Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-10/26/1998PLANNING BOARI) MEMBERS BENI'qETT 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 October 26, 1998 Present were: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Richard O. Ward G. Ritchie Latham Kenneth Edwards Melissa Spiro, Planner Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Martha Jones, Secretary Absent: William Cremers Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Mr. Orlowski: Good evening. I'd tike to call this meeting to order. The first order of business, Board to set Monday, November 16, 1998 at 7:30 p.m. at Southold Town Hall, Main Rd., Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting. Mr. Latham: Move it. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS Site Plans: Southold Town Planning Board 2 October 26, 1998 Mr. Orlowski: 7:30 p.m. Raphael Vineyard - This proposed site plan is for a '13,897 square foot winery on a 50.4829 acre parcel, on IRt. 25 in Peconic. SCTM# 1000-85-3-'11. At this time I'll ask if there are any comments on this site plan? Muriel Andrews: My name is Muriel Andrews and I live on Indian Neck Lane in Peconic. When the Planning Board was approached by Steve Mudd several years ago advising them that the Petrocelli's wanted to put up a building, and inquiring how much property should be set aside for this building, so as not to ruin grape vines, I hope the first question that you people asked was how big will this structure be? That way an appropriate sized parcel could have been set aside. Well, apparently somebody blew it, and now the homeowners who border the vineyards property will have to suffer the consequences. A building 180 feet long and 60 feet wide is quite a monstrosity, no matter how beautiful it may be. I also believe that this is the first vineyard to infringe on many home sites. No matter how you put it, this is a commercial industry and it should be set close to the Main Road as the other businesses are. I have many concerns such as what are the plans for this place? Do they have intentions of having weddings like Pelligrini/Are they going to hold parties and festivals there like Pindar? I saw plans when came down to see Mr. Kassner, for additional parking set behind [ne barn that faces the Main Road, and I would like to know the precise plans regarding [nis. Another concern I have is the noise levels. We can hear verbatim from Pindar, the bands that play there on the week-ends. And if they're good enough, we can sing along with them if we choose to. However, I want to know how we're going to be impacted by a building that size along with the noise levels.. Will there be buffers such as trees to help shield it and deflect it? I've also heard recently that Mr. Petrocelli has.ust purchased Dave Cichanowicz's property. Why doesn't he look into building the winery there as there are no vines planted to be ruined, no homes to disturb, and he could also have a more symmetrical look for the whole vineyard. I hope That the Town Planning Board and the Petrocelli's will do the right thing and can somehow find a compromise to do what is best for everybody who will be affected by this business. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Don Perry: My name is Don Perry and I'm one of the adjacent property Southold Town Planning Board October 26, 1998 owners as well. And I would just like to say it was my understanding from the way that the vineyard was originally laid out that this building was going to be set closer to the road, away from the homeowners and quite frankly I think that's the only sensible location for it. My understanding is that the Board is forcing a setback of I guess almost 500 feet, which puts it right along side the property of most of the folks that you see sitting here today. And frankly, we were all thrilled to see a bunch of beautiful vines go in, and we're all dismayed now to find that this building is going to be setback right on our property lines. I think the original plans that these folks had was not an unreasonable one and I would ask that you allow them to build as they originally planned and intended, because it doesn't really hurt any of us here. My understanding is that this is not going to be a winery that is going to entertain weddings and things like that. If that's the case, I can't see it greatly affecting the traffic in that area either. That's all I can say. Thank you. James Andrews: I'm James Andrews. I live on another adjacent property on 772 Indian Neck Lane. I just want to say, when you decided to move this back 500 feet, or whatever it's going to be, 500 or 400 - which one is it? Mr. Orlowski: 400. Mr. Andrews: Who are you trying to protect here? The people driving by on Rt. 25, so that Rt. 25 looks nicer in Southold? Were you even thinking of the individuals that live on Indian Neck Lane and how this would affect us? Now, I can't see how moving it closer to the Main Road would congest further, Rt. 25. I just can't see it. It's just closer. Are people going to slow down more because it's closer, to see it? And as far as what Don Perry just said, I agree if it goes back to the original plan and these people have no intent of having parties and weddings and whatnot, that's fine. There's nothing wrong with that. But I think if it turns into a wedding factory or a party factory of some sort, this has to be enforced. We have to watch over, somehow something has to be written into this if these people don't turn it into that. Mr. Orlowski: OK, any other comments? Richard Harbich: (submitted affidavit of posting and certified mail receipts) My name is Richard Olsen Harbich. I'm hired as winemaker by the Petrocelli family. I want to thank everybody for coming out and expressing their opinions and we want to listen to everybody's concern. This particular project, if you will allow me just to explain a little bit about it. I did have a handout as you walked in which I think talks about some of the business Southold Town Planning Board 4 October 26, 1998 philosophy, but what we are trying to do with this I think has been unprecedented on the eastern end of Long Island in terms of the amount