 Ihe lervlce ,lallons In comm~icl811y zonp.d i , .B~l'lrd 01 StandArds, holding, In plitt: ' dlilrlcl. (Arllcle V, 8252.30IA](\IJl\ i spe' , . 'Although we do nol re.d secllon 12.10 clal exception was ll,iued,rather,thana use " ~f the Zoning Relolu~lon as exp'relslr. per- v8rlahce, ~IThe lundarttel1\1l1 difference be:. ~ltUnR Ihe construction of R conven ence , l)\leer! i variance and f& Ipeelal, permit I. ' 'IItore al an llcce.iotr ule to ah "automo. that.. varlllnce.ll the authority to UI~ prop,~ '- t1ve lervl,ce illation,., as Exxon would have , : ~rtY In.8 rnan,"e,rlorbldd~!1 by ~I.' ~~.dl. ~;'~1:"~'"us do, Ihere.188mp.le ~,Ylden~e, on,lhe ba. nonce I'hll. . .p.da' porinll or .xceplloni. ill of Ihe .tecotd b.lor~ Ua, Ih.l. conv.. ., Is Ih~,ulhorlty .10 u.~ ~roperty lri. ina~... .: . nlence atore m.y.w.U fall ..lIhln lhe lon. , .~/ ~xpt~hl~ p~fit\lll~d"'(CIlA C.Wone, Ing Re.olullon'. senoral definition 01 an Inc, v.Holbrook, 188 AD2d 599,591 NYS2d :'Acceuory use." F.JUi:orr" proposal obvl- 493, 495 (2d D.pl., 1992lJ. The burd.n 01 ou.ly s.lIslle. the IIrsland I.st part. of Ih. prooffo'lI .ped.1 permll i. nluch IIghler' dellnlUon, a. lhe f.clllly.Would b. nn Ihe Ih.n lor;' vllrlance (Id.). '.,' .,.... . .ame lol.nd would ope..te for th. benelll. .on Oclober ,II; 1991 p.Utldnerappll.d and conv.nlence of II. cuslomerl. Only the for a building pernHt to more thArt double requirement thllt the proposed use be one (opproxlm.l~fy450 iq. fl.IO 9181q. II) Ihe cu,lom8rlly found In connocllon wllh. and exlitlng bUilding In order to convey coove. Incldent.&t to. the sale of Rasollne pOles II nlence store Itemi, By letter dAted Nov~tn~ lactu811lsue lor Board resolution." (Exxon, ber 13, 1991, r!!'pondent Bello d.nl.d Ih. sup..! ,.,298.) . appllcallon dsvtolaUv. of Sped.1 Excep' Th. 7ipp~lIale plvt,lon, Flr.1 D.psrt- . , Uon No. 97 .nd Secllon 252-30(A)(II). On ment, w.s again call.d upon 10 p...upon Dr about Deeember.i2i}99f peUUoner ep- the determlnlltlon .of Ihe Boardof Stan' . po.l.d Ihe..derillll tu respond.nl Bo.rd of . , dord.ln. .ubs.quenlapp~al fr"'n th.lr .'r. ,ZonlnJtAppeal. and reQuelted 8 varlaMe, decision rendered on remand from _the ptl- Ori Jufy 30, 1992, rollowll1g . publle h..i. or d~lernllnaUon. In the.iubs.qnent dod. <, 'Ing, ..spond.nt Boord .of Zoning Appe~l. . 'Io.h, Ihe Court .laled. 10 part. . denied petltloner', \r"'tI8i1t~ IIppllcatlon, It .. ~ The dispute herein, IhvolvllIlJ 811 at. ~. :: subsequently cotnlnetlced the wlthlh pro. tempt by pet1t1oh~t Exxon COrpOTlltlon to ceedlng (Index No; 23855/92) to reverll! procure permlllslon to operl'l.te a combined ~. IInd .r\nUllhAt,delettnlnallon. ,', conyenlence store/gasonne stillion oil Us '; In Ihe Jnterlml bn or ~bOut June 29, 1993; premises hi B'yslde". Queens; Was prevl-,. .."~. p.ilUdnet requ..I.d p@rinl..lori 10 Utlllt~'i:" ou.lyeon,ldi!ted hy Ihl. cUurlllclm. twd :"~ .\' tho o.lollng ilrucldre, WlthOut.xl.rldr",. ...'., y..r..gd. Allhill time, Y1~ held 111M '. ctlnhl. mbdlflcaUont, 10 .ell convenience store \lenience .tote I. not prbhlblted M &n at. " IU'!m8, That reque,lIt WIHI denied on or abmil ceuory tJse hy the 7.onlng ResolUtion, al- \ April 28, 199>1. ^ sepat..t~ proceeding (In- though It Is hot expteuI'ltulhorb:ed,' anrl de. No~ J 5033/94) h85 been commenced thet mRlUer W1\8 temanded .10 respondent , 'eek~rR .,If? r~ve~s~ ,8lid 8~n~~ ~haL . ' ~oard of Standards and Appeals of rhe ell}' delerrrll,f"/aUohll,.' '! "". ::' ., " of New York "orspeclflc flndln8so"acla. The ta\\i" II well 8enl~d thftt "Ihe protec~ to whether Exxon's proposed use qualifies hol1 01 vet led, rlght.lnll nonconforming as 8':H!lC'.ce8sory ule "'!Ihln lhe.iectlon 12. strudureul.tlng ollhe lime a prohibitory 10 g.....1 d.linltlorl of thai term.... .' tdd@ Ill!h~H~d doei,l1o{ extend to Inibse.I'Notwlth!lhmdlng thll court'suOlIunblgu- quent corislnittlori" (CUcd v. BoMd. of Ap. 01jj determination that a cdnvenleoce peals of Huntington, 1M AD2d 372, 5<45 store'ii not precluded as an acce~sory use,. ,NYS2d 850 12d Depl., 1989]). In II.. ab.. . ie,poridenl, followlhg . public IIe.rlng,.. .' Umce of an ordinance to the ,contrAry, A found hi Its resolution thAt a 'rell!lll conve. lJ;opf!~h' bwh~r' tnay not lubstltuten new nlence store 18 Inhe~ently different from nonconforming t1fle for ~h existing one de., and wholly unrelated 10 the lale of 88SO- Iplte 110 apparent similarity olusel (Oarcl~ line' and Ii, Iherefore, 'not IIn accessory v. Hol'., 94 AD2d 759, 462 NYS2d 700 [2d u.e to.n aUlomoli"elervlce !hUlon', flow' Dept., 1983\).' A rlgh\ to I:ohhnue an exist. ever, since the quellUon of a convenlente ' In8 oOl:1ton ormlng use doei nollnclude store as Iln acce810ry lIse WillS aln~ady de> the.rlghl to ex,telld or enl'rli.lh~ ''''.. lInlllvely ,etlled I'rlo' to Ihe r.m.hd, Ihe (Snillh V. .Boitd of Appeal..of lilip. 202. ' only m.liel b.lore Ihe .Bo.rd w.. whether AD2d 674,609 NYS2d 91212d bep!., 1994]). Exxoh'; .peclllc proposed Use 'illallned a. Mor.over,lhe VIII.ge ~ode ..pl...ly prd. In accenory d.e by beIng 'one cu~toOlirl- hlbhtl gasoline fervlce !itaubn, with ot., '. Iy fouhd In, tonneclloh wHh. lind Ineldental ,1 without tmive,Hence ,tote lt~irul (Cucci ~u- 'o,lhe sale of gllflollnt!I", . : not whether : fra at 851: Gu en)' v. B.bard of Appealli, tonvenlence stores In gertt!:rRI constitute 12.AD2d ~22j ,492 ~YS2a 8212d Dept., " an Accessory hse, Ah ~xaml",lllon of the . 1985]).' . " ,>, 'J'~i':' "\ "', ': . tel:ord I~ere~n In.dlc8tea thAt the only basis , JUdicial. ;evl~\! ~fvarla~'7e applications for Jf!A:p.ondent's reJec;t1on 01 Exx()h's ap/JII. Ii reslrlct_ed to determining whetherUuf. callon Is Its opposition to lht!: tbficept 0 '. Board', Ilctlon wu 1II~881. arbitrary or al1 operAlIn" convenience, stores hi conlunc- Ibuse or discretion anti WIII}1ot he dls. lion wHit gasoline stations, the Issue prevl~ lurbed II ratlonAlly'biledhpon substantial ously decided by Ihl. tOlltl..ht that.regard .' e,vldence (Young v. Board o' Appellls bf , Ule evIdence demon!llltates thai the specll~ .G.rden Clly. 196 AD2d 796,599 NYS2d.632 'Ie u.. propo,ed by petlllonor" a qualified ,[2d D.epl1' t993)j Ma~ter of Fuhat v, Fofey, 45 aC'cenory use,ln that lhe type 0' conve- ;-,MV2d 44 ,410 NYS2d.561382'NE2d 156:. nl~nce slore Intended hy Exxon Is com. I Doyle v. Amster, 79 NY2d 5921 584 NYS2d ,"only Ilnd cw,'ornsrlly found in connec. 417,594 NE2d 91.(19921)., ",< .. 'e' . tlo" wllh. and Intldenlallo.lhe principal On the prelent let \)f flletl!ll petltlonr hM use of Iln automotive sE!rvlce statll'm." (Id. faUedtb e"sbUsh .lh~I",pondenl Board @439).)... . . 01 Zoning Appeal. denial of a variance to The court hlid earlier noted: ' construct 8 hulldlng twice the site of Ihd' " , . . In 1985 over 55,000 stllllons in this < existing one In, ord~r t6 .ell <;onvenlence' ,country combined the sale of gMollne with store I,terns In ilddltlon to Aulo supplle8 l convenience slore. The hie ot conYe' 'I..' f?';~,: ;:':ti~;;~:(j~;~~;:\vf~;:,~r'~;1 ' ,:'!_""1:':<'i"'l.'lt.~f"~,4: ~ ~-il.;..t~, DECISIONS I I l I l r, r< B, hi fo. I . ,.. PLANNING BOARD MEMBER_ RICHARD G. WARD Chairman . GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS en ;2: ~ ~ ~.. ~ ~O./ + i-~<;::;rJ '~zrJX"/#i1 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 1 L 1995 William D. Moore Attorney at Law 315 Westphalia Road P.O Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Site Plan for Tartan Oil Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue. Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore. As recently discussed. the Planning Board would like to review the draft covenant and restrection as mentioned in your letter of July 5, 199~. In addition to the above, an application must be made to the Zoning Board of Appeals as contained in the Stipulation of Settlement Index No. 88-10700, dated October 12, 1989. If you have any questions, or require further assistance, please contact this office. (ill'1 i. ~. ~rl~~es;=1/ cc: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman. Board of Appeals . . ~a: 1"'6 IE'K MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 William D. Moore Patricia C. Moore Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 Margaret Rutkowski Secretary July 5, 1994 Southold To\\'Il Southold Town Main Road Southold, NY Planning Board Hall 11971 Re: Tartan oil / Mattituck SCTM # 1000-115-3-9 Dear Chairman Ward and Members of the Board: Last week I had occasion to speak with Bob Kassner of your office with respect to the improvements to be made to the site. As you may recall, we had discussed, and your Board had agreed to phasing in of the improvements on the property. We had earlier requested a five year phase in period but understand that your Board would prefer a three year period for these improvements. We will like to abide by that three year plan and would request that the completion of the improvements be insured by the filing of Covenants and Restrictions which shall include a provision authorizing the payment of all costs, disbursements and reasonable attorney I s fees for the Town of Southold in the event that it would become necessary to enforce the Covenant and Rest:!:"iction against Ta:!:"tan or any subsequent property owner. Please advise if this proposal is agreeable, and if so, I will draft a proposed Covenant and Restriction for review by the Board and the Town Attorney. Thank you for your cooperation. WDM/mr cc: Barry Tallering, President Tartan oil Ken Robinson, Esq. 00 rn @ l~ li \l~! r SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD ; ~ j i ;i;; U J Jl1. 7 1..:;"4 ~ William D. Moore Patricia C. Moore Southold Planning Board Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, NY 11971 Dear Members of the Board: . . MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law Clause Commons Suite 3 Main Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 Margaret Rutkowski Secretary May 15, 1990 Re: Tartan Oil / Mattituck I Enclosed please find one (1) print of the proposed site plan for the Mattituck Mobil slation. Also enclosed is a copy of the stipulation of settlement of the legal proceedings between Tartan Oil Corp. and the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals. Please advise if you would like me to meet with one of your staff members before appearing before the Board. WDM/mr Encls. ~:1 tro~ YO:VL-- JUIUoo" ."o-,-",,,",:",w"""j_;; \' \-\ .,.....- r' ,~) ,"' ~ \ ~:\ \,.J, ~. "'1 " :Ii ,.. <) 5JI. ~- ffi 1(" k,.t F:/ < :. . SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK --------------------------------------x TARTAN OIL CORP., Petitioner, : -against- BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT Respondent. Index No. 88-10700 --------------------------------------x SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK --------------------------------------x TARTAN OIL CORP., Petitioner, : -against- . . Index No. 88-10701 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, : Respondent. --------------------------------------x IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the petitioner Tartan Oil Corp. (hereinafter Tartan) and the respondent Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold, (hereinafter the Zoning Board), that the above Article 78 proceedings are settled upon the following terms and conditions: 1. Tartan shall apply to the Southold Planning Board for site plan approval, which site plan, if granted, will be conditioned upon Tartan's obtaining the variances and special exemption permits recited hereinbelow. '''J r','" - ','~ 1 j~; ...,. ;.' "'!~. -1- ",' ," ./ / .' . . . 2. Upon the grant of conditional site plan approval, Tartan shall apply to the Zoning Board for a variance for placement of the canopy, as an accessory structure, in the front yard for a variance of the height requirements applicable to the canopy. 3. Simultaneously with the hearings on the zoning variance applications set forth in paragraph 2 above, the Board shall reopen the previous variance application for the convenience store and the special exception application for self-service and full-service gasoline sales, both of which had been denied without prejudice. In the event site plan approval and the variances set forth in paragraph 2 above are obtained by the petitioner, then the convenience store variance and special exemption applications will be granted subject to the following conditions: a) food service to be limited to packaged items, plus the heating of previously prepared foods, all for off-premises consumption; b) no alcoholic beverages to be sold before 5:00 p.m. on all days when school is in session; c) all lighting at rear of property be shielded from adjoining residential property, in addition to all site plan requirements set by the Planning Board; 4. Upon Tartan's obtaining and complying with the approvals set forth above, the Building Inspector would -2- /' . . be authorized to issue the appropriate certificate of occupancy. 5. Both proceedlngs shall be discontinued without costs or disbursements to either party and this stipulation can be submitted by either party to a Justice of this Court to have it .so ordered" without further notice to the other party. Either party can file this stipulation without further notice to the other party. 6. See rider annexed hereto. Dated: October /Z-r 1989 I. . ~7L ~0#A'kJ_' ~--L.s;, "'- SMITH, FINKELSTEIN~~UNDBER~ ISLER and YAKABOSKI Attorneys for Respondent Office & P.O. Address 456 Griffing Avenue P.O. Box 389 Riverhead, New York (516) 727-4100 So ordered this day of , 1989. J. s. C. --:/ BARRY T LLERING, Pre of Tartan Oil Corp. u-(2L~ LEVINE & ROBINSON, P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner Office & P.O. Address 50 Charles Lindbergh Blvd. Mitchel Field, NY 11553 (516) 794-6900 -3- . . Richard G. Ward, Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 12, 1994 William D. Moore Attorney at Law 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Tartan Oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: The Planning Board has received your letter of March 29, 1994, requesting a phased approach to site improvements. The Planning Board will accept a three year phase-in of the improvements. The Board will require a schedule of improvements for each year in addition to a performance bond for all of the improvements. If you have any questions, or require further assistance, please contact this office. Sincerely, ~ tJ. WD.ILd./"'"i Richard G. Ward Chairman 1 - ( ). - 7'i. /J._" ~ 0 /( . vUild/~" If?d ~/ 0; 7-/~~ f #: h~ ,.M~~~ """--"~r' ,k.>- . . ~P!c..e- 1e3 ,Oc.. MOORE & MOORE Attorneys at Law 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, New York 11952 William D. Moore Patricia C. Moore Tel: (516) 298-5674 Fax: (516) 298-5664 Margaret Rutkowski Secretary March 29, 1994 fD)rn@rnuwrn~ Hll WIt 3 0 1994 ~ Southold Town Southold Town Main Road Southold, NY Planning Board Hall 11971 ~, ,i';.:o" Re: Tartan oil Corp. / Mattituck, NY SCTM # 1000-115-3-9 Dear Members of the Board: At a work session with the Board, we discussed together with representatives of Tartan Oil, the installation of the necessary site improvements that you have identified as per the site plan last revised November 16, 1992. At that time, we explained the financial situation at that location and the high cost of those improvements relative to the amount of business that is generated at that site. In our discussion, we reviewed the possibility of making these site improvements over a period of time. Enclosed is a list of the necessary site improvements prepared by Louis DeRonde, Tartan's engineer. We request that you permit the installation of these improvements over the next five years so that the cost of them can be spread out over that time frame. To insure that this work is accomplished, we propose to offer Covenants and Restrictions setting forth the listed improvements, and the time frame within which they must be accomplished. These covenants could be enforced by the Planning Board through the Town so that if the improvements were not done, the Town would have an enforcement mechanism by way of injunctive relief or revocation of the Certificate of Occupancy. Please advise if the proposed method of insuring the . . completion of the site plan elements in the time frame proposed is acceptable to the Board. I look forward to hearing from you in this regard. ~ WDM/mr Enc. cc: Tartan oil Corp. Barry Tallering, President Kenneth L. Robinson, Esq. . Louis DeRonde 16 VIctoria Drive Amllyvllle. New Vorl< 11701 . (516) 598-1065 November 15, 1993 RE: TARTAN - MATTITUCK DRAINAGE CALCULATIONS Area to be drained.. 