Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-02/24/1992PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski. Jr.. Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Fax (516) 765-1823 MINUTES FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Present were: Absent: Bennett Orlowski Jr., Chairman G. Richie Latham, Member Richard Ward, Member Mark McDonald, Member Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Melissa Spiro, Planner Holly Perrone, Secretary Jane Rousseau, Secretary Kenneth Edwards Mr. Orlowski: I would like to call this meeting to order. First order of business is for the Board to set Monday, March 16, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board Meeting. Mr. McDonald: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: ~ ~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 2 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski: Eleanor Sievernich - ThiS minor subdivision is for two lots on 3.743 located on the east side of Cox Neck Lane in Mattituck. $CTM ~1000-113-8-5. It is still at the Zoning Board of Appeals so I'll entertain a motion to keep the hearing open. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Wolf Pit Estates - Board to discuss amending the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions for this major subdivision located on Mill Road in Mattituck. SCTM ~1000-107-4-2.1 Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board will hold the hearing open pending the submission of a revised Draft of the Covenants and Restrictions by the applicant for review by the Planning Board and the Town Attorney. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE C~ANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Final Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Mattituck Creek Estates - This major subdivision is for six lots on 19.1220 acres located on the southwest corner of Mill Road and Grand Avenue in Mattituck. SCTM $1000-107~1-2. g'~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 3 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final'surveys dated October 31, 1991 with the following conditions to be affixed tO the map: 1. All items listed in the Engineering Inspector's report dated February 18, 1992 includinq the planting of the street trees, must be completed ~efore any building permit will be issued. The Planning Board in a letter dated January 22, 1992, reduced the caliper size of the street trees to be planted on the western edge of the open space lot (along Grand Avenue) down to between 1 & 1/2" to 2" All the other street trees shall comply wi~h the Town's specifications. The Planning Board reserves the right to re-inspect the smaller trees within one year of planting and to require their replacement if any should die within that period of time. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Ortowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. (Chairman enclosed maps) Mr. Orlowski: Porter J. & Mary Goss - This proposed lot line change is to subtract a .09 acre of land from a .74 acre parcel to add it to a .99 acre parcel on Fishers Island. SCTM $1000-2-1-13 & 14. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to Offer the following motion. P~SOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated January 8, 1992. All conditions of final approval have been met. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. A~y questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. (Chairman endorsed maps). S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 4 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski: Porter and Mary Goss and Michael Laugh/in This proposed lot line change is to s,~btract a .66 acre of land from a 5.47 acre parcel and to add it to a 1.16 acre parcel on Fishers Island. SCTM ~1000-2-1-15.1 & i6. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southotd Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated February 10, 1992. All conditions of final approval have been met. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered, Preliminary Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: North Fork Industrial Park - This major subdivision is for eight lots on 29.11 acres located on the northeast corner of Middle Road and Depot Lane in the L10 District in Cutchogue. SCTM $1000-96-1-1. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. ~SOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant Preliminary Approval to the maps dated January 10, 1992 with the following conditions of approval: The final maps shall be revised in accordance with the reports dated December 23, I991 and January 30, 1992 from James A. Richter. The Board is requiring that Depot Lane be resurfaced with a 2" lift of asphalt. However, the lift is to start at C.R. 48 and is to extend North along Depot Lane until the intersection of Corporate Road, rather than the 2,200 lineal feet stated in the December 23rd report. J The final maps shall indicate a temporary turnaround at the end of Corporate ROad. This turnaround shall remain until such time that Corporate Road is extended r $~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 5 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 into the adjacent property. The landscaping design for the one-hundred (100~ foot buffer area is to be shown on the final plan or on a separate landscape plan. The landscaping in the buffer area shall include, in addition to other plantings, a double row of evergreen trees, and Shall provide a total visual barrier both along C.R. 48 and Depot Lane. All landscaping items will be included in the bond estimate for the subdivision. One entry sign will be allowed for the sign for the industrial part. Such area should be designated on the final subdivision maps. Street trees will be required along all proposed roads. These may be indicated on either the final plan or on the landscape plan. The location of the firewei1 must be indicated on the final map. If the present well is accepted by the Fire District, the location of such well in addition to any easement granted to the Fire District to obtain access to such well, must be shown on the map. 7. The following covenants and restrictions will be required for the subdivision: (a) The access for all lots located at the end of a cul-de-sac (Lots 3,4,7 and 8 on the map dated January 10, 1992) shall be designed, at such time that the individual site is developed, tin such a manner as to provide additional turning area for tractor trailer trucks. (b) Parking shall be prohibited in all cul-de-sacs. (c) Ail parking shall be provided on site for each lot. (d) Access to all lots shall be via the proposed roads. No lot shall have direct access onto Depot Lane or C.R. 48. 8. A property owners association must be established for the road and drainage area. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. ~ S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 6 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Preliminary Extensions Mr. Orlowski: Summit Estates - This major subdivision is for thirty-five lots on 40.8223 acres located on the southwest corner of Main Road, N.Y.S. 25 and Shipyard Lane in East Marion. SCTM $1000-35-8-5.3. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a six month extension of preliminary approval from February'25, 1992 to August 25, 1992. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Ortowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All ~hose in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Setting of Preliminary Hearings: Mr. Orlowski: Angel Shores - This proposed subdivision is for forty-nine lots on 92.74 acres off Main Bayview in $outhold. SCTM $1000-88-6-1,3 & 5. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, March 16, 1992 at 7:30 p.m. for a preliminary public hearing on the maps dated December 27, 1991, subject to receipt of the report from the Suffolk County Planning CO~L~Lission by such date. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. ~ S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 7 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Sketch Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Robert D. Hamilton - This minor subidivision is for three lots on 3.4958 acres located onthe northwest side of C.R. 48; 102.31 feet southwest of Westphalia Road in Mattituck. SCTM ~1000-141-2-21.1 Mr. McDonald: I would like to make a motion. BE I'T RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch approval on the map dated February 5, 1992 with the conditions listed below. This s~,hdivision is designed as a Cluster S,,hdivision and will be reviewed in accordance with Article XVIII of the Town Zoning Code. 1. Lot %1 shall not have access onto C.R. 48. Access for this lot shall be from Westphalia Avenue only. Ail buildings on Lot %2 must be affiliated with the church. At present, the church is not in use. If the church use is reactivated, an As Built Site Plan will be required. 3. A curb cut approval for access onto C.R. 48 will be required for Lot %1. 4. Building envelopes should be indicated on thefinal plan for Lot ~1 and Lot %3. 5. There shall be no further subdivision of any lot in perpetuity. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr~ Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Sketch Extensions: Mr. Orlowski:1 Briarcliff Acres - This major subdivision is for seventeen lots on 35.7022 acres located on the north side of Main Road off Maple Road in Southold. SCTM %1000-75-2-8 & 9. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. $~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 8 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a sixI month extension of sketch approval from January 14, 1992 to July 14, 1992. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Engineering Reports: Mr. Orlowski: Briarcliff Acres - SCTM ~1000-75-2-8 & 9. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED to adopt the February 13, i992 report from the Engineering Inspector with the following amendments (numbers correspond to numbers in report): 1. As written. 2. As written. Curb cut approval will be required prior to the final determinations. The d'eed to the property includes a right-of-way in common with others 66 feet more or less in width to and from the subject property over Maple Avenue. It is assumed that this is the reason a 67' wide right-of-way is shown on the map. A 50' right-of-way with a pavement width built to Town specifications is required. 4, 5 and 6. As written. The subdivision maps have been forwarded to the Fire District for review. Any wells required must be indicated on the final plans. 8. As written. As written. The Board is requiring a street light at the enhance to the subdivision and at the end of the proposed cul-de-sac. 10. As written. S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 9 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Latham: Second. Fir. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Petro Stations - SCTM ~1000- Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman I make a motion. BE IT RESOLVED to adopt the Engineering Inspector's Report dated February 20, 1992. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. A~yquestions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Bond Reduction: Mr. Orlowski: Chardonnay Woods - This is an approved subdivision of 18 lots, located between Sound View Avenue and Old North Road in Southold. SCTM ~I000-51-3-3. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Board hereby reduces the performance bond estimate for the subdivision of Chardonnay Woods from three hundred and fifty thousand ($350.-000) dollars to forty-two thousand (42,000) dollars to cover the cost of the remaining work which includes installation of a fire well, the proper quantity and type of street trees, and the street lights. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham $~DUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 10 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. **************************************** MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES, SET OFF APPLICATIONS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Mr. Ortowski: Petrol Stations Ltd. - This major subdivision is for four lots on 5.836 acres located on Main Road, 264.57 feet west of Alvah's Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM $ 1000-109-1-23. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, t would like to make a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board start the lead agency coordination process on this unlisted action. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions onthe motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Robert D. Hamilton - SCTM ~1000-141-2-21.2. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Orlowski: two lots on 2.2612 acres located off a right of way off Lighthouse Road in Southold. SCTM $1000-50-3-14, 15 & 16. Any questions on the Opposed? So ordered. Charles Lewis This minor subdivision is for Mr. Orlowski: Mr. McDonald: RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board start the lead agency coordination process on this unlisted action. S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD i1 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board start the lead agency coordination process on this unlisted action. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Lead Agency Status: Mr. Orlowski: Harbor View Landin9 - This major subdivision is for ten lots on 83.117 acres located on Sage Boulevard in Greenport. SCT~ 91000-53-5-t2.5. The Planning Board to review responses to lead agency coordination request and to review information for SEQR determination. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. WHEREAS on September 30, 1991, the Planning Board started the lead agency coordination process subject to receipt of revised maps; and WHEREAS on January 15, 1992, the revised maps were submitted by the applicant; and WHEREAS on January 21, 1992, the Planning Board started the lead agency coordination process; and WHEREAS on January 28, 1992, the Planning Board received a response from the Department of Environmental Conservation stating that based upon a review of the information submitted, the proposed action will require permits from the DEC. Due to the fact that the applicant for the project'had not made an application to the DEC, that agency asked the Planning Board to defer their decision regarding lead agency determination until the DEC received a formal application; and WHEREAS on February 20, 1992, the Planning Board received a response from the Southold Town Trustees requesting an extension of time for review of the proposed map with respect to wetland issues; ~OUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 12 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 BE IT THEREFORE RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board extend the time frame to determine lead agency status until the next regularly scheduled Planning Board meeting, which is March 16, 1992. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Mr. Flynn: Mr. Chairman, do you entertain questions from the floor? Mr. Orlowski: I will. Mr. Flynn: I am a resident of Southold and the owner of abutting property. I would like to inquire as to whether your Planning staff has reviewed this application prior to its submission to the various state agencies? This application is replete with so many falsehoods, so much misinformation and so many misleading statements as to constitute misleading these agencies as to the extent and impact of this project. Now, were I to utilize the current phraseology, I would classify this whole proceeding as a scam. Now, I am prepared here, I have a few notes, I could be here all evening recounting everything that is wrong with this application but I would just like to point out a few of the things that are wrong. I am quite serious about this and I intend to pursue this to the extent permitted by law. The application is completely at odds with the map submitted, initially and as revised. Each contradicts the other. In here, in the application is what is in effect an attempt to trade a negative declaration for land which is absolutely against the law. Now, as I say, I cannot take all evening, but I will give you a few specifics. With respect to the application itself which was submitted in August of 1991, it says that there are no unpaid taxes and no liens against theproperty. When this was submitted to the state agencies, and I checked this with the Receiver of Taxes, there are substantial taxes unpaid on this property and there also have been lis pendens published against this property. Now, it states, the application~ not to get into at this moment that so lengthy appendix to the EAF. It states that there are only 11.5 acres of tidal water and that it is part of Southold Bay. Obviously, the 11.5 acres are not part of Southold Bay. They constitute the Sage Estuary. The fresh water ponds and the so called southerly one and one half acre marina are absolutely ignored. Now, there is a estimate of the cost of public improvements at $20,000 dollars, now, one of the scams inherent in this entire project intended to mislead anybody who doesn't investigate the matter is that they claim the sole road construction is to be in what they call the southerly part of the property for a length of 1500 feet. Well frankly, they ~ SO~THOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 13 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 don't even know the points of the compass because it isn't the southerly part of the property, it's the southeasterly part of the property and rather than 1500 feet, what is proposed here on the map in contradiction of the application is 3500 feet or more of road installation, and for this they put down an estimate of $20,000 dollars to cover the installation of a fifty foot road, the drainage, the paving, the underground electr'ical service and the water service. This is absolutely false, and I don't know who reviewed this application but it is an'absolute insult to the intelligence of a creatine. Now, as for the EAF. The subdivision of the property states that 57F247.acres will be dedicated to the nature conservancy to be kept for ever wild. The map indicates that this property is to be held by the homeowners association which is an entirely kettle of fish. The homeowners have the right to sell this property and there is no question of dedication to the nature conservancy. Further, in other aspects of this application, they refer to it not as forever wild, but as open space, which is another entirely different definition of property use. The acreage is completely miscalculated and as I said, the directions are such that nobody who is not intimately familiar with the property could understand what they are talking about. Essentially, what they are trying to mislead people into