HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-11/03/1997PLANNING BOARD MEMB~_~S
BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR.
Chairman
WILLIAM J. CREMERS
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
GEORGE RITCHIE LATI-IAM, 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
Present were:
PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MINUTES
November :S, 'lgg7
Bennett Orlowsl(i, Jr., Chairman
Richard G. Ward
G. Ritchie Latham
Kenneth Edwards
William Cremers
Melissa Spiro, Planner
Robert (;. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer
Absent:
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Martha Jones, Secretary
Mr. Orlowski: Good evening. I'd like to call this meeting to order. The first
order of business, Board to set Monday, November 24, 1997 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. Cremers: 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. Cremers.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried.
Southold Town Planning Board
2 November 3, 1997
PUBliC HEARINGS
Subdivisions- Final:
Mr. Orlowski: 7:30 p.m. - Sallie Wells and James & Mary Ellen Ruhr - This
proposed lot line change is to subtract 0.31 acres from an existing 17.88
acre parcel, and to add it to an existing 0.87 acre parcel. The parcels are
located on the south side of Westphalia Rd., approximately 24 feet west of
the intersection of Bennett's Pond Lane and Westphalia Rd., in MattitucK
SCTM# 1000-113-13-1 & 2. I'll ask if there are any comments on this lot line
change?
Abigail Wickham: Good evening. My name ~s Abigail Wickham. I'm here on
behalf of Mrs. Wells, the owner of the property. These are your affidavits of
posting and publication. This is a fairly simple application and I won't belabor
the Board other than to explain the reason for the request. Mrs. Wells did
decide after many years to sell her property and in consideration of a lot of
extra effort and help on behalf of her neighbors in helping her in her ater
years, she and her family did want to give them a strip of property along
their side for a little additional protection and that is the reason for the lot
line change; to Keep their property on which the residence is located a little
bit further away from what is, at the present time going to be a horticultural
operation, and down the road we're not sure what could I~e developed or
whatever, so that's the reason for the application. If you have any questions
'd be glad to answer them
Mr. Orlowski: Not yet. Any other comments on this lot line change? Hearing
none, any questions from the Board? Mr. Ward?
Mr. Ward: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Latham?
Mr. Latham: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Cremers?
Mr. Cremers: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Edwards?
Mr. Edwards: None
Southold Town Planning Board
November 5, 1997
Mr. Orlowski: Being no further questions on this lot line change I'll entertain a
motion to close the hearing.
Mr. Ward: So moved.
Mr. Cremers: 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 Does the Board have a pleasure on
this?
VIr. Ward: Yes. Mr. Chairman, 'd like ~o offer the following resolution.
WHEREAS, Sallie W. Wells is the owner of the property known and'designated
as SCTM# 1000-113-13-I and James and-Mary Ellen Ruhr are the owners of
the properW known and designated as SCTM# 1000-113-13-2 located on the
south side of Westphalia Rd., approximately 24 feet west of the intersection
with Bennett's Pond Lane and Westphalia Rd in Mattituck; and
WHEREAS, this proposed lot line change is'to subtract 0.31 acres from an
existing 17.88 acre parcel, and to add it to an existing 0.87 acre 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 October 6, 1997; and
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Chapter 58,
Notice of Public Hearing, has received affidavits that the applicant has
complied with the notification provisions; and
WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at
the Town Hall, Southoid, New York on November 3, 1997; 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 January 24, 1997, 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
Southold Town Planning Board 4 November $, 1997
resolution:
1. The filing of new deeds reflecting the lot line change. Copies of the
recorded deeds must be submitted to this office.
Mr. Cremers: Second the motion.
Mr. Or]owski: Motion made and seconded Any questions on the motion? All
those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Odowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried.
Site Plans:
Mr. Orlowski: 7:35 p.m - Robert W. Sorenson - This proposed site plan is to
construct a 2,960 square foot building on a '1 acre site located on Tabor
Road in Orient. SCTM# '1000-25-2-20.18. I'll ask if there are any comments
on this site plan? Hearing none, any questions from the Board? Mr. Ward?
Mr. Ward: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Latham?
Mr. Latham: 1'11 abstain from this because of a possible conflict of interest.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Cremers?
Mr. Cremers: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Edwards?
Mr. Edwards: None.
Mr. Orlowsl(i: If there are no further comments, I'll entertain a motion to
close the hearing.
Mr. Edwards: So moved.
Southold Town Planning Board 5 November 3, 1997
Mr. Cremers: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr, Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers.
