Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-63.-1-29.2 LAW OFFICES FREDERIC P. RICH 62965 MAIN ROAD- SOUTHOLD. NEW YORK I 1971 (616) 766-34116 July 7, 1980 Mr. Henry Raynor Chairman, Planning Board Town Hall Southold, N. Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Raynor: several weeks ago, I read in our local papers your memorandum concerning subsidized housing in Southold. I am in complete agreement with you and wrote to the town board saying so. I also sent a copy of your memorandum to my friend Robert J. Scanlan, Administrative Assistant from Arizona. I am enclosing a copy of his reply. Thought you might be interested. Best regards. Sincerely, JOHN J. RHOD£5 Jun~ 19, 1980 Mr. Fred Rich 7657 East Meadowbrook Avenue Scottsdale, AZ 85251 Dear Fred: Congressman Rhodes is well aware of the problems in HUD which you described in your recent letter. He does everything he can to give local authorities more of a say in the selection of housing development sites. But, as you and I have discussed, as long as we are in the minority, it is most difficult to get any changes made. Mr. Rhodes has continually called for "oversight committees" to determine if legislation passed is actually doing what the Congress intended. HUD is a good example of what he is talking about. Perhaps the November election will turn the tide for us, or at least get us started in the right direction. I am forwarding your letter to Mr. Rhodes to belp prove his point. Our hot weather has arrived with a bang. You left just in time. Best regards to you and Flora. Sincerely, Robert J. Scanlan Administrative Assistant, Arizona RJS:cc =;DUTHDLD-PECDNIC CIVIC ASSDCIATIDN, INC. SOUTHDLD, L. I., hi. Y. June Second 1980 Nr. Henry Roynor, Chairman Southold Planning Commission Town Hall Southold, New York Dear Mr. Roynor: At a Board of Directors' meeting of this Association on Nay 26th, 1980 it ~?as unanimously voted to advise you that we are opposed to the concept and proposed develop- ment of the project on Youngs Avenue, Southold, known as "Southold Commons". The necessity for such a project has not been established and the further taxing of local facilities,-water, sewage disposal, police and fire protection, road maintenance, etc. should be sufficient grounds on which to reject this proposal. Very traly yours, SOUTHOLD-PECONIC ~IVI.~ AoSN., . H ~'$~tle, President HL: emb HENRY E. RAYNOR. Jr.. Chairman FREDERICK E. GORDON JAMES WALL BENNETT ORLOWSKI. Jr. GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, Jr. S ~Y Southold, N.Y. 11971 TELEPHONE 765- 1938 The following is noted regarding the application of Leon Weiner Associates to HUD and letter from HUD regarding determination of need received by the Town on May 14, 1980. The proposal is for 149 federally funded units under Section 8 Housing with 100% funding on $4.6 million on a 40 year mortgage at 7-1/2%. The total cost of the project is anticipated to be $4.8 million. They could go for 20% assisted but have opted for 100%. The application states that this will be set up under Delaware Corporation. Purchase price is listed at $275,000. The proposal is for 13 buildings on 22.8 acres. One bedroom apartments will rent for $433 per month and two bedroom apartments for $514. There will be ll6 one bedroom and 33 two bedroom units. All buildings are two story. An on-site sewage plant will be provided. Public water exists in the area. The application states that there is a public stormwater sewer system. The minority application is based on the 1970 census tract for the area which was 2.9%. The applicant states minority housing for 20%. The plan is for 22 units for blacks and 7 for Hispanics. The following are the comments of Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr., Chairman, of the Planning Board with the concurrence of Mr. Gordon and Mr. Orlowski: 1. There is no public stormwater sewer system. 2. With 'the water problems that have been encountered by the Village of Greenport and the closing of Plant 6 due to the high aldicarb count, it is questionable as to -2- ® whether the Village of Greenport would be willing or able to supply public water. Southold School records indicate there are 13 black and 2 Hispanic children enrolled representing 7 families. The Town tax records indicate that all but one of these families own their home. This would not appear to justify the need for this kind of housing in the amount requestedas it is questionable presently that the 2.9% minority exists. Also, the percentage of minority apartments proposed is approximately 20%. INCORPORATED 1075 FRANKLIN AVENUE · GARDEN CITY, NEW YQRK 11530 TELEPHONE (516) 248-2200 Does tax-free interest income - in the form of a monthly check - interest you? We would like to send you a preliminary prospectus con- taining information on THE DEAN WITTER TAX-EXEM~T TRUST, TENTH SERIES ... a "monthly payment municipal bond fund" which is being sponsored by Dean Witter & Co. Incorporated. The Trust will provide interest income which will be, in the opinion of counsel, exempt from Federal income taxes. Return of the enclosed card does not, of course, obligate you in any way. A registration statement relating to these securities has been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission but has not yet become effective. These securities may not be sold nor may offers to buy be accepted prior to the time the registration statement becomes effective. This document shall not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy nor shall there be any sale of these securities in any State in which such offer, solicitation, or sale would be unlawful prior to registration or qualification under the security laws of any such State. On motion made by Mr. Gordon, seconded by Mr. Raynor, it was RESOLVED to recommend to the Southold Town Board and the Department of Housing and Urban Development denial of the application of George Ahlers and Barry H. Hellman, Project #NY36-0006-040, Yotungs Avenue, Southold, £or housing assistance to be provided by the Department o£ Housing and Urban Development, for the following reasons: 1. There already exists within lO00yards of this proposal a multiple dwelling area for the elderly. 2. There is a second multiple dwelling project in the general area which is in process and has been given preliminary approval, which consists o£ over 200 omits for the elderly. 5. No need exists £or this type of housing in this area in excess of what exists and what has been approved. 4. There exists an adequate quantity o£ low-income housing in the To~n o£ Southold. Vote o£ the Board: Ayes: Wickham, Raynor, Gordon. JUDITH T. 'fERRY · TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS OFFICE OF To~ CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SUFFOLK COUNTY Southold, L. I., N. Y. 1 1971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1801 May 9, 1979 Mr. Alan H. Wiener, Area Manager Department of Housing and Urban Development 666 Fifth Avenue New York, New York 10019 Subject: Project No. NY36-0016-002, Southold Commons, Southold, New York. Dear Mr. Wiener: The Town Board of the Town of Southold has studied the Southold Commons as per your request of April 5, 1979. In this respect, an investigation has been conducted into the availability of rental units in the Town of Southold, and this investigation reveals there is no need for additional units at the present time. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Town Clerk DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND UF~BAN DEVELOPMENT AREA OFFICE 666 FIFTH AVENUE NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10019 2,L~. Albe~tM. ~Ia~tocchia Supervisor Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 ,.5 APR 197§ DeareSt. Martocchia, Subject: P~oject No. NY36-0016~002, Southold Commons, Eouthold, New York We have received the enolosed application involving hou~ing assistance to be provided by ~ur Department ~nyo,~r jurisd3~ction. ~rsua_nt to Section 213(c) of the Housing and Com~nityDevelopnent Act of 1974, we must determine whether or not there is a need for such housing assistance, taking Lute consideration any applicable Slate housing assistance plan, ~ud that there is or will be a~ilable in the area public £zcilitics and services adequate to 'serve the housing proposed to be assisted. ~_u application may be approved only if ou~ determina- tion is in the affirmative. We invite you to submit ~o us all cements or information you may b~ve which you deem relevant to o,~ dete~aination. '~nile we will not be bound by any sach comments or infozuation, ~ll relevant comments o= iufomnation you provide to us will be considered. We will consider only comments or information from you received by us no later than~_d~-s after the date on ~B~cn you ~ecezve this letter. However, zn order to expedite the application, we would appreciate a reply as soon as oossible. If you do not intend to submit-a~uy comments or infornation, please so notify us as soon as possible so that we may med<e o,mr detez~zi_uatinn. Sincerely, Area l~na~er ~uclosure JOHN ~CKHAM. Cha~man FRANK S. COYLE HENRY E. RAYNOR, Jr. FREDERICK E. GORDON JAMES WALL P D T(~D~ Southold, N.Y. 11971 January 18, 1979 TELEPHONE 765- 1938 Mr. Wilbur Klatsky 625 Middle Country Road Coram, New York 11727 Dear Mr. Klatsky: The following is an excerpt from the minutes of the Planning Board meeting of January 9, 1979. "Mr. Henry Raynor, Vice-Chairman, reported on discussions he had withthe Town Attorney, Robert Tasker, and the Chairman of the Board of Appeals, Robert Gillispie, Jr., regarding the Southold Commons apartment complex. At the last meeting the applicant informed the Board that he was continuing the old appeal decision of Ahlers and Hellman. On reviewing the site plan, there are some substantial differences with regard to the two plans. One is that there are certain amenities left out of the new site plan that were granted as part of the decision including tennis courts, shuffle board and a pool and playground. On the appeal decision they have given an appeal to erect 13 buildings~'of not over 12 apartments each. The site plan submitted to this board is 16 buildings. It seems to be the considered opinion that this may no longer be an extension of the application to the Board of Appeals. This should be reheard by the Board of Appeals. The matter was discussed separately with the Town Attorney and the Chairman of the Board of Appeals and also at the group meeting January4th." Yours truly, M, Secretary Southold Town Planning Board TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE OF BUILDING INSPEC~rOR TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, N. Y. 11971 TEL. 765-1802 December 12, 1978 Southold Town Planning Board Town Clerk Office Southold, N.Y. 11971 Re: Southold Common $ Gentlemen: The following are my comments after reviewing the revised site plan dated, December 8, 1978 for the above: 1. Buildings A.B. & C exceed the minmum four (4) family occupancy as set forth in permitted uses, Article IV, Section 100-40 A.2. There are two parking areas located in the front yard at Youngs Ave. This would require a variance under Article XI, Section 100-112 J (2). Also, site plan does not show marked parking areas and screening as required under sub sections - (1) -(5). Based on the driveway establishing a front yard within the site, the accessory recreation building would require a variance for its location. Under site data, parking spaces were computed at 200' S.F. - Article XI, Section 100-112 C requires 350 S.F. for parking space computation. It is also noted that the site development plan does not include the data as requiredunder the following sections for presub- mission conference. Article XIII, Section 100-134 Legal date -A -(7); Natural Features B. (1) (2) (3); Existing Structures and utilities C.4) 2) (3).