Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-02/26/1996PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS RICHARD G. WARD Chairman GEORGE RITCHIE LATHAM, JR. BENNETT ORLOWSKI, JR. WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-3136 Telephone (5161 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MINUTES February 26, 1996 Present were: Richard G. Ward, Chairman Bennett Orlowski, Jr. G. Ritchie Latham William Cremers Melissa Spiro, Planner Martha Jones, Secretary Robert G. Kassner, Site Plan Reviewer Absent: Kenneth Edwards Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Mr. Ward: Good evening. I'd like to call the February 26, 1996 Southold Town Planning Board meeting to order. The first order of business is the setting of the next Planning Board meeting. Board to set Monday, March 15, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. at Southold Town Hall, Main Rd., Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting. Is there a second? Mr. Orlowski: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. PUBLIC HEARINGS Site Plans: Mr. Ward: 7:30 p.m. - Port of E~vDt. Enterprises, Inc. - This site plan is for the construction of a swimming pool at an existing marina on Rt. 25 in Southold. SCTM# 1000-56-64 & 6.1. Is the applicant here that would like to address the Board? Southold Town Planning Board 2 February 26, 1996 Garrett Strang: Good evening. The application speaks pretty much for itself. The Board, in 1993, approved a site plan at this facility for the construction of about, I believe, 25,000 square feet of storage building. The owners of the facility decided that it would serve their interests better, given the fact that the nature of today's marinas are such that people are looking for other amenities, specifically swimming pools, and that it would serve their interest better, were they to forgo that building that had been approved and put a swimming pool in place of that. In October of 1994, we made the application that is before you to amend the previous site plan, substituting the swimming pool facility for the previous storage building. Again, I think it's pretty straight forward and we're here to address any questions the Board may have along those lines and our concern at the present time is that it did get a little behind schedule and we are looking to get this facility up and runmng for this coming season, so it is our hODe that the Board will be able to proceed with this in a timely fashion, so that we can move ahead with the construction of this facility. If there are any questions, certainly either myself or Mr. Leiblein would be available to answer them. Mr. Ward: Thank you. Anyone else like to address the Board on this particular site plan. Mr. Flynn? Frank Flynn: I'm F.M. Ftynn, a resident of the town of Southold and I had intended to make more extensive remarks this evening, but due to the complexity of what I encountered, I think I will just express some general opinions with respect to this application and provide the Board with a written analysis of the site plan as I see it. I'm shocked that the approval process for this parcel has proceeded to this point. The subject's site plan is so disingenuous and so based on false and misleading data and calculations that a child could see through it. The arrogance of this submission seems to expect complicity on the part of this Board. The fact that this Board issued a Negative Declaration prior to this hearing, and the actions of others, without public notice, smacks at least to the question of due process. The planning process and the question of what constitutes the entire contiguous parcel should be raised. The question of whether this particular parcel and the one to the west of it, the hotel site, are in constructive contiguous ownership, and should be a matter of some concern to the Board in it's planning decisions. This planning presumes that the site of the motel, etc., is owned by the Suffolk County Industrial Development Agency, and it's so described in the legal notice. The agency says no. They have emphatically told me that three times. The agency spokesman, the deputy director, states that this property, referring to the motel site previously identified as lots 3.2 and 3.3, is in the beneficial ownership of C & L Realty, Inc., whose principals are William Leiblein and George Cottral. Southold Town Planning Board 3 February 26, 1996 The contention that the property is owned by the SCIDA probably arises from the deed dated 11/27/84 in the assessor's files. Were it examined, there was no monetary consideration at that time and it was not considered by the agency to be an arms length transaction. It is my opinion that this contention that the entire property consists of 4.96 acres, rather than 7 acres, is akin to a house of cards supported by a slender reed. /challenge this Board to research the recorded instruments pertaining to this property in 1984. I did. I encountered well in excess of one hundred pages of filed documents in the Town of Riverhead. I will provide entre to these documents for the Board's consideration, and I believe that a definitive legal determination is required. Now, much