Mr. Orlowsl(h Opposed? Motion carried. What's the pleasure of the Board?
Mr. Edwards: I'd like to entertain the following motion. Be it resolved 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 of non-significance, and grants a Negative Declaration.
Mr. Cremers: Second the motion.
Mr. OrlowskJ: 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. OrlowskJ: Opposed?
Mr. Latham: I'll abstain.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Latham was ~n the negative there. Motion carried.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, have a further resolution.
WHEREAS, Robert and Rachel Sorenson are the owners of the property
known and designatec~ as SCTM# '1000-25-2-20.'18, located at Tabor Rd. in
-Orient; and
WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was
submitted on October 22, '1997; and
WHEREAS, the. Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State
Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 6'17, declared itself lead
agency and issued a Negative Declaration on November 5, '1997; and
WHEREAS, this site plan was certified by Gary Fish, Building Inspector, on
November 5, '1997; anc~
Southold Town Planning Board
6 November 5, 1997
WHEREAS, the applicant agrees to install buffer plantings along the rear
property line. This condition must be accomplished and approved by the
Planning Board before a Certificate of Occupancy is issued by the Building
Department; and
WHEREAS, any change of use from a carpentry shop and storage will require
a review by the Planning Board; 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. approve grant final
approval on the surveys dated October 20, 1997 and authorize the Chairman
to endorse the final surveys subject to a one year review from date of
building permit.
Mr. Cremers: Second the motion.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All
those in favor?
Ayes: Mr, OrlowskL Mr. Wardl Mr. Edwards, Mr. Cremers,
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed?
Mr. Latham: I abstain.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion carried.
Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings:
Mr. Orlowski: Broadwaters Cove - This site plan is for the expansion of a
concrete block tool shed at an existing marina located on Skunk Lane (Bay
Ave.) in Cutchogue. SGTM# 1000-104-8-2.5.
Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I' offer the following resolution. Be it resolved
that the Southold Town Planning Board hold the hearing open pending a
code interpretation by the Zoning Board of Appeals.
Mr. Latham: Second.
Sour:hold Town Planning Board
7 November 5, 1997
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion?
Any comments while this hearing is still open? Hearing none, ali 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. SET OFF
APPLICATIONS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT
Determinations:
Mr. Orlowski: Paradise Isles - This minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 30.619
acres located on the north side of Island View Lane; 234.18 feet west of
Bayshore Road and on the south side of August Lane in Southold.
SCTM# 1000,53-6-46.2 and 57-2-1.1.
Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make the following motion. Be it
resolved that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State
Environmental Quality Review Act, assumes lead agency, and as lead agency
makes a determination of non-significance, and grants a Negative
Declaration.
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. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried
SITE PLANS
Rescinding of Site Plan:
A,qricultural Equipment Repair Shop - This approved site plan is
for a 5,000 square foot agricultural equipment machine shop,
· Southold Town Planning Board 8 November :5, 1997
located on Rt. 25 in Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-113-12-10.4.
(See following)
Final Determinations:
Mr. Orlowski: A,qricultural Equipment Machine Shop - This site plan ~s
for a 5,000 square foot agricultural equipment machine shop, located on Rt.
25 in Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-113-12-10.4.
Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'll offer the following resolution. Be it resolved
that the Southold Planning Board rescind the final site plan approved for the
Agricultural Equipment Repair Shop, granted on December 23, 1996 because
of the misinterpretation of use.
Mr. Ward: 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. Cremers: In addition, Mr. Chairman, Whereas, Thomas Talbot is the owner
of the property Known and designated as Agricultural Equipment Machine
Shop located at County Route 48, Mattituck, SCTM# 1000-I 13-12-10.4; and
WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was
submitted on July 2, 1996; and
WHEREAS, this site plan for Thomas Talbot is for a 5,000 square foot
Agricultura Equipment Machine Shop; 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 August 26, 1996; and
WHEREAS, this site plan was certified by Thomas Fisher, Senior Building
Inspector, on December 23, 1996; and
WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of
Southold have been met; De it therefore
Southoid Town Planning Board
9 November ;5, 1997
RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant final approval on
the surveys dated October 23, 1997 and authOrize the Chairman to endorse
the final surveys subject to a one year review from date of building permit.
Mr. Latham: 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,
Waivers:
Mr. Orlowski: Gary Flanner Olsen - This waiver of site plan is for an additional
professional office in an existing 1-1/2 story frame building. SCTM# 1000-
97-5-4.4.
Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution.