of planning, the scale of the building, the design of the building and the type of wine making that we're trying to do in this. As I've tried to lay out in a business statement - and Mr. Petrocelli has already made it clear to the Planning Board that he doesn't really intend to do catering in this facility. This is a facility that is built to produce one great wine that's from the eastern end of Long Island. Unlike some of our neighbors which are producing numerous different kinds of wines, sometimes in the neighborhood of 12-15 different styles, we're basically doing one. The market is high end. We're designing this building exclusively around the production of red wine which is also unprecedented for the east coast. To emphasize Mr. Petrocelli's dedication and commitment to doing this and carrying forward this goal, we've hired the services of one of the world's most famous wine makers, Paul Pontallier from Chateau Margaux. He is working with us as consulting winemaker, to make this happen. So some of the concerns about free for all parties and other kinds of events I think are warranted due to some of the instances that We've seen. But this is not the intention of our business. We are completely dedicated and focused to producing a quality product and a great wine, period. As was stated, Mr. Cichanowicz's farm was purchased and along with that, the sale of the development rights, so at this point we're looking at a tota development right package that will go back to the Town of approximately 55-60 acres. Again, this is Mr. Petrocelli's commitment to the region and willingness to do what's necessary to make a quality product. Unfortunately, he could not be here tonight. He wishes to meet with anybody and talk with anybody that wants to express any concern. His son Jimmy is here tonight if anyone would like to speak to him after also. At this point, I just want to let our architect, ira Haspel just talk about the building and if anyone has any specific questions about the structure or the inside workings of the building it would be good to talk to Ira about it. Ira Haspel: My name is Ira Haspel. I'm the architect. Basically what you see on the boards is what is being proposed. The setback as we've been encouraged to show it, was 400 feet on the west side. It's a little bit more on the east side of the building, basically setting the building square to the rows of vines that have already been there Southold Town Planning Board 5 October 26, 1998 We have some parking spaces for 55 cars shown. We also have if needed, space on the east and the west on the roads that are there now- 28 foot wide access roads. This would be about ,300 feet west of the residential area to the east. There is some - on the drawing- land bank spaces shown and that was a request that was put in early on in the planning, and it could be there, it could not be there, but we feel confident that we could contain any additional parking requirements on those two 28 foot wide unimproved access roads. Basically this is a facility which would have the total wine making capability from crushing, producing, bottling, barrel storage and so on. The proposed structure would be clad in a Spanish tile roof and stucco exterior (inaudible) particulated, and we think would be an enhancement to what might be there. So if there are any questions, I'd like to answer them. Mr. Muliin: Does your boss want to go back that far? Does he have any objection to have it up front near the road? Mr. Haspel: No, we originally proposed it up closer to the road. Mr. Mullin: So he wants to come up to the roadway - he would prefer it? Mr Haspel: That was his preference, that's why the space in the vines were left open. Mr. Mullin: Well~ I don't understand then why there's a problem here. It's you people up there. Why don't you give these people what they're after. Give them (inaudible). Give them a break. Let them live in peace. That's all they're after. Think about it. Mr. Orlowski: OK, any other comments? Rich Tynabar: Good evening, my name is Rich Tynabar. l live over on 1200 Indian Neck Lane. I want to thank the Town Board first of all for giving us this opportunity. I want to thank the gentlemen who proposed the plans and showed us everything. But I just want to make it very clear that I think this is totally out of the question. I don't even go along with the building site, as beautiful as it is. And the reason why is, and i'm sure that you people over the last couple of week-ends, maybe the last 3 or 4 years, have you ever driven down Rt. 25 past Pindar, past Krupski, past Farmer Mike's farm stand on a Saturday afternoon. You can't get through, there's too many cars. We escaped from the south side of Long Island years ago, and came to the north side because we thought it would be very quiet. It's a beautiful town. Southotd Town Planning Board 6 October 26, 1998 It's to the point now that people on the north side are going to have to leave here to go to the south side because of all the traffic. Industry is good, we understand that. But it gets to a point where we who live here, who are residents we have to stop and think, there's a commitment to the people who live here. You know, it starts out very small and quiet, but before you know it, what's planned to be one thing unfortunately maybe for reasons that we just can't figure now, people will sell that vineyard and it goes into somebody else's hands. And maybe where we had these wonderful plans of being very quiet - although I can't see a business being quiet, because if you go out in the farm lands you can hear voices travel - it's going to turn hands and then it's going to become even more of a problem. I think you have to consider the congestion; I think you have to consider the people who have lived here for years, who pay taxes, who want to have an environment that's not going to be overruled by business. I think there has to be a balance, there has to be an equilibrium and from what I'm seeing is we're going from one side of the continuum to the other. And unfortunately I think the people who live here, we're losing a lot of our rights, and I think that's wrong. And I think what's happening to beautiful Southold and you people as Town Board planners are responsible to see that we keep the equilibrium where it doesn't get tipped to the point where it,s all congested. My property doesn't border where this vineyard is going to be, but I know I'll still hear the noise, and that's wrong. And I hope you consider. And as much as this is well planned, I don't think we should have any more on that road. I think it's a hazard. I thank you for your time. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Richard Pt:iefel: Good evening. Richard Pfiefel, 825 Leslie Road, one property removed from the Petrocelli property. I live and farm just across the sod field, to the west of the Petrocelli property. We are delighted to have them as neighbors. We feel it's one of the cleanest operations that we've had. If the winery is built and operated as professionally as the vineyard has been established, I can't imagine that we'll have a problem. We welcome --I, by the way, am in the grape business; I'm a grower, and I live on my vineyard --welcome this type of thing, feel that if we're going to have agriculture in grapes we know we have to have wineries, we can't just be growers. The grapes have to go somewhere. So it's a choice of do you Southold Town Planning Board 7 October 26, 1998 want vineyards in our open spaces, or nothing? And I think that the vineyard industry has proven their ability to be good neighbors and to continue the practice that you people have been used to for years out here. It's a wonderful opportunity. We've got to have wineries if we're going to have vineyards. Thank you. Roland Grant: My name is Roland Grant, I live at 1775 Indian Neck. I love the agricultural business. I moved out here because of all the beautiful vineyards, but where I'm living now I hear Pindar, I hear the road traffic. Another winery there is going to produce a lot of noise. Ill can hear Pindar, which is twice as far as this facility, I'm definitely going to hear this: And by setting it back this 400 feet is going to affect the value of my property, and the surrounding properties right there. So please, think before you set this building back or approve the plans as is. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Donna Dzugas-Smith: I think it's just a note of interest, I started my process for my winery on the North Road, the same time as Raphael. And just so the neighbors know, it's the only time we hear from the neighbors, is when we have this public hearing. And maybe it's the town hall that needs the re- vamping. You should be given an opportunity to talk before this point. We put in many months, they put in many months, dealing with the Architectural Review Committee, dealing with the Planning Board who has also spent much time, and it's really the Architectural Review Committee that is pushing back on the distance. No one has really stated that. I've gone through the same problem with them. That's when you need to be involved. You have an appointed, volunteer committee that does not live anywhere near these projects going up telling us what to do Time to go to a town nail meeting and bring this to them, and tell them you want your town hall run differently. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Hearing none, any questions from the Board? Mr. Ward? Mr. Ward: I do have a question. The potential of the land bank parking, we wou d want to see that at least a buffer I~e put in there, if and when that would be constructed. At the present time, I understand you have no intent to build that because you don't see a need for it, it's land banked. But if in the future that was used we would obviously require a landscape buffer of maybe 25 foot between the property lines and that parking area October 26, '1998 Southold Town Planning Board 8 Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Mr. Latham? Mr. Latham: No. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Edwards? Mr. Edwards: None. Mr. Orlowski: I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. James Andrews: One more question. Can I know the reasoning why it is being set back? Mr. Ward: Actually, we could make available through the Planning Board, the recommendations the Architectural Review Committee and the Planning Board in concert with them, was that the size of the structure and the impact of it on the site, was to push it back to mitigate the size of the building. And also doing that, it's pretty equal... Mr. Andrews: Excuse me, mitigate it from who? Mr. Ward: Mitigate it visually... Mr. Andrews: From? The Main Road, and make it larger for the people who live in back. That's my point. Mr. Ward: It's pretty equal distance between the Main Road and the surrounding properties. Unknown: But Main Road is where businesses should be. Mr. Ward: Well, the access is off Main Road. Bill Mullin: But it should be on the Main Road, not off it 500 feet. That's a big distance. Mr. Andrews: I'm just trying to get an answer as to why you want to mitigate the size of the building from the Main Road. So what table did you use to decide the distance of that? I don't understand. Mr. Ward: We relied on the Architectural Review Committee to give us their recommendations which they did. Their recommendation was to put it back 500 feet: The compromise was around 350-400, The applicant came Sour;hold Town Planning Board 9 October 26, 1998 back and said actually the 400 worked for them in terms of the way the vines were laid out, so that was the final resolve on it. Unknown: But now they have to pull up the vines, right? Mr. Ward: There are some vines that have to come out, yes. Some will be planted in the front where originally it was left open. Mr. Andrews: Is this hearing for us to just voice an opinion on something that's already done, or is there a possibility of a change coming from our comments here tonight? Mr. Ward: That's up to the Board when they vote tonight. Mr. Andrews: I see. Well, I hope that you see we are very concerned here and it's a winery that affects individuals, at least 15 different households in the area as opposed to other wineries that don't affect that many