Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-09/27/1999PLANNING BOARD MEMB~ BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCYIIE LATHAM, JR. RICHARD G. WARD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES September 27. 1999 Present were: Berinett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Richard 6. Ward G Ritchie Latham Kenneth Edwards William Cremers Melissa Spiro, Planner Robert g. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Martha Jones, Secretary Absent: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Mr. Orlowski: 6ood evening. 'd like To call this meeting to order. The first order of business, Board to set Monday, October 18, 1999 at 7:30 p.m. au Southold Town Hal, Main Rd., Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting. Mr. Cremers: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowsl(i, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS Mr. Orlowski: 7:30 p m Rockcove Estates- This major subdivision is for 23 lots on 27 6921 acres located on the north side of Middle Road (CR48); approximately 500 feet west of McCann Lane in Greenport. SCTM# 1000-33- 3-19. I'1t ask if there are any comments on this subdivision? Southoid Town Planning Board 2 September 27, 1999 Charles Cuddy: I'm Charles Cuddy. I represent the owners, Bettina Equities Co. Just a few comments Mr. Chairman and members of the Board. As you said, this is a 23 lot subdivision in an R-40 district which allows I acre zoning. In this subdivision there is an open space area of 5.6 acres. There is also a beach area of 1.5 acres. The subdivision basically follows as far roads go, the existing tap roads that are shown on the 'tax map of the Town of Southold. We believe that over a period of time, we've met all the requirements. We've submitted extensive covenants to the Board. I would like to point out - and I believe that our notices must have gotten home because we sent out 38 notices and posted it in s~x places - for those people who are here in connection with this subdivision that there s a building lot on the large acreage which is shown on the map as lot 19. That's just for one Rouse. That homeowner will come over on what's called Homestead Way - will not go out into the Main Rd. The road network as have indicated to you shows Sound Drive going through and connecting and basically using Inlet Pond Rd. and is a means of access and ingress and egress I believe that most of the traffic will go in two directions, t will either go down McCann Lane and come ~n to Sound Drive or wil go back, perhaps the better majority will go down Inlet Pond Rd. and eventually to Moore's Lane and come out again on the main road, on Rt. 48. For the record I would also indicate that both Howard Young and Doug Adams of Young & Young are here, the people who prepared the map, and I believe that we have met all the requirements and I would ask the Board, after the hearing, to approve this map Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments on this subdivision? Marry Erinreich: Good evening. My name is Marry Erinreich. I've lived in Eastern Shores for over 30 years, and I've just heard of this development yesterday. I did not receive a notice. I go[ a call from the president of our association and I am al in favor of good development. I don't see how the available land for access and egress was not considered. The attorney just talked about a beach facility. Great. Using Inlet Pond, whatever those tap roads were, that's fine. But Moore's Lane north is way overused now. It's a little road. We have a new development, Schembri Estates that come through there. We have roughly, and again this is just in the asr couple of hours, we have Southold Town Planning Board :5 September 27, 1999 145 homes scheduled for Eastern Shores. 145. All coming in off Moore's Lane north. The quality of ire for those people occupying homes around Inlet Lane will certainly be affected by the construction or whatever have you. I don't understand and what may I ask, the attorney or the developer, was there ever consideration of an entrance on North Rd., rather than putting all the burden in little Eastern Shores? Was there ever consideration, and why did they pass? Why did they pass? Mr. Orlowski: This subdivision has been here since 1994. Mr. Erinreich: Right. Mr, Orlowski: And a preliminary hearing was held in 1995 on this and at that time the Board approved the preliminary layout, and the layout as it is, to keep as much traffic off of Rt, 48 as we could and not put another exit onto Rt. 48, So that's why it's coming out like that. Mr. Erinreich: Our little Moore's Lane north ~qas become ~ nightmare. I live up on the sound and t just have consideration for my neighbors who have built homes recently there. Then there are many homes that are not. And if this development...as I say i'm in favor of good development, they should have access and egress on the North Rd. to come into that development. I appeal to the Board to give this further consideration, not to approve this at this moment. We have an association of 145 homeowners. This is rather shor[ notice and think...go up to Moore's Lane north and try ~o make a left in there. And now you qave this other development. 1 appeal to the Board to refrain from voting on this thing and just give it further consideration. The access from McCann's Lane and from Moore's Lane really should not be made to serve that development. I don't know what else to say. As they say, I just think it's way overkill for that little road. Thank you very much. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Robert Hughes: I'm Robert Hughes. I'm here representing Mr. and Mrs, Karaholis and Gall Port and Christine Anderson who are residents on Sound Drive, to the east. The Karaholis' own the property on the sound, directly to the east of this proposed development. And Ms. Port lives across Sound Drive and Ms. Anderson lives a couple of doors down. The way this is laid out with Sound Drive becoming a through road, it's going to add an awful lot of traffic onto Sound Drive and it's going to burden both Sound Drive and McCann Lane and it seems that there should be some sort of option for access from the east, perhaps along Sutton Place, a noad that just dead ends right into the property. Perhaps there instead of forcing everybody to drive Southold Town Planning Board 4 September 27, 1999 all the way up the whole length of McCann Drive to get into the development from the east. There are some specifics particularly that the Karaholis' are concerned about and that has to do with the location of the public beach. The way it is located now, the beach would be directly adjoining their property. It appears that there is a ten foot right-of-way, fifteen foot right-of-way, I'm not sure how wide it is, going from Sound Drive down to what is the public ~)each. I assume that this would mean it would just be a foot path and then entail anybody who s going to be using that beach to ;)ark their cars along Sound Drive in that area which would...there are 23 lots, they're going to be congregating very close to the I(araholis'. It seems to me that a sensible alternative would be to put the public beach in