WHEREAS, Anne Olsen is the owner of the property known and designated as
SCTM# 1000-97-5-4.4, located on Rt. 25 in Cutchogue; and
WHEREAS, a professional office is a permitted use in this General Business (B)
zone; and
WHEREAS, an examination has been made of all uses and the existing parking
was determined to be adequate for a uses; and
WHEREAS, the proposed addition of an additional professional office will not
be 8 more intensive use of this property; 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 8 waiver of site plan
requirements
Mr. Latham: Second the motion.
Southold Town Planning Board 10 November $, I997
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.
SITE PLANS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT
Lead Agency Designation:
Mr. 0rlowskh Agway - This proposed site plan is to create an area for
seasonal display of plants and to construct a 1,500 square foot greenhouse
and a 34 square foot gazebo SCTM# 1000-60-I-5.
Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, '11 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
ead agency makes a determination of non-sgnificance, and grants a
Negative Declaration.
Mr. Ward: 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.
Determinations:
Mr. Orlowski: Bell Atlantic NYNEX Mobile - This:proposed site plan is to erect
a 99 foot telecommunication tower for cellular antennas and an
associated 12 foot by 40 foot unmanned equipment shelter, in
Mattituck. SCTM# 1000-141-3-34.
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
Environmenta Quality Review Act, establishes itself as lead agency.
Southold Town Planning Board
November $, 1997
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. Chairman, l abstain.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried.
Mr. Ward: Also, i'd like to-offer the following resolution. Whereas, the
Planning Board has reviewed the Short Environmental Assessment Form
dated April 4, 1997 and the Long Environmental Assessment Form dated
June 11, 1997; and
WHEREAS, it has reviewed the comments of its environmental consultant,
Nelson, Pope and Voorhis, LLC, dated October 9, 1997; and
WHEREAS, this review has indicated that the proposed monopole height is 99
feet, and that the visual impacts of the proposed monopole on the historic
and aesthetic aspects of Mattituck's business hamlet; and
WHEREAS, the subJeCt property is one third smaller than the minimum
required area within the Light Industrial Zoning District, thus making it
difficult to screen the tower; and
WHEREAS, the applicant has not submitted documentation of need; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project presents a potential visual conflict with the
community's vision for the Mattituck business district; and
WHEREAS, the project sponsor nas not provided site specific mitigation
measures relevant to the application, e.g. architectural mitigation of
proposed monopole; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Board wishes to prepare Part 3 of the Long
Environmental Assessment Form in order to more closely consider the
s~gnificance of potential land use conflicts, visual intrusion on hamlet
historical character and cumulative impacts of the proposed project, be it
therefore
Southold Town Planning Board
12 November ~, 1997
RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, aCting under the State
Environmental Quality Review Act, as the lead agency makes a determination
that the proposed action is an Unlisted Action; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the applicant submit documentation of need
and detailed information about the proposed mitigation measures including
elevation drawings and artist's renderings and other designs which may be
more in character with the neighborhood that will enable the completion of
Part 3 (Evaluation of the Importance of Impacts.)
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that if the applicant chooses not to provide this
information the Planning Board may prepare a Part 3 at the applicant's
expense,
Mr. Latham: 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. Chairman, I abstain again.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carded.
Mr. Orlowski: Bell Atlantic NYNEX Mobile - This proposed site plan is for a
cellular telephone tower facility to be located on a 4,530 square foot
section of a 10.5 acre lot located on the south side of SR25, 375
feet east of Platt Rd. in Orient. SCTM# 1000-100-18-6-5.
Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, I offer this resolution. Be it resolved that the
SouthOld Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality
Review Act, establishes itself as ead agency, and as lead agency makes a
determination of significance, and grants a Positive Declaration
Mr. Edwards: Second the motion.
Mr. Latham: Also, I'll read the reasons supporting this determination. The
applicant has provided the lead agency with a Long Environmental
Assessment Form and a Part Ill. These documents have been reviewed by
the Planning Board, the Planning Board's Environmental Consultant, and
Southold Town Planning Board
t5 November 5, 1997
other nvolved agencies. The Bell Atlantic project is expected to have a
potential significant impact particularly in view of site sensitivity regarding
the following issues:
The proJect is located within an agricultural community that includes the
historic hamlet of Orient..The proposed project may impair the unique visual
and historica characteristics of this area, which is zoned Low-Density
Residential, R-80, a two acre district. Also, the proposed project les in close
proximity to the Orient Village Historic District, which is on the Nationa
Register and has been since 1976.
