Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-11/16/1998PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. Chairman WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE RITCHIE LATI~AM, JR. RICHARD G. WARD Town I-Iall, 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 November 16, 1998 Present were: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Richard G. Ward G. Ritchie Latham Kenneth Edwards William Cremers Melissa Spiro, Planner Martha Jones, Secretary Absent: Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Mr. Orlowski: Good evening. I'd like to call this meeting to order. The first order of business, Board to set Monday, December 14, 1998 at 6:00 p.m. at Southold Town Hall, Main Rd., Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting. Mr. Cremers: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Oriowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: Mr. Orlowski: S&L Irri.qation - This site plan waiver is for a 1,000 sq. ft. office building and a 2;500 sq. ft. storage and warehouse, for an irrigation business, in an existing building. SCTM# I000-113-10-14.1 &15. Since it's held open I'll ask if there are any comments on this application? Sour:hold Town Planning Board 2 November 16, t998 Robert Leonard: Good evening. My name is Robert Leonard and I'm representing S&L Irrigation here this evening. As I stated to the Board previously and as we discussed in the work session, we're all in favor of planting the 20 foot buffer, in fact it has already been planted. It was planted a couple of weeks ago. It's in place. The local residents as well as the Board also requested that we use stockade fence instead of chain link fence. We're in favor of that also, we agreed to that. We have no problems with that. Other than that, because we've pretty much done even/thing even/body's asked us to do I really don't have too much more to say here this evening. It did come to my attention earlier this week that some of the neighbors stopped by with some photographs of our building and what we've laeen doing up there, and I add with this Board's approval, as wel as the Code Enforcer's approval - I don't know what the pictures were supposed to represent but I brought some of my own pictures of the building prior to our purchasing it. Some of the neighbors have led everybody to believe that there was always what I would call a natural buffer there. This Board as well as the town code does not require us to have a natural buffer. It is a landscape buffer which according to the town code, must be a maintained buffer. This building, as my photos will show, was far from maintained before myself and my partners purchased it. The work that we've done there is basically bringing the building up to town code and no more than that. I'll g'~ve you these (submitted pictures). As those photos will show you - I've got one more here for you - the single photo I handed you is the building in the summertime prior to me buying it. The other photos are pictures of the building in the wintertime prior to me Guying it. You can obviously see the neighboring houses in those pictures. The evergreen buffer -20 foot evergreen buffer - in which the town's required me to plant, and that planted, will by all means produce a better screen once they've grown ~n than what they've ever had there. I understand that the neighbors to the east purchased that house 19 years ago. I don't think they've ever had anything better to look at in the past 19 years than what we're trying to produce there. The neighbors to the north, it's a newer house, it's been there for two or three years. There was, again what I would call a dilapidated buffer there, which again, we're not trying to do anything more than upgrade that buffer and bring it up to town codes. The placement of the fence has also come into question. According to the town code a fence can be in lieu of a buffer - an approved fence I might Southold Town Planning Board November '16, 1998 add. We are proposing to put up the fence and the buffer. We can't ask for too much more. I don't think anybody can ask for too much more. I will only put the fence on the property line as is allowed in LB as well as residential zoning. Both zones allow for fences on your property line. Should any neighbor choose to put in a swimming pool, they will be required to fence it in. If they do fence it in and they put their fence on the property line, that is leaving a little slough of land about 20 feet wide between what the neighbors want me, or wherever they want me to put the fence, and where they will be putting their fence. Some of the neighbors may say they will never do that. It's come to my attention recently that one of the neighbors is recently gone to contract on their house. They may be able to speak for themselves; I wonder if they can speak for the new owners? I wonder if the new owners are here this evening? Potential owners I should say. I happen to know and be acquainted with the people that have gone to contract to purchase the house. Although they are not here this evening, as far as I know they are not in any way, shape or form, unhappy with what we've been doing with the building. Unless anybody here has got any questions for me this evening, I've pretty much said what I've wanted to say. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Ellen Latson: My name is Ellen Latson I'm an adjacent property owner to the east. I think the major issues that were in question here was that on the property to the west, on the S&L properW, was that it was a change in use. For approximately the time that 've lived there, which is 19 years, there was no activity on the property. We received a notice from Mr. Leonard for a waiver on the site plan. At that time we came to the first public hearing, Everyone stated their comments. The zoning code calls for a 20 foot setback on the buffer from the adjacent residential properties. Mr. Leonard stated from the beginning that he had no intent of putting a vegetative buffer in front of a fence. In fact, he had said, if am required to put n a vegetative buffer, then I am going to be the one to enjoy it. So my question was, if there is a vegetative buffer on the line facing the North Rd. and a vegetative buffer on the line facing Kenny's Rd. where all the commercial traffic and residential traffic passes, why should the adjacent property owners not have the same benefit with the 20 foot setback? Mr. Leonard has done an excellent job. There ~s no question in planting the trees. They are six foot trees. Apparently the Planning Board has been very impressed by the six foot trees from the work sessions that we've come to, but the code calls for six foot trees. Whether anybody else ever ~lants Southold Town Planning Board 4 November 16, 1998 them, I don't know, but that's what your code calls for, a six foot buffer. So everybody should be doing it. if not, you'd better get after them and make sure that they do it. The other question was the stockade fence, and I'm happy to see that Mr. Leonard is going to put the stockade fence in. But the point is, if there is a vegetative buffer and if the code calls for a vegetative buffer in between a residential and a commercial property, that's what the issue here is. it's a residential vs. a commercial property. The residential property owners should benefit from the buffer, if somebody puts a pool in 15 years from now or next week, that has nothing to do with it. It's that if its a residential property next to a commercial zone the code calls for a vegetative buffer and/or a fence. And I understand it is in the discretion of the Planning Board to do that. You can make the determination of where you want to put it, and you will. I have paid taxes on that property for 19 or 20 years and have lived on that property for 19 or 20 years. Mr. Leonard made the rude comment that it never looked so good. Wel that's in his judgement. But i'd like to ~ave Mr. Leonard Know that for many of those years I was a single mother raising three children and i'm sorry that I don't have it vegetated to a landscapers capability, but it is a n~ce looking yard with lilac bushes and rose of sharon and privet hedges and many bulbs in the spnng, so that is a very rude comment to make. Mr. Leonard: was referring To my building, not to the neighboring buildings. I apologize if you misunderstood what I was saying. Ms. Latson: Excuse me, I misinterpreted that wrong. And really that's all have to say. I would almost rather see it go for the 10 foot setback and the stockade fence in behind as the original plan went, than to have a stockade fence right on the property line. He does have 15 feet of plantings so he has left himself room one way or the other to put the fence on the inside or the outside because it's only 15 feet from the property line to the last of the plantings. And one other thing that l have to just say because I don't really quite understand this. The public hearing was open all of this time and I've been to 2 work sessions, Mr. Leonard has been to 1. We've never, as well as other neighbors, and we've never ended up at the same work session where everyone could sit down and talk together. But I was told by Bob Kassner and members of the Planning Board that he could not even turn a spade of dirt until he had the Planning Board's approval or a waiver on the site plan Southold Town Planning Board 5 November 16, 1998 and the hearing was left open. And when Town Hall closed on the 12th of October, Mr. Leonard was out there with the bulldozer. He has put all of his plantings in. None of the permits have been issued. Apparently he was given the OK at a work session, so i'd really just like an explanation on how all this can occur when a public hearing is still open and really nobody knows what is going on. I don't think it was fair to the adjacent neighbors for him to be told -- 1 was told that he was told, I wasn't there -- at a work session that he could go ahead and plant. When I was at a prior work session, I sat very quietly while the Planning Board said he has to meet that 20 foot setback. So it's really been an unnerving experience all the way around, never knowing what's going on. I was just wondering if anybody from the Planning Board has a comment on that? Mr. Orlowski: The 20 foot buffer, or planting, when Mr: Leonard talked to this Board at the work session, he said he was going to go out and plant a six foot evergreen, and that's by code, so the Board had no problem in planting trees on your property especially since, as you said at the start of your statement, that it looks very nice now. So he was told he could do that. Ms. Latson: But why would he be told he could do that when the public hearing is still open and he's still under a site plan review? That's what I don't.. Mr. Orlowski: Because the code asks for a 20 foot buffer and he said he had the trees there and he asked if he could plant them, and we see no problem with planting those trees. And you seem to say it looks very nice now. Ms. Latson: Yeah, it does look nice, but I'm just saying what if it didn't though. Mr. Orlowski: Well, if they were 2 foot trees and they were '10 foot on center, I don't think we would have said that, but we did say that... Ms Latson: Yeah, but I don't think a public hearing should be open. Close it and tell everybody what's going on. Mr. Orlowski: We didn't feel it was fair to hold him up with six foot trees sitting there, so we did say that. Ms. Latson: OK, thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Anyone else have a comment? Southold Town Planning Board 6 November 16, 1998 Tom Hamlin: I'm the neighbor to the north of S&L Irrigation. I must say that Mr. Leonard and S&L Irrigation did do a real good job planting the trees. There's just one question about the lighting. The lighting is on all night long: To me, it's not a high crime area. Do we need the lighting on all night long? That's just something that my neighbor who couldn't be here tonight told me to bring up at the meeting. Also about the fencing, does it have to be on the property tine? Or will it be setback like Ellen said with the 10 feet or the 20 feet back on the property? Mr. Orlowski: Are those your two questions right now? Mr. Hamlin: Yes. Mr. Orlowski: The question on the lighting? Mr. Leonard: The lighting issue, I was asked originally itl was going to be adding any lights or doing anything. The lights on the building are original lights. I did change the fixtures, but there were always fixtures there. Whether the previous people used them or not, I have no idea. At my own personal home, a very quiet street, I always usually do leave a door light on. I'd be more than willing, if it offends the neighbors, to put them on a timer and shut them off. It's not a high crime area, howeVer, I am a new business there. I can't say the neighbors have been overly friendly to me. I'm not saying anybody is going to do anything. I'm not saying even with the lights on or off that anything is going to happen. The lights are definitely directed down and not shining off the property and I'd be more than happy once again ... I wave to you every morning, you wave back to me. If you say, Rob, these lights are bothering me, can you please turn them off at 10 o'clock, I would shut them off. Mr. Hamlin: They're not bothering me personally... Mr. Orlowski: Please address the Board so it doesn't become a debate. Mr. Leonard: I don't believe that should be an issue for the Board to really consider this evening. Mr. Hamlin: There's a few different types of lighting that can be installed. One is a motion light that only pop on when you cross the beam and they stay on for a certain amount of time. Also, there are the lights that only come on at night but they stay on all night long. Either one way or the Southold Town Planning Board 7 November 'i 6, 1998 other. Mr. Orlowski: I think Mr. Leonard talked about a timer. Mr. Leonard: Right now it's on a switch. I turn it on when I leave and I shut if off when I come in. Mr. Hamlin: Or a motion light. If somebody breaks the zone the lights pop on and then they go out after a while. It's trivial but... Mr. Orlowski: I guess the only other question is the fence, whether it's stockade or chain link or on the line or in the middle. Do you have any comment on that? Mr. Leonard: In regards to the fence, after discussing it with my attorneys, my insurance agents and other people, the only place I'm willing to put a fence is on the property line. Should this Board decide the fence is not acceptable on the property line, and it needs to be placed in on the property, I will withdraw my application for a fence permit and no fence will be erected. This is not a mandatory item. The buffer zone is, the fence is not. I truly would like to have a fence, but after operating out of the building for three months now, I question myself why I even need the fence. My equipment fits fine right inside the building. I moved from a 1700 square foot office to a 3500 square foot building and I don't necessarily need the space outside. The stockade fence at this point in time is for the neighbors benefits and not for mine. Mr. Ward: I'd just like to aska question, being that it is I think we all agree that the buffer is for the neighbors, would the neighbors 'ather see, if you're going to put a fence up on the property line, a chain link fence like a black vinyl or something, 'ather than stockade so you would see the landscaping rather than see a stockade fence. Mr. Leonard: That was my original offer. Mr. Ward: I understand that. Mr. Hamlin: He went out of his way to plant all those nice trees, all the trees will be inside the fence. Mr. Leonard: I would like to say, if I may interrupt you, I went to school for two years for ornamental horticulture. I've been in the irrigation business for 16 years, irrigating plant material and around plant material I've worked with Southold Town Planning Board 8 November 16, 1998 many landscapers. Evergreens especially as well as any other kind of plant material enjoy a southern and a western exposure here in the northeast. A northern exposure or on the north side of a building, plants are stressed, especially in the wintertime. An eastern exposure, the only time the plants get sunlight is in the early morning hours when the sun is weak. Placing the fence on, for intents and purposes, the inside of the buffer or my side of the buffer is going to shade this plant material from its southern on the northern property line and its western sun exposures on the eastern property line. These plants will not grow as well with a fence blocking the sunlight from them. Mr. Orlowskh So right not, you don't care if you have a fence or not, and you've planted your 20 foot buffer? Mr. Leonard: Our original plans, my partners and mine, were to have a fenced in yard. I would still like to have a fenced in yard, but I will not be forced to fence 20 foot in or 10 foot in off my property. I believe the Town code book allows for a fence to go on the property line and I have conceded to a 20 foot buffer when we've gone from 5 to 10 to 20. I've conceded from chain link to stockade. I will not concede on this issue. If a fence is to go up, it will go up on the property tine only. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Is chain link OK? Mr. Leonard: Chain link is OK with me. Green or black vinyl? Mr. Orlowski: Black vinyl. Mr. Leonard: Black? I prefer green. Mr. Orlowsld: You've got it. Mr. Hamlin: Both neighbors agreed on the stockade. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Donna Dzugas-Smith: Tuckers Lane. I have a large property opposite S&L. This as you know goes a long way back, and I'm in the process of the Planning process, so I know what everyone goes through here, And business is a tough thing out here. There's something I think the neighbors are saying, there's a big difference between light business and residential. We have a problem in this town of what light business is. That was a building -- yes it may not have looked great from the outside, but it was hardly used, Southold Town Planning Board 9 November 16, 1998 and it was being used, and we've gotto consider that. Now that it's going to be used more, we do need that buffer. That buffer is definitely needed. love the way it looks from the front. You have those great greens. We get the wonderful view (inaudible) residents, and we're going to have a winery opposite so I appreciate that view. But I think that's the kind of view they need too, they need those tall nice greens going down. Greens look a lot better than any fence. And I think the other thing which I've mentioned at many meetings, both Town Board meetings and here is that the thing about Southold is that you need to be neighborly. And there's two things that can be accomplished here. Number I that you have to follow the code and do what's best according to the code, but also think of it as being in your back yard. That's the big secret about all these hearings. If you can think of it as if you're living next door and what would you think looks the best too. Then you can kind of listen to everybody and say ah, that's what they're trying to say. Mr. Leonard: Just one final thing, it was mentioned that the plantings are 15 feet in allowing space from either side of our fence. Just to let the neighbors know how the plantings arrived where they're at, it's actually 16 feet 8 inches from the property line to the inside row of trees. The trees are spaced at 6 foot 8 inch intervals off the property line which is 1/3 of a 20 foot area. That was recommended by Ed Forrester in the Building Dep~artment. The first row is 6 foot, 8 inches; the second row is 6 foot, 8 inches and then there's a 6 foot, 8 inches for growth into the property. Mr. Oriowski: Any other comments? I'll entertain a motion to close the hearing. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Cremers: 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. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution. WHEREAS, Robert C: Leonard is the owner of the property known and Southold Town Planning Board 10 November 16, 1998 designated as SCTM# 1000-59-3-19 located on Rt. 48 and Kenny's Rd. in Southold; and WHEREAS, the moratorium does not apply to this application because it involves: an improved parcel and no Zoning Board of Appeals approvals are required and because the proposed use is not "a change of use" from the previous use. The previous use was a use permitted in the Limited Business (LB) zone pursuant to Section 100-8i A.2 (f) and the proposed use is a permitted use under Section 100-81 A.2 (f). WHEREAS, an examination has been made of all uses and the existing parking was determined to be adequate for all uses; and WHEREAS, a twenty foot wide buffer consisting of a six foot stockade fence, off-set from the property line, and six foot evergreens, ten feet on center will be placed on the north and east side of the property to screen storage vehicles and equipment from neighboring residential property; and WHEREAS, a handicapped parking space will be provided; and WHEREAS, any violation of the conditions of this resolution may be grounds for rescinding this waiver; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a waiver of site plan requirements. 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. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS. LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Setting of Final Hearings: Mr~ Orlowski: Richard Reinhardt - This minor subdivision is for 3 lots on Southold ToWn Planning Board I 1 November 16, 1998 20.5995 acres. Proposed lot #I is for 16.5995 acres of which 14.5995 acres are pending the sale of the development rights. The proposed subdivision is located on the northeast side of Alvah's Lane, 2875 feet north of Main Rd. in Cutchogue. SCTM# I000-102-4-5. Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll 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. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Cremers: In addition, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED to adopt the October 27, 1998 report prepared by James Richter. 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. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Cremers: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, December 14 at 6:00 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated April 29, 1998. The final hearing will be held open if final maps containing a valid stamp of Health Department approval are not received by the date of the final hearing. (Change tape). Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Southold Town Planning Board 12 November '16, 'i 998 Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. Sketch Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Estate of William Goubeaud - This minor subdivision is for 2 lots on '1.46'1 acres located on Pine Neck Rd. in Southold. SCTM# '1000- 70-I0-37'. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to entertain the following motion. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch approval on the map dated July 23, '1997, with the following condition: Parcel 2 (the 40,000 square foot parcel) shall be subject to a covenant to be filed with the Suffolk County Clerk that will prohibit future subdivision. Mr. Cremers: 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. Mr. Odowski: Opposed? Motion carried. APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the October 26, '1998 minutes. Mr. Latham: Move it, Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Odowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Southold Town Planning Board Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? 13 Motion carried. November 16, 1998 OTHER Mr. OrlowskJ: HarrY and Janet Hohn - Planning Board to set a public hearing in regard to allowing the construction of a 6' by 6' platform and stairs underneath the rear door of the existing house to occur outside of the building envelope designated for Lot Number 2 in the Harry and Janet Hohn subdivision. SCTM# 1000-118-6-1, 3.1. Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following resolution. WHEREAS, the Planning Board required a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions as a condition of subdivision approval for the Minor Subdivision of Harry and Janet Hohn; and WHEREAS, a Declaration was filed in the County Clerk's Office in Liber 11343 page 237; and WHEREAS, Condition Number 3 of the Declaration states that "Houses and their accessory uses, structures, and facilities, including, but not limited to the access driveways for the subdivision lots, shall be sited and constructed only within the building envelopes and driveway areas shown on the subdivision map."; and WHEREAS, the owners of Lot Number 2 in the Hohn subdivision have asked the Planning Board to allow the construction of a 6' by 6' platform and stairs underneath the rear door of the existing mouse as shown on the September 30, 1998, site plan for Lot Number 2; and WHEREAS, the proposed construction is outside of the building envelope for Lot Number 2; and WHEREAS, the Declaration requires that any modification to the Declaration be approved by a majority plus one of the Planning Board after a public hearing; BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, December 14, 1998 at 6:05 p.m., for a public hearing in regard to allowing the construction of a 6' by 6' platform and stairs underneath the rear door of the existing house to occur outside of the building envelope Southold Town Planning Board 14 November 16, ~ 998 designated for Lot Number 2. Mr. Edwards: Second the motion. Mr. Odowskk Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried. All FOR DISCUSSION Mr. Orlowsld: Raphael Vineyard - This proposed site plan is for a 13,897 square foot winery on a 50.4829 acre parcel, on Rt. 25 in Peconic. SCTM# 1000-85-3-1 This one has had a lot of discussion also, and at our work session I think we've hashed it out. The Board in its discussion feels that the 225 foot setback is not all that bad. I think that everybody that was there and maybe the 350 that signed the petition should probably all be in agreement. But what the Board will have to do on this is hold a public hearing just to make sure that we do this right Yhe Board will hold a special hearing on November 30 at our work session This will give us time to advertise it so when we do it we'll do it once and for all. So that is our intention. If the Board has any comment or the applicant would like to say anything, we will isten, or we will continue and do a resolution to set a hearing on November 30. Mr. Ward: I'd like to .offer the following resolution