Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-02/12/2001PLANNING ~O~D MEMBERS BENNETT ©RLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD CAGGIANO Town Hall, 53095 State Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1938 Fax (631) 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES February 12, 2001 6:00 p.m. Present were: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Richard Caggiano William J. Cremers Kenneth L Edwards George Ritchie Latham, Jr. Craig Turner, Planner Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Carol Kalin, Secretary Mr. Orlowski: Good evening. I'd like to call this meeting to order. The first order of business is for the Board to set Monday, March 12, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board Meeting. Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Two February 12, 2001 PUBLIC HEARINGS Sdbdivisions: Mr. Orlowski: .6:00 p.m.: North Bayview Associates - This minor subdiviSion is for 4 lots on 15.973 acres located on North Bayview Road in Southold. SCTM#1000-79-8-12 Would anyone here like to make a comment on this? Charles Cuddy, Esq.: Good evening. I represent the applicants, North Bayview Associates. Gentlemen, this is a four lot subdivision that you're familiar with on North Bayview Road in Southold. The lots run from three acres to four and one-half acres. There's a common driveway, through covenanting, to use it as a common driveway to maintain open space. On the sixteen acres of land, nine acres are open space. So, we think the Board has reviewed it as seositive to the community, and certainly, as sensitive to the land and we ask that you approve this subdivision. Thank you. Mr. Odowski: Does anyone else have a comment? Hearing none, are there any questions from the Board? (There were none.) Since there are no further questions, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr: Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:03 p.m.) Does the Board have any pleasure? Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to entertain the following motion: WHEREAS, the proposed minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 15.973 acres; and WHEREAS, this subdivision was designed as a cluster subdivision with the open space as part of each building lot; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board declared itself Lead Agency and issued a Negative Declaration on July 19, 1999; and Southold Town Planning Board Page Three February 12, 2001 WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to ChaPter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Planning Board close the final subdivision hearing. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Site Plans: Mr. Orlowski: 6:05 p,m.: Stephen Pawlik - This proposed site plan is for a 1,200 sq. ft. storage building. The property is located on Sound Avenue in Mattituck. SGTM#1000- 141-3-40 Stephen Pawlik: Good evening. I'm the applicant. I'm here to answer any of your questions. As you can see, it's a very limited building. It's 30 by 40 with a very limited use. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., very good. Would anyone else like to make a comment? Since there are no further comments, what is the pleasure of the Board? Do we have a motion to close the hearing? Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:06 p.m.) Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer this resolution: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for Stephen Pawlik, is to construct a 1,200 square foot storage building; and WHEREAS, Stephen M. Pawlik is the owner of the property known and designated as Stephen M. Pawlik, Sound Avenue, Mattituck, SCTM#1000-141-3-40; and Southold Town Planning Board February 12, 2001 WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on July 18, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this action is a Type II Action and not subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617; and WHEREAS, this site plan, last revised November 10, 2000, was certified by the Building Inspector on December 18, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endo~rse the final surveys, dated November 10, 2000, subject to a one year review from date of building permit. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: 6:10 p.m.: Sprint Spectrum - This proposed site plan is to replace an existing 100' monopole with a new 110' monopole, replace all existing antennas, affix 9 additional wireless telecommunication antennas and install related equipment cabinets at the base of the pole. The property is located on Rt. 25 & Elijah's Lane in Mattituck. SCTM#1000-108-4-11.3 Lawrence R6, Esq., Munley, Meade, Nielsen & R6, 32 Woodbury Road, Huntington: appearing for the applicant. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Board, this application was before the Zoning Board of Appeals and a variance was granted on December 7th, 2000. This application is simply for a replacement pole to enable Sprint to provide service to this area. We're aware that the Town is against the proliferation of poles and, for that reason, we're going to replace the existing pole which would enable the carriers that are there now, plus Sprint, to provide service to the area. I have the engineer here if the Board has any questions with respect to the site plan. Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Five February 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: I think we're all familiar with it. Mr. Cremers: You got a variance on December 7th' you said? Mr. R~: Yes, that's when it was issued. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Would anyone else like to comment on the monopole? Hearing no further comments, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Caa.qiano: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: .Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:11 p.m.) Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for Sprint Spectrum, is to replace an existing 100' monopole with a new 110' monopole, replace all existing antennas, affix 9 additional wireless telecommunication antennas and install related equipment cabinets at the base of the pole; and WHEREAS, William J. Baxter is the owner and Sprint Spectrum is the lease holder of the property known and designated as Sprint Spectrum Antenna Site, Main Road, Mattituck, SCTM#1000-108-4-11.3; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on September 22, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself lead agency and issued a Negative Declaration on January 8, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a variance for the monopole height on December 7, 2000; and WHEREAS, this site plan, dated July 12, 2000, was certified by the Building Inspector on January 12, 2001; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and Southold Town Planning Board .Page Six February 12, 2001 WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys, dated July 12, 2000, subject to a one year review from date of building permit. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowskii Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: 6:15 p.m.: Gulf Service Station - This proposed site plan is for a 135 sq. ft. addition to an existing service station. The property is located on the Main Road in Southold. SCTM#1000-70-7-4 Are there any comments on this site plan for the GUlf Service Station in $outhold? Garrett Stran,q, Architect: I think the application speaks for itself at this point. We reviewed it in Work Sessions and the like. If the Board has any questions, I can certainly address them at this time. I do have with me the return cards I received. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments on this service station? Hearing none, ! will entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Caaaiano: So move. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:16 p.m.) Any pleasure? Mr. Ca.q,qiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: Southold Town Planning Board Page Seven Februaw 12,2001 WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for the Gulf Service Station, is to construct a 135 square foot addition to an existing building; and WHEREAS, A & S Southold Oil Corporation is the owner of the property known and designated as Gulf Service Station, Route 25 & Main Bayview Road, Southold, SCTM#1000-70-7-4; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on May 25, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself lead agency and issued a Negative Declaration on October 13, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals granted a rear yard setback variance on October 5, 2000; and WHEREAS, this site plan, dated January 25, 2000, was certified by the Building Inspector on December 18, 2000; and WHEREAS, the applicant hereby agrees and understands that if the site plan which receives stamped Health Department approval differs in any way from the proposed conditional site plan on which the Planning Board held a public hearing and voted on, then the Planning Board has the right and option, if the change is material to any of the issues properly before the Planning Board, to hold a public hearing on this "revised" site plan application and review its conditional approval; and WHEREAS, on February 12, 2001 the applicant signed a statement agreeing not to object to a new public hearing and Planning Board review of the revised application; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the surveys, dated January 25, 2000 and last revised on January 31, 2001, subject to fulfillment of the following condition. This condition must be met within six (6) months of the resolution: 1. Review by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa.qe Ei.