Due to the inherent visual contrast between the community's unique
historical and rural aesthetic character and that of an 85 foot tall cellular
telephone antennae, and the Town's economic reliance on this unique
historical and aesthetic character, the impact of the proposed tower ~s ikely
to be s~gnificant and detrimental unless substantially mitigated.
Further, a tower on the project site would be visible from the Town's
Seaview Trails network, specifically the North Fork Trail and the Narrow River
Trail. These two trails follow existing State and local roads, and were
specifically chosen for their outstanding scenic attributes The Seaview Trails
concept was initiated in 1994, It consists of a network of bicycle, boating
and hiking trails within the Town of Southold.
Finally, the project site's scenic value is underscored by the fact that it lies
within the viewshed of SR 25 and Narrow River Road, both of which are
being studied under the Town's Scenic Byways Corridor Management Study
which is currently underway. Funded by the State of New York, this study
will develop a management program to protect the viewshed from these
roads.
The Southold Town Planning Board has determined that an Environmental
Impact Statement be prepared in order to provide a means to access the
s~gnificance of the impacts of the project, to obtain input from involved
agencies and the community, and to research possible alternatives and
mitigation measures.
Mr. Ward: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the mo~ion?
Matthew Pachman: My name is Matt Pachman, of Pachman, Pachman and
Brown, a~orneys for the applicant. Mr. Chairman and members of the
$outhold Town Planning Board
14 November 5, 1997
Board, as this Board is aware, the application was originally filed with the
town in December of 1996. After a coordinated review, this Board
requested an expanded Part III which was targeted to certain issues. That
expanded Part II was submitted to this Board in June of 1997 Since that
time, the only additional comments that the Town's environmental
consultants raised were with respect to the two houses which appeared on
the SPLIA blue inventory forms and I have our enwronmental consultant i~ere
tonight who I would like to comment on that.
Given that, I respectfully betieve that the only reasonable determination from
this Board is that the criteria for significance have not been met and that 8
Negative Declaration should be issued. I would ask with the Board's
permission that I nave an opportunity to call Theresa Elkowitz, who is the
applicant's environmental consultant to speak up to those issues. Ms.
Elkowitz, if you could please start off giving your background and a brief
rendition of your curricula vitae to the Board, and then commenting on the
SEQRA process and on the historical house question that was raised by Mr.
Voorhis in his last report.
Theresa Elkowitz: As Mr Pachman said, my name is Theresa EIkowitz. am
the Chairman of the Suffolk County Council on Environmental Quality. I'm a
private enwronmental consultant and I'm a principal of Freudenthal &
Elkowitz Consulting Group. I'm also a member of the Suffolk County Historic
Trust. I serve as the Village Planner for the Village of Manor Haven. i've been
a special consultant to the Village of Sands Point and have testified before
many Boards in Nassau and Suffolk counties and in Westchester.
There are a couple of issues that were raised here, and as Mr. Pachman said,
we prepared a visua impact analysis that was submitted to the Town in
January of 1997 Never in any of the commentary that we have seen from
Mr. Voorhis has that visual impact analysis been referenced or
acknowledged. We prepared and submitted a Part I Environmental
Assessment Form n April 1997. Mr. Voorhis raised several issues and
recommended to this ~3oard that a Part II Environmental Assessment Form
be prepared. That Part III was very comprehensive and it spoke to the
purpose and need for the project, the public need, the methodology for the
selection of the site, the determination of the monopole height, potential
land use conflicts, visual impacts again, as well a cumulative impacts to
public health, land use and visual resources.
The only issue that has been raised subsequent to that is this issue about
potential historic rouses. And what Mr. Voorhis raised was the Bower-Young
house which is allegedly situated at the southeast corner of Platt and Rt. 25.
Southold Town Planning Board
15 November :~, 1997
And the Ann Hopkins house which is, as he says, possibly located on the west
side of Platt Rd. And it took until October 9 for these issues to be raised,
when this application, as Mr. Pachman told you, was submitted on December
6, and we started submitting SEQRA information in January 1997.
With regard to these two alleged historic resources, I have correspondence
and a report from J. Lance Mallamo, who is a historic preservation
consultant...if I could bring this up to the Board...and he's also the Suffolk
County Historian. And I'm not going to stand before you and read this entire
report, but there are a couple of passages that I would like to read to you.
Specifically with regard to the Bower-Young house, Mr. Mallamo states and I
quote, "The structure has apparently been modified many times over the
years and the original design and architectural features have been
compromised by the addition of a large dormer wing and new windows." He
goes on to talk about how this house has been altered and how it does not
have historic integrity.