- (4); Proposed Development D. 6. I would also like to point out to the Board, that the 20' securit~ access to Hortons Lane runs through a parking area in addition to an undeveloped "C" Light Industrial D~rict. . /  tf~ ~bmitted, ~ ~ ~X~~ Building Inspector hen 'y a. zuckerman, associates architects planners tides office buildinq, route 25a. rocky point.new york .11778'516'744.6188 December 8, 1978 -1- Southold Planning Board Mr. John Wickham, Chairman Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Re: Southold Commons Dear Mr. Wickham: Two months have passed since Mr. Klatsky and I had our pre-submission conference with the board. We h~d attempted to revise the site plan and resubmit it at the November meeting. However, we have spent con- siderable time analyzing the boards' comments, concerns and suggestions. The revised site plan, which we are presenting on December 10th, ad- dresses itself to those comments discussed at our October meeting. The site plan has been amended to include a reduction in the density from 153 units to ~49 units. The length of each building has also been decreased. The main entrance has been amended to include an accelera- tion and deceleration lane. We have provided a twenty foot wide secondary means of access to the property from Horton Avenue. As per the boards~ request, this access will be used only for emergency vehi- cles. We intend to utilize rolled curbing along the entire primary access road, so that emergency vehicles will have access to the project at all times. A traffic study wa's prepared by Raymond, Parish and Pine of Tarrytown, New York, which indicates that the traffic generated from this project will not have any negative effect on the traffic flow on Youngs Avenue, the North Road or Route 25A. We had a meeting with Mr. Fisher to review his concerns with respect to .the buildings. We have clarified the requirements for front-yard set- back and have resolved that there shall be no parking or building within the required fifty foot setback from the entrance road. As per Mr. Fisher's request, we have separated the community building from the ap- artment structure. henry a. zuckerman, associates architects-planners tides office buildinq · route 25a. rocky point, new york .11778 '516'744.6188 -2- Ve'y tru Henry A. HAZ:jb I trust the board will feel confident that we have addressed our- selves to its concerns, and we look forward to a positive reaction at the December 18th meetin? so that we can proceed to obtain final site plan approval. R.A N.C.A.R.B. Zuckerman, Attachme~ ~s: 1) Revised site plan dated December 8, 1978. 2) Architectural drawings, sheets 2, 3a, 4, 5 and 6 dated December 8, 1978. 3) Traffic study dated November, 1978. November 22, 1978 Mr. Wilbur~Klatsky 625 Middle Country Road Coram, New York 11727 Dear Mr. Klatsky: Pursuant to our telelphone conversation of this morning, I am writing to verify that I have cancelled your appointment with the Southold Town Planning Board for November 27th. I have rescheduled you for 9:00 p.m. on Monday, December 18th. Please have plans in the office of the building inspector at least fifteen days prior to the meeting. Yours truly, Muriel Brush, Secre~u~y $outhold Town Planning B~ard November 8, 1978 Mr. John Wickham, Planning Board Chairman SouthOld Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 ATT: Mrs. Brush, Secretary RE: Final Site Plan Approval Southold Commons Dear Mr. Wickham: Pursuant to the Planning Boards's request at our meeting of Monday, October 30, 1978, please find enclosed five (5) copies of brochures describing the activities of Leon N. Weiner Associates. I hope the brochures outline the extensive experience of Leon N. Weiner Associates. Looking forward to seeing you on November 27th. Very truly yours, WILBUR KLATSKY' WK:jg Enc. CC: Henry Zuckerman Marvin S. Gilman 625Middle Country Roade Coram, New York 11727e (516) 473-6161 TO Henry A. Zuckerman & Ass~jates Architects/Planners Tides Office Building Route 25 A ROCKY POINT, NY 11778 (516) 744-6188 Southold Town Planning Board Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU [~ Attached [] Under separate cover via [] Shop drawings ~ Prints [] Plans [] Copy of letter [] Change order [] °^~1/1/78 I'°""°' Mrs. Brush, Secretary "~'Southo]d Commons, Southold, New York [] Samples the following items: [] Specifications COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 5 '6/18/76 7-7 Southold Commons, Preliminary Drawings THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: [] For approval ~ Eor your use [] As requested [] For review and comment [] FOR BIDS DUE [] Approved as submitted [] Resubmit [] Approved as noted [] Submit__ [] Returned for corrections [] Return [] 19 copies for approval _copies for distribution __.corrected prints [] PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO SIGNED: Judy Bonkowski If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS "Southold Commons" Southold, New York Prepared by Transportation Planning Group Tarrytown, New York November, 1978 Transportation Planning Group 555 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, New York 10591 914/631-9003 2!2365Z666 Contents Page Summary Data Collection Traffic Analysis. Conclusion Exhibits SUMMARY The purpose of the following traffic analysis is to evaluate the impact of traffic generated by "Southold Commons" on the streets and intersections adjacent to the site in the Town of S0uthold, New York. (See Exhibit No. 1). In order to conduct the analysis, data was collected on traffic volumes, turning movements, acci- dents and roadway characteristics. Based on this data, and a pro- jection of traffic movements resulting from Southold Commons, the capacity of the affected intersections to accomodate future traf- fic was analyzed. The conclusion of this analysis, which is set forth in detail in the remainder of this report, is that the fic generated by Southold Commons can be accomodated with no dif- ficulty or congestion by the nearby affected intersections. DATA COLLECTION The followinq basic data was collected to provide the necessary in-put for the traffic capacity analysis. Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Data was obtained from the Suffolk County Department of Trans- portation indicating "the total volume of traffic occuring in both directions during the 24 hours of an Average Uay" for both North Road (County Rd. 27) and Main Road (N.Y. State Rt. 25). AADT on the former road was 5,200 vehicles in 1976 and 7,750 on the latter. (See Exhibit No. 2). o Turning Movement Counts Manual counts were made of all directional movements at the four nearby major intersections - Youngs Avenue at Rt. 2~ and Rt. 27, and Horton Lane at Rt. 25 and Rt. 27 - during the morning peak hour. These counts, summarized on Exhibit No. 3, are extremely important, since peak hour volumes ~nd types of turning movements are critical determinants of intersection capacity. Street Dimensions The width of each approach to each of the four intersections was measured and plotted. This data is a necessary component of the papacity analysis. Other intersection and roadway features, such as signs, shoulders and channelization markings were also noted. 2 Accident Data The Town of Southold Police Department provided information concerning traffic accidents at the four major intersections. (See Exhibit No. 4). Such data can help identify locations where intersection design may be faulty. The only intersec- tion where more than three accidents occured in a year is at Youngs Avenue and North Rd. (Rt. 27). There were six, so far during 1978. A review of the turning movement data indi- cates that the number of left turns at this intersection are greater than at any of the others and there are separate chan- nels for right turns. These factors may account for the higher accident rate; however it should be noted that four of accidents occured during the peak summer months. In any event, the accident rate is relatively iow. ANALYSIS The following tasks are necessary to analyze the traffic Southold Con~ons. impact of Adjust Traffic Volumes In order to account for seasonal and daily fluctuations in traf- fic flow, the turning movement counts were compared to the AADT and adjusted upward ~rop~rtionately to derive an accurate measure of all existing turning movements for the two primary intersec- tions, Youngs Avenue at Route 27 and Route 25. (See Exhibit No. 5). 3 o Est~t~e o~.T/9[f~c ~en~r_atiq~ Peak hour traffic to be generated by Southold Commons, at its completion, was then estimated based on standards developed by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. This total traffic pro- jection was then routed through the adjacent intersections in accordance with present traffic distribution patterns· (See Exhibit No. 6). Intersection ~apacity Analysis The adjusted existinq traffic volumes and the projected traffic generated by Southold Commons were then combined to produce an estimate of total traffic volumes at the affected intersections upon completion of Southold Commons. Resulting volumes and turning movements at each principal intersection are shown on Exhibit No. 7. From this data,, the level of service (operating efficiency) was determined for each intersection· On at grade streets, where the intersection basically determines street capacities, the level of service is related to the degre~ of delay at the intersection. It is expressed in a ranqe of values from A to F, where A represents the least congestion'or highest level o[ service, and F represents total congestion or forced flow. The level of service is determined by both physical factors and vehicular operating charaoteristics. Som'e of the physical factors are roadway width, parking regulations, road- way grade, etc., and vehicular operating characteristics include the percent of turning movements, percent of commercial vehicles, local bus service, etc. Level of service C is considered to be good design and was used as the desirable level of service in this study. Exhibits No. 8A and tions, the design hour volumes and hour volume* represents the volume 8B indicate the level of service computa- service volumes. The design for which the street system should be designed to operate at level of service C. For this analysis, the projected AM peak hour volumes were used sign hour volumes. Service volumes are the maximum traffic volumes (with prevailing roadway conditions and traffic char- acteristics) that can be accomodated at each level of service from A to E. CONCLUS ION / The above analysis indicates that the two intersections o~ Youngs Avenue - at Rt. 27 and Rt. 25 - will accomodate traffic volumes after completion of Southold Commons with no difficulty. The Rt. 27 intersection will operate at level of service A, as' the design hour volume is only 25% of the actual service volume. The Rt. 25 intersection will operate at level of service C, with design hour volume only 60% of the actual service volume. Furthermore, this *The design hour volume is the 30th highest traffic volume hour anticipated throughout the entire year. analysis indicates that each intersection will capacity for growth other than Southold Common. sections will be affected by the project. have substantial No other inter- A review of the internal circulation system prepared for Southold Common indicates that the street design will satisfactorily acco- m~date traffic flow. The 30 foot width of the cul-de-sac street is adequate in that no on-street parking is contemplated. 