18,251 sq. ft. X 0.167 (2- rainfall) .. 3,048 cu. ft. use 8 ft. dia. X 10ft. depth drywells @ 42.24 cu. ft. retention/ft. 3,048 cu. ft. + 42.24 cu. ft. .. 72.14 ft. required Use 8-8ft. X 10ft. depth drywells w/slabs. Back fill wlbankrun COST ESTIMATE 1. Drywells, top slabs, interconnecting piping, etc. per the above .. 2. Supply & install asphalt paving a Stone & asphalt around each pool area b. Entire area 1-. overlay as required.. 3. Street curbs 320 ft. @ $18/ft. (including asphaltic patching) .. 4. Internal property planting curbs 170 ft. @$121ft. .. 5. 2-8- reinforced concrete entrance ramps 720 sq. ft. @ $8.50/ft. .. 6. 2- asphalt entrance ramps 500 sq. ft. .. 7. Concrete sidewalks - 825 sq. ft. @ 4.50/sq. ft. .. 8. Landscaping $18,000 16,425 5,760 2,040 6,120 1,500 3,712 7.500 Total cost of improvement 61,057.00 10% contingencies 6,105.70 Grand total $67,162.70 Cost of canopy (estimate) Percentage of improvements to canopy cost $20,000 356% . (1//Xff..l"Z?7':>-o,:>"? ,yfiJ~ 'i,\iHOl", ~ .'} ~.~...~....'. ".'.'.1..... t'~ :)' (~ .', ~ ::::> " ;...: Q, ' . "'" '", "'" ~,~,~~r" ;;, ',0 "'&() '. "...~A- ~,'{ ,'W ']\9 dY ~;'":>-. '..:.. i'-fD .-'-C~rLJ::C;]1JY . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G, Ward Mark S, McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards seOIT L. HARRIS Supervisor Telephone (516) 765.1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P,O, Box 1179 Southold. New York 1/971 Fax (516) 765.1823 August 10, 1993 William D. Moore Moore & Moore P.O. Box 23 MattituCk, NY 11952 RE: Tartan Oil Site P1anSouthwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business (LB) SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: This is in response to your question regarding the scale of your site plan. The Board will accept a scale of 1" = 10'. However, the Board requests that a reduced plan at the scale of 1" = 20' be made for our file copy. If you have any questions, or require further information, please contact this office. ~ . rfp;r;a::r.z;-.>c-. yj/ ^UfFOl ",'''~ v\>" '1 J> " f'",,""" ,<no La '\'\ ;, .;"l::V ~ ~ <,is ~\!, 'I ~ r".-i."~', ;".$' t,'; , ! ,-~.t!' ~ ,\~ .,..- ',"'- ..,*- ~-~ ,-~, ;~'I ,,~~./r! tIt f ...:,~ -LV _' ~ I,.")' '>'::"0~;--.Dj7-)f . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Benllett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L Edwards scon L HARRIS Supervisor Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 July 20, 1993 William D. Moore Moore & Moore P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Tartan oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business (LB) SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: This letter will confirm the Board's discussions with you on the above referenced property at our public meeting on July 12, 1993. - As a suggested alternative drainage system for the site, trench drains could be placed in the curb cuts. - Curb cuts on Marratooka Lane and Sunset Avenue must be a minimum of fifty feet (50') from the intersection of Route 25. - The scale of the planshould be 1" = 20'. - The sign shown on the plan is a Mobil sign. - The asphalt area between the sidewalk and the pump islands should be landscaped, preferably with a low yew hedge, to prevent cars from driving onto the sidewalk. .~ . . - The curb cut on Route 25 nearest Marratooka Lane should be narrower and designed for entry from Route 25 only. Signage on the site should direct customers to exit onto marratooka or out the westerly curb cut. The purpose of this is to eliminate the prospect of cars on Marratooka having to compete with customers leaving the site from the easterly cut. Enclosed for your use is a copy of the Board's letter of December 8, 1992, explaining other details of the site. t:t,4u'lff:;;Y~A l11t~t~: Ward Chairman Enc 1. \":. , ) , . . ..i ~, . . ," j .~ . -' , ~ ':........ . ,~.. . T )).....,.:. I \... .~\., .,', ...~~; -"\'. ...-..-'.;;9': .',,:,,! ___/ '~1:. ".:- .f ','> SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor / MBERS ~--Jr.. Chairman J.AlChie Latham. Jr. Richard G Ward Mark S. M, Donald Kenneth L. :=:dwards ~','.J .-.... T clephone (51 () 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Sou!hold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 December 8, 1992 williiun D. Moore Moore & Moore P.O. Box 23 Mattituck NY 11952 FE: Tartan Oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Dear ~Ir. Moore: The Planning Board has received a letter from the New York State Department of Transportation in response to its letter of Novenilier 16, 1992, concerning the width of the sidewalk at the above referenced property. (Copies enclosed). The DOT requests that you comply with their 5'-0" sidewalk standard. In addition to the above, the following items must be added to the site plan before the Board can proceed: 1. Drainage plan and calculations must be shown. 2. Parking calculations must be shown, including handicapped parking. 3. An enlarged diagram of the floor plan showing all uses must be provided. 4. A landscaping plan must be provided; see enclosed sketch. Street trees must be provided on Route 25, Marratooka Lane and Sunset Avenue. , . , < ,0 ~~ , .:,; , , .' \ Page 2 Tarton Oil 5. The free standing sign must be twenty-five from the front property lines. The maximwn such a sign shall be fifteen (15) feet. (25) feet height of 6. Percent (%) lot coverage and landscaping must be shown. 7. The total area of the property must be shown. 8. All lighting must be shielded from adjoining properties. In addition to the above, consideration should be given to relocating the parking spaces away from the underground storage tanks to facilitate the delivery of fuel. Further, Suffolk County Department of Health Services and . New York State Department of Transportation permits are required. If a fire well is required we will notify you. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office. Very truly yours, ~~'r2~ / Bennett Orlowski Jr. }Y"~S Chairman Enc l. cc: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector Gerardp. Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals ~ . ~NNI:-;G BOARD ~lE~1BERS ~nnC'[( Orlm.v..ki. Jr.. ChJlfrl1:ln GC'ur~c Ril\:hl~ L..lch;lnl. Jr Rich::rLl (j. \\';lrJ ~brk S. ~1CJ)lln;lrJ Kenneth L. bJ.....arJ.. ~ "-i"() IT 1 1l.\h:RIS .:,<.t\hP( ..... ','. .,...' .,J Tch:phonc (516) 765-1l)3R PL\;-.I1'OI:-;G BOARD OFFICE TO\VN OF SOUTHOl.O , . ", ," .... 'l" ~ \, I " I i-.ll. ,..u" 'rl_'.I..,~ \ Novemocr 16, 1992 Vito Lena, Regional Permit Engineer State of New York Veterans Memorial Highway Happague, NY 11787 Dear Mr. Lena: RE: Tartan Oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Your Case # 90-425 This is in reference to your letter to this Board of January 2, 1991, in which you indicate a five foot sidewalk would be required for the above referenced project. The Planning Board would like to request that the sidewalk width be reduced to four feet due to the anticipated low volume of pedestrian traffic, and the fact that there are no other sidewalks along State Road 25 in this vicinity. We also note that adjacent properties are zoned for Agricultural or Residential uses. The Board would appreciate a written response to its request. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office. Very truly yours, . 0. ~Jl/jLctl ~U/-, /V-/Kf Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman . .~ l!\~!\, :,.' -'H'.~_:,-..~ _ J:'o~h ["'" , L1" ~t' ;''>'" , . -~.'., ;' ~ ~'\l~~ II _."~~Jj '\;.---:;''1~~''''-J , ',[~H~\""_-" , \ JAMES A. KUZLOSKI REGIONAL DIRECTOR STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HALJPPAUGE. N.Y. 11788 '\ December 3, 1992 FRANKLIN E. WHITE COMMISSIONER Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Office Tm.m of Southold Tmm Hall, 53095 Hain Street P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 ,Dear Mr. Orlowski: Tarten Oil Site Plan State Route 25 and Sunset Ave. Mattituck/SCDl 1000-115-3-9 Our Case No. 90-425 Reference is made to your letter of November 16, 1992 concerning the sidEl;valk installation along State Route 25 at the above noted location. Your request to reduce the width of the proposed sidewalk along Route 25 has been reviewed by this office. New York State standards require that whenever applicable the installation of 5'-0" wide sidewalk be applied. In situations where we have different width sidewalk abutting the proposed site we will match the existing. In this case both parcels which are adjacent to this site do not have any sidewalk. Therefore, we will apply this standard and require that the new 5'-0" sidewalk be installed five feet from the back of curb. Any questions concerning this matter may be directed to this office at 360-6025. si~cftbelY .~urs,. j/iZ,o ! u{ / VITO F. UnA Regional Permit Engineer VFL:BC ..... -:'. .._-~..... -:',~'_~_~'h '''_'_'~_ ~_~ :',,' I;: l'~' . _1.,:., II, . ...~.-._--_.-.._~"_...-.._.,! i 'I. '-, , 1_____...---. ___.~_ ...._._~j o ...--.-..........-. _._-_._.~--,_... AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER . \ I I 'I!' ; H.,. . Ii .0 t 1':\........:...:.... '4F-+~ ,- ~~:' ~~.'j ~lll\\.ll.:. D!i: ~I - . ' . ---l' --- . 'I""';" "-J.. I'" ". <j \: \:......; I \', . .C>',z.z (. _J +.O-l.j I i; .~ Jill'> . ~ II -~ .,~~.:i.'~~:,..::t.::-.~.[~:'T.:~ . ill:fI]I'::c"'l":':~\:~ :'.~ ~ .'. Iii:'" C\! Ji J'. ~')~,,',:.,'\".f,"",.:1-'" ~ 1'./ ,~.. .:..:,.<-.: ij,~'. . Jilt \1; , "'. " '-.:. """i ,."..,,,.(~, \j i I \ q - I ,~ . "::.<:< - .' '. ~ I. . ~l" '::~:>.' L"C ~ II. " II ..:3 : ~ .' "'-. ','011(-, .'.. "1'"'1)1 I,.].::::,::::~:,;~~ Ii ~ \l 'f <Q Ii 2-11;:: .:":~, ~ \~'.; '7CD--( I ~'::'::F,!r< i>,~l"~,,~ fl1 ~ i"I'.. . " 10i \j .:L[;/Y:;>I.... ",.,.t..., I~ _ 'I I ....'L.';;;..i.:......' . n" ;. ,Z}'2i:h';,'; m~~ ~ ;f y\. !Ii-I ' "~" ' L:l. Ifl" ..J;'L ;,:.)~ :n,~. !I j '\ 'I':;'~ . , \ !/ ~ I :," ','>~ .jil~~f '. II ':',! 11+ I ~.~ . ,,/ )... ' ;"~\~..'i ;:s.!: J :1' ~ ,I ^.l. .,~ 4J I' .)! 't _"" J;.. d .<!; 1:1. 7" :':'~"i ; ,I . \'* :i1!(; <,! II I 'LJ/ 't~f;. ! .Ii I ( ~~:..: " :-- c-;-, '~" -,I'l, ,,\ '1'- ; @"~";"" !'\ R~I,~, ii/I / /. . '.-, ~ I UfH\':!, ' 'I~ '1// //; \ tJ..~~;!,-j'I/~---/ i,l co.' ,~~~. A---' . (' \J ~' i.; U \1 Q ~"I .J ? ~ ~ s '" ~ '0 : . i ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I ~ i ~ I ,~I '\.iSz:- i :~ 'J) ~\\)I i\)/ \"! '3 -,,;:. "2 ~I I \,.! 'J ~ -'?I ~ ~ ~ 'L,~ !' : g i '. . I '<- . ~ I' \ ~i -Jj '" ;! ~ -...-- .; \{)! " I '\ I VI ~ ti ; ~, ; ~ I "'\ I ~-Q x..:: '\:~~:'J i I l1! -:r 'L' ::0' ~ I ~) ~ i. IJ I I t ~ ~ j ~ . _ ~ "'-";S", ~ I-.I''l-~: 11 , . '>j ..... ~ j.". l:: < ',' -.,.- t--J: '-li'~~', .~. .,; ,.' ,,-- ~. " ~ 1/)1;'11:' I.!'" '''.' !oJ I ' 'lIIl-.....~ <t' :': 1"'/1: '11.0 ----.-:::l.-x :i___._.... --;-i I!lJ..ot ~ T<f f' -;"o~;! .;: I j ! t~1 !~I ;~ -~ ) Dt.:.J\. . ~ I,-f i 'rr) ';'L', ,-, ~ - La :-.. UJ r 1 ~~ , i V i ~ ~., .":l,, ' '-' I I I; " J.,.: ~ - ~ I I '-l , ;~~r' \\ ~ ,_ I " \ i j" . 'r I " ~~ . ..... I .~ .~ ,I.,.') CE) " '\ 11 i ~ \! .. \\j . ,< ;+' 'pk '-'[j"'-', ! .~ ~ ,1./ "", ~ '. . N' I (,\ ! ~ ~ , ; I, t, !If : - '" r-I >.0 " ",\, -, ~ -"" lr=- -"{" l~/' ji,,: ..;.. 0"' . : "," Ii ~. , i" 0 -h-~_L '<>"s' i),~~= i .L c/ II/Pjllii',};~/ i . ". \1i!;IU ~!...' ! ~1~lhi I -4- , r i -, , . , " "... " .... '" :;- ~ --?.:::l :> . -.. ~ . ~P'::> "".. ~ ~. -,.__ =-----:. '. - "r V)..::',. ~~------ "",(-:::-0/ / I ---1 W"'l.. '" r- ~~ -- . . "..,'. . . ".-' '.~. ~ . .: . , " . ..j " ... . "'/~' .... - . ~ - 'r .. ....':-~I. '.. ~~':'~:' ....:.~.. .... .':""';' . -t~' -. . .,. -....... .. . ',~ ~~r;'" ".~ . . ,.... .. '-:.' -. . ~. " . . ...~.~.~. . ~.'., ;. "'..f.... "".' '.;~~.. ~. i,:-. . ~, ....- , . \;'.':,;:,~.;;.:I '.!'...:' .. ..:: . . ._..~;., . .:;' -.. ;~~~~.-.~~" . "0-' '.' . ." ~"''''''. ."~::t':'" .::. . '!':"" . . ...;,' ,!:":::}. ..- ';'-~;,' .:~~.~~. , fzr \-.....:,.. ""'" . ....... ...." . ~ .:-..... .... . ,. .,' ...."': . ,,..-.... . ., .'~ .."tt~>: :~~:;:. ; ......).,.: " - . .,....;... ~~;,'.I /It :'. ~ '. .- ~- ~~!~~; . :;2~~~'~; J . ~~ ' ---. . ". ~ \) ~ \. . ~< ". f ; ~~~ ,o~. i .~--~). - ~~~ ~" ~ /'~ --V ..;y---- \ I '" <' J" I ...--. ~,: .; . I c<' ./" ,./ ;(v..- \J '<" '" ~ I -.) . ~-----l. \ ~ ~ <;;, " tC i - . , / /'.. -,- '~f=- . - \. ~ - ! 7C7/7'cY~~::~v":-YJ'~"- {\",. . .\~~-2;:.~-jj\J J (/' ~ ~<,;>/y' Ji . '. .. '''''l 'I.. b::, ~ '- - , j " i!<.~(7/7cY~V-- I~ =~,.;, ~ ~I - , .' Q~'~-' .~~ ~ i " , \> -. T ,\\\~ \' '~ _ ~i , ,. \ C\j / ~ -, . '\ . . \, ~ ...; tl. .,. : <")., , .- l~l ~ .-! ~~ , \\j!l~. . I \ \)', ~ - '''--l - " \"11 'Ii ,"J ' "I ...." \ II, ,III "'..: , I! I q I J .. J?; , "" .1. :;:/'. -l- I . I. I i \) ~ i !' ~ ~ I <? I I 1<; \JI I~ ! I' ~ 'i! I::; i ~ ' 'i I ,": I ~ : I 'l.J j \): I ,~ i ~ I I '~Ii ~ni ~I : ~I" 'N' "Vi\J,' I, --i-j ~ : "Q I I, v "Jl~ "', ; I- ~ I "I ~ ' I' '" " i,! "':'''' I' . II\)I'~~', 1 I l-.. .. , 'I:' i : ~':1 .=::--)~ t;K' i,f,~\'\.,.-, ,,: ii',:" 7>\' \; r- 1 11111..:\\V \ <) '\l~'1::;:!IJI ,'1' \,1' .1~, ..~' I' jll ~ 1 t~.\~ ~ I + i~~Y I; ;1 !~\~'\ , p ,~;;.,: I ;; j}~'" I ii ~i~i"~1 'J! (:j!,~ / ,'tl . ....' .,fp '<:;': '" tl" I ~ ,-', ~!J:.-; I. c"~ :S 't' '.' C \J ~ IJ ;n~ i ' I' ~<i I., 'l + ' \ . 'lJ~i'l J Q.\) '> ,,', ,I , '~'i~{1 ,I I~ I h ~~L:rl !\j I!,',I ,.r;" j . ; L 'I:~ I' ;~:~' t"'1 -.G '''lJ f~ "- o. ll,', _ I!~ ......,. . ."- ~-- ~~. ! . Yr-... \.1 :11 " " t <:1 a.' ~"} ( J , . \' () l:I \"L; :: iT I /" ,l-: ;f)' ~I "<I 'I, ''''4' 'I.') , :h.j ,~ .... ',~ ,::-:-.J "- ':> :" "- ~ -' <: 'J. '- ,-, ""'l: :~I ';~I;QI' "\I~ '!~I~I' "e:;: ", li"'U '?'- . j~i~ -'r- J'..-4O~t>"......... ~o~65 . '. I ~I , ; ~! llJ,~I,~ ~ hi~_ ~:~i ~ c\ ' I ~': ~I 3! ~-) ...11 ~ 4 i, ,'<: J, ~l -.)1 ~i ~' ~! r. ~: 'QI Ul: , ~', .. I ;". '!J ;-.1 . I 'I U'\ ';' ''-I !! P '1; }II'; c: 0: -' , . , , , I ! ' I,' ,", ;:! "I- /...... IJ ...".. "'< i'0::i' . I .... "" J \l ,"> to; ~" I, J l" -,' "I' V N1, 01' ','--~~J';"", 8/ I'~.< ~'~I \)'" ~" "- \; :~ i, 1./\ ~ \J2p . II '. \!II! ], "I >.' /-'1 . .. .' " ~" ~ "- 'I - . tV ~ . . IS' t.(i " , ,11', , '" ~I ~, ~ I~ " ,_L.::::....: . ", '.: :-~_~t~~'~. '.~ '. "".' .,",. "';. ,.,.,., .-. '." ,', '0' ~'. ' :", ....-... . ;:' .'," ,.. .' . . ;' '".- ,,: . .'