Then he speaks to the Ann Hopkins house, and he stateS, "An oral interview
undertaken nearly a decade ago claims that this structure was moved to this
site from a previous location on the Orient school grounds. While this
assertion has not been substantiated, the structure does not appear at this
location on 19th century maps." And he goes on to explain how moved
structures are generally ineligible for historic designation.
If you read the October 9 letter from Mr. Voorhis, and I must say to you I
have professional respect for Mr. Voorhis, it relies on a SPLIA - Society for the
Preservation of Long Island Antiquities - blue inventory forms for these two
houses. And Mr. Mallamo states "The reliance of historic preservation policy
on the identification of potentia historic sites identified by SPLIA ~s
uninformed and somewhat misleading. The SPLIA inventory has no official
status Jn and of itself, and functions solely as a preliminary information
source."
And then he goes on to explain what it takes to become a designated
historic resource, not only in this Town but also on the national and state
registers He concludes,"Based upon the above, the erection of the
proposed cellular communications facility at the 2450 Main Rd. location,
especially in the form of a silo or ~)ell tower, will have no effect on
documented cultural resources"
Which brings me to another point. Something was said in that resolution
that Bell Atlantic Mobile never offered mitigation and it would have adverse
Southold Town Planning Board
16 November 9, 1997
effects on the agricultural resources. Bell Atlantic Mobile both and writing in
the Part III EAF and in extensive testimony in several hearings before the
Board of Zoning Appeals, offered a silo, offered a bell tower, offered
landscaping, and none of this appears to have been recognized in that
resolution.
Before I conclude, there are criteria in SEQRA, under 6 NYCRR 617.7 that set
forth criteria for determining significance. And while I'm not going to go
through every one of those criteria, I implore you as a Board, independently
to rewew those criteria and make your own conclusion as to whether or not
the erection of this public utility structure would truly warrant a Positive
Declaration and an environmental impact statement, especially when the
SEQRA documentation has been before you for nine months. Thank you very
much
Mr. Pachman: Mr. Chairman, would ask that that report that was submitted
be made part of the record.
Mr. Orlowski: It is. Any other comments? (CHANGE TAPE)
Freddie Wachsburger:...the tower would look like, taken from the field by
the Peluzo house. The photograph on which it's based are these. It's just a
sort of fragile arrangement here but if you wanted to just have a look.
That's looking towards Rt. 25 from the field behind the projected site of the
tower. That's based on an 85 foot tower. I also wanted to enter into your
record, photographs from Tabor Road, Narrow River Road, Platt Road and
the Main Road, which think indicate more clearly than those submitted in
the third part of the EAr, the general characteristic of the scenery there of
the lack of tree cover and the general flatness. I won't be lengthy but I
would like to address the comments that were just made. it is covered in
the document that submitted to you on Friday, but it seems to me that
there are four specific criteria under SEQRA of substantial impacts which are
definitely reflected in this application and as you know the SEQRA regulations
are very clear that the requirement for an ElS depends only on the
recognition of at least one significant adverse environmental impact, and I
think we can clearly show four. And it also says that to determine that an ElS
will not be required for an action - this is 617.7 that was sited - to determine
that an ElS will not be required for an action, the lead agency must
determine either that there will be no adverse enwronmental impacts or that
the identified adverse environmental impacts will not be significant.
Clearly what you have just read as part of your resolution and clearly what
has been submitted in the Voorhis report, shows that the impacts are
$outhold Town Planning Board
17 November 5, 1997
significant indeed. And so since this was a question just now I'd just like to
refer to a couple of very specific ones.
617.7 C-4 - The creation of a material conflict with the community's current
plans or goals as officially approved or adopted. Well, that one's obvious.
What you were just talking about, it conflicts with the stated (inaudible) of
the Master Plan, it conflicts with the initiative for the Scenic. Byways, it
conflicts with the purchase of development rights to preserve the rural
quality of the farms. So, I won't go into the whole discussion there, but that
one is obvious.
The second one that is obvious is 617.7 C-5, the impairment of the character
of quality of important historical, archaeological, arChitectural or aesthetic
resources, or of existing community or'neighborhood character. I believe,
and I'm speaking now as President of the Historical Society also, and as a
retired archeologist, so I have some background in the historical aspect of
this. But what I really wanted to address is the aesthetic resources of the
existing community or neighborhood character.