6 B~ Y HOG ~ECK BA~ LITTLE }lOG NECK t/¢/~ ~ TFG-6 RAYMOND, PARISH 8, PIN,,i~kNC TRANSPORTATION PLANNINWR~Up TURNING OlAGRAM~ 0 [ 15 --'- ,P,c::::,,E!i~c~ LA NE I0 N YouuGg [' I~ .,x(ou ~4cq~, .4.v6 POLICE DEPARTIV1ENT. TOWlN O[:= $OUTHOLD PECONIC, NEW YORK, 11958 Novembsr 14, 1978 Mr. Wil!iamR. McGrath, PE, Director Transportation Planning Group Raymond~ parish~ pine & Weiner~ Inc. 555White Plains Road Tarrytown, New York 10%91 Dear Nr. MeGrath, Ref. to your request this date for a listing of Hotor Vehicle Accidents at the intersections of Rte. 27A & Youngs Ave., Rte. 25 & Youngs Ave., Rte 27A & Hortons L%ne~ and Rte 25 & Hortons ~ane, Southold, please find information on enclosed sheet°This Cata covers the period~f January 1, ]976 th~m October 31, 1978. }loping this data will be of assistance to you. F,t;CL (1) Hg.,,'/j fr Sincerely~ . ~ Lt. H. D. Winters POLICE DEPARTMENT. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PECONIC, NEW YORK, 11958 Intersection of Route 27A & Youngs Avenue, Southold ; 7-03-76 2 Vehicles 10-12-78 8-20-7; 2 Vehicles 10-27-78 1-24-77 2 Vehicles 5-31-78 8-22-77 2 Vehicles 8-2~-78 8-27-'i' i' 2 Vehicles 8-03-78 10-10-7 ~ 2 Vehicles 7-11-78 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vebicle~'--- of_ .hqu_te- _~_~, _!o~n_gs Av_~n~u~e~ Southold ; 5-14-76 2 Vehlc] es 8-21-78 7-19-76 2 Vehicles 8-24-78' 10-23-76 2 Vehicles 9-1]-78 2-07-77 2 Vehicles 7-07-7 F 2 lFchicles 6-1h-7~ 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 10-07-7 8-8-77 10-15-7i/ One Veh. vs Bicyclist 2 ~rehicles 2 ~a~h:i cle,n Intersection o(j,'.,'m_t_e 2_~_~2Jf.?_rt__o_n_s~A~v?j(~% Southold ; 5-31-77 10-26-7 7 5-08-78 1 Vehicle vs. Tree 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles Il q~ I ~0 D lO tU D ~ c::). VoL u Transportation Planning Groul General Description Direction Phase Physical Conditions 'wA Width ,of Approach, curb to curb Pkg. Parking within 250' Inter~Iction Capacity Workshe: Project lntersection'l/CXJt'J,(0$ A~f¢/gT.'~5 By / L- S- R L- S R I L-S- R A A I ~ One-way or two-way Environmental Conditions Date AREA T,/pe o¢ Location; CSD, F, OBD. R fA Area Factor, Figure 6.8, 5.9 P Metro Area Population (in 1000's) PHF Peak Hour Factor Characteristics Traffic fT rR Percent Trucks Truck Factor, Table Percent Right Turns Right Turn Factor, Table Percent Left Turns Left Turn Factor, Table Type Bus Stop & Number/Hr. fL3 Local Bus Factor, Figure fi Intermediate Factor ~-i - rA'rpPHF'fT'fR' L'fLB LeveJ°fService A B C g E 1~--~ I s~ LF Load Factor 0 .1 .~-.3 .3-.7 .74.0 .8~ .85 Control Measures c s~o~l Cycle /Sac> ]o.5t J Calculations - Comoos~teFactor = fi'(G/C) CSV Char[ Service Vol. (Same figure as fA) ASV Actual Service Volume = CSV. fc I0oo I 660 OHV Design Hour Volume t lo>f! I b~[ i ][/ l~'~sl Transportation Planning Grog Interljction Capacity Works Project ~ O oTJ~ o~.T) (~-'0 ~N4. MO['J General Description Physical Conditions '2/A Width Of Aporoach, curb to curb Pkg. Parking within 250' Environmental Conditions AREA Type of Location; CBO, F, OBD, R fA Area Factor Figure p Metro Area Population (in lO00's) PHF Peak Hour Factgr 1.0o / ,5 5. 6.5, 6.7 ~-'ql6.5, 6.6. 50o Traffic Characteristics / T Percent Trucks fT Truck Factor, Table R Percent Rioht Turns fR Right Turn Factor, Table L Percent Left Turns fL Left Turn Factor, Table Type Bus Stop & Number/Hr. fLB Local Bus Factor, Figure 0 I n(ermedJate Factor Fi~ fA.fPPHF,fT.fR-fL.fLB Level of Service A B C D E LF Load Factor 0 .1 .1-.3 .3-.7 .7-1.0 .85 Cor~trol Measures C Signal Cycle (Sec) Calculations CSV Chart Service Vol. (Same figure as fA) [Iq~ -' Iq0ol gS;o 55C ASV Actual Service Volume = CSV. fc /O~O! ---~ 10%'1 'l, lg M5 ~ Additional Comments TRAFFIC ANALYSIS "Southold Commons" Southold, New York Prepared by Transportation Planning Group Tarrytown, New York November, 1978 Transportation Planning Group 555 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, New York 10591 g14/631-9003 Contents Page Summary Data Collection Traffic Analysis Conclusion Exhibits SU~L~LARY The purpose of the following traffic analysis is to evaluate the impact of traffic generated by "Southold Commons" on the streets and intersections adjacent to the site in the Town of Southold, New York. (See Exhibit No. 1). In order to conduct the analysis, data was collected on traffic volumes, turning movements, acci- dents and roadway characteristics. Based on this data, and a pro- jection of traffic movements resulting from Southold Commons, the capacity of the affected intersections to accomodate future traf- fic was analyzed. The conclusion of this analysis, which is set forth in detail in the remainder of this report, is that the fic generated by Southold Commons can be accomodated with no dif- ficulty or congestion by the nearby affected intersections. DATA COLLECTION The following basic data was collected to provide in-put for the traffic capacity analysis. the necessary Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Data was obtained from the Suffolk County Department of Trans- portation indicating "the total volume of traffic occuring in both directions during the 24 hours of an Average ~ay" for both North Road AADT on the the latter. (County Rd. 27) and Main Road (N.Y. State Rt. 25). former road was 5,200 vehicles in 1976 and 7,750 on (See Exhibit No. 2). Turning Movement Counts Manual counts were made of all directional movements at the four nearby major intersections - Youngs Avenue at Rt. 2~ and Rt. 27, and Herren Lane at Rt. 25 and Rt. 27 - during the morning peak hour. These counts, summarized on Exhibit No. 3, are extremely important, since peak hour volumes ~nd types of turning movements are critical determinants of intersection capacity. Street Dimensions The width of each approagh to each of the rotor intersections was measured and p~o[ted. This data is a necessary component of the capacity analysis. Other intersectiom and roadway features, such as signs, shoulders and channelization markings were als~ noted. 2 Accident Data The Town of Southold Police Department provided information concerning traffic accidents at'the four major intersections. (See Exhibit No. 4). Such data can help identify locations where intersection design may be faulty. The only intersec- tion where more than three accidents occured in a year is at Youngs Avenue and North Rd. (Rt. 27). There were six, so far during 1978. A review of the turning movement data indi- cates that the number of left turns at this intersection are greater than at any of nels for right turns. accident rate; however accidents occured during the peak summer months. the accident rate is relatively iow. the othe~s and there are separate chan- These factors may account for the higher it should be noted that four of the'Kix'---- In any event, ANALYSIS The following tasks are necessary to analyze Southold Co,nons. z the traffic impact of Adjust Traffic Volumes In order to account for seasonal and daily fluctuations in traf- fic flow, the turninq movement counts were compared to the AADT and adjusted upward proportionately to derive an accurate measure of all tions, No. 5). existing turning mow~ments for the two primary intersec- Youngs Avenue at Route 27 and Route 25. (See Exhibit 3 Peak hour traffic to be generated by Southold Commons, at its completion, was then estimated based on standards developed by the Institute of Traffic Engineers. This total traffic pro- jection was then routed through the adjacent intersections in accordance with present traffic distribution patterns. (See Exhibit No. 6). Intersection ~apacity Analysis The adjusted existinq traffic volumes and the projected traffic generated by Southold Commons were then combined to produce an estimate of total traffic volumes at the affected intersections upon completion of Southold Commons. Resulting volumes and turning movements at each principal interse-ction are shown on Exhibit No. 7. From this data, the level of service (operating efficiency) was determined for each intersection. On at grade streets, where the intersection basically determines street capacities, the level of service is related to the degr6e of delay at the intersection. It is expressed in a range of values from A to F, where A represents the least congestion'or highest ].eve] of service., and F represents total conqestion or forced flow. The level of service is determined by both physical factors and vehicular operating characteristics. Some of the physical factors are roadway width, parking regulations,, road- way grade, etc., and vehicular operating characteristics include the percent of turning movements, percent of commercial ve~icles, local bus service, etc. Level of service C is considered to be good design and was used as the desirable level of service in this study. Exhibits No. 8A and 8B indicate the level of service computa- tions, the design hour volumes and service volumes. The design hour volume* represents the volume for which the street system should be designed to operate at level of service C. For this analysis, the projected AM peak hour volt, es were used as'~e-~'~- sign hour volumes. Service volumes are the maximum traffic volumes (with prevailing roadway conditions and traffic char- acteristics) that can be accomodated at each level of service from A to E. CONCLUSION The above analysis indicates that the two intersections of Youngs Avenue - at Rt. 27 and Rt. 25 - will accomodate traffic volumes after completion of Southold Commons with no difficulty. The Rt. 27 intersection w~]l operate at level of service ~, as'the design hour volume is only 25% of the actual service volume. The Rt. 25 intersection will operate at level of service C, with design hour volume only 60% of the actual service volume. Furthermore, this *The design hour volume is the 30th highest traffic volume hour anticipated throughout the entire year. 5 analysis indicates that each intersection will capacity for growth other than Southold Common. sections will be affected by the project. have substantial No other inter- A review of the internal circulation system prepared for Southold Common indicates that the street design will satisfactorily acco- m~date traffic flow. The 30 foot width of the cul-de-sac street is adequate in that no on-street parking is contemplated. 6 ~.i T 14 QL PECONIC S O U T-f~'O L"'lY-- HOG NECK BAY BEACH Mo. [ FDRM TPG-6 RAYMOND, PARISH TRANSPORTATION PLANNiN(]~Ib,,(jU p TUt~AIING N ~0 Lo~'no~ ~OO'T'.