took place about this property on November 1, 1984. Four and a half years after this purported conveyance of the westerly portion, this 3.2 and 3.3, the Port of Egypt is still flaunting and advertising it's ownership of the entire 7 acres. That's four and a half years after this property was supposedly conveyed to the agency. The deputy director of the SCIDA concedes that the agency's participation represents a legal method of tax avoidance. The motel portion is now on the tax exempt roll in the Town of Southold. My opinion of what has happened with this property is subject to legal interpretation. I believe that Messrs. Cottral and Leiblein ended up with a $400,000.00 payment based on a bond which permitted them to buy and improve this property. That this money eventually reverted to themselves and is now, according to the instruments on file, a purchased money and building mortgage, guaranteed by a so called lease. Now, in my opinion, the owners of the Port of Egypt have constructive ownership of the entire 7 acre parcel. The plot plan itself is hardly worthy of comment. It displays a contem pt for any reviewers intelligence. The legend surreptitiously and stealthily attempts to intrude district 1000, section 56, block 4, lot 10.1, as part of the approval sought. There's no planning for that parcel, nor is that parcel the object of this public hearing. The plan, as submitted, is the equivalent of choosing one from colu mn A and one from column B, in this instance, survey by Roderick Van Tuyl, and a plan by Peconic Associates. It is difficult to decide on the most egregious aspect of this plan. According to code requirements, the planned parking for the present uses constitutes 131 spaces less than what the code requires, that's approximately 1.05 acres ~n land area. We have here a plan that locates so called parking spaces in a public r-o-w within a building devoted to other use and with spaces within 2 or 3 feet of mean high water. How can this Board even keep a straight face when examining a plan that provides 10 spaces for what are probably more than 165 dry stored Southold Town Planning Board 4 Februa~ 26,1996 boats on the property. The storage is so intensive that boats are now stored on the property of others. The question of more intensive storage of stored boats and dry stored boats, by reducing parking requirements, was long since faced by the Town Board and no such change was allowed. The plan was based on other outrageous and specious assumptions which I do not have time to discuss in detail on this occasion. Obviously, I wouldn't be granted the time to discuss it in the detail that they deserve. For this reason, I submit to the Board a more detailed report, written remarks and opinions, the jist of which I am prepared to examine and explain to the Board's staff. Now, in conclusion, I had mentioned that there was a Negative Declaration on this property. This property is in a critical environmental area on a flood plain, and as such requires a long environmental assessment form. I haven't seen anything such as that. The end result of all this is it probably insults the Board's intelligence, this site plan. And it certainly insults mine. rm concluded for this evening, and I'd be glad to provide a more detailed set of calculations and the background for some of these remarks that I've made. Thank you. Mr. Ward: I know Mr. Leiblein is here. I don't know if he would like toat this time just address the differences in your ownership between the two parcels, on the record, rd appreciate that. William Leiblein: About 50 years ago this month, my father and my uncles bought the original Port of Egypt property from Carl Rider, and over the years purchased adjacent lots, up to and including the lots on which the Port of Egypt property now stands. As well as some property across the street. They owned it in a partnership at that time. In 1969 when I got out of the navy and came back into the business, it changed to a corporation so that my father could share his interest with his two sons and over the years the percentage of the shares varied between my father, by brother and I and my two sisters. At the present time, the Port of Egypt Enterprises property is owned by myself, my wife, my five children and my brother. Specific shares are 33, 32, the children each have five shares and my brother owns 15 shares. In 1984, we had the opportunity to purchase the property adjacent to the Port of Egypt. My brother and sisters had no interest. My brother-in-law George Cottral, my wife's brother, and I and our wives decided that it was a good investment. We purchased the property from the Morris family in November of 1984. At that time we opted to use the Suffolk County Development Agency with developing agency bonding, what at that time certainly appeared to be a very Southold Town Planning Board 5 February 26, 1996 advantageous rate of 11%. You may recall in the 1980's interest rates were up in the 20's. We borrowed $400,000.00. $250,000.00 was used to pay for the property. The remainder was used to improve the proper[y, specifically the motel and fish market which were in a horrible state of disrepair. The conduit for using the SClDA allowed for tax abatement on the improvements only. It's not a tax dodge. It was an opportunity that the county made available. At the present time we pay a very small tax upstairs, and then we go downstairs an d we make a payment in lieu of taxes, which at the present time the combined total is approximately $30,000.00 a year. So it isn't like we're getting off scott free. My brother-in-law has absolutely no interest in Port of Egypt property, nor his wife. My wife and I combined have a 50% interest in C & L Realty, and it is presently on the market and has been On the market. Unfortunately we bought when prices were high and now prices are down and we don't have a taker, so we're just hanging in there. The Port of Egypt property is totally separate, there is no connection between the two. There was a time when we thought about developing the whole complex and putting condos in along with the marina, back when condos were the thing to do and at the time we had considered getting a SCIDA loan for both C & L Realty and Port of Egypt combined, and we were going to borrow $4,000,000.00. (inaudible) And we decided not to do that at the time, and I can't remember what year we started with the application to put up the storage building and Garrett has addressed the reasons for switching over to the swimming pool. There is no connection between the two properties and as the Board well knows, we're not in collusion with you. Are there any other questions that were brought up? Mr. Ward: Any of the Board members have any questions at this time? (None) Mr. Flynn, we're always interested in the public input in our process and we appreciate you actually coming in to see Bob a few days ago, or last week, whenever it was, and a lot of the things you brought up we did check into and will be part of the resolution that we are prepared to present tonight. It may not totally satisfy you in terms of it, but we did look into many of the items and this Board was very much in favor of this particular ,p, roject in lieu of the storage building. And we're in the process now where we probably ca a vote on it in a resolution, if there is anything else that you would like to add before you do that. Mr. Flynn: Yes, I most certainly would like to add something. You say I had met with Bob. The (inaudible) of the situation was such that for one thing there was very limited public notice of this and it was also over a holiday week-end and it's a very complex problem. Now, this hearing is for the purpose of the Board securing information on which to base it's deliberations. I assure you that if you go through those remarks which I submitted this evening, you will find no reason to grant this application in accordance with the Town Code and I presume you are operating in Southold Town Planning Board 6 February 26, 1996 accordance with the Town Code. This plan, as I said, provides for 10 parking spaces. Has this Board inspected this property? It is literally covered with boats. There are so many boats, that they also are stored off the property. Every one of those boats, according to the code, requires a parking space. And the question is not simply one of parking. This battle was fought long ago, and the Town Board came to the conclusion that the only control they had to regulate the density of use, per parcel, was via parking. They cannot very well administer- although they should - the number of boats on a property. The Town Board concluded that were they to reduce these parking lots to one quarter the current requirement, it could result in additional thousands of boats being placed in town waters. So the end result of this is any plan which provides for such limited parking, and which provides for parking ~n a public r-o-w and which provides for parking within two or three feet of mean high water and all these other things which have been apparently overlooked either by the Board or by its staff, n reviewing this parcel are such egregious violations of the code that there is no logical or equitable basis for just ramming this thing through. Now, I presume I have consumed about 10 minutes previously in speaking about this thing. There have been undoubtedly countless meetings between the applicant and this Board, or staff members, etc. in the past. I can't possibly explain all the deficiencies in this plan verbally in such a short time frame. So I merely say that based upon my analysis of that plan, if you approve it, you are violating the Town Code. There is another issue involved here. There are 4.96 or 8 acres supposedly involved. Has anybody counted the uses on. this? They may be no n-conforming uses, but by my calculations the uses on this property call for a minimum of six or more acres. Now, there aren't six acres, but there are uses on this property where it would be possible to apportion this lot into the required 80,000 square foot lots or plots, without over-intensively developing the property. This is not a pure vacant parcel of land that is being developed. This is a parcel of non-conforming uses which it is possible to some degree to make conforming. And I believe that's also a function of this Board, and one which they should analyze, undertake and carry through. There is much about this application that wouldn't stand the light of day and it is unbelievable to me that this Board would rush through such an application replete with so many errors, miscalculations and other egregious statements that don't meet the light of day. Now, with respect to this change of title on this property, obviously I don't (inaudible) to a change of title. However, the referenced deed in November of ! 