Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-02/25/1991PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Odowski, Jr.. Chah-man 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 25, 1991 Present were: Absent were: Bennett Orlowski Jr., Chairman Richard Ward, Member Mark McDonald, Member Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Melissa Spiro, Planner Holly Perrone, Secretary Jane Rousseau, Recording Secretary G. Richie Latham, Member Kenneth Edwards, Member Mr. Orlowski: Good evening, I would like to call this meeting to order. First order of business are public hearings. Subdivision Finals, 7:30 p.m. the Wanat Set-Off. This proposal is to set off a ten acre parcel from an existing 107.62 acre parcel located on the north side of Bergen Avenue in Mattituck. SCTM $ 1000-112-1-16.1. We have proof of publication in both local papers and at this time everything is in order for a public hearing. I'll ask if there are any objections to this set-off? Hearing none, are there any endorsements of this set-off. Henry Raynor: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, I am representing Mr. Wanat. As you know, the set-off is on ten acres and it is inclusive of his residence and there are also some barns on the property. Of late, we received the exemption statements of the Department of Health Services and I have for the board their request for extra copies. This received sketch plan approval back in November 29th and the Planning Board then declared themselves lead agency in December. I believe this proposal complies with Section Al06 of the Town Code and I would request a Negative Declaration on the SEQRA, this board's final approval PLANNING BOARD 2 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 and a signed map. If you have any questions, I would be gladto answer them. Mr. Orlowski: Any other endorsements of this subdivision? Hearing none, is there anyone out there who is neither pro nor con but may have infozmation pertaining to this subdivision that may be of interest to the board? Hearing none, any questions from the board? Board: No questions. Mr. Orlowski: Being there are no further questions, I will declare this hearing closed. Does the board have any pleasure on this set-off? Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I make a motion that we approve this set-off. WHEREAS, JosephWanat is the owner of the property known and designated as SCTM ~ 1000-112-1-16.1, located on the north side of Bergen Avenue in Mattituck: and WHEREAS, this set-off, to be known as Wanat Set-off, is to set-off a ten acre parcel from a 107.62 acre parcel; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself Lead Agency and issued a Negative Declaration on February 5, 1991; and W~EREAS, a final publichearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on February 25, 1991; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; and be it therefore, RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the surveys last dated November 29, 1990, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys subject to fulfillment of the following condition. This condition must be met within six (6) months of the date of this resolution. 1. Submission of three additional final maps with a valid stamp of Health Department approval. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. I will note that Mr. Raynor did hand in the maps tonight. All those in favor? PLANNING BOARD 3 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Ortowski: 7:35 p.m. Goldman and. Brice - This proposed lot-line change is to subtract 11,000 square feet from a 55,000 square foot parcel to add it to a 21,000 square foot parcel in Laurel. SC~ $ 1000-128-8-7 & 8~2. We have proof of publication in the local papers and at this time ever!rthing is in order for a final hearing. I'll ask if there are any objections to this lot line change? Hearing none, are there any endorsements of this lot line change.? Hearing none, is there anyone out there who is neither pro nor con but may have information pertaining to this that would be of interest to the Board? Hearing none, any questions from the Board? Board: No questions. Mr. Orlowski: Being no further questions, I will declare this hearing closed. Does the board have any pleasure? Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. WHEREAS , Kenneth Goldman and John Brice are the owners of the property known and designed as SCTM ~ 1000-127-8-7 & 8.2, located at North Oakwood Road and Peconic Bay Boulevard in Laurel; and WHEREAS, this lot-line change, to be known as Proposed Lot Line Change for Goldman and Brice, is for a lot line change adding 11,000 square feet from a 55,000 square foot parcel to a 21,000 square foot parcel; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act~ (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself Lead Agency and issued a Negative Declaration on December 3, 1990; and W~EREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on February 4, 1991; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; and now therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board approve and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final survey dated August 2, 1990. PLANNING BOARD 4 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any~estions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. (Chairman endorsed maps). Mr. Orlowski: Preliminary Subdivisions and Preliminary Hearings. 7:40 p.m.