front of lots 2 or 3 in the center of the development. That way, the access would be more closely opposite where nlet Rd. intersects with Sound Drive allowing ~:or more parking, less congestion. If you have cars parked on both sides on Sound Drive up near where the proposed walkway is now, you're going [o have trouble with, if emergency vehicles have to get through or whatever, there's not much accommodation there for emergency vehicles. Aisc, as a matter of interest and importance to the Karaholis', apparently over the last few years the developer has cut the path through where the access will be to the beach, and has been depositing construction fill down there. I wanted to ~now whether the Board was aware of this and if they were, were permits issued or do we know anything about that activity? Unknown: Where is that, I'd like to know? Mr. Hughes: Down at the beach. (Inaudible) beach, which is The eastern part of the beach property of the whole waterfront. Mr. Odowski: This is a public hearing for the Board's information, not a debate. Mr. Hughes: I just found out about this, I don't know if you folks are aware of anything like that. Mr. Orlowski: Well, that access was discussed many times with the Board because it just laid out better to put it between lots three and four to get to the beach than anywhere else on that property. Southold Town Planning Board 5 Mr. Hughes: Could you explain the reasoning there? Mr. out Mr. Mr. September 27, ~ 999 Orlowski: We felt it was much better than putting it along the property and keeping it in the subdivision and the way the topography was it laid much easier to put it there. Hughes: Easier than putting it between one and two or two and three? Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Hughes: How is the topography better there than elsewhere. I haven't seen a topographical map so I don't know, If you could explain it to me. Mr. Orlowski: Well, if you took a look at it...like I said, this has been here s~nce 1994. Mr. Hughes: That means that we shouldn't ask this question? Mr, Orlowski: Wel, you can, but if you look at it you can see that it does lay OUt... Mr. Hughes: Why, is it steeper in between two and three? Mr. Orlowski: It's not as steep, yes. Mr. Hughes: It's not as steep where, between three and four? Mr. Orlowski: Between three and four. It's more of a natural...do we have a topography map here? Howard Young has it and, we discussed this with the surveyor and he probably can answer that question better than we can Mr. Hughes: Is it anticipated to just be a walkway or ~s it going to be a cat walk or... Mr. Orlowski: Well, it's just ten foot so you're not going to...it's a walkway. And they'l be walking from other houses there and there's no parking made available to drive down there and park, so. Mr. Hughes: So they'll park on Sounc~ Drive. Mr. Orlowskk No, they'll probably walk from the house they own from which they have access. Southold Town Planning Board 6 September 27, 1999 Mr. Hughes: You really think the people who live back here are going to walk 2000 feet with their beach furniture and their coolers for a p~cnic on their beach without driving over here? Are you go~ng to put in signs that say no parking? Mr. Orlowski: Does anybody else have access to the sound in this subdivision? Mr. Hugnes: I don't Know whether they do or not. Mr. Orlowski: The other subdivisions? They have access too, don't they? Mr. Hughes: I don't know. Mr. Orlowski: I ~}elieve they do, and I don't think there are a lot of cars parked on Sound Ave. there, is there? Mr. Hughes: i'm not concerned with the other ones, t was just asking about this one. Unknown: There's no access other than the 69 steps, which is way over. The private homes have their own staircases for going down Ms. Spiro: Eastern Shores has beach access at the other end of Sound Drive. Mr. Hugnes: Well, the fact of the matter is you're going ~o have 23 lots that are going to be having access there and the fact of the matter is you're going to have basically a public beach now right next to Karaholis', whereas, s~nce this is a development that is, I don't Know how wide it is along the beach, why not put the public ~)each in the middle of the development nstead of off to one side where it all of a sudden starts burdening a neighbor who has a private t3each and who nas not infringed on their beach and all of a sudden he's going to have basically a public beach right next to his property, rather than putting it in the middle of the development. It's putting a lot of burden on one neighbor. And there is a concern again, about the safety of the.. if there are cars parked along those sides of that road because it's not very wide, I don't know if the Planning Board or who has the authority or whatever to recommend no parking signs or whatever. If you say they're all going to walk, then you shouldn't have any objection to them putting no parking signs all the way along there Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Southoid Town Planning Board 7 September 27, 1999 Mr. Hughes: That's alii have. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments on this subdivision? Eleanor Kopeck: My name ~s Eleanor Kopeck. I'm a resident of Sound Drive on the west side of this development and I would also like to say that serious consideration should be applied to another road leading out to Rt. 48. It can be a terribly dangerous situation and in case of an emergency with just Moore's Lane or McCann Lane being the roads out, Also on the west side of the'Eastern Shores of Moore's Lane north, Mr. Schembri has built a development in there And those cars also exit onto inlet Pond and Homestead Way going out to the North Rd. through Moore's Lane north, so we have lots of traffic there. So t really think you should consider a new way of entering and exiting that development. Inaudible: My name is (inaudible). (inaudible). Sound Drive I've lived here for the last 70(?) years. I've never seen so much traffic on Moore's Lane, especially on the week-ends and it's impossible to go in and out and take it from me we have a lot of accidents even without this development because it's a crowded road over there. We left the city and came here for the quality of life and now these people they want to build all these lots and they will take money to sell more and (inaudible). I object (inaudible). This would make exit in and out from the 48 road. Don't destroy our life. Name inaudible: My name is (inaudible) and I live on (inaudible) Lane and would like to have clarification in regards to the open space easement area. What exactly is this going to be? Empty? Mr. Orlowski: There will be nothing there. There will be one building lot on that property. Unknown: What's the reason? Why? Mr. Orlowski: That's the way they laid it out and basically clustered it up and left the open space, that large lot. Unknown: This ~s going to I~e a land that's not utilized at all? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Unknown: (inaudible) because of that easement? Right? Mr. Orlowski: Yes, Southold Town Planning Board 8 September 27, 1999 Unknown: And this is owned by whom? By the owner? Mr. OFIOWSki: Well, right now it is, yes. Unknown: I don't know, something is very confusing here. The Town has land that is owned by the owner and it's going to be empty? Mr. Orlowski: No, it will all 'be part of one large lot. Unknown: Yes, but how are you going to get there? (inaudible) Mr. Orlowski: it will come off of Homestead Way, it's to the west. Unknown: You're going to open that too? Mr. Orlowski: Yes, for that one lot. Unknown: Do you Know sometimes I try to get out from Moore's Lane north, and I (inaudible) There are people walking there. They (inaudible) and I have to (inaudible) myself coming out, (inaudible) all the time my (inaudible) because I don't know if someone is (inaudible) and coming in And now you want to put more people on the same entrance and exit. This is (inaudible). I think that the entrance has to I~e given to this area. Otherwise it will cause a lot of confusion and problems (inaudible). Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Cornelia Keogh: Yes, Mr. Chairman. My name is Cornelia Keogh Our home ~s bounded on the north and on the east by the designated building lot 19. Althougn we would prefer the entire mapped area remain underdeveloped, we acknowledge it is unrealistic and we have no argument with the proposed map, our concern being the open space easement area. That pond is a home to muskrats, turtles and seasonally breeding ducks. It is also a stopover of many m~grating bird species ncluding the Great Blue Heron. I've heard nothing about an Environmental Impact Statement. Is there one? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. That was done in... Ms. Keogh: Right in the beginning, probably. Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Southoid Town Planning Board 9 Ms. Spiro: Yes, it was done quite a while ago. 1994. September 27, 1999 Ms. Keogh: Can you tell me, because I'm ignorant of this. What is the setback requirement for structu res on the south and west lines of lot 197 Mr. Orlowski: There is a building envelope, have you seen that on the map that's outside? Lot 19 has a building envelope. It's nowhere near the pond or anything else. Ms. Keogh: That's right. I just wondered what the side line setbacks were? Ms. Spiro: It would be in conformance w~th the R-40 zone, for the front and sides. Ms. Keogh: OK And if l may make a comment about the ingress and egress problem. Many, many years ago when the very first proposed maps were filed on this large area, the first couple showed ingress and egress through that 92 foot stnp there that comes on our east line out onto 48. If that were possible, it would solve some of the ingress and egress problems. But understand that it was after that the decision was made to have no more ingress and egress onto Rt. 48. is that correct? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Ms. K, eogh: Was that a County proposal or was that something that was done in the Town, to timit the ingress and egress to 48? Mr. Orlowski: It was probably on both. The County was reluctant to allow a lot of entrance and exits onto 48. The Board in its review felt it was a little bit too much to have three there. The unfortunate thing is the property to the east and the property to the west has been developed. And the subdivisions are laid out in such a way and they were laid out purposely with five spur roads. And each road, as you've noticed, connec[s to the only property that's left in the middle. The applicant came ~n in 1994 and we worked with them on a layout. We had a preliminary hearing in 1995 approving the layout. Not putting another exit onto 48 was a concern of ours. Not going through that: pond and that Iow area to try to build a road through that pond to get to 48 was another concern of ours. And unfortunately, I know everybody is moved in and they're there already, but these roads were put in for a purpose and we're trying to use as few of them as possible without connecting all the roads to all five spurs. Southold Town Planning Board 10 September 27, 1999 Ms. Keogh: I have no argument with the cross roads. I understand the concern of these neighbors with their ingress and egress, Thank you Mr. Chairman. (change tape) Bill Borelli: My name is Bill Borelli. We live on Inlet Pcnd Rd. and Green Hill Lane. You Nave a dead end that goes in Inlet Pond Rd. and goes about 90 feet and assume that it's going to connect with a road off McCann Lane? I'm worried about the elevations, because when you have a heavy downpour there's a lot of water that congregates. And you've been reading in the papers lately about mosquitoes in Nassau County and in Queens, and encephalitis and all. If you don't have the proper pitch on those roads, I'm going to get a whole [or of water accumulating nght in front of my house. So I would like to Know if they've taken into consideration the elevations to drain Inlet Pond Rd., either east or west, and then down the hills away from the house? Has any consideration been given to the elevations? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. When the surveyor and the engineer stamped this map, they have to take that into consideration. And if it does cause a problem, then it's their neck that's on the line because no runoff of water from this subdivision is allowed to go onto anyone else's property. Mr, Borelli: Well, it won't go onto my property because I'm about four feet over the road now. I have a heck of a slope and when I cut the grass I almost fall I'm worried about other people. Is it going to drain away off the roads and not have stagnant water on the roadways? Mr, Orlowski: It should. Mr. Borelli: And if we have stagnant water, who do we go to. Mr. Orlowski: Well, you go to the Highway Dept., but it would go back to the engineer. Mr, Borelli: And somebody is on the hook for that? Mr, Orlowski: Yes they are. There's a bond placed... Mr, Borelli: Is there some way that we can get recourse for that, if there's water? Mr. Orlowski: Well, we'll get it fixed, that's for sure. There's a bond in place when they develop and.,. Southold Town Planning Board September 27, 1999 Mr. Borelli: Yeah, but you have to have a hell of a downpour to see which way the water is going to roll Unless you're going to open up some hydrants to see which way the water is going to drain. Mr. Orlowski: Well right now the map is stamped saying that it will drain. Mr. Borelli: And do I come back to see you if it's not draining? Mr. Orlowski: Come on back. We'll be here. Any other comments? Charles Cuddy: Just one comment, t want to point out to the audience and also the Board that one of the problems here is circulation of traffic which I alluded to originally. We believe that the circulation will take probably ten lots and go down McCann Lane The other 11 or 12 lots will go in the other direction. And it's pretty much [aid out that way. The distance oetween McCann and the actual 92 foot area that the woman just spoke about is 300 feet, so you'd have two roads within 300 feet of each other and I think that's been a concern for a long time, for the Board, and that's why it wasn't done that way. Mr. Orlowski: The Board and the County. Marry Erinreich: Thank you again. Just in response to that comment by the attorney, 90% of the traffic going to Moore's Lane is coming from the west, not from the east And so we are impacted most dramatically from the west. We will be much more heavily trafficked than McCann Lane from the east. Thank you. And again, I appeal to the Board to reconsider regardless what was done four or five years ago. There are many more houses that have been built and there are many more people whose quality of life is going to I~e affected. I'm up there 30 some odd years and again, don't oppose development I'm for good development. But that road should go onto 48. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Edgar Burr: I live on the north road. I probably shouldn't open my mouth but I did own that property. You're talking about traffic, yes I see traffic every day. And t Know it doesn't improve. Somebody questioned about the sound frontage, we made a road down there after we bought the first (inaudible) in the 50's, that goes down the back. And as far as anything is down there, we made ~etties and all Kinds of things before you had to get all these permissions and-we did it which we thought would (inaudible) in the right way because we didn't carry it IoacK to the banks or your waves and $outhold Town Planning Board 12 September27,1999 stuff wouldn't gouge stuff out. Anything that's up there it's according to law and it's been approved. Somebody had questions on some of that stuff up 1:here. n fact, I've been kind of perturbed why they let other ones come in and go down that bank and do favors for some of the other ones at the east of me. Some of them things kind of irk you a little bit once in a while too. It's nice to see progress, but i've been living there all my life which is quite a while. My grandfather bought that propeFcy back in early 1900's, I've got the canceled check from it. It used to be Al Youngs property. It was 30-1/2 acres when it was bought there then. If you've got any questions, I iDrobably could answer a few of them. What's his name over there, he knows it's a gradual slope from the sound right down towards my house here because you get up to the sound and kick the car out of gear and it will coast right down to the pond there. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? (inaudible) Simidor: understand that this present map was approved in 4994 -95? Mr. Orlowski: The preliminary map was in 1995. Mr. Simidor: What was the zoning prior to that change? Ms. Spiro: The zoning on this property has been the same since the subdivision came in which is R-40, which is one acre zoning. Mr. Simidor: It was an acre situation that you could build on at the time, is that correct? Ms Spiro: Yes. The zone has not changes. Mr. Simidor: And now it's less than that. Ms. Spiro: No, it's still one acre zoning. Mr. Orlowski: It's clustered, so the lots are... Mr. Simidor: It's clustered so the lots are less than an acre? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr, Simidor: And this was approved in 1994-957 Southold Town PLanning Board 13 September27,1999 Ms. Spiro: The preliminary map was. Mr. Simidor: I'm just concerned about all I lqear about diversity, space and so forth. So we're allowing more building in the same area.. Mr. Orlowski: No. Mr. Simidor: ...less building, because of the cluster factor, is that correct? Mr. Orlowski: Same building. Mr. Simidor: Same building as I~efore as it is now? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. The way cluster works, you come up with a yield map first, showing that you can develop it with so many lots, which the applicant did. And then he went back and drew another map clustering the subdivision which he did, and ke~)t his number of lots. Any other comments? Christine Anderson: One question. I'm Christine Anderson and I live on the corner there. And that gentleman who raised the point about the drainage, think it's very important and the engineer apparently has said that there would be some sort of guarantee as to drainage. I would like to have that for the rest of us because we've seen the floods and the hurricanes recently and I would like to have something for the rest of us in that area there to insure ahead of time that there is adequate sewage and adequate drainage, and there's some guarantee, not after the fact, but prior to the fact, that there will be adequate drainage. And this gentleman said he's very high so it doesn't matter to him. But the rest of us in that area I think should be protected and would like to have some kind of assurance from the Board that they will require advance certification from the engineers that that will be taken into account. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Well, the code is very specific that all storm water runoff is created during development has to remain on site. The map is laid out.by a professional surveyor and engineer that stamps the map and signs it, guaranteeing that to us, and there's a bond for the improvements. Christine Anderson: What's the amount of the bond? Mr. Orlowski: S404,86t.00 $outhold Town Planning Board 14 September 27, 1999 Ms Anderson: Is something like that adequate for a real disaster? Look at North Carolina recently. Mr. Orlowski: Well, don't think they guaranteed it either but... Ms. Anderson: is it a perpetual guarantee, this bond? Mr. Orlowski: No. But during construction and after it's constructed...it's engineered so the drainage is correct and I don't think Mr. Young would stamp and sign this mad if he didn't think it was. if'you want to know, he's back there. Ms. Anderson: Is Mr. Young here tonight? Howard Young: Yes. I would be glad To review the drainage with you if you would ike to stop in to my office or (inaudible). It's l~een done by my firm and approved by (inaudible) and reviewed by the Highway Dept. Hopefully we addressed all of your concerns. But I'd be glad to review it with you and show you what we've done. Mr Orlowski: Well, what the Board can do tonight is entertain a motion to hold the hearing open until our next meeting if anybody wants to take a look and review the drainage - it appears the drainage ~s a major problem for everybody. And the road layout like I said, this Board has gone over it since 1994 and we feel as does the County and everyone else that that's the best way to lay it out. '11 entertain a motion to hold the hearing open. Mr, Ward: So moved Mr. Latham: Second Mr. OrlowsKi: Motion made and seconded, Any questions on the motion? Unknown: My question is that traffic that's going to be on Moore's Lane, that s impossible. (inaudible) is going to be very good, but you should get the road from 48. Mr. Orlowski: Welt, you have three more weeks to put your comments in writing and like said we'll I~e back here in three more weeks. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. OrlowsKi, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Southold Town Planning Board '15 September 27, 1999 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: Mr. Orlowski: Summit Estates - Sections I, 2, 5 & 4 - Public hearing in accordance with Condition Number 11 of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for Summit Estates. SCTM# 1000-35-8-(5.4-5.18) and 38- 7-(8- 12). Summit Estates - Section 4 - Section 4 of this major subdivision is for one 4.3739 acre lot (Lot # 33). The properly is located off Shipyard Lane in East Marion. SCTM# 1000-38-7-p/o 10 (a.k.a. SCTM# I000-35-8-5.3). Before we get any further or get into this, the Board made about it's lOth or 12th ins pection out there and took more look for everyone. And our feeling was if the applicant of this subdivision is going to use the dock, we will limit their use [o the "T" shape of the dock. So now that the hearing is open are there any comments? Donna Geraghty: I think at this point that we've all been here we've heard many different things from many people. I'm asking this evening that we please move forward. We don't have any problem with utilizing the "T" section. I would just like to further expand that to say that i'd like to Keep it open to the area in which tqe Army Corp of Engineers has designated as the dredged area. And I just want to show you this. They refer to it as proper safe docking and I think that using their terms as proper safe docking if we can restrict the use to that area I think we'd be very happy with it. I think we've taken into consideration as well as I'm sure the Army Corp has taken into consideration all of the dock space that's next to it. So, if that's acceptable to the Board, it's certainly acceptable to us this evening and we move to go forward. Mr. Orlowski: There are no measurements on this area. Ms. Geraghty: I have the entire permit here with me and if you,d like, I'd be happy to..,l'm sure they go into great detail as to the depth and so on and so forth. We havea continued dredging permit for that area, so what 'm saying is I)asically, as long as we can dredge that area for boating purposes, I would assume that that would be the proper area to use. And it really only encompasses the "T". Here's the rest of the permit. Mr. Ward: If you had to go back to put pilings in for any reason, you have to Southold Town Planning Board Sept:ember 27, 1999 go back to the Trustees. Ms. Geraghty: That's correct. Mr. Ward: So it's really not under our jurisdiction. Ms. GeraghW: I agree. Mr. Ward: So I don't think we will address that tonight. Ms. Geraghty: OK. Tonight specifically 'm referring to a designated area as opposed to... Mr. Ward: We'll be designating a "T" section it will be up to Trustees or anybody else to...for boat layout, we're not going to get into that. Ms. Geraghty: OK, that's acceptable to us. Tom Krause: My name is Tom Krause. I'm a resident of Crescent Beach Condominium. Could I have a clarification of what that means, restricting to the "T". is that a covenant? Is that a permanent restriction that's connected with a conveyance to the HOA? Is there a way for it to ~)e overcome. I would just like to understand. Mr. Ward: Wel I assume the covenant, they can come back here and askfor it to be modified. Just as they're doing now, changing ownership. Mr. Krause: But then they would have to come before going before the Trustees for anything else or... Mr. Ward: My understanding is that if they put pilings in to hold boats in palce, that's under the jurisdiction of the Trustees. ~t's not our jurisdiction1 Our intent tonight was to, in trying to come to a resolve in fairness to both parties, was to come up where they could only use the "T" section of the dock or use of the owner and two other vesse Is. Ms. Spiro: If the Ptanning Board does go ahead tonight and proceed with this resolution, one of the conditions' of approval will be that they file an amended Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions. In order to amend that any further in the future, they need to have a public hearing and a vote of the Planning Board of a majority, plus one to amend that Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions. So it will nvolve a public hearing for us, and if they need pilings it will involve something before the Trustees. Southold Town Planning Board 17 September 27, 1999 Mr. Krause: OK, then not to put words in your mouth, but to tell you what understand then, is this restriction means sorry folks you can't just tie up boats to the side of the dock. And so the only place you can put them is in the T where there have been slips created. And if you want to put more boats up, you've got to find a way to get more slips. Mr. Orlowski: That's it. Mr. Krause: That's the extent of what's going on. it's not a permanent restriction that says'only three boats or four boats are ever going to be on that dock. Mr. Ward: Well, it's only permanent in the sense of what's here in the covenant Mr. Krause: Right, so it's not about the eventual potential usage of the dock, it's about how many boats can go there now as the dock is currently conficju red? Mr. Ward: Well, it's limiting it to the 'T' section at this point. If they wish to go further somewheres down the roaa, they would have to come back to us and to the Trustees (change tape). Mr. K, rause: In your review of the area and if you say the "T" area, how many boats does that mean to you? Mr. Edwards: It depends on the size of them. Mr. Ward: A lot less than using the whole dock, basically. Ms. Spiro: And they're still imited by the code, which we discussed at length last time. Mr. Krause: Right, OK SO, it's not about slips, it's not about limitations of the boats, it's where the boats can be? Mr. Ward: Right. Mr. Krause: OK, is it the andward and seaward side of the "T", on the east and west side? Mr. Ward: Yes. Soutlnold Town Planning Board Mr. Krause: OK Thank you 18 September 27, 1999 Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Francis McNally: My name is Francis McNally, I'm an owner at Crescent Beach. In the future, if they wanted to expand this or change the covenant for this, would they have to put out to the adjacent homeowners as they did in the past? A registered letter to inform us or would it just be in the paper? Mr. Orlowski: Well, they'd have to go to the Trustees for permits, which there would be a notification The Army Corp of Engineers maybe, they'd have to go and the C&R's that we're going to put on this, they'd have to come to the Planning Board. And to override the C&R's you need a majority plus one here, and the public hearing. So there could probably De three public hearings. Mr. McNally: And we would ~)e notified by certified mail as wewere last time? Mr. Orlowski: I know from this Board you would be notified. Mr. Spiro: If you're an adjacent owner. The adjacent owners will be notified. Mr. McNally: in reference to what Mr. Krause was talking about, there could be 19 boats tied side by side out there then, correct? Mr. Spiro: The code only allows two boats in addition to those owned by the person who owns the land. If we convey it to the HOA, if they form this corporation or do whatever, then the HOA could own as many boats as they wish. However, they could only have two in addition to that, And whatever could physically be tied up to the "T" section of that dock. If they have six foot boats, they could have.quite a few of them. If they have a 30 foot boat, they would be limited in the number of boats that they could have out there. Mr. McNally: So conceivably you could have 19 boats tied up out