984, again, was not an arms length deed. It was in the corporate transaction where the two of the owners, Mr. Cottrel and Mr. Leiblein, and this whole contract Southold Town Planning Board 7 February 26, 1996 was conditioned upon the granting of this $400,000.00 bond issue which through a whole series of transactions became a purchased money mortgage and bond. The lease referred to constitutes a situation which my analysis at least indicates, is that it serves to pay off the mortgage. It serves as security or the mortgage. Over a period of 15 years, at the end of which the current owners, C & L can purchase this property and are obligated to purchase this property, for one dollar. Now, it is my contention that there is a distinct relationship between the ownership of these parcels. Mr. Leiblein's actions indicates such, inasmuch as he pays taxes on both of these parcels. He advertises, or at least lists with brokers, certain aspects of the C & L property. The mortgage sites boat slips on the mortgage property, which I presume you will find to be in a unity of use with the marina property. There are also a line of sheds between the hotel and the main metal building on the so called marina property. Consequently, there is evidence, circumstantial but worth investigating, that there is still a unity of use between these parcels. So, for you to say on a notice that appeared a week ago that this Board is prepared to rubber stamp this application with the objections rve raised, to me constitutes not only lack of due process but rather high handed action. Thank you. Mr. Ward: In relation to the parking, Mr. Flynn, it's been this Board's policy for a number of years to handle the dry storage of boats, out of water (change tape) the standard of care that we've been using as a Board for a number of years is one care per four out of water slips, not only at this marina but others within the town. That's been our policy for a number of years so it hasn't been on a one to one basis. This particular project has been to us a number of years. There's a lot of complexity to it, I agree with you. But, we did carefully look through, I believe, all the issues you've raised. Mr. Flynn: You haven't, rve raised additional issues based on my research. Mr. Ward: I listened to you. You have to listen to me now. What rm saying is that we did due diligence in our research and efforts to look at this particular project. We've had an extended review with the applicant on this. We, as a Board, look to this project as a far superior project to the community than the storage building that was going to go up. I think that this is a much better benefit to that particular site and to the project. We see this in that case as a benefit. I don't really have at this point...you've raised a number of issues, I think that what we will go through tonight will answer some of them, probably not all of them but the ones at least we felt we would have to address. Mr. Flynn: You raised an issue right now, pertinent to the Board's actions in allocating a quarter space for a dry stored boat. I call your attention...I don't know it off hand, it's in my notes, to that section of the Town Code which says you may Southold Town Planning Board 8 February 26, 1996 have the right to waive parking requirements, provided they don't affect the health, safety and welfare of the inhabitants and further, if they are not different or in conflict with the intent of the Town Code and it stated conditions. Now, here you have a real dichotomy between what you're doing and what the Town Board permits to be done. Do you really consider...have you seen this property? I would guess that there are an excess of 200 boats there. Do you really believe that 10 parking spaces for dry stored boats constitutes any equitable solution to what is dictated by the Town Code? I don't, rm sure if there were more people aware of what's going on here, they would agree with me. Thank you. Oh incidentally, may I raise one other issue? This application is not to put in only a swimming pool. You'll note there ~s a cabana plan there which in incidentally on the site of the non-conforming building, and there is a playground. To me, this has all the aspects of a beach club, which is provided for in the Town Code provided that you have 80,000 square foot land area to go along with it. Now, to have an associated use for this parcel, it has to be the type of use that prevails throughout the community. The only similar use that I know of, and it's in close proximity, is at Young's Marina. Young's Marina was required to dedicate 80,000 square feet of its site for its swim club. Now, there are definitions as you well know in the Town Code as to what constitutes a club. n most instances, these clubs are supposed to be non-profit. Where it is on a property which is operated for profit, the criteria applicable are those for a swim club. And it is hardly to be put on that property without the prospect of profit. Therefore, this is another area where you have obfuscation as to what the real intent here ~s. And by the way, just to emphasize the fact, if this is to be construed as a swim or beach club, there are additional parking requirements. Notably, one parking space for every two...in other words, two thirds of a parking space per member of the club. So, all and all, this application, this plan, raises more questions than it answers. And again I state, that for this Board to approve this site plan in no way reflects well on the ability. Now, this question of parking, leaving a lie aside, this question of dry boat parking, how about the question of in-water slips and the boats therefore. That plan calls for 122 boats. Mr. Ward: The in-water slips are accounted for by a one to one basis on site. Mr. Flynn: Yes, but the plan calls for 122. Do you realize Mr. Leiblein has advertised a capacity of 1507 And this is more or less confirmed by a survey conducted by the North Fork Environmental Council which not only confirmed the in- water storage situation but also found a much higher number of dry storage boats than were previously shown. You are getting, I believe, into the question of the operation of a business here, when your remarks are this is better than that, etc. I long since learned that when Southold Town Planning Board 9 February 26, 1996 you value a property, you do not value it in accordance with the owners business or fluctuations therein. You value it based upon the maximum utility of the property. I presume that the Planning Board acts in the same fashion. If so, this property as it exists is over-improved and cannot provide the facilities specified for in the Town Code. I find, in conclusion, that I'm up against a stone wall here, when there has been a decision made prior to the public hearing. And I thought the purpose of this public hearing was to elicit facts reflecting on an analysis of the site plan. Now rm told you know everything that I know. Frankly, I doubt it. And you have not taken the time to go over my statements, my calculations, etc. I find this a very strange hearing. Thank you. Mr. Ward: There are a couple of other marinas that have pools. Matt-A-Mar ~n Mattituck, Stirling Harbor, Greenport. We felt we had done due diligence on this, but rll leave it up to the Board at this point. Mr. Leiblein? Mr. Leiblein: I'll try to remember some of the remarks Mr. Flynn made and I'll address the C & L issue one more time. The manner ~n which he's presented it makes it sound like there was some sort of sneaky deal and at the end I get to buy it for a dollar. There's no question that we're making mortgage payments to a bank because that's the way the SClDA set it up, they held title, they get the tax bill, they send it to us, we pay the tax bill. And we're running the place for a profit. That's why we bought it and at the end of the mortgage payments to the bank and the note is paid off to the bank, the SCIDA signs it over to us and then it's ours. And if we wanted to sell it now, if we could find a buyer now, we can sell it now, pay off the mortgage and that's it. The SCIDA has no direct say in what we do on the property, what we charge for the rooms or anything of that nature. And when that place is sold, my brother-in-law gets half the money and his wife and my wife and I get the other half, if we sell it. And if the Port of Egypt property were sold, I would get my share and my brother would get his share. There is no connection between the two other than I am a shareholder in both corporations, and so is my wife. There are more than 200 boats stored at the Port of Egypt, but it's the middle of winter and that's what we do in the W~nter time in order to earn the money to pay the taxes and pay the health and all the other things that have to go on. None of our boats are stored on any state r-o-w. And if anyone thinks that the boats that are just across from The Barge on that little tongue of land between Old Main Rd. and the Main Rd., those boats belong to Club Wave. And they are being sold by Club Wave and we have absolutely nothing to do with that piece of property. In fact, it was originally owned by Armando, and is now owned by Club Wave. In the summer time, the boats that are on land go into the water. Some of them go to the people's homes or go to other marinas and the ones that are docked at our Southold Town Planning Board 10 February 26, 1996 place go into our docks. So, there is no parking problem as the Board knows from surveys that were done over the years. If anything, the parking is underutilized. The primary purpose of this swimming pool is to provide additional amenities to the customers in our marina. And when I made this application I was told by Mr.Kassner that we would only be able to allow people in our marina to use the swimming pool; we couldn't sell outside memberships. It really wasn't our intention to sell