- Franklin Blachly - This major subdivision is for nine lots on 20.4 acres located on the northeast side of Alvah's Lane; 2,873 feet northwest of New York State Route 25 in Cutchogue. SCTM $1000-102-4-5. We have proof of publication in both the local papers and at this time everything is in order for a hearing. I'll ask if there are any objections to this subdivision? Hearing none, are there any endorsements of these subdivision? Mr. Pete Danowski: I am speaking for the applicant and also present are Ken Abruzzo and Tom Wolper of Young and Young. Mr. Abruzzo can answer any questions regarding the preparation of the map, Mr. Wolper will come to the rescue of Mr. Abruzzo if he can't answer a question. As you know, this application started back in 1988 and I brought a couple of maps here just to Show the progress we have made in showing the plan. The preliminary map before you is drawn consistent with your recommendations after the sketch plan approval is granted. However, it was our clients original question that was posed to the board wherein they came forward and said, we're willing to show a proposedminor subdivision of four, five acre lots which we are willing to covenant in perpetuity whichwould not be further subdivided. Their comment at the time was, we have owned this land for twenty or thirty years and we rent it to a local farmer, I think his name is Mike Koleski and we would like to retire out here and build our homes here and homes for our kids and we realty don't look to profit and make a large subdivision here. We think we could restrict the building envelopes and create a lot of open space consistent with the desires of the Town. Unfortunately, in further discussing that, I think the board came to the conclusion that they wish to continue a roadway from a neighboring subdivision to Bridle Path and Bridle Lane and therefore they would insist or require the building of the roadway through this area regardless of whether it was a minor or a major. I think you also pointed out that we are in the AgricultUral Conservation zone, maybe not when they first owned the land but in recent years when it got converted to that. That was sort of unfortunate because you heard the co~ent that you must cluster in this zone event hough the purpose of the cluster was to protect agriculture. We could PLANNING BOARD 5 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 have put our building envelopes right close to the road and created all kinds of agricultural space and these people could have rented it to the neighboring farme and we would have preserved all kinds c However, apparently, that was not what under the town laws as they are now wrJ board directed us in a different way. We then designed the p~ recommendations by this board. We have it and Sidney Bowne had some co~ents t it and it is now on this Board and it i the preliminary map hearing. However, a few other maps, we had also designed an open space development type of design t same plan except it shows a large lot c or farmed it themselves agricultural land. felt we could do tten and therefore the sliminarymap based upon drawn it, we've redone ~at we have readjusted before this Board for I've discussed with a shown to the Board an ~at is basically the very Dncept. We do favor the large lot conoept. The Blachey's will ~dmit that they are no spring chickens anymore and would like ~o do the large lot. They are trying to avoid the homeowners association. They don't want to do the homeowners association and they hav~ asked the Board to consider this alternate way of developing the site. Providing, by recording covenants the s~me protection; doing a roadway system to connect the right of '~ay; doing the drainage requirements as suggested, and we could do the engineering just as well with this particular map. I wo'lld leave this board with you tonight as well as the other board '¢ith the minor and I would ask you to get us to the final ma'~ stage, and perhaps in doing a resolution of approval at perha)s the final z~p stage giving us approval to a large lot conce )t. We could have the preliminary map hearing tonight and we uan hear your recommendations in a final resolution for approval for the preliminary map and hopefully you'lI incorporate the possibility of filing the map with the large map concept, so, we have these boards to be left with you tonight that shows drainage calculations, that shows what we addressed throughout with the recommendations from the staff. The answer here is we've tried to work with you and we all recognize w~ere we are going on this map and you know the large open areas for agriculture, the continuation of road system if that is what you desire are shown are both the preliminary map and on the other design for the same t~pe of area. We would have preferred initially the four five acre lots but we recognize the comments you made, so we are now saying, would you approve the large lot design? Mr. McDonald: I would like to hold the meeting open if I could. I want'to get a good look at this. ~r. Orlowski: I don't think you have seen the minor, did you? Mr. McDonald: No, I never saw the mino~ at all, the original concept. Mr. Orlowski: Do you have a problem with keeping the hearing open? PLANNING BOARD 6 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Danowski: It started in 1988, I don~t mind until certainly the next meeting. Mr. Orlowski: It's moving along pretty fast you know. Mr. Danowski: I think there is a good purpose for doing it and hopefully, perhaps we will get the large lot concept. Mr. Orlowski: There are only three of us here tonight and Mr. McDonald is not familiar with the minor. Mr. McDonald: I think one of the reasons I would like to keep it open is if we decide to do the other in the preliminary, I would like to have actually an open hearing where we are going to actually consider that at a preliminary stage so anybody who wants to get their licks in can get it right up front rather than the final so if holding it open one more helps to facilitate that, I ask your indulgence in keeping the meeting open. Mr. Orlowski: Do you have a problem with that? Mr. Danowski: I don't have a problem. We are going to have a final map here where the public can make comments on it. I was here the last time the Board had a meeting with people de~and~ug a further shot, you can have a shot at me. Mr. McDonald: If that is the case, I would like to make a motion to hold this hearing open. Mr. Ward: Second. Nancy Swiatocha: Can I make a co~a~ent? Mr. Orlowski: Sure. Nancy Swiatocha: I would just like to make a comment that the Koleski's are still interested in renting that land as they had been. If you could make it so they could, it would really be helpful because they came before this Board to try to develop their land and they were told that 71% of their land is not usable and should be donated to the Town so now they have to farm and they would like to be able to make some money doing it so they would like to rent more land to make a living at it and they have always used that land. So if there is anyway possible that you could make a little piece of the land that is good for farming usable to rent it would be in a farmers need. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any one else neither pro nor con but may have information pertaining to this subdivision that would be of interest to the Board? Hearing none, any other questions fr~m the Board? Do we have a motion on the floor? Mr. Ward: I'll make a motion. PLANNING BOARD 7 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next order of business, preliminary hearing, Paul Matthews - This major subdivision is for thirty-four lots on seventy acres located on the north side of Mill Road; 852 feet east of Reeve Road, and on the south side of Sou~dview Avenue; 660 feet east of Reeve Road in Mattituck. SCTM $ 1000-95-4-14.1. We have proof of publication in both local papers and at this time everything is in order for a preliminary hearing° I'll ask if there are any objections to this subdivision? Hearing none, are there any endorsements of this subdivision? Mr. Raynor: Good evening Mr. Chairman, for the applicant Mr. Matthews. The proposal here, as 1988 seems to be the year that a lot of these things started, goes back to t988 when the Planning Board gave a sketch approval. We haVe proposed on the 70 acres 34 clustered building lots of approximately one acre. To date, the test wells, test holes for the Department of Health Services and the completion of their paper work. The Planning Board back in June of 1989declared themselvesthe Lead Agency and made the initial determination of non-significance on SEQRA. Subsequent to that we have changed ~e drainage concept from the proposed swale system that was initially put before the Board and we understand that a final drainage system will submitted prior to final approval. The road and lot configurations that have been modified and represent the Planning Board's request of the applicant and I have been told by staff that there has been a survey on the property both.by the CAC and the Trustees and there are no wetlands involved. The question has arisen with regard to the historic structure, the Gildersleeve house, which is on the property and at presently is in very poor condition but is being rebuilt. Any suggestions pertinent to that structure the applicant should be aware of and we would certainly like to know what the Board's thinking on it. Basically, I believe the plan before you is in conformance with the subdivision section as well as the input of staff and yourselves, I would request approval~ Thank you very much. Mr. Orlowski: Any other endorsements of this sulxiivision? Hearing none, is there anyone out there that is neither pro nor con but may have information pertaining to this subdivision that would be of interest to the Board? PLANNING BOARD 8 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Martin Sidor: I don't know if this is information for the Board as much as information for myself. I just wanted to rest with you the title about the naive farm boy, I think I am going to take that away from you today. I am very confused about some of the things. I farmed this for the last three out of five years and my first question would be, what is the intent of the concept of clustering zone? What is the purpose of it? Mr. Orlowski: To preserve the open space, the open area. Mr. Sidor: My question would be coming from the Agricultural Board purposes for agriculture. Mr. Orlowski: Is it farmland or is it just open spacer is that the question? Mr. Sidor: Right. Mr. McDonald: The Code has five or six things in it., reasons for the open space. The first one is watershed, the second one is farming and the third is preserve open space character of the Town visual aspects. I wish I could remember what the other ones are. There is a series in the Code. Mr. Orlowski: YOU mentioned the two most important. Water and farming. Mr. Sidor: From an agricultural point of view, that land and I think it was just mentioned here befores is and will be becoming much tighter, and unavailable. Being on this farm, I would just wonder how it would be clustered. The farming on this particular piece that I know of, there are some places that are not as suitable. Mr. McDonald: Have you seen the map? Mr. Sidor: Just now I did. I think I have enough of an idea and I just wanted the input from the agricultural side. Mr. McDonald: Well, we're here and we welcome to hear whatever you have to say. Mr. Sidor: Well, first of all I came up here to stress ~rf indifference neither pro nor con on this particular piece. From the farmer's point, down the road, I realize that land will be becoming very scarce and when these things came into play, wy understanding was that it was very much to help agricultural stay, the input from farming to stay in this area. How a farm gets cut up, some parts in this particular farm are not suitable for agriculture. Mr. Orlowski: You do notice that the developed area is the southern end of the farm and that the preserved area is the northern end. PLANNING BOARD 9 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Sidor: Is anybody acquainted with the farm? Mr. Orlowski: What you are saying is that the better land is on the other end? Mr. Sidor: Is anybody acquainted with the farm? Mr. McDonald: I've been on the property but as a farm I wouldn't know. Mr. Sidor: Have you gone from North to South? Mr. McDonald: Yes. Mr. Sidor: O.K., and you feel that the way it is set up this way is O.K.? Mr. McDonald: Well, there have been a lot of considerations besides that. The end construction of the road was one of the real problems in this subdivision. The connector in the road and trying to create the connections in existing roads. The drainage swale in the southern end which is part of the previous subdivision is connected to other subdivisions that preceded it was also an important element in the subdivision as well. Some of those things were limited factors. But, as to the quality of the farming, the land in the north is that substantially less than what is in the south.? Mr. Sidor: In my viewpoint, yes. Mr. McDonald: Well, you farmed it so you ought to know. Mr. Sidor: Again, I stress my indifference in this particular project. It is down the road, many times I've been told here how we are going to promote agriculture and these little things that are adding up to something, that in mymind my future is bleak. In this partiCular case, I think farmland will be lost. Mr. McDonald: Everytime fazl, land is cut up for residential purposes, we lose farmland. Mr. Sidor: Some will be lost. Again, my viewpoint would be clustering would help off set some of that loss. As long as it's being viewed in that vain it is fine with me. Mr. McDonald: It is, but I don't think it is the only concern on every subdivision. As I said, there are other problems. Mr. Orlowski: Are you familiar from the very beginning on this proposal? Mr. Sidor: No. PLANNING BOARD 10 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Orlowski: Because it was laid out the other way. The objections came from most of the homeowners up on the northerly parcel and connecting the roads and they were more in favor of this then the other. Mr. Sidor: I'm not looking to change it then. Mr. Orlowski: I know it's all farmland totally right now, half of it is going to be developed. It is not easy to sit here and keep the farmer and the resident real, real, friendly at all times. We are trying. Sometimes the Board can't be that friendly on some of these issues but we are working on different ways to control this open space and to preserve it for agricultural use and also to preserve the groundwater in these areas and we are working on that right now. This is a preliminary hearing. Before final, I hope that we have something together as far as how we are going to preserve that in open space without going to a homeowners association and having to rent from forty people or whatever the number of residents there, are there. I thought maybe before we get to final we can preserve that piece. As far as the way it was laid out it was a compromise and I know the north may be a little bit lighter then the south end. Any other comments? Bill Sanok: I work with the Cooperative Extension and I also live near the farm we are talking about. I would just like to elaborate a little bit more on what Marty Sidor co~ented on. On that particular piece, if you look on the north end it is a very sandy soil and it has not been farmed on the extreme north end for eight or nine years because it is a little bit sandy. I woUld suggest to the Board that when you look at these things in the preliminary stage, please look at a soils map because I think it does tell you a great deal about the kind of pre-activity your talking aboUt~ If the north end is to be in open space it probably will not be farmed up near the soundview because it is very sandy and it does take a lot more irrigation and a lot more management. The other thing I would like to comment on just so the rest of the Board will R~ow, and Valerie Scopaz and Mark McDonald are on the same 8xlvisor~ council with me, on the special groundwater protection area advisory council, and right now we are arguing with a number of people about the future of agriculture on these clustered developments. There is a lot of interest by people on the council to limit the type of agriculture that can exist on the open space that results in clustered development. There are a number of things taking place now in agriculture that are changing the scene. We are seeing a lot more crops with lower use of chemicals or pesticides and fertilizers. Just keep it in mind as you look at some of these pretiminarydevelo~,ents and I think this is relevant to the Koleski fazm too, I am not familiar with the specific piece of property there but it doesn't make a lot of sense to anyone in agriculture to save open space because it is open space for agriculture unless the soils are pretty good and it's just that much of a challenge, PLANNING BOARD 11 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 unless you want to have continued stock nursery, we're not even using th~ soil, I'm not sure you want that either, so with that I'll be glad to answer any questions on this, but I would just like to make that comment tonight. Mr. Orlowski: Being as we do work together, I am in total agreement with you and the use and the Board is addressing that now very diligently, we are working on it, we've got a couple of subdivisions that we've held up for almost a year now to come up with that answer. We are working with the groundwater and farm preservation and we are trying to put it together so it will work. Mr. Sidor: The other thing to look at is the groundwater flow, because in that particular development, the water flow is to the north. Mr. McDonald: I think this is a SGPA. Mr. Sidor: I don't think that that would be the primary concern on this piece of property at all. But I think it is something to keep in mind especially when you are looking at the SGPA. Mr. Orlowski: At the time this thin~ was initially started, the open space was open space and was put into a homeowners association and I think we all agreed to try and get away from that somehow and hold with covenant's to keep it for agricultural groundwater preservation so all sides are happy. In this case here, it was rearranged to help protect some of your neighbors. This has been going on since 1988 as Mr. Raynor said, but it is only preliminary so we will see what happens. Mr. Sidor: Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Tom Flater: I live in Mattituck adjacent to the property in question. I just want to speak on behalf of a number of the homeowners in the area. We realize that there were major changes made as far. as our traffic concerns which we presented to you and we do appreciate the compromises and changes. Pretty' much all of the homeowners I have spoken to do appreciate the changes and I do want to thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Hearing none, any questions from the Board? Board: No questions. Mr. Orlowski: No further questions or coim~ents, I will declare this hearing closed. Does the Board have any pleasure? PLANNING BOARD 12 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. McDonald: 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, make a determination of non-significance, and grant a Negative Declaration. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski~ Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Does the Board have any other further pleasures on this tonight? Mr. McDonald: I would like to make a further motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional preliminary approval on the maps datedDecember 31, 1990, subject to the following conditions: Submission of road profiles and grading and drainage plans for review by the Planning Board and the Road Inspector. The Board is not in favor of using swaled roads for road drainage. 2. Final maps must show the following: A revision of the two (2) cul-de-sacs off Chandlers Way to make them shorted so that they do not intrude as much into the last two lots. The cul-de-sacs must provide proper frontage to the end lots. A fifty (50) foot conservation easement along the rear of lots 5-20. This easement will serve as a buffer between the proposed subdivision and the adj.acent property. There shall be no clearing, regrading or structures allowed in this area. Only maintenance of the natural vegetation shall be pe~itted. C. The following statements: Access to Lot 3 and Lot 6 shall be from the proposed cul-de-sac; Access to Lot 26 and Lot 31 shall be from the proposed cul-de-sac~ Access to Lot 20 shall be from the proposed PLANNING BOARD 13 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 road only, and not from Oregon Avenue. D. Building envelopes to be shown for all lots. 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. Orlowski: Opposed? So Ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Hearing Held Over From Previous Meetings: The North Forty - This major subdivision is for thirteen lots on 30.3565 acres located on the south side of Oregon Road; 621 feet west of Depot Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM $1000-95-4-14.i. The hearing is open, I'll ask if there are any comments? Mr. Pete Danowski: I would just. like to ask your approval of the large lot concept. I have given a letter to the Planning Board directed toward the use that we envision for the large lot, and we indicate in that letter from Walter Gatz and George McDowelt that in fact we have rented to a farmer, actually a chinese vegetable farmer, Zing Lee, the past year and he has shown some interest in acquiring a large lot in back of that continuing to farm it. If not, Mr. Gatz is in the landscape business and he would be interested in putting landscape material on that back parcel. So, we have given you a letter of intent and we would like to have the large lot plan approved. Mr. Orlowski: The question was raised whether you would think about switching this layout? Mr. Danowski: Wow! At this stage, I would be very reluctant to do it~ that is for sure. What would be the purpose of switching the layout? Do you mean putting the open space in the front along the Main Road? Mr. Ortowski: Yes. Mr. DanOwski: Then you are going to have the road system going all the way to the back. How are you going to get to the back lot? Mr. Ward: By a road. Mr. Danowski: By a road. Then, you are going to build through the middle of the open space and I think when we went through the planning process, we talked about tying neighboring parcels up with the open space and lining them all up together. PLANNING BOARD 14 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 We ~id notice the subdivision in the back, behind us as well. I think also, there were some contours for the'drainage parcel in the back as well. So I think we had a lot of planning input~ engineering input as to how we laid it out and why we laid it out the way we did. If we were in sketch plan stage, however, when you were first coming me with a plan and you suggested for whatever reason you wanted to flip it, we would say O.K., let's do it. I don't see the purpose, especially when you are talking about building the road system to serve the back area. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., I'm going to recommend we hold this hearing open. Mr. Danowski: Some of these become a little dangerous with the Health Department, s stamp of approval, which expire after six months and there is always a chance of them not being re-stamped so I have some real problems with continuing. I've had some of these open forever. I've been lUcky with getting some of them restamped but I recognize the policy with the Health Department is changing too and that doesn't make me happy. Mr. Ward: I think what we are looking at here is the fact that it just is designated for what we're looking at right now, the specifics in it from day one. In other words, having the open space in the front. Mr. Danowski: I would just be curious about having the input from that as to why, my own theory was, that open space was created in a place where it wouldn,t be interrupted bysplitting the parcel with the road but the road is going to go through it to begin with, then you have hurt some of that open space already. Whereas, the back you wouldn't be invading it with a road~ you could stop the road before it hit the open space area. I know you recognize it, when I was here I was back last time I said I would get the letter and continue the hearing open but I would like a decision at the next meeting and I recognize some Board members aren't here. Of course, anybody wko looks at me and says they might vote no if I don't agree to continue the hearing, a second time. Mr. McDonald: I think that's one of the problems we had. Some poliCY questions, because of the rapid change, still, remain to be answered. Mr. Danowski: I think the real question I have is where does it stop and when does it stop? I'm trying to keep my map alive and it's not just this Board, I do have to deal with other agencies and so I am really concerned about this one and about the Cohill map, Mattituck Creek Estates, because you might approve it three months from now and I may not be able to get another agency to approve it. Mr. McDonald: From my, and I am not speaking for the Board, from my stand point, if you feel you are in that much danger we can go ahead and approve this as a homeowners association today. PLANNING BOARD 15 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Danowski: Is that a threat? Mr. McDonald: No it's not, I don't mean it like that, I am just saying that we can do, if you want to move it ahead, that is something we can do right now, without desention. You will probably get all the votes you'll need. Mr. Danowski: What I'm saying backwards to you is, when is enough time for you? Mr. McDonald: If we were of one mind, I could tell you that. That is the problem. No one can speak for everybody else when you are not unanimous and where you are headed. Mr. Danowski: I understand, I understand there are only three people here tonight that can vote. Mr. Orlowski: As I said, I would like to hold this meeting open. We just got your letter today. Two of the Board members aren't here, This open space and large lot issue is a very hot issue right now. Do you have other stamped maps besides these from the Health Department? Mro Danowski: On this map? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Danowski: I just delivered some but I don't believe it was on this one. Mr. McDonald: What is the date on that? Mr. Orlowski: These are expired. Mr. Danowski: They may be back into the Health Department. That is always a question. I know what their policy changes are, and Mr. Sanok can listen to this too because he is here, but the question of nitrate loading on the adjacent farmland. All I am saying is if we have got to continue the hearing I would just ask that perhaps this Board, with a full Board, can be ready at the next meeting. Mr. McDonald: I don't want to go on any longer with these open hearings. Mr. Danowski: Well, obviously I don't want you to vote No either so -. Mr. McDonald: I mean, I don't like having these hearings open up on one question that we don't get a resolution on. I want to resolve it and move ahead and move these projects. That is my feeling on it. PLANNING BOARD 16 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Orlowski: We all do and we have to. Like I said before, when it comes to agriculture and water we have to come to a happy compromise here. We have been in contact with soil and water to give us a hand, we are always in contact with Cornell University and all the fine work that they do at their research farm. We are trying to put something together so these covenant's will keep us all happy and we can handle it as either a large lot or preserve open space. Mr. Danowski: I am happy that we have open mindedness to the concept now and let's more forward with this. Mr. McDonald: Just so you are aware there is another issue. The other issue that remains is, the purpose of the law in some respects is to create a diversity of housing choices. As an example, I think almost everything you have in front of us you brought up with this concept. Instead of having all homeowners association, and I'm not saying that wouldn't help create the diversity because initially we'd have to certainly make some considerations for all the years that we did it the other way. But there is a question about when is this used, and when is a homeowners association used. Which use to create the diversity housing types that you want and what proportions. Mr. Danowski: I think that that hits on the point. First of all, I can think of Henry Appel subdivision which is just in the process of getting filed. We formed a homeowners association. We got the waiver and we didn't ask for the relief. We showed you a map doing the alternative and we went ahead with the homeowners association. But I think that same diversity question strikes at your policy. Where your statue towards clusters about how you have minimum lot size of thirty thousand square feet. I've heard, whether it is a direct policy statement or not, that on almost ever~map I've come to this board, with you've directed me to shrink everything down to thirty thousand square feet. That's not the purpose in the code. The code clearly says, that's the minimum size. So diversity on the board, in my mind, should have been, this map should be forty thousand, this should be sixty thousand and this one should be thirty thousand. So I think that more than this issue there has to be diversity in clusters. That's the concept of flexibility. Mr. McDonald: I think we agree. Mr. Danowski: O.K., but we haven't, I don't think over policy in a last year because my maps,I have basically been told you are showing forty thousand square foot lots, shrink them to thirty thousand. And that has been I think, the policy, that I don't agree with. Mr. Ortowski: It would preserve more agricultural land? PLANNING BOARD 17 FEBRUARY 25 , 19.