individuals. Bill Mullin: You know I'm absolutely confused. I know I'm an old man and so forth but why, when the applicant would just as soon have it up further near the road, and the people living in the area would love it, it would protect them. Why do you always listen to the so-called prima donnas, the architects, and the engineers. How about considering the people, the ones who are disturbed. The architects and engineers won't be affected, they'll still get their fee. But think about the people. And the man who is building it he also wants to go up further near the road. And that's the way it should be. Suppose we bring an A&P out here. You going to put it back 500 feet? Give the people a break. It's past due. You guys have been up there for 40 years now, you know better. You can do a better job than what you're doing on this. This is affecting children and old people, and this is what they came out here for, hopefully to have a peaceful existence. But you're not helping. I don't understand why. Roland Grant: I just have one more question. The buffer that they're talking about that's being set aside for potential - the 28 foot buffer on both sides, I assume of the building? That particular buffer that's being set aside, what is the potential of how many cars could actually, or parking lot area could be built to provide parking, for how many cars would that be? Mr. Orlowski: Which area are you talking about? Mr. Grant: Well, I'm just saying, the architect said... Southold Town Planning Board 10 October 26, 1998 Ira Haspel: A 28 foot wide access way. it's not really a buffer, it's just the access to the vineyard. Mr. (;rant: Right, but you said that could be set aside for potential, not going to be developed, set aside for potential... ira Haspel: That's this lighter colored strip without the lines here and the similar one up here. Mr. (;rant: Right. If you develop that into parking lot, that buffer there, what would be the potential number of cars that could actual!y park there? Mr. Haspel: I don't know exactly, but... Mr. Grant: Can you give me a guesstimate? Mr. Haspel: Probably more than double the parking that we have... Mr. Grant: So with 55 cars now, they could probably have about 150 people there at one time, and by doubling that, you're saying to me that they could have maybe 300 people there at one time. And you're saying that you're going to nestle this right next to our homes where 300 cars are going to be there? I'm sorry, 150 cars with 300 people there. That doesn't seem appropriate to me. And to mitigate those circumstances you're saying you can't move the building closer to the roadway if you are going to vote for this particular piece? Something doesn't make sense here. There's no common sense being used. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Just to let you know, it's been in discussion, sometimes a tough discussion in wondering what to do. I think we all have to realize that this is agricultural land and not commercial. Any money invested in this building of this size is only going to be used for an agricultural use, which is a winery. The developer has stated that that's all he wants to do is make wine and he has no intention right now of catering or anything like that. (Change tape) So the discussion of the Board was to put it back 200 feet or 210 feet, or go to the 350 or 400 to lessen the impact of the building so you don't get that shopping center look. It's put right out smack in the middle of the vineyard and basically as far away from the houses as it is from the Main Road, and surrounded by vineyard instead of nothing in front of it to lessen that impact or to have something that you turn around the corner and it looks like a shopping center; Southold Town Planning Board 11 October 26, 1998 So the Board's ultimate decision with discussion with the Architectural Review Committee which did recommend 500 feet which we thought was too far and pushed it way back behind that parking area and further back and closer to the houses, we felt that the 400 was a good enough compromise and that's why the map is drawn the way it is right now. So, it's an agricultural use, it's an allowed use. We have to keep that in mind. It's not any kind of a commercial use, such as a shopping center or a retail or industrial or anything like that. Muriel Andrews: Do you consider Pindar a commercial facility or do you consider that agricultural? When they have people, hundreds and thousands of people coming in on the week-ends, purchasing something, drinking and partying, that's not agriculture to me. That's commercialized industry. Mr. Orlowski: Unfortunately, the Agricultural and Markets Law defines the vineyard and the winery as an agricultural use. It is an agricultural use. Ms. Andrews: That's true. A vineyard and a winery is, but when you have people coming in drinking and partying with bands, that's not agriculture. Mr. Orlowski: That's an allowed use in the code and they have that right to have that use. Ms. Andrews: Then the code should be changed. Mr. Orlowski: That would be another step. Ms. Andrews: Well, can we do that? Mr. OrlowsKi: That's another Board, too. Ms. Andrews: What Board is it? Mr. Orlowski: The Town Board. Roland Grant: If this is an allowed use, are you telling me that they're going to have wine-tasting, I assume. That they're going to be able to offer their products there? What you're saying is really commercial business and there's going to be a lot of traffic flow. it's tough enough to get out of Indian Neck Lane now. But on top of that, with traffic flow comes noise. And now you're pushing that noise back into our back yards. Why are you doing this? You're saying to mitigate the aspects from the roadways so you can't see it, but on the other hand you're shoveling the dirt somewhere else Soul;hold Town Planning Board 12 October 26, 1998 and you're putting it right on top of us. And with the taxes we pay, this is unbelievable. Thank God one of my neighbors called me tonight to tell me you were going to have this meeting, because I hadn't seen the notices and out of what I understand, the surrounding people, very few were