~ht February 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: 6:20 p.m.: Alex Boukas, DD$ - This proposed site plan is for a 536 sq. ft. addition to an existing dental office. The property is located on Route 25 in Mattituck. S CTM#1000-114-8-5 Is there anyone here who would like to make a comment on this? .Don Feller, Architect: It's a small, one-story addition. There will be no changes to the site. If there are any questionS, I will answer them. I have the return cards here and other things for the Architectural Review Committee. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Does the Board have any questions? (There were none.) Are there any other comments on this extension to the dentist office? Hearing none, I~11 entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:22 p.m.) Does the Board have a pleasure? Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan for Dental Office of Alex Boukas, is for a 536 square foot addition to an existing building; and WHEREAS, Afrodite and Alex Boukas are the owners of the property known and designated as Dental Office of Alex Boukas, Main Road, Mattituck, SCTM#1000-114-8- 5; and Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Nine February 12, 2001 WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on December 1,2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this action 'is a Type II Action and not subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617; and WHEREAS, this site plan, dated November 3, 2000, was certified by the Building Inspector on January 11,2001; and WHEREAS, the Architectural Review Committee has approved the elevation drawings on November 28, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, apl the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys, dated November 3, 2000, and last revised on December 8, 2000 with Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval stamp, subject to a one year review from date of building permit. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr: Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr..Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: Since we're running a little bit ahead, and it's not 6:25 yet, I'm going to skip over to Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings. VanDuzer Appliance Co, - This proposed site plan is to add a 1,800 sq. ft. addition to an existing building, The property is located on CR 48 in Southold. SCTM#1000-55-2- 24.4 Is there anyone here who would like to make a comment on this? Don Feller, Architect: Same routine. One-story addition. Any questions? Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Ten February 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Does anyone else have any comments on this? Hearing no further comments, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Ca,q,qiano: So move. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. (The hearing was closed at 6:23 p.m.) Mr. Latham: !'11 offer this resolution: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan, to be known as site plan forVanDuzer Appliance Co., is to construct a 1,800 square foot addition to an existing building; and WHEREAS, VanDuzer Appliance Co., Inc. is the owner of the property known and designated as VanDuzer Appliance Company, Inc., County Route 48, Southold, SCTM#1000-55-2-24.4; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on September 26, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this action is a Type II Action and not subject to review under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617; and WHEREAS, this site plan, last revised September 20, 2000, was certified by the Building Inspector on December 27, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys, dated June 9, 1999 with Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval stamp and later revision of September 20, 2000, subject to a one year review from date of building permit. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Southold Town Planning Board Pa.~e Eleven February 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: 6:25 p.m.: Cross Sound Ferry - This proposed new site plan is to amend the June 6, 1995 site plan for the Cross Sound Ferry Company Terminal. The subject site encompasses three parcels located on the west and east sides of SR 25 at its eastern-most terminus in Orient. SCTM#1000-15-9-10.1 and 11.1 and 15.1 Mr. Orlowski: i just want to say that, before we get started, this hearing will be left open. We just got the Traffic Report this afternoon and we are waiting on our consultant who has finished the SEQRA Review. So that report will be in probably tomorrow. So, this hearing will remain open and we will be back here again next month. By then, hopefully, a review will be done of the Traffic Report in our office and the SEQRA Study. Right now, I'm just asking for comments on the site plan. Richard Warren, Inter-Science Research Associates, Inc.: Good evening, i'm here on behalf of the applicant. We're here tonight - it's a continuation, that was renoticed, of hearings that were held in October for the Cross Sound Ferry Project. At the last meeting where the public attended in October, the public specifically asked the Board to make sure that there was an engineering site plan in the file for this and so, to that extent, we complied with that and prepared the required engineering drawings that we now have for this hearing tonight. The engineering plan was prepared by John J. Raynor and follows closely site plans that were subject of the hearings before. The prior plan that we had submitted, that was discussed in the October hearings, indicated location of guard rails, curb stops, surfacing of the parking area, the regrading that was proposed and landscaping. It was done in conceptual form so we could have some dialogue with the Board. It was done so we could have some dialogue with the public. There was substantial public comment at those two hearings. We now have an engineer drawing that includes the details for all of the information on the plan. We've got guard rail details on this drawing - 2 ft. high wooden guard rail with a 4 ft. by 10 ft. plank bolted to 6" by 8" posts, anchored in the ground in concrete; curb stop details, which are utility poles which we anchored in 1" rebar into the ground; a crosswalk is shown on the plan; the regrading of parking surface is shown with the elevations and the surface of the material of the compact surface and stone blend that is proposed. We've got drainage shown on the plan with catch basins at the two locations in the entries of the parking lot. Lighting is shown with specific details on the plan - the 2 ft. high safety lighting to be around the perimeter on top of the guard rail for safety of the patrons. Landscape detail has been placed on the one plan so that this way it makes it a little bit easier, rather than having more than one. It's been prepared by a landscape architect, Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Twelve February 12, 2001 Tim Rumpf of Araiyas Design, and the planting list shows the details that include 'shadbush, red cedar, bayberry, beach plum and beach rose. The details that you have on this plan were all reviewed by the Planning Department prior to formal submission. This way we knew that we had everything on this plan for review for tonight. I believe that we've complied with the requests that the Board has made at the prior hearings. It's been a long haul' for the applicant here. We're here to listen to public comment tonight. We hope that we can move forward to a resolution and we will answer any questions that come up at the end. Mr. Orlowski: Thank you. Would anyone else like to make a comment? Dr. Joseph Lizewski: I'm here to speak on behalf of the ferry. I think that the ferry has been here for about 100 years. I think that what is being asked of you to approve, basically, is the parking lot. I think that the Planning BOard has an obligation to focus on what is being asked to be improved and a parking lot is, basically, what is at stake even though I think there will be a lot of comments about other parts of what this ferry does and the kind of traffic that it may generate. A parking lot is what this actual plan is about and I think that is what you have to focus on and I think that's what has to be determined - if this ferry deserves this parking lot, if it's not adequate or whatever the parking lot has to do with the ferry. Thank you very much. Mr. Orlowski: Anyone else? Thor Hanson, President, Southold Citizens for Safe Roads: I welcome the opportunity for public input. I do think it's a little hard to make input on this which, to us, seems more like a landscaping plan. Although we've just heard a lot of things that are in it, there are a lot of things that aren't in it that would make it a plan. in our opinion, this is a concept. Still, when you previously talked about conceptual, I think this still is because there's nothing shown other than 69 spaces that Were already approved and there is nothing shown about anything else - about numbers of cars or how they'd be put, how the slots would go or anything. But, what I'd like to do - I'd like to recall just a bit of the history on this because in '95, as we just stated, this Planning Board - not quite the same people - did approve the site plan for the West Lot for employee