~Lb , t,,J '1' "~0. POLIOE DIEPARFI ,4ENT. TOWbJ OF $OUTHOLD PECONIC. NEW YORI-<, 11958 Nov,~mbmr 1}~, 1978 Fir. William R. MeGrath~ PE, Director Transportation Planning Group Ra.ymond~ parish~ pine & Weiner~ Inc. 555 White Plains Road Tarrytown, New York 10591 Dear ~ir. McGrath, Ref. to your request this date for a listing of £.iotor Vehicle Accidents at the intersections of Rte. 27A & Youngs Ave.~ Rt.e. 25 &' Youngs Ave.~ Rte 27A & Hortons L~ne~ and Rte 2.~ & Hortons Lan% Southold, pleese find information on enclosed sheet,This data covers the period~6f January 1, ~976 th~a October 31, 1978. }loping this data will be of assistance to you. ENCZ (1) HDW/J £r SJncerely~ ~ , Lt. H. D. Winters POLICE DEPARTME]NT. TOWN OF-- SOUTHOLD PECONIC, NEW YORK, 11958 7-03-7(, 2 Vehicles 10-12-78 8-20-76 2 Vehicles 10-27-78 1-24-77 2 Vehicles 8-31-'75 8-22-77 2 Vehicles !3-26-78 8-27-7[ 2 Vehicles 8-03-78 10-10-7 ~ 2 Vehicles 7-11-78 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles 2 V eh~,.cl e ~,--.,-- 5-14-76 2 Vehicles 7-19-76 2 Vehicles 10-23-75 2 Vehicles 2-07-7 ~ 2 Vehicles 7-07-7 i 2 Vehicles 6-!h-Th 2 Vehicles _Int_e?_s_e_c_t_i_o_n_ .o f _R~o_u_t_e_2 7~_Z, _! [?_t~o n_ s_Av enue ; 5-21-78 2 Vehicles 8-24-78 2 Vehicles P-1]-78 2 Vehicles 10-07-7 8-8-77 10-15-7i! One Veh. vs Bicyclist 2 Vehicles 5-31-77 lO-26-77 5-08-78 1 Vehicle vs. Tree 2 Vehicles 2 Vehicles · . q I',,.t o. '7' Vo L u ~es Project Transf~ortation Planning Grou~ 555 White Plains Road Tarry[own. New York !0~91 General Description Interaction Capacity Worksh~ Intersection ~'OO k( (~ A~l'~//C-2('."Ld¢ B V L-S- R A Direction Movements L - S - R Phase A Dale Physical Conditions IWA Width -Of curb~to curb Approach,, Pkg. Parking within 250 One-way or two-way I~zo I ¢o I Environmental Conditions AREA T,/pe of Locauon; C3D, F, 0BP, R fA Area Factor, Figure P Metro Area Population (in 1000's) PHF Peak Hcur Factor [.oo I I.oO fPPHF Combined Adjustment Factor Traffic Characteristics T Percent Trucks fT Truck Factor, Table Percent Flight Turns fFi Right Turn Factor, Table ' L~t, Turns fL Loft Turn Factor, Table T,/be 8us S~cp & Number/Hr. fL3 Local Bus Factor, Figure fi Intermediate Factor Fi = iA.fPPHF.fT.fR-fL-fL8 Level of Service A B C O E LF Load Factor 0 .1 .1-.3 .3-.7 .7-1.0 .85 c Control Measures Calculations Transportation Planning Group General Description Direction , Movemen Is Phase Physical Conditions C-T, %'3 L -S R ~.'T. A I'"A Width of Approach, curb to curb Pkg. Parki¢-9w~thin 250' One-way or t~vo-way '~ / NO I0 j I0 I~ / NO Environmental Conditions AREA Tvpeof Location;CSD, F,OBD, R 6 5,6.6, 6 ? . ~ 6 9 6.8. 6 9 6 3, 6.9 P Metro Area Population (in PHF Peak Hour Factgr ~.00 ~.00 [, 0 0 ~ (.0 0 fPPHF CombinedAd~ustment Factor Traffic Characteristics T Percent Trucks fT Truck Factor, Table R Percent Right Turns fR Right Turn Factor, Table L Percent Left Turns fL Left Turn Factor, Table E Type Bus Stop & Number/Hr. fkS Local Bus Factor, Figure fi In[ermed[ate Factor Fi = fA.fPPHF.fT.fR.fL-fLB 6.6 Level of Service A 8 C D E LF Load Factor 0 .1 .1 .3 .3,7 .7-1.0 .85 Control Measures Calculations I, ?~q/,e4 Signal Cycle (Sec) Rat,o ,c Co 0o,,teFactor :fi' O/O Inl i'N .St! CSV Chart Service Vol. (Same figure as fA) I qoc I~0o ;lSD~ 5sd Additional Comments N4-v C. A~v A'F .L~-v~b ow <~6~,~c~ A E¢~rF 8~ henry a. zuckerman, associates architects-planners tides office buildinq~ route 25o. rocky point.new york.Il778'516-744.6188 October 23, 1978 Mr. John Wickham, Planning Board Chairman Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Att: Mrs. Brush, Secretary Re: Application for Site Plan Approval, Southold Commons - west of properties owned by R. B. Grattan, Wetkowski and others; east of Youngs Avenue - north of property owned by D. Charnews; south of L.I.R.R. and others Dear Mr. Wickham: I represent Leon Weiner Associates on the above subject property. As you may recall, we have had some preliminary discussions concerning the pro- perty some months ago. The parcel was rezoned by the Town Board in May of 1972 and referred to the Planning Board for Site Plan Approval as one of three conditions placed on the property. The other two conditions refer to approval and construction of a sewage treatment plant. My client is prepared to meet the conditions established. Accordingly, this letter will confirm our meeting with the Planning Board on October 30, 1978 at 9:15 p.m. to discuss and analyze the site plan and to formerly make appli- cation for Site Plan Approval. Thank you for your cont~d cooperation. / / ucke~ N. C .A.R. B. HAZ:j~ cc: Mr. Bill Klatsky Mr. Marvin S. Gilman Also, please find enclosed a check No. 2445 dated 10/23/78 in the amount of $25, representing accompanying fees for application for site plan review and approval; all preliminary drawings (architectural and site). TO Henry A. Zuckerman & AsOiates Architects/Planners Tides Office Building Route 25 A ROCKY POINT, NY 11778 (516) 744-6188 Mr. John Wickham, Planning Board Chairman SouLhuld Tuw,, Hdll Main Road Southold, New York 11971 10/23/78 Mrs. Brush. Secretary GENTLEMEN: WE ARE SENDING YOU [~ Attached [] Under separate cover via [] Shop drawings ~ Prints [] Plans [] Copy of letter [] Change order [] [] Samples the following items: [] Specifications COPIES DATE NO* DESCRIPTION 6 6/18/76 6 of 6 Southold Commons, Southold, New York - preliminary drawings - (architectural and site) THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: [] For approval [~ For your use [] As requested [] For review and comment [] FOR BIDS DUE [] Approved as submitted [] Approved as noted [] Returned for corrections [] 19 [] Resubmit__ [] Submit [] Return copies for approval copies for distribution corrected prints [] PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS COPY TO_ SIGNED: Henry A. Zuckerman, R.A., N.C.A.R.B. SOUTHOLD COMMONS 5/ /74 5/15/74 p.91 5/23/?4 5/3 /74 614174 6/24/74 6/27/74 7/lO/74 ?/11/74 s/20/74 9/5/?4 9/ 5/?4 9/10/74 1/27/75 p.12 Received site plan elevations window schedule foundation floor plan sprinkler planting community building sewage collection electrical specs C/Z map lighting plan Ahlers appeared. Told to send in 5 more copies Ahlers took back lighting plan. Gave him back his sewage report Ahlers brought in more copies of site plan Gave Wickham, Raynor, Coyle and Moisa copies of site plan. Wickham and Raynor also took sewage book Received drainage plan and details (5 copies) Sent to Wickham, Raynor, Moisa and Coyle p.ll8 Board authorized to secure services of Ed Bage Ed Bage came in. Told him to see Henry Raynor Ahlers in making inquiry Ed Bage picked up site plan from Henry today Ed Bage brought back site plan and recommendations Gave copy to Howard. Received recommendations of Building Inspector Sent both to Planning Board Frank picked up site plan and copies of recommendations of Bage and Terry Howard suggests meeting with committee from Planning Board and men from Building Inspector's office. Told Ahlers check with Bage and Dean re curbs and gutters. Find out from Monsell primary water source. TOIVN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW yORK D^TEA~.-.gS 197 rubllc 6/t8/7 ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 1799 nate June 6, 1973 ACTION OF TH~ ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS ON THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To Gaorge Southold, l~ew York AppeLlant l~blic He.ting I at a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on Oeoision of was considered and the action indicated below was taken on your ( ) Bequest for variance due to lack of access to property (X) Request for a special exception under the Zoning Ordinance ( ) Request for a variance to the Zoning Ordinance ( ) the appeal 1. SPECIAL EXCEPTION. By resolution of the Board it was determined that a special exception ( ) be granted ( ) be deuled pursuant to A~tiele .................... Section .................... Subsection .................... paragraph .................... of the Zoning Ordinance and the decision of the Building Inspector ( ) be reversed ( ) be coo.firmed because 8550 P.~.I, (EoSoT.), upon application of George Ahlers and ~ax~-~' Hellman, Cutchogue and $outhold, ~ew York~ respeotivsly, for a special exception in accordance with the Zoning Ordinances A_wtiele V, Section 500, Subsection B-l, for per. salon to erect multiple dwellir~s. Location of propert¥~ west side Youn~s Avenues Southold, bounded noz~th by Ds Charnsws! east by Youngs Avenuel south by Lor~ Island Railroad, ~Lter, Averett, tLaelin and othersl and west by Rs B. Grattan, t4etkowski and others. Fee pa~d ~5.00. 2. VARIANCE. By resolution of the Board it was determined that (a) Strict application of the Ordinance (would) (would not) produce hardship because SEE REVERSE practical difficulties or unnecessary (b) The hardship created (is) (is not) unique and (would) (would not) be shared by all properties alike in the immediate vicinity of this property and in the same use district because SE~ REYEI:~SE (c) The variance (does) (does not) observe the spirit of the Ordinance and (would) change the character of the district because (would not) SEE REVERSE and therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance ( ) be granted ( ) be denied and that the previous decisions of the Building Inspector ( ) be cor~fIrmed ( ) be reversed. SEE RI~VERSE FORM ZB4 ZO~NG BOARD OF APPEA.I.~ :~ia~Jorie 1.~cDermot% Secretary Southold Town Board of Appeals The Board f~nds by Lnvestl~ation and public he.rings that a char~s of zone on applicant's property was recommended by the $outhold Town ?lann~ Board to the Town Board on ~l~Ch 23, 1972o The zone was ohar~ed from 'A' Residenti°1 and AC~lo.ultural on ~ay 9, 1972 to '~;-1', which petite Multiple l~el~in~s sy ~pac~al Exception of ~he ~o~ of Ap~e~s~ ~d e~te ~1~ app~v~ of the Pi~ ~. The s~te consists of 22,8~2 ~res on which Xt is p~posed to e~ct ~een (l~) build~sf ~t over 12 ap~aenta per b~ld~e ~t ove~ 1~2 feet ~ leah (~ee V~i~oe Appe~ No, ~800)~ with a tot~ of~ 10~ one b~om ap~ments of app~ximately 82~ sq. ft, ~ ~2 ~ bed~o~ ap~ents of app~tely i~OQ~ sq. ft,~ ~d It ~[~ ~ol ~ oo~lty bulldi~ ~o te~s oo~s~ shuffle ~ co~ pl~d co~, ~d sew~e t~atment pl~t w~th public water. At a number of public hearings, the problems of character and appearance, compatibility, development policies relationship, community facilites relationship, traffic generation (approxi- mately 933 vehicular trips esti~ated at completion), access, drainage, design standards, and a sewage treatment plant, have been carefully considered. The applicant is presently having an engineering study made to determine the best sewage treatment plant for the project, after which the design must be presented to the Suffolk County Department of Environmental Control and the Suffolk County Board of Health for approval. The several Boards of the Town are concerned by the nitrates problem. 