that the Board set the public hearing for November 30 at 5 p.m. at Town Hall and that the Board would like to see several things presented prior to that time. One would be the plan, which I believe is in our possession at this time, showing the 225 foot setback. Beings that we're closer to the road, we'd like to see some evergreens in front of the parking lot, not necessarily something that's 10 foot high, ~)ut something that would be 5 foot high that would grow into that to give us some buffer to the parking. One thing that has not shown on the plan was to indicate the location type and height and wattage of site lighting, if that could be presented to us before that public hearing. And also the fina colors and type of exterior finishes of the building If we could have all that so we could wrap everything up on the 30th. Mr. Cremers: Second that motion. Soul:hold Town Planning Board 15 November 16, 1998 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any comments on the motion? Richard Olsen-Harbich: Winemaker for Raphael. Mr. Chairman, it was on the site plan that we submitted recently, the 225, that we would plant vines in front of the building, in front of the parking lot, which would be a six foot high trellis. Would that not be adequate enough for parking lot buffers instead of 5 foot high evergreens? Mr. Orlowski: I think when we talked, it was a mOund to be placed on the front or a berm. Not a berm berm, but to mound that up or to put the evergreens on, and it didn't show on this plan that you have submitted so the Board is recommending that at the edge of your parking. So, I don't know how that will work. Mr. Harbich: I think we prefer the vines since we... Mr. Orlowski: Oh, you are going to do the vines? Mr. Harbich: Well, we can't really do both because the trees are going to shade the vines. We really need to do one or the other. It's a little redundant. And also because of the fact we're taking out vines, we'd like to have the vines put back in front to make up for the vines that we're taking out. The trees are going to get much higher than the vines are and number one it's going to cause shade, and number two it's going to be a roost for birds. It's going to be kind of a disaster there. Jack Petrocelli: I think the evergreens would be in the way of the vines. Basically it would really hinder the vines. To me, the vines would be more sufficient in height than the evergreens. Mr. Orlowski: How about the berm that we discussed at... Mr. Harbich: Well, that would raise the level of the vines probably. Mr. Petrocelli: And we'd put a buffer in there too, to sort of create a little more height. Mr. Ward: Alright, I think our question was screening of the parking from the roadway and if you can visually show that, I think that's what our intent is. Mr. Petrocelli: You were talking about the color of the building, is that what you were asking for? $outhold Town Planning Board '16 Mr. Orlowski: Yeah, did you ever hand those in? time ago. Mr. Petrocelli: I have them in the car. believe, the colors. November 16, '1998 That was asked a long long I think they were at the last meeting, I Mr. Harbich: Since this is an amendment, I don't understand why this has to be done at this point. The color of the building...we're approved. Mr. Ward: You are approved at this point. These are things that...like site lighting and things that we really were an omission on our part not asking for them. Mr. Petrocelli: I thought we gave them the submissions on the site lighting. Mr. Ward: We didn't see them. Mr. Orlowski: You did, but on this last one when you just handed it in, those two things were missing off of it, and since we're amending it and doing a public hearing on it, we should just take a look and put everything back on. I don't think that... Mr. Petrocelli: We really don't want to put that much site lighting because of the neighbors. Mr. Ward: That's why we wanted to see that. Mr. Petrocelli: We don't want to put any. Mr. Orlowski: think you had it on the other one it's just that to do this formally, these things just weren't shown on this when you handed it n. Mr. Harbich: One of the reasons we wanted to do this was we assumed it would De done relatively quickly. Now we have two more weeks, and we're a little bit surprised. Mr. Orlowski: Well, I think you'l find rather than doing it by resolution so we make sure everybody Knows about it, we should do it by hearing. Mr. Harbich: I think everybody at this hearing who really cares about this, ~s here tonight. Why can't we (inaudible) this tonight. Everybody who is here is here. We've gone through this already. We've had a public hearing. We got a petition with 300 names on it. Everybody is here,..who has anything to Southold Town Planning Board '17 November 16, '1998 say, please get up and say it tonight. I don't think anyone else is going to show who is not here tonight. We've got to go through another registered mailing and another posting, again? We just did this. We were approved. We assumed this was going to be an amendment to the site plan, not an additional site plan process. Bill Mullen: Mr. Chairman, I have something to say here if you don't mind. I know you will. Mr. Orlowski: No, I don't mind. Mr. Mullen: These people have been waiting for a considerable period of time and I've been getting calls, it's strange, from