Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-01/09/1989Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD MINUTES JANUARY 9, 1989 The Southold Town Planning Board held a regulkr meeting on Monday, January 9, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold. PRESENT WERE: Benne~z Orlowski, Jr., Chairman Member William Mullen Member G. Ritchie Latham Member Richard Ward Member Kenneth Edwards Town Planner Valerie Scopaz Planner Melissa Spiro Mr. Orlowski: Good evening, I would like to call this meeting to order. First order of business is Wal~h Park. I'would tike to keep the Public Hearing open from October 14th, 1988 pending receipt or-'revised preliminary maps. This is an Affordable Housing Project and is located on Fishers Island. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: I would like to set Monday, January 23, 1989, at 7:30 p.m. au the Southold Town Hall, Mai~ Road, Southold as the PLANNING BOARD PAG5 2 JANUARY 9, 1989 time and place for the next regular P~anning Board Meeting. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded, any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Mullen, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: I would also like to set February 6, 1989 at 1:00 p.m. at Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold. Mr. Latham: So moved: Mr. Mullen: Seconded. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Ward. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: On the subdivisions, finals. Cbfam Realty - Board to authorize the Chairman to endorse the final maps, dated as amended January 5, 1989. This minor subdivision is on 4.178 acres located at Mattituck. SCTM #1000-122-7-3. Mr. Cuddy: You have before you a Milar map to be signed. The Milar map does not have on it approval from the CounTy Health Department. I spoke to the Chairman this afternoon and I explained to him I have a print that has the County Health Department approval on it. the print also has,on it the Declaration of Covenance and Restrictions which was put on this afternoon by Mr. Van Tuyl~.. I would like to have you authorize the Chairman to sign this print, so at least I can have one that:~sddone. The Chairman can hold that one print and they can then take the Milar and have Mr. Andrioli, at his convenience, sign the Milars. Otherwise, I have one that is completely done at this point and time. I would just like to have somebody have one that's signed, meaning you, that's a full-complete map. In order To do that I have To get you to sign it. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 3 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: O.K., .that has everything on it now? Mr. Cuddy: Yes, that is why I wanted to bring it up to you. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Mr. Cuddy: I have tw.o Of these, but I need one back because I have to show it to Mr. Androli. Mr. Ward: I would like to make a motion to the Chairman to endorse the maps as provided along with the proper Milar. Mr. Latham: Seconded. Mr. Orlowski: I have. a motion made and seconded. Any questions? All those in favor? Ayes: Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have the Woods at Cutchogue - Bo2rd to request the Town Board to accept the Dedication of Open Space. Board to set Monday, January 23, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. for a public hearing on the final maps dated as amended September 19, 1988. This major subdivision is on 29.54 acres located a Cutchogue. SCTM #1000-102-1~4. Mr. Orlowski: I'll take a motion on that recommendation to the Town Board. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Ward: Subjac~ to it being for general town-purposes. Mr. Ward: Can we amend the motion? Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. we have a motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: ~r. Mullen, Mr. Orlowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 4 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: Board to set Monday, January 23, 1989 at 7:30 p.m. for ~ a public hearing on the final maps dated as amended September 19, 1988. This major subdivision is on 29.54 acres located at Cutchogue. SCTM #1000-102-1-4. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board; Ayes: Mr. Mullen, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: OppOsed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Hiawatha's Path. I know you don't have it on your agenda, this is an affordable housing project for the town. I would like to set a final hearing for January 23, 1989 at 8:15 p.m. at Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Mri~;Qrtowski, Mr. Ward, Mr. Latham, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Mullen. Mr. Ortowski: Opposed? So ordered. ********** Mr. Orlowski: Calvin Rasweiler - Board to set Moada~ January 23, 1989 at 7:45 p.m. for a public hearing on th~ question of a determination on the preliminary maps dated as amended April 21, 1988. This major subdivision is 55.4896 acres at Laurel. SCTM #1000-129-1-I. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen Latham, Edwards, Ward. ' Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD PAGE ~ JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr, Orlowski: Next we have Norr~s/Carr/Wanat - Board to review the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. SCTM #1000-122-5-4. Mr. Hart you have a new letter stating you are going to wait for the town board's decision so we will wait to proceed on the hearing on the impact statement. Mr. Jack Hart: Chairman Orlowski, I only thing I would like, so we know we are all proceeding on the same basisf I have brought with me a copy of a letter which was addressed to the town board and to this board on April 5th, 1988 and the change of zone application, which is an alternative under the DEIS on the Norris property, was filed on October 22, 1987. There was a scoping session with the town board and on April 5th, 1988 we've said an application for a change of zone from Residential to "M" Light Multiple, was under consideration at that meeting and that by resoIution, adopted at the town board at a regular meeting held on February 23, 1988. The board as lead agency~equested Mr. Cart and Mr. Wanat prepare a ~raft Environmental Impact Statement and attached to that was a State Environmental Quality Review Positive Declaration bearing January 1988 prepared by Mr. Emilita. It was Mr. Emilita, if you'll recall who made the suggestion that this was a positive resolution or way positively of solving the problem. The Planning Board, to go on to the letters, it is my understanding that the Planning Board is the lead agency for the Norris property and continues in that capacity. The applicant is therefore proceeding on parallel courses which will provide the following: A DEIS statement to be presented to the town board for the 107 acres Carr/Wanat property which will furnish the information requested showing the impact of 107 single family dwell±ngs on this parcel. We will also furnish property for the draft DEIS being prepared for the Planning Board for the Norris property. This will consider the development of the Norris property with i32 units. In addition, there will be an alternative proposal which the Planning Board will receive which will show 25 units on the Norris property to be coupled with the 107 units on the Carr/ Wanat property. If the alternive solution on the Norris property is adopted, it will require action by the Planning Board to approve the site plan for Norris and a Change of Zone by the town board with simultanious site plan.approval by the Planning Board for Carr/Wanat. It is my understanding that this action will proceed on parallel tracks and the decision making process will be simultaneous. In the event, for whatever reason the changes of Carr/Wanat and the Norris 25 unit site plan was not approved it is the intent of the applicant to proceed with its right application for Norris which is already before the Planning Board. That was back in April and a great deal has happened in those nine months and hopefully the jestation period has come PLANNING BOARD PAGE 6 JANUARY 9, 1988 to an end and we will proceed with some kind of action. Thank you gentlemen. Mr. Orlowski: From the one letter I received on January 6th, the developer will only proceed with a maximum number of zoning units allowed on the North parcel if the alternatiVe draft of the Norris draft enviromental impact, statement is not acceptable to the town. Mr. Hart: It is my understanding and we are sort of, I gather for whatever reason, been put in a position where there is a circle, and I don't know who's chasing whom, but what we would ask of course is that there be some action taken and that we get off the dime and we know where we're going with this so that the developer and the community will know what is going to happen. There is, as you know, a unique situation. This is not a president setter, this is a oner. I don't know of any other properties that are zoned multiple like the Norris piece. We are dealing with not a presidence setter, we are dealing with a unique situation,, we're dealing with a one time only situation. We're dealing with an opportunity to provide for a solution to a full standing problem which has existed with respect to the feelings of'some of the residents adjacent to the Norris property regarding this development and we have provided for the Norris property a sane solution and one which is recommended by Mr. Emilita and we would submit and that if this juncture we should go forward. Mr. Orlowski: What is the pleasure of the board, as far as any recommendations to the town board on the change of zone? Mr. Ward: Well Mr. Chairman in terms of the Change of Zone for the Carr/Wanat property I propose a resolution of a denial on the basis that it is not in keeping with the proposed Master Plan in terms of density and transmit that to the town board. Mr. Mullen: Second the motion. Mr. H. Sigmund: Mr. Chairman, I'm interested in the Norris property and we have an organization by the name of Can Do which you know has been in existence for a while. We've been fighting this thing for three years now and it was thought out about twelve or thirteen years ago. The point that I want to make is the following: The first map that came out on the Master Plan showed the Norris property zoned as two acres. When somebody says today that this is not in PLANNING BOARD PAGE 7 JANUARY 9, 1989 conjunction with what was shown on the map or shown in the Master Plan that's not so. We have never been able to find out to this day how the map got changed from a two acre zone to back to multiple dwelling or to H-D as you call it now. I think that for anybody to take a position now when the thing is trying to be resolved, for