- ',. ...... ... Southold Town Planni~Board 13 ~lY 12, 1993 OTHER Mr. Ward: San Andres - Mr. Saland to discuss purchase of development rights. SCTM# 1000--125--1--2.9. Is Mr. Sa land here? If not, we'll move on. Mr. Ward: Tartan Oil -- To discuss drainage for property site plan. SCTM# 1000--115--3--9. Is anybody here for them? William Moore: We just had a couple of items. This thing's been kiCking on for awhile. We're back and forth with our site plan drawer, our engineer. We ~ave from the Board a letter in which you requested certain piece information on our site plan and, in fact I'v ~ad these things for awhile. By the time I had site plans put in my file, you had gotten a letter from the New York State Department of Transportation with regard to sidewalk width so we're back allover again to reo-draw t~e sidewalk because the State doesn't want to reduce t~e width. You had requested a narrower sidewalk and the State disagrees with you so now we've got to go back and draw the new sidewalks allover again. But, l)efore we went and did that, we had a couple of items we wantee] to discuss with you relative to some site plan elements you wanted to see. One of which was a drainage plan. I know you're familiar with this site, this is the piece that's elevated where the building is. It's all asphalt and it's been that way for years. (TAPE CHANGE) It's been in its relative present state for a year as far as asphalt goes. It's all wooded to the back and then asphalted right up to the road. You had asked for drainage plan calculations and the engineers have been playing around with some ideas and they wanted to get conceptually from you...in fact we had one of the fellol{S from Tartan speak with Mr. Kassner, and he suggested we come and speak with you tonight. The problem we hae] with this site is it being asphalted from the buile]ing down to the road, the rainwater is going to run right down into the street and that obviously presents a problem. The idean we are trying to come up with and see if you would more or less go along with it is to utilize the proposed curbing or an internal kind of trench train as a trough leading to some dry wells as a solution to this and we wanted to get some kind of an idea if that was workable or doable rather than a proposed reo-grading of the site which we thought was... Mr. Ward: Well, if you took it...is the whole site drainihg to the Main Road? Mr. Moore: No, I'd say, having seen it in a good rain, I'd say some of it at least drains over to Marratooka as well, at least that portion of the property. It slopes quite dramatically from that east side of the building down to Marratooka. Mr. Ward: Because you could intercept it with trench drains in those areas and then go to dry wells with that, but these would have to l)e pre--cast or have to be substantial structures, not just gravel. It woule] have to be drains. Constructive drains. Mr. Moore: OK. Southold Town PlannieBoard 14 elY 12, ]993 Mr. Ward: Li'ee you would see when you go into a dip in the city where the drain.. . Mr. Moore: I think that's what we were thinking about as well, as a solution, if that's agreeable to you we'll see if the engineers can work on that. The second item of some significance there is the sign which is there and that sign at the present location has been there for I don't know how long but the letter that you folks wrote to us requested the sign be moved ba~e 25 feet, and we were asking if the sign remained where it is it's going to be within a landscaped area. As far as visibility goes you have in your file a study done by Dunn Traffic that we had presented to you back when we were debating and negotiating and arguing over the number of curb cuts on Rt. 25. You had '<anted the one at one point and we had Dunn Engineering come bac]e and do a traffic study to show that two would work. One of the findings in their traffic study was that the visibility at Marratooka and 25 where that present sign is located is no trouble whatsoever. So, where the sign is presently situated does not provide a visibility problem for the use of that intersection. And so we asle that that sign remain where it is and has been, and not be relocated. Drainage was the one thing and the sign is the second. Otl1er than that I tl1inle we can Jet a site plan that's suitable. If you have any questions, I l1ave the Tartan Oil folks here as well. Mr. Ward: We'll talce it under advisement and get 1:Jac'e to you. Does the Board have any comments? Mr. McDonalrJ: The site's lOOking better. The signage is dropping, you're site's loolcing better. ******************** Hiq'1point at South Har1:Jor -- This major subdivision is for 9 lots acres located on the east side Of South Harbor Road and the Bayview" Road in Southold. SCTMjr] 000--75--4--22.1. Is e t would like to speak this evening regarding t -proposed "",,'" Michael Croteau: I'm 'th a few of the other peo ~~ed in the subdivision. The lates Ian the developers Itted...and I understand he doesn't feel it necessa to submit _ ~e, has the ]00 foot lots running down South Harbor Lan 'that there's been some discussion with the Planning Board as to th " ibility of this plan already. I am here just to say that T thin " at ther 's a more effective way to exercise the cluster zoni - "hat they had 0 hat piece of property, to put the houses in an area .' t keeps the open vista th for South Harbor Road awl Bayview Road a . -uses that piece Or property '1 nner that doesn't essentially cut' " 'off from both sides as it "ould wit ract of houses that they pr se to run down South Harbor Road. T don't 1 if the Dlanning rd has received any other plans from the developer this point, t T thin'e T'm spea1dng for myself and alot of other peop re tha re pretty upset with the existing plan that he has on the ta1:Jle, and T wouln li'ee to speal{ my peace tonight about that plan. . . $/A 8Fi I..J5" ~t::.; SUBMISSION WITHOUT COVER LETTER DATE: 7/ /2-/'12> SENDER: Bill Moore SUBJECT: To..rtan oil SCTM#: /15-':>-"'/ COMMENTS: submitk_c< 6 Pl1.feJL prinb ~ Pi) mt-r. U (ii JLJL l 3 ; [bUL:: ,1. .J. ' SOU.'.'lrl' D'........rl:~\'.-I':"iT<.......- i H\":1.. \.",,'1 1 . PLANNING BOf~RO___~.j 1 . . /' S utflLh RK . PLANNING BOI\RD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards SCOTI L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Telephonc (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 D~ "7' , 19 'Tz. John A. Keogh, Secretary Mattituck Fire District Pike Street Mattituck, New York 11952 Dear Mr. Keogh: Enclosed please surveys for CJ.' :SLr~/t:bd-lltl--7- y. Please notify his office needed. Please specify whether will be needed. Please reply .by f2k.- -;;z:1... cooperation. as to whether any firewells are shallow wells or electric wells , 199~. Thank you for your C:;~~A Bennett Orlowski, JF. Chairman enc. 1u, c-l.",t 1M U tt )ilt,\ <\~y Mall;,,,,,,,, H. y.l{9~ John A. Keog4; .~~ ;;), 'j!' 41,;;11' ""'1 DEG 2 9 1992 s--.J OUTHOLD TmVN PLANNiNG BOeRD . . ~ . r . i '", . J~". '~. ) . ..._">~' /-?~ -;_::~.;' .~. J; t). '.~\ ..,~ '\~' ~ ., ,.,;; ';:' ,:- ')' - --::;;;> .~~~ ' ~"": 1 . _ ,> ::.... ..{' . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jf. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box I 179 Southold. New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765.1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765.1823 December 8, 1992 William D. Moore Moore & Moore P.O. Box 23 Mattituck NY 11952 FE: Tartan oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: The Planning Board has received a letter from the New York State Department of Transportation in response to its letter of November 16, 1992, concerning the width of the sidewalk at the above referenced property. (Copies enclosed). The DOT requests that you comply with their 5'-0" sidewalk standard. In addition to the above, the following items must be added to the site plan before the Board can proceed: 1. Drainage plan and calculations must be shown. 2. Parking calculations must be shown, including handicapped parking. 3. An enlarged diagram of the floor plan showing all uses must be provided. 4. A landscaping plan must be provided; see enclosed sketch. Street trees must be provided on Route 25, Marratooka Lane and Sunset Avenue. . . " Page 2 Tarton oil 5. The free standing sign must be twenty-five (25) feet from the front property lines. The maximum height of such a sign shall be fifteen (15) feet. 6. Percent (%) lot coverage and landscaping must be shown. 7. The total area of the property must be shown. 8. All lighting must be shielded from adjoining properties. In addition to the above, consideration should be given to relocating the parking spaces away from the underground storage tanks to facilitate the delivery of fuel. Further, Suffolk County Department of Health Services and . New York State Department of Transportation permits are required. If a fire well is required we will notify you. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office. Very truly yours, ~~'a~.. Bennett Orlowski Jr. ~"~S Chairman Encl. cc: Victor Lessard, Principal Building Inspector Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Board of Appeals tt . PLANNI:'>G BOARD ~ll'~1BERS Bennet( Orlowski. Jr.. Ch;,.l1rman Gcur~e Ritl.:hll': Lllharn. Jr Rich.J.rJ (j_ WarJ Mark S. \h:l>nn,dJ Kcnnclh L. EJwanh \('(iIT I 1l.\RR.IS .:"."f\T,<'r ,~ --/ '. ~ ',1 . .,;.." t. j '. ..,.-.... 'l,'" ! ,"1 Telephone (516) 765-1~3R PL\:-INI:-';C BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHaLl) .~, ,'U'I 'rl_".I.,~l No'!cmbcr 16, 1992 Vito Lena, Regional Permit Engineer State of New York Veterans Memorial Highway Happague, NY 11787 RE: Tartan oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Your Case # 90-425 Dear Mr. Lena: This is in reference to your letter to this Board of January 2, 1991, in which you indicate a five foot sidewalk would be required for the above referenced project. The Planning Board would like to request that the sidewalk width be reduced to four feet due to the anticipated low volume of pedestrian traffic, and the fact that there are no other sidewalks along State Road 25 in this vicinity. We also note that adjacent properties are zoned for Agricultural or Residential uses. The Board would appreciate a written response to its request. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office. Very truly yours, Jj}v't/ltdr ~-, 9~/v!r Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman ,~ JAMES A KUZLOSKI REGIONAL DIRECTOR STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HALJPPAUGE. N.Y. 11788 FRANKLIN E. WHITE COMMISSIONER December 3, 1992 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Office Toem of Southold Tmm Hall, 53095 Hain Street P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 .Dear Mr. Orlowski: Tarten Oil Site Plan State Route 25 and Sunset Ave. Mattituck/SC~ 1000-115-3-9 Our Case No. 90-425 Reference is made to your letter of November 16, 1992 concerning the sidewalk installation along State Route 25 at the above noted location. Your request to reduce the width of the proposed sidewalk along Route 25 has been reviewed by this office. New York State standards require that whenever applicable the installation of 5'-0" wide sidewalk be applied. In situations where we have different width sidewalk abutting the proposed site we will match the existing. In this case both parcels which are adjacent to this site do not have any sidewalk. Therefore, we will apply this standard and require that the new 5'-0" sidewalk be installed five feet from the back of curb. Any questions concerning this matter may be directed to this office at 360-6025. ;tft~ VITO F. M:NA Regional Permit Engineer VFL:BC ----~._._ - ~._.__._ o. .___._~.._ __" .- ....,1 '-l Ii:; l! .. ....-._.-..~.,_.._'>..~-'.~..'1 j i I: - . L.r__. ; .._.._..1 AN EOUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFlRMA T/VE ACT/ON EMPLOYER .. , PLANNI!'JG BOARD MEMBERS Benneu Orlowsk" Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S McDonald 'Kenneth L. Edwards SCOTI L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Soulhold. New York 11971 Telephone (510) 705-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 1)~ 9' , 19 '7~ John A. Keogh, Secretary Mattituck Fire District Pike Street Mattituck, New York 11952 .~ Dear Mr. Keogh: Enclosed please surveys for SLr~/aoo-lI,r-7- y. Please notify his office needed. Please specify whether will be needed. Please reply .by J2k- :;2:J.... cooperation. as to whether any firewells are shallow wells or electric wells , 199~. Thank you for your C:;~~A Bennett Orlowski, JF. Chairman enc. .~ . * . 0U~t..e:- ....6 ,e/G ,/ v::> STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE. N.Y. 11788 JAMES A. KUZLOSKI REGIONAL DIRECTOR FRANKLIN E. WHITE COMMISSIONER December 3, 1992 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Planning Board Office To,m of Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Street P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Mr. Orlowski: Tarten Oil Site Plan State Route 25 and Sunset Ave. Mattituck/SCTM 1000-115-3-9 Our Case No. 90-425 Reference is made to your letter of November 16, 1992 concerning the sidewalk installation along State Route 25 at the above noted location. Your request to reduce the width of the proposed sidewalk along Route 25 has been reviewed by this office. New York State standards require that whenever applicable the installation of 5'-0" wide sidewalk be applied. In situations where we have different width sidewalk abutting the proposed site we will match the existing. In this case both parcels which are adjacent to this site do not have any sidewalk. Therefore, we will apply this standard and require that the new 5'-0" sidewalk be installed five feet from the back of curb. Any questions concerning this matter may be directed to this office at 360-6025. ''f{F""" , tu t< VITO F. A Regional Permit Engineer VFL:BC ';:, :' C' DEe - 4 1992 1..... AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY/AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards ~~ ~.~~ ~ . ~ => " ;.",. Q . . Ct.l . ". t ~ .", ., ~ i:' "~ .. ~ ~O . '~<::>~ ~~~ . SCOlT L. HARRIS Supervisor Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 November 16, 1992 Vito Lena, Regional Permit Engineer State of New York Veterans Memorial Highway Happague, NY 11787 RE: Tartan Oil Site Plan Southwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM* 1000-115-3-9 Your Case * 90-425 Dear Mr. Lena: This is in reference to your letter to this Board of January 2, 1991, in which you indicate a five foot sidewalk would be required for the above referenced project. The Planning Board would like to request that the sidewalk width be reduced to four feet due to the anticipated low volume of pedestrian traffic, and the fact that there are no other sidewalks along State Road 25 in this vicinity. We also note that adjacent properties are zoned for Agricultural or Residential uses. The Board would appreciate a written response to its request. If you have any questions, or require additional information, please contact this office. Very truly yours, ~ ~-,9~/~ Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman . . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (5 I 6) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 October 28, 1992 william D. Moore Attorneys at Law 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: TARTAN Oil Site Plan ~outhwest corner of State Rte. 25 and Sunset Avenue, Mattituck Zoning District: Limited Business SCTM~ 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: A review of the above-noted file and site plan indicates that the following information or approvals will be needed before the Planning Board can proceed: 1. Health Department approval (for the conversion of the service bays to the mini-market: 2. Curb cut approval (239K) for the curb cuts on state Route 25; 3. Landscaping plan which shows the landscaping at the northwest and the site between the curb cuts. illustrates this concept. addition of northeast corners of The enclosed sketch 4. Approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. If you have any questions, or require further assistance, please contact this office. Sincerely, ~ ~~1v./1/1; Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman cc: Zoning Board of Appeals Encls. 'j .; I . ,~ .~ '. ! ~. . '.1 /'r~. I . . . : ~ '" " oJ) "- )~ ~J~j ; :.:.1 EM/.) . ill.. '.' . ':".CL/~ . " . ~. .'J.....\ /~"..'" TO A#)n::;'1 .-=> . . "d: . ~I a/aT~.oe ~ At-IM L.- -: Infot/ltw:Su\ I f..o- r~E ,-~ /. ~ -; . ..~ ,:=,". . ~o.;.;;.!"-1 //2"// .,~~;.!P:r-7~~::~: ';1'eL~ ~ /_. ..._"..~, ..__,- c. _ ~'i'f2att.~.__i:...C...... '~.. . Jrg~' ~ 7. ';?': ~w~:,,'"';:~~.';'';'-' _ '-,r ",- ,'.. . .:. ~ .4-z, t.. :3.$. .' J_c...x:. .'iCu....... . ... l SO~ . ......, . ~- -, PF~,oL~..: !' ",,04J . /S~J lei; . Sl~ rC~flttIV "0'0 '0 ..i.;.... ,<.<:.','.. 1. '. -;:... f 0 . :'~~ ._, .." :",;10'" '.' ~~,.-. J".. - -..-- -~:- i] e: \ , I (..,j .~ \" '.~~ " , ~.. ...... """",' +- j 4-'"' A~AI..T. .4AL.II7E. tUU.41..J ~""'T".<JIJ1' , I , n 'l) iii In ." ," ~-~ .-- l F~ ~~_.- .. . rT~'-~ t. '..' ) .. ....".,~ . ". ~ ':; ..,...y... :':","Y "h .\ , _...___~4--",:,-; , , , ."~ , ,".'" .f. . , <' -' ~o' ,.... '-~ ,! " I , ;~ i~.:_._~' -<:-, .;:" . . , , . , ~ ~'-,!. ~ .-.-.<-'-: .b: .. ,. . . l~i';":" ,"h':- . i E.""t)~~. , 1.,../;,) '. ~... ...... Llc:.a:r ..-.....1') ~; I ~..::::.;. ~It.. ~f:... l~:~" t{~~..... 1 -' .....-;< ~ ~ -i""'..". ;-......a.... ;;,~ ':"':"-''i:' I'. i~ co .'-....:.. :~."!:~ . t~?~ t-.,.( ,.+f~~~~$". r- . ~:_' .:,;::-:.h' ." '.' , .' . '." ......... f": '~"'l · .... ;V' "'" ".J ~. .~. .... ~. '" ':\ _.'l::v.+ .~~ .~~. :.;~., ,"-. ,."<+ '. '-~~- ::~:;'~>l.::.~~-' I .,'-. ,.. '.. i;,'!.i ;.~. " f"': l;:4~: ,- :'!-f....,. lot,'; "". "t,"'.', . . o,of.-.. , ...'$2 .. ../D/.JJ1. -;,,~,,_.....~ , . '~N 8"R&'/V',r. cove.'-'-- ~~c(/r ..' ~~...~'.'. :1 ~,:~', '30: d' I ' .J;~ue ~:~;/ . '::' ~IL-G. &LI!..V'" "T'''',. , - IlI(S,,', - UJ Ii I , : ; '. , l.- I: ! - .., " f'-...Jr Eu! .~ .'4 , ~re '. t -J ?~ .,~.:,,~.-; ,':;~ ,,-"t-""'. -~ ,,,.:-'~ ~ ' t" ,..~t . 'it" .. ~ '"~~ \~ 3' '-:.-:~ ~....- ;->~ ,-~ ~. . .....~.:."'., . ~,' ....... ,...... ,.'.::~'ti: ,.._~~ ;.:'i~ .;~;~~ ':~' ~ .....~. ..-~' 'u: - ,.;fi~;~7 ~j;n'; .~~~ <~,.. . '. ,1'7'';.,.. ._-_t-.,~,,~.-:. .'''t, ., .-' ,'-tii'- : "~'r~lt , at">."'- ,....':"- i-"'" . .v,.., ~ ",' _:--, ~;"""" ~ .....,!< -.-:'i( ""i (p... ~ ".' . , <<-, ~ 'f"! -. - 00 m(nO ,U 23 . - SOUTHGl~ T PlAN_NINC3 IS ~ '; . "' l)1i J 1- ~' ..,::'r~~~: . . .. " ..,i:'!,;', . (;->:; , ~~ {. >~ g]/~hhl.Mf'~1.) 7Y>/J~_b-(;~. ..'. . ',- ":'~?~~:..,~'>';:~~t~-,!~~'::ii' T: ;'"ti::;-35i:7:i~~}\f~;~ '~.,' . ,i ., . . l' ~ .:~. ':~';~;N -">/;.~~~ .~~:~.: \i -:~i~..' 'C' ~. , . .......;.:::,_. ',' .:,1 " .' ~ "';;:;~,:~~i".~":' ~':... ;'.;..:;:: .> ~ :':'':', ",",.~_ ..f ',.1!' '. " ~ ...:~:~~. .,..::" .... .," . i ~ '':' .'~. ~ .~,.,., · ",,,,,,,.t., '~l"~T{~.;:: : ~'~~",: ,~" t.:~'" ""~~'~~-1",:..'" .1l.....1O.l' ....~\!' 1"''''__''1 ~'-~"~~'i"""-'" ~ ..... .. ,.~> . ~ -"'J:~\ '"' .~-'" ;"M~:' ,..~ ... ":.' -":""',,1' ~'(t). ~'.. '~"l ';.. ~'I' J'.:.['oVw{ ':t':l:'''-~j~_;..~'}.~..1',~~"",~ ~1'r't;r..,. ''1-....~~~.; ~....;{ ''''~I~''r''~:..: :)', :;1~",~.t7.\~1o}:; ":""'~" 'F.,,,., '~..: ",,' ~. """, o ;' :""""'<i'lit"'J!.!:".,~,-";\- ,,,,",l~.., ~ .'t' l" "".~~fI'I: .... _" '.,.. , " .~~~"'''' .~... .. ;'.<';,..: ;....,. ~:'-~-!Y""7:~~-.;~~~::, ~~/...~ ..... .. ....; . '.-.~k:. ", ...~~~~ \.:~ _ , . ',. /.........;.. r-{-{ '{~"";'''l:,.... ,."!-tt::,....,,> ......~tl;' . ..~....:(-~.t,~.,.~...:'-i?:r .,~;..,'.. ....~.:~,:,~-::.::-":~ "~.'I-.....~....; ~.._~'"O!~"'1.1-(4 ". ~ , ):.;~~...'(;,,_~ ~.:,~\it7i~;;;~?~~\:[>;'t~21ifJ,i-~ "'- ' ; ~"i"" ~ ,~ t <I ,'. ".'c'" . ''''''i'' . ~l ,~~... "':"'1'\0- .~,..t'-"4";"", ~ 1 \'Ii . .,.~.. ',' .,~ d",.,,,._ -- ,.'.;<.~':. '-!" ;:~'" ~ ,. ..~ i~.: '....f'" ;1:.- [ .', ,.; . .....~ ,"t . 'f~ :O'~~'!i1:' ~ '_::U;~~: .:: ;.\::~~(t~~t~;. : . ","",-. 5 ,r..;,' '''-,"'Look '. . '<~ .~.~ ~~ " -', :f...~.. Jet', ,,,;,~,,,,;,-">'lh"\;;~':,~, . + " '.. . ". .0' ~,~_ ....J: ' -..'. .1... .:It t".t~'" ~ ,. '<;-~_:';:"'" >:i:"~>.?:::t-'$:.rl?: . -' ~.~ .... ..',(,. " .~ ~ .,":. :;.'. ."., >', . . ,--:---:0.- . Bennett Orlowski. Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards scon L HARRIS Supervisor PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS . .~ . . -. >"'":'~ '";_~; _/:::.,)J---' Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTH OLD October 20, 1992 Fax (516) 765-1823 william D. Moore Moore & Moore P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Tarton Oil, Mattituck SCTM~1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting on October 19, 1992. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, make a determination of non-significance, and grant a Negative Declaration. Enclosed please find a copy of the Negative Declaration for your records. Sincerely, ~~0//.s Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Encl. . . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards SCOTI L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Soulhold. New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 state Environmental Quality Review NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of Determination of Non-Significance October 19, 1992 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act) of the Environmental Law. The Southold Town Planning Board, as lead agency, has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and a Draft Environmental Impact Statement will not be prepared. Name of Action: Amendment to Site plan for Tarton Oil Corporation SCTMlI: 1000-115-3-9 Location: Southwest corner of State Route 25 and Marratooka Road, Mattituck SEQR Status: Type I ) Unlisted X) Conditioned Negative Declaration: Yes No ( ) (X ) Description of Action: Proposed site plan is for an existing canopy over a partial self-service gas station and the addition of a convenience store in place of the service bays. . . Page 2 Tarton oil Corporation SEQR Negative Declaration Con't. Reason Supporting This Determination: No correspondence has been received from any of the coordinating agencies in the allotted time. Therefore it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from those agencies. A traffic impact study was conducted on this site. The proposal includes the installation of curbing and curb cuts along the State Route 25 road frontage as well as on Sunset Avenue and Marratooka Lane. The addition of clearly defined access points will improve traffic safety and traffic circulation at the site. In addition, the replacement of some black top in the front yard areas with landscaping will improve the aesthetic impact of the site on the surrounding area. No expansion of the existing building is being sought and the proposed (existing) uses will not require an expansion in sanitary facilities. An Environmental assessment has been submitted and reviewed. We determined that no significant adverse effects to the environmental were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. For Further Information: Contact Person: Valerie Scopaz Address: Planning Board Telephone Number: (516) 765-1938 cc: Suffolk County Department of Health Services NYSDEC- Albany Cramer Voorhis and Associates, Inc. Judith Terry, Town Clerk Building Department Board of Appeals Applicant NYS Dept. of Transportation . . MEMORANDUM TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals FROM: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Members of the Planning Board RE: Site Plan for Tartan Oil Corporation STM 11 115-3-9 S/W/c State Route 25 and Marratooka Road, Mattituck DATE: September 24, 1992 On Friday, September 17th, we received a copy of your letter to William D. Moore, on the above referenced matter. By copy of that letter, you asked if the site plan was acceptable to the Planning Board. Since we are in the middle of lead agency coordination and the environmental review, which was started on August 18th, we cannot respond legally to that specific question until a determination of environmental significance is made. Since your Board is one of the agencies with jurisdiction in this particular application, we look forward to receiving your comments on the environmental impacts within the next few weeks. The determination of environmental significance probably will be made at our next meeting which will be held on October 19, 1992. With regard to the recommendation that a preliminary conference be held; this application has been under review by this Board since August of 1987. Given that Mr. Moore has maintained an ongoing dialogue with this office, another preliminary conference is not necessary. cc: William D. Moore, Esq. . "ap;za=q v:' ::c~ ,1]f "",UffOl'" '~ 'F" 'I t! . 'f'~'\,:.' ~ ~/ ,~ :;:":.0 ~ (:) ,:'. ~ U) ,-~ _,; .c=: ~\'. '., ~ ~~ "', i> , r.t ',"t.,< .....' < < ><;--:>-. O"J" -~ ~'?-c:::.>CJX.D . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L Edwards scon L HARRIS Supervisor Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 SouthoId. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765.1823 MEMORANDUM TO: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Members of the Zoning Board of Appeals Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman $0(1.-- / tiS Members of the Planning Board . 'l FROM: RE: Site Plan for Tartan Oil Corporation STM 1I 115-3-9 S/W/c State Route 25 and Marratooka Road, Mattituck DATE: September 24, 1992 On Friday, September 17th, we received a copy of your letter to William D. Moore, on the above referenced matter. By copy of that letter, you asked if the site plan was acceptable to the Planning Board. Since we are in the middle of lead agency coordination and the environmental review, which was started on August 18th, we cannot respond legally to that specific question until a determination of environmental significance is made. Since your Board is one of the agencies with juriSdiction in this particular application, we look forward to receiving your comments on the environmental impacts within the next few weeks. The determination of environmental significance probably will be made at our next meeting which will be held on October 19, 1992. With regard to the recommendation that a preliminary conference be held; this application has been under review by this Board since August of 1987. Given that Mr. Moore has maintained an ongoing dialogue with this office, another preliminary conference is not necessary. cc: William D. Moore, Esq. . <.~-~., . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie utham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards SCOrf L. HARRIS Supervisor Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 August 18,19 92 .. RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Reviewer: The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: site plan for Tartan Oil /I~-_3_ 7 Requested Action: Propased site plan is for an existing canopy over a partial self service gas station and the addition of a convenience store in place of the service bays. SEQRA Classification: ( ) Type I (X ) Un'listed Contact Person: Robert G. Kassner (516)-765-1938 . . The lead agency will determine the impact statement (ElS) on this project. the date of this letter, please respond have an interest in being lead agency. need for an environmental Within thirty (30) days of in writing whether or not you Planning Board Position: (x This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. ( ) Other. (See comments below). .' Comments: This site plan is a result of stipulation of settlement between the Tartan Oil Company and the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. (copy attached) Please feel free to contact this office for further information. dt::;;;'L,4~ , Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman cc:~Board of Appeals Board ~-of-'r... uS Lees ~ Building' Department Southold Town Board ~Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services 'NYSDEC 5 LUll;' B-reok... NYSDEC - Albany . o:S. .;: _ Dert: of P.uhJ.icJlorks, cu..:]. Army Corp or .t.nY.Lue:cr3 -f N. Y . S. Dept. of Tr ansporta tion * Maps are enclosed for your,!cview Coordinating agencies q.\) ~r . . ..:sLf8FiLE PE:> ~K. / SCOTT L. HARRIS VS Supervisor APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Serge Doyen, Jr. James Dinizio, Jr. Robert A. Villa Telephone (516) 765-1809 Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTH OLD September 14, 1992 William D. Moore, Esq. Moore & Moore 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Site Plan Application - Tartan oil Corp. Dear Mr. Moore: Our office has reviewed your letter of September 2, 1992. You should feel free to file the variance application at any time. However, as you may recall from past experiences with the boards, it will be necessary for the Planning Board to coordinate comments on the site plan issues to our office prior to the concluding of a public hearing on the variance application. It is recommended that a preliminary conference be held with the Planning Board Members and Building Inspector concerning the site plan, if not already done so. This would enable you to at least receive preliminary comments or suggestions from the Planning Board or suggestions at an early stage of the site plan process, in writing. This would also enable the Members of the ZBA to review the map in its entirety before sealing the record. By way of a copy of this letter, we are requesting that the Planning Board send, in writing, its update concerning acceptance or any possible suggested changes on the site plan map to complete the town's coordination efforts at this time. Very truly yours, GERARD P. GOEHRINGER CHAIRMAN cc: Chairman, Planning Board ~ ,tP I 7 1992 j , l LL-}l~~~JBr I I . . ~d~Ufr.Dl;;,"io r'l,,,"~ "(2 '"' c\!l~ ~.'.".' ~_\\ ~' "= 'u, '? \\ ~::" ':., ,,:.~ ;...::. \:i Q .~ G1> f' "" ".., ,.., \he::>, ,,"'~. ~ '" "--9', '-" ~"'i '-e- /".{ -. i--:S yr ~:"~~<<-~~!-v:f.c:./:<ff .. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennen Orlowski, Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G, Ward Mark S, McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards scon L. HARRIS Supervisor Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Town Hal!, 53095 Main Road P,O, Box 1179 Soulhold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 AUGUST 18, 1992 William D. Moore Attorney at Law 315 Westphalia Road P.O. Box 23 Mattituck, NY 11952 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Tartan Oil SCTM# 1000-115-3-9 Dear Mr. Moore: The following resolution was dUly adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, August 17, 1992. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, start the coordination process on this unlisted action. Please do not hesitate to contact this office if you have any questions regarding the above. Very truly yours, ~~;~-/tL5 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman . <,:.2:: . PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski, Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards SCOlT L. HARRIS Supervisor :c Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Fax (516) 765-1823 August 18,19 92 RE: Lead Agency Coordination Request Dear Reviewer: The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6 NYCRR Part 617 the fOllowing: 1. Your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. Your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3. Issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed please find a copy of the proposal and a completed Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: site plan for Tartan Oil 11'>-3-7 Requested Action: Proposed site plan is for an existing canopy over a partial self service gas station and the addition of a convenience store in place of the service bays. SEQRA Classification: ( ) Type I (X ) Un-listed Contact Person: Robert G. Kassner (516)-765-1938 . . The lead agency will determine the impact statement (EIS) on this project. the date of this letter, please respond have an interest in being lead agency. need for an environmental Within thirty (30) days of in writing whether or not you Planning Board Position: (x ) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. ) This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. ( Other. (See comments below). Comments: This site plan is a result of stipulation of settlement between the Tartan Oil Company and the Zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold,(copy attached) Please feel free to contact this office for further information. d=#u4i t( Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman cc:~ Board of Appeals Board-of Tl...bLc:c:s ~ Building" Department Southold Town Board # Suffolk County Dept. of Health Services 'NYSDEC SLuuy BJ:GOk.. NYSDEC - Albany . .,s. <:. D'ilI't o f-PubJ.i..cJlorks- 'Y.3. Army Corp uf Enyrnec:rs ~ N.Y.S. Dept. of Transportation * Maps are enclosed for your_~eview Coordinating agencies , ~ .- M " .' f) .- . SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK --------------------------------------x TARTAN OIL CORP., Petitioner, : -against- . . BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, : STIPULATION OF SETTLEMENT : Respondent. Index No. 88-10700 . . --------------------------------------x SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK --------------------------------------x TARTAN OIL CORP., : Petitioner, : -against- . . Index No. 88-10701 BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS OF THE TOWN : OF SOUTHOLD, : Respondent. --------------------------------------x IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the petitioner Tartan Oil Corp. (hereinafter Tartan) and the WUlilill!M'l1....r.." ....;.~..M's of the Town of Southo1d, (hereinafter the Zoning Board), that the above .'.""7-' proceedings ~..,.tt_..'lIl1illi......ti'~>!.~ 'aftCt:' 'CO If.l..... 1 . "-Ill :Jtr ;...,.,.Ii.._&:;lm. t,..:i,.....,'l\4 l"".i.ng . BOUlt".~, :P"'.*IIP"'Cl1!d.. ._-.tW:,>>lM.. it 9DheI, w,j.l._',.e.rrlU",nl"lflf:_", ~.,;"'t..hJ('_ v"$ilt"".., aM' J,IIJIIIIII.l.'i.'~i9.~I:I'.'1 "~'r!"f;_llIiw.h,"l~.t '__~...~___c ""j P f';,' '0 , .; ',: l' : I J', !~ ;'1 . .,.,...~:r:,"",_:;~"",,:'; ".. " -1- .' . II . . 2. ~lii'.''9fat~;c.lrd'1jd._l''.._:Ilan ,44.1I:."tll Tartan _,.'.lyt:'o 'the IoMIUJ_fltfidi'tiif vari~,~ftl_(f~IL>.I,'J"'''''j.;!.' tlQfeaaOlt, as an accessory .">;.;....,ic.'.<f;.,j.. structure, in the front yard for a variance of the height requirements applicable to the canopy. 3. s'." ~iIIr- <, :uNltINII' . , . ',' . . ' ,.1 . A"".~. ".. ';~fl.'Jt. . _. .... . '7, rtl1't'W~.~l".~i$;M "*"~M"'''IIIIU II 2. .ove, the iii , "1~ .I\LM.Il1'Ii~"";,,\J J;J1~'!lIi"'\l.J1 "J!U1t ~plllf'lIil"'~{o.r ," '., ,::"--",,,,'-~".f~1'i'. ,-'. ....,'.. ',.,', * ."iI!lI."...~p~.II~"~Ull;1.# '''_~I1l~" .1llMWIi_, ...1.i.cation -" QJ,~,..~~t~r".}~ng;".f1]11"1I!ilJ;JI.i;;;1iI gU91,ine sales, both of ..,."............. "'.,-),:.;:,',:~:,~X>' ',,' .\"," "''''\:r.;,:-'''::'h;.,.~.\ ....., which had been denied without prejudice. In the event site plan approval and the variances set forth in paragraph 2 above are obtained by the petitioner, then the convenience store variance and special exemption applications will be granted subject to the following conditions: a) food service to be limited to packaged items, plus the heating of previously prepared foods, all for off-premises consumption; bl no alcoholic beverages to be sold before 5:00 p.m. on all days when school is in session; cl 4. Upon Tartan's obtaining and complying with the approvals set forth above, the Building Inspector would -2- II . f) . . be authorized to issue the appropriate certificate of occupancy. 5. Both proceedlngs shall be discontinued without costs or disbursements to either party and this stipulation can be submitted by either party to a Justice of this Court to have it "so ordered" without further notice to the other party. Either party can file this stipulation without further notice to the other party. 6. See rider annexed hereto. Dated: October /z.-, 1989 .."-"S, BARRY T LLERING, Pre 1dent of Tartan Oil Corp. I. . ~7L ~0t/~~_. ~ ./~ SMITH, FINKELSTEIN~~UNDBER~ ISLER and YAKABOSKI Attorneys for Respondent Office & P.O. Address 456 Griffing Avenue P.O. Box 389 Riverhead, New York (516) 727-4100 {J!-W~ LEVINE & ROBINSON, P.C. Attorneys for Petitioner Office & P.O. Address 50 Charles Lindbergh Blvd. Mitchel Field, NY 11553 (516) 794-6900 So ordered this day of , 1989. J. S. C. -3- . ., \ " . . Rider to Stipulation 6. It is agreed and understood that all prior proceedings between the parties remain open until the Planning Board and Board of Appeals render final decision herein, and that if Tartan chooses to challenge any such final decision no statute of limitation or res judicata defense will be raised by such Board as to those prior proceedings. Dated: ~ ~e~" BARRY T LERING, 1 ent of Tartan Oil Corp. LEV~i~~s. P.C. Attorneys. for Petitioner Office' P.O. Address 50 Charles Lindbergh Blvd. Mitchel Field, New York 11553 (516) 794-6900 GERARD P. GOEHRINGER, Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals SMITH, FINKELSTEIN, LUNDBERG, ISLER and YAKABOSKI Attorneys for Respondent 456 Griffing Avenue P.O. Box 389 Riverhead, New York (516) 727-4100 .... I' _ .' e^ ~~\ I!I/.~ CRAMER, VO'RHI .8&A\SOCIATES "ENVIRONMENTA Jti~~iNG CONSULTANTS ' )~ \\\~ i .\. ..5udi42 July 24, 1992 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Review of EAF for Mobile Service Station, Mattituck, NY SCTM No. 1000-115-3-9 Dear Benny: As per the your request, we have completed a preliminary review of the above referenced project in accordance with your request. Tasks and completed activities are identified as follows: 1. Review Part I LEAF The parcel has been field inspected by CV A, and the LEAF has been reviewed and amended as necessary. A copy of same is attached. 2. Prepare Part /J LEAF The Part II LEAF checklist has been completed and is also attached. Additional information concerning our findings is included below. 3. Environmental and Planning Considerations .. The parcel has been inspected and environmental references concerning the site and area have been consulted. The proposed project is identified on the site plan prepared by Petroleum Associates, Proposed Canopy Installation Site Plan (Amended 11-20-91; Drawing No. TO-8701; Sheet 1 of 1). The subject site is the present location of a functioning gasoline service station operated by Tartan Oil. The site is 0.78 acres in size and is located in the southwest corner of Route 25 and Maratooka Lane, Mattituck, NY. The proposed project involves a site plan amendment to allow two curb cuts to Route 25, with appropriate curbing and sidewalks. The site is fully utilized at present, and there is presentlX unchanneled access to the existing gas pumps. The proposal would create two (2) 30 foot reinforced concrete driveway curb cuts into the site from Route 25, and one (1) 25 foot wide asphalt ramp into the site from Maratooka Lane. Driveway cuts would include appropriate radius', and the frontage along Route 25 would include sodded areas, and a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk. The traffic flow implications of the proposed project have been addressed in a Traffic Engineering Exammation by Dunn Engineerin~ and reviewe '. 1992. The concluding statement of that review is as folio h rn @ rn 0 W rnr JUL 2 8 1992 @I Page 1 I SOUTHOLD TOWN .mW'iG BOARD 54-2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (51 ., . .- Mobil Service Station I-.: EAF Review "In summary, the traffic access scenario proposed by the applicant appears to be sound with respect to traffic operations with no negative impact. Proposed improvements to the site will enhance operations and improve safety due to the presently uncontrolled site access scheme. It is recommended that two curb cuts on Main Road be allowed in this particular case due to the site specific conditions of existing site layout and operations, specifically internal! external circulation, separate traffic flows for the on.site convenience store, and the desire to minimize side street conflicts." The proposed action may actually improve traffic flow conditions in the vicinity of the site, along with the fact that and will certainly not degrade operations. In addition, the use is not an over-intensification because the site is utilized to full capacity at present. There is no additional square footage prop'osed, nor will sanitary disposal facilities be changed in any way. There are no sigmficant natural or human resources associated with the site which would be affected by this project. Accordingly, based on this review and the Long EAF, we feel the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. If the Plannmg Board is in agreement, we feel that a Negative Declaration is justified for this project based on these findings. I hope this letter provides the Board with the information needed to continue review of this \?roject. We.would be pleased to provide additional input upon request. Please do not hesitate to call If you have any questIons. Very tmjnourf/] ~z:;c ~ .- harles J. Voorhis, CEP, AICP ~~A CRAMER, V, I, SOCIATES ENVIRONMENT~'\ ! . i~G CONSULTANTS Page 2 . . .~~" -'. ','. ,. s;;.TE rnvr----- ALITY REVIEW - FULL """'~ ASSF.SSME1!f roRM ~ =- i" 1< [,u R ~ WI I~ i; Pw:pose: 'I11e full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies dete:' .,.1 ~ :9 I~ erry'i manner, whether a project or action IMY be significant. The question 0' f' . ther an action'!! IMY be significant is not always easy to anS\Oer. Frequently, there I aspects of .a"C. LL project that are subjective or inrneasurable. It is also understood tha se wIx:l deter- mine significance IMY have little or no fo:r:rnal knowledge of the enviro . S ,OL 01., nically expert in E'nvironrrental analysis. In addition, IMnY who have ewledga"A!inNtl>tiel ticular area IMY not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the quE'S 1.on of signifi- cance . The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, canprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allew introduction of info:r:rnation to fit a project or action. Full EAF Ccrnponents: 'I11e full EAF is canprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides objective data and info:r:rnation about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts II and III. Part II: F=uses on identifying the range of possible ~cts that may occur fran a project or action. It provioes guidance as to whether an ~ct is likely to be considered SIMII to moderate or whether it is a potentially large impact. 'I11e fonn also identifies whether an ~ct can be mitigated or reduced. Part III: If any impact in Part II is identified as potp.ntially large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the ~ct is actually important. DETERMINATICN OF SIGNIFICANCE - Type I and Unlisted Actions Idpntify portions of EAF canpleted for this project: X Part I 2s('Part IIO Part III Upon review of the infonnation recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropri- ate) and any other supporting info:r:rnation, and considering both the Magnitude and im- ~~e :e e::j=::~l i:o:S ~::::n:l~:e:=: bv;:::d ::~s~~~, there- fore, is one which' will not have a significant impact on the environment; therefore, a negative declaration will be prepared. c:::J B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted ktion because the mitigation measures described in PARI' 3 have been required; therefore, a a::NDITICNED negative declaration will be prepared. * CJ C. . 'I11e project IMY result in one or m::>re large and important irrpacts that may have a significant irrpact on the environment; therefore, a positive dec- laration will be'prepared. * A Conditioned N~ative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions. Name of Action: /t:;~ It- 5~VI CE[/'f;;: nWNarre of Lead Agency:.s~ui7+0uvDUJ..J;<V'''-'1, .3'Q,ue..,j Print/Type Name of Officer in Lead Agency: 6r:}1/1V7:,....,O~wLV'iI~1 Date: Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer . RLC>c/lc7.U7'~ c21?~.r-9/~ " ., . . . .- PARI' 1 - P~ INFORMATICN. Prepared by Project Spon.."Or , .' NOrICE: This doc:unent is designed to assist in determining whether the action pr0- posed may have a significant eff€'Ct on the environrrent. Please ccrnplete the entire fODD, Parts A through E. An~rs to these questions will be =nsidered as part of the applica- tion for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional infonnation you believe will be needed to ccrnplete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that ccrnpletion of the full EAF will be dependent on inform3tion cur- rently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If informa- tion reauiring such additional ~rk is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. . KINDLY ANSWER l\I.J., QUESTICNS; IF 00 oor APPLY, RESPCND 'NIA' NAME OF ACI'ICN: Mobil Service Station LCCATICN OF ACI'I~: Rt. 25 & Marratooka Lane. Matti tuck. NY NAME & ADDRESS OF APPLICANr/SF'etlSOR: Tartan Oil Corp. BUS. PfOlE: 516-420-8080 SUFFDLK OXJNI'Y TAX IDrnrIFICATICN NUM8ER: Sec: 115. B: 3, Lot: 9 DESCRIPTICN OF ACTICN: Proposed hwy curbs, curb cuts. and sidewalks tf), '7?' ______ 17 I? ,= C J -rr.- PLEASE cx:MPIEI'E EACH QfJESTION - INDICATE N/A IF ror APPLICABLE: A. SITE DESCRIPTION: Physical setting of overall project, both developed and 1.J!1developed areas. 1. Present land use: LJ Urban {~7 Industrial IX; Cam-<>rcial [J Residential Suburban ! I Rural (non-farm) I JForest: I,'J Agriculture CJ Other (Specify) 2~ Total acreage of project area: APProXIMATE ACREAGE: Meadow or Old Field (Non-agriculture) Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, pasture etc.) Wetland (Fresm.'ater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of D:L) Water Surface Area PRESEN'I'L Y o acres AITER CCM>LETIa-l o acres ~O_acres 0.260acres o acres o acres o Q acres o o o 0.520 acres acres acres Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces other (Indicate type) 3. What is predaninant soil type (s) on project site? I3v07/f01.A SWGlY' LtZ1/'1 a. Soil drainage: ..'ell drained 100 % of site Mxlerately well drained 100 % of site Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land Classificati0n System? N/A acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370) (1). .. 1 0- acres acres o .520'_acres acres (1) . ~- . Are there bedrock.tcroppingS on project site? L YES a. What is depth to bedrock? -700 (in feet) 5. Jlpproximate percentage of prop:lsed project site with slopes: ~ 0-10% 10-15% _ 15% or greater 6. Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a brilding, site or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? ~ YES CJrJ N) .. ... . 4. (XI NJ 7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National landmarks? C I YES W NO 8. What is the depth of the water table? }5+ (in feet) 9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer 1J;.7YES I r~.jNO 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opp:lrtunities presently p~ist in the project area? r 7 YES - r Xl NO 11.. a. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identi- fied as threatened or endangered? I...] YFS ! 'IJ NO Identify each species: b. What wildlife species have been con finned or VJOuld be expected to occur on site? None c. Do any rarE', protected or species of special concern use this site? None d. Are there any rare or protected plants or unique plant ccmnunites present on site? None 12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (Le. cliffs, dunes, other geological formations) CJ YES GJNO DESCRIBE : 13. Is the project site presently used by the ccmnunity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? I 1 YES I -xl NO If YES, EXPIAIN 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be imp::>rtant to the ccnmu nity? CI YES QI NO 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: None a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary: 16. Name of any Creek, Dnbayrnent or Harbor within or contiguous to project area: a. Name: N/A b. Size (In Acres) c. Width at project site: d. Waterbody to which it is tributary: 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ~ YES ~! NO a. If YES, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? I'Ll YF..5 /. J NO b. If YES, will improvements be necessary to allow col-nection? r-I YES I ]t;J NJ (2) ,.' , . (. . . Is the site locaA or substantially contiguous" a Critical Ehviromental Area designated p.rrsuant to Article 8 of the ECL,and 6 NYCRR 617? CJYrn 1KJ 1-0 Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? ~YES Q 1-0 CJ Unlcnown 13. PRn:ID:T DESCRIPI'IOO: 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate) a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor: 0 b. Project acreage to be developed: N/A acres initially; N/A acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to remain urdeveloped 0.260 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: N/A (If appropriate) e. If the project is. an expansion. indicate percent of expansion proposed ~%; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 8 ; proposed 8 g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour ~ (upon canpletion of project)? h. If residential: NUT1ber and type of housing units: One Family - 'I\.Q Family Multiple Family Condaninium 19. 1tl. Ini tially: Ultimately: i. Dimensions (ft) of largest proposed structure M Il{lgt _width; Lgth j. Lin Ft of frontage along public thorough::are project will occupy is? 544 2. Haw much natural material (Le. rock. earth. etc.) will be r€'ITOved fran the site? 0 tons/cubic yards 3. Will disturbF>d areas be reclaimed? r: J YES I~ 1-0 Ix.7 N/A a. If YES. for what intended p..trpOse is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? ~ YES r~7 NO N/A c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? L-:J YES l~ NO N/A 4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be raroved frem site? o acres 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegeta- tion be raroved by this project? CJ YES [D NO C:J N/A 6. If singlE' phase project: Anticipated period of construction 1 m::mths, (in- cl~ing demolition). 