All the communities of Southold are very special and the people in each of
then, from what I've seen, are totally dedicated to the preservation of their
place, The people of Orient are totally dedicated to their environment. It's
of profound importance to the residents of Orient and they care very, very
deeply about it. There is no question that the erection of this tower in this
area would seriously impact the neighborhood character, the existing
community character. There is absolutely no question about that, and that's
clear from the photographs:
And I mentioned in the document that I gave you, the quotation from Tony
Hiss's expenence of place, which says the first ten percent of degradation in
an area creates fifty percent of the loss of the experience of place. The
second 10 percent creates the whole destruction of the sense of place. This
initia thing would be that serious n its creation of the degradation percent
of place of Orient.
So, those are two very significant ones. The substantial change in the use of
land, including agricultural, open space, and recreational resources, that's
obvious, that's 617.7 C-8
Even the most important I think is 617.7-2, the lead agency must consider
reasonably related long Term, snort term, indirect and cumulative impacts.
One of the most serious things about this decision and why I feel the Positive
Declaration is so essential here is the precedent wil be set not only by
Southold Town Planning Board
November $, 1997
putting the tower in a residential agricultural area, no only setting a
precedent from that point of view, but the very piece of the FCC regulations
and the piece of the telecommunications act of 1966 which demand that
there be no discrimination among providers. The push to create enumerable
telecommunication systems is well documented.
The FCC fact sheet itself, which was published a year ago, says that
communities in the coming year or two can expect four to eight providers in
every community which means there are four to eight competitors possibly
coming into Southoid Town This is what we have to anticipate. And we
know that, we're told that, is that towers need to be approximately a
maximum of six miles apart, if you imagine four or eight providers each with
their own towers ~ecause although we can talk about pole location, the FCC
fact sheets themselves say that for the most part providers do not want to
co-locate because of the competitive nature of the business, number I, and
number 2, each co-location requires another 15 feet and another 400 or 500
feet of building on the ground, so it's not really a solution.
So, we magine all this competition coming in and we cannot discriminate
among providers means that any permission that's given to one provider will
have to be given to others, which means that we could have not one of
these towers n a farm field in Orient, but four or eight. And not only in
Orient, but in farm fields elsewhere in town. So the cumulative effect of the
decision that's made on this is crucial. For all of these reasons, I want to
compliment the Board on their decision and thank you very much on behalf
of the Orient Association and people of Orient for your decision of the
Positive Declaration
And I did just want to mention this - I know I gave you copies of - this
request here that was fulfilled by Bell Atlantic for a DEIS of approximately 400
pages for a 100 foot communication tower that was erected in a clover leaf
on the Southern State Parkway. I can't imagine that Bell Atlantic, having
prepared a 400 page DEIS, and certainly we don't need anything like that
here, but a 400 page DEIS for a cellular tower on the Southern State, I can't
believe that they would say that that's more deserving than a tower in a
rural farm field in a historic community like Orient. Thanks very much.
Mr. Orlowski: Thank you Any other comments?
Ann Hopkins: I'm sorry but I can't resist correcting the record. My name is
Ann Hopkins and I am the owner of the house that was referred to as the
Ann Hopkins, although I don't think of it, and most of my neighbors don't.
They think of it possibly as the Vail house or by other names of its long
Southold Town Planning Board
19 November $, 1997
history and it iS indeed on the west side of Platt Road. Directly it is 380 feet
'n on Platt Road so therefore absolutely on the line with the proposed tower.
It was built by the best estimates of historical people who have visited it,
around 1820, and was indeed moved and I can certainly provide
documentation of that. But I'm puzzled that my house and one other was
singled out because Gordon Price has a house of equal historic importance
a~Dout I0 feet from the proposed tower and there ~s another one nearby, so
I therefore am speaking in full support of the Positive Declaration and the
way it was worded
Mr. OrlowskJ: Another comment?
Ted Rock: My name is Ted Rock and live in Orient. I would just like to
comment on the distinction in the two determinations here. In Mattituck I
noticed you said extensive documentation of need was provided and I didn't
hear that statement in terms of the Orient tower. And my question
throughout this process has been, can they document their need? There
was a statement by the environmental consultant about community need.
I'm not sure what that is since there's not even a cellular communications
black out underneath the tower, but I also commend the Positive Declaration
specifically in site of the fact that there has been no documentation of need
presented. Thank you.
Gwen Schroeder: I just have a brief statement. I'm Gwen Schroeder from the
North Fork Environmental Council (NFEC). The NFEC strongly recommends
that the Planning Board give a Positive Declaration to this application We
have reviewed the report of Nelson, Pope and Voorhis concerning the long
EAF on this project. It seems very clear to us that since Voorhis sited several
environmental impacts which are inevitable with this project, a Positive
Declaration must be made.