there? Ms. Spiro: Row boats. Mr. Orlowski: OK, any other comments? Patrick Regina: I'm Patrick Regina from Crescent Beach Condominium. I'm a little confused by this. That means that they could have 19 row boats out there, for the hundred feet of property of the waterfront? This is a very Southold Town Planning Board September 27, 1999 sensitive area near our sw~m area. We give courtesy to our neighbor by pulling our ropes and keeping them 40 or 50 feet from the dock. Actually, we could tie, if we went by the as-built survey, we could tie the ropes to our neighbors dock. Let's be honest here, so if we see a boat we can then tie our ropes to our neighbors dock because it's in the as-built survey? Because we were told, you build your dock according to the as-~uilt survey. So in other words our families swim in this area; the minute we see boats going up, we can literally Dring our ropes to that dock and you couldn't get a guppy through. I mean lets cai a spade a spade here. This is a very sensitive area here. And this aw confuses me because like honesty, straightforwardness, and everything brought out straight, right to me, I don't think this is Deing brought straight to me This confuses me. Now, that means 1 can bring my ropes that's been our swim area since 1955, Cresceqt Beach, and bring them right as close as we can to that dock and protect our swimmers? We're not here to be bad neighbors. We're here for justice. We're here to protect this swim area. We want to get along with our neighbors. Mr. Orlowski: Well, before you go any further, we're only allowing them to use the "T" portion of this whole dock. Mr. Regina: But this is not written in stone. We'd gladly let them use the "T" section, but... Mr. Orlowski: OK, don't say anymore. Wait a minute. Hold it. You said that's fine, That's all this Board is doing tonight. Mr. Regina: But how many boats can be put in the "T" section? There's no limit. Mr. Orlowski: How many boats do you nave at your dock? Mr. Regina: 7 or 8. Mr. Orlowski; Do you think 7 or 8 would fit on the end of this dock? Mr, Regina: No, but we don't back up into a very sensitive swim area, Mr. Orlowski: They can't, they've got to use the "T". They can only use the Southold Town Planning Board 20 September 27, 1999 Mr. Regina: They cannot come in the future? They cannot build any docks on the west side of that dock? Mr. Orlowski: They can make all the applications they have to make to the Trustees, the Army Corp of Engineers and they also have to make an application here. Mr. Regina: Well then here we go again. Mr. Orlowski: But you could also make an application to extend your dock. Anybody can. Anybody in this town can do that. Mr. Regina: But we're not backing up into a swim area. I think we're missing the point here. I wouldn't care where it was. This dock is in a very sensitive area. Mr. Orlowski: It is, and I think you're right. By approving the "T" it's going to eliminate having to worry about that. You're asking me if they can do something later on? Anybody can do anything later on. We can't control that. You're a lowed to ask for anything. And when they do, they'll be public hearings, they'll be notification. Besides those two, the Trustees and the Army Corp of Engineers and their hearings they have to override the covenants that the Planning Board is going to put on them. So, that's another hearing over here. And that has to be a majority plus one. So, I think we're giving you all the tools that we possibly have to control this. Anybody can still askfor anything. Mr. Regina: Thank you very much. Donna Geraghty: I just want to respond to the gentleman whojust spoke With reference to your comments, think we really need to refer to the Army Corp of Engineers who has stated that thearea that we're referring to as safe dockage area. Now I'm sure they'll be people taken into consideration. Any swimming area, certainly your docks were there prior to and I truly understand your concern. However, I think that the Board has looked at it, I think we've looked at it and the Army Corp has looked at it. We're not bad neighbors and we're not trying to run over your children, in fact, we tooka ride out there this week-end with our bOat, and I understand none of the children are there any longer. But we have taken everything into consideration. We've met every requirement that's been asked by this Board, by the Trustees and any other applications that need to be made, and we've fulfilled them. We're not bad Southold Town Planning Board 2t September 27, ']999 neighbors and we're not going to let anyone run over your children. Sol understand where you're coming from, but we've met the requirements, I think this has gone on long enough, and I ask that we end this, I have to say squabbling, and move forward, and hope to do that this evening. Thank you. Mr Orlowski: This is a public hearing and not a squabble. Francis McNally: Again, Francis McNally from Crescent Beach Condominium. The young lady refers to the report by the Army Corp of Engineers. Was that report dated prior to the installation of our dock, may know? I'm not sure about that. Mr. Orlowski: When did you install yours? Mr. Regina: '97 was when the extension was done. Mr. McNally: Not the extension, the original. Mr. Regina: It was '88 or '89, what's the date on that one? Ms. Spiro: I think 1988, but I'm not sure. Mr. Regina: It was put in after... Mr. McNally: I think that report was done prior to us installing our dock. And the other question I had is how does that dock that was put in just east of us come into this territory which we supposedly should have had, which is the lateral or outscore boundary. How did that ever happen? Looking at this, how did something like that ever get by this Board? Mr. Ward: It's not our jurisdiction. It's Army Corp, Town Trustees, we're not involved in the water. Mr. McNal'ly: I'm just questioning because, if you were in my position looking, you should say, my God, how could that happen And you come up with an as-built survey which was requested here and we did get. Mr. Ward: Who owns the property under the water, I'm not sure. Maybe no one. Mr. McNally: From the high water mark down, no.one owns it. Southold Town Planning Board 22 September 27, 1999 Mr.Ward: $o the lines out in the water don't mean very much, do they? Mr. McNally: Well, they have to Mr. Orlowski: That's what we thought. Mr. McNally: Thank you. Sue Hallock: My name is Sue Hallock, I represent Cleaves Point Condominiums. I just want to understand what you're doing tonight? You're amending an existing covenant and how will that read? Mr. Orlowski: I'll be reading it shortly. Ms. Hallock: OK, I'd like to hear it. Janet Misler: Hi, I'm Janet Misler from Crescent Beach. I have a question. How tong is the "T" that we're referring to here? Mr Orlowski: Probably 80 or 90 feet. It says 50 here, but I think it's longer than that. Ms. Misler: You don't know how ong it is? Mr. Orlowski: I can't tell you right now. Ms. $piro: That was permitted by the Town Trustees and the Army Corp of Engineers. It wasn't something Before the Planning Board. Ms MiSler: Well is there somebody here that owns it that knows now long it is? Donna Oeraghty: 80 feet