7. If multi-phased: N/A a. Total number of phases anticipated (number) . b. Expected date of carmencerrent phase 1 (inc1. demolition) 9/92 c. Approximate canpletion date of final phase N/ A rronth year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? CJ YES CJ NO N/A 8. Will blasting occur during construction? CJ YES fKJ NO c:J N/A 9. No. of jobs generated: during construction 3 ; after project canPleted 0 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project n (3) . ~ "" , 1l. '0 .' Will project requ. ~location of any projects or fIr'litieS? If YES, explain . Is surface liquid waste diSp:lsal involved? c:J YES CYJ U) a. If YES, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) LJ YES CIJ 00 12. and arrount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste diSp:lsal involved? ~ YES CE NO Type 14. Will surface area of an c=; YES CJ NO N/A existing water body Explain: increase or decrease by proposal? 15. 16. Is project or any thereof located in a 100 year flcxxl plain? 0 YES m NO Will the project generate solid waste? CJ YES lEJ NO a. If YES, what is the arrount per m::mth? tons b. If YES, will an existing solid waste facility be used? r:~ YES LJ NO c. If YES, give n~ ;Location: d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage diSp:lsal system or into a sanitary land- fill? ~ YES CJ NO; If yes, please explain: 17. Will the project involve the dispo!'al of solid waste? ~ YES a. If YES, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? b. If YES, what is the anticipated site life? vears. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ~ YES. CJ;J NO Will project routinely produce odors (rrore than 1 hour/day)? q YES [:Jj NO Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? CJ YES tp NO Will project result in an increase in energy use? C1 YES ill NO If YES, indicate Types: If water supply is fran wells, inc1icate ptvnping capacity: N/A gallons/minute. Total anticipated water usage per day: N/A gallons/day. Does project involve Local, State or Federal =unding? CJ YF..5 If YES, please EXPLAIN: Approvals Required: c:5il NO tons/rronth lB. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. . I.KJ NO 25. Type Sub11i. tta 1 Da te TOwn, Village Board Town, Village Planning Soard TOwn Zoning Board County Health Department Local Agencies Regional Agencies Federal Agencies Other Agencies c:JYES c;:JYES ~YF..s CJYES CJYES !XJYES CJYES CJYES G;1NO L:JNO !:YJNO [3[JNO mNO c:JNO lYJU) [j[JNO (4) ST'T'P. PTAN 12/9Q NYSDOT Hwy Permit to be submitt€ .(;: ;~-AND PUINNING ~\TICN .: .', ....-1. Does proposed act~involve a planning or zoning .ision? !XJ YES ~ 00 If YES, indicate decision required: CJ ZOning Amenc1ment ~ ZOning Variance L:J Special Use Pennit o Subdivision CJ;J Site plan c::J New/Revision of Land Use Plan CJ Resource Managanent Plan L:J other 2. What is the zoning classification(s) of the site? Business 3. What is the maximum potential developnent of the sitei:: developed as pennitted by the present zoning? As existing 4. What is the proPOSED zoning of the site? Srimp 5. What is the maximum potential developnent of the site if developed as pennitted by the proposed zoning? As existing 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recarrnended 1.:Ses in adopted or recan- mended local land use plans? L5CJ YES CJ NO 7, What are the predcrrinant land 'use (s) and zoning classifications within a 1/4 mile radius of proposed action? Residential 8. Is the proposed action CCITpatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a 1/4 mile? rrJ YES CJ NO 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, hco,..' many lots are proposed? N/A a. h'hat is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(sl for the formation of sewer or water districts? CJ YES C!/ NO 11. Will the proposed action create a significant demand for any ccmm.mity provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection? ~ YES fD NO a. If YES,is existing capacity adequate to handle projected cemand? DYES ONO 12. ~7ill the proposed action result in the generation of tra::::ic significantly above present levels? ~ YES L2l NO; If YES, are existing roacs adequate to handl", the additional traffic? L:J YES C:J m D, INroRMATIONAL DETAILS At'.:ach any additional information as nay be needed to clarify your project, If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. VERIFICATION: I certify that the inforrration provided above is true to the ,best of my l<:nowl- edge. Louis DeRonde Date: Name of App~t/Sponsor ~ Signature~h.d ~ .t.~ 6/16/92 Title Agent ~~./ ~ (5) If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a State agency, CCITlplete the Coastal Assessment Fonn before proceeding with this asseSSI:lPJ1t. . I - .~~\ /;~.. GRAMER, VQgRHI~ ~1ASSOCIATES ENVIRONMENTA~ND;;8tANNING CONSULTANTS -.......-..; if/I/I '.;,';\\ I . SufffLE May 6, 1992 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 fD)rn@ffiowrnfn) IJ!J .f I ! ":92 ~ . Re: Review of Traffic Evaluation Tartan Oil, NYS Route 25, Mattituck SCTM # 1000-115-3-9 SOUTHOLD TOWN PlANNING BOARD Dear Benny: As per your authorization, we have completed a review of the Traffic evaluation prepared by Dunn Engineering Associates for the above captioned application. The project review was conducted with particular focus on the applicant's request to provide two curb cuts along its frontage on Main Road (NYS Route 25). The following comments pertain to the site, and the information submitted, followed by a conclusion as to the appropriateness of the proposed access and circulation scheme. Existing access to the site is presently uncontrolled along the entire frontage of Main Road with the exception of removable signage which sometimes restricts access directly north of the pump island. Main Road serves as the principal access to the site; however, the site may also be accessed by Sunset Avenue and Marratooka Lane. These secondary access points are also not channelized with formal curb cuts. As noted in the Dunn Engineering report, the sight distance at all access points is excellent, exceeding the minimum stopping sight distances recommended by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (A Policy on Geometric Design on Highways and Streets, AASHTO, 1990). It should be noted that some foliage pruning is required on Sunset Avenue in order to meet and exceed the AASHTO recommended mmimum stopping sight distance. An examination of the accident history at the intersections of Main Road/Sunset Avenue and Main Road/MarratGoka L:lne revealed a low incidence of traffic accidents. The accident frequency for the three year period from 1987 to 1989 consisted of two reportable accidents and one nonreportable accident. Although the accident rate was not expressed in the customary terms of the number of accidents per million vehicle-miles of travel, three accidents over a three year period is well below the number of accidents that would warrant a "High Accident Location" status for an intersection on the New York State Department of Transportation highway system. Observations of the site as presently configured revealed no operational problems and internal and external circulation functioned well. The addition of a canopy over the pump dispenser island is not expected to adversely affect operations or internal circulation. A canopy would serve to provide a better focus to the site in addition to the usual benefits a canopy provides to patrons using the gas pumps (i.e. weather protection). Page 1 54-2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455 . . Tartan Oil Traffic Review In addition to the canopy, the applicant proposes to create two curb cuts along Main Road and one formal curb cut each on Sunset Avenue (30 feet south of Main Road), and on Marratooka Lane (50 feet south of Main Road). Clearly, the curb cuts on the side streets would benefit operations by more orderly control of the flow of traffic ingressing and egressing the site from the side streets. Curb cuts on the side roads would also reduce the number .of conflict points with pedestrian and motor vehicle traffic along Sunset Avenue and Marratooka Lane. The question regarding the number of curb cuts on Main Road is one that requires . assessment of the specific site conditions and circulation operations. Consideration should be given to the geometrics, observation of current operations, adjacent and nearby land uses, site layout and traffic circulation. The site appears to function well in its present condition. The excellent sight distances are a contributmg factor and the low accident frequency is a confirmation of good ooeration in the vicinity of the NYS Route 25/Marratooka Lane intersection. The relatively close proximity of the pump island to Main Road lends itself to a "flow-through" operation which would be facilitated by two curb cuts. The proximity of the pump island to Main Road also reduces the queuing area for ingress and egress creating conflicts that could degrade circulation. Such conflicts could spill out onto Main Road creating delays and hazardous conditions. The presence of a convenience store on site in addition to the gas pumps will generate additional internal circulation patterns within the site. The internal traffic flow permitted by two curb cuts on Main Road would become more significant in consideration of these additional internal circulation needs. The curb cuts on the two side streets will complement the Main Road curb cuts to help separate the internal flows and will serve local traffic from Sunset Avenue and Marratooka Lane thereby eliminating additional movements onto NYS Route 25 in order for trips originating from these two streets. If the presently uncontrolled site access were reduced to only one curb. cut on Main Road, this would result in a number of vehicles diverted to the secondary accesses on the side streets (Marratooka and Sunset Lane). Traffic so diverted to the side streets could increase the number of potential conflicts. This could in turn increase accident potential with pedestrians and local traffic as well as add to the overall delay of traffic trying to gain access to Main Road from Sunset Avenue and Marratooka Lane. We are in agreement that the alternate flow through traffic scenario utilizing one curb cut to Route 25, and one curb cut to Marratooka, could result in a dangerous queuing situation as vehicles await gaps along Route 25 from the Marratooka Lane side street. In summary, the traffic access scenario proposed by the applicant appears to be sound v:ith respect to traffic oRerations .with no negative impact. Proposed improvements to the site Will en~ance operatIOns and Improve safety due to the presently uncontrolled site access scheme. It IS rec?mmen~~d that,t,:\,o curb c~t~ on ~ain Road be allow~d in this particular ~ase due to the site. specI~lc conditions of e~lstmg site layout an,d operations, specifically mternal/external circulatIOn, separate traffiC flows for the on-site convenience store and the desire to minimize side street conflicts. ' ~~~ /!II,,~ CRAMER, VOORHIS &:'~SSOCIATES ENVIAONMENTAb"AND\.~tArirNING CONSULTANTS ""= vlllr-iM, Page 2 .' . Tartan Oil Trame Review Thank you for the opportunity to provide the Board with this input. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questIOns. ~~~ /II~ CRAMER, VOORHIS &';ASSOCIATES ENVIRONMENTA~D);'LA1ilI)lING CONSULTANTS ""_ ';//lr--'\,\~ Page 3 December 5, 1991 O E. -.. (-- unn nglneerln~SSOclates Consulting Engineers 66 Main Street Westhampton Beach, N.Y, 11978 516-288-2480 .. ",.' ~.' . Mr. Allan Leon Tartan Oil Company 532 Broadhollow Road P.O. Box 1017 Melville, New York 11747 ~ /}&110 rJg f';) Fro -" ~/!Jf! ~u.- " v -'~'c:.i 111 'V. IfA~WOlD TOWN INO 8DARD RE: Traffic Engineering Examination Mobil Gas Station Route 25 Mattituck Town of Southold, New York Dear Mr. Leon: In accordance with the requests by Mr. Bill Moore, Esq. and you, Dunn Engineering Associates has completed a professional traffic engineering examination of the Mobil Gas Station and convenience food store on the south side of Route 25 between Sunset Avenue and Marratooka Lane in Mattituck, Town of Southold, New York. The major aspects of our examination included: a) a review of the existing access in relation to the internal and external traffic flows as well as sight distances and accident records, b) the improved access to the site as proposed by Tartan Oil Corporation in relation to expected internal and external traffic flows, c) the access to the site as suggested by the Town of Southold Planning Department in relation to expected internal and external traffic flows, and d) necessary improvements to enhance the traffic flow. These aspects are discussed in the following paragraphs of this letter report. Review of Existin~ Access. Si~ht Distance. and Accident Records With the exception of a short section of curb located on the southwest corner radius of Marratooka Lane and Route 25 (Main Road), the site is uncurbed along the entire frontage on the south side of Route 25. Therefore, access can be obtained to the site at any point along Route 25. Entering and exiting traffic presently use the entire frontage to access the site. In addition, no curbs exist along the site frontage on the west side of Marratooka Lane, and access is obtained by entering and exiting the site at any point along the site frontage on Marratooka Lane. The site frontage along the east side of Sunset Avenue is uncurbed between the south side of Route 25 and a tree line which covers a portion of the site frontage along the east side of Sunset Avenue. Thus, access to the site is obtained at any point along the east side of Sunset Avenue between Route 25 and the existing tree line. . .' o. .' e( eC Mr. Allan Leon December 5, 1991 Page 2 Our review of sight distances indicated that available sight distance is good at all points along the site frontage on Route 25. This available sight distance along Route 25 ranges from 900 feet to the east and over 1000 feet to the west at the easterly end of the site on Route 25. At the westerly end of the site on Route 25, the sight distance available to the east is 800 feet and 750 feet to the wesL Sight distances range between these values at other points along the uncurbed site frontage on Route 25. At the intersection of Marratooka Lane and Route 25 good sight distance exists to both the east and the west with a sight distance of 900 feet to the east and 1000 feet to the west along Route 25. Sight distance is also good along Marratooka Lane to the south from the easterly side of the site where available sight distance is 600 feet. Furthermore at the intersection of Sunset Avenue and Route 25 good sight distance also exists to both the east and west with a sight distance of 800 feet to the east and 750 feet to the west along Route 25. Sight distance to the south on Sunset Avenue from the west side of the site is somewhat restricted by brush and tree branches growing out over the edge of pavement to the south. However, this sight distance would be improved to 500 feet or more by minor pruning. Based on accepted sight distance standards, the stopping sight distance required at Route 25 based on a posted speed limit of 40 miles per hour is 400 feet. Furthermore, the stopping sight distance required on Marratooka Lane and Sunset Avenue is 350 feet based..on a posted area speed limit of 35 miles per hour. Therefore, the existing available sight distances at Route 25 and Marratooka Lane, Route 25 and Sunset Avenue and across the Route 25 site frontage are excellent based upon minimum stopping sight distances. Also, sight distances on Marratooka Lane to the south from the easterly site frontage is excellent based on minimum stopping sight distances. The improvable sight distance to the south on Sunset Avenue would exceed minimum stopping sight distance values after some pruning was accomplished. Accident data was obtained from the New York State Department of Transportation on all the accidents that have occurred in the vicinity