notified to begin with. This is a shame that you're pushing this building back on top of us and I hope you think about that before you go approving this project. Joan Oelish: My name is Joanie Gelish. I'm the daughter of Jack Petrocelli and l just want to say that I know my father really wanted to have that building where it is. If you notice there's a sign that says Steve Mudd. That's where he wanted the winery and had the plans for it. But also I'd like to say that we've been living in Southold for 17 years. The grandchildren have always been here and we don't plan for it to be like Pindar. We want it more quiet. It's not going to be like Pindar. But again, we still want it up by the street. Ms. Andrews: Give them what they want. Give us what we want. Cut us a break. Carol Hunter: I'm Carol Hunter. I'm from Indian Neck Lane also, and I've just fought a battle where I work dealing with fumes. We have buses outside that run all the time and the fumes are killing us. Now we finally got them to turn off the buses, you,re going to put these cars back there. Buses and cars are going to come in because that's part of the job. They're going to want to visit the winery and they're going to run those buses and those fumes are going to asphyxiate us. And we're going to have sound, and we're going to have odors. I escaped from that to come here. You've got to protect this place. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Richard Olsen-Harbich: I think our a~ten[ion here is noble. I hear the comparisons that people are making to other Ioca businesses and think they're unfortunate, but that is not our intention to emulate any of the activity that is taking place there. I don't feel, and Mr. Petrocelli doesn't feel that that kind of activity correlates with the production of quality wine. We intend to be a good neighbor, as we have been, as Mr. Petrocelli has been in the almost 20 years he's been living in Southold. And we intend to have a Iow key operation for the mos[ part. We're not looking for a lot of these extra-curricular events that are taking place. We are focusing on wine production and growing grapes. And not a single grape is going to be produced in this facility from anywhere else but our Soul:hold Town Planning Board October 26, 'i998 own property. In fact, we are only going to be hand picking our grapes so that grape harvesters are not going to be on this property. This is a very special project, a very unique plan, and I think something that's going to be adding to the quality of the area and not taking away from it. Thank you. Muriel Andrews: With all due respect Mr. Olsen, we appreciate what you have to say. We've never met you from day one. We wouldn't know you if we fell on you. And if you want to be a good neighbor to us then come and talk to us because a lot of our fears are because we don't know what is going on. Come and see us, you know where we live. We don't know when you're there, but you know we're there all the time. So, come on over. Mr. Orlowski: OK, if there are no further comments, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Does the Board have any pleasure? Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, establishes itself as lead agency, and as lead agency makes a determination 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 in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr: Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution: Sour:hold Town Planning Board '14 October 26, '1998 WHEREAS, Joan and Jack Petrocelli are the owners of the property known and designated as proposed site plan for Raphael Winery, located on Rt. 25 in Peconic, SCTM# 1000-85-3-11; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on September 8, 1998; 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 26, 1998; 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 September 18, 1998 and authorize the Chairman to endorse the surveys subject to fulfillment of the following conditions. All conditions must be met within six (6) months of the date of this resolution: Certification by the Senior Building Inspector. Curb cut permit by the New York State Department of Transportation. 3. Review by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Mr. Latham: Second. 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. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Bill Mullin: I'm amazed, i'm absolutely amazed at you people. These people come down here and ask your consideration. You don't even talk about it among the four of you. You approve it the way it was. So, we wasted our time, that's what it comes down to. Mr. Grant: A total disappointment, Mr. Mullin: It's disgusting. I'm glad I got the hell off that Board. Southold Town Planning Board 15 October 26, 1998 Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: Mr. Orlowski: Wankel - Moran - This lot line change is to subtract 23,600 square feet from a 63,601 square foot parcel, and add it to a 75,165 square foot parcel. SCTM# 1000-'113-I0-14.1 & 15. Melissa Oreenburger: Good evening ladles and gentlemen. My name is Melissa Oreenburger. I'm an attorney appearing of counsel to Aurelius Sclafani and (inaudible), 3330 Veterans Memorial Hwy., Bohemia, NY, on behalf of Edward Wankel. It is my understanding that this carried over from the last meeting and Mr. Wankel is present and I'm wondering if you have any questions for him, or what the status is, what the investigation was. We're here to answer any questions that you might have. Mr. Orlowski: I think the question that was brought up was how you were able to get the lot line changes, but I think it's all been answered. We talked with the assessor. Bob, do you want to bring us up to date on that. Mr. Kassner: I talked to Scott Russell, the assessor, and he assured me and he showed me the documentation that the transfer of Penn Ave. is proper and so forth, so that issue is not alive anymore. Mr. Odowski: So our question was answered. Are there any other comments and questions on this change? Bruce Campbell: 620 Meday Ave., Mattituck. I only have one question. How was the Penn Ave. issue solved so easily, and why? Mr. Kassner: Are