or so, g~ve or take. Ms. Misler: Is anybody here proficient in docks? Mr. Orlowski: What is the question you're asking? Ms. Milser: Well, anybody here that is familiar with how many Boats would typically fit on a dock that size? Mr. Orlowski: is it an 8 footer or a 50 footer, we don't know? Southold Town Planning Board 25 September 27.1999 Ms. Misler: Well, it depends on if you're parking it parallel or if you're parking it head in. Ms. Spiro: You would need to put different pilings in to park boats in different directions. Right now the structure of this dock is set in to dock your boat parallel to the dock. There's a picture here that they gave us a few weeks ago. Donna Geraghty: It's difficult to keep boats on the outside during rough water, so typically you're not going ~o be boating, you're not going to be permanently tying up a I~oat on the outside of the dock, if in fact the water is rough. The reason you have a "T" is so that you would put your boat behind it and it would be protected from the sea I don't Know if you keep a boat there or not, but that would be a typical thing to do if you were concerned about the safety of your boat. So if you have an expensive boat, you certainly wouldn't ~)e putting it out on (inaudible). Ms. Misler: Is what we're talking about here tonight as far as them being able [o use the "T", use the outside of the "T"? Mr. Orlowski: Either side. Ms. Misler: So that would allow more boats. Mr. Orlowski: Depending on the size. But they're only going to be out on the "T" Ms. Misler: Only on the "T" ~)ut either side of the "T" i'm.~ust trying to figure out how many ooats can be there. Mr. Orlowski: Well, the last picture there was only one there. Ms. Spiro: Did you sent this picture? Ms Misler: I live there, so I've seen (inaudible). Ms. Spiro: Right, well this shows i~ow's there one boat docked (inaudible). Ms. Misler: But what we're talking about though, is they can go here, here, here, here. All along here. Here and here, Ms. Spiro: That's probably about five boats, aluminum boats maybe on the other side Nobody is going to leave their boat on the outside of the dock. Southold Town Planning Board 24 September 27, 1999 Patrick Regina: They have a permit to dredge? Could you use the microphone because everybody would tike to Know what you're saying, but this lady is first so 'd like her to finish. Ms Misler: Here's my question, is it possible ...does another ~Dermit or does somebody have to come to you if they have a dock like this, I don't care who it is whether it's this particular individual or somebody else. If they have a dock like this with a "T" and they want to add pile ons out here for people to go head in, woutd that mean that person would have to come before the Board to get approval to do that? Mr. Orlowski: t would come to the Trustees and probably Army Corp of Engineers, I'm not sure. Mr. Ward: Navigable waters the Army Corp would be involved. Ms. Misler: Thank you. Mr. Orlowskh I don't think you'd want to stick your boat out there though. Patrick Regina: They have a dredging permit? I don't understand this. Can they come closer to the shoreline and dredge? Ms. Geraghty: No sir, it's a maintenance permit. Mr. Regina: What does a maintenance permit allow you to do if you don't mind me asking? Ms. Geraghty: To keep a designated area which is at 8 feet. Mr. Regina: The depth of the water? Mr. Orlowski: Around the 'T". Mr. Regina: That means they cannot move in... Ms. Geraghty: No, it's a designated area. Mr. Regina: Unless they get a permit to come closer to the shore? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Regina: But then if we pulled our ropes to our boundary line? Southold Town Planning Board 25 September 27, 1999 Mr. Oriowski: God Jaless you. Mr. Regina: Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other questions or comments? motion to close this one hearing. I'm going to entertain a Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made anc~ seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr OrlowskJ: Opposed? Motion carried. WHEREAS, in 1989, Gusmar Realty Corp. made an application to the Planning Board for a major subdivision of 35 lots on 40.822 acres To be Know as Summit Estates; and WHEREAS, prior to the submission of the 35 lot subdivision, a residential dwelling and a dock existed on the property; and WHEREAS, after the Planning Board granted preliminary approval to the subdivision application, the Planning Board allowed the applicant to proceed with the fina submission in four separate sections (Section I: Lots 1-I0, Section 2: Lots 11-23, Section 3: Lots 24-32 and Lots 34-35 and Section 4: Lot 33); and WHEREAS, the Planning Board granted final approval To Summit Estates, Section I, on October 4, 1993; and WHEREAS, Summit Estates, Section I, contained 10 lots on 17.5036 acres, in addition to three (3) parcels of Open Space (Parcel A, Pancel B, and Parcel C) and one (I) parcel for a Park and Recreation Area (Parcel D), all subject to covenants and restrictions contained in a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions recorded as part of the subdivision approval; and WHEREAS, Condition Number 11 of the Declaration of Covenants and Rest fictions for Summit Estates reads as follows: "The dock, and any further expansion of such, cannot be conveyed Southold Town Planning Board 26 September 27, t 999 separately from Lot No. 33 except by permission of the Southold Town Planning Board after a public' hearing, and if such conveyance shall be allowed, it shall be To the owner(s) of the park and recreation area only." and WHEREAS, Lot No. 33, as of this date, is not an approved tot, but is a proposed lot on which the existing dwelling is located and is now known as the pending application for Summit Estates, Section 4; and WHEREAS, Donna Geraghty, as agent for Gusmar Realty, notified the Planning Board in July 1999, that the Summit Estates property owners would like to convey the use of the dock to the Summit Estates Homeowners Association and would like to establish the use of four boat slips; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board referred the applicant to the Town Trustees in regard to the number of boat slips allowed prior to the Planning Board making a determination in regard to the conveyance of the dock ownership [o the Summit Estates Homeowners Association; and WHEREAS, in accordance with Condition Number 11 of the Covenants and Restrictions, the Planning Board initiated a public hearing on July 19, 1999, which was held open in order for the Town Trustees review in regard to the allowable number of boat slips and the allowable use of the dock for the dockage of boats; and WHEREAS, the Town Trustees, in a report dated August 23, 1999, stated that the dock was approved by the Trustees as a single family dock, subject to the regulations under Chapter 100-31 C.