2~wever, it is felt that the solution of the denitrification problem, as it applies to this project, lies with the Suffolk County Board of Health. Oallona~e estim_~ted b~ the applicant to make sewage plant operable is variously estimated from 10,000 to 30,000 gallons per day. The Board finds that the public convenience and welfare and Justice will be served and the le£ally established or per- mitted use of neighborhood property and adjoining uae districts will not be permanently or substantially injured and the spirit of the Ordinance will be observed. ~REFORE IT WA~ RESOLVED, George Ahlers and BaA-A-y Hellman, Cutche~ue and southold, ~ew York, respectively, be GH~TED perm[esCort to erect 13 buildings, as originally applied for, subject to the follow[n~ condit~ons, 1. Site plan approval by the Plannin~ Bos~ of the To~ of Bouthold. 2. ~o Certificates of Occupancy shall be issued by the Building Inspector unless a Sewage Treatment Plant, subject to the approval of the Suffolk Comity DepaA-tment of Health and the suffolk County Department of vironmental Control, is installed and certified operable by these t~-o ~jencies. 3. The construction of the sewage treatment plant shall also be subject to any applicable local, County, State, or Federal law. Vote of the Board~ A~es~- I~;eesrs! Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, Grigonie. · '~s Board finds by investigation and public hearings that a change of zone on applicant's proper~y was recommended by the Sou'~hold Town Planning Board to the Town Board on ~tarcb 23, 1972. The zone was, changed from "A' Residen~ial and Agricultural on ~:ay 9, 1972 to "~;-1'", which permits ~iultiple Dwelling~s by Special Exception of the ~'card of Appeals, and site plan approval of the Planning ~oard. The site consists of 22,842 acres on which it is proposed to erect thirteen (13) buildL-~s, not over 12 apart~aenta per building, not over 132 feet in length (See Variance Appeal No. 1800), with a total of, 10% one bedroom apax-tments of approximately 82~ sq. ft., 32 two ~edroom apartments of approximately 1,005 sq. ft., and 16 ".:fftciency apartments of approximately 625 sq. ft. Ai~o, a SW~mm~n6 pool and community building, ~wo tennis Courts, shuffle board court, playground court, and sewage treatment plant with public water. At a number of public hearings, the problems of character am~ appeme, compatibility, development policies .relationship, community facilites relat~-onahip, ~m~ffic generation (approxi- mately 933 vehicular trips est'.sated at completion), access, drainage, des~n s~mndards, and a sewage treatment plant, have been carefull~ considered. The appliosnt is presently having an engineering study made to determine ~he bas; sewage treatment plant for ~he project, after which the design must be presented to the Suffolk County Department of Environmental Control and the Suffolk County Board of Health for approval. The several Boards of the Town are concerned by the nitrates problem. However, it is felt that the solution of the denitrification problem, as it applies to this project, lies with the Suffolk County -Board of Health. Oa~o~_~e estimated by the applicant tO make sewage plant operable is variousl2 estimated from 10,000 to 30,000 gal/one per daM. The Board finds that the public convenience and welfare and Justice will be served and the legally established or per- mitted use of neighborhood property and adJoinir~ use districts will not be permanerftly or subs~ntially injured and the spirit of the Ordinance will be obse~v~d. TP~REFORE IT WAS RE$OLV~D, George Ahlers and BaA~-y Hellmsn, Cu~chog-ue and Southold, ~lew York, respectively, be G~'ffED permission to erect 13 buildings, as ori~inally applied for, subject to the following conditions, 1. ~ite plan approval by the Pl~ru~in~ Board of the Town of Bouthold. 2. ~o Cert[fica2es of Oocup~cy eh~l be issued by 2he B~ld~ ~ector ~ese a 5ew~e '~ea~en~ Pl~t, subjec~ ~ ~he ~p~v~ of ~he J~folk Co~y ~p~en~ of He~th ~ the S~folk Cowry Dep~ent of ~ vi~ent~ Contel, is inst~led ~d codified operable by these ~o ~encies. 3. The concoction of the sew~e treatment pl~t sh~l ~o ~ s~J~t to ~y applicable loc~, Cowry, S~ate, or F~e~ law. Vote of the ~oard~ Ayes,- hessr~, Gilltmpie, ~er~en, hulse, Grigonis. Southold Town Board of Appeals -12- June 28, 1973 MR. CHARLES GRIGONIS, JR.: This was done long before there was a Zoning Board. We started in 1957. Before then you did not,have to come before a Board. After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to operate a second business (Take-out Deli) on same premises with a public garage on the north side of Main Road, Orient, New York. The findings of the Board are that the area is zoned A~Ticultur~l-Residential and this property was given a non-conforming use to operate as a garage; ~nd that permitting another business in a non-conform- ing business area would expand the use of the property on an undersized lot. The members of the Board agree that it is. beyond the scope of the Board of Appeals to grant this application; and that the only solution to the problem would be for the applicant to endeavor to have the zone cha~ed and to acquire additional property. The Board finds that strict application of the Ordinance would not produce practical difficulties or unnocessary hardship; the h~rdship created is not unique and would be shared by all properties ~like'in the inuuediate vicinity of this property and in the came use district; and the variance ~ill change the character of the neighborhood, a/xd urlll not obsex~-e the spirit of the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Gillispie, seconded by Mr. Bergen, it was RESOLVED, Joy Finkle and Millie Messeri be DENIED permission tO operate a second business (Take-out Deli) on same premises with public garage on the north side of ~in Road, Orient, New York, for the reasons stated. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, Hulse, Grigonis. PUBLIC HEARING: Appeal No..1799 - 8:30 P.M. (E.S.T.), upon application of George Ahler~ ~nd Barry Hellman, Outchogue and Southold, respectively, for = special exception in ~th the Zo~nE 0rdin~oe~ Article V, Section ~00, Subsection ~-1~ for ~ermission to erect multipl~ dwellings. Location west side Yo~s Avenue~ Southold, bonded north by D. east by Yo~s Avenue; south by Lon~ Island R=ilr~ad~ ~elin ~d others; ~d west by R. B. Gratt~, Wetkows~ and ~thers~ Fee paid $1~.00. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a special exception, legal notice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, and notice to the applicant. Southold Town Board of Appeals -13- June 28, 1973 TB~ CHAIRMA~ By way of back,round, I might say that this change of zone ~s recommended by the Planning Board in a letter addressed to the Southold To~ Bo~d on ~rch 23, 1972. reason I ~ loo~ over the records of the Sou~hold To~ ~d the Southold To~ pln~n~n~ Bo~d i~ that "M-I" Zonin~ which ~s created by th~ To~ Bo~d, c~n o~y be used ~der application to the Southold To~ Bo~rd of Appeals ~d si~e pl~ approv~ of the Pl~nin~ Board. I ~ lookin~ at t~t is a reco~ of a To~ Bo~-d hearing, w~ch ~a for ~y pa~es, ~ whi~ ~so centana = feral ~2~ement of zone by the To~ 01erks Alber~ W. Rio~ond, coverin~ this proper~y, ch~in~ from "A" Residenti=l-A~ic~t~al ~o "M-l" M~ti~le Residence~ ~y 9~ 1972. ~s he~in~ ~a reconvened from the meetin~ h~l of the Supe~sor~ office to $1=e ~si~ of Greenport High So, el at 8sO0 P.M. Pre~ent a~ this he~ln~ were Supe~sor ~ber~ M. ~rtocohia~ Justices ~tin Surer ~d ~uis De~est~ Co~oilmen ~r-~n ~d Rich. Evidenee wns given by the applicantu. Many people presented objections! some spoke for it. I ~rlll read some letters from the Planning Board which I believe are pertinent. The Chairm~- read letter dated June 22, 1973, addressed to Mr. Robert W. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman of the Southold Town Board of Appeals, as follows: "In general the Plam~ning Board does not approve of v~ri=nces on new conotI~Aetion after the ~ite plan has been approved or at lemst finalized. ~ere might, how- e~er~ be some exten~i~ Ciroums~oes if =11 of the ~its ~ontained 850 sq~re feet ~d the ~nim~ distress between ~1 the buildings ~s strictly obse~ed. The Plan= ~oard mi~t be inclined to look more favorably on this if the pri~r~ p~ose were to ~ke the livi~ ~ts more spacious." Si~ed- Jo~ Wiok~n, Ch-ir~n, Southold To~ P~-~ Board. T}~ CHAIRMAN: There seems to have been some misconception about a variance in oo~.neotion %rlth the length of the building. It was explained to us when we a~reed to accept the application for a variance that the purpose was to enlarge the kitchens. After looking over the plans, we decided that slightly more kitchen space would be highly desirable. There is a 125t ~rbitrary length requirement in the Zoning 0rdinanee which is a figure that ~s literally determined without ~Lny specific guide lines. Thus, you can prevent someone from building one long building in the Multiple D~ellin~ Zonin~ Ordinance but it does not cover the width of the building. The applicant could increase the area of the apartments by increasing the width in the interest of facilitating an orderly plan, we thought that it would be advisable to entertain an application for a 7j length variance. With regard to what )~. Wiol~h=m h~s said about 890 sq. there is no minimum standard in the Zoning 0rdin~nce for size of apartments except what is determined by the Multiple Residence Law ef the State of New York and the $outhold Town Housing 0ode. $outhold To~n Board of Appeal~ -14- June 28, 1973 As I went over the plans I saw that the proposal is for 1105~one bedroom apartments - 825 sq. ft., 1,005 sq. ft. for '~W~ bedroom apartments~ and 645 sq. ft. for efficiency apartments. MR. GEORGE ABLERS~ The total should come to 153 units. THE CHAIRMANI The layout of the 13 buildings has been prepared. On the site plea% is shown the 13 buildings contained within a~ oval which has entrsaxce ~nd egress, ~nd parking spaces on the periphery in the center of the mall. There is a pool and commuzxity building (enclosed), a sitting area, shuffleboard cou~t and playground. Also~ a sewage plant which is off to the southeast and some distance from the nearest buildings. TB~ CHAIRMAn: Is there anyone present who ~ishes to spea/~ for this application? MR. JOP~ R. McNULTY~ Riverhead: I would like to ma/ce it a part of the record that it has been through several Boards. One of the po/~xts to be brought out here is that ~he se~age treatment plant w~uld be located in the southwest portion of the premises and that would be adjacent to the Long Island ~atlroad~ and also adjacent to a fertilizer plant of A~way to the east, which %~uld seem to be the proper place for a sewage plant. HR. ROBERT ~ERG~N: Do I understand that you want to extend ~11 30 bu/ldinge by ? feet? THE CHAIPu~AN~ Actually the variance applies only to the length of the buildings ~n4~ as I have explained here~ you could make these buildings 100~ wide. MR. McNULTY~ The problem is that the kitchen is narrow. I submit that this is an ideal location for this ty~e of structure. It is within walking distance of the village and the se~ge treatmen~ pl~t wo~d be in ~ appropriate area. T~ C~ I~ Is adjacent to existi~ industrial property. I thi~ there ~s some discussion as to whether it would be 500 fee~ of ~ Road. It is not. ~, Mc~ I don~t t~ it's more t~ 500 feet from ~he railroad to ~in Road. ~ C~: It's accessible to the village, has public ~ter~ ~d ~u pl~ a se~ge treatment pl~t. ~. A~RS~ ~atever the Cowry requires ~11 be done. ~ve si~ed a contract ~th P~xfioation Systems of Ooeanside. ~s t~es ~unsiderable ~ime to get t~ough the Cowry Environmental Control. Southold Town Board of Appeals -15- June 28, 1973 'A'~ C~: The new Multiple Residence Law applies in this situation, and the Southold To~n Building Code also applies. The Suffolk County Environmental Control ~Toup is involved also New York State Environmental Control. MR. AP~.MRS~ I think it is State Environmental, County Environmental ~nd the Board of He=lth. TH~ CHA~R/4A/~: I thin~ that as f~r as any questions bein~ raised as to density, this is within the li~tts of the zoning laws of 1971. You need site plan approval by the Planning Board, loc&rich of pa~ lots, la/xdsoaDing~ otc, F~. AHE/~RS~ None of this cs.n be done until we find out if you ~e goin~ to extend the buildings. TH~ CHAIPJ~A~ The nitrate problem is one ~hat has not been solved yet. MR. AHLERS~ From what · c~n gather from the engineering company that will be building =he pls~nt, They a~e submitting proposals to the Oounty. I ~de~st~d ~h~t in S~folk Co~y =here ~e no operatio~l ~erti~y pl~s. One is ~oin~ =o De built in P~tcho~e. ~e Oo~y Is experimentl~ with t~ or t~ee difx'ere~ t~es to see w~t is most effio~en=. 