you addressing me? Mr. Campbell: Yes. Mr. Kassner: Well, it wasn't solved so easily and it wasn't solved recently. Scott Russell showed me documentation that he signed about a year or so ago transferring.., the road was abandoned and acquired by the adjacent property owners, properly and legally and he signed off on it for the Town and assured us that it was a proper transfer. Mr. Campbell: And his assurance is the proper way of a dissolution of a paper road? Southold Town Planning Board 16 October 26, 1998 Mr. Kassner: Yes. Mr. Campbell: So, your tax assessor normally signs off on paper roads being dissolved? Mr. Kassner: He's one of the persons to sign off. And obviously there was a legal deed transferred to the property owners. Mr. Campbell: Are there any other criteria in the Town Code that are required for a paper road to be abandoned, such as maybe the Highway Department survey, seeing if it's really necessary or not? Let's say notification of the other properties abutting that paper road? A signature of the Highway Supervisor saying that it's not necessary, etc.? None of those things are required? Mr. Kassner: I spoke with the Highway SuPerintendent Ray Jacobs... Mr. Campbell: Well, I'm talking about the law, I don't mean to interrupt, sorry. Mr. Kassner: I would defer to the Board then, I guess. Mr. Campbell: ...like the law, the Town Codes. Mr. Orlowski: What did Mr. Jacobs tell you? Mr. Kassner: Ray Jacobs said as far as his conversation with Scott Russell it was transferred by quit claim deed in a legal and a proper manner. Mr. Campbell: OK, they said that. That's great. Did anyone confirm with your Town Attorney, Greg, by any chance, to see if it was done legally? Did anyone do that? Mr. Kassner: Scott Russell assured me that he had investigated the issue at the time a year and a half ago. Now, who he spoke to at the Town Attorney at that time, we do not know. Mr. Campbell: OK, well generally I don't just take people's word for things. Mr Kassner: Well, ne had a signed document. Mr. Campbell: Well, I know that. We can sign documents, sure. But did it follow the letter of the law for the dissolution of a paper road in the Town of $outhold Town Planning Board 'i7 October 26, '1998 Southold, that's all I'm asking. Mr. Kassner: Yes, he assured me it did. Mr. Campbell: OK, he assured you. OK, fine, thank you. Laurie Wells: My name is Laurie Wells and my property will abut their property. I am also contiguous with the paper avenue. As a homeowner, I was never notified of it being abandoned nor...there was no deed given to me by any Town giving me this property that was abandoned. Mr. Kassner: Your portion of the road I think hasn't been abandoned. It's only the portion that intruded between Moran and WankeI. Ms. Wells: OK, then why? Because my road, Meday Ave. is an unimproved road, so basically it's residents only. I don't understand why part of it which would be the access way to get in, if anything was ever developed through that past behind my other neighbor north of there, why only half a road? Mr. Kassner: I think Mr. Wankel's attorney or Mr, WankeI himself can explain the early decisions regarding this road. Ed Wankel: We made application only to abandon the portion of the road that abutted our property because I believe we had no rights to abandon that other portion. Our neighbors to the back, I'm sure can make the same kind of application and this Board would entertain that application. I don't see any need for a cross street. I don't think we would want a cross street going through there anyway. That would only incur more traffic on that back road. But, the other neighbors can make the same application I assume. Bruce Campbell: Yeah, we can do that but we would probably do it through the proper procedures that are followed by everybody else that lives in this town. And if you're telling me that the way this was done was the proper and correct way for the disolvement of a paper road, then something is really wrong here because you're just taking a piece of a paper road and just wiping it out. What does that make the rest of the road. Useless? Is that a road anymore? It just ends there. That really sound incorrect both from common sense and probably through your own statutes that you laave here in the town that you're supposed to follow. So, if you're disregarding all this and going ahead with this anyway and approving it, then you're probably making a big mistake. If everyone could Southold Town Planning Board October 26, '1998 just do that and abandon a piece anywhere they want, won't that be very chaotic. I think you should really think about it before you decide pro or con for this issue. Because somewhere down the line it's going to have to be answered, the questions that i'm asking here will have to be answered to my satisfaction if not everyone else's here, and this seems like the proper forum to decide this issue right here and now, so think about that before you make a decision. Howard Wells: Howard Wells, Mattituck. I'm just curious, there's a 7.7 acre piece to the north end of Penn Ave. Is there any other access to that piece? You can't use Meday, there's a 40 foot r-o-w. Penn Ave. is a 50 foot. I believe that's required. Mr. Orlowski: That's accessed off of Cox's Lane. Mr. Wells: Yeah, but it's also built all along Cox's Lane. Mr. Orlowski: Well, it shows access on the tax map right now. This is also a paper street on the other side I assume, right? Right now, Penn Ave. Mr. Wells: Yes. it's from Westphalia to that 7.7 acre. Mr. Orlowski: Well, unfortunately, years ago these paper roads were cut out and put on subdivision maps and then the developer usually walked away and never paid the taxes. And back then it was I guess first come, first served. But now the Town has pretty much an agreement with the County, they get first option on anything that comes up on a tax sale. Because it's almost impossible for the Town to even know that that was done that way. But, talking with Scott Russell and I questioned it also like all of you did. At that time with his discussion with the Town Attorney at that time everything was done legally and by the book