parking. They did approve that. Within about two weeks, or three, after that the Cross Sound Ferry began operations of a high speed, passenger only gambler boat. At that point, you, Benny were quoted as was the then Supervisor, Tom Wickham, to the fact that you had been "snookered". Snookered. And I want to keep that in mind throughout this. And, by the way, those 69 spaces that were approved then, to my knowledge, are the only spaces that have ever been approved for any parking out there in any of the lots to date, except maybe 4 where you can stop and let off a passenger or two. At that time, when you and Tom Wickham said you were snookered, you also brought suit in the Supreme Court of New York against Cross Sound Ferry for the expanded and increased intensity of use of that property out there because of the introduction of the high speed ferry. That motion, as you recall, was denied and you made a motion for an injunction to stop operations on the ferry until a Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Thirteen February 12, 2001 proper site plan had been submitted that would speak to the actual operations out there. The injunction was denied but the Judge made it very clear that a comprehensive site plan should be obtained and that the Town should work with the Ferry to get that and he said: "If you don't, you ought to come back to me." As far as I know, you haven't gone back to him. But, the point was, it was to be a comprehensive plan on the actual what was going on, what was the use at that time and what was projected for that property. A year later, in July of '96, Cross Sound submitted a site plan. It was incomplete and, as you recall, you accepted it to, I think the quote was, "to get SEQRA going" and it would all get resolved with that. And, in September, the consultant who was just mentioned earlier, Voorhis, and you declared that this was a Type I Action requiring a Positive Declaration and that it required an Environmental Review. That was your Positive Declaration and you had ten very pertinent reasons. I'm not going to read them, but there they were. Mr. Voorhis made them up. Ten very good reasons why a Positive Declaration should be issued and why SEQRA Review was required which the Ferry then sued the Town and the Planning Board and said that your action in doing that exceeded your authority, that the part of the Code - the Town Code - that it was based on, in their opinion, was unconstitutional. You did go ahead in December of '96 to have a Scoping Session with people from offices all over the state and you gave out a scoping outline that that site plan when it came should include. And it was based on your Positive Declaration. And it was based on the fact that it needed to have complete environmental review. Now, in our opinion, that was a proper action that you took because this is a critical environmental area out there. It's adjacent to a national natural landmark, the park, and as I say, that scoping outline also used those ten cogent reasons you had produced in this Planning Board as to why they were in there. Then Cross Sound Ferry sued you a second time - an Article 58 for the same reason, saying it was based on an unconstitutional part of the Town Code. Since that time, Cross Sound has delayed and delayed. They withdrew their site plan and in the long run with, I guess your concurrence and you, as a Lead Agency on this for the Town, have never initiated any SEQRA proceeding even though New York State Supreme Court Judge Dunn has since thrown out both Cross Sound suits. Strongly threw them out and he said that the introduction of a new service clearly had an effect and that the Court does not find that our Code was so vague as to be unconstitutional and he made the point that the Town of Southold has the right to require CSF to submit a site plan in connection with the introduction of a passenger only service, referring back to that '95 decision of the same Court, different judge but the same Court - that it was to reflect what was being done out there by the Ferry at that time. Now, in another finding that this same Judge, Dunn, made in 1998 - he said under SEQRA there exists a relatively Iow threshold for requiring an Environmental Impact Statement. Now, our question is, why, when you have won in the Court two different suits where the Judge has made it clear that the SEQRA Law is on your side, why have you now seemingly reversed course? Why are you apparently welcoming this concept - and I'll maintain that it is a concept because it does not show at all, as the Judge in '95 $outhold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Fourteen February 12, 2001 said it should, what's going on - anything about - actual operations out there. It shows 69 spaces - that's what it shows. Why are you apparently welcoming that and to modify that plan - the one that you said you were snookered by - it just doesn't make sense to us. It seems that you are willing to take this and are looking ahead to say it's alright in allowing the Ferry to go ahead and operate without ordering the SEQRA. We say what has changed since '96? What has changed on the tempo of operations - if anything, they've increased the course because since that time the Ferry has withdrawn a smaller boat and put on a bigger boat; they have much more traffic; they're operating more and more runs and they brag about it when you call in to get a reservation. They'll say "we now have an earlier run and a later run" and all these things. The tempo of operations increases and there's no reason to us that you shouldn't still feel that that SEQRA and a Positive Declaration is not important. So, we ask what is going on here. As the Lead Agency, you should be out front with a responsibility of protecting the interests of the citizens out here. You seem to be taking a back seat. So, we say to you five - what's the matter? Are you tired of it? Is it too complicated? Or maybe you just don't care but you know a lot of people in this Town care because three weeks ago I gave you 500 letters, indicating well over 500 people who are very upset and are asking for a Type I decision and a Positive Declaration. There are a lot of people who do care. I'd like everybody to recall, remember, there has never been for this major operation that is going on now and is intended to continue and to expand - this Town has never had a proper Environmental Review on anything out there. Not ever. And this, to us, is the time that it should be done. And if you allow Cross Sound to expand - you seem to be doing that just in a piecemeal fashion, a bit here and a bit there - this plan is about a part of it. A part we can see. It doesn't include anything about the numbers of cars on the Snack Bar Lot that has never had anything approved for that. There's never even been a site plan on the Snack Bar Lot - ever. But, if you approve that, it would condone the present operations of the Ferry and they, themselves, have admitted that they are operating in violation of five different particulars in the two site plans that they are operating under- the '84 and the '95 site plans. They are violating that five ways and they sent a paper over with a recent, about a year ago site plan, that lists the five things they say they're violating - right there. So, this is very much a serious issue that we do not believe you should allow to happen. I don't think the public should have to believe that after - this is our seventh year now since this started - we're in the seventh year of negotiations and litigations with CSF - that all of this has been - any of the decisions legally haVe been made in your favor by the Judge - in your favor - and that somehow that that lawsuit initially filed by you and Tom Wickham in '95, was about landscaping and some guard rails. It wasn't about that. It was about increased intensity of use and what was going on out there and none of this addresses that, that you have today. I would submit, Sir, that you - all five of you - you as a Board just cannot approve this submission because, as I said before, it's not a site plan. It's a concept. It is not fulfilling what the Judge said in '95 and what your own Positive Declaration said in '96. That is not fulfilling any of the things that those specify that it should and it's supposed to depict the reality of the present operations. Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Fifteen February 12, 2001 In closing, I think about a comment that our Supervisor, Jean Cochran, made in ali seriousness about another threat to our environment out here last year and that was the . tall poles of LIPA, the lighting poles. And I'll repeat that comment in all seriousness to each one of you five - she said "what do you think we are here - a bunch of chopped liver?" and that's what I'd ask you. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Thank you. Would anyone else like to make a comment? William Esseks, Esq., representing Cross Sound Ferry: I'm one of the attorneys for Cross Sound and I wasn't intending to speak but Mr. Hanson has said statements that are either untrue or partially true and not designed to be of assistance, I submit. In 1995, the Town brought an action to enjoin the high speed ferry and the Judge said he wouldn't do it. The Judge also said that, if there was a problem, the applicant- Cross Sound - or if there was a perceived problem, Cross Sound could find a way to try to alleviate that and Cross Sound, in the presence of the Judge in a conference and then before this Board and before the Town, submitted an application for site plan approval and for change of zone. Two separate matters. The Town, for its reasons, chose to Pos. Dec. that pursuant to SEQRA. But the action is an action that gets reviewed and for this a determination of significance was for a site plan and for a change of zone. Change of zone is presumptive of a Type I Action and would require arguably a Positive Declaration and a requirement for an Environmental Impact Statement. The response from the people in Orient to our request for a change of zone was sufficiently negative that a decision was made to withdraw that application and to only submit a site plan of the three properties.that are owned by Cross Sound. That is a different action and it is that different action that we anticipate and expect that you will find - (interference) - an Environmental Impact Statement so the answer to the statement that you have changed your mind, I submit is not correct because a site plan and a change of zone - and now we only have a site plan and the site plan that is pending before you is for the three existing parcels - two of which have already been approved by you and I submit that an examination of the records of the Town would reveal that in the applications previously submitted by Cross Sound to this Board, it showed all the parcels then owned by Cross Sound and it showed parking on the Snack Bar Parcel and I believe that the Building Inspector has confirmed our submission that the Snack Bar Parcel has been used for parking for more years than the lives of many or most of the people in the room. I know that there's been parking on the Snack Bar Parcel because I've been parking there myself since 1948. I believe that this matter has been - I might want to say something else because it's not generally known - the issues of the litigation that's existed between the Town, existed at a time when you were litigating and had before you the change of zone application - the change of zone application has been withdrawn. The litigation was in large part at that and I know the status of the litigation. I know what's been served and what has not been served and therefore a statement that the Court has made certain rulings and say that one side is right and one side is wrong, is not correct. So, ! don't think there should be any announcement or conclusion or assumption on that basis. Southold Town Planning Board Page Sixteen February 12, 2001 $o, I submit that you have before you a site plan application that is aimed at parking on the Snack Bar Parcel. It deals with the other two parcels owned by Cross Sound and the Code of the Town of Southold provides a certain number of parking spaces for different uses. It says that if there is no specific provision of how many square feet per car - if that's not provided in the Code, then you get to make that up, you get to decide that. That's specifically given by the Town Board to you in your discretion to' decide that. There isn't a provision for a ferry parking so, specifically, only you can decide how many spaces there should be on this site. Also, this site - has people come in in the morning and leave at night, or come in in the morning and stay overnight - most parking is in and out all day long. This is a different situation. You get to chose how many cars to park there. This is also a sand lot. I don't think there's anybody in this room that wants you to order us to blacktop it. If we wanted to blacktop it, people would be here saying "Don't blacktop it." We're here saying we never wanted to blacktop it; we don't want to blacktop it and you can't put lines in sand. So, for the Admiral to say he can't see the parking lines, he'll never see them because they'll never be there because I don't think yould let us blacktop if we wanted to. So, with those comments in mind, which I thoug, ht were unnecessary as presented, I wanted to try to make the record more clear. I most respectfully ask that you consider closing the record at the end of tonight except for written submissions. I've asked you to do that and hope you'll decide what is appropriate and perhaps that should be explained to you in a letter as to why you should make that decision. I thank you very much. Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments? Frank Murphy: I was the Supervisor back in the '80's and just to go back a little bit, the Governors of the two states, New York and Connecticut, appointed a commission. There were probably about thirty officials from the East End, the South Shore and Connecticut. It took about two years of a lot of work and input and the base results that came down was to support the expansion of the two ferries - Port Jefferson and Orient Point. Through the efforts of State Senator Ken LaValle and Assemblyman Joe Sawicki, we received a grant from the '85 Bond Issue, I believe, the Transportation Bond. Cross Sound Ferry did the work to improve the service to make it more dependable, to make it safer and to improve and make it more available for the people as the demand went. They've done, I think, an exceptionally fine job to do this. They've helped a tremendous amount of industries out here - the farming industry, the nurseries, greenhouses - everybody benefits. The tourists benefit, coming each way and it's a service that is really needed on the East End. We're a dead end; it's far easier to take the ferry to go to Boston than to drive around through New York. I give them a tremendous amount of credit for the work they've done to improve their boat service, the scheduling - all the things that the people out here need and really want. To talk about and waste so much money about a gravel parking lot that's been there for a hundred years and to waste the time of the local government, to waste the time of the attorneys for Cross Sound, to waste the Town Attorney's time - we're wasting too much money and time. I really ask you people to try to get this thing closed as soon as possible and resolve and to stop wasting so much money. Thank you. Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Seventeen February 12, 2001 Freddie Wachsber,qer, SCFSR: I'm sure that the Board is gratified to have so many of your Connecticut constituents here tonight. I hope it doesn't mean that there are too many Southold citizens that couldn't get in but that's the way it goes. When Mr. Murphy was Supervisor, the Orient Association asked for a determination of a Type I Action on the proposed expansion at the Point. There were protestations made to, the Planning Board that not only would traffic not increase, but one of the large boats would be removed and a smaller boat would replace it. The next year, the number of boats was increased and traffic was multiplied by at least three times but there was, at the time, no positive Declaration made although we felt very strongly that it should have been and, in fact, we have correspondence when there was an application to HUD for a grant to add to the other grants received for this expansion and HUD wrote to the Board and said that they felt the Orient Association was correct in asking for a Type I Declaration and the HUD money was refused by the Town. I'm going to read a statement which I would also like to submit to you for the record which might repeat some of the things that Thor said but ~ hope it will also answer some of the statements that Mr. Esseks made: In 1996, you, the Planning Board, determined that an application submitted by Cross Sound Ferry was a Type I Action. The purpose of the application, as you said quite specifically - I have your document here - was to provide additional parking to a previously approved ferry terminal on Route 25 in Orient in order to accommodate increased demand for parking that had been generated by the inclusion of a high speed passenger only ferry service to the existing vehicular ferry service. Although that application was subsequently withdrawn, the passenger ferry and the traffic and the parking needs associated with it and the conditions on which you based your Type I Designation remain to be addressed. The Type i Action is one which has the potential for a negative impact on the environment and, therefore, requires a Draft ElS to assess that potential. In your document, you gave ten reasons why you believe that the parking and traffic associated with the high speed ferry might be anticipated to have a negative impact. 