'A~ere ~e ~n~ processes ~ end,needs ~ ~il worK. There i~ no' ~a~a ~olleo~ed yet ~ ~he 0o~y. T~s is ~1 ~enitrific~i~n. 'A'H~ C~AIRMA~ The ordix~ary tertiary sewage plant has done nothing about denitrification, which leads me to a question that has puzzled me. As I unaerstand it you need a certain flow before you o~n m~e the p~-~ ~r~ a~ ~1. if yOU ~ve aOout ~0 ~ts~ ~o you ~ow W~ the co~t ~d Se? MR. A/~LERS~ The Cou~tTuses, on a oeuroo~a count, M~O-3OO ~llons per day. I thxn~ ~he State law reads up to 30~00u ~llons ~or multxple dwellings. If the total flow did not come up to ~0~000 ~allons, you would not h~ve to put a se%r~ge plant in. THE CHAXRMAN~ Ass,,m~ngyouhave to have a certain flow, what w~uld you anticipate the number of units would be? individ,,n] apartments. TH~ C}LAIR~4/~ Will each one of theso bnildin~s h=ve the same mixture of t]rpes of apartments as the other bu/ldings? MR..al-n','m-RS: Tixere will be a mixture. The buildings are labelled "A", "B", arid "C". TP~E CHAI/IMA~ Wh~t w~uld be the aequence of development? Southold Town Board of Appeals -16- June 28, 1973 MR. Am.mRS: We would start with the firs~ four or five buildings. We .would put the roadm in, branch feeder lines. Electric underground wirtng h~s to be done prior to pavin~ the roads. Once the sewage treatment plant has been approvedv we ~rlll continue on. T~E CHAIRMAN: AssumAn~you start with five buildingsf how many dwell/x~,m~ts will that be? MR, A.'m'-~-RS: Sixty. THE CHAIRMAN~ How m.~y bedrooms in the first.five? MR. ~1%S: A-1 has one bedroom, B is Efficiency Apartments a~d C has two bedrooms. Rouw. hly this would be 60 apartments. It may be that we would only build the flr~t four. I spoke to Mr. Wickh~m on the telephone one day ~nd I t,hin/c he told me someth/n$ like 45 units. We ~uld have to have temporary cess- pools. TP~ CHAI/~M~ How fast do you want to proceed? MR. ABLERS~ As soon as we possibly can. TH~ CHA/dtMA~: ~nere is a letter here from a bam~k indicatin~ a willingness to consider financing.the project predicated upon proper sonin~ a/xd economic fe~sibilxty. One of the conditions stipulated by Mr. Wiokb-m in a letter to N~.Pat Realty Corp. dated Januax~ 18, 1~73 (oopie~ to Supervisor Martocchia and Robert Tasker~ Esq.) is that sewage treatment pl~ts must be wor~ when one third of the ~ts are occupied. (~s condition ~s set do~ by the Southold To~ Board). ~so, the Suffolk Co~t~ ~p~ment of Envi~nent~ Control ~s issued ~ ~lin~ as of J~ 1~ 1972, that ~trate removal in ~1 sewer pl~ts nitrate re~v~ pl~ts are not perfected ~d that "We ~e br~n~n= this to yo~ attention because the nitrate levels in the To~ of Southold ~ve become extremely critical ~d pose ~ i~edi=te t~ea~ to public health ~d ~ety. ~or t~s reason the Plain= ~d c~ be e~eoted to insist on ri=id co~li~ce to this req~rement." ~ y~u ~ers~ "when one t~rd of the ~ts MR. HOWARD TERRY, Buildir~Inspector: They have h~d con- vereatio~ ~th J, ~Ly~.~s staff on these private sewer pl~ts. Basio~ly~ the~ he~d ~t they sh~d ~ve 50 ~ts ~o ~ve sufficient flow. Seuthold Town Board of Appeals -17- J~u~e 28, 1973 THE CHAIRMA/~: 1,005 sq. ft. is. a generous size. I don't agree that all people want 850 sq. ft. You only plan 16 efficiencies, the bull= of the units would be 825 sq. ft. (10.~ of them), ~nd 50 two bedroom apartments would be 1,005 sq. f~. This Board has to come up ~ith a decision and if this is granted we have to impose conditions that ~ill meet all the vs~--ying de~ands as to how -~ny buildings there ~-ill be, when you are goin~ to put the sewr~e pl~t in, when the roads, ~en the playgrounds, etc. MR. AHLERS: One of the first things would be roads. h~ve to put dry sewer lines ~n and underWround electrical facilities for the buildings. MR. HOWARDTERRY, Building Inspector: All utilities have to go underground for ~I1 thirteen buildings. THE CHAIRMAN~ You may only be able to build five buildings ~nd then five or ten years later, five or so more buildings. MR. A/~RS: I ~ould disagree with ~. ~icl~ham as to the time lapse. The engineers think they can solve this problem. As to speed of construction: We would have to build the first five buildings (50 mnits). As lor~ as the demand is great enough and the sewage treatment is on line~ we would continue ~ith anether bu~ldin~. The initial buildings would have to have cesspools. I would assume they would be nea~ the buildin=s. Cesspools have no mechanical pumping. THE CHAIRMAN: If your se~ge treatment plant went out, how would eight or nine buildings get to these cesspools? MR. A/tLERS: I know the County will tell me what I have to do and what I don't ~ave to do. I am sure the County Health Department has rules ar~ regulations which lay things all out. The sewage treatment plant is me,toted daily. We intend to si~ a contract ~t~ a f~m t~t ~11 ~intain ~d ~ the ee~=e treatme~lt ~la~t. Ve~ strict records we kept. MR. ~0WARD TERRY$ Tats has to be done by a licensed person° MR. AHLERS: Probably the Resident Manager woul~ ~ve to have a license for day to day ou~e, ~nd the firm would tm/~e care of the neeessaa--/ chemicals for the operation of the plant. There are standby generators. It is a package type T~ CHA~R~L~N: We don~t have authority in this field. Presumably sewage problems will be contained. Sout~bld To~rn Board ox' Appea2. s -18- June 28, 1973 MR. AHLERS= from six months plants. The County is very strict abo~t this. It ts/~es to a year to get approval on sewage treatment THE CHAXRMA~= There was something in the minutes about hau/ing away solid waste. MR. TERRY: It depends on the t}Te of plant. MR, ARLERS~ It seems that both the Planning Board and the Town Board saw a need for such units. ~ny people in the real estate business say there is no place to rent out here.. T}~ CHAIPu%L4~N= People dontt want to see the Town change. I think the Town ~oard reoo~aized that there is a need. MR. ARLERS= Our intention is to make the buildings Colonial in style so they b-111 blend with the area. THE CHAIHMANg There are many other objections to apartments. I jotted down the usual criteria.., character and appearance, compatibility ~rith the surtout, ding area, etc. This will not interfere w~th any known development policy of the County or Town. Some of the other things are= how close to a shopping center is it?.,~ traffic generation (I think they use the fi~lre of 6.1)... entrances ~nd exits, drainage~ etc. Access appears to be good. MR. A/-ILERS: As far as drainage goes~ it's almost all sand. There is one low spot with a slight amount of clay but the rest Of it is sand. THE CHAIRMAN: Another point is desicn standards. MR. AHLERS: Our architect is Sigmund Spiegel. He sits on the State Board on zoninK matters~ and also on another Board. He is very well known. THE CHAIRMAN: That's a vor~ rough list of the criteria the County uses. MR. A/4T~RS~ I spoke tot he assistant to ~4r. Koppol=~n ~nd his opinion of the project ~r~s that ho thought it ~.s needed ~nd very well thought out. Southold To~rn Board of Appeals -19- June 28, 1973 MRS. JEAN TIEDK~: I would like to corn=end you on the variety and size of the apartments. TH~ CHAIRMAN: Does anyone else wish to speak for this application? There was no response.) TH~ CHAIRMAN: Is there anyone present who wishes to speak agains~ this application? There ~s no response.) TH~ CHAIRMAN: I assume that some of the people who are present are here for information. MR. W. D. WELLS: I would like to have a clear understanding of wh~t the traffic will be on ¥oung's Avenue when 6.1 people per unit are using it. THE CHAIRMAN: That is 6.1 vehicle trips per day. MR. WELLS= They will be using Young's Avenue. THE CHAIRMAN: This is per dwelling unit. Their figure might be a little different. There won't be 900 vehicle trips unti~ many years from now, MR. WELLS: Where are the trucks and equipment going to come from, Route 27 or Route 25? I c~=x tell you that the noise and traffic right now are excessive. That's the first objection. CHAIRMAN: I don't know how we can retain traffic. MR. WELLS: I don't think it was clearly explained about these septic tanks that will be put in temporarily. I don~t know how this will work out with residents in the immediate vicinity, THE CHAI~V~_N~ This is on = 22 acre tract and presumably these septic tahks~ or whatever they are required to build theret will not affect the whole area. MR. WELL~: Then there is the n~tter of nitrates. We are at the danger point now. THE CHAIRMAN~ We can't solve thie problem now. THE CHAIRMAN: Does anyone else wish to speak? Southol~ Town Board of Appeals -20- June 28, 1973 MR. A~LERS: The only thing I might point out is that existing homes on Youngls Avenue all have one or two cesspools. The nitrate count in that area is exceptionally high. The point that I am making is that with the County's new regulations requiring septic tanks in addition to cesspools, this is a far superior manner of handling it. We had to start doin~ that in 1972. A septic tan/c is a holding tank in which bacterial action takes place. In actuality the cese pool is holding solids with a higher nitrate content but for a private dwelling today we have to put in a 900 gal. septic tank plus cesspools. MR. WELLS: You have to solve the nitrate problem. MR. AHLERS: We will have a fa~ greater recovery rate and purer w~ter. If this project were done as one family homes it would be a different matter. The fact that you have a sewage treatment plant is really an advantage. The Health Department says you should h~ve 100' between well points and cesspool. They will allow you to go within 65 feet. MRS. MARG~ HARRIS: When there is a big storm ¥oun~'s Avenue looks like the Erie Ca~=l. ~at are you doing about storm sewers? In front of one property you have what amounts to a dike. MR. AHLERS: There is a low spot. I think probably what it has been is that the wash from the property has deposited soil during the years of soil erosion. TH~ CHAIRMAN: The Planning Board will be involved in site pl~n approval and will undoubtedly require drainage. MRS. HARRIS~ I just hope they don't plan to tie it in with the sewer. What h~ppens if technolo~-/ is not forthcoming on the nitrates. Can they plead hardship ~nd just put in cesspools? THE CHAIRMAN~ Thatls a very interesting question but I don't believe I have the answer for it. The Planning Board have said in their letter of June 28th that they are"prepared to insist on the absolute performance of each of these conditions and this becomes pertinent because although the County has set a date for the installation of denitrification equipment, there is currently no acceptable process. Nevertheless, because each of the developers has been notified and because denitrification is vitally importu_nt in the Town of $outhold, the Pla.