outside memberships. So in our view, the same people are going to walk from their boat in the marina over to the swimming pool and then get in their car and go home, so it doesn't require any additional parking. The cabana, which is the term that Garrett has applied to the building with the showers, you have to have showers and bathrooms if you have a swimming pool and apparently the common term is to call it a cabana. It's not a big fancy place, it's just going to be a place with bathrooms and showers and there's going to be a washer and dryer in there and a little place to sell sandwiches, the same as they do down at Brick Cove. They have the cigarette machines and things of that nature. There ts a piece of property in front of the restaurant, a triangular shape piece of property which we do not have title to, which we lease from the state and pay rent for. Perhaps that's what's referred to when some of our boats are on that triangular piece of property and we have a lease with the state of New York and we pay for that on a monthly basis. I guess that's all I can add. Mr. Ward: Are there any further comments? Anybody else that would like to address the Board? Mr. Strang? Garrett Strang: I would just like to go on record taking exception to the point that was made about the accuracy of the calculations on the Site. I believe that they are accurate. The acreage was defined by a survey. The amount: of area that we used in calculating lot coverage was based on that survey and the actual size of the structures on that site. And in fact they show as per the plan that we're considerably under the allowable 30% lot coverage as far as that goes. I think what's neglected to be mentioned is the fact that the parking calculations based on use is required 199 parking spaces and we have, as shown on the drawing, 251. So, we have provided more parking than is in fact required. Again, I just wanted to make it a point to be o-n record that the accuracy of the site data stands on its merits, rd be glad to answer any other questions that the Board may have. Mr. Ward: Mr. Flynn? Mr. Flynn: A couple of issues have been raised here. This could pretty well get to be an election debate. With respect to the so called leased area by Old Main Rd., rd like to see that lease, and I presume the Board should like to see it as well. Because rm certain that the lease does not give exclusive rights to the use of that property to the Port of Egypt Marina, for the simple reason that it serves on many Southold Town Planning Board 11 February 26, 1996 occasions to divert traffic. It also serves as a means of access to the other parcels to the east. Consequently, I don't believe they have the exclusive rights to it and I question rather they have the right to construct improvements on it or any other leased parcel. If you were to look at that site and compare it to the survey, you would find that the Port of Egypt has constructed improvements on what was to use your phrase, now or formerly Main Rd. Now, with respect to coverage, this is the same problem that came up before. And incidentally, the two maps sited, the site plan and the Van Tuyl survey, showed different improvements. But more to the point, is what they don't show in the calculations. Section 100-13 of the Town Code, as you well know, states that structures or buildings consist of anything above grade, constructed of any materials so that the ground underneath cannot be used for any other purpose. There is a huge slab, which the Board of Appeals and the Trustees refuse to consider in terms of prior applications, or hearings rather. And also, you have a number of perimeter walks and other situations here which add up to the coverage. And finally, this is a parking lot proposition as much as anything else. And a parking lot in the Town Code as you well know is defined as a grade level paved area for the temporary parking of motor vehicles. Now, the question of pavement here doesn't enter into this situation at all. And another thing which has not been shown in any form on the site plan is the requirement for landscaping. Now, surely this property if any property should have landscaped screen. And as a matter of fact, one of the previous consultants to the Town in one of the 'surveys he made for the Town said that the upland storage of boats was an eyesore. How much more of an eyesore is it to have towering racks filled with boats and yet this Board has evidently not seen fit to provide a single plant of landscaping on this entire property. Previous approved properties also required landscaping along the bulkhead line. And how can you maintain that there is proper parking here. Is it proper parking to park within two or three feet of mean high water, in a flood plain? This is ridiculous. I might just as well walk outof here now. There's no way I can penetrate the pre-conceived and obvious bias of this Board. Thank you. Mr. Ward: Anyone else like to address the Board? If not, all is in order to close the hearing. Is there a second? Mr. Orlowski: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. What's the pleasure of the Board? Southold Town Planning Board 12 February 26, ].996 Mr. Flynn: Mr. Chairman, may I be indulged to ask you to poll the Board here. I didn't quite hear the votes of the individual members of the Board. Mr. Ward: We haven't voted. Mr. Flynn: Oh, I thought you had. Mr. Ward: All we did was vote on closing the hearing. Mr. Flynn: I'm sorry. Mr. Ward: What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Chairman, t'd like to make a motion. WHEREAS, Port of Egypt Enterprises, Inc. is the owner of the property known and designated as Port of Egypt Marina located at Main Rd., Southold, SCTM# 1000-56- 64 & 6.1; and WHEREAS, a formal application for the approval of this site plan was submitted on November 10, 1994; and WHEREAS, the site plan consists of placing a 30 x 50 swimming pool adjacent to two existing non-conforming buildings (as to set backs); and converting one building to a cabana and snack bar (vending machines); and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, conducted a coordinated review with the Suffolk County Department of Health Services, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Southold Town Board, Trustees, and Building Department, declared itself lead agency, and issued a Negative Declaration on January 9, 1995, subject to the regulations that were m effect at the time; and WHEREAS, the swimming pool will be used only by a membership club consisting of present and future marina slip users; and WHEREAS, the manna and accessory swimming pool have been determined to be consistent with the purposes in the Town's Comprehensive plan for the Marine II District, which this property is zoned; and WHEREAS, the use of buildings with pre-existing nomconforming set backs on the subject site for the swimming pool will not significantly expand any of the uses of these buildings; and WHEREAS, the adjacent property known and designated as SCTM# 1000-56-6-3.4, Southold Town Planning Board 13 February 26, 1996 The Terning Point Motel, is a separate parcel owned by the Suffolk County Development Agency; and WHEREAS, Town Code 100-254 (4) gives the Planning Board authority to vary or waive parking requirements; and WHEREAS, Planning Board and its staff have made inspections of the parking conditions at the site, and have determined that the swimming pool for marina slip users will not require additional on site parking; and WHEREAS, the 251 existing and/or proposed parking spaces have been determined to be adequate for all existing and the proposed use of the site; and WHEREAS, this site plan was certified by Thomas Fisher, Senior Building Inspector, on February 26, 1996; 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 and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final survey dated February 7, 1996 subject to a one year rewew from date of building permit. Mr. Latham: Second the motion. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Final Determinations: Mr. Ward: Stanley & Sharon Swanson and Robert Hamilton- This lot line change is to subtract 8,129 square feet from a 35,389 square foot parcel and add it to a 44,094 square foot parcel. SCTM# 1000-141-2-15 & 21.5. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, rd like to make the following resolution. Be it resolved that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final Southold Town Plannin8 E~oard 14 February 26, ].996 surveys dated August 2, 1995. Conditional final approval was granted on October 23, 1995. All conditions have been fulfilled. Mr. Ward: Is there a second? Mr. Orlowski: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Preliminary Extensions: Mr. Ward: Wildberry Fields- This major subdivision ~s for 10 lots on 22.3886 acres located on the south side of Sound View Ave.; 289 feet west of Clark Rd. and the north side of County Road 48; 320 feet west of Clark Rd. in Southold. SCTM# 1000-51-3-12.2 & 12.4. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, be it resolved that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a retroactive six month extension of preliminary approval from October 10, 1995 to April 10, 1996. Mr. Orlowski: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Setting of Final Hearings: Mr. Ward: Thornton Smith- Section 1 - This major subdivision is for 9 lots on 80.5893 acres and designed in two sections. Section 1, comprising 47.2985 acres, will result in three non-residential lots; the development rights have been sold to the Town for the area of proposed lots 1 and 2, and proposed lot 3 is protected by a conservation easement to the Peconic Land Trust. Section 2, comprising 33.2908 acres will result in six, 5 acre residential lots. SCTM# 1000-121-1-1 and 113-7-19.2. What's the pleasure of the Board? Southold Town Planning Board 15 February 26, 1996 Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman I'd like to make the following resolution. Be it resolved that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, March 18, 1996 at 7:30 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated January 23, 1996 for Thornton Smith, Section 1. Mr. Orlowski: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Ward: North Fork Industrial Park (a.k.a. Tide GrouD) - This major subdivision is for 8 lots on 29.11 acres located on the northeast corner of Middle Road and Depot Lane in the LIO District in Cutchogue. SCTM# 1000-96-1-1. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I make the following motion; be it resolved to adopt the bond estimate dated February 3, 1996 and to recommend same to the Town Board. The bond estimate is in the amount of S405,295.00, with an administration fee in the amount of $24,317.70. Mr. Latham: Second Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. Al in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Cremers: And, be it resolved that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, March 18, 1996 at 7:35 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated February 5, 1996. Mr. Orlowski: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Southold Town Planning Board 16 February 26, 1996 Sketch Extensions: Mr. Ward: Peconic Development Corp. (a.k.a. Harvest Homes): - This major subdivision is for 13 lots on 14.9 acres located on Oaklawn Ave and Wells Ave. in Southold. SCTM# 1000-70-3-22. Mr. Latham: Be it resolved that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a six month extension of sketch approval from February 7, 1996 to August 7.1996. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Latham: Also be it resolved to adopt the Engineering Inspector's report dated February 13, 1996. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ortowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Review of Reports: Engineering Mr. Ward: Ann Marie Nelson- This minor subdivision ~s for 4 lots on 12.1 acres located on the west side of Ninth St. in Greenport. SCTM# 1000-45-6-9. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make the following resolution. Be it resolved to adopt the Engineering Inspector's report dated February 7, 1996. Mr. Latham: Second the motion. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Southold Town Planning Board 17 February 26, 1996 MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES, SET OFF APPLICATIONS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Determinations: Mr. Ward: Thornton Smith-Sections I & 2- SCTM# 1000-121-1-1 and 113-7-19.2. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Cremers: Mr. Chairman, I make the following motion. Be it resolved that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assumes lead agency status, and as lead agency makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration. Mr. Latham: Second the motion. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Ward: Russell Pellicano - This minor subdivision is for 4 lots on 18.54 acres on the south side of North Bayview Rd. in Southold. SCTM# 1000-79-8-13. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Cremers: rVlr. Chairman, I make the following resolution. 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. Orlowski: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Mr. Ward: Board to approve the January 29, 1996 minutes. Is there a motion? Southold Town Planning Board 18 February 26, 1996 Mr. Orlowski: So moved. Mr. Ward: Moved. Seconded? Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Ward: All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. OTHER Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion that WHEREAS, the Planning Board has standing policies in regard to time frames for conditional final approvals of subdivisions, set-offs, lot line changes and site plans; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board wishes to adopt these policies in order to provide uniform guidance to applicants and to the public; and WHEREAS, the policies are set forth in the attached Policies in Regard to Time Frames for Conditional Final Approvals of Subdivisions, Set-offs, Lot line Changes and Site Plans; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board has determined that the policy adoption is a Type action under the State Environmental Quality Review Act; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board set March 18, 1996, at 7:40 P.M. for a public hearing on the Policies in Regard to Time Frames for Conditional Final Approvals of Subdivisions, Set-offs, Lot Line Changes and Site Plans. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Ward: Motion seconded. All in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. Mr. Ward: Policies ~n regard to time frames for conditional final approvals of subdivisions, set-offs, lot line changes and site plans. What's the pleasure of the Board? Southold Town Planning Board 19 February 26, 1996 Mr. Ward: Is there anyone here that would tike to address the Board in their public session, on the record, otherwise we'll be adjourning now and going to a work session. I noticed some of you are here for that. Any member of the Board wish to state anything at this point for the public record? If not, a motion is in order to adjourn. Mr. Orlowski: So moved. Mr. Cremers: Second. Mr. Ward: Moved and seconded. Al in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham, Mr. Cremers, Mr. Ward. Mr. Ward: Opposed? Motion carried. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Richard G. Ward, Chairman Respectfully submitted, Martha A. Jones Secretary