The SEQRA law states that only one such impact is sufficient to require a
draft ElS. The Orient Association's statement is very thorough and we
support it's recommendations. We would like to emphasize the fact that
there are several aspects of this proposed project which do not fit the
objectives in the Town's Master Plan papers. It is very important to hold
whatever philosophy the Town has in regards to it's plan. It seems to us that
here, in the early stages of this effort, it is the time to do it. Thanks.
Mr. Orlowski: One more comment. I think that all the comments are running
along the same lines and we do have the motion on the floor, but we'll
entertain one more.
Southold Town Planning Board 20 November 3, 1997
0ordon Price: I'm 0ordon Price. My house is directly in front of the
proposed tower, within 100 feet of my lot line. The original part of my
house was built in '1830. it is not on the historical register, but my house is
one of half a dozen that are in that same area as you can see by some of
those photographs which are directly effected by the possible erection of
that tower.
Now, not only is it offensive from a standpoint of visual impact to the
community, but it is a direct negative effect on the eouity value on a half a
dozen houses within its range. I would say conservatively that the value of
my house, if that tower is erected as planned, the value of my house would
be decreased by 25 or 30 percent, and that's conservative. I just urge you
to think about what this impact would be on not only the whole community
but the residents, the owners of the six or seven houses, or eight or ten
houses that are directly effected by the possible erection of the tower.
Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: One more comment?
Harold Watson: I'm Harold Watson from Orient Point. In terms of mitigation,
there ~s one thing that I really think that you could look into or ask of Bell
Atlantic. There are other technologies of which Bell Atlantic is very familiar. I'
have done work for telecommunications companies, AT&T, NYNEX and now
Bel Atlantic, and I have helped introduce the technology and marketing
programs over the last ten years So I do have some knowledge of what's
out there.
In Boston, they have been mounting small shoe box size boxes on the sides
of buildings. It's a very successful trial in Boston; it's what they've been
doing in Europe, because they don't want all the towers. In European
villages and in Boston and in other places in urban areas, they are mounting
small boxes on the sides of buildings and on telephone poles that essentially
requires a lot more maintenance and more boxes, but it can do very s~milar
things. And I think in terms of mitigation, I would specifically ask them to
explain that technology to you because that could be put into existing
telephone poles without the same kinds of problems.
Walter Smith: I'm going to change the tune a little bit. When NYNEX was
here before, I specifically asked them about grounding for the towers. I
asked them if they were copper plates, and they specifically said that they
were copper and they were copper plates. Now having done a lot of work
with trace metals it's interesting to point out that copper, in the book l
edited "Culture Marine and Vertebrate Animals" on page 298 (inaudible) says,
$outhold Town Planning Board
21 November 3, 1997
as a genera rule, all metal, particularly copper must De avoided in any
situation (inaudible) growing of invertebrate animals. And then I testified
against the Shoreham plant and of course they rebuffed it but amazingly
they agreed that metal copper can be extremely toxic to marine life.
Coming back to another project that we had, and that was ~n Goose Creek a
number of years ago. We were studying what happens to the material in the
ground water, where it comes out. To do that we put (inaudible) in
cesspools all along the shore on Goose Creek. In four weeks that material
was out in the bay. Now they're going to have big copper plates on these
towers that's going to leach out into the bay that's going to cause havoc
with out marine life. There's no ands or ifs about it. Right now we have a
tremendous change going on. For some reason or other we're getting a
very significant sea evel rise
No~v, if some people in Orient who only had sump pumps going a few hours
a day, some are going 24 hours a day, and that's due to sea level rise
pushing the water up through their basements. So, we have to be very
careful of anything that we put into the environment IDecause it's going to
get out in the bay sooner or later. So if we don't watch and take a stand
now against this sort of thing, we're going to be in great trouble. And the
way it works, it either Kills the larvae on the fish, it gets on their gills and
that's going to kill them. So we Dave to be very, very careful of anything
that we're going to put into our groundwater, and these copper plates -
copper is one of the major Toxins for our marine enwronment. We avoid it
like the plague.
