Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-05/14/1990PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Bennett Orlowski. Jr., Chairman George Ritchie Latham. Jr. Richard G. Ward Mark S. McDonald Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOAR~ MINUTES SCOTr L. HARR~ Su~isor Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 1197t Fax (516) 765-1823 MAY 14, 1990 Present were: Bennett Orlowski, Chairman G. Richie Latham Jr. Richard Ward Mark McDonald Kenneth Edwards Melissa Spiro, Planner Holly Perrione, Secretary Jane Rousseau, Temporary Secretary Mr. Orlowski: Good Evening, I would like to call this meeting to order. First order of business is the public hearing of East Coast Associates - This major subdivision is for 5 lots on 10.806 acres located on the west side of Alvah's Lane; 113 feet north of County Road 48 in Cutchogue. SCTM ~1000-101-1-16.1. We have proof of publication in both the local newspapers 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 thissubdivision? Marie Ongioni - Attorney - Representing the applicant. As the board had indicated it appears at this point the file is in order and I am here to answer any questions which the board may have regarding the application. Are there any questions? Mr. Orlowski: Not yet. Are there 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 would be of interest to the board? Hearing none, any questions from the board? PLANNING BOARD 2 MAY 14, 1990 Board: No questions. Mr. Orlowski: Being there are no further questions, I'll declare this hearing closed. Mr. Orlowski: Does the board have any pleasure on this preliminary map? Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I'll make a motion. It was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Pla~ing Board grant preliminary approval on the maps dated February 5, 1990, for this major subdivision. The board requests a draft of declaration of covenants and restrictions which will be reviewed by the Planning Board and the Town Attorney. The draft must contain the following: (1) (2) The one hundred (100) foot front scenic easement and the one hundred (100) foot rear scenic easement as designated on the major subdivision map shall be left undisturbed, with the exception of the drive- way access areas as shown on the map. These covenants and restrictions can be modified only at the request of the then owner of the premises with the approval of a majority plus one of the Planning Board of the Town of Southold after a public hearing. Adjoining property ~wners shall be entitled to notice of such hearing but their consent to such modification shall not be required. 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. Edwards Mr. Latham. ' ' Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next order of business is a hearing on a proposed amendment to the Subdivision Re~ulations, specifically Section A106-3,SE in regards to money in lieu of land. RESOLVED to adopt the following amendment, and to reco~L, nend same to the Town Board for adoption. Section A106-38E. (3) (Money in lieu of land) of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: PLANNING BOARD 3 MAY 14, 1990 Paragraph (3) - The amount to be deposited with the Town Board shall be two thousand dollars ($2,000.00) per lot for each vacant lot in the subdivision. For the purpose of this Section, a vacant lot shall be construed as a lot that doesn't contain an existing residential structure at the time the subdivision receives final approvall In a subdivision containing lots designated as affordable pursuant to the Town's affordable housing code, those lots so designated shall be exempt from this computation. Mr. Orlowski: We have proof of publication in both local papers on this hearing and I'll ask if there are any objections to this amendment? Mr. Pete Danowski: Not that I object to it yet and I recognize that other Town Code's have similar provisions. I'm just inquiring whether you intend to make this retroactive for pending applications and recognize that you do park and recreation areas on certain maps. That affects our yield and I think perhaps the motivating force behind the amendment is probably a good one, but as far as objecting to it, by what I find how it applies to some of my clients who are now in the process, if it is less expensive I'll be for it and if it's more expensive, I'll be against it. I just question after you close the hearing and before you pass the resolution whether you are going to apply it retroactively or not and certainly I won't object if it doesn't affect me. Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other co~L~ents? Charles Cuddy: Just an inquiry. Can you tell me if this applies to both major and minor subdivisions? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Cuddy: I would just voice an objection to minor subdivisions, I think that is an outrageous amount of money for one, two, three or four lots, just for the record. Mr. Orlowski: Any other objections, pro or con comments? Does the board have any comments? Mro Ward: The reason that $2000.00 came up as the number is that we took the history of the past few years of subdivisions in the Town and we presently go through the route of having appraisals made and coming up with the estimated value of that particular parcel of land. The track record has averaged about that. Some have been lessr some have been more but this way we're hopeful it will help streamline the process and everybody would know up front what the dollar value is. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments from the board? PLD~NING BOARD 4 MAY 14, 1990 Board: No further comments. Mr. Orlowski: No further comments, I'll declare this hearing closed. Mr. Orlowski: Does the board have any pleasure? Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I move for the adoption of this amendment as so read. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: This will be sent over to the Town Board by resolution recommending that they do the same. Hearings Held Over From Previous Meetings: Mr. Orlowski: The North Forty - ~nis major subdivision is for thirteen lots on 30.3565 acres on the south side of Oregon Road; 621 feet west of Depot Lane in Cutchogue. SCTM ~I000-95-4-14.1 Mr. Orlowski: This hearing is still open. I'll ask if there are any comments? Mr. Pete Danowski: Attorney for Mr. ~atz and Mr. McDowell. I haue had a very brief opportunity to speak to Mr. Arnoff and I was hoping that he would have an opportunity tQ speak to you people. If he has, hopefully, it is a positive word. If he has ~ot~ I indicated to hi~ and I indicated to the board tP~t we would be happy to meet at a joint meeting with all of you; but I would think'that we could adopt the policy either after this hearing is over or perhaps in the next couple of weeks to allow the large lot ownership of open space with the recorded covenanus, so whether you keep the hearing open some more or whether youclose it we certainly are looking to cooperate with the town in having a large lot concept. Mr. Orlowski: We haven't had a chance to talk with Mr. Arnoff yet. I think we'll keep it open. Mr. Danowski: That would be fine. PLANNING BOARD 5 MAY 14, 1990 Mr. Orlowski: subdivision? hearing open. Mr. Edwards: Any other comments or questions on this Hearing none, I'll entertain a motion to keep this So moved. 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. MAJOR AND MINOR SUBDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES AND SET OFF APPLICATIONS: Setting of Final Hearings: 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 at Cutchoque. SCTM ~%000-72-2-2.1 & 3. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I would like to entertain a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, June 4, 1990 at 7:30 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated April 9, 1990. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Sidney W. Olmstedr Jr. & Robert W. Olmsted - This minor'subdivison is on three lots located on the north side of WeStphalia Avenue; 123 feet west of County Road 48 at Mattituck. SCTM $1000-114-7-14. Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion. PLANNING BOARD 6 MAY 14, 1990 RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, June 4, 1990 at 7:35 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated April 16, 1989. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Pauline W. Ketcham - This lot line change is located on the corner of Hamilton Avenue and Glenwood Road at Cutchogue. SCTM ~1000-137-5-17. Mr. Orlowski: In regards to the State Environmental Quality Review Act, what is the pleasure of the board? Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, do an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action. ~The Planning Board establishes itself as Lead Agency, and as Lead Agency makes a determination and grants a Negative Declaration. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed.? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: In regards to a hearing. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion. RESOLVED that.the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, June 4, 1990 at 7:40 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated October 13, 1989. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? PLANNING BOARD 7 MAY 14, 1990 Ayes: Mr. Latham, Fir. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Sean M. Delehanty - This lot line change is located on Knollwood Lane at Mattituck. SCTM 41000-107-1-13,14. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, June 4, 1990 at 7:45 p.m. for a final public hearing on the maps dated May 16, 1989. ~. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Fir. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So moved. Preliminary Extensions: Mr. Orlowski: Mattituck Creek Estates foz~uerl¥ James Cohill - This major subdivision is for nine lots on 19.1220 acres and is located on the southwest corner of Mill Road and Grand Avenue in Mattituck. SCTM ~1000-107-1-2. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a six month extension of preliminary approval from May 20, 1990 to 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. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD 8 MAY 14, 1990 Sketch Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Franklin Balachly - This major subdivision is for nine lots on 20.4 acres located on the northeast side of Alvah's Lane; 2873 feet northwest of NYS 25 in Cutchogue. SCTM % 1000-102-4-5. Mr. Latham: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch approval on the map dated October 12, 1989. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Ortowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Martin Sidor Jr. - This proposal is to set off a 16.786 acre parcel from an existing 33.57 acre parcel located on the west side of Locust Avenue and the south side of Main Road in Mattituck. SCTM $ 1000-115-7-13. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to entertain a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch approval on the map dated April 30, 1990. 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. Review of Reports: Suffolk County Planning Commission. Mr. Orlowski: Margaret J. Gada - This minor subdivison is on 4.25 acres located on Fisehrs Island. PLANNING BOARD 9 MAY 14, 1990 SCTM ~ 1000-10-7-2.1. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I would like to entertain a motion. RESOLVED to adopt the May 3, 1990, Suffolk County Planning Commission report with the following amendments (numbers correspond to numbers in report): 1, 9-, 3 & 4. Are to remain as written. 5 & 6. Are to be omitted. 7, 8, 9, 10 & 11 Are to remain as written. 12. 13. Is to be revised to read: These covenants and restrictions can be modified only at the request of the then owner of the premises with the approval of a majority plus one of the Planning Board of the Town of Southold after a public hearing. Adjoining property owners shall be entitled to notice of such public hearing hut their consent to such modifications shall not be required. Is to remain as written with the addition that the Liber and Page number of the filed document be included on the final map. The Planning Board has adopted Number fo-ur-.(4) from the Commission's comments with the following amendments: It is to be revised to read: The area that this subdivision is located in is considered to be archaeologically sensitive according to the State of New York Office of Historic Preservation. A preliminary survey should be made to assess this parcel for archaeological sensitivity. 1, 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 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. Numbers 7 & 13 must be shown on the final map. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered, PLANNING BOARD 10 MAY 14, 1990 MAJOR AND MINOR SUBIDIVISIONS, LOT LINE CHANGES, SET OFF APPLICATIONS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT Lead Agency Coordination: Mr. Orlowski: Franklin Blachly - SCTM 91000-102-4-5. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board start the coordination process on this unlisted action. The Board asumes lead agency status and in that capacity makes an initial determination of non-significance. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, ~ir. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Mcdonald. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Martin Sidor Jr. - SCTM 9 1000-115-7-13. Mr. Latham: I would like to offer the following resolution. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board start the coordination process on this unlisted action. The Board assumes lead agency status and in that capacity makes an initial determination of non-significance. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Determinations: Mr. Ortowski: James Patrick Kelly - This set off of 94,829 square foot lot from 9.182 acre parcel at Southold. PLANNING BOARD tl MAY 14, 1990 SCTM ~ 1000-56-1-4.1. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, make a determination of non,significance, and grant a Negative Declaration. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Pauline Ketcham - We did that one already. SITE PLANS: Final Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Love Lane Laundromat - This proposed site plan contains 23 machines on 10,252 square foot site at Mattituck. SCTM $ 1000-140-3-3.1. Mr. Orlowski: What is the pleasure of the board in regard to SEQRA? 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, do an uncoordinated review of this unlisted action. The Planning Board establishes itself as Lead Agency, and as Lead Agency makes a determination of non=significance and grants a Negative Declaration. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Latham. PLANNING BOARD 12 MAY 14, 1990 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Does the board have any other pleasures on this application? Mr. McDonald: I would like to offer the following motion. WHEREAS, Richard W. Block and Richard B. Reilly are the owners of the property known and designated as the Love Lane Laundromat, SCTM ~ 1000-140-3-3.1, located at Love Lane, Mattituck; and WHEREAS, a formal applicaton for the approval of this site plan was submitted on April 20, 1990; 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 May 14, 1990. WHEREAS, ali the requirements of the Site Plan Regulations of the Town of Southold have been met; and Be it therefore; RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board approve and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final survey dated May !1, 1990 subject to a one year review° Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Ortowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. (Chairman signed maps). Mr. Ortows~: Goose Island Corporation - This site plan is located on Central Avenue on Fishers Island. SCTM ~ 1000-10-1-~.i. Mr.-Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. WHEREAS, Goose Island Corporation is the owner of the property known and designated as Goose ISland Corporation. SCT~ ~ 1000-10-1-8.1, located at Central Avenue, Fishers Island, Southotd; and PLANNING BOARD 13 MAY 14, 1990 WHEREAS, the SoutholdTown 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 14, 1989; and Be it therefore; RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the site plan subject to a one year review and authorize the Chairman to endorse the final survey sttbject to receipt of five (5) paper copies of the map showing the following: 1. A valid stamp of Suffolk County Health Department approval. e The location of permanent barriers to protect the dry wells from vehicular traffic this barrier must be fenced and planted. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ms. Cynthia Estrabrooks: I'm General Manager of Goose Island Corporation. You are giving us approval on the site plan with a review in a year and I just had a new site plan drawn up showing the barriers for the septic system and then create a more substantial barrier around that. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., motion made and seconded. Any other questions? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. (Chairman endorsed maps) Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Sal Prato: This site plan is on Kerwin Blvd. in Greenport. Mr. McDonald: I would like to make a motion. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the as built site plan dated May 8, 1990 with the seal affixed on May 14, 1990, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the as built plan. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recoK~end to the Building Department that a Certificats of Occupancy be issued subject to a one year review. Mr. Latham: Second. PLANNING BOARD 14 MAY 14, 1990 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Fir. Ward, Mr. Latham Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Determinations: Mr. Orlowski: Love Lane Laundromat - We've already done that. LOCAL LAW PROPOSALS Mr. Orlowski: Chapter 100 - 281A of the Zoning Code. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I would like to offer the following resolution. WHEREAS the legislative intent is to require all applicants to provide the information needed by the Building Inspector; and WHEREAS, the Planning Board finds that t~is~change will make the Building Inspector's job easier; BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Board is in favor of passage of the proposed amendment. Mr. McDonald: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. McDonald, Fir. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. SETTING OF NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING: Mr. Orlowski: Board to set Monday, June 4, 1990 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. Latham: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. PLANNING BOARD 15 MAY 14, 1990 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. McDonald. Mr. Ortowski: Opposed? So ordered. APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES: Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the April 30, 1990 minutes. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Edwards, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Edwin M. Latson - Board to authorize endorsement. SCTM $ 1000-57-2-1.1. 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 surveys dated March 8, 1990 for Edwin M. Latson. The March 8, 1990 plan entitled Edwin M. Latson, splits the existing four acre non-buildabte parcel which was created by the Bertram Holder minor s~,hdivision, into three lots. These lots are to be merged with the adjacent owners as shown on the map. Note that the lots being created are not to be considered building lots. The DeclaratiOn of Covenants and Restrictions in effect for the four acre parcel is also in effect for the March 8, 1990 plan for Edwin M. Latson. In addition, it is noted that the plan fox Edwin M. Latson in no way effects the existing right-of-way or the existing easements. PLANNING BOARD 16 MAY 14, 1990 Mr. McDonald: 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, ~r. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. (Chairman endorsed maps) Discussions: Mr. Orlowski: Associates. Richard Haefeli - To discuss Cliffside SCTM ~ 1000-45-1-1. Mr. Orlowski: Is Mr. Haefeli here to discuss Cliffside Associates? I don't see Mr. Haefeli. Is there anyone here representing Cliffside? Mr. Ken Abruzzo: Young and Young, I am not here to discuss Cliffside but if there is something I can pass on because Mr. Haefeli is a client of ours. Mr. Orlowski: You might not want to get into the middle of this. Mr. Abruzzo: You're right. Discussions: Mr. Orlowski: James Duffy - to discuss his site plan in Mattituck. SCTM % 1000-121-2-2. Mr. James Duffy: It was suggested that I come to the Town Board Meeting to ask if I have the right to, instead of paving my parking lot, to put bluestone down this year and pave it next year. I'm trying to re-open the Old hut into a new restaurant and I don't have the funds available to blacktop this year. Mr. Orlowski: What do you plan on using? Mr. James Duffy: Bluestone. Mr. McDonald: Are you planning on putting down a base? Mr. James Dully: I'm not doing the work myself. There is a base going down on top and then they told me that was going to act as a base for the blacktop when they do the blacktop. Blend, that's the word they used. PLANNING BOARD 17 ~AY 14, 1990 Mr. Ward: O.K., you will accomplish the paving within a one year time frame. Mr. Dully: Definitely. Mr. Ward: O.K., we can do it in a one year review like we do everybody else. Mr. McDonald: One of the questions that was asked and I don't know whether it got back to you was if you have the authority to amend the site plan. Mr. Duffy: Mr. and Mrs. Gatz? Mr. McDonald: Yes. Mr. Duffy: Absolutely. Mr. McDonald: Do we have anything on record on that. Mr. Duffy: I got a letter in the mail today asking for a letter and I think also you asked me to have my site plan changed to draw a line showing the difference between phase one and phase two of the proposed site plan. Before I have an architect draw up, go ahead and change the plan, he penciled this in in different color inks and suggested I bring this to you and show it to you and ask if when he draws that line will it be O.K? Mr. McDonald: Melissa, do you have a copy of the letter you sent? Melissa: It's in the file. Mr. McDonald: O.K., thank you. Melissa: Can we keep that map? Mr. Duffy: I'll bring it back tomorrow. Melissa: I would like Bob to take a look at it. How ~bout if we keep it and you can pick it up tomorrow morning? Mr. Dully: O.K.. The green is where the fence is going to be. Anything else? Mr. Orlowski: Not right now. Mr. Duffy: Thank you very much. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. our next appointment is with Thorton Smith to discuss his Sl~hdivision. PLANNING BOARD 18 MAY 14, 1990 SCTM ~ 1000-121-1-P/O 1.1. Mr. Dan Ross: Wickham, Wickham and Bressler for Thorton Smith. Basically there are four points that we would like to address tonight. The first one Ken Abruzzo is going to address it, it concerns the fencing around the drainage or the request not to have any fencing. The second one is the covenants and restrictions that have been requested by the board prohibiting the removal of vegetation except that which is necessary to site to construct the house. The third issue is the money in lieu of land which I addressed at the April 9th meeting. We would just like to touch upon that and the fourth issue is a request for an extension of time, the six month period between preliminary and final approval with respect to that part of the major subdivision that is not included in section I. There is a letter in the mail to the board. I guess we would like to address the fencing issue first and Ken is going to address that. Ken Abruzzo: Members of the board, ladies, Ken Abruzzo from Young and Young land surveyors. I think we have talked about this before also but I came tonight with some figures that hopefully might shed a little different light on our planning methods. For years we did standard recharge basins approximately ten feet deep that wouId hold ten foot of water on a one on two slope with fences and screened planting around the fences. Over the years, Valerie, who is not and some other planners had asked to see some areas that were more suitable to farm development or some open space development that would not have the ten foot deep, would not have theSe u~ly fences around the recharge basins, We have designed qui~e a few of those around including SOme in Southold that are presently built and work. Reydon Court is one that was approved by your board without any fences with a shallow drainage area which works very well. There have been some other ones, Country Club Estates was in a natural drainage swail that we lowered the grade a little bit and there is no fencing and that works. ThiS particular area has a very big natural depression with sOme wetlands in it. But in. order that we didn't divert the storm water directly into the wetlands, we propose to have a Ponding area. It's not a pond land it is not designed to have water in it except during rainfalls. We put some delusion wells in the bottom of these ponding areas of natural low drainage areas in order to insure that the water recharges into the ground and would not filter up and create a pond. I have some figures here. I did some calculatiOns'today, and for a two inch rainfall, which this system was designed for, after a two inch rainfall or in this case a little more then a 2.3 inch rainfall, the water would run through an overflow system and into the wetland area that presently exists on the site. During a two inch rainfall if there was absolutely no percolation into the ground, if no water discharged off in a twenty four hour period, there would be three feet of water in drainage easement A and three and one-half feet of water in PLANNING BOARD 19 MAY 14 , 1990 drainage easements B and C. That storm occurs according to the charts from the airport drainage and Long Island soil about once every five years. Certainly we have one inch storms much more frequently. If we had a one inch storm with absolutely no percolation, with nothing going into the ground water, just a solid container, you would have about one foot eight inches of water in these recharge basins if nothing leaks out. The other consideration is when we started to design systems like this we were concerned that we didn't want the steep one on two Slopes, that we made slopes of one on five which were very, very shallow. Very soft slopes that'anybody walking into this pond could turn around and walk out. Be it a small child or an adult it doesn't matter. They are not steep where they would fall into something and with that thought in mind if there was six or eight feet of water in there, which there can't be in these particular ones because of the overflow systems, somebody couldn't fall into them such as in a swimming pool or in a regular sump. I think if you read through the reports, I don't have any of those figures but just through my own memory you have heard about children drowning in recharge basins, you have heard about children drownin~ in the swimming pools where they fall and they can't get out. These are certainly not the type of slopes we are talking about. They are very, verY flat and very natural, one on five type slopes and to design a system such as we have that will lend itself to the vineyard area or the farm area and then to come around and put a six foot high chain link fence around it you axe taking away all the natural beauty of what we tried tQ~de~gn here and I think what the Town of Southold is trying to do is a more natural type of planning. I think tha~ we went with this natural design based on a few other plans that were approved here without fencing and that we certainly wouldn't have gone to this type of design if we knew we had to fence it because we could have made these drainage areas much smaller and much deeper and not taken the amount of room we had. Again, I would just like to bring this up that maybethe board can rethinkthis before everything is done and all the eyes are dotted and t's are crossed and we can rethink this fence issue. We want to make it look nice but I can't see how we can make these natural shallow drainage areas look nice when we are going to put six foot high chain link fences around them. I just ask the board to rethink this and if you want a report on some of the numbers I've given you I'm happy to forward that off to you but again we are talking about very, very shallow areas with defusion wells or leaching pools within the areas that will recharge this water back into the ground. Thank you. Mr. 0rlowski: Does the board have any co~m~ents or questions? Mr. Ward: Is this Thorton Smith that you brought? Would you show us where the overflows are? Mr. Abruzzo: Yes. PLANNING BOARD 20 MAY 14, 1990 Mr. Abruzzo: These two systems will level out by way of this pipe that is actually equalizing the two systems out. We have a drainage area heze which I believe we called A which takes care of the runoff here and also takes up the water on Sound Avenue. Mr. Ward: What is contributing to this? Mr. Abruzzo: In acres? The contributing lines on all drawn on here. Mr. Ward: This basically is coming into here. Mr. Abruzzo: That's correct and this part of the road is coming in here. Mr. Ward: What is happening here? Mro Abruzzo: This system will take care of its own in here if indeed we wanted these to equalize out so that this would act as an overflow for this one. The whole system is designed based on this one type that when the water reaches this elevation it will go into this overflow pool which is also connected from A. This was situated at a place where there was a natural swale going down the wetlands so it wouldn't erode and there's no steep slope. It was also a hundred feet away from the wetlands and when this pond reached this elevation or this ponding area, if it did, the water would then overflow and would go into the area here. Based on the twenty six contou~he~e just this natural hole here that would hold over six inches of rainfall not counting these things if there was ever a torrential rain where we had six inch rainfall. Mr. Ward: Before you overflow, what is the depth of these basins? Mr. Abruzzo: This basin, there is no percolation at all, three and one half feet of water and that is it. Mr. Ward: What you are saying is that you feel comfortable having a pond in the specs? Mr. Abruzzo: It is not a pond it is a ponding area. Mr. Ward: You feel comfortable having it three and one half feet deep and no fencing? Mr. Abruzzo: That is correct. I don't think there is going to be three and one half feet of water in there Mr. Ward. That is based on absolutely no percolation. I'm sure that you know that the greatest calculations are done based on a containment area. Mr. Ward: The problem is, we really don't have problems when these are flat and spread out but here you've got them right in PLANNING BOARD 21 MAY 14, 1990 backyards and you take the last couple of years with the storms we've had there would be an awful lot of water in there. Mr. Abruzzo: Even with a hundred year storm you wouldn't have more then three and one half feet in here if there was no percolation and we put the fusion wells in here or leaching pools that will guarantee that this land won't get siltered up it is always going to have a place to leach. LOng~ Island soil is perhaps one of the best soils around for leaching. The Health Department for years had it leaching at three gallons per square foot. Just recently in the last four or five they went toone and a half gallons per square foot which I think is a safety factor. But certainly, if we had an inch of rainfall and I believe if you went to some of the other ones around here and looked after a normal storm of a half of an inch of rain or a quarter of an inch of rain they are b~ne dry. It leaches as fast as it goes in here. Now, most storms if we got the inch of rain in two hours or an hour and one half, certainly you would have some ponding in. the bottom of this but with these leaching pools we have, the water would defuse, I believe so quickly, and so do other engineers around that this will theoretically not have three and one half feet of water. Some of the proof I mentioned here the other day is tO drive down the expressway where we have all the runoff from the expressway and the recharge basins are dry except for the ones that were built on bog areas or something like that. They are wet all the time. But certainly the ones that were in good sand are dry. Mr. Ward: Based on what you're telling me since t~re is such capacity here why do you need to retain. Mr. Abruzzo: Because the DEC didn't want us to drain directly into wetlands. Mr. Ward: Why shouldn't we retain something shallower? Mr. Abruzzo: Less than two inches you mean? Mr. Ward: Less than three and one half foot potential. What about a foot and one half. Something a lot shallower. Mr. Abruzzo: Well, we can. The DEC likes us to hold two inches of rainfall before it goes in there. We could certainly have spread this out. Mr. Ward: These are set at two inch? Mr. Abruzzo: Yes. Certainly the key I believe is also the slopes that we are talking, one on five slopes that 'are not very steep. They are very easily maintained. I'm sure there's a lot of yards with a slope of one on five and that it is not the type of hazard and we have ponds in Riverhead, I understand this is Southold right now, but are open in the back of the yards and unfenced. We have a lot of ponds, Wolf pit pond which was just PLANNING BOARD 22 MAY 14, 1990 approved and I can't remember anybody falling in. There are a lot of people living on the bay and the Long Island Sound and the Atlantic Ocean that certainly don't fence there backyard when they abut the ocean and the sound so again I think we are taking something that we are trying to design that is pleasing and that works and is very functional and we're really not making it look very nice. Anything else? Mr. Thorton Smith: I think I have been before this board with a subdivision longer than most people have been on the board. I don't know, ten or fifteen years, something like that. I do think we are pretty close to the end of the process and I think that Ken and Dan Ross have represented me very well for a long time but I'm here to speak of several issues that are before you tonight because I. think they are important. Incidentally, by background I am a civil engineer and I am registered in this state and several others, construction manager and I've served on the Board of Zoning Adjustment and I've been a Building Inspector and I will make reference to that on the next issue and I'm also a retired Colonel of Engineers so I am somewhat familiar with these problems. I think Ken has expressed ~he situation well with regard to the ponding areas. The slope is as he says one that a baby could crawl out of and there is more water now in a natural pond in the area that has been put off limits by the DEC than there generally will be in anyone of these ponds. The three and one half feet is for a five year storm without any percolation and we only have five year storms once every five years. I personally think, and ~think I have some background in this area that this would be a much preferable solution than to what we could have done and which I asked Ken not to do which is to design a utilitarian one foot horizontal five foot vertical deep ponding area and put up a chain link fence. I do hope you folks will consider it and I. understand that some members of your group have been looking at the situation in Southold and in Southampton and Riverhead, I think that is what they are doing and I think it would be a good thing for this co~m~dnity. Mr. Orlowski:' Any other col~m~ents or questions on this? O.K., You're second question on the C & R's on the vegetation removal? Mr. Ross: Mr. Chairman, basically, I met with Vale~rie Scopaz on this and she said that the two areas that the board was concerned with was. one, whole wiping out of the vegetation by the builder and areas of very steep incline which if the vegetation was removed would cause erosion. That really, it seems as though those being the concerns the requested covenants doesn't address that. We're here for some feedback and I see basically four different approaches that could be taken that is a percentage type of application per lot. So many feet from the boundary for each particular lot, an envelope or the one that we prefer in this case is a for review process. I don't know if that has ever been done here in the town with respect to landscaping on residential lots but it would seem as PLANNING BOARD 23 MAY 14, 1990 though since the lots especially in the subdivision are going to be so different possibly before a homeowner would have a particular plan someone from the board or someone from the building department could come down and review it. Those are the different approaches but we are open to suggestions and would be most eagar to see the fourth suggestion entertained. Fir. Orlowski: You feel that putting in clearing and grading within each lot shall be limited to that necessary for siting and constructing a house with the intent of preserving as much of the natural vegetation on the site as possible, is to restrictive. Mr. Ross: Yes, I addressed that in a letter to Ms. Scopaz dated April 12, I990 but basically it sounds like it should be read that if you've got poison ivy ten feet from your front door, you can't remove it. Now, I don't think that is the boards intent but these covenants are going to run in favor of other people. There are going to be neighbors who are going to have the right to enforce them as time goes on and I think it should be addressed to what the board is trying to prevent here and I don't think this is it. Mr. OrlowSki: Do you want to rewrite this C & R in your own words and we'll run it by our attorney. Mr. Ross: I would be happy to, I was just hoping to get some feedback in terms of what direction you want ....... Mr. Orlowski: It is a standard covenant and we have approved many s~bdivisions with this on it. It sounds like you want to subject yourself to a site plan approval on each building lot which to me wouldn't make much sense. Mr. Ross: The thought crossed my mind but Thorton Smith feels that each lot has its own particular values and that is the way he wants to go. I'm willing if, what we're looking for is some feedback and I'll draft it the way the board wants to go. Mr. Thorton Smith: I suspect with regard to the thirty five lOts that are here, there may only be four or five and I'm not even sure there are those where the landscape in regard to the site would create any probtemat all. It would seem to me, having been a building inspection, that having a building inspector pass, if you gentlemen are concerned ~boutwhat the owners may ~o to the property when they are built, the building inspector must pass on a landscape plan as well as on a building plan and apply his knowledge to this particular site with a review 1by one of your boards, I would be very comfortable with that as it's a position I've been in before and I think is a reasonable solution Go your concern that the individual landowner will not do a poor job on the property. If someone wants to put a sw~ingpool in or wants to change the grades a little bit I think he should be allowed to do that. I think PLANNING BOARD 24 MAY 14, 1990 what has happened here is that you put this covenant in in the past and essentially not enforced it and if it were enforced I don't see really how it is very enforceable and I think it would sort of negate the profession of landscape architecture as it is written now. Mr. Ward: I think the concern that we had and the reason it was in was the fact that some of the lots were wooded and rather than see a clear cut of a lot, maybe a simpler way to address this is if you could present a reasonable percentage of clearing, just some number that you are comfortable with, Mr. Thorton Smith: Obviously, the landowner is going to want to clear enough to build his house and have a driveway and maybe have some lawn. It so happens that we do have some wooded lots that you folks are ve~t well aware of and I appreciate your support in allowing John Simcich and I to switch properties so that essentially he is before you now asking for a winery on what was my propertY as opposed to asking to clear those back lots to put a winery where it would have otherwise been, I hope you can understand by virtue of that change that I am in favor of making those wooded lots as attractive lots and I think any homeowner that I know of is probably going to have to pay a little more money for it and he is not going to want just to clear that lot any more than it is going to be done in an attractive landscape plan. Once again, to have this board or any other board or the building inspector pass~}~ement on an appropriate landscape plan is quite acceptable to me. Mr. Ward: It is more the clearing plan that is our concern than what somebody ends up doing with their lots. Mr. Smith: Can we agree that the clearing plan will be reviewed by a responsible party? Mr. Dan Ross: What if I dropped a few covenants and run them by the Town Attorney? Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Your other question money in lieu of? Mr. Ross: We would just like to reiterate our objection. The board has indicated at the April 9, 1990 meeting it's position. It seems as though by requiring to show the parkland, ~n the yield map and then refusing to take land, the parkland and insisting on the money, it seems like a double dip and I address the issue the board indicated that it was going to do things the way it has been done in the past and we just want to reiterate our objection to that. I think Thorton has a few words regarding that. Mr. Smith: One of the things I'm very happy ~hout in this plan and I was before this board probably ten or fifteen years ago with what I believe was the first cluster proposal that you had PLANNING BOARD 25 MAY 14, 1990 and I was so unhappy with-it and I thought the concept of cluster proposal hadn't gotten very far that I just withdrew the proposal and put it on ice. We now have a proposal as you probably know that with your permission we hope to be able to put off a good part of the forever greenland. Essentially all of the land which is not wooded will be put into grapes which I think is just a much better proposal then the one I had ten years ago which was no proposal at all. We would be happy to give you what ever acreage of that property you want as parkland as one of the alternatives I think is allowable under the code. I think had we understood the circumstances, you've changed your perimeters for the yields in the last year or so as we have been working on it. If we had a yield map now we would. have given you a yield map with thirty six lots instead of thirty five. We started earlier under an earlier system and we came up with thirty five and the process has gone along and we didn't intend to change it and I think we are locked into thizty five lots now but we would be happy to offer you the parkland and I think we could find a suitable place. The fact that we could offer you the parkland, I believe there is so~t of a double take here. It is a complicated situation and obviously we have to leave it to you gentlemen and ladies to determine what should be done. Mr. Orlowski: Does the board have any comment on that? O.K., we'll take that into consideration, I have a request for an extension of preliminary approval. Mr. Ross: Yes, we submitted the final map of section I but for the other part we request an extension. Mr. Orlowski: That would only be on Section 2 and 3 right? Mr. Ross: Right. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., I make a motion that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a six month extension of preliminary approval for Section 2 and 3 from May 20, 1990 to November 20, 1990. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham. Mr. McDonald: Mr. Chairm~u, I abstain. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So moved. PLANNING BOARD 26 MAY 14, 1990 Mr. Orlowski: I have nothing left on my agenda. I'll ask if there are any questions or comments? Mrs. Valerie Cardona: I am a volunteer enforcement for handicapped parking. Last July 21~, after a survey based on our responsibilities, Ed Hanus and I surveyed certain prQperties to determine if they were within the guidelines of the regulations implementing accessibility, phYsical accessibility for people that are physically disabled and April 30, of this year, Ms. Scopaz had sent me a letter regarding some of the problems that are inherent within our over regulated marvelous State of New York. They have so much paperwork to do that it all takes a great deal of time and I can appreciate that with some of the things that I am involved in as a parent of a child with a disability. It is overwhelming and burdenSome and at this time I would like to offer my services. Since that preliminary survey was done last June of 1989, very little has been done to rectify some problems. I can appreciate the fact that it takes a while for site plans after they are approved, that certain laws are not in place. We can go back to the architectural barriers act of 1968. That of course was for only buildings, programs receiving federal money but of course that was expanded and by 1974 this was to apply to everybody. By the time everybody go their act together, we're talking about 1981 and I'm talking about Chapter 203 of the New York State Laws. This specifically addresses handicapped parking facilities being available for developers or businesses where there are five or more businesses and at least five'percent that.is available must be available for people that are physically challenged and to come into compliance with that Section 1203 of the Vehicle and Traffic laws, 1203C I believe it is, I'm sorry, The only marking designated must be a sign by New York State Law the blue does not have to be on the ground but the sign must be observable and unobstructed by a vehicle. There are some places in town that don't come into compli~nce and I offer my services to review plans with you, to assist in any way that I possibly can having been disabled myself and many others too when you have crutches on and you are trying to get in and out of places. I will again say I appreciate being able to help out the Town of Southold but I also offer my services to you should you ever request it and Ms. Scopaz has my phone number and has my address. I do have my response to her that I can give to you now, is that O.K.? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. This board on all our commercial site plans, we do make sure there is handicapped parking in place. Mrs. Condona: Would you like a copy of the code? I know Mr. Lessard has it. Mr. Orlowski: We look out for it and also when it is sent over to be certified Mr. Lessard looks out fox it. On all approvals those signs should be in place. PLANNING BOARD 27 MAY 14, 1990 Mrs. Condona: The signs should be in place but also take into consideration the ramp, you know the accessible isle on either side. It should be at least five feet wide and the ramp width for the State is also a 32 inch width. But, you get somebody in a wheel chair or electric wheel chair, 32 inches is nothing, Doorways, the width is 32 inches, that is totally unrealistic it should be at least 36 inches, preferably 46 inches. I know these are ideal but I know at the same time, like some of the curb cuts in some of the places are like right in front of where the automobile pulls up. Now, if somebodygets out from there van that they've got they get into that marvelous five foot wide access isle and then boom they run into a curb. They have to go back into their van and backup and then where is the van? In parking, not in the parking lot but obstructing other traffic. Mr. Orlowski: Have you noticed any of these in any of our previous site plans? Mrs. Cardona: I haven't looked at any recently. Mr. Orlowski: I mean if you do notice these we could probably through the Building Department rectify them. Mrs. Cardona: Do you have a copy of the survey? Mr. Orlowski: Yes, that was a year or so ago wasn't it? Mrs. Cardona: Yesr it was last July. Mr. Orlowski: Most of those were pre-existing sites where the problems were. Mrs. Cardona: Yes, now you say pre-existing but Chapter 203 of 1989. Mr. Orlowski: Well, that would be outside of our juristiction but, the building inspector should be notified. Mrs. Cardona: This is really out of my league. Now, you say out of your juristictiont how do you mean? Mr. Orlowski: We're not the enforcement agency. Mr. McDonald: If they were pre-existing, we review the site plans and s~bdivisions that come before the town. That is the area where we have some authority, anything else is outside of our power. We have nothing to do with that either there are laws that say something must be done, we cannot possibly enforce them because we have no authority to do so. Anything that is pre-existing, by law, would be the Building Department. Mr. Orlowski: Specifically, the ordinance and enforcement officer which is Mr. Wicezorek and if you see any problems you PLANNING BOARD 28 MAY 14, 1990 can let him be aware of them and he should follow through and take care of them. Mr. McDonald: If you see problems that recur and obviously you have because you are at the site by all means feel free to to come so we can make sure they are elevated in whatever comes before us. We will be particularlycareful When we review them, because when we go down to review the site plans and in all honesty there is so much is the site plan that you're not aware of all the problems you might not look for that specifically. Mrs. Cardona: If I make up a little blurb for you fEom the anti-regulations and from State law so you can look at it and say ah-ha it suppose to be eight feet wide, it is suppose to be etc. etc.. Mr. Orlowski: We have all that. Mrs. Cardona: You don't have any other questions? Mr. Edwards: No, thank you for coming. Mr. Orlowski: Being no further comments or questions, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. Mr. Edwards: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Ail those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards: Mr. Ward, Mr. McDonald, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ortowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So moved. Meeting was adjourned at 8:45 p.m.. Bennett Orlowski Jr .F, Chairman Respectfully submitted, Jane Rousseau RECEIVED AND FILED BY 7~lg SOD'TI{OLD TOWN CLERK DATE H//~//o HOUR //, 'I~w,~ C:i~tE_ T.~vn__oi-Southold