someone to say that this is not in accordance with the Master Plan, that's not so because your own people who ever did the work to show what the Master Plan should look like said that that peice of property should be two acres. Now let me tell you what the feeling is of the people living in that area because we're getting a little tired too of wait- ing for three years for an answer to what's going to happen. We tried everything we could to get the Town Board to change that map back again or else tell us how it got changed from two acre to H-D and if they could'nt tell us to put it back to the two acres again. Now when it looks like there is a likely solution to it because some people run around town and say spot zoning and use the word spot zoning as a reason why you should not come up with a resolve to this problem, I think the spot zoning took place when H-D or multiple dwelling was put on the Norris property, that's real spot zoning, the only peice of property in Mattituck that carries an H-D zone or carried a multiple zone. For you to put us into a position, I'm talking about the people who live in that area now, for you to deny to try to make some kind of a resolve to this problem, for you to say or put us in a position to have 95 condominiums built on 27 acres on a piece of property that everybody in this town, including everybody sitting there, knows does not belong there because that piece of property is completely surrounded by water and there is salt water intrusion in the wells around there now. People for the last five years have been moving their~wells back further and further from the water all the time in-6~rder to get the salt out of their wells. If you have another piece of property in the Town of Mattituck that supply the water and we're not saying we don't want it in our backyard, we are saying that we are willing to accept the one acre situation as well as putting part of the one acre situation in another area that you have two acres right now. I don't think that's being unreasonable as far as the people are concerned that live in that area. I think we're being very fair about it. In fact we're not the type of people who are saying, we moved ou~ here locked the door or closed the door behind us. We're saying let the people come in but d~mn it don't put them on 27 acres where everybody is worried about salt water, and there is already salt water intrusion in there. My request to your board would be not to use an excuse that because the Master Plan doesn't show it as being a one acre PLANNING BOARD PAGE 8 JANUARY 9, 1989 piece of property. The Master Plan did show it as two acres of property but somebody changed it and I would like to know how the hell it was changed. That isn't my main concern now, my main concern is that if something can be worked out to resolve this problem, I think its the responsiblity of both the Town Board and the Planning Board to do so. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., any other comments? I have a motion made and seconded by this board. All those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Mullen, Ward, Latham, Orlowski Edwards, Orlowski Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have the Marina Bay Club - A special meeting was held on Wednesday, January 4, 1989, whereas; the Planning Board extended the public comment period from January 4, 1989 to February 3, 1989. This is a site plan located in New Suffolk. SCTM ~1000-117-8-18. I would like to amend that change to January 23, 1989 the next Planning Board Meeting. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Ward, Latham, Orlowski, Edwards Orlowski Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Cove Beach - Board to set a public hearing for February 6, 1989 at 1:00 p.m. for the Addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact State. Mr. Ward: So Moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in Favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Edwards, Ward, Latham, Mullen Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered PLANNING BOARD PAGE 9 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: Cove Beach - Board to extend the public comment period from January 18, 1989 to February 16, 1989. This subdivision is located at East Marion. SCTM ~1000-22-3-15.1&18.3. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Latham, Mullen, Ward, Orlowski, Edwards Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? ~So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Angel Shores - Board to make a detrmination on the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement. This major subdivision is located at Southold. SCTM #1000- 88-6-1,4,5. The Department of State has asked for more infor- mation and so has the Department of Health. In regards to Angel Shores, Dave Emilita has said that we should deem this incomplete, the draft environmental impact statement for now. Mr. William Moore - I have a letter here dated January 6, 1989 is this a subsequent letter from Dave? Has he changed his mind and deemed it incomplete. Mr. Orlowski: Did you get another letter from Dave today? Mr. William Moore: The one I got is January 6th. Mr. Orlowski: Well, Mr. Emilita called us up today and said at this time to hold up and we're going to proceed with his recommendation. Mr. William Moore: Did he give the grounds? Did he change his mind on that? Mr. Orlowski: Well, its based on the Department of State and Department of Health and their request for certain information which he said he did not know about so we're going to go along and wait for that. Mr. William Moore: I have with me tonight the environmental gentleman who prepared the tax map and he can take exception with the Health Department but as far as the Department of State goes Mr. Orlowski: I would suggest getting a hold of Dave Emilita because he called this in to us today. PLANNING~BOARD PAGE 10 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. William Moore: I would hope you have a problem with the way Mr. Emitita gets the comments to you because aB of 3:30 p.m. on Friday afternoon when Town Hall closed because of the snow, I was led to believe that we were §oing to move forward with this. Its problomatic to get information at the last minute like this when he's already given a recommendation. Mr. Orlowski: What is the pleasure of the board? Mr. Latham: I think we have to get further information. Mr. Mullen: I second the motion and wait for further input. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Latham, Mullen, Edwards, Orlowski, Ward. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed, so ordered. Mr. Patterson: Requested permission to speak regarding Angel Shores. Mr. Orlowski: The Hamlet at Cutchogue Board to make a determination under the State Environment, al Quality Review Act on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. SCTM #1000- 102~1-33~3. Mr. Emilita has also made the recommendation that this is deemed incomplete right now. Mr. Cron, have you been in touch with Mr. Emilita? Mr. Cron: No, we haven't. Mr. Orlowski: At this point we can just deem it incomplete for right now. I would like you to get in touch with him, he faxed over some thing~ to us and the board hasntt even looked at it yet. You can pick up a copy of this in the office and get a hold of Mr. Emilita. We haven't ever reviewed it yet. Mr. Cron: O.K. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Mullen, Latham, Edwards, Ward, Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 11 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: Rita Cushman - Board to start the coordination process to determine Lead Agenay and Environmental Significance . This lot line change is located at Fishers ISland. SCTM #1000-8-1-6.3. Mr. Mullen: So ~mo~ed Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Ward, Edwards, Latham, Mullen Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Elijah's Lane Affordable Housing - Board to start the coordination process to determine Lead Agency and Environmental Significance. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Ward, Latham, Edwards, Mullen, Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Board to start the coordination process to determine Lead Agency and Environmental Significance on the following: Peconic Ho~es, -JOsePh Macari, A. T. Holding Co., Daniel Jacoby - PLANNING BOARD PAGE 12 JANUARY 9, 1989 WHEREAS, the stretch of Sound Avenue between Bergen Avenue to the west and Cox Neck Road to the east is the sole point of access and exit for four major and one minor subdivision proposal which in total encompass 210.96 acres and 84 Lots; and WHEREAS, none of these subdivisions have ready access to other public roads for additional access; and WHEREAS, this stretch of road is a winding, and curving road on hilly terrain, its capacity to handle safely the additional volume of traffic from the projected development is in question; and WHEREAS, this stretch of road is a heavily travelled east-west corridor; and WHEREAS, these particular applications are in the vicinity of Laurel Lake, there should be consideration of the potential cumulative impact of the proposed development on the area with regard to potential stozmwater runoff, septic system leaching, groundwater quality and loss of habitat; and WHEREAS, the applications lie adjacent~,to or within, whether ~wholly or in part, the Core Watershed Protection Area which has been designated by the Town Board (January 19, 1988) as a study area; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Water Advisory Committee has been reviewing land use management practices in this area, and the Core Watershed Protection Area has also been included as a special groundwater protection area by the LIRPB'S Special Groundwater Protection Area Advisory Council; and WHEREAS, these individual actions around the Lake are in effect, unlisted actions, the cumulative effect is akin to a Type I action, and THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVR~ that The Southold Planning Board hereby assumes lead agency status in the review of ~he following applications: A.T. Holding Co,. SCTM9 121-5-18 and 122-2-25 (34 lots, 91.53A) Joseph Macari SCTM~ 121-4-9 (27 lots 63.57A) ~ Peconic Homes SCTM~ 121-3-7 and 121-1 p/o 5 (19 lots, 45.28A) Daniel Jacoby SCTM#125-1-5 (4 lots 10.58 acres) and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that The Planning Board hereby determines that the cumulative impact of~the above noted applications, for the above mentioned reasons, is likely to have an adverse environmental impact. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 13 JANUARY 9, 1989 Henry Raynor: My name is Henry Raynor and I represent Peconic Homes. In reviewing what the definition of access is, with regard to subdivