Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-09/09/1991PLANNING 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 SCOTT L. HARRIS Supervisor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York l 1971 Fax (516~ 765-1823 SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD MINUTES SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Present were: Bennett Orlowski Jr., Chairman G. Richie Latham Kenneth Edwards Richard Ward Mark McDonald Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Melissa Spire, Planner Holly Perrone, Secretary Mr. Orlowski: Good evening, I would like to call this meeting to order. First order of business is the setting of the next Planning Board Meeting. Board to set Monday, September 30, 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. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PUBLIC HEARINGS: Subdivisions - Final: Mr. Orlowski: Harry Hohn This minor subdivision is for three lots on 7.368 acres located on the southwest corner of Aborn Lane and Nassau Point Road in Cutchogue. % ~ SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 2 SEPTEMBER 9w 1991 SCTM ~ 1008-%18-6-1. We have proof of publication in both the local papers and everything is in order for a final hearing I will~a~if there are any objections to this subdivision? ' George Burrell: Yes, I have an objection. I have written on three occasions in connection with it and I don~t know to what extent they have been met by any consideration. However, I do think that the matter should be postponed at the present time. As of ten o'clock this morning when I appeared at the Planning Board office, there was still documentation that had not been supplied~ There still was a declaration that had not been completely revised although I was told it was going to be revised and I would assume that it has been by this time. But I have not seen, as of this moment, any such revisions on those declarations, it seems to me and the objections which I voiced in my letters previously ..... It is known to you if you haVe read my letters and I think they are pertinent and I think that they should be considered or I should be given an opportunity to adjust them.more realistically after I have seen all of the documentation. For example~ wate~ supply system, the declaration, the sketch or final map that has been submitted seems to be filled full of certain discrepanciesw nothing else. There certainly is a lot of material in there which is pertinent to the particular review by the Planning. They seem to have been taken out on one occasion, but not fully on the second occasion so that these things ~have been tQld and have been presented and yet as of this moment, they have no~ been addressed as far as I am concerned. It seems~ to me that on the basis of that and on the basis of what has yet to be read into the record and I haven't seen them and I think I am entitled to it, there should be a short adjournment so that we can respond to it. I don't even know that I do have any objections to that as yet, but certainly I should like to have the opportunity to do so and I addressed this in my letter on August 16th, August 26th, and again in a letter dated yesterday. On all occasions I addressed just that particular point of view and as of now, I have not had any of the documentation that I think is pertinent to a final determination. I think that there should be a short postponement in order to give me an opportunity, and give the board a opportunity to address the letter that I sent in which I personally delivered at 10 o'clock this morning. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., any other objections to this subdivision? Mr. George Burrell: May I ask that the record include the letters that I have filed with you and the objections that I have made. Mr. Orlowski: Yes, they will be in the record. Mr. Burrell: And that there should be some documentation as to the extent of the Planning Board determination here. For example, you address in the declaration, as I have seen it certain lots which belong to me and yet they seem to be part of ~ ~ SOUT~OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 3 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 the subdivision° You put in other declarations for delineations, for what ever it is designations on property again, which is on my property and yet its not in there, yet it seems to have a stamp of approval of the Planning Board. Now, I do note from my first letter that when I did make that objection previously, they did take out some of the things that were on my property leaving certain other matters to be, I don't know, for the future to be determined or whether it is to have the stamp of approval of the Planning Board. This is something that is very pertinent and which I addressed in my letter and I think deserves consideration for a postponement so that we can present just that kind of thing. Mr. Orlowski: Well, nothing has a stamp of approval on it yet. Mr. Burrell: I appreciate that, that is why I am asking for a postponement so that we could go into the matter so that we could get a final dete~ination and get this done for once and for all. I don't like this appearing and objecting to these things anymore then anybody else does. I don~t like to waste my time especially at this moment, I have other things on my mind right now and I just don't feel that this should be rushed through on the basis of a last minute, I don't know, corrections, revisions or what have you and they certainly don't. And the things I have seen don't conform to the matters which have been set forth by the water resources and by the declarations themselveS. That does not conform and they should be reviewed. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., any other objections? Hearing none, are there any endorsements of this subdivision? Mr. John Wagner: Good evening, I'm with Esseks, ~efter, and Angel, Riverheadt New York for the applicant. We are here this evening requesting that this Board grant approval to this subdivision. Conditional approval if you will tonight. Response to Mr. Burrell, there have been numerous documents supplied in on-going dialogue with the Planning Board as to provisions to the maps. Tonight, in fact, I have to hand up to the Board a copy of the latest plat wi'th the latest changes agreed to by all sides which has been endorsed with the approval of tbs Health Department, pursuant to its own review and pursuant to the Health Departments Board of Review determinations and the sample approval endorsed on the Map is dated September 5th, so we did not have an occasion to bring it to you before today. I also have with me tonight, and I have an extra copy for Mr. Burrell if he would like to see it, the latest revision of the Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions required by this Board with the advise of the Suffolk County Planning Commission. This contains the latest changes which were agreed to this morning and its a clean copy. I also have for your review, a copy of the reported declaration of covenants and restrictions that were put on record for the ~ealth Department pursuant to their ~ ~ SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 4 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 approval. I would like to hand out these documents to the Board and Mr. Burrell I have a copy for you as well. Mr. Burrell: This is what I mean. I don't know how there is any response that can be made to something that is not even handed up to the Board yet much less myself. This is why I am asking for that short postponement, it may very well be that it can be clarified very easilybut certainly there should be some considerationJgiven to some documents which I have not as yet seen as of the final meeting, so called. As I understand it there is something from water resources also being handed up. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Burrell: Mr. Orlowski: I don't want to have an argument ~ere. I'm addressing you sir. We are listening tonight and we will take everything under consideration before we make any approval but we don't want to go back and forth because we could do that all night long. We have your correspondence and we will take a look at it and will make our decision based on a lot of things. Mr. Burrell: Very good. Mr. Wagner: Let me just say a few more things. To protect you from matters that are shown on the plat, everything that is shown on the plat has been in accordance with surveying practices.. Also, with this specific request and approval of the Planning Board over time there are elements shown, I believe, on Aborn Lane and properties to the north. These elements are not part of the subdivision, the subdivision is on the property to be owned by the clients. The purpose of showing Aborn Lane and the lots to the north is really for reference purposes and also to indicate what is a street shown on two filed maps of Nassau Point. It is to show access to lot ~3, he also had to show some of the filed map numbers from the old filed maps in particular lot ~93 because a portion of that filed map lot overlays a portion of our property and must be abandoned currently with the filing of this subdivision so it's all with the aim of illustrating where we are and not with the aim of taking over anyone else's property. There is no intent of that. The subdivision covers what is within the bounds of the lots described on it. Mr. Burrell: A famous English judge once said, "if it doesn't mean what it says, it should say so." If it doesn't mean, the language which is contained in here, which refers to the lots, they numerated on the map are not applicable then somebody should say that they are not applicable instead of putting all the lots down, which is extraneous to the subdivision and yet expect somebody to pass upon it to spite the fact that it is not included in the subdivision. If we can get a response to that effect or a letter to that effect saying that all of the lots and anything outside the subdivision is not applicable to the ~ ~ SOUT~OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 5 SEPTEMBER 9r 1991 subdivision, that should settle it. But when words drawn by an attorney appear in such loose fashion, then I certainly must voice an objection to it. Take for example, the gallon per minute. They put down five gallons per minute when I understand from a decision that the maximum is ten. They don't put the maximum down they only put a minimum down. This is kind of, I would almost say devious, but that is my objection and that is why I want to be heard on it while I want the consideration given to it. But, to tell you at this time, that it doesn't apply and all of this stuff that he put in this thing does not apply, that is not satisfactory as far as I'm concerned. If it does not comply, it shouldn't be there. Mr. Orlowski: Is your concern Aborn Lane? Mr. Burrell: Sorry. Mr. Orlowski: Is your concern Aborn Lane? Mr. Burrell: No, it is not my concern Aborn Lane. It's my property. The lots that he puts in there. He puts five of my lots in there and designates them and yet the language says, that there should be nothing done in connection with my lots although I am not involved in this subdivision and that is in my letter. He puts down a right- of- wayor a way, a fifteen foot way, that is not in the subdivision and yet it is in the map. Now, why should that be in the map? If it is on my property and has nothing to do with the subdivision, he limitsthe subdivision to three lots south of Aborn Lane and that is the way it should be. Aborn Lane should be the demarcation. Why go beyond that? This is my objection. He took out a lot of things there but left those two things in here which leads me to suspect that those were left in for a specific purpose and its that specific purpose that I think should be addressed. It's unnecessary, I've been told by everybody that it is unnecessary to have all of this other material. Yet every time I object to it, it still goes in and that sounds to me to be devious. Mr. Orlowski: Well, let me assure you that all the Planning Board is looking~at is what is within the boundaries of the property owned by the applicant. Mr. Burrell: Sir, if you would put that in for the determination and make it certain that there is no ambiguity -about what is put in there and that it is addressed merely to that, I will be content. ~r. Wagner: Let me add one thing. The covenants and restrictions required by this Board and by the Health Departments are in the documents that were given to you. They both contain a schedule which gives a meets and bounds description of the property affected. That schedule and meets and bounds therein pertain only to the property to be owned by my client. The meets and bounds cut off any property outside ~ ~ SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 6 SEPTEMBER 9, 199t that area. There is absolutely no intent to impose the covenants on other lands. Mr. Burrell: But that is not what the language says. Mr. Orlowski: The property shown on ~he map and described by the meets and bounds is all that this Planning Board is looking at or will approve or disapprove at some point. Mr. Burrell: Then, there will be a change in this language. There will be no further subdivision in perpetuity. Any lots, shown on said subdivision map. Well, the subdivision map that they have includes areas that are outside the subdivision. Mr. Orlowski: But the meets and bounds description explicitly holds it within those limits. Anything shown on the outside has no effect by any determination of this Board. Mr. Burrell: that we are talking about has been ch been made most by accretion. For exa lines which are designated on the dee 120 feet. There shown on the map as what has happened there and so I have the objection to it. But, this is th have here and all I am seeking is to what we have and incidentally, it is down here because this man has now be connection with his clearing and othe Unfortunately, the meets and bounds description · nged since the deeds have mple, there are certain is to the McKnights as [43 feet. I can understand referred to it but I make kind of ambiguity that we ie it down so that we know mportant that we tie it ~n warned~three times in things like that and there has been no respect shown to any particular agency as Fir. Trambone says, this man comes in and does what he wants and then has to answer to it at a later date. Mr. Orlowski: Let me just assure you that our approval will only cover what the applicant owns and in those meets and bounds. We can word that probably to your satisfaction in any motion made by this Board. Mr. Burrell: Very good, I'm content wi~h that. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Mr. Wagner: I would just like to say in conclusion that we spent a long time on this map and there has been a lot of thought given to it. We're applying for three lots which are much under the density provided for by the code. We had a lot of talk about it. We plan, as proposed, to allow fgr preservation for large trees, to allow for no clearing along Nassau Point Road. It is an environmentally sensitive plan that has come about after great thought and it is probably one of the better plans that you will ever see for a property of this size. I would urge its approval. To my knOWledge there are no outstanding matters that could not be resolved by conditional approval and resolved to the Board's satisfaction within the ' ~ SOUT~OLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 7 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 next two or three weeks. We are in a position now where we have reached some ~final agreement on the language of the declarations which Mr. Burrell now has a copy of and I am prepared to send that off to the current owners of the property for execution and filing. We have some what of a time restrain ourselves. I understand that we would like to begin construction on lot ~1 before the winter sets in. I am sure you can understand that the foundation should go in before the ground freezes up and the house should be enclosed before it is exposed to the wind and winter conditions. In view of that, I am asking the Boards indulgence that they work with us to move this application forward and I respect the request that we have a conditional final approval tonight which would list all the conditions outstanding which we will meet to the Boards satisfaction before presenting the final map for signature. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., are there any other endorsements of this subdivision? 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° Mr. Burrell: May I ask, that since there seems to be some request for further meeting with the Board in connection with this matter. If any such meeting occurs, is there any possibility of my meeting with them on the occasion tomake certain that we don't have any further argument or contention . Please believe me, I am not contentious but there is a difficulty here that is beyond the Boards ken. We have to be very careful here to protect Our interests and this is exactly the thing that is happening here. We are getting snowed under with all of these beautiful treachers and yet at the same time we find these little digs going in there which is going to be very detrimental to us and that is why I insist upon objecting to what we have here tonight. Mr° Orlowski: O.K.. Mr. Wagner: May I just say one more thing. There has been some sort of taking offense here, some allegations are being made. There has been no intent to include anybody's property on the subdivision. There has been no intent to do anything under the rug. The purpose of showing the adjacent properties is well established particularly in this area where we are doing lots with abuting roads, and the Board:, in sound planning practices, is entitled to know what Aborn Lane is and what properties abut it and what takes access off of it. That is all we are trying to do. We are trying to assist this Board and not do anything ulterior. Mr. Burrell: No where is there any designation that the property adjourning is my property. Merely, just lot lines and other rights of way or other things that they put in but nowhere does, although they mention Trambone's name on the other side, ' ~' SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 8 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 my name is not mentioned. This is why I believe there is some purpose to this extraneous material that is being put in. Mr. Orlowski: O,K., any questions from the Board? Board: No questions. Mr. Orlowski: Hearing no further co~uL~ents or questions, I'll entertain a motion to close this hearing. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald~ Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Harvey Bagshaw and Parviz Farnazad - This proposed lot line change is to subtract 2.326 acres from a 4.686 acre parcel and add it to a 1.92 acre parcel on the north side of State Road 25 in Mattituck. SCTM ~ 1000-122-6-31. We have proof of publication in the local papers and at this time everything 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? Henry Raynor: Mr. Chairman, I represent the applicant. Unfortunately, I don't have any beautiful speeches for you tonight. Basically, the lot line change is in conformance with Section 106A of the subdivision regulations. I believe the Board has all the documentation necessary and I would request the Board approve this proposed lot line change. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other endorsements of this subdivision? Hearing none, is there anyone out there neither pro nor con but may have information pertaining, to this subdivision that may be of interest to the Board? Hearing none, anyquestions from the Board? Board: No questions. Mr. Orlowski: Being no further questions, I'll entertain a motion to close. Mr. McDonald: I move to close this hearing and to offer the following resolution. ~ SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 9 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 WHEREAS, Harvey Bagshaw and Parvis Faranzad are the owners of the property known and designated as SCTM ~ 1000-122-6-31 and 35.6, located at the north side of Route 25 in Mattituck; and WHEREAS, this lot-line change, to be known as Lot Line Change for Harvey Bagshaw and Parviz Faranzad, is for a lot line change subtracting 2.326 acres from a 4.686 acre parcel and adding it to' a 1.92 acre parcel; and WHEREAS, the Southotd Town Planning Board, pursuant to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, (Article 8), Part 617, declared itself Lead Agency and issued a Negative Declaration on August 12, 1991; and WHEREAS, a final public hearing was closed on said lot-line amendment application at the Town Hall, Southotd, New York on September 9, 1991; and WHEREASt 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 received by the Board on July 2, 1991, 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. A corrected survey submitted to the Planning Board showing lot three (3) and date of original survey and revisions. The filing of the deed pertaining to the merger of Lots two (2) and three (3) (ParvizFaranzad). A copy of the deed must be submitted to the Planning Board office. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any ~eestions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwardst Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: ' SOUTHOLDTOWNPLANNING BOARD 10 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Mr. Orlowski: Eleanor $ievernich - This minor subdivision is for two lots on 3.748 acres located on the east side of Cox Neck Lane in Mattituck. SCTM ~ 1000-113-8-5. No one has any comment and we will entertain a motion to keep it open since there is a Article 78 proceeding against us. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS Final Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Orient Park Estates (formerly George & Irving Newman) This minor subdivision is for four lots on 16.1073 acres located on the south side of Main Road inOrient. SCTM ~ 1000-19-1-15. 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 June 12, 1990 and the final road and drainage plan dated June 12, 1990. this subdivision received conditional final approval on April 9, 1990, and at this time, all Conditions of the approval have been fulfilled. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. (Chairman endorsed maps) Setting of Final Hearings: ' SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 11 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Mr. Orlowski: Mattituck Creek Estates (James Cohill) - This major subdivision is for nine lots on 19.1220 acres located on the southwest corner of Mill Road and Grand Avenue in Mattituck. SCTM ~1000-197-1-2. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, September 30, 1991 at 7:30 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated August 13, 1990. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. EdwardS, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlo~ski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Baxter/Terp - This proposed lot line change is to subtract 0.197 acres ~rom a 2.779 acre parcel and to add it to a 28,550 square foot parcel located on the east side of Griffing Avenue and State Road 25 in Cutchoque. SCTM ~ 1000-102-5-9.3. 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, do an uncoordinated review of thi~ unlisted action. The Planning Board assumes lead agency s~atus and in that capacity 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. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would also like. to offer the following. ~ ~ SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 12 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, September 30, 1991, at 7:35 p.m. for a final p~blic hearing on the maps dated August 8, 1991. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Porter J. and Mary Goss This proposed lot line change is to subtract a o10 acre parcel from a .74 acre parcel to add it to a .99 acre parcel on Fishers Island. SCTM ~1000-2-1-13 & 14. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, September 30, 1991 at 7:40 p.m. for a final p~hlic hearing on the maps dated November 20, 1990. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Porter & Mary ~ossandMichael Laughlin - This proposed lot line change is to subtract a °66 acre parcel from a 5.47 acre parcel to add it to a 1.16 acre parcel on Fishers Island. SCTM $t000-2-1-I5.1 & 16. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, September 30, 1991 at 7:45 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated November 21, 1991. Mr. Edwards: Second. ' SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 13 SEPTEMBER 9, i991 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. motion? Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. War Mr. McD Mr. Orlowski: Final Determin Mr. Orlowski: Any questions on the ~, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Dnald, Mr. Orlowski. Opposed? So ordered. ~tions: Harvey BagshawandParvis Faranzad- SCTM % 1000-122-6-31 (Already Done) Sketch Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Thomas Shalvey - This set off is on a 21.782 acre parcel located at the southeast corner of Middle Road (C.R. 48) and Bridge Lane in Cutchogue. SC~ 91000-84-2-2. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold'sTown Planning Board start the coordination process on this unlisted action. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. McDonald: I would like to make another motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch approval on the map dated July 19, 1991. 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. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. ' ' SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 14 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Review of Reports: Suffolk County Planning Com,~Lission Mr. Orlowski: Barry Savits This minor subdivision is for three lots on 12.4 acres located on the east side of Sound View Avenue; 932 feet north of Mill Lane in Pecor~c. SCTM % 1000-999-2-18o Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED to adopt the August 7, 1991 Suffolk County Planning Co~mtission report with the following amendments (numbers correspond to numbers in report): Is to be amended to read: No lot line shall be changed in any manner at any future date unless authorized by the Town of Southold Planning Board. 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 & 7. Are to remain as written. The Planning Board is also requiring the following covenants and restrictions: No vegetation shall be destroyed, cut, or removed, except as required for disease control, within the seventy-five (75) foot buffer area adjacent to the wetland area. There shall be no construction of any kind within the seventy-five (75) foot buffer area adjacent to the wetland area. Ce The dwelling unit on lot %3 shall be located in a manner so that construction of this unit and any accessory structures such as a tennis court, swimming pool, garage, etco, shall not necessitate intrusion into the buffer area. The seventy-five (75) foot buffer area adjacent to the Wetland is to be delineated by snow fencing prior to the development of lot %3. Haybales are to be staked end to end adjacent to the snow-fence and left in place until permanent groundcover is established. F. Ail roof runoff is to be directed into the ground by means of gutters, downspouts and drywells. G. The setback of the septic system for lot ~3 shall not be less than 100 feet from the wetland line. E ' SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 15 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 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. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Lead Agency Process: Mr. Orlowski: Thomas Shalvey - SCTM %1000-84-2-2. (Already done) Determinations: Uncoordinated Review Mr. Orlowski: Baxter/Terp - SCTM %1000-102-5-9.3. (Already done). APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the June 4, 1991, June 24, 1991 and the July 15, 1991 minutes. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: OTHER Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Planning Board hereby authorizes its Chairman to re-endorse the Open Development Subdivision Plan for the Fishers Island Development Corporation Showing East End Lots; said plat drawn byChandler, Palmer & King in August of Mr. Orlowski: FIDC0 - Planning Board to consider re-endorsement of Open Development Subdivision Plan for Fishers ISland Development Corporation. ~ ~ SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 16 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 1981. This plat had been adopted by the Planning Board in January of 1988 and previously approved by the Suffolk County Department of Health Services Board of Review on December 4, 1987. However, since this plat had not been filed with the County Clerk's Office in Riverhead, this endorsement is to allow for the filing of the map in accordance with the provisions of New York State Town Law. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mro McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: We have some appointments tonight. Mr. Bitses is here. Mr. Bitses: In 1979 you granted a minor subdivision to Catherine Bitses and I come before you now in effect for~ not a new subdivision but for a lot line change. In other words, extension to the south to increase the size of the lots from one acre two, three, and three and one half acresin accordance with the town plano I have been submitting covenants and restrictions for the last five years. As each submission was made, you asked ifor further covenants and restrictions and I finally have come before this Board with several covenants and restrictions which I assumed that will be acceptable to you for this lot line change. There is one covenant that I cannot agree to and that is the covenant granting you a scenic easement on a ribbon of land D00 feet wide right across the front of the property. An easement, scenic easement that is so restricted that it would deprive futture owners of this property as a reasonable enjoyment thereof. In other words, to give the Town of SouthOld, the Planning Board a right toventuz'e upon this property and inspect it and order changes in the future ~and if in the opinio~ of the inspectors a non- compliance of your candid scenic easement. I believe seriously, that you have oversteped your bounds of authority, in other words, if you ask for a scenic easement which in essence is a right of property ownership and your powers arrive from the police powers of this state or proper regulation. I understand that there should be regulations, but when that regulation extends over and disturbs ownership purposes if some regulation must under certain circumstances the way you ask for a scenic easement that would deprive the future owners of this property of the reasonable residential use thereof I believe you have gone over the line somewhat considering the property adjoining this property (inaudible) around nine or ten acres. All I am asking SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 17 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 for is an extension of the existing granted minor ~ubdivision so that each lot will be not one acre but two and oneJhalf, three, three and one half and four acres which I thought is reasonable. Now, I purchased this property some time ago and I have invested f~rty thousand dollars in tax money in essentially a piece of vacant land and I was very secure in that investment because I thought I was investing in Southold Town and that this would be my annuity when I retired. Not|to bother you with my concerns, but this is a very real concern that should be considered by the Town° I have been payJ reasonable taxes on vacant land for a a time when I wish to subdivide it, excu~ subdivided now that I am asking for a lot increase the size of the lots and constar additional restrictions and additional c¢ restrictions and additional covenants th~ on most of the covenants because they ar( ng on this property iod of thirty years at e me, it has been . line change to .tly faced with ~enants and .t you demand. We agree reasonable and I would be the first to agree with them because we wish to maintain certain standards in this town. But the~e are certain covenants that I can't agree to, the one being the~granting of the scenic easement right across the front of this property 100 feet in extent given ~he right to re-enter at an~ime in the future and to order changes at will. The other is ~nd I will read it. No lot Sba!l] be subdivided nor its lot line,changed in any manner. or at any future date unless authorized DY appropriate authority of the Town of Southold in the manner according!to law. That is a standard clause and somewhere along th~ line someone suggested the word in perpetuity and a deformation of a right in the easement shall be imposed on ion other than those imposed'by the laws Of the Town of County of Suffolk, State of New York and the United States ¢ ica. This is what ' citizen is entitled too Ther(fore, I respectfully yougive honest this, my final declaration of covenants and re I can get on with the prospect of possibly setting some of lots or as in for my annuity. This is why I have been investing the tax money in this town for the last thirty years. This property amounts to my annuity at the time of my retirement, I don't think I am being unreasonable, if I am please explain to me how I am being unreasonable in requesting that I be abl~ to use this property as a residential property without hinderance, particularly considering that my right next door adjoining my parCel has a end zone. Is there any comment from the Board on this? SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 18 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Mr, Orlowski: Are you discussing the fifty foot scenic easement? Mro Bitses: Fifty foot, seventy-five, hundred foot, doesn't matter. If it is a scenic easement across the front of the property it deprives the owners of the reasonable use of the most valuable part of that property. Mr. Orlowski: Well you can't do anything within seventy-five foot of it anyway. Mr. Bitses: Well you see, the easement that you have suggested to me would give you the right in the future. Mro McDonald: It is in the rear yard, you're talking about an easement in the rear yard. Mr. Bitses: The creek, in the rear yard. Along the creek line. Mr. McDonald: Not in the front, in the rear. Mr. Bitses: What ever you want to call it. Well anyway, the problem is, that in the future we do have the right to come in and intervene and interrupt the lawful use of this property by residential holders. Mr. Orlowski: But you are not going to be able to do anything in this area anyway. What are you going to do in this area? Mr. Bitses: Extend the four lots with a lot line Change. Mr. Orlowski: Are you going to build your house there too? Mr. Bitses: I would like to buld my house there. Mr. Orlowski: Within that scenic easement? Mr. Bitses: No, not within the scenic easement. In fact, I would like to keep people out of the area that would be the scenic easement. But I can't grant the scenic easement under the terms you have suggested. You have suggested terms that would allow the Planning Board or other appropriate authorities to enter this property in the future if you thought there was a violation of the scenic easement. Now, when people buy these parcels, the first thing they are going to do is plant lawns. That is forbidden by the scenic easement, within fifty or one-hundred feet of the water. This is a inappropriate use, inappropriate restriction for residential use. Mr. McDonald: We're discussing four lot line changes, is that correct? Mr. Bitses: That is right. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 19 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Mr. McDonald: Do we have maps for the four lot line changes? Mr. Bitses: I believe I submitted them. Mr. McDonald: It is being treated as a subdivision. Mr. Orlowski: We weren't sure what to do with it so we decided to do it that way. Mr. McDonald: Is there a Trustee determination on this? Mr. Orlowski: It is within seventy-five feet. Mr. McDonald: Has he been to the Trustee~s? Has he got a Trustee permit? Ms. Spiro: I believe he has been to the Trustees. Mr. McDonald: What are the conditions of the Trustee permits? Mr. Bitses: To do what? Mr. McDonald: You have wetlands on your property? Mr. Bitses: There is a fringe along the waterfront. We can always get Trustee approval, but right now I am hung up with the covenants and restrictions. Here is the original subdivision. We want to extend these lots down to the water.~ It is a lot line change, not a subdivision. This is the one that was granted in 1979 along the road and the maps that you have show these four lots being extended down to the water. It isa lot line change. Mr. McDonald: One of the things that is confusing me is the numbers you are using as the size of the finished lots are not the same numbers that are showing for the acreage on these lots. Mr. Bitses: Let's take a look. This is 2.6 acres, where it was one acre over there. This is 2.5 and this is 3.1. There is a four acre lot here. Mr. McDonald: So this map is not correct even as it stands, correct? Mr. Bitses: I thought I had submitted the superseded map. Mr. McDonald: I'll be honest with you, I am not interested in addressing this until I see what the Trustee's have said about this property. You know, they are going to have a lot to say about the area. I would like to hear what they are going to say. Mr. 0rlowski: Mark, we're installing the standard scenic easement that we usually do on the waterfront. On the bay side SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 20 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 it is seventy-five feet~ We put it into a scenic easement to offer more protection and it is a standard policy of practice of this Board. What you are asking now is You want to do something down there and if you are going to do anything you are going to have to go to the (cut off by Mr. Bit,es). Mr. Bitses: I want to mow the lawn down there. But according to your scenic easement, I can't do thatl Mr. McDonald: You may well not be able to have any lawn at all. Mr. Bitses: It's six feet above the ~e~n high water mark. Mr. McDonald: That's why I would like to send it to the Trustees. Mr. Bitses: Alright, I'll start a dialogue with the TrUStees rather than submit any writing to you now. Let me talk to the TrUstees, then I'll come back and talk to you. Not the next meeting, I'll talk to tbs Trustees first and try to get things organize~ there and then we'll eventually set up another hearing. I appreciate the fact that you put me On as a add on tonight. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., good night. ***************************************** Mr. Or!owski: O.K., next we have an appointment with the Cooper family who have scheduled an appointment to talk to us about their property in Mattituck. Mr. Cooper: I guess basically, what e are interested in doing is splitting up the property that wil~ enable us to divide it up by my father's will. I think I have a letter from my lawyer, Dan Ross, I think'it came from the Planning Board. Basically it says that they are against breaking it they the file of a declaration of cove stating that there shall be no furtheI in perpetuity. Just what exactly does ~r. Orlowski: Well, I think the Board what you are doingwith ~he whole parc in cluster and still allow farming on full density now instead of going thrc up the way it is unless, ·ants and restrictions subdivision of any lots that refer to? wants to know exactly el so maybe we could do it this piece and get you [gh a subdivision that is still going to take time and money. I meanou could do everything right now in letting us kncw whatyycu want or what you are trying to achieve and if you want to keep farming, you can use the open space for that and get your density in the lots that you want to create or have and we could work together on this to do that instead of just backing it into three large pieces and not knowing what further subdivision is going to do to you. You may end up having to cut a huge road through all of SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 21 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 this and I am sure you wouldn't want to go through all of that expense. Mr. Cooper: The problem is that this is the property the way it was willed to us and I am farming it right now. What my brothers want to do in the future, or at any particular time, I don't know. The best farmland is basically this section here. Up to about here. (A lot of discussion). A road comes off the subdivision on the other side and cluster building in here on both sides which really chews up the best piece of farmland. It's really, as far as we're concerned, not too acceptable. Mr. Cooper: Another problem is that this brother if he wants to sell or subdivide in the future and even though I can still farm this, to tie everything into one subdivision at this time in cluster zone it where you want to cluster zone in here would make it difficult. Mr. Ward: What you would have to do is you would have to go back to what we know, as the Planning Board, as one parcel. As of right now there is no approval for this subdivision. Also by code, we are up against a restriction here is that the Planning Board has mandated to cluster in .this particular zone with this amountof acreage. So I certainly feel that the Planning Board would certainly look to cluster. Being that you are farming this piece that our initial thought was here because we saw the development but if in fact this is the best soiland everything else I see no problem with putting the density, here but it would mean the three of you in a sense have to get together, come together as one map and present it. Mr. Cooper: Well, the problem that we've run into is everybody has their own ideas as to what they want, and my older brother Dave is not in the best financial shape, he wants to take a mortgage out on his part. Mr. McDonald: Once the lots are there you can portion the lots out and sell them just as well. Really, as from our standpoint its only one parcel. The three of you own it but you have got to get together and work. Mr. Cooper: What we would definitely like is to have it the way it was willed. Mr. Cooper: You can't split it up like this and if it was to be subdivided in the future just have a short road in each one of these and have three or four lots on each one. Ms. Scopaz: There is one other thing that you should think about, if you want to stay in farming. You really don't want to drop your farm lot down below ten acres because then you are no longer eligible for agricultural district exemption. If you do a cluster, you preserve that option. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 22 SEt~TEbIBER 9, 1991 Mr. McDonald: One of your brothers needs money and is looking for it as quickly as possible, I get that impression that that is an issue. Maybe not a number one issue, but it is an issue. They might be ~hle to do something for you. It doesn't cost you a nickle to talk to these people at all but if they can do something for you, they can do something for you, if they can't help you then you certainly are no worse off. They might be able to do something for you that would get you moving along a lot faster because they know ways to get around people, like the Health Department and us. Mr. Cooper: Talk to who? Mr. McDonald: Peconic Land Trust. They just opened an office in Peconic by the tracks. Walk in and talk to them. Take the map and walk in. Do what you please, it is your property. It might be a help and it is free. Mr. Orlowski: If you are going to do something now, I really don't want to see you go through all of this expense and then later on do it again and then it will cost you much more. If you know what you are looking for or what density being the family is so large and you know each one needs so many lots maybe we could put them off to one side so it's a equitable position for everybody and preserve the rest so it can stay in agriculture forever, the whole farm and we might be able to do it with flag lots and other ways in here if we come to an agreement. It would save you a lot of moneyon the road because at two hundred dollars a foot it takes a lot of the equity away. Mr. Ward: This fellow here knows how to handle it too. He can be of help to you because he has done a lot of clusters in subdivisions. Mr. McDonald: You can go to the land trust and they will talk to you for nothing. Howie is a really good guy but he doesn't work for nothing. Mr. Cooper: With Paul Freidberg's property back here which is in the process of being subdivided, I don't know if that was finalized or not. Mr. Orlowski: Not yet. Mr. Cooper: From a farmers point of view, which is mine, my impression is that it's going to be clustered on the north end which is up here. Mr. Orlowski: On both ends. Mr. Cooper: Well, the best farm land ....... SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 23 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Mr. Orlowski: They have the biggest hole in Mattituck right in the middle of it but we couldn't put the houses in the drainage area. Mr. Cooper: Well, they could be built around that. Mr. Orlowski: Talking to John, he does a lot of this, lays this out and so family wise and estate wise you might find it a lot more equitable than making a mistake now and doing this. tt is worth a shot. Cooper: This top little piece up in here is a little knoll. A lot of discussion among the Board members. Mr. Latham: Row many acres is this whole thing? Mr. Cooper: About twenty-eight. Mr. McDonald: 26.8. Mr. Latham: I think it is a good idea for him to go down and see John Halsey or who ever is down in the office. Mr. Cooper: You don't think it would be feasible to split it up into different parcels? The reason that to me is the simplest. If Dave wants to sell off any of his because he has several kids that he will probably want to leave some to. Cluster building means everybody gets so many lots but you have to invest the money into roads. Mr. Orlowski: If you do it all together and you lay it out the right way there may be no road costs. If we can come to an agreement here on what density you are really looking for and how many kids you have to get lots for and we have a give and take on both, we can probably do it with flag lots. Then they will be there forever and your equity is there and it is all figured out and the farmland will be there forever. It would also be one separate lot. Peconic Land Trust has a lot of good ideas along those lines and it is worth talking to them. Mr. Cooper: That is John Halsey? Ms. Spiro: If you come in tomorrow, I~ll give you his number. Mr. Cooper: O.K., thank you very much. Mr. Orlowski: Our next appointment is with Tom Samuels and Nancy Steetman. Mr. Tom Samuels: This is Mr. and Mrs. Robert Pellegrini and they own the vineyard in Cutchogue which is Island Vineyards SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 24 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 plus their gazebo and we are talking about doing a new winery on the front side, meaning on the street side of that. A total of about thirty six acres. We're basically' just interested in showing you a very preliminary site plan drawing that we have and hoping that maybe you have some interesting co~,~lents or advice for us. We will obviously be going through a lot more processing with you but in the mean time we.thought this would be a good way to introduce you to our clients. The basic notion of the project, which this is obviously just a small portion of the entire site° Mrs. Steelman: This is an old map, small barns and houses existed at that point, this is 1963. I don't know when this was actually torn down. Mr. McDonald: The proposed winery and the vineyard are one contiguous piece of property? Mrs. Stee!man: Yes, thirty-six acres. Mr. McDonald: Is this going to be the majority production of grapes for the wine you are about to make? Mr. Samuels: Yes, this would be an entire facility and it would be production and sales within the limits allowed by the special exception that we would seek bythe Zoning Board of Appeals. It's an AC zone. Mrs. Steelman: There would probably be a small building further into the site which would be just for equipment. would be production. This Mr. Samuels: So basically this is the site with the design as it stands scamatically. Whatever is white is building area. The pink area is a kind of paved court. The little building in the front is a tasting sales area. The long building which is essentially a potato barn, it's eight feet down, eight feet above grade. That is, your basic production area. Bottle storage would be in this portion in a pass through in a sense to a terrace and whatever happens beyond. Mrs. Steelman: Then functionally there would be a crushing pad doWn on the lower level, down the eight foot elevation which would have access back into the fermatation and barrel storage. Mr. McDonald: Where is the gazebo rightnow? Would that show on this? Mrs. Steelman: It is probably pretty much dead center. Mr. Samuels: It's about a acre and a half cleared area. Mrs. Steelman: We are not encroaching any further into that, these lines that are showing are the existing grapes. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 25 SEPTEMBER 9~ 1991 McDonald: This building would be back how far from the road? Mrs. Steelman: 60 feet. Mr. McDonald: Do you have a loading zone? Mr. Samuels: That would be here. It shows now actually as a parking space but we need to clarify that and find another place for that car. Mr. Orlowski: Twenty-two, is that the minimum parking? Mrs. Steelman: Well, we need to study that. There is a lot of storage area and a lot of production to find out which is production and which is storage area. That is pretty close to whatwe have calculated. ~r. Ward: What actually gets put on this pad out here? Everyone talking at once4 Mr. Samuels: Hopefully, we can get it down to the grade or the level of the floor of the winery. Mr. Ward: You are saying it's that far below? Mr. Samuels: Our intention is to have this building visible from the road which is about thirty feet by ninety or something of that scale so it is not imposing to get it below. Like a potato barn so it's extends only above grade. Mrs. Steelman: We need about sixteen feet clear in that space for the tanks. Everyone talking. Mr. Orlowski: What type of architecture are you going to use in this? You don't have any elevations yet do you? ~r. Samuels: No, we haven't invested in going that far because we wanted to make sure there was no inherent problem here. Mr. Pellegrini: Our intention is to create a building which has argriculture flavor but also enough style to signal that its a facility to invite the public to come in and tour and have some wines. Mrs. Steelman: I believe it is important to keep it similar to what is out here. Mr. Samuels: That is our intention. Mrs. Steelman: We don't want to do anything right out of California. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD 26 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Mr. Samuels: Not like Pindar, nothing against Pindar but it's not going to look like that. I like Lenz. Mr. Ward: The only comment I would have in terms of the circulationmight be that if you got a bus in there it might be a little difficult to get him around. Mr. Samuels: The issue of circulation has been difficult for us even at this time because we don't want to remove wine grapes that are already planted there and there is a acre and a half and the building to go with it and we feel architecturally that we would like to do that so we will have to work harder to get the onsight circulation. Mr. Pellegrini: It makes this whole area look like a big mass because this would all be open. This looks structural here but it's not. Mr. McDonald: Are the trees you are sho~ing proposed or are they existing? Mrs. Steeiman: Some are existing. Mr. McDonald: Pretty thin trees up there? Mr. Samuels: There are some nice maples along this edge, most of the rest are locust, poplar types that have just gotten huge. There are some nice ones and we're going to make an effort to save the ones that are saveable and also on this edge. Mr. Pellegrini: The gazebo, hopefully we'll find a new for it. Everyone talking. Mr. Smmuels: Our intention is to totally work with the Town to not only make appropriate in terms of the rules and regulations that regard such things. Mr. ortowski: Mr. Samuels: Conceptually it looks fine to me. Thank you for your time. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. DanoWski has scheduled an appointment. Mr. Danowski: Mr. Terry really wants to give his daughter a one acre lot that used to exist at less than an acre probably two thirds or maybe less than that and unfortunately, it became merged by the Town. We dated it back and the line got erased, and I~ve got a map that Mary-Ellen and I just discussed and Mr. VanTuyl has proposed a one acre lot. It is on the Main Road, SOUTHOLD TOm PLANNING BOARD 27 SETEMB~ 9, 1991 it shows a fifty foot potential area for the future access to the remainder of the thirty-three acre parcel. We're showing a lot line that I've just taken a solid black pen on and said perhaps we should change that line a little bit beca~e we show a lot line separating two buildings by a very short distance and as I understand it needs a ten foot setback from a building lot. The reason Mr. Terry, however, wanted that line is that he very clearly wants his son Fred who fa~i~,s it to have all the farm buildings and the farm and not Mary Ellen. She gets the house and the garage and that is it so he wanted that line drawn there very specifically for a purpose and he doesn't want to take his farm buildings down right now either. I agreed to all of that so I don't have the liberty really with his permission to draw the line there. There is a little green house in the back and there is a little building that used to house chemicals and I suppose we could probably exchange distances ~nd put the solid line in the back to create the ten foot distance and subtract it however, because we don't want any more land being taken up by Mary Ellen away from this building lot. I would think, unless I'm mistaken and haven't been present at early discussions or anything years ago, if no one would have a major objection to doing this. Mr. Orlowski: This is in a R-80 right? ~Ir. Danowski: It's an R-80, I'm saying it is a cluster and I can't imagine there would be a lot of opposition to. it because there is plenty of land in the back. Just a little history, the DEC taking a line in the back and picked off the back parcel. Mr. McDonald: That lot is one acre? Mr. Danowski: Yes. Mr. McDonald: It's R-80 presently right? So you would be prepared to say somehow or another that one acre and the rest is not in the yield. It would solve some of the problems you've been having with this all along. Mr. Danowski: Right. Mr. Orlowski: Does anyone have any problems with this? Board: No problems. ~ir. Danowski: O.K., thanks. Mr. McDonald: When you say ten foot, is that the rear yard? Mr. Danowski: Setbacks of buildings from properties go by size of lot in R-80, I just read it and it said if I had a 20,000 square foot lOt I could have three foot. SOU~OLD ~ PLANNING BOARD 28 SEPTEMBER 9, 1991 Mr. McDonald: If this were an R-40, what would the setback be because you are creating a one acre lot. The other thing that we could do and I'm not saying we want to do this but if we put a building envelope on this and show that building we could violate the setback. I'm not saying that we should do that but we would have that option. MrQ Danowski: There is an existing house there now° Mr. McDonald: No, I'm talking About the building, the original line that he wants and you are saying that it is too close. I'm saying if we put a building envelope on there that includes that building even though it is closer than a ten foot line we could do that. We could move the building envelope to allow that to happen. Mr. Ward: So you should show the building envelope is what we are talking about. Mr. McDonald: Show the building envelope with the line he likes with that building inside the building envelope. Ms. Scopaz: In other words, it would be like granting a variance but the Board would do the final approval. Mr. Danowski: We have fruit trees over here floating around and I think his big deal was really to argue the property rights. Thanks a lot. Mr. Orlowski: Any other questions or comments? We signed the FIDCO map for you tonight. Do you think you can get someone over there to file it now, that's the third time. Mr. Ray Edwards: We'll see what happens. Mr. Orlowski: Any other questions or co~:~ents? Mr. Latham: I move that we adjourn. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr~ McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Being there was no further business to be brought before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:55 p.m. SOUTHOLD TOWN PLAi~q~ING BOARD 29 SEPTEMBER 9r 1991 Jan~ Rousseau, Secretary RECEIVED AND FILED BY THE $OUTHOLD 'rOWl, l CLERK