1 will quote some of them from your document because what was true then, is equally true now. Number One: The project is located adjacent to the surface waters of Gardiner's Bay and lies within the Orient Point Critical Environmental Area. The proposed project may impair the environmental characteristics of this EAF. Two: The proposed action will cause a significant increase in the intensity of land use on the project site as a function of.the expanded parking, demand for parking in connection with ferry operations and on-site traffic circulation for parking access. Three: The proposed action may increase the demand for other community services including fire, police, recreational facilities and utilities. Number Five - I'm just choosing some of them: The project may adversely change noise and air quality as a function of increased traffic and may substantially increase solid waste generation. Number Six- Increase the intensity of site use for high speed ferry service will increase the use of on-site facilities, particularly sanitary flow and water use, and may result in an adverse impact upon the environment. Number Seven: The project may impact visual and aesthetic resources, particularly as regards lighting. Number Ten: There is potential impact of passenger Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa.qe Ei.ahteen February 12, 2001 only jet boats on the marine environment. You were correct in your identification of the potentially negative impact of the passenger only ferry traffic on the environment and what was the case then, is equally the case now. There are no fewer passenger ferq~ departures now than there were then and no less passenger ferry traffic. In fact, traffic has been increased by additional vehicle ferry departures. In other words, it is as obvious now as it was then that the increased intensity of use due to the passenger ferry has the potential for a negative impact on the environment and should be addressed with a Draft ElS as you determined five years ago. Now, we've heard at other meetings a lot of eloquent testimonials for the ferry and from Mr. Murphy tonight but SEQRA has very specific criteria. SEQRA does not say that if a company is thought to bring in business or is good to its employees, then you can use different standards. SEQRA does not say that you should make a Positive Declaration if you don't like the company but otherwise you can ignore it. SEQRA is State Legislation and the same criteria must be applied to everyone and the criterion here is the potential for a negative impact on the environment and you have already determined that that potential exists in relation to the passenger ferry traffic. So, a site plan addressing the use of the Cross Sound Ferry Site, including parking and traffic attendant on the passenger ferry - the site plan you asked for in 1995 - should and must have a Positive Declaration. To declare such a site plan less than a Type I Action would, I submit, be ultimately indefensible. But the proposal before you is not even the site plan that you asked for five years ago. It is a landscaping and grading and.drainage scheme. But what it does do is attempt to codify the violations of their site plan that Cross Sound Ferry has been committing for five years, including parking on a piece of property which has never been approved for parking and for which no viable prior use as a parking lot has been demonstrated. It's very easy to say the Building Department has accepted prior use but what you have and what you know you have is a photograph showing three cars sometime way back. Now, you gentlemen have chosen to be Lead Agency on this issue. You have chosen the responsibility. It is your responsibility to the taxpayers of Southold Town to require an integrated site plan as you did five years ago. It is your responsibility to determine that it is a Type I Action as you did five years ago and it is your responsibility to see that the Environmental Review is carried out to completion. This is the responsibility to the citizens of Southold that you have chosen to assume by becoming Lead Agency. Therefore, i urge you not to accept the present proposal because if, after all these years and after the thousands and thousands of dollars of taxpayers money that have been spent on your attorney, you were simply to throw up your hands and tell Cross Sound to just go on doing what they are doing, I would submit that this responsibility that you chose to assume has been profoundly misplaced. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments? Merlon Wi,q,qin, 10940 Main Road, E. Marion: I've never lived in Connecticut; don't expect to. I've lived there for almost forty years. (Main Rd., E. Marion) I occasionally use that high speed ferry. I'm not a gambler; I've never been to Foxwoods but I go to the $outhold Town Planning Board Page Nineteen February 12, 2001 Coast Guard Academy. My grandson has applied to the Academy and we expect to visit him. My wife is very handicapped, visually and in mobility and it would be nice to have a parking lot where she could get out of the car without wading through water, without going through rough stone and get to the ferry. We don't have that yet. That would be great if we had a nice piece of parking lot that was well graded and well drained. !. know a lot of you are worried about the traffic. Where I live in East Marion - I live right on the Main Road and I'm probably impacted by traffic more than most. All of the vehicles that live in Orient, as well as the ferry traffic, go by my house. Twice over these years I've had vehicles that leave that highway, go across my lawn - one missed my house by a few inches. They were not Cross Sound Ferry traffic. Did you know that Cross Sound has a franchise to provide service to the public between Connecticut and Orient Point? They are required to meet the needs of the public. Now if they are harassed to the point where they give that up - let's just say for the sake of discussion - and a government operation comes in and takes over that ferry, do you think that you'll have, as a public entity, this much opportunity to talk with the people that operate that ferry? I would doubt it very much. And if they don't operate the ferry, you won't be seeing an Environmental Impact Statement- at least I don't think you will. Talking about the environment, I hear cars that go across that causeway from my bedroom at night with the windows closed going at such a high rate of speed - they go by at, I would guess, eighty or ninety miles an hour at one or two o'clock in the morning. That's not ferry traffic. If people want to do something about the traffic, I wish they would really work with the public officials to make the connection between New London and the South Shore a reality. Or maybe they can work towards public transportation of a bus service that would take people directly there. Maybe there's a proposal to have gambling up further on Long Island. I understand there's talk about Grumman may have it. At least that would cut down on the traffic and the impact that goes by my house. I really hope that you can improve this parking lot and make it more convenient and usable for the public, especially for handicapped people. Thank you. Captain Ed Kruszeski: I was in the oyster business down this end of the island for years. I was born in Orient, a mile west of where the ferry is landing. I've been a skipper of three oyster boats. I'm a native. I remember when the old ferry used to land down there back in the 1920's. It landed where the village dock is in Orient, also in Greenport and Sag Harbor - the old "Catskill", as some of you remember. As I look around here, I don't see many natives that lived around here in 1930 or 1920 - very few. I remember the ferry slip, the ferry dock right where the slip is now. Also, we had in the late '20's the Orient Hotel which was right across the street. That was later owned by Gene McDonald who built the Jiffy Bite in the late 1940's and 1950's. I remember the concrete highway down to the Point in 1929. I also remember the swamp and meadow right where the Plum Island complex is and the marina and restaurant is. That used to be a swamp at one time. I don't know how many remember the gas station right where the entrance to the Orient State Park is. That was owned by a local farmer- the same one Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Twenty February 12, 2001 that owned Long Beach Point. Instead of growing potatoes like the farmers did, they're building houses. That's progress. There's traffic. But we're not about traffic here. We're about a site plan for a parking lot. But getting to the traffic, it's not created by the ferry company; it's created by the people who live here - the Plum Island workers, the marina and restaurant, the State Park. They all have to use the road to go back and forth. Like Mr. Wiggin here said, they go by his house at different hours of the night - in a hurry because they're late to get to work. The ferry company did not create this traffic which they are accused of and a simple solution to it is to put traffic control lights in Orient, East Marion and Greenport that will slow them down, keep down the speed. Also on the parking site - you can only get so many cars in any given area. When it's full, it's full. The number of cars makes no difference. You can't get any more in it. So, if he's got an area for parking, grant it to him so they continue on. This ferry company is a good business neighbor. Over the years they've helped to improve the community. They've donated a vessel, crew and so on to many occasions - the fireworks are one, the lighthouse, Up-sail, the Christmas tree they took to New York just lately, many other things. So, as a native out here, I wish the Board would grant them their site plan so they can continue on instead of fighting - improve things down there and get on with it. Also, on the ferry subject: Do any of you remember Mr. Swezey who owned the trucking company? He was a blind man but he had the foresight and the vision to buy three LSTs to run a ferry service across the Sound - done by a blind man. I thank you. Becky Weisseman, Associate Director, L.I. Farm Bureau: Good evening. I'm representing the 5,800 members of the Farm Bureau here on Long Island and our support for the Cross Sound Fer;ry in its efforts to obtain the site plan approval before the Planning Board. Just as Bob VanBourgondien previously stated at the first hearing this past fall, Cross Sound Ferry plays a vital role in supporting the agricultural community on the East End of Long Island. Farmers and nurserymen, including many here in Southold, rely on the Cross Sound Ferry because it continually provides reliable, year-round service to the agricultural industry seeking to deliver their products to New England Markets. The services that Cross Sound Ferry provides between Orient Point and New England provides the agricultural industry in the Town of Southold and throughout Suffolk County with additional outlets to sell their products. These markets help our agricultural producers remain profitable thereby helping to preserve the vast open spaces and the way of life that has provided Southold Town with its unique aesthetics. The Long Island Farm Bureau urges you to support Cross Sound Ferry and its efforts to obtain site plan approval for the necessary improvements to its service. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Joan A.B.M. Egan: I have been at this end of the island for quite some time. I've owned a home in East Marion in Gardiner's Bay Estates since 1964. I don't know what we're Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Twenty-One Februaw 12,2001 going to do. I think we have to live with Cross Sound Ferry to some degree. I don't know enough probably about the site plan but i think there are some options that have not been taken. I think it is - for myself - it is very important to be able to get out of Old Orchard Lane on time. I'm a Eucharistic Minister in the Catholic Church and I like to be at church at least fifteen to twenty minutes ahead of time to get ready. My mother was in the nursing home; I like to serve there as a volunteer and I like to be there when I am expected. I have doctors in Southold. I have to get up to doctors in Riverhead and let me tell you - sometimes I have to leave, in the summertime, at least forty-five minutes to an hour early and sometimes I have to make a right to make a left and go back to go east to go west. It is a mess. It is a grand and glorious mess in the lives of people. When I go to the Post Office in East Marion, it is worth your life at 11:00 if you have to go across the street to the Post Office. It is awful. The cars go by - I've written letters that were published in The Suffolk Times in regard to these cars - they whisk by, dead animals on the road -it is awful. Now, there is a site down there for ferry people, and as it has been mentioned, it does provide income; it does provide commerce. It does a lot of good things. Where the Orient Point Inn was is now owned by New York State, isn't it? (It was mentioned that the County owns the land Ms. Egan was referring to.) Well, regardless of who owns it, it's public property to a certain degree. So let's not mince words. Why can't that be opened as a site and let these worthless people who abuse our roads walk across and see what it's like to get from one side from the north to the south. Something has to be done. There are other sites where we could maybe - people - because let's not kid ourselves if they're going over to Foxwoods, they can get a drink on the ferry and then they get to Foxwoods and they probably get - I've never been to Foxwoods but they get free drinks there. If they lose, they want to drink more on the ferry coming back and if they win, they want to drink even more. Correct? So, we not only have speeders, we have drunks. I've been in AA since 1976 so I know what it's like. So, you've got to do something and you've got to do it PDQ. I'm sure you all know what PDQ means - pretty darn quick. We are in serious trouble. People are living longer by the grace of God and medicine. Many of them are in wheelchairs; there is a nice sidewalk for people to walk on in various parks but they're scared stiff to be in a wheelchair even when somebody is with them because these idiots go right - as with Mr. Wiggin - they go right up on the sidewalk. So, let's get moving in the right direction - up, not down. Thank you. · Robert Jenkins, Greenport/$outhold Chamber of Commerce: I'd like to submit a letter in support of the applicant - Dear Mr. Chairman and Planning Board Members: We, the Board of Directors of Greenport/Southold Chamber of Commerce, serving over two hundred members in the business community, urge the Planning Board to approve the current site plan application for Cross Sound Ferry in order to finally resolve this matter between the Town and the ferry company. As a member of the Southold business community, Cross Sound Ferry has demonstrated itself to be vital to the local economy. Cross Sound Ferry provides jobs, pays taxes, patronizes local vendors. Ferry passengers patronize our local businesses, buy gas, eat in restaurants, stay in our B & Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Twenty-Two February 12, 2001 Bs and they shop in our stores. Cross Sound Ferry's work on behalf of numerous charitable organizations in Southold Town is well documented and should be commended. Cross Sound Ferry and the future of ferry service between Southold Town and New England is vital to all residents and members of the business community. We urge the Planning Board to approve Cross Sound Ferry's site plan. Sincerely, Greenport/Southold Chamber of Commerce, Board of Directors. And I'd like to submit that letter to you. Ann Hopkins, President, Orient Association: I was not going to speak this evening because I feel that Thor, Freddie and others have spoken to what the Orient Association majority supports but as I listen, yet again, to all of these encomiums to the Cross Sound Ferry - all the good work that they do and how important they are, I must simply put myself and our association on record as saying that that is not the point. It is not why we are here. We are here about a process of law and a process of planning and the need for SEQRA on that site and that is what we should focus on. Dan McConlo,que, Truman's Path, E. Marion: I hear a lot of talk about Cross Sound Ferry being nice guys but the fact is that they're guilty of adding traffic to a road that is extremely dangerous. There are parts of that road in East Marion where the road is narrower than the bike path. There's no divider. There is no foot or two feet separating the two lanes. It's probably the most dangerous, or one of the most dangerous, roads in the State and I think it came about because the bicycle clubs in New York City got together and petitioned the politicians in Albany to provide a bike path. Well, they provided a bike path; they provided two of them and narrowed the driving pavement. Maybe I'm getting old or something but I'm getting very leery of driving on that road with all the lights coming. And don't tell me that Cross Sound and Foxwoods isn't adding to that traffic. It has to be. Car after car after car - you know when the ferry is coming or just unloaded. Thank you. Howard Meinke, President, North Fork Environmental Council: I'm speaking for one thousand members. I'm really puzzled a little bit about what Ann Hopkins said. We keep throwing in all this side talk about they're good neighbors and we're only talking about withdrawing some paperwork and putting in another piece of paper; it's not about the ferry business. Well really, common sense says it is about the ferry business. I've ridden the ferry many times. The boats are clean; they keep a schedule. I don't have a problem with the basic ferry service. The problem, as I see it, is that the ferry started here maybe in the '50's or before with a couple of little drop-front landing crafts. It has expanded many, many, many times between then and now and has never undergone the routine review that is requested of all businesses that come to Town and want to build and do and set up some sort of a service and we just pulled our appliCation that was about to start a SEQRA Review so we don't have to do that any more. Now we only have an application in here for a parking lot. That may be all legally correct but the bulk of us here are not lawyers and it's garbage. The real point here is that this business is expanding and expanding and the citizens of Southold are owed the proper review so that, at some point, we get an opportunity to say the results of the expansion through the traffic, the pollution, etc. is more than the business is worth and they should stop. Southold Town Planning Board Page Twenty-Three February 12, 2001 Nobody is telling them to go away; nobody is telling them to go home. (interference) All this whining about I've got to go there; my son goes to college, etc. - that's a lot of garbage. That's all going to be there. The point is, as citizens, we should get the right to see this reviewed just because of the potential hazards to our area and the Board and the Government owes the citizens to use due diligence and make sure that, with this type of business that obviously has a potential for environmental damage, that the review is done. So, I think we're all talking around across purposes. I realize that I'm not talking to the hearing of this particular parking lot. That should be thrown out because it's not complete but you should go right back, and common sense says that we need an environmental review of what that business is currently doing, encompassing the expansions that it has made and the expansions that it ought to tell us about if we could get them to do the Coordinated Review. Thank you. John Nickles, Jr., President, Southold Business Alliance: Good evening. The business community realizes, more than anyone, that some people have a desire to go back in time to return to a period in Southold's history that they think is ideal. There's an old saying: You can't stop progress. But, it seems that many