of the site over the three year period of 1987 throug!: 1989. This accident information revealed that over the three year period, one reportable accident occurred in 1987 at Route 25 and Sunset Avenue. At the intersection of Route 25 and Marratooka Lane, over the three year period, one reportable accident occurred in 1987 and one classified as a non reportable accident occurred in 1988. No accidents were reported on Route 25 along the site frontage between Marratooka Lane and Sunset Avenue during the three year period. Non reportable accidents are those accidents that are not required to be reported to the Department of Motor Vehicles. A review of this data revealed that these intersections are not considered as high accident locations. Furthermore, this data revealed there is no serious traffic safety problems in the vicinity of the site. This accident information is particularly significant in view of the fact that in times of heavy uninterrupted traffic flow on Route 25, it becomes difficult to make turns out of Marratooka Lane and Sunset Avenue, particularly in the summer. . . e( - ( e. Mr. Allan Leon December 5, 1991 Page 3 Our observations of existing conditions revealed that there are no major problems with the internal or external traffic flows at the site. However some recommended modifications regarding access to the site are contained in a following section of this letter. These modifications are intended to enhance both the internal site circulation and minimize potential external traffic flow problems. Review of Access As Proposed by Tartan Oil Company The access configuration as proposed by Tartan Oil Corporation in their revised site plan of November 20, 1991 would alter the site frontage along the south side of Route 25 to provide raised continuous curbing with two separate driveway openings for access to and from the site on Route 25. The westerly access point would be 30 feet wide and would be located approximately 25 feet east of Sunset Avenue. This access drive would allow left and right turns into the site and left and right turns out of the site onto Route 25. Another 30 foot wide easterly access drive would be located on Route 25 approximately 35 feet west of Marratooka Lane. This access drive would allow left and right turns into the site and left and right turns out of the site onto Route 25. This access plan, on the easterly side of the site would provide a raised curb extending 125 feet south of Route 25. Site access would be provided by a 25 foot wide drive on the west side of Marratooka Lane and would be located 50 feet south of Route 25. This access drive would permit right and left turns out of the site and left and right turns into the site. Along the westerly side of the site, on the east side of Sunset Avenue a raised curb extending 70 feet south of Route 25 would be provided. Site access on Sunset Avenue would be by a 25 foot drive located 30 feet south of Route 25. The curb and access drive have been located to afford the least adverse impact on an established tree line on the east side of Sunset Avenue. The location of the drive also is suited to reduce potential internal traffic conflicts between entering and exiting traffic and patrons stopped at the kerosene/diesel pump area in the vicinity of the drive. Left and right turns would be permitted both in and out of the drive. As previously discussed good sight distance will exist at both of the proposed access points at Route 25 and also along the west side of Marratooka Lane. Sight distance, although restricted along Sunset Avenue, can be improved to 500 feet by pruning overhanging tree branches on the east side of Sunset Avenue to the south. It is usual for most of the traffic accessing a facility such as this to be generated from the highway lane adjacent to the facility. Thus, it can be expected that most of the traffic entering this site from Route 25 would originate from the west. The predominant traffic flow therefore would be for most vehicles to enter the site by using the westerly driveway and leave by the easterly driveway on the south side of Route 25. The location of these two driveways provide for an efficient traffic flow both into the site from Route 25 and out of the site onto Route 25. .' , e( eC Mr. Allan Leon December 5, 1991 Page 4 The formal access drives on Marratooka Lane and Sunset Avenue provided in this access plan will allow for an orderly traffic flow pattern both within the site and on these adjacent roadways. Review of Access SU!1l:ested by Southold Town Plannin~ Department The access configuration as suggested by the Southold Town Planning Board would alter the site frontage along the south side of Route 25 to provide raised continuous curbing with only one driveway opening for access to and from the site on Route 25. This single access point on the south side of Route 25 would be located to the west near Sunset Avenue and would allow left and right turns into the site from Route 25 and left and right turns out of the site onto Route 25. The suggested plan also proposes that curbing be installed along the east side of Sunset Avenue with one driveway opening at a point approximately one hundred feet south of Route 25. The driveway will allow left and right turns into the site from Sunset Avenue and left and right turns out of the site onto Sunset Avenue. The access proposed along Marratooka Lane would provide for curbing along the west side of Marratooka Lane with two access driveways. The northerly access driveway would be located approximately fifty feet south of Route 25 and would allow for left and right turns into the site from Marratooka Lane and left and right turn out of the site onto Marratooka Lane. Because of its location, this driveway was intended to service gas customers utilizing the pumps in the front of the facility and also walk-in customers to the convenience food store. The southerly site access driveway as proposed at approximately one hundred feet south of Route 25 on the west side of Marratooka Lane would provide access to a proposed convenience food store drive up window at the rear of the gas station. Since the proposal to provide the convenience food store drive up window at the rear of the gas station has been dropped however, this southerly driveway on Marratooka Lane would be unnecessary. Since this plan provides for only one combined entrance/exit on the Route 25 site frontage, most of the patron traffic will utilize this driveway to enter the site from Route 25 and will exit the site onto Marratooka Lane through the proposed northerly site access driveway on the west side of Marratooka Lane. In order to return to Route 25 from the site, traffic will make a left turn onto Marratooka Lane and will proceed a short distance to the north and then enter Route 25 by either making a right turn or a left turn. The approximate distance between Route 25 and the location of the proposed driveway on Marratooka Lane is 50 feet. Considering a vehicle length at 20 feet, enough storage room will be provided between Route 25 and the northerly site driveway for two and one half cars. During times of uninterrupted traffic flows on Route 25, such as that which occurs during the summer months, few gaps may occur in Route 25 traffic flow that would enable side road traffic to enter the mainstream of Route 25. For this reason, an accumulation of traffic generated from the site at times could queue up from Route 25, across Marratooka Lane and back onto the site, thereby blocking Marratooka Lane to vehicles entering from Route 25. Considering . .' : e( e( ., Mr. Allan Leon December 5, 1991 Page 5 again the minimal storage area between Route 25 and the northerly site driveway, it would not require too many vehicles to saturate the intersection area and create an all stopped situation. Thus, the provision of only one access point on Route 25 will result in additional traffic on Marratooka Lane which could increase the delays to local traffic on Marratooka Lane desiring to turn onto Route 25. Proposed Improvements As a result of the conduct of our traffic engineering examination, it is recommended that the two driveways on the south side of Route 25 (Main Road) as proposed by the Tartan Oil Corporation plan be installed and maintained as the principal access to the combination gas station and convenience food store. The two driveways will serve both on site and off site traffic needs and will offer the most efficient traffic flow patterns for traffic entering and leaving the site on Route 25. This configuration will allow exiting vehicles to store within the site instead of on Marratooka Lane during times of high uninterrupted traffic flows on Route 25. Providing the two access points on the site frontage on Route 25 will eliminate the potential for a traffic problem on Marratooka Lane. A single access point on Route 25 would result in, a) additional turns for vehicles to access the site, b) internal traffic circulation problems, c) additional traffic volumes on Marratooka Lane and d) additional delays to vehicles accessing Route 25 from Marratooka Lane. Thus, two access points on Route 25 are recommended. Left and right turns into the site and left and right turns out of the site onto Route 25 will be permitted at each of the two site access points on Route 25. It is also recommended that access to the site on Sunset Avenue and Marratooka Lane be channelized through formal driveways instead of the free access which now exists along both of these roadways. Therefore, one access point is recommended on the west side of Marratooka Lane and one access point is recommended on the east side of Sunset Avenue. These access drives would allow left and right turns into the site and left and right turns out of the site from and onto the adjacent roadways. The single access point recommended on the west side of the site on Sunset Avenue would be located a short distance south of Route 25 and would primarily serve the local area residents from the south desiring to access the gas station and convenience food store. The location of this drive would not require removal of major trees located in the tree line along the east side of Sunset Avenue. The location is also compatible with good internal traffic patterns in the area of the kerosene/diesel pump located on the west side of the site. , . .'. .: . e( e( .. Mr. Allan Leon December 5, 1991 Page 6 The proposed parking plan within the site is designed to mlmmlze conflicts between parking and unparking patrons of the convenience food store and drive through vehicles using the gas pumps. It is further recommended the overhanging branches be pruned on the east side of Sunset Avenue to maintain good sight distance to vehicles exiting the site onto Sunset Avenue. I trust this information meets your needs. If you have any questions or require any additional information, please call me. Sincerely, W dttl lJ-? ~~"--) f WALTER M. DUNN, JR., P.E. Principal WMD/bf P910057 L910498 '. ..\~'~ :Ii; '\.:/ '. -. CRAMER, V~ Ac;OCIATES ENVIRONMENT~G CONSULTANTS .. ..5uH1~ July 24, 1992 Mr. Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Chairman Southold Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Review of EAF for Mobile Service Station, Mattituck, NY SCTM No. 1000-115-3-9 Dear Benny: As per the your request, we have completed a preliminary review of the above referenced project in accordance with your request. Tasks and completed activities are identified as follows: 1. Review Part I LEAF The parcel has been field inspected by CV A, and the LEAF has been reviewed and amended as necessary. A copy of same is attached. 2. Prepare Part II LEAF The Part II LEAF checklist has been completed and is also attached. information concerning our findings is included below. 3. Environmental and Planning Considerations The parcel has been inspected and environmental references concerning the site and area have been consulted. The proposed project is identified on the site plan prepared by Petroleum Associates, Proposed Canopy Installation Site Plan (Amended 11-20-91; Drawing No. TO-8701; Sheet 1 of 1). Additional The subject site is the present location of a functioning gasoline service station operated by Tartan Oil. The site is 0.78 acres in size and is located in the southwest corner of Route 25 and Maratooka Lane, Mattituck, NY. The proposed project involves a site plan amendment to allow two curb cuts to Route 25, with appropriate curbing and sidewalks. The site is fully utilized at present, and there is presently- unchanneled access to the existing gas pumps. The proposal would create two (2) 30 foot reinforced concrete driveway curb cuts into the site from Route 25, and one (1) 25 foot wide asphalt ramp into the site from Maratooka Lane. Driveway cuts would include appropriate radius', and the frontage along Route 25 would include sodded areas, and a 5 foot wide concrete sidewalk. The traffic flow implications of the proposed project have been addressed in a Traffic Engineering Exammation by Dunn Engineerin~ and reviewe " 1992. The concluding statement of that review is as folIo n m 00 mow JUl281992 i~i i~1 I 54-2 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (51 Pa SOUTHOLD TOWN NN!NG BOARD .. .. Mobil Service Station Long EAF Review "In summary, the traffic access scenario proposed by the applicant appears to be sound with respect to traffic operations with no negative impact. Proposed improvements to the site will enhance operations and improve safety due to the presently uncontrolled site access scheme. It is recommended that two curb cuts on Main Road be allowed in this particular case due to the site specific conditions of existing site layout and operations, specifically internal/external circulation, separate traffic flows for the on-site convenience store, and the desire to minimize side street conflicts." The proposed action may actually improve traffic flow conditions in the vicinity of the site, along with the fact that and will certainly not degrade operations. In addition, the use is not an over-intensification because the site is utilized to full capacity at present. There is no additional square footage prop,osed, nor will sanitary disposal facilities be changed in any way. There are no sigrnficant natural or human resources associated with the site which would be affected by this project. Accordingly, based on this review and the Long EAF, we feel the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. If the Planmng Board is in agreement, we feel that a Negative Declaration is justified for this project based on these findings. I hope this letter provides the Board with the information needed to continue review of this project. We would be pleased to provide additional input upon request. Please do not hesitate to call if you have any questIOns. DeJA TES G CONSULTANTS Page 2 . -." ", 'STATE El-NI ..J~ ITY REVIEW - FUIL \ :~ Purpose: 'l11e full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies dete manner, whE'ther a project or action rmy be significant. The question 0 rmy be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequently, there project that are subjective or inTreasurable. It is also understood tha mine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the eJwiro nically expert in E'nvironmental analysis. In addition, rmny who have ticular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the quE'S cance . The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, carq:>rehensive in nature, yet flexible to allCM introduction of information to fit a project or action. Full EAF Canponents: 'l11e full EAF is carq:>rised of three parts: Part I: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts II and III. Part II: Focuses on identifying the range of possible inpacts that may occur fran a project or action. It proviaes guidance as to whether an inpact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially large impact. The fonn also identifies whether an inpact can be mitigated or reduced . Part III: If any inpact in Part II is identified as potp..ntially large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the inpact is actually iJnp::>rtant. DETERMINATICN OF SIGlIFlCANCE - Type I and Unlisted lIctions IdE'..ntify portions of FAF carq:>leted for this project: X' Part I Lsi(Part II 0 Part III Upon review of the information recorded on this FAF (Parts I and 2 and 3 if appropri- ate) and any other supporting information, and considering both the Magnitude and im- ~~ :e e::j:::~l i~:S ~::::n:l~:e:=: bv;:::d ::~s~~~, there- fore. is one which will not have a significant inpact on the environment; therefore, a negative declaration will be prepared. c::; B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Jlction because the mitigation rreasures described in PART 3 have been required; therefore, a a:tIDITICNED negative declaration will be prepared. * c:::; C. 