(3)(a), which states that 'There shall be docking or mooring facilities for no more than two (2) boats other than those owned and used by the owner of the premises for his personal use."; and WHEREAS, the pulolic hearing in regard to Condition Number 11 was closed on September 27, 1999; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board allow the ownership of the dock to be conveyed to the Homeowners Association subject to the following conditions: The use of the dock for docking and mooring purposes shall be imited to that allowed under Chapter 100-31 C. (3) (a) of the Town Code. As per this Section of the Code, no more than two (2) boats other than those owned and used by the owner of the Southold Town Planning Board 27 September 27, 1999 premises, shall use the dock for docking or mooring purposes. In order to further ensure that the use of the dock for docking or mooring purposes remains similar to that allowed for a single family dock, and does not result in a marina type use for boats owned by the Summit Estates Homeowners Association, the Planning Board is requiring that the docking or mooring or boats be limited To the area of the existing "T" portion (the area which is parallel to the shoreline) of the dock. The attached Exhiloit '%" indicates the "T" portion of the dock. Exhibit "A" is to be made a part of this resolution. The Zoning Board of Appeals in a decision for a different matter clarified for the purposes of interpretation that "for the purposes of Section 100-31 C. (3) (a), an owner of a parcel of land shall be an individua, a partnership, corporation, cooperative, or other entity, or a combination of the above, as a single unit.' Therefore, the Planning Board's decision is further clarified to mean that no more than 2 boats other than those owned and used by the Summit Estates Homeowners Association shall use the dock for docking or mooring facilities. All members of the Sum mit Estates Homeowners Association she have the right to use the dock for purposes other than that of docking and mooring of boats. These uses shall include but not be limited to, uses such as walking on the dock and fishing from the dock. The Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for the Summit Estates subdivision shall be amended to include the above mentioned conditions of approval. A draft Declaration must be submitted for the Planning Board's review and approval prior to the recording of the document in the County Clerk's Office. The Summit Estates Homeowners Association Offering Plan must be amended to include the above mentioned conditions of approval. A copy of the amendment must be submitted for the Planning Board's review and approval prior to the recording of the document. The Town Tax Assessors must I~e notified of the conveyance of the ownership of the dock to the Homeowners Association for Southold Town Planning Board 28 September 27, 1999 assessment purposes. Verification that the Tax Assessors have been notified of the change must be submitted to the Planning Board. Mr, Cremers: Second that motion Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Or!owski: Opposed? Motion carried. In regards to the other nearing. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Board nold the final hearing for Summit Estates, Section 4 open until such time that Conditions Number 3, 4 and 5 of the approval in regard to the public hearing in accordance with Condition Number 11 of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions are fulfilled to the satisfaction of the Planning Board. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr, Orlowski: Motion made and seconded those in favor? Any questions on the motion? All Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. (change tape). Saundra J. Perry Physical Therapy This site plan is for a 710 square foot addition to an existing building, in Southold. SCTM# ~000-63-4-3 Mr. Cremers: I'll offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board hold the hearing open pending receipt of New York State Department of Transportation, Architectura Review Committee and Suffolk County Health Department reviews. Mr. Latham: Second the motion. Mr, Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Soul:hold Town Planning Board Mr, Odowski: Opposed? 29 Motion carded. September 27, 1999 MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Setting of Final Hearings: Mr. Orlowski: Ginsber_q Family - This proposal is to set off a 3.8 acre parcel from a 52.27 acre parcel. The 3.8 acre parcel is proposed to be donated to the Peconic Land Trust and the remaining 48.47 acre parcel is pending the sale of development rights to Suffolk County. The property is located on the south side of Main Road (S.R. 25) in Cutchogue. SCTM# I000-116-I-2. Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following resolution. WHEREAS, this proposa is to set off a 3.8 acre parcel from a 52.27 acre parcel located on the south side of Main Road (S.R. 25) in Cutchogue; and WHEREAS, the 3.8 acre parcel is proposed to be donated to the Peconic Land Trust; and WHEREAS, the remaining 48.47 acre parcel is pending the sale of development rigt~s to Suffolk County; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch approval on the map dated September 9, 1999. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Cremers: In addition, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that due to the fact that there is an existing house on the parcel to be set off, and the sale of development rights is pendipg on the 48.47 acre parcel, that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, do an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action. The Planning Board establishes itself as lead agency, and as lead agency makes a determination Southold Town Planning Board :50 September 27, 1999 of non-significance, and grants a Negative Declaration. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those n favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowskh Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Cremers: In addition, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that since there ~s an existing house on the parcel to be set off, and the sale of development rights is pending on the 48,47 acre parcel, and the applicant nas been assured that Health Department approval will be granted shortly, that the Planning Board set Monday, October 18, 1999 at 7:50 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated September 9, 1999. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those ~n favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers Mr. Orlowskh Opposed? Motion carried. LOCAL LAWS Mr. Orlowski: Local Law for the zone map amendments for the County Route 48 Corridor Land Use Study. The Town Board is asking for our recommendation. ! wholeheartedly recommend that we send a letter to the Town Board supporting the Rt. 48 Corridor Study and if you ask I'll address that letter and have it to the Board by Friday. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Southold Town Planning Board 51 September 27, 1999 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. There's nothing left on my agenda. Does anybody have anything they'd like to add or say? Hearing none, guess we can adjourn to a work session. Mr. Cremers: I'll second the motion to that. Mr. Orlowski: All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Martha A. Jones Secretary RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTI-IO~.D TOWN CLERK Tow~ C~m~ Town o~ ~outho~