people not only want to stop it but even go so far as to reverse it, as it sounds like some people are saying tonight. We believe that this type of thinking is unrealistic, if not completely impossible. Even if the Town should attempt to affect this ideology with a drastic planning measure - I hope they don't - we cannot stop growth; we cannot reverse it but we can control it. Cross Sound Ferry's business is driven by demand for the service they provide. If they need more parking in the future to get cars off of Route 25, an option should be explored so that parking can be planned for. The ferry is already restricted by the land that they own at the site. The Town will have to work with the ferry from here on in so that that site develops the very best possible way for the Town. Reasonable growth should be expected and planned for. The Southold Business Alliance believes that the site plan for the Cross Sound Ferry Terminal in Orient should be approved by the Southold Town Planning Board. Unless it is the Planning Board's intention to restrict interstate commerce and force the ferry operation into an emasculated position, there is no reason why the ferry shouldn't have the existing site plan approval and be fully supported by the Town of Southold. Cross Sound Ferry provides a valuable service to Southold Town and the people who use their service. What the ferry is asking for is only an approval of the way their business has been operating for years. And that's the reality of it. The approval of the existing site plan will have no significant increase in the traffic of the ferry or the authority that it generates. We should all support them in their endeavors. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments? Henry DeLisle: I'm a twenty-eight year permanent resident in East Marion and I just have one comment. My wife and I use both ferries; some of my neighbors use both ferries and we'd like to see a better parking situation in Orient. Thank you. Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Twenty-Four February 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments? Jim Dinizio, Greenport: I'm a native of Southold so I guess I'm qualified to speak. I've got to say a couple of things, especially of what I've heard tonight. One of the things that kind of strikes me about the Board and the way that they are reacting to this is that they've done the right thing - they've listened to everybody. It appears that you're not going to use - I hope you're not going to use - SEQRA as a further delay or an action that could help or certainly help the environment down in Orient because any person that belongs to an organization for safe roads that objects to parking cars on the side of the road where people are going so dangerously fast, I think you've got to think about their motive and their intent. And I think you have. I think, environmentally, what they're asking for right now is sound. I mean we're not going to drain this into the Bay, let's hope. I hope you looked at that. I hope this thing is sloping away. I hope the gravel is going to be nice and level and it's not going to create mud puddles everywhere. Certainly if it's gravel, you can't mark the spaces but you know how many spaces you can get on a piece of property and rightly so. I think that that's on the site plan. Certainly a crosswalk is something that maybe an applicant wouldn't consider but obviously is on there by some means - probably by your suggestions. So, I'm urging you folks to approve the site plan and not let SEQRA be used to prolong this. SEQRA wasn't meant for that. This is a business that's been there for - I don't know what Captain Ed said but I've known Captain Ed my whole life since I was a baby and he's known me - the man is filled with common sense - if it's been there this.long, they've done the planning, o.k.? They've reacted to it. They've seen lines of cars when they pull in, trying to get on that boat. They've left cars; they've purchased more land for parking. They purchased bigger boats. They purchased more land; they purchased bigger boats. So, guess what? That's planning. They have another piece of land out there that's not zoned properly for what they need to do, but guess what? At some point in time, you're going to have to zone it for that because that's what this is all about. That's what planning is all about. You have to let a business do that. You have to let a business think ten or fifteen years ahead of time. You guys do - by zoning, o.k.? Here's a person, a business that needs to have you uphold your planning, o.k.? Sometimes you have to vary that. This is certainly a case where no one could have ever thought that the East End of Long Island would be the way it is now. No one would ever have thought that that ferry would be pulling boats in like that thirty years ago, but it is. It's not going to stop. If there's problems with traffic on the road, I said it the last :time - it's not Cross Sound Ferry's problem. It's not your problem. It's a policing problem. Let the police take care of it and enforce those laws. Thank you very much. Ronnie Wacker, Cutcho,que: I just don't understand what all of this fuss is about. This just seems to be ludicrous. We're discussing ending the ferry which has been here for years. We all use it; we like it; we love it; we think it's great. They're good neighbors. They helped a lot. But, for God's sake, we're not talking about ending them. We're just talking about common sense planning and when someone up here talks about Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Twenty-Five February 12, 2001 development and enlarging as planning - that's not planning; that is simply growth and greed. It is not planning. Planning is where you say well, o.k., you want to expand, this is the way you do it. You do it within bounds. You don't just go hither, thither and Put whatever you want, where you want. You have to think about the people that you are affecting and how you are affecting them. All we're saying here is if this plan is so innocent - apparently both sides say nothing has changed very much - they've thrown in a few bushes and made it cosmetically more attractive, but what is the effect of these additional parking spaces on the area around them? What is the environmental effect? Now, we do ask this of every other intensified use in Town. We say: "What will be the effect?" Maybe it's good and maybe it's bad. It might very well be the best thing that has ever happened to Southold Town but, let's find out. It seems to me a simple and sensible request. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Are there any other comments? Right now we're just going to hold this hearing open and I'm going to entertain that motion in a second. Richard Warren: We're going to ask the Board again to consider closing this public hearing except for written comment. We've had an interesting discussion here tonight - an interesting, philosophical discussion about cars, about traffic, about ferries. But we've got a site plan application before you for a particular piece of property. People talk about expansion of parking. It's on a particular site and we were asked to provide a plan - a plan that is technically complete and in compliance with Code. We're here about this specific event, We haven't heard a comment about any of the specifics of the plan. We could go on - we had two hearings in October where we talked about the philosophical issues about parking but we're here because we've got a site plan for this. People talk about the expansion of parking. This is smaller than it was before. The applicants would have preferred to keep the other piece of property involved in this but they listened to what the people said and it was withdrawn. It wasn't withdrawn prior to SEQRA being undertaken. SEQRA was started. We had an ElS which was probably about six inches thick. You probably all remember that. ' We've tried to work with the Town to try to resolve this. The Board is going to do whatever they decide to do but I don't think that Cross Sound should be criticized for trying to resolve this issue which we've heard a lot of that tonight. People are criticizir~g them in terms of trying to sneak something through here. We've been open with you from Day One. We came in with a plan - a concept plan and I think it's a little disingenuous for the public to criticize them for that. We don't hear people talking about the wineries. We don't hear people talking about the pumpkin patches or the farmstands that draw a lot of traffic. We've got a ferry here that's part of the community. It's something you need to deal with. Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Twenty-Six February 12, 2001 We're here, I think, with a reasonable plan to deal with a piece of property that has had parking on it; that has a legitimacy of use. So, we're asking you to consider closing this hearing and keeping it open for written comment only because I think we're just going to get back into more philosophical discussion and it's not going to be about the site plan. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Just for the record, this is a new application. This is not the same old application that we did a Positive Declaration on a long time ago. This is a new application and SEQRA has not been done, so we have no idea what we're going to do with SEQRA until the report is in and the Board reviews it with the Traffic Study. The Traffic Study just came in today and the SEQRA Review by our consultant should be in tomorrow. I believe the Board is going to want to look at all of this before we make any decisions. I see no problem in keeping the pubic comment period open. We'll leave the meeting open. You can make your comments in writing at any time and send them to the Planning Board Office. They will all be taken under consideration. A public hearing is for comments and we'll just keep listening to the comments until we finish this hearing process. We're not going to finish the hearing process tonight because we have not gotten all of the information in regards to SEQRA and the Traffic Study done which entails both. Joan E,qan: I don't understand why there was a DOT meeting here, ! think in December, at the high school - why don't you have a representative from the DOT and the Southold Police and the Riverhead Police - you've got to get more information. You need motorcycles, police cars. Mr. Orlowski: There's a Transportation Committee in this Town that does that all the time. .Joan E,qan: They don't seem to be doing their homework, though, do they? Mr. Orlowski: Right now, I'm going to entertain a motion to hold this hearing open. Mr. Edwards: So move. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Thank you for coming. $outhold Town Plannin,q Board Page Twenty-Seven February 12, 2001 MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET. OFF APPLICATIONS Final Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: HolzapfeI-O'Connor/Leudesdorf - This proposed lot line change is to subtract. 15 of an acre from a 6.38 acre parcel, SCTM#1000-26-2-42.1, and add it to a .30 acre parcel, SCTM#1000-26-2-41. The property is located on King Street in Orient. Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated August 22, 2000. Conditional final approval was granted on October 2, 2000. All conditions have been met. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: Bruce & Maureen Campbell and Charles Moran - This proposed lot line change is to subtract 58,792 sq. ft. from a 98,813.45 sq. ft. parcel, SCTM#1000-113-10- 15.4, and add it to a 69,417.47 sq. ft: parcel, SCTM#1000-113-10-10.1. The properties are located on Illinois Avenue between Meday Avenue & Westphalia Road in Mattituck. Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated December 11, 1999. Conditional final approval was granted on June 12, 2000. All conditions have been met. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. $outhold Town Planning Board Page Twenty-Eight February 12, 2001 Mr. Odowski: John & Helen Berdinka - This proposed lot line change is to subtract 2,260 sq. ft. from a 9,950 sq. ft. parcel, SCTM#1000-142-1-8, and add it to a 9,325 sq. ft. parcel, SCTM#1000-142,1-7. The property is located on Factory Avenue in Mattituck. Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, !'11 offer this resolution: WHEREAS, John and Helen Berdinka are the owners of the properties known and designated as SCTM#1000-142-1-7 & 8 located on Factory Avenue in Mattituck; and WHEREAS, this proposed lot line change is to subtract 2,260 square feet from a 9,950 square foot parcel, SCTM#1000-142-1-8, and add it to a 9,325 square foot parcel, SCTM#1000-142-1-7; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, did an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action, made a determination of non,significance and granted a Negative Declaration on July 31, 2000; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on August 21, 2000; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58, Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has complied with the notification provisions; and WHEREAS, alt the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the. Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated July 8, 1994. Conditional final approval was granted on August 21, 2000. All conditions have been fulfilled. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries, Southold Town Planning Board Page Twenty-Nine February 12, 2001 Preliminary Extensions: Mr. Orlowski: Laurel Links, Ltd. - This proposed major subdivision is for 31 lots on a total of 222.85 acres: Lots #1-29 are Clustered residential lots ranging in size from 28,325 square feet to 34,225 square feet; Lot #30 is 157.9 acres and is shown as a golf course; Lot #31 is 2.39 acres and is shown as a golf course maintenance area. The property is located in Mattituck. SCTM#1000-125-3-13,15,17; SCTM#1000-125-4-21, 24.1 and SCTM#1000~126-7-1. Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a retroactive six-mOnth extension of conditional preliminary approval from December 12, 2000 to June 12, 2001. Conditional preliminary approval was granted on June 12, 2000. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Setting of Final Hearings: Mr. Orlowski: Reynold Blum at Southold - This proposal is to set off a 1.84 acre parcel from a 63.99 acre parcel. The remaining parcel of 62.15 acres has had Development Rights sold to Suffolk County. The property is located on the north side of the intersection of Main Road (State Route 25) and Lower Road in Southold. SCTM#1000-69-5-18.1 & 18.2 Mr. Caaaiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, March 12, 2001, at 6:00 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated November 28, 2000. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded, Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Southold Town Planning Board Page Thirty February 12, 2001 Mr. Odowski: Deerfield Farm - This proposed lot line change and minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 7.362 acres. The property is located on the northwest corner of Main Bayview Road and Jacobs Lane in Southold. SCTM#1000-88-1-1 & 2 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, Ill offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, March 12, 2001, at 6:05 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated July 28, 1999. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Sketch Determinations: Mr. Od°wski: Baxter Sound Estates - This proposed minor subdivision is for 2 lots on 4.65 acres. The property is located on Oregon Road in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-72-2- 2.1 Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following resolution: WHEREAS, this subdivision was granted conditional final approval by the $outhold Town Planning Board on February 25, 1991; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board determined that the subdivision approval had expired; and WHEREAS, a new application has been received; and WHEREAS, the Zoning Board of Appeals determined on January 24, 2001 that the original variance of September 16, 1988 (Appl. No. 3744) was still valid; and WHEREAS, the Planning Beard determined that since the two applications are identical, and a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions with development restrictions was filed on March 8, 1991, the October 16, 1989 Negative Declaration is still valid; be it therefore Southold Town Plannin,q Board Pa,qe Thirty-One February 12, 2001 RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch plan approval on the maps dated December 20, 2000. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Sketch Extensions: Mr. Orlowski: John Tuthill - This proposal is for a clustered set-off of a 0.574 acre lot from an existing 35.918 acre parcel. The parcel is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Main Road & Rackett's Court in Orient. SCTM#1000-17-6-6, 13 & 14 Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer this: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a six month extension of conditional sketch plan approval from March 6, 2001 to September 6, 2001. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Review of Reports: Mr. Orlowski: Robert Schreiber - This minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 47.4 acres. Development Rights will be sold on 32.27 acres. The property is located on Oregon Road in Mattituck. SCTM#1000-95-1-4 Mr. Ca,q,qiano: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board adopt the Suffolk County Planning Commission report, dated January 3, 2001, with the following amendment (number corresponds with number in report): Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Thirty-Two February 12, 2001 There shall not be any access structure to the beach without any necessary permits from the Southold Town Board of Trustees and the Building Department. Mr. Cremers: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Set Hearings: Mr. Orlowski: Mullen Motors - This proposed site plan is for a new parking lot and enhancements to an existing parking lot. The property is located on Locust Lane in Southold. SCTM#1000-62-3-11, 19, 22.1 & 24.1 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following: BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, March 12, 2001, at 6:10 p.m. for a final .public hearing on the maps dated December 7, 2000. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? The motion carries. Mr. Orlowski: I have nothing left on my agenda. If anyone would like to put something on the record, we would be willing to listen. If not, I will.entertain a motion to adjourn. Mr. Cremers: So move. Mr. Ca,q,qiano: Second.' Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Thirty-Three February 12, 2001 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Caggiano, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carries. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. Bennett OrlovCski,";Jr., Chairma¢~ ' Respectfully submitted, Carol Kalin, Secretary