and it's done and over. There's no way that I can see going after it or.., Mr. Wells: You say there's access on Cox Neck Rd. I don't see any, there's houses all along there. Mr. Orlowski: (Change tape): Well, all I can say isif there are houses built there now then they've cut off their own access, and if they don't have access then there's nothing going to happen over there. Mr. Wells: In other wOrds, in back of those houses built on Cox Neck- they're landlocked? Southold Town Planning Board 19 October 26, 1998 Mr. Orlowski: If there are houses there now, yes. It's all one piece. It shows on the tax map as one piece. Seven acres. Mr. Ward: How many houses are on it? Mr. Wells: Three or four along Cox Neck Rd. Mr. Ward: Well, there are houses along Cox Neck but are they all on that seven acre piece? Mr. Wells: I don't know (inaudible) Mr. Ward: There are a whole bunch of lots along there on Cox Neck and there may be a house on the seven acres but all along Cox there's other houses and lots. That's the way the tax map shows it. Mr. Orlowski: All we have to tell you at this time.~.l mean we have to look at it as done legal and by the book and there's not much this Board can do. Mr. Campbell: Yeah, but after what I said last time, did you bother consulting the Town Attorney? Mr. Orlowski: Yes and the Town Attorney... Mr. Campbell: And he said? Mr. Orlowski: At the time this was done the Attorney who was responsible for this...I mean it doesn't make this illegal. This was done back a year and a half, two years ago whenever the other attorney was there. And with the assessor and the Town Attorney at that time, it's what we have to go by. Ms. Wells: I did speak to Ray Jacobs and he had no knowledge of this originally. How come now ... Mr. Orlowski: It's a paper road. It's not a Town street and it was never ever taken over the by Town. When the Subdivision is approved, it,s approved with that paper road in it and it's looked at by the Planning Board if more development occurs if we use that paper road to make that developer construct that road to Town specs to be taken over by the Town. In this case, to be perfectly honest, there's no way I can see that that road would ever have to be built for any reason. Ms. Wells: Correct. Southold Town Planning Board 20 October 26, t998 Mr. Orlowsld: So, it wouldn't have done any good to leave it a paper road. And probably if the Town was offered that they wouldn't have taken it anyway. So, it's just something that was done, and it's happened. If it was something that we would have looked at for a type of access to more subdivision of land, then maybe there was something we could do to improve the life and safety issue. But in this case it doesn't do that. Mr. Campbell: One last question. Aren't paper roads dissolved as a full entity, not piecemeal? Mr. Orlowski: Paper roads are part of the original subdivision, but they also have their own tax bills. Mr. Campbell: Have you run across a lot of paper roads that have been piecemeal dissolved or are they mostly full entitles? Mr. Orlowski: After tatking with the assessor I understand that there have been quite a few of these old paper roads: You've got to remember, back then quarter acre was the lot size and left a lot of paper roads for a lot of small lots. In this case actually the applicant is making the lots bigger than presently exist there, so we also have to look at that. We're not trying to get the quarter acre lot out of it anymore. Mr. Campbell: But has it happened a lot that paper roads have been just one piece of them has been dissolved, making the rest of it not a road. Has that happened before? Ms Spiro: Yes, especially where there are two owners that are similar on either side of the right-of-way. Mr. Campbell: And that's happened before, without notifying any of the other abutting properties? Ms. Spiro: I believe it's happened in the same way that this has happened. They go tothe County and file whatever and the assessor signs off. I've seen it before. Mr. Campbelh You have? I'll take your word for it, Mr. Latham: Could we get a written thing from the assessor saying... Mr. Ward: He already signed off on it. Southold Town Planning Board 21 October 26, 1998 Mr. Latham: In writing? Mr. Ward: Yes Mr. Latham: Where is it? Mr. Orlowski: We have it. It was a good question but I can't give you a good answer back, except that it was done proper. Mr. Campbell: Alright, thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments or questions while the hearing is still open? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Does the Board have a pleasure? Mr, Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to entertain the following motion. WHEREAS, Judith and Edward Wankel are the owners of the property known and designated as SCTM# 1000-113-10-15.1; and Charles Moran is the owner of the property known and designated as SCTM# 1000-I 13-10-14.2, located on Westphalia Rd. in Mattituck; and WHEREAS, this application for a ot line change is to subtract 23,600 square feet from a 63,601 square foot parcel, and add it to a 75,165 square foot parcel; 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 September 14, t998; 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 22 O~ober26,1998 WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York, on October 26, 1998; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the surveys dated August I0, 1998, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys subject to fulfillment of the following condition. All conditions must be met within six (6) months of the date of this resolution: New deeds reflecting the lot line changes must be filed for all parcels involved. Copies of the recorded deeds must be submitted to this office. Mr. Latham: Second the motion. Mr. Odowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Mr. Ward: Abstain. Mr. Orlowski: One abstention, Mr. Ward. Motion carried. Mr. Orlowski: Jimbo Realty Corp, - This proposed site plan is for a 34,200 square foot self serviCe dry storage building; a 1,750 square foot residence, and a 1,575 square foot office building on a 2.9 acre site on Rt. 48 (a.k.a. North Rd., Middle Rd.) in Southold. SCTM# 1000-59-4-8 & 9. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution. Be it resolved that the SOUthold Town Planning Board hold the hearing open until June 14, 1999 based on a letter from the applicant dated October 14, 1998. The hearing will resume upon written notification from the applicant and be subject to all Town Code requirements at the time of resumption of the hearing. Sour:hold Town Planning Board October 26, 1998 Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. OrlowskJ: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Technically this hearing held open, but we're not going to address it again until the applicant decides to come in and give us all the information. Donna Dzugas-Smith: Is this because of the moratorium? I thought you were saying as of November whatever? Mr. Ward: You have to come to the mike. Ms. Dzugas-Smith: I'm sorry, I'm just wondering, the last hearing that you had you had suggested that if he didn't respond by a certain date that the application was going to be gone, dead, whatever, and start anew. Is this new decision because of the moratorium in effect? Mr. Orlowski: Well, because of the moratorium it is basically in effect and he referred to that in his letter and agrees to keep the whole thing in abeyance until then. Ms. Dzugas-Smith: Until what the Town's going to do with the moratorium? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Ms. Dzugas-Smith: OK, thanks. Bernard Heinisch: I have a question. On this proposed application, will you people advertise this again when the hearing is held open, by a legal notice? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Heinisch: Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Orlowski: S&L Irri,qation - This site ptan waiver is for a 1,000 sq. ft. office building and a 2,500 sq. ft. storage and warehouse, for an irrigation Soul:hold Town Planning Board 24 October 26, 1998 business, in an existing building. SCTM# 1000-113,10-14.1 & 15. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, i'd like to offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board hold the hearing open, pending receipt of a revised site plan. Mr. Edwards: Second. 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. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Orlowski: Dzu.qa$ Winery - This proposed site plan is for a 1,116 square foot winery on a 28 acre parcel on Rt. 48 (a.k.a. Middle Rd., North Rd.) in Southold. SCTM# 1000-59-10-6.3. Mr. Latham: I'll offer this, Mr. Chairman. BE IT RESOLVED to close the public hearing. The Planning Board has received the recommendation from the Suffolk County Department of Public Works regarding curb cut location. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Oriowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Sketch Extensions: Southold Town Planning Board 25 October 26, 1998 Mr. Orlowski: Paradise Isles - This minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 30.619 acres located on the north side of Island VieW La.; 234.18 feet west of Bayshore Rd., and on the south side of August La., in Southold. SCTM# I000-53-6-46.2 and 57-2-1.1. Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer this. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a six month extension of sketch approval from September 15, 1998 to March 15, 1999. Conditional sketch approval was granted on September 17, 1997. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. OrlOwski: Carmine Rufrano - This proposal is for a lot line change to subtract .7809 of an acre from a 5.7131 acre parcel (SCTM# 1000-127-2-5.3) and add it to a 1.3452 acre parcel (SCTM# I000-127-2-6.1) and a 2 lot minor subdivision on 4.9254 acres, in Laurel. SCTM# 1000-127-2-5.3 & 6.1). Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution. BE iT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a retroactive six month extension of sketch approval from August 23, 1998 to February 23, 1999. Conditional sketch approval was granted on February 23, 1998i Mr. Latham: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowsld, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. EdwardS. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. SITE PLANS Southold Town Planning Board 26 October 26; 1998 Bond Determination: Mr. Orlowski: Peconic LandinR - This application is to amend an approved site plan for construction of I ~ 8 single family detached cottages; ~ 32 apartment units; 24 unit assisted living center; and 32 bed skilled care center with supporting amenities, SCTM# '1000-35-1-25, Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED to adopt the bond estimate dated August 28, '1998 and to recommend same to the Town Board. The bond estimate is in the amount of ~3,964,2'16.00, with an inspection fee in the amount of S237,852,96, Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the October 5, ~g98 minutes. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr, Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. OTHER SouthoJd ToWn Planning Board 27 October 26, '1998 Mr. Orlowsld: Robert Rowehl - Planning Board to re-endorse final surveys of approved subdivision, SCTM# I000-100-2-6, Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. 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. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Ortowski: Local Law in Relation to Revising the Definition of Freshwater Wetlands, there was a mistake there, but I think we should support the change. Mr. Edwards: I move that we send our comments to the Town Board. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr, Latham, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. I have nothing left on my agenda and we will go into a work session right now, so if anybody wants to say anything before I close the meeting, for the record, or we will start our work session. Motion to adjourn? Mr. Edwards: So moved, Mr; Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr, Latham, Mr, Edwards. Mr. Orlowskh Opposed? Motion carried, ~ ~ Southold Town Planning Board 28 October 26, 1998 There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Martha A. Jones