'l11e project may result in one or IIOre large and important inpacts that may have a significant inpact on the environment; therefore, a positive dec- laration will be prepared. * A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions. Name of lIction: 1'101!i<:..5~W(~~rnNName of Lead Agency:S~Ui'?l-OuPU-v;.hN1> B~ Print/Type Name of Officer in Lead Agency: 6~-raUJu.J:S;H I Date: Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer R6VI&./'E:iJ r::2:fJ:/0c;:;;e: , . "PARr 1 - PIDJEX:T JNFO~TICN" Prepared by Project Sponsor . I ..., NOI'ICE: This docurent is designed to assist in determining whether the action pr0- posed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please canp1ete the entire fODD, Parts A through E. An~rs to these questions will be considered as part of the a~lica- tion for approval and may be subject to further verification and P-Jblic review. Provide any additional infonnation you believe will be needed to canp1ete Parts 2 and 3. It is expected that canp1etian of the full EAF will be dependent on infonnation cur- rently available and will not involve new studies, research or investigation. If infonna- tion recruiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. . KINDLY ANSWER ALL QUESTICNS; IF 00 ror APPLY, RESPCtID 'N/A' NAME OF ACTICN: Mobil Service Station :L()2ATICN OF ACl'I~: Rt. 25 & Marratooka Lane. Mattituck. NY NAME & 1\OORESS OF APPLICANl'/SPCtlSOR: Tartan Oil Corp. BUS. PIOlE: 516-420-8080 SUFFDLK ClJl.MI'Y TAX IDENI'IFICATICN NU-ffiER: Sec: 115, B: 3, Lot: 9 DESCRIPTICN OF ACl'ICN: Proposed hwy curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks tf),7('" -------4:U1-E < J'1'T- PLEASE ca-lPLETE FACH QUESTION - INDICATE N/A IF NOT APPLICABLE: A. SITE DESCRIPTION: Physical setting of overall project. both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: LJ Urban L~7 Industrial //t; Ccmnercial / J Residential SUburban / / Rural (non-farm) / JForest / J Agriculture C"J Other (Specify) 2. Total acreage of project area: APPFOXIMATE ACREAGE: Meadow or Old Field (Non-agriculture) Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, pasture etc.) Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) Water Surface Area PRESENTLY o acres AFTER CJ:'M>LEI'ION o acres 0.260acres o acres ~O _acres o acres o acres o o o 0.520 acres o acres a=es Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces Other (Indicate type) 3. What is predaninant soil 1:ype(s) on project site? f<3v071H:nA 54v0" ia~ a. Soil drainage: h'ell drained 100 % of site M::lderately well drained 100 % of site Poorly drained % of site b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land Classification System? N/A acres. (See 1 NYCRR 370) (1). - , o.-acres acres o .52ct_a=es acres (1) 6. Are there bedroc~ingS on project site? ~ YES en 00 a. What is depth to bedrock? -700 (in feet) Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: ~ 0-10% 10-15% ____ 15% or greater Is project substantially contiguous to, or contain a I::W.lding, site or district, listed on the State or the National Registers of Historic Places? ~J YES r XI ro Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Landmarks? C/ YES GJ ro What is the depth of the water table? J'B (in feet) Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer 1y.]YES I C ../NJ 10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently p~ist in the project area? r 7 YES - r xl NO 11.. a. roes project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is ider.ti- fied as threatened or endangered? /] YFS " 'fJ ro Identify each 4. . . 5. 7. 8. 9. species: b. What wildlife species have been confirmed or \YOuld be expected to occur on site? None c. Do any ran', protected or species of special concern use this site? None d. Are there any rare or protected plants or unique plant CaTtl1UI1ites present on site? None 12. Are there any unique or unusual land dunes, other grological fonnations) fonns on the project site? (Le. L:J YES G NO DESCRIBE: cliffs, 13. Is the project site presently used by the CaTtl1UI1ity or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? I 7 YES 1..xJ ro If YES, EXPIAIN 14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the ccnrnu nity? CI YES QI NO 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: None a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary: 16. Name of any Creek, Thlbayment or Harbor within or contiguous to project area: a. Narne: N/A b. Size (In Acres) c. Width at project site: d. Waterbody to which it is tributary: 17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? ~ YES ~! NO a. If YES, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? 1X-1 YES f J ro b. If YES, will improvements be necessary to allow cormection? ~I YES I "1 I'D (2) . ~e" ~s the sire loca~ or substantially =ntiguous ~ Critical Envirormental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the EX::L,and 6 NYCRR 617? L:JYES IKJ 00 19. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? CJYES Gf:l 00 CJ UnIcnown 13. ProJEX:!' DESCRIPI'ICN: 1. Physical diJrensions and scale of project (fill in dirrensions as appropriate) a. Total =ntiguous acreage owned or =ntrolled by project sponsor: 0 b. Project acreage to be developed: N/A acres initially; N/A acres ultimately. c. Project acreage to ranain urrleveloped 0.260 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: N/A (If appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed ~%; f. Number of off-street parking spaces existing 8 proposed 8 g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour 1 7 (upon canpletion of project)? h. If residential: Nunber and type of housing units: One Family - 'I\o:) Family Multiple Family Condaninium Initially: ffitimately: i. Dimens ions (ft) of largest prop:>sed structure N I ,iIgt _width; Lgth j. Lin Ft of frontage along public thoroughfare project will occupy is? 544 2. How much natural material (Le. rock, f>arth, etc.) will be reIfOved fran the site? 0 tons/cubic yards 3. Will disturDod areas be reclaimed? r: -.; YES !~ 00 /x 7 N/A a. If YES, for what intended purp:>se is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamaticn? CJ YES r_7 NO N/A c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? L~ YES l~ NO N/A 4. How =y acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be rem::>ved frcrn sire? o acres 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegeta- tion be reroved by this project? CJ YES [XJ 00 c:J N/A 6. If singlf> phase project: Anticipated period of =nstruction I IlOnths, (in- cluding demolition) . 7. If multi-phased: N/A a. Total number of phases anticipated (number). b. Expected date of ccrnnencerent phase 1 (incl. demolition) 9/92 c. Approximate canpletion date of final phase N/A IlOnth year. d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? CJ YES [~NO N/A 8. Will blasting occur during construction? CJ YES /EJ NO c:J N/A 9. No. of jobs generated: during =nstruction 3 ; after project canpleted 0 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project n (3) . :f~':.will project requ~location of any projects O~litieS? LJ YES C5fl 00 If YES, explain . 12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? C:J YES C'iJ 00 a. If YES, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and arrount b. Name of water Ixxly into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? CJ YES CE NO Type 14. Will surface area of an L:J YES CJ 00 N/A existing water Ixxly Explain: increase or decrease by proposal? 15. Is project or any thereof located in a 100 year flood plain? 0 YES fFl NO 16. Will the project generate solid waste? C:J YES f!iJ NO a. If YES, what is the arrotmt per rronth? tons b. If YES, will an existing solid waste facility be used? L.~ YES LJ NO c. If YES, give name ;Location: d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal systen or into a sanitary land- fill? CJ YES CJ NO; If yes, please explain: 22. 23. will the project involve the dispo!lal of solid waste? CJ YES a. If YES, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? b. If YES, what is the anticipated site life? years. will project use herbicides or pesticides? CJ YES. ClJ NO Will project routinely produce odors hrore than 1 hour/day)? t=J YES [~NO Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? CJ YES tp NO Will project result in an increase in energy use? C1 YES fX] NO If YES, indicate Types: If water supply is frc:rn wells, indicate PUlping capacity: N/A gallons/minute. Total anticipated water usage per day: N/A gallons/day. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? 0 YES If YES, please EXPLAIN: Approvals Required: [3 NO 17. tons/rronth 18. 19. 20. 21. 24. . !XJ NO 25. Type Sul:rni ttal Date TOwn, Village Board Ta..m, Village Planning Board TOwn Zoning Board Cotmty Health Department Local Agencies Regional Agencies Federal Agencies Other Agencies CJYES t::iJYES c::JYES CJYES CJYES !Y:JYF..S CJYES c=JYES !:5ONO t=JNO !:Y1NO frJNO a:JNO c::JNO DOoo !.TINO q T'T'~ PT ar-..l LI/ltg NYSDOT Hwy Permit to be submittE (4) . .c: ;zGi..ffii-AND PU\NNING ~ .. 1. Does proposed action. involve a planning or zoning decision? !5LJ YES ~ 00 If YES, indicate decision required: CJ Zoning Amendrrent CJ Zoning Variance CJ Special Use ?ennit o Subdivision CE Site plan CJ New/Revision of Land Use Plan ~ Resource Managerent Plan L::J Other 2. What is the zoning classification(s) of the site? Business 3. What is the maximum potential developnent of the site if developed as pennitted by the present zoning? As existing 4. What is the proPOSED zoning of the site? SAmp 5. What is the maximum potential developnent of the site if developed as pennitted by the proposed zoning? As existin'J 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recarrnended I.:ses in adopted or reccm- mended local land use plans? llJ YES ~ NO 7. What are the predminant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a 1/4 mile radius of proposed action? Residential 8. Is the proposed action canpatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses within a 1/4 mile? LXI YES CJ NO 9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, ha..; many lots are proposed? N/A a. vlhat is the minimum lot size proposed? 10. Will proposed action require any authorizationfs) for the formation of sewer or water districts? c:J YES L3 NO 11. Will the proposed action create a significant demand for any ccmnunity provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection? ~ YES ~ NO a. If YES,is existing capacity adequate to handle projected demand? DYES 000 12. Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? LJ YES l2I NO; If YES, are existing roads adequate to handlE' the additional traffic? CJ YES c::J 00 D. INroRMATIONAL DETAILS Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your pr0posal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. VERIFICATION: I certify that the information provided above is true to the .best of my mowl- edge. Louis De Ronde Date: Name of ApZli t/Spo. nsor ~ Signature Pid ~ rti.~ - 6/16/92 Title Agent ~~J~ If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a State agency, canplete the Coastal Assessrrent Fonn before proceeding with this assessmPJlt. (5) - - -.. - - , PIF (�,¢pous GuMFEy s piJ��kA f �• kf t''�' - '---: 7 . . p ' NIAY.,J -52.0. .'PRY& ' t - o lo' 5e4tr IJA rU 2AL 1/JGpD LAOV R 12• � Lefertt., owe., JIMY l _ Y OF P-vt + _ tt taysrG. gLaa, 7 i CtvR/j •..r77 i y` �W MkFA L }A'C O .AGLaA LYi. V V' 14• yy �(� ��� �Y'ie 4."l m•J �� _ . . � tr.A /_rP 4 _. ��i ARrA1t LTi AIA LiI,yV (JAq Aat IIMPO i ul LIE - �G -t< 7S C..rA. MAF 3 � i - .�� ..f ,•._.�, I.. 3 - 2�.ST' EL�,rAr11.� a� f/..fepy I f�5. I ! --- .� Cve>r,ER.� w oL ,„ . •'4y y tom' , uV LICNT FwTure.E 2-a'x ?r.e, F ITOO•"7 /arwc _ y y [t 44 Ir—•._"_i 3. _ 'e � . re- k: �C - Y1fe'� -, '• LecK uP Lbd¢ E''i--��._. rt - �/ 'I �! � ' ( � � ) - - �u. "ww f5 � - III � ��, *! � GGdr '45c - 'eAodi TO EvretJr,+ nvo^z EitSYG,I^_LTiG. 7 6 Li 1 N (✓¢rGe•„ ., j -`� ,`11 o ( +94 L3 °1 VALGUM a ,fA,teTa arrrL. r y* j I • len.^�.'7' k�eenfrvrE..�'u I'uh7P ti -' ! �.• to - r" k. { L` n �A ,`rSpAr � fy,w r< 4"U _TL . IiUMYr¢:J.e, �d A \� I •1.97:G7 �— '.�" Y'�,a499,sS .4':f+ ' tTL.�.aern S".rnJ9 N� �r�/�} r „ •t tfik�L' '� , S}oc lJ ME7/.0 r_y VAP^<Z. Av,EA WGAr-��. ' 72 102.15 ti �f 'i I f '"fir Q b ; EXeST_ — r� Cwd're MA s t) r.c'fty m.cz;,oa mdm 1 it I �V Z4:'o' e. :n-CA,.)0 t' av ri• Lou a (t '� -� -y' 4.1Aa'A-1 TO A.'f.4TG!-A J' X ..�J .P! a . rs vb _ - , - 1 • mlr8' :yes 7"�h -aJF+� rsuY,�, - / 4Q"hST 3 r r . L,J' _J„ kF for ` C�iJd• MAT', P G I �' 'k x 'FIY,TUz.Ca' MTU, ,Jr M,4 CAJO u' I' Mill 'MwL ua VA Pd' WA, r , � f Cf�h S LE J5 ', tr � t r .,.- „l, - .r - .l .FM. M-Iro. r 1I� 4-102. 3S-o 54TpAu•= k, - �F - p� Inl...'7, - ",�,- TCAr ASA LIGT--,_T 5,4, 6 -KL,IGE iG r_1 FeY�SYA'Ttor.7 z 6 -�� L,Jms 6C aa} rw Tr laaxr�7" t s^ r _ _ J . Ic L� _ -{ • ="- P•4, , _ _ ._.. r _-'�`•-� A t v., -i s �, 1uLJ/fl /�� .LJ �i'L1+V�'J�' �I' ' I , , r 1/4 + fl ~ f -- �.� '� '('fir1 I // ' 'oNYS.i�-o J 640e,( fir A, -1 s (� V J,- '{ t,' l I � . � JJ, O1 a,d� G"cad tel'• eu' si/SC .i L �r'S 9 vra/' .oDa .PEoo4744,Way 4.4 /6;'' rn,L:�. ,7 �•, "- x `> Y�3 I.I„., u.� - - \VS j� ` jj 8 /�. / 'GaallecT .I na aaY.. 'a3 ,�,/,1 :�,.- ' ` B•n'� KQ' 0��� \p. f } £�I SII�, - \ \ � f� l ' %•�•' _ 1. .!-�� __/AE', / L (OM rFt! a e '+3 ,'}.i;^' ,1 ":"�^in Ik•. 7 7� ! 'JY�GC, +,9.t/8 ± ^ /o ., 3K.GkSFC^"i .GNYk15 'EC :..; ;;. l ' ..� - _ / ' � �••- ... �'; T . ., - ,III -----^., .,• h nc., • i � I �� .'.- ' -' .:, �, - • Y .� 5_F+71rA 4L&� ,I��, — �� � III i. � ;,<,�...-' '� ''�� d'„sem yr v.k�a.J •.n.� �; >t »,. PrzrcG 116.1 M QFe-e�J E�-e"Y( % 4'te"IrJ - �iale, 'SnP G5".n.l sy�reti ewerz. .r,o.nxao5 TO BE ------- n° / � 4/_7-6R4 UE/t/ .7 -87 G LR, LI - a fls � _ - ,1,/ , e'4+'s A' tilNETnL AL,pF AeE'A LT., ! •� ' csi 4F �'-'••• t r . '. .1 1 n ..1 d 19 - Cj'j,R ! , .$ .-. j if Q�•� ,;- . . r Tre TIl'�r a �1 kl.?m` S a.r; r $_ - ELUiI �`•..cz f / !� ,.L� W/•r � . EI�f /EL F? tae.w-s'�'•IMkh- e4tr w. Fu.xR 1, " nf :3 � ttra :� c fJIVG Cl ... J 2O Q, 4`FGEC Z (3 "Y G ro onu wevlsro+s .- i . rnxmnP _.,..,,.,,,_ - ,„—•r,r^---:---`-- '"_,.'_'1f ti' :r- r, 1 97. s G t C �l L! 4lh/CJG i� " ,' I/Kr — • - �I✓at. 2 ..- ol,_� , 7 Tia¢7 AJi L - �¢er�.�e ---- T_ ` "f �_- 1� i K,'•''•. �, , r7 ' Wa:y4- ' '� 'Iso �7A.Am klok ow aye. (P.n,a.+. r N, G, ,_ 'a•6/E/�4'�H.PE/�f/L. GC.f{•NG -" _ .,r � �r-= V6 /w c���.PE/N�Irll:,.tvF.i'�z "� �, � I ' - J. M1F{,ya LLE rJ.y. ,1'7'x#7 Re ,+r•'�--- /1.d.8?ft - _._,,.�._ _______-.z,__.._. _: J� /L/�!N � ” Gam(/!`i • .J., '�LL l4!C 111' .'. ._-1 �.. - -.��i - -- •� ! �;4:� Po ?4, 1aE-7�So go.4,4. ,ww 2d, , MEaNri.�:$: fTLE to I 1 �- fj � � �_ 141 I➢G...� "' ��:..,.- '> •lce �.,Y. R.✓ t AT ter' �/ I'-Qa aSE^? C-A,� aldv/ nJ .a4 �T Is Cpl, I} 97 a- .- r < C8 36 "GJ" _ +9%41 k. .-_. 3 7 ©J^ / o- i„ qe. e -.,,."_....- 9'l.'.A4 _. .__....�/EW L:OI�/moi GL/ �R +Ico.O I ,_-.__., -.�_So � P.F� 1"IAE2.4T4eltA 1A .SWS4T ICY[. M,�L " 'E'rf} , - IL' -IIII, of 14 (1 1.,� F-Ifs1M7 1G9PL'`3 IV.y` ..1. Qr V" g l• / �iC4R71rS fl ••rt..,nr.f 1 � f PETAOLEUM A �"�b G'' r :o,yN,� ---� _•... '. III JUL �J M.H. bEllTZMAN P.€, �13.F.SGIAEFF A 5B cHERRY LANE 112#1DWARDAY*, J r SMITHTOWN N.Y. 11787 ' SDNTHDLD TOWN - NILp).TLE$E%N 0088}6 PLANNING 11111 57&266.22.58. - 2Q�X90 y}B,g i " OWN AV OTC sl I I /j 6 ?I 5 /� 1 /JJ✓D SGAIJ[ —� N — i�LS !✓* scx�r ,ea omrwc. t 7ue ' .,1F�►' #. _ ���'?a�,✓s�; .�r�dx✓�! ro _...v Yad-.,a :J',r.3• J � '