You remember when they used to put the copper coating on the bottom of
~oats? That's been banned because of the effect it has on marine life. So
what we really have to do is control these phallic symbols of the!people and
stop corporate greed, that's the only word I can express it to you. But the
copper must be rooked at and I don't think we should avoid it and perhaps
have in-depth studies done because very little has been. done on this
migration We do know it migrates into the bay or into the sound and is
going to cause a lot more problems - perhaps not in my generation, but in
yours and your childrens, so we have to be. very careful in what we're
putting into the ground, in particular things like copper plates. Like we took
some of the insecticides out and some of the pesticides and we're dealing in
part per billion not part per million. So we have a major problem here and I
think it's something that should be looked at very, very carefully. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Thank you.
Southold Town Planning Board
22 November :5, 1997
Ellen McNeely: This will be quite brief. I want to thank you for the Positive
Declaration. don't know if any of you read the Times today, but it refers to
cci ular towers as vertical real estate. And cellular towers do provide, as we
know, major economic benefit to their owners and the sites are major
revenue producers which is why they got the designation of vertical real
estate.
Like any real estate development, it must meet certain zoning requirements
(inaudible) if you concede it as a real estate development. Although Bell
Atlantic would like us to dea with their proposed tower solely as a public
utility, and them as guardians of a public service, the fact is that they are
only one of a number of potential service providers and can gain significant
economic advantage if they are in place first. Location, location, location.
Southold is being asked to permit Bell Atlantic to entrench itself to reap
these benefits in its competitive enwronment without being held
accountable for its effect on ours. Our zoning is critical and so is the SEQRA
review process, crucial to any real estate development with significant
environmental impacts
It is our interests, not theirs that should be the primary concern and it seems
that it would Ioe appropriate to solicit 13ids from the various communications
providers to ensure that we get the most benefit, the best technology with
the least environmental impact, and the first step you have taken which is to
declare a positive impact. Thank you.
Mr. Pachman: Mr. Chairman, would I have an opportunity to see the
computer renderings that were submitted?
Mr. Orlowski: Yes.
Mr. Pachman: And these are the photographs? If I may just took at these
also?
Mr. Orlowski: Sure. Do you have any other comments now?
Mr. Pachman: If I could just have a moment to review this.
Wel, Mr. Chairman, what I would say, members of the Board, is that Bell
Atlantic Mobile submitted certain visual computer generated renderings back
in, probably May. I would ask that this motion be tabled until only the next
meeting so that we may have the opportunity to review this and comment
as we see appropriate.
Southold Town Planning Board
25
November 3, ~i997
Mr. Orlowski: Is that your only comment?
Mr. Pachman: Well, would also like to have an opportunity to review the
record of possible other comments with respect to some of the statements
that were made here tonight. I think that certainly would be reasonable. I
think that the Board should consider that before issuing a Positive
Declaration. Again., especially since our submissions were made back during
the spring, certainly no later than June of this year, except for the (inaudible)
additiona comment which was made by the Town's Planning staff and
environmental consultant which was in respect to two houses in the SPLIA
forms which we addressed earlier.
Mr. Orlowski: Well, the Board has reviewed a lot of comments anc~ have a
motion on the floor, I'c~ like to proceed with the motion. (CHANGE TAPE)
I think that as we go on to the DEIS and the scoping outline, a lot of these
comments and questions can be addressed then. What's the pleasure of the
Board? All those in favor?
Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards,
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried
Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, abstain again.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Cremers abstains.
OTHER
Mr. Orlowski: Farmveu Associates - Planning Board to authorize the
Chairman to endorse a Certificate of Correction for this approved
subdivision SCTM# 1000-121-3-2.
Mr. Ward: Mr, Chairman, I'd like to offer the following resolution.
WHEREAS, the major subdivision of Farmveu Associates was filed in the
Suffolk County Clerk's Office on September I, 1989; and
WHEREAS, a Certificate of Correction has been submitted by Werner Adel,
General Partner of Fa rmveu Associates, to correct survey errors regarding
SCTM numbers 1000-120-3-(8.3-8.8), 8.24, 8.25, 8.35, 8.36 and 8.37 [a.k,a.
subdivision lot numbers 1-6,22,23,46,47] and drainage area] as described in
the Certificate of Correction; be it therefore
Southold Town Planning Board
24 November. ,5, 1997
RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to
endorse the Certificate of Correction upon submission of documents signed
by the involved property owners.
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. Orlowski: Opposed? Motion carried.
Mr. Ortowski: I have nothing further left on my agenda If there s anyone
here that would like to make a comment on the public recorcl, we will be
here in a work session following this meeting. Hearing none, '11 entertain a
motion to adjourn.
Mr. Edwards: So moved.
Mr. Cremers: 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.
There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting
adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
Elennett-C?flo~k-i, J~., ChafF'man
Respectfully submitted,