people about the time it takes for them to get anything done through this Planning Board. And I'm working on something that perhaps will change it a little bit, but I'll have to have your cooperation. And I mean not the Chairman alone, but give me at least two people that I work with, because I'm concerned about the economy of the Town of Southold. Whether you realize it or not it's going down, and you have to cooperate and work with these people. Thank you. Don Perry: I'm Don Perry, one of the adjacent land owners, and I just wanted to thank the Board for reconsidering and taking the neighbors lifestyle into consideration. And I'd also like to thank the owners for their consideration of the neighbors. Thank you. Roland Grant: ~/lr1 Chairman, my name is Roland Grant and I'm also a neighbor on Indian Neck Lane and very close to the site that's being developed and I don't really see any need to have a public hearing if we're all in agreement. I mean, there's no reason to hold up the building or any of the stuff that Re wants to go forward with. I think we're pretty much pleased with the outcome that you've reconsidered it and brought it back and re-discussed it, so unless there's a dire need to have a public hearing, think we could probably settle this tonight. Unknown: And the people that are here that collected the petitions are here tonight. We went out and collected the petitions, put it together and presented that to you, so I don't see any need to prolong this Muriel Andrews: Hi Benny, hi everybody. I'm Muriel Andrews, I also live on Indian Neck Lane and if you look in here, the majority of the people that are here tonight, all border the property of the vineyard and I think it's safe to speak on their behalf and let you know that they are al in agreement with Mr. Petrocelli and Richard over here. We already did the public hearing, we Southold Town Planning Board 18 November 16, 1998 did get the signatures. It seems to me that the people that are affected by this winery are all for what you just proposed to us, so instead o~: making Mr. Petrocelli wait any longer, would it not be possible for you to just say let's just do it. Sometimes you've got to bend the rules a little bit, but they've been waiting a real long time and let'sjust get while the getting's good. Mr. OrlowskJ: Do you have Health Department approval? Mr. Petrocelli: Yes. Mr. Orlowski: You have it? Mr. Petrocelli: Yes, we have Health Department approval. Ithink we're just waiting on the DOT. Mr. Ward: Did you submit Health to us? Mr. Petrocelii: I did, yes. It'sjust the DOT. It's contingent on us going back and forth basically. Mr. Orlowski: Do you have the plan with the Health Department stamp on it? Mr. Petrocelli: Not with us. Mr. Orlowski: But you have one? Mr. Petrocelli: We have one. I believe it was sent to the Building Department. Ms. Spiro: Directly? Mr. Harbich: The site plan was submitted with a letter ~:rom the Health Department that stated we had approval, at that time was contingent on SEQRA, Then we got SEQRA approval... Ms. Spiro: Right, but did you get the plan with the Health Department stamp? Mr. Harbich: A stamped site plan? Ms. Spiro: Yes. Mr. Petrocelli: I believe the architect got it and forwarded it to the Building Southold Town Planning Board 19 November 16, 1998 Department. Ms. Spiro: 5o maybe it went to the Building Department and not to us. Mr. Petrocelli: But we have approval. We had approval prior to the last public meeting when it was contingent to $EQRA. 5o it was approved contingent upon that at the last meeting. Ms. $piro: Right, but one of the Planning Board's conditions of' approval was that you get review by the Health Department. That was one of our... Mr. Petrocelli: ...(inaudible) SEQRA. It was a catch 22. Mr. Orlowski: But do you have the stamped map with the Health Department stamp on it? Mr. Petrocelli: Not with us. Mr. Orlowski: But you got one after that? Is there any further discussion on this motion? Do you want to do anything different? Mr. Edwards: Take the vote. Mr. Orlowski: I guess so. I have a motion on the books to hold this hearing on November 30th. All those I favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Odowski: Opposed? Opposed: Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Motion lost. OK, now that we've done that, anyone want to make a motion to approve this amendment to the site plan? Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make 8 motion to approve the amended site plan subject to Health Department approval Mr. Orlowski: And those conditions that Mr. Ward said, which I think are standard, and shouldn't be a problem - curb cut and the Health Department, and Mr. Wards ist. Motion made and seconded Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? November '16, '1998 Southold Town Planning Board 20 Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Opposed: Mr. Ward, Mr. Cremers. Mr. Orlowski: Motion carried. Being that I have nothing left on my agenda -- I think President Clinton needs me now in Washington -- I want to entertain a motion to close the meeting. Mr. Latham: I'll move that. Mr. Ward: Second. 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 8:30 p.m. Behd~ett Orl6~vsk~r. ~'hai~'an ' RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE SOUTHOLD TO%~qN CLERI~ Respectfully submitted, Martha A. Jones