~ ~1 Mr. Danowski: We're back on board again. O.K., if you have a wetland parcel, you have a comptetelywooded parcel, could talk different things in agriculture but, on some flat space land it can be farmed so wh~ not do a large lot In some other areas, why not do, I won't say close to a standard thing but why not do some larger lots in a cluster? That's all. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., I'll entertain a motion to keep this 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. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Summit Estates - This major subdivision is for thirty-five lots on 40~8223 acres located on the southwest corner of Main Road NYS 25 and Shipyard Lane in East Marion. SCTM ~1000-35-8-5.3~ The hearing was held open for the Planning Board to review their previous SEQRA determination and classification. Although the Negative Declaration incorrectly classified this action as unlisted, the action was properly coordinated as a Type 1 action. The classification on the Negative Declaration has been corrected so I will ask if there are any comments on this subdivision? Hearing none~ any questions from the Board? Board: No questions. Mr. Orlowski: Being there are no comments or questions, I'll declare this hearing closed. Does the Board have any pleasure? Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning' Board grant preliminary approval on the maps dated October '26, 1990~ subject to the following conditions: The utility easement, requested by Greenport Water Company, which is to be located between Lots 6 & 7, must be shown on the final map. e The New York State Department of Transportation has indicated that any future construction alon~ State Highway Route 25 would require a seventy-five PLANNING BOARD 18 FEBRUARY 25~ 1991 (75) foot right-of-way. As the existing road is sixty-six (66) feet in width, the Planning Board is requiring that a strip of land, nine (9) feet in width along State Route 25, be offered for dedication to the State for future road widening purposes. This dedication should be indicated on the final map. Final maps must be submitted with six (6) months of the dated of the preliminary approval. If such plat is not so submitted, or an extension of time is not requested by the applicant and granted by the Planning Boardf approval of the preliminary plat may be revoked by the Planning Board. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any ~estions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Eleanor Sievernich - This minor subdivision is for two lots on 30.3565 acres located on the east side of Cox Neck Lane in Mattituck. SCTM ~ 1000-113-8-5. Mr. McDonald: I would like to make a motion that we keep this hearing open. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: We are looking for revised maps delineating the upland and Wetland area of each lot. Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Final Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Baxter Sound Estates - This minor subdivision is for two lots on 5.022 acres located on the north side of Oregon Road; 1100 feet west of Bridge Lane in Cutchoque. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. PLANNING BOARD 19 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 WHEREAS, William Baxter, Jr. and Jane Baxter Goeller are the owners of the property known and designated as SCTM ~1000-72-2-2.1, located at the south side of Oregon Road; 1100 feet west of Bridge Lane in Cutchogue; and WHEREAS, this minor subdivision, to be known as Bawter Sound Estates, is for two lots on 5.022 acres; and WHEREAS, a variance for insufficient area and width for Lot two was granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals on August 18, 1988; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental QuAlity Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself Lead Agency and issued a Negative Declaration on October 16, 1989; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said subdivision application at the Town Hall, Southold, New York on January 14, 1991; and WHEREAS, all the requirements of the Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; and be it therefore, RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grant conditional final approval on the su~eys dated February 24, 1989, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys subject to fulfillment of the following conditions. All conditions must be met within six (6) months of the date of this resolution. 1. Submission of a Letter of Credit, or the equivalent in the amount of $86,186.00. 2. Submission of the inspection fee in the amount of $5,171.16. 3. Submission of a copy of the filed Covenants and Restrictions. Submission of five paper prints and two mylars all containing a valid stamp of Health Department approval. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD 20 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Orlowski: Goldman and Brice - Has already been done. Mr. Orlowski: Too Bee Realty - This minor subdivision is for four lots on 7.956 acres located at Southold. SCTM ~ 1000-50-6-5. 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 February 7, 1990 subject to a final review endorsement of the review of the drainage maps which were sut~itted today to see that they are revised accordingly. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald~ Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Setting of Final Hearings: Thomas W. Russell Jr. - This minor subdivision is for two lots on 2.22 acres located on Heathulie Avenue and Beach Avenue in Fishers Island. SCTM ~ 1000-9-11-9.1. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, March 11, 1991 at 7:3.0 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated December 28, 1990. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. ~ly questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Review of Reports: Suffolk County Planning Co~,~Lission PLANNING BOARD 21 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Mr. Orlowski: Harry and Janet Hohn - This minor subdivision is for th_tee lots on 7.368 acres located on the southwest corner of Aborn Lane and Nassau Point Road. in Cutchogue. $CTM $1000-118-6-I & 3.1. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would ask if there is some way we can hold this off until the next meeting since we would like to make some changes in this report and we don't have the necessary number of votes to do so. Mr. Orlowski: We don't. We can't make any changes tonight. Mr. Wagner: I understand. Mr. Orlowski: Do you want to make some comments? Mr. Wagner: With respect to condition four, it imposes a hundred foot setback requirement for both residential construction and sanitary disposal facilities and I would just like to request that that condition be modified so that there will be a seventy five foot setback for the residential structures with a hundred foot setback for sanitary disposal facilities. That change would be consistent with the Town Code Section 100-239.4 which imposes a seventy five foot setback. Mr. Orlowski: I don't think we have a problem with that, we just can't do anything about it. Mr. Wagner: I'll leave it to you to act on it whenever you get your people together. Mr. Orlowski: O.K.. Mr. Orlowski: Porter & Mary Goss and Michael Laughlin - This lot line change is to subtract .66 of an acre 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 & 16. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED to adopt the February 7, 1~91, Suffolk County Planning Commission Report. Numbers 1 - 4 must be presented in a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions in proper legal form. A copy of the draft Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions must be submitted for review by the Planning Board and the Town Attorney. Once approved, the document must be filed in the Office of the County Clerk. PLANNING BOARD 22 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 Number 6 must be shown on the final map. This notation must include the Liber and Page number of the filed document. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward~ Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Porter & MaryGoss - This lot line change is to subtract .1 of an acre from a .74 acre parcel and add it to a .99 acre parcel on Fishers Island. SCTM $1000-2-1-13 & 14. Mr. McDonald: M~. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED to adopt the February 7, 1991 Suffolk County Planning Co~m~ission Report. Numbers 1-4 must be presented in a Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions in proper legal form. A copy of the draft Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions must be submitted for review by the Planning Board and the Town Attorney. Once approved, the document must be filed in the Office of the County Clerk. Number 6 must be shown on the final map. 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. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT - Lead Agency Process Mr. Orlowski: Cichanowicz and Jerome - This major subdivision is for seventeen lots on 35.7022 acres located on the north side of Main Road (SR 25) off Maple Road in Southold. SCT~ $1000-75-2-8 & 9. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. PLANNING BOARD 23 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 RESOLVED that the $outhold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assume lead agency status on this unlisted action. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. motion? Ail those in favor. Any questions on the Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Orlowski: 3.1. Mr. McDonald: resolution. Opposed? So ordered. Harry & Janet Hohn SCTM ~1000-i18-6-1 & Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Boar, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, assume lead agency status on this Type 1 action. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Ortowski: Motion made and seConded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. SETTING OF THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING Mr. Orlowski: Board to set Monday, March 11, 1991 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. Ward: So moved. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD 24 FEBRUARY 25, 1991 APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the January 14, 1991 and February 4, 1991 minutes. 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. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Being as I have nothing left on my agenda, are there any questions from the audience or the Board? Nancs' Sawast!rnowicz: On the Alvah's Lane development, there is about an acre where their irrigation pump is and it floods out about one dozen times a year about an acre wide which I am sure they are aware of it. Mr. McDonald: As you drive along the road there is a depression right along the side of the road. Mrs. Sawasttrnowicz: No, it is further down by where they have the irrigation pump. There is an irrigation pump there right now. I would, say that the pump is right about in that area. There is an existing irrigation here but it floods out at least an acre wide because everytime Mike plants something there they lose it. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., we'll take note of that. Any other co~,ents? No more comments, I'll make a motion to adjourn. Mr. McDonald: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Being there was no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.. Respectfully submitted, BOARD 25, Bennett orld~ski ~r,, Chairman~ FEBRUARY 25, 1991 JandRousseau,