~nin~ Board will insist on strict performance. This probably means that the second tLalf of the units in all such developments now being planned will be postponed for as ~uch as five or ten years. The Planning Board is prepared to instruct the Building Inspector to withold certificates of occupancy until all these conditions are met, but it would seem that the Board of Appeals might =1so require this as one of the conditions for approval under their special exceptions". Presumably if the problem is not solved, it won't block all housin~ in the United S~atee. Southold To~n Board of Appeals -21- June 28, 1973 MRS. HARRIS: You are coming in the back door with the whole plan. You may finish half and your technology will not have been solved· I would like to see the technology forthcoming. THE CHAIRSL~N: The point I w~s trying to make is that this would block all building. It is not Just here but over many sections of the country. MRS. TIEDKE: Mr. Halzmacher appeared here in Greenport and he was suggesting that it would be five or ten years before a really workable nitrification system was available· MRS. HARRIS: I agree that housing is desperately needed but it's these little technical things that I get hung up on. MR. McNULTY: If the nitrate problem was not solved, would we then be able to plead hardship and install cesspools? The point is that the nitrate problem has nothing whatever to do with a sewage treatment plant. The sewage would be treated by the plant. We would not go back into cesspools. THE CHAIRMAN: In another year or two there may be other things that are discovered in the soil or air. We have ecologists in conflict as to what is feasible and what is not. MR. AHLERS: In talking with the engineers about the pla~, we have found that they are working on the construction of a sewage treatment plant in a new town which has been developed by Brookhaven. It is a tremendous area. We have had estimates on the plant which we propose ranging between $250~000 to $300,000 to construct and this is what we anticipate.., about $1,500 per unit. It would be almost double w~h~t cesspools would cost. MRS. TIE~KE~ What kind of facade will this have? MR. A~LERS: Shingles, clapboard, brick· We have given the Plam_ning Board varieus facades· They will all be Colonial in n~ture. We brought several photographs to the Planning Board and asked which ones they like. Mr. Wtckham said that they can't dictate design but indicated the one he prefers so that is the one we will select · I THE CHAIRMAN: Tl~e Town Board struggled with this problem, whether Or not to do it at all, and I think it was a farsighted move because I believe you have to have more than grid develop- ments on Long Island. I would like to poll the Board with respect to their giving me the authority to write all the conditions with the Town Counsel, with the help of the Planning Board, so that we may come up with a decision so that these people can get moving· Ayes:- Messrs: Bergen, Hulse, Grigonis. Southold Town Board of Appeals -22- June 28, 1973 THE OHAI~MAN~ ~"ne actual decision will be made =t a public meeting. We donet know hew ion= it will take to ~et all this co~elatedo The Board approves ~ubject to defining the oondition~ of whatever needs to be stipulated in the Action° You have tentative approv~l with regard te the disouusion we have.had here tonight. On motion by Mr. Bergen, seconded by Mae Hulse, it w~s RESOLVED that Robert We Gilllspie, Jr., Chair~n of the Southold Town Board of Appeals be GRANTED the authority to write the conditions applying to Appeal No. 1799 urith the aid of To~n CouneeLand the Southold To~n Planning Bo~rd.. Vote of the Boa~d~ Ayes;- ~essrs: Bergen, HtLlset Grigonis. PUBLIC HEA~ING~ Appeal No. 1800 - 8:45 P.M. (E.S.T.), upon application of George Ab_lets a~d Earry Hell=~n, Cutcho~ue and Southold, respectively, for a variance in accordance with the Zoning 0rdinancee Article V, Section 30~, for permission to construct multiple dwellings with some buildings over 125~feet in length. Location of property: ~est side ¥oungs Avenue, Southold~ bounded north by Do C.harnews; east by Youn=s Avenue; South by Long Island Railroad, M~ier, Ay.reft, ~elin and other~; and west by Re B. Grattan, Wetkowski a~d others. Fee paid $15.00. The Chairman opened the hearing by reading the application for a variance~ legal notice of he,ring, affidavits attesting to its publication ~n the official newopapers, and notice to the applicant. THE CHAIR~L~N: Is there ~-nyone present who wishes to spe~k for this application? M~. GEORGE A~RS: I think we have covered, basically, the reason* for wan~ing to exceed 12~ feet. %"~.en we ~ot the drawings from Mr. Spiegel we found that the kitchen5 were a corridor type of kitchen, approximately 7 feet in ~dth and 10 feet long, withou~ ~ eating area. We felt that to =ke the people who would be renting these apartments, mostly senio~ citizens, e~t ~11 their meals in ~he dinin~ room did not ~e sense. We decided we ~uld like to allow for an eat-in kitchen. I thi~ we have com~ up with = good la~out~ rather ~ique as f~ as =p~tment house kitchenm ~re concerned. It added 3 fee~ to ~ho ~dth of ~ho dining room also~ which ~de the whole thin~ more rentable and more co~or~&ble. ~s ~s o~ reason for doin~ it. Southold Town Board of Appeals -23- June 28, 1973 HR. JOHN R. McA~UOLTY, Riverhe~d: When we were before the Planning Board on approval of site pla~, the Planning Board indicated that they would give us tentative approval if the Board of Appeals ~r~nted us a v=mi~nce. They had no objections to the plac:i.x~ of the units. THE CPIAIRMAN~ Does anyone else wish to speak? There was no response.) TPEE CHAIRMAN: It's about a 4% increase in the maximum range according to our Zoning Ordinance. There is no limit on the width in the Zoning Ordinance so the applicant ia not achieving anything for himself that he could not have achieved in another way. The space c~ua be utilized better by lengthening rather than wideninG. HR. AHLERS~ All other requirements will be met. We may shift the buildings a little bit so they will meet all requirements. THE CHAIRMAN: There will have to be one ~nd a half spaces for parking for each dwelling unit plus one ~nd a half spaces for each employee. THE C~J~IRMANz Is there anyone present who wishes to speak a~ainst this application? There was no response.) After investigation and inspection the Board finds that applicant requests permission to construct multiple dwellinG with some buildings over 125 feet in length located on the west side of Young~s Avenue, Southold, New York. The findings of the Board are that applicant wishes to construct multiple residences with each building having a length of 132 feet, an increase of 7 feet .~ The Ordinance requires that buildings should not exceed 125 feet. The petitioners wish to increase the size of the kitchens in each unit to allow for eat-in space. It is the feeling of the petitioners that the additional 7 feet will not detract from the aesthetic value of the units and will not increase any density of population or any increase upon the ecological burdens of the area. The Board a~rees with the reasonir~T of the applicant. The Board finds tt~t strict ~pplic~tion of the Ordin=noe would produce practical difficulties or unnecesm~y h=rdship; the hardship created is unique a~nd would not be shared b~ all properties alike in tho immediate vicinity of this property ~nd in the same use district~ and the variance will not change the character of the neighborhood and ~ill observe the spirit of the Ordinance. Southold Town Board of Appea~s -2~- June 28, 1973 On motion by AMt. Grigor~, seconded by Mr. Hulse, it w~s · RESOLVED, George Ahlers ~d Barry He!im~n, Cutchogue Southold, respectively, be GPu~NTED permission to construct multiple dwellings with some (or all) buildings over 125 fee~ in length on the west side of ¥oung~s Avenue, Southold, New York, as applied for, for the reasons stated, subject to the fellewin~ conditions: 1. That the increase sh~ll be no larger th~n 7 feet. 2. That there shall be no other increase in the size of the buildings. Vote of the Board: Ayes:- Messrs: Gillispie, Bergen, igonis. PUDLI0 ItEARING~ Appeal No. 1801 - 9:00 P.M. - upon application of Oar1 H. Schoeff, Hobart Road, Southold, New York, for a variance in accordance ~rlth the Zoning Ordinance, Article III, Section 301 ~nd the Bulk Schedule, for permission to divide lots with dwellings which do not have sufficient area or frontage. Location ef property: Hobart and 01d Shipyard Lane, SeuthoId, Lot #41, Map ef Founders Estates. Fee paid $15.00. The Chairman opened the hemring by reading the application for a variancet legal no£ice of hearing, affidavits attesting to its publication in the official newspapers, ~nd notice to the applicant. T}IE CHAIRMAN: This application covers a piece of property in single and separate ownership on 01d Shipyard Lane. There are two houses, one with an attached garage and one with a separate garage. The applicant proposes to divide at a point most advantageous to each. THE CHAIRMAN: Is there ~nyone present who wishes to speak for this application? DR. CARL SCH00FF: I have stated my reasons in the application. The first houset a cottage was built about 24 years ago. We built the second house about 20 ye~ a~o when we decided to move permanently to Southoldo Goldsmith Brothers and Jack Harrell advised us to build a permanent house on the corner of the same plot. We have occupied that house for 20 years but I wish to retire frum dental practice and live in the smaller cottage and sell the larger house. M~S. JEAN TIEDKE: As a neighbor of Dr. Schooff, I think it is a log-lcal thing for him to do. Tom oF SOUTHOLO, aw YO~ DA~ ...... 4.