believing, is that this is an application for an improvement of a twenty=two acre parcel. This is an application for the improvement of an eighty-three acre parcel and you cannot consider the impact on twenty-two acres and ignore the impact on the rest of the property. The rest of~the property is actually so environmentally sensitive, that the applicant states that it is the habitat of endangered and threatened species and that the Sage Estuary is the feeding ground for these species. Now, what is intended here in the map, but deliberately misstated in the application is to put a fifty foot wide road directly through the wetlands without the required setback from either freshwater wetlands or salt water wetlands. Now this is absolutely false and it is an insult as I say to anybody who has any knowledge of planning or can even make a simple Calculation. Now, it is stated here that forty percent of this property is made land. Anybody who has walked over that property, as I have many times, knows that it is not forty percent made land. This again is a deliberate misstatement. It is ~possible that forty percent of the a~ea fronting on the bay is made land, but God made the wooded acres, certainly not man. With respect to the property fronting on the bay, it is casually stated that it is forty-nine hundred feet in length. For anybody tohave checked this plan, they realize that it is nowhere near forty-nine hundred feet in length, it is approximately, if my memory serves me, seventeen hundred feet in length and were you to have a map made to indicate at a one hundred scale, a property forty-nine hundred feet in length, you would obviously have to have a piece of paper forty-nine inches long and if you just take a glance at the map, you would know SC~JTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 14 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 that that is a physical impossibility. So, what I am saying here is, that this is a deliberate effort to mislead everyone as to the impact of this proposed development on the nature of~ the surrounding area and I suggest, most stronglY, that this entire proceeding be started from the on set remapped and made to c~nformwith the application. Now, there is probably a few other things I could mention here but, probably the single most important thing to mention here is that, in my opinion, this is phase 2 of an operation planned by Mr. Bredemeyer to make the entire Sage estuary a public anchorage and inherent in this plan is proof positive of that. There are plans supposedly for eleven slips or moorings. Now, the one and one-half acre southerly marina could easily accommodate fifty to seventy-five boats alone and ~et it is maintained that there are only eleven slips required. As a matter of interest, since there are ten houses, why are there eleven slips required. Because it states in the application that one of the slips will not be for a homeowner but will be for someone outside the property and I would very much like to know who it is that is going to have the right to Moore in that area. Finally, perhaps the most egregious misstatement of all, they plan another marina at what they describe as the northerly end of the property in the Sage Estuary and this marina is calculated to be approximately 3.87 acres in area of which a portion is in the upland and about 3 acres in the wetlands. That three acres is stated to be a mooring area, b~t were you to read the application, it does not say a mooring area, it says, slips-mooring. Based upon many years of experience, I will tell you flatly, that those approximately three acres can accommodate approximately one hundred boats in slips or if you were to calculate the swing radius at a mooring, it would accommodate perhaps forty-five or fifty. This is not intended to be part and parcel of this development what-so-ever, and I underline again, that this is supposedly to be in the ownership of the homeowners association. The homeowners association by right, could~ sell this off. Not only could they sell it off, but it is obvious that the homeowners with their approximately two acre parcels on the bay frontage are not interested in owning property that remote from them particularly when they are well served by the marina that has existed there in relation to the cottages. ~ow, as to the widening of the road, that road is a right-of-way, and it is sixteen feet in width. It has served thirty-one cottages for many years. Now all of a sudden, it is proposed to widen this road to fifty feet and the reason for that, in my opinion, is that it is intended to serve the Brick Cove Marina because, were you to examine the map, you would find that where this road passes the Brick Cove Marina, all of a sudden it widens to approximately eighty feet to create frontage for the Brick Cove Marina which never had frontage on the right-of-way. It is my opinion, that this is the method being used to force the applicant to put this road in there and no consideration was given to his previous S'OUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 15 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 plans where it was possible to put in that road across the connecting roads from the adjoining developments which was his primary intent. I will go so far as to say, that I sat in my attorney's office with Mr. Clifford Rudolph and Mr. Clifford Rudolph, at that time said, that he had no intention what-so-ever of widening Sage Blvd. (1) because of its detrimental effect on the environment and (2)because it would certainly increase traffic and would certainly damage his waterfront parcels which were the most valuable portion of the property that he owned. So, I feel, although I can't prove it at the moment, that pressure has been exerted on Mr. Rudolph to submit a plan which is in no way in accordance with the information conveyed to the various state agencies or the information conveyed over a period since 1988 to your own Planning Board and the end result of this is it is proposed to destroy this area which the applicant himself admits is the habitat of endangered species which the state shows fresh water and salt water wetland and the entire bottom of the Cove is salt water tidal water and further the bottom of the Sage Estuary is admitted by the Southold Baymen's Association to he one of the most productive areas of shellfishing. The area is closed during the marina season currently which is a de- facto admission of the pollution emminating from the marina and here this plan, apparently nobody has ever taken the trouble to analyze, would induce another hundred votes into the Sage Estuary. I say this is an afront to intelligence and it is an afront to any planning procedure and it has all the earmarks of a done deal. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Right now, the motion is to extend the time allowed for Lead Agency. Mr. Flynn: The point of the matter is Lead Agency decision has to be made by these state a~encies who havebeen deliberately misinformed as to the impact of this property. So what happens in an instance like this? The Lead Agency says, well this isn't a very important thing, there is only $20,000 dollars of improvements going in here etc. etc. and then they release it and permit the Town to adopt Lead Agency status and then it gets into the political arena and that has been the history of this whole Situation including the five suits that I have brought against the Trustees and so far have hadfour favorable decisions. Based upon the same line of reasoning that I am entertaining or expressing here and as I say, I am a man of principal and if this thing is not corrected, I shall pursue this to the utmost extreme of the law. Mr. Orlowski: O~K.. Like I said, right now this is in regards to Lead Agency, if you have those col~=~ents and you have them in writing, you can send them to us and to the DEC. We are waiting for the DEC co~m~ents and the comments from the Trustees before anything is done with Lead Agency. This is the long form SaOTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 16 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 and I am sure we will have public hearings and plenty of time to address all of those comments but right now this is what the resolution states. Your comments will be entertained. This is not a political arena over here. Mr. Flynn: With all respect, are you telling me that you propose not to correct this misinformation that has been submitted to these state agencies? These state agencies cannot reach a valid conclusion based on what you have conveyed to them as being the environmental assessment fo£,,, it's appendix and the application. You would have to have a level playing field here where the state has the facts to work with rather than factious r innamed, incorrect and deliberately misleading statements. Mr. Orlowski: We are both looking at the same document and the state agency has basically said, wait a second, we want to take a closer look. We are allowing them to do that right now. Mr. Flynn: But, there closer look entails examining the documentation that you sent to them. I know that. I have had enough experience in these areas and incidentally some of these misstatements are motorized. Consider the impact of that. They work on what you send them, these state agencies, if you send them misinformation then you are involved in submission of incorrect data in a matter concerning the public. Mr. Orlowski: Does the Board have any comments? I have a motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ortowski, Fir. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Thomas Monsell - This minor subdivision is for three lots on 3.0 acres located at the south side of Monsell Lane in Cutchogue. $CTM $1000-138-1-2.1, 9.1, 13.1 & 14. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assume lead agency status on this Type 1 action. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 17 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. **************************************** Mr. Orlowski: Annette Z~hohonski This minor s~hdivision is for two lots on 5.91 acres located on Crescent Avenue on Fishers Island. SCTM $ 1000-6-2-1. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assume lead agency status on this Type 1 action. This action is classified as a Type 1 action as it is located~within a Critical Environmental Area. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. motion? All those in favor? Any questions on the Ayes: Mro Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Ernest & Jean Schneider - This minor subdivision is for three lots on 13.423 acres located on the southwest side of Alvah's Lane 1347.3 northwest of CoR. 48 in Cutchogue. SCTM ~1000-95-3-10; 101-1-14.3. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assume lead agency, and as lead agency make a determination of non-significance, and grant a Negative Declaration. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and second. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. SO~THOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 18 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Southold Fire District (George Stepnoski) - This minor subdivision is for two lots on 21.044 acres located at Main Bayview Road and Baywater Avenue in Southold. SCTM ~1000-75-4-22. Mr. McDonal.d: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, established itself as lead agency on February 3, 1992, as as lead agency makes a determination of non-significance, 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. Ward, Mr. McDonald,. Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Edward Rouse - This proposal is to set off a 4,207 square foot parcel from an existing 11,514 square foot parcel located at the corner of Sterling Place and Champlin Place in Greenport. SCTM ~1000-34-3-28. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting u-nder 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. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. SOOTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 19 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 SITE PLANS Final Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Handy Pantry - This proposal is to convert a catering hall located at the southwest co~ner of Main Road and New Suffolk Avenue, Mattituck, into a shoDping/office complex. SCTM %1000-114-12-3.1. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grants final approval to the site plan for the conversion of the Tolendal Inn to a Handy Pantry Store; said plan signed by Donald Tase, Licensed Land Surveyor, (and revised 1-5-92), subject to completion of the following conditions; Submission of six revised 'as-built' site plans prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy showing the following revisions: 1. Replacement of the 30' lightingpoles with i2' high poles; and the shielding of the rear spot lights. o A driveway (constructed to parking lot specifications) from the ramp to the southerly curb cut on New Suffolk Avenue. Revision of the handicapped parking spaces to reflect the new standards of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. The passageways alongside the westerly .and southerly sides of the building shall be shown striped and marked for Fire Access. A sign prohibiting parking in front of this fire lane shall be shown as being posted at the southwestern and northeastern corners of the building. Se A statement on the section of the site plan showing the tandbanked parking area to the effect that conversion of the area between the ramp and the new curb cut shall require the submission of an amended site plan and an accompanying drainage and landscape plan for review and approval by the Planning Board prior to the issuance of building permits. A statement'that the sign shall be similar to the existing sign on the premises with regard to size, and exterior lighting. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 20 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 7. A statement that all interior curbing shall be constructed of concrete. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that no Certificate of Occupancy may be issued until the site is constructed in accordance with all the conditions noted above the six revised plans have been received by the Planning Board Office. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. ~Oriowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski:. Opposed? So ordered. Ms. Scopaz: Mr. Chairman, may I give the agent for the applicant a copy of the conditions because he will have to sign them. Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. orlowski: Pellegrini Winery - This proposed site plan is to construct a new winery and tasting room on approximately 1.4 acres of an existing thirty-six acre vineyard located on Main Road in Cutchogue. SCTM ~1000-109-1-8.7. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board ~rants final approval to the site plan for Pellegrini Winery, signed by Nancy R. Steelman, R.A. and dated a s revised on Februar~ 24~ 1992, with the following condition: No building permit shall be issued until the applicant receives a work permit from the New York State Department of Transportation for the curb cut on SR. 25. 2. The Conditional approval is subject to certification by the Building Department. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward. SO%ViVMOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 21 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. SITE PLANS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Metro Service Station - This site plan is for addition of canopy to existing site, located on Main Road and Depot Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM ~1000-102-5-26. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. BE IT RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, as the lead agency makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration for the amended site plan of Metro Gas Station, last revised on January 9, 1992, and signed by Kevin H. Bryant, Licensed Engineer. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: NYNEX Mobile Coa~,unications - This proposed site plan is to permit the installation of a 100 foot telecommunications monopole, located on C.R. 48 in Cutchogue. SCTM # 1000-96-1-19.1. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, as the lead agency makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration for the amended site plan of Arthur V. Junge Inc. for NYNEX Mobile Communications, last revised on July 31, 1991, signed by Richard E. Tangel, Licensed Engineer, and received in this office on September 13, i991. Mr. Latham: Second. SOL'OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 22 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All ~hose in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATIONS Mr. Or~wski: Mattituck Airbase - Presentation of petitioner on h~~ to ch------~nge zone of 4-8 acres of land from R-B0" Residential to "LI" Light Industrialzone. SCTM $1000-123-1-2. Is there anyone here representing MattituckAirbase? Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask that we hold this o~en and put it on the next agenda so someone will be here from Matituck Airbase. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. we'll hold that open. Mr. Orlowski: Oregon Road Recyclin~ Corp. - Discussion of fire well letter. SCTM ~1000-83-3-4.5. We have conditional approv$1. I went to sign it and noticed one of the conditions that should have been on there was the firewell. What would the Board like to do? Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. WHEREAS the Southold To~n Planning Board has received a letter from the Chief of the Cutohoque Fire Department, dated February 19, 1992, in which a recommendation is made in accordance with that Department's policy, that a fire well be installed on subject property due to the fact that there is no fire well within 1500 feet; and whereas said distance of 1500 feet is considered the maximum effective distance from a suitable water supply for fire protection; and whereas the closest wells to the property are 2121 and 2626 feet away; AND WHEREAS the Southold Town Planning Board also has received a letter from the Chairman of the Cutchogue Board of Fire Commissioners, dated February 21, 1992, which states that a recent safety inspection of the subject premises revealed that S~OUTHOLD TOWN pLANNING BOARD 23 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 adequate fire protection measures and procedures were not in effect, and that the "life and safety of Fire Fighters and Neighbors are in jeopardy"; BE IT RESOLVED that in the face of this clear and present danger to the public health, safety and welfare, the Southold Town Planning Board hereby amends its resolution of December 9, 1991, whereby the conditions for obtaining final approval for the Oregon Road Recycling site plan were set forth, by adding the following condition to those which must be fulfilled before the Chairman may endorse the site plan: That a fire well be installed and that fire protection measures suitable for use on hazardous waste be installed, both to the satisfaction of the Southold Town Planning Board, and that fire access lanes be clearly designated on the site to prevent their use otherwise. Mr. Olowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Mr. Latham: We received a letter from the applicant on February 21, 1992 stating that they were expecting a child and would not be able to attend this meeting. I think the applicant deserves another shot at this. I hate todo this without the applicant being here. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., we'll hold this over until the next meeting. We'll hold the resolution in abeyance Mr. Orlowski: I have nothing left on my agenda but for some reason there seems to be a lot of people out there that might have a question or two. Mr. Tom Flatter: Mattituck Saltaire Homeowners Association regarding Matthew's Project or Willow Run. I just want to reiterate past points and our present concerns. We really are concerned that our neighborhoods public saf~ety comes second place to development, farming and who knows what else~. We're real interested that the safety aspect in an existing long term neighborhood comes second place, maybe even third or fourth. We are also concerned that there has been an absolute whole lack of any sort of positive response at this point to concerns that we have brought up for almost four years from when we first became aware of the planned development. We have been here from day one bringing our points across and we still haven't seen any positive actions ~regarding our safety related requests. We have also noticed that when you had moved the subdivision temporarily to the south part of the property you had arranged for a realignment of the Mill Road, Mill Lane, Oregon Road intersection which at this time is fairly unsafe at .times. The Town had the opportunity to get a realignment of that road at 'S6UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 24 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 the developers expense and by moving everything back to the North, the Town has lost the initiative of getting that done at essentially no cost to the Town. We would really like to know in addition, why are w~ being ignored? We ~re trying to figure out who you people are suppose to be responsive to. We are the people who have to live with your decisions. You people aren't up there, we are. Your decision is going to effect us, nobody else. By the way, I just want to make sure the Planning Board is aware of the present actions that are taking place up there. There has been surveying done on the North end and they are now drilling test wells and we are just curious as to what is going on up there. If this gentlemen keeps doing his wells and so forth and goes to these expenses, he has got every right to do his thing on the North end and then we are going to get this garbage jammed down our throats which I don't think is appropriate. It is not fair to the developer and it's not fair to us. The developer has every right to get a prompt response on his thing and we feel and by the way, just to make it official, can we have a show of hands of the people here regarding this tonight. There are a few people concerned about it and we all think that our concerns should be considered and to date, at this point and time, we considered they haven't been. Thank you. M~. McDonald: .... He is talking for them. I did meet with them and we ~had a lengthy discussion. I assume their presence here is a result of that meeting, plus their past correspondence. Elizabeth Visser: As the President of the Board of Directors of the Mattituck Saltaire Incorporated, I am here this evening to ask you to give us your assurance that the proposed Willow Run subdivision will have a southerly exit. After years of attending your meetings, visiting your office, and appraising ourselves of relevant guidelines, we should have your clear support on the issues of safety, quality of life and property values. We are absolutely sure that we have made every effort possible to communicate these needs to you. You have in the pertinent file the petition for 1988 signed by resident voters. We should not have to continue to appear at your monthly meetings any lOnger to be included in the planning process: the will of the majority of the area residents has been clearly enumerated. No compromise on the traffic through the neighborhood should be made. If Wavecrest Lane cuts through to the new subdivision against the wishes of long time residents and the new subdivision cuts through to future subdivisions to the east. All of the traffic from those new homes will proceed directly through Mattituck-Sattaire to go south on the only possible road, Reeve Avenue. The Town Highway Department, upon inspecting the corner of Wavecrest Lane and Reeve Avenue some ~OUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 2 5 FEBRUARY 2 4, 19 9 2 years ago at our request, stated that there was poor visibility for traffic coming out of Wavecrest Lane onto Reeve Avenue. This is because there is a natural rise in elevation on Reeve Avenue just south of Wavecrest Lane. My neighbors and I have had several near misses coming out of this street over the years. It would be poor planning to designate this unsafe intersection as the most used access to the south. It is puzzling to think of Reeve Avenue as the only southerly access from new subdivisions when we have been told that your plans should include two exits from each major subdivision. Doesn't it completely defeat the purpose of two exists when traffic will simply bottleneck at Reeve Avenue? Wouldn't it make more sense to exit the traffic for Willow Run/Matthews to the south? We would like to know the official reason for changing the plans on this subdivision back to the north end of the property. There doesn't seem to be any logical or legal reason for this. We are not Pleased with the way that the Planning Board has turned our legitimate needs into an adversarial situation, pitting our residents against the farming community. This obfuscates the requirement for you to plan correctly based on the safety of the majority of the residents. Since Joe Gergela of the Farm Bureau is not a taxpaying, voting resident of our Town, we believe that the letter he wrote to you, claiming to represent Southolders, should be removed. Mr. Gergela will not suffer as a result of increased traffic and decreased safety and property values. We, as much as the farmers or baymen, have as legitimate a right to voice our needs on this or any other planning issue. Educators, police officers, attorneys, computer programmers, government employees, housewives, retired citizens and our dear children have a right to a continued safe and peaceful quality of life. That is what a neighborhood is: many of us chOse to live here so that our families would have a chance at a quality neighborhood. This is not incompatible with good planning for area farmers, and it is up. to the Planning Board to align our needs, not to alienate us. Do we have your support? Mr. Orlowski: Does the Board have any c'on~nent? As of right now, I don't even know where this sets. It is in Mr. Matthews hands and he came back with a four lot'subdivision that shows us four lots on the northerly end of the property and we have no idea what he is even doing up there. I have been in favor of leaving the lots up on the north. The subdivision was originally laid out and Wavecrest Avenue was laid out to connect to the property to the west. ~S6UTHO~ TOWN PLANNING BOARD 26 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 MS. Visser: So you favor a southerly access? Mr. Orlowski: I favor a southerly access, I don't know about the rest of the Board but what Mr. Matthews is going to do and what he ends up with, those test wells up there are probably because he is not getting good water or whatever the situation is, I don't know. I don't know what is going on up there and whatever happens he still has to cross that bridge and I think Mr. McDonald met with you and brought you up to where we are with it and it is basically in Mr. Matthew's hands. Ms. Visser: Did Mr. McDonald have an opportunity to share another letter I gave him on Thursday? Mr. McDonald: I posted it for it to be copied into everyone's boxes. Ms. Visser: Thank you. I plan on attending the Town Board meeting on this issue tomorrow, I just wanted to make sure I told you that before I go ahead. I am submitting this letter to them. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Ms. Visser: Thank you. Bill Young: I have a question. We asked you a question as to where you stood and it kind of confused me, Mr. Orlowski. Were you in favor of the subdivision being put in the North end or the South end? Mr. Orlowski: North end. Mr. Young: In other words you are in favor of making Wavecrest the main entrance? Mr. Orlowski: Well, it would have been off of Wavecrest and Sound Avenue. Mr. Young: Then you understand that all of the traffic is going to enter on Wavecrest? Mr. Orlowski: For now it would, but there may be another connection in the future that would drop down. Mr. Young: To my understanding there would be no southerly access until at least three developments over so all of this extra traffic is all going to come into Wavecrest and you are aware of that? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. ' S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 27 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Young: So what you are saying is that you are totally against ev.erybody who is here. You are not looking at our opinions or our views. Who are you exactly looking after? Mr. Orlowski: I'm giving you my opinion. Mr. Young: Now, I'll ask you again, who are you looking after? Mr. Orlowski: Our intent is to preserve a lot of the farmland up on Oregon Road and in doing this we've discussed clustering and clustering everything to the North and carrying it down on some roads down to Oregon Road and off of Sound Avenue and this is the intent. When you got into that subdivision Wavecrest did butt up against the adjoining property. That is what it was meant for. Mr. Young: I have no problem with any of the homes going in behind me. I live right on the farm. I have no objection to thatwhat-so-ever. My sole objection is the fact of that road. I cannot believe that a reasonable person would bring all of that traffic up to that end and it is a safety problem Of the road being the only entry into the whole area. There have been times when a tree has gone down across the road and a fire truck won't get in there, a rescue, no one is going to get in there. It seems like common sense that the development, for a road at least would be going down to the southerly access. I just don't understand whos interest you are looking out for, t just don't understand. There are quite a few more of us than there are farmers. Mr. Orlowski: I know, I guess I represent a minority then. But, right now I don't know what is happening with this subdivision. Mr. Matthews has not come back to us with what we have asked for, we have given him the option, I think Mr. McDonald has explained it, that he can come in with a southerly subdivision, he has not come in with that, he has come in with a four lot subdivision and it is not what we asked for. I don't know what is going on here. I am one vote. The rest of the Board except for one member who isn't here, and I guess it wouldn't be fair to pool everybody right now without seeing what Mr. Matthews is going to do. I have no idea. Mr. Young: Well, he is doing what you want him to do. You want him to put the development at the north end. He originally stated that he would put the develo~,ent anywhere, all he wants is the lots approved. So he is doing what you are telling him to do. Mr. Orlowski: Have you talked to Mr. Matthews? Mr. Young: Yes, I have. Mr. Orlowski: And that is what he is going to do. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 28 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Fir. Young: He originally stated to me that he would (someone sneezed) as long as you would divide the land for him. He says that you had pushed for the North end and then you pushed to the South end and now you are pushing back to the North end again. In other words, you say you are waiting to see what he is doing and he is more or less waiting to see what you want. Where did he get the idea for this minor subdivision? Who gave him that idea? Mr. Orlowski: We just talked about the four lots (inaudible) but we want to see the total subdivision. Mr. Young: So you are allowing the minor subdivision up north? Mr. Orlowski: I'm not allowing anything, I have nothing in front of me. Right now, it is one lot. Mr. Young: Let me rephrase that then. You had suggested that the four lots be put up north? Mr. Orlowski: We suggested that the subdivision be laid out up north and put four lots on Reeve Avenue. That is what we suggested. Mr. Young: So, you want to see the whole thing laid out. Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Young: Thank you. Ann Cremers: I would just like to ask one question. Why was it moved in the first place? You people did an environmental assessment form that was great. When it was laid out to the south, it was a beautiful assessment now all of a sudden this is wrong? Why was it changed? Could you give us that answer? I wasn't at the meeting withMr. McDonald, I don't know. I would like to know why, we would like to know why it was changed? There are a lot of concerned people in our area and we are worried about traffic, not houses. We have got kids. A lot of them are grandparents with grandchildren. A traffic study should be done if you are going to do this. Mr. Orlowski: Well, if we ever get to that point. Ms. Cremers: Yeah, but why the flip flop? Mr. Orlowski: I was always in favor of the north anyway because of preserving that tract of open space along Oregon Road. Ms. Cremers: You people did the SEQRA and you said it was great the way it was laid out. Mr. Orlowski: And there was no support for my idea, I guess, until after. That is what public hearings are for. We did have ~ ~OUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 29 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 a lot of comments and it wasn't just Joe ~ergela. Joe Gergela represented a lot of farmers in the Town and they supported changing it back. Ms. Cremmers: Look at all of these people sitting out here. Where is Joe Gergela? Where is Marty Sidor and all of these other people? There are a lot of families that are involved. Thereare one hundred and fourteen houses in our area now, and there are going to be a lot more as you well know. Aren't you concerned about us? We pay the taxes too so why did you change it? You still didn't answer us. Mr. Orlowski: Why do you think Wavecrest was developed that way butting up to the next property? Ms. Cremers: We are not objecting to the houses going through. We know there is going to be traffic going~through there but we don't want to see it all barreling through our subdivision. Oregon is a much wider area, there are fewer homes and we have no outlet going out also and you are not considering that. The reason you people changed it in the first place is because we came up here and said we are upset about traffic so you changed it back to the south. Now, flip flop again, Mr. Orlowski: Right now, I don't know which way it is going and we will have to wait and see. Ms. Cremers: We don't want to wait, we want an answer, we want it to go the way it should go. We want a traffic study. The environmental impact statement that you people wrote on the assessment form was in our favor. Mr. Orlowski: Does anybody have any c~m~e~t? Ms. Cremers: Listen, we need your help. We really do, we are counting on you people to help us. We don't want to fight you. If you don't help us, where do we go? We don't? We all get angry? That is no way to keep your citizens. We are counting on you for help. Are you going to help? Mr. Orlowski: We'll try. Ms. Cremers: I hope so. Mr. Flatter: You talk about Waveerest being a tap road. That doesn't mean it has to be the southern most access. We have no problem cutting Wavecrest through but it doesn't mean that when Wavecrest was laid out all ~he way, nothing was laid in stone that that had to be the southern most access. Why can't we go down to Oregon? Second point. You are so concerned about this farmland. You are talking about maybe thirty useable acres, that has only been farmed two years out of the last five. It is not even farmed now. If it was farmed every single year actively, then you could talk on the basis of farmland. ~ S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 30 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 YOU are talking about a bare field right now. You are not talking farmland, you are talking a bare field. Unknown person: It was farmed once in the last five years. Mr. Flatter: It has been fa~l~ed once since then, one year since then, Mart~ Sidor farmed it. The few times I have looked through your file there are lots of comments from us asking to be taken i~tQ account on this. The only thing that I have seen talking about moving it to the north is a letter from Henry Drogue, a letter from Joe Gergela and I was in here one day when Marty Sidor verbally said let's move it to the north. Why don't you respond to the official documents in the file on this job? People talk to you on the street or whatever. What is more important? All these people here or a bunch of farmers or whoever it may be. Joe Gergela called you up and said, listen Benny, we have got to get this thing moved to the north. What is more important? We are the people who have to live with this crap. Sorry. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Unknown person: Are you going to respond to these people or what? Mr. Orlowski: I don't have an application to respond to. Unknown: They made some very good points. Mrs. 0rlowski: You already know how I feel but I'm only one person but I don't have an application to respond to. Mr. Jeff DeAndro: I am here in reference to the outdoor lighting for the Southold and Greenport Seven Eleven. Ms. Scopaz: Are you protesting the twelve foot poles? Mr. DeAndro: Yes, exactly. Ms. Scopaz: Apparently Sky Electric has asked that they be allowed to put fourteen foot poles and they have been sent a letter saying that the light and Pole be twelve feet in height. Mr. DeAndro: I'm from Sky Electric one of the contractors doing the Suffolk County Pole length for Southland Corporation Mr. Orlowski: We are going to go with the twelve foot. Mr. DeAndro: Was there a reasQn, only because I noticed, we have been ou~ here a few different nights to layout the lighting ~OU:THOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 31 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 and there were numerous other locations with poles quite a bit higher then twelve feet and I did come here ........ Mr. Ward: Now you know why we want twelve foot. Mr. McDonald: You didn't have the advantage of being here earlier but one of the decisions we did today was to tell all of the people to take down their thirty foot and put up a short one. We don't have control of the pre-existed rights, but our policy is to try and bring the lighting down to a scale that is more in keeping with the rural character of the Town. Mr. DeAndro: I fully understand that, but what happens is, in this case bringing down the level to a twelve foot pole you are forced to put maybe a power flood t!rpe fixture in pushing the light to cover a parking lot area. Where the architectural design throughout the country is a shoe box type fixture which contains a light almost like a flashlight coming down directly on the parking area or the site area. It is not a power flood whereas the higher you go up to put a power flood it would be a nuisance, almost a eye sore. Mr. Ward~ Obviously, going with twelve foot poles , it may be an extra pole or two and it may mean lower wattage to make your even distribution. Mr. DeAndro: My main concern is that would be fine in some cases, but where you have a parking area where Y°u can't cover the total gap unless you mount a power type flood to push the light across the parking lot area was our concern. Obviously, the higher level in which we bring the light up, we are not creating more light, we are using the same type of fixture, but we get more of a overall light over the parking area and I think that was our concern. I have some photographs. Mr. Orlowski: Are you saying twelve foot won't do it? Mr. DeAndro: Actually, the original sketch was a three foot concrete base with a seventeen foot pole. They do make a fourteen foot pole Which is available which would take~bout four weeks to get. We have used seventeen foot poles throughout and I understand that Southold is a little bit more concerned about making it look like a co~a~ercial type area. Fourteen foot poles are available. Mr. McDonald: For installation on a three foot high concrete pad? Mr. Ward: We're talking mounting heights, not higher poles. We're talking twelve foot mounting heights. Mr. DeAndro: I understand that and actually I am not even sure those poles are available forthat mounting height. ~ SbUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 32 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 This renovation is taking place across the County, I guess. Basically, what it is is a lighting upgrade mostly for safety and security purposes. Mr. McDonald: But it is taking place on a wider scale except with Southold so Southold wasn't evaluated on its own merits, it was the fact that it was designed with the fact that it would be adequate for the average site. Mr. DeAndro: It was a twenty foot pole mounting height. What I am looking to do is try and find a happy medium. Smithtown has a height requirement of eighteen foot and we were able to meet that. Other areas do not achieve building height and our concern is to keep the lighting contained to the parking area. Mr. McDonald: Is the lighting insufficient on these sites already? Mr. DeAndro: Well, out in Greenport there was one incident where someone was mugged or assaulted in the parking lot area. Mr. McDonald: The security is not the question, I mean the in store security. Mr. DeAndro: No, inside the store is. not a problem. I think what is happening is the total program with Southland Corporation is that they are finding that there is more and more working women in the field today so what is happening is that they want to light up the parking lot area. N~t necessarily brighter because a lot of them have 1000 watt metal floods type of situation which has a low wattage type of lamp but getting more of an even lighting throughout the parking lot areas. This way working women on their way back from work want to stop and feel a little bit more secure in the parking 10t areas, I think that was one of the main concerns and also they are just trying to improve the overall look. Mr. Latham: Southoldstore has a small parking lot, smaller than most and it seems to me that when I have gone by their at night or stopped, the sign that is there does a .pretty good job with the interior lighting and the sign itself lights up a lot of the parking lot. Mr. DeAndro: Actually'Southold is probably much better lit than the Greenport store and I don't think we are looking to actually increase the lighting but I think we are just trying to make it more of an even spread. Mr. Latham: There are houses behind and also at Greenport, Driftwood Cove apartments are right next to it and we hate to see a lot of light going over there. Mr. DeAndro: The type of lighting that they a~e dealing with is not a glare type of lighting. The light won't.be leaving ' 'SdUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 33 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 the premises. Actually, looking at it from the outside, I have got some photographs and you actually can't even see where it is coming from it is basically an overall, you know illuminates the parking area. Mr. McDonald: What about Cutchogue? Mr. DeAndro: Cutchogue is on the next step, now that you mentioned, I figured whatever evaluation ......... Mr. McDonald: I see, it is to come. Mr. DeAndro: Right, in other words, I would do it as soon as I could. Mr. Orlowski: Maybe, we can just order a bunch of twelve foot poles and forget ~bout it. Mr. DeAndro: Well, the twelve foot pole would be alright except for the fact that in Southold and Greenport we have three foot bases already installed there. My concern is that we would have to go for a nine foot pole. You are probehlywondering why do we install the basis to begin with? I did come by and we had a tight schedule. They had appropria%ionsby the end of December and they have the installations in and they did come by and at that time there were no restrictions in Southold Town and there was no'building Permit required for installation of outside lighting. I was advised that there wasn't a perceivable problem to request a site plan waiver and proceed. Generally, it probably wouldn't have been a problem if there was something in writing at the time stipulating that there was a twelve foot limit on the poles. At the time, there wasn't anything available. Mr. McDonald: What are the stock sizes made? Are they available essentially in any length? Mr. DeAndro: Right now, there is fourteen foot and seventeen foot pole available. The two sizes. They did send someone out to inspect the sites. Mr. McDonald: So a fourteen-foot would have a seventeen foot total height and the seventeen foot would have a twenty foot total height. Mr. DeAndro: Well, I have got ~hout six inches of the base actually buried into the ground. Everyone talking. Mr. McDonald: I don't think the building is higher than twelve feet, is it? Mr. Latham: Well, maybe fourteen. I'm guessing. ~O~THOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 34 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. McDonald: I~ mean, it is hard to understand putting the lighting higher than the building. (inaudible) Mr. DeAndro: I can give you a couple of ideas to see what type of lighting we are talking about. It's a shoe box type fixture. Everyone talking. Mr. Orlowski: The Planning Board would like to stay with the twelve foot poles. Unknown person: Mr. Orlowski, as a point of order, we weren't finished with what we were speaking about and these people want to be ~ble to go home. Mr. Orlowski: Well, I didn't realize that and this is just a open discussion and there is no agenda so I am letting him speak. Unknown person: As a peint of order, you should have finished with this discussion first. Everyone talking. Mr. Orlowski: Any other questions or comments for the Board? Mr. Rich Artmar - Mattituck Saltaire - I live on the northern dead end of Wavecrest so I certainly havean interest in this whole project. I haven't been opposed to the development of that property from the beginning because when I moved an there I felt that it was going to eventually be developed, especially the way things were booming back in the late 70~s and early 80's and I followed this along the last few years and I was pleased to see that the Board indicated to Mr. Matthews to shift it and cluster it to the south and I saw those site plans in the file and thought that things were going to proceed, along those lines. I believe that was last s~t~er that I looked at those. Then, I was surprised to see that that wasn't proceeding as.planned and I guess it comes back to the question that was asked before. Why have things been reversed now, flipped and is Mr. Matthew's previous application, does he have to file an application when he files those site plans? Is that present application in effec~ at this point? The southerly clustered site plans because you said before he hasn't revised anything, just looked at it. Mr. Orlowski: Actually, it is stuck in preliminary. Mr. Artmar: What does that mean? Mr. Orlowski: There is no preliminary approval granted. ' ~ S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 35 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Mr. Artmar: On the southern end? Mr. Orlowski: On anythingyet. Mr. Artmar: So what is the status then at this point? Those were the last plans I saw. So, those site plans for the southerly layout aren't the most current on file as being filed by Mr. Matthews with a application? Mr. McDonald: My question would be, is there a sketch plan approval on this subdivision? Mr. Orlowski: We don't have the file here. Mr. Artmar: A set of site plans are put in the file with a application. Mr. Orlowski: As of right now, I don't know what he is doing. He is at the Board of Health, standards have gotten tougher and I don't know what he is going to do. You know, I have no idea. Mr. Artmar: It has been at the urging of the Board to have him considered moving back up to the north. Mr. Orlowski: We asked him if he would, but we don't know what he is doing. Mr. Artmar: But, prior to that you had asked him to do a southerly layout, which he did. He developed plans and I remember being here when it was discussed about having the roads zigzag a little so he wouldn't speed on down to Oregon Avenue there but I recall all of that taking place and a good deal of discussion on the amounts of buffer space on the existing development and his development and so forth. It seemed like a lot of consideration went into recommending to him that it be clustered to the south and apparently, the majority of the Board must have felt that way in order to recoau~end that to him and he was willing to do that. Now, it just seems like everything is turned around. Mr. Orlowski: Well, we asked Mr. Matthews to flip it back over. If you listen to some of the USUKreco~endations coming down about preseEving farmland and making every attempt to do so, I mean this goes along with it. It would be nice to preserve that thirty acres of land if we could hut I don't know if we are going to or not but, if all of this is basically in his court, I know Mr. McDonald met with a lot of you people last week and told you exactly where it stands right now. Mr. Artmar: It seems that he was proceeding with the southerly approach until someone on the Board stepped in and reco~u.ended that he go back up to the north. ' ~O~THOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 36 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Ms. Scopaz: Can I explain something that may not be clear. Mr. Matthews application at the Health Department has been rejected, he has not made an appeal so the application has no status. It is dead in the water until he decides what he is going to do. He cannot proceed with any application before this Board regardless if it is north, south, middle, east, west. He cannot go any further because his application has been rejected by the Health Department. Mr. Artmar: Ms. Scopaz: Mr. Artmar: On the whole parcel? On the whole parcel. So if he can get the wells to test out in a certain location, lot's say the northerly end, then he could proceed. Ms. $copaz: We do not know, he has not proceeded. We do not know anything more than that. Mr. Artmar: I guess I am asking a hypothetical question thon. If he were to get the water approved UP north? Ms. Scopaz: We don't know that though and until he proceeds we cannot make a decision. Mr. Artmar: Can I just finish my hypothetical statement? If he were to get the water approved from the Health Department on the northerly end then he could proceed with a northerly development. Hypothetical yes or no? Mr. Orlowski: If he got his approval up north ....... Mr. Artman: Up north, if he got approval on the wells up north, then he could develop a clustering arrangement up north and not have to worry about this other land because no houses are going in down there, whether or not that water is good or not. What does the Health Department look at in terms of testing water? The whole parcel? Just where the houses are going? I don't know, that is why I am asking. Mr. McDonald: They require a fire well every tenacres. As for testing areas each of the areas in each Of the target areas, it is at the discretion of the person reviewing it at the Health Department. He will circle whatever spots he feels are appropriate for the wells. It is totally at their discretion. Normally the routine is one for every ten acres. If they feel the more need for more testing they will circle more places. Again, it is their discretion. If they can't find good water there, they might send them north and say look here and look deeper. Mr. Artman: So when the Health Department rejected his application prior to this was that based on the entire parcel? " ~S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 37 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 Ms. Scopaz: I don't know exactly where the test wells were done, you Would have to check the Health Department records. All we have is a letter from the Health Department. Everyone talking. Bill Cremers: I have gone to the Health Department many times, the four test wells were done on the north side, he failed those tests, he now has the option of putting a well on every site or he has to go to five acres. That is his option at this point but he had the plans going south and the Health Department now has his plans with the four lots on the north side which you have told him to go ahead with and that is what he is proceeding with. The lots that you say go ahead with are also, according to your draft environmental impact, are in environmentally sensitive areas and now you are telling him to develop on an area that you told him was bad. Everyone talking. Ms. Cremers: USUK said to preserve existing fa~,land, farms through transferred development rights. This is not a farm, this has already been subdivided. It is too late with USUK with this one, as you well know. Mr. Ortowski: On the southerly piece? Ms. Cremers: On any piece. What is wrong with farming on the northerly piece? They farmed there for years. That was just farmed last year down the end of the road by us . Joe Krupski, he farmed. They have all been farming up on the north end. Why can't they continue that. There are a lot of people concerned with traffic and this is really our main point. Mr. Ortowski: You are saying as long as we don't connect to Wavecrest ....... Everyone : No, No, No, No. Ms. Cremers: We know that is going to go through. We don't want the main drag, we want Oregon to get some of it. We know they are going tO hit through Wavecrest. The people coming down Reeve have to make a right to get onto Oregon. Otherwise, they all have to barrel through Wavecrest to get into the ~evelopment. Whereas, if it is down on the southerly portion, at least some of the traffic will be coming through Oregon. We have no outlet up there even on Soundview. Have you ever seen the skid marks along Soundview? We have a problem, not to mention the fact that if you put this subdivision there, then there is the next one, and the next, and the next and this is all going down Reeve Avenue? Mr. McDonald: Let me ask you then, you wouldn't have any objection, I understand individuals may have a problem, but as a "~S~UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 38 FEBRUARY 24, 1992 group you wouldn't have a problem with the idea that if the road ran all the way from the north, directly straight to the south, even if it was after Wavecrest, somewhere along there. Ms. Cremers: Right, that's right. You cannot do this. You can't do this. Having all of these cars racing through there, there are going to be a lot more houses developed in the area, it is not just this one subdivision. There is going to be a lot more and planning, that is what USUK said, plan ahead and consider traffic. That is important. Mr. McDonald: One of the things I think you should think about was the idea of a break away. I take it from your co~La,ents here tonight that the general feeling is against a break away at that intersection. Ms. Cremers: That is the craziest thing I ever heard of. In fact, the one on Bailey Beach, have you seen how many times that has been broken away when you say break away? They break away. That is almost silly. Mr. Ward: I just have a coLm:~ent Mr. Chairman, I would like to possibly put a bow on tonight's meeting and get back to this group with what the Pla~uing Board's position is going to be so that they can either fight harder or go home and stay home so I think we ought to let them know what our intent is and go from there. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., any other comments? Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on that motion? Mr. Flatter: Does that mean we will be officially responded to or do we have to come chasing you people? That is what I would like to know. Mr. McDonald: You will get a letter from us. Mr. Flatter: Thank you very much. Unknown person: I want to know if these four lots can be built on between now and your next meeting? Mr. Orlowski: No. Those four lots are nothing like we asked for. Mr. McDonald: Anything he would do up there in the way of construction or destruction, other than routine testing of the wells is illegal. Mr. Orlowski: Ail those in favor? ~ ~'S~0UTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 39 FEBRUARY 24, i992 Ayes: ~r. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Being there was nothing left on the agenda to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. ~ -~ ~ _ ResDe~tfully~bmitted, ~ennett Orlo~s~-i J~hairman /A / iL $00~I0 ~LD TO%%R~ C~ Town Clerk, Town of