~...28, 197~ ACTION OF THE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Appeal No. 1300 Dated Jun,, 6, 1973 ACTION OF TtFE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF THE TOWN' OF SOUTHOLD AppeLant at a meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals on J~ ~8, 1973 was considered and the action indicated below was taken on your ) Request for variance due 'to lack of access to property ) Request for a spec/al exception under the Zoning Ordinance kRequest for a variance to %he Zoning Ordinance ) the appeal 1. SPECIAL EXCEPTION. By resolution of the Board it was determined that a special exception ( ) be granted ( ) be denied pursuant to Article Section .................... Subsection .................... paragraph .................... of the Zoning Ordinance and the decision of the Building Inspector ( ) be reversed ( ) be 2. VARIANCE. By resolution of the Board it was determined that (a) Str/ct application of the Ordhmnce (would) (would not) produce hardship because practical difficulties or unnecessary (b) The hardship created (is) (is not) unique and (would) (would not) be shared by all properties al/ko in the immediate v/c/nity of this proDerty and in the same use distric~ because (c) The variance (does) (does not) observe the spirit of the Ordinance and (would) change the character of the district because (would not) and therefore, it was further determined that the requested variance ( ) be granted ( that the previous decisions of the Building Inspector ( ) be confirmed ( ) be reversed. ) be de~ed and FORbI ZB4 ZON/NG BOARD OF APPEALS (" I~'DWAI~D J, FIAGE: ~ Post Office Box 972 - Southo~d, New York 5~6-765 168! August Ltr. No. 124 "~'· Southoid Conml,;~,c Southold Town Planning Board Uouth~,ld~ New York 11971 Gentlemen: Upon raviewina the pl~;s ~' · "~ ~ o_ South_~id U~mmor;,., I offer following commen~s: Site Oavelopmsn~ l. ,',~o sit= drainage is cho:~:~. ~s this by using ;_eaching ba,~r~ or recharge Final elevation oontdurc ar,~ o~t ~hown. rheas should be aa ar?anged us t,~ ,qr~:,rtud~ in~e?u~tion of the natural drai~ago ~a~;terns of adjacent lan:J preclude drainage ffri, m this parcel 4. ~o ¢enoin~ shown a~O,.F,d ~;;:L~=~,~, disoo£.=l O ~,%. NO screening planting sh:~;m arownd se rag~ ~i ~ ~-' plant. Site LiQhtirlg Light intensit7 l~vels of' individual !a,?p; ~s :o~ shown. When selecting lsmps~ the minimum ~Jnht intensity between adjace~t least equal to everaEe r~loJnlight or u. U2 2. No lamps shown in tennis court drea and s wa~,~ disF -J.--! plant area. EDWARD d. BAGE Post Office Box 972 '" Sout~o!d, F:e~v York 516-765 168~ 11971 ~ater Nain 1. The main coming in ¢r:;m Hzr;~n L~;r:~ sh~ul~ be ~ £ncl:es in diameter. An addiBional 4 inch fEsd into central lo~p be provided. I~ should bL; located diagom~llv opposite tbs existin~i ~ inch The central loop should cootain ~solatiwn so that the entire uomplsx ne~d not b~ sh~;t :Oo~,n in tl~e event, of a TEL. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE rlf BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OLERK'S OFFICE GOUTHDLD, N. Y. 119'71 September 5, 1974 Southold Town Planning Board Town Clerk Office Southold, New York Gentlemen: The proposed development of "Southold Commons" has not followed correct procedure to date according to the current Zoning Ordinance. I have not received the three sets of complete plans as required. I have "borrowed" a set of plans for Preliminary comments as follows: 1. There appears 1 (one) too many apartment units for land area (Proposed Managers apartment) Parking should be provided for a minimum of 231 spaces @ 350 sq.ft, each=80,850 sq.ft, plus all roads with no parking allowed. Some parking areas shown are not 15 ft. from buildings as required. Certain areas should be fenced and/or screened,-- Swimming pool, tennis court, sewer plant, parking lots on exterior side of premises, etc. Schedule for same should be shown. "On premises" control of all drainage-including "run-off" from outside of property lines coming on these premises. May possibly need a "recharge" basin w/fence. See Edward Bage report of Aug. 15. Specifications for all drainage structure pipes etc. to be spelled out in detail and approved by Town Engineer & Planning Board for 6" rainfall. All-paving specifications for roads, R.O.W.'s, walks, paths etc. and any other incidental requirements be spelled out in detail and approved by Planning Board & Town Engineer. 11. 12. 13. 14. What kind & size sign and where to be located? Any interior directional sign? Access Right of Way to Horton Lane runs through "A" Zone-not permited under Sec. 110-112-L. Current map does not show all adjacent owners names-(4 sides) No street lights or flood lighting plans shown-See Ed Bage report-Aug. 15th. Also, is P.A. System proposed? Must have restraints imposed on such a system. Has there been plan for Tennants Association to pick up any maintanance or service expenses? Have all utility services-Electric, water, sewer,etc been approved by Supplying Agencies and Supervising Agencies? I would recommend minimum 8" water mains with at least 4 fire hydrants. I question window areas in some of the apartments as shown on plan submitted. What is the building schedule - which will be first? and how many in each group? Be sure all utilities are in road bed before final grading, curbing or paving and road has at least a base treatment and surface before Building Permits are re- quested or issued. I would like to sit down with a committee from the Planning Board and one of my Inspectors who will be following this up, to assure all points will be covered before you give any approvals. It appears some items may have to be sent back to the Board of Appeals for exception before final approval can be given. Y~s trul~,~ Howard Terry Building Inspector HT:jk EDWARD ,I. BAGE PROFESStONAL ENGINEER Post Office Box 972 · Southold, New York 516-765-1681 11971 ~ugust 15, 197~ Ltr. No. 124 RE: Southold Commons Southold Town Planning Board Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: Upon reviewing the plans for Southold Commons I offer the foiiowing comments: Site Development 1. No site drainage is shown. Is this to be accomplished by using leaching basins or recharge basins? Final elevation contours are not shown. These contours should be so arranged as to preclude interuption of the natural drainage patterns of adjacent land and to premlude drainage from this parcel onto adjacent land. 3. No access road to sewage disposal plant shown. 4. No fencing shown around sewage disposal plant. 5. No screening planting shown around sewage disposal plant. Site Llqhtin9 Light intensity levels of individual lamps are not shown. When selecting lamps, the minimum light intensitv between adjacent lamps should be at least equal to average moonlight or 0.02 foot-candles. 2. No lamps shown in tennis court area and sewage disposal plant area. EDWAI~D J. BABE PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER Post Office Box 972 · Southold, New York 11971 516-765-1681 Water Nain 1. The main coming in from Horton Lane should be 8 inches in diameter. An additional N inch feed into centrsl loop shou~ be provided. It should be located diagonally opposite the existing ~ inch feed. The central loop should contain isolation valves so that the entire complex need not be shut down in the event of a failure. Respectfully submitted, Mr. George Ahlers Eugene Road Cutchogue, New York 11935 Re: Southold Commons Dear Mr. Ah~ers: I am enclosing the pertinent part of the zoning ordinance as pertains to site plans. Basically, you should include a site plan, floor plan, elevations and a planting plan. I have set aside an appointment for you at 9:00 p.m. on Wednesday, May 15th to present your plans to the Planning Board. Any questio~s~u may have you can discuss with them at that time. If you are unable to m, ke this appointment, p%ease get in touch with me. Yours truly, Enclosure Muriel Brush, Secretary Southold Town Plar~ing Board June 28, 1973 ~. Robert #. Gillispie, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Office Main Road 8outhold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Gillispie: The Planning Board has notified each developer contemplating ~_~a~_.tr~tment plant }hat_they will be expected to co~ply ~&~ w~fl r.'lO reclu~remen~s O£ the Town and Co~lnty. ~..Th~.se ~equ~re.men~s. include the co~pletion and operation &ooep~t. --,- ~y An lieu si ~ns~ruotton will not ~ The Planning Board is prepared to insist on the absolute ~neren~ntC~l,::oh_?~ these conditions auld this ...... a+~nough the County has set a date for the znstalla=lon of danitrification equip~ent, there is c~rrently no aooep~ble pr~eo8. develo--rs - ..... ~v~rtheless, ~oaule each of vitally ~rt~t in the T~ of Sou~old, the Plying ~d will insist on s~iot ~rfo~nce. T .. htl pro~ly me~s t~t ~ second ~lf of the . . ..... x~ ~i~n~g ~ard is prepared to Instruct the Building Ins~otor to with~ld certificates of ~oup~cy ~ttl all ~se c~dttions are ~t, ~t It ~uld seem t~t t~ ~ard of ~als might alas re, ire this as one of the conditions for approval ~der their sp~ial Very sincerely, John Wtckham, Chairman JW:tle $outhold Town Planning Board June 22, 1973 Mr. Robert W. Gi111spie, Jr., Chairman Southold Town Board of Appeals Town Office Main Road Southold, New York 11971 Res Application for variance for George Ahlers end Barry H. Hellman - Southold Com~ons Apartments Dear Mr. Gillispie= In general the Planning Board does not approve of variances on new construction after the site plan has been approved ez at least finalized. There might, however, be some extenuating circumstances if all of the units contained 850 square feet and the minimum distances between all the buildings wes strictly observed. The Planning Board might be inclined to look more favorably on this if the primary purpose were to make the living units more spacious. Very sincerely, JW=tle John Wickham, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board January 18, 1973 N~nP&t It~alty Corp. 250 Cox L~ne Cutohoque, #ow York 11935 Gentlemen One of the conditions set down by the Southold working when one third of the units are cooupl~l. Also, the Suffolk County Department of Bnvirantal Contlrol has issued a ruling that aS Of Jmluary 1, 1972, nitrate removll in all sewer plants is required. As of today, nitrate red,oval plsnts are not per£eoted. We are bringlng this to your attention beoause tho nitrate levels in the Town of 8outhold have bec~ extr~ly oritioal end pose an lmmdiate thzent ~o public health and safety. For this reason, the planning Board san be expected to insist on rigid ocoplianoe to this requirement. Very sincerely, John Wiokham, Chairman SoutholdTownPlannlng Board ~:tle cos Supervisor Albert N. Martooohia Robert Tasker, B~q. 6fle[$fa Jon talio , 11776 7000 516-765-'i'800 January 19, 1972 Southold Town Planning Board Southold New York Gentlemen: Re: Southold Commons Apartment Project Young's Avenue, Southold, N. Y. At the request of Mr. George Ahlers, we wish to inform you that we have indicated a willingness to consider financing the above project predicated upon proper zoning and the economic feasibility. This letter is not to be misconstrued as a commitment, but merely a letter of intent. RWT/mc s cc: lVLr. George Ahlers Very truly yours, Executive Vic~/~e sident 11 , uP I~R --- / iii U :%¸ JiI , Il AtT, Ii ..- L W-- L-- ~ V'~ 'T =1 I ! I I 'T'I' ~ -E, tEoo~.lo t~goo~z "Th'p, l::t ~'T 4 SIEGMLIND SPIEGEL, A. !. A. ARC P, ITEC'i' $1EGk~UND SPIEGEL, A. I.A. ARCHITECT 2035 HEMPSTEAD TURNPII<E EAST MEADOW, NEW $1EGMUND .SPIEGEL, A. I.A. ARC{41TECT 2035 HEIklPSTEAD TU~NPII<~ EAST MEADOW, NEW YORK IV¢- N HOE 3-8049 -.-Ph_,,:~.:,._, A. I. A. A~ ....T~CT 51EGIVIUND SPIEGEL. A. I. A. ARC! itTECT 2035 HEf~PSTD-&D TURNPIKE EAST MEADOW, NEW yORK IVANHOE 3 8049 $1EGIVIUND SPIEG!:_'L, A. I. A ARCH1TZC~ SIEGMUND SPIEGEL, A. I. AR CI--IITECT $1EGMUND SPIEGEL, A. I. A. ARC!-IITECT EAST MEADOW, NEW yORI4 A,rq CF".iT FZCT $1EGIViUND / SPIEGEL, A. I. A. ARCHITECT ! ./ 7 ! ! ! '~$kHerc~tlo~ of this Document except by o Licensed Profes- sional Engineer, Is IIJegal". Sedlon 7209, SubdivJ~}o. 2, N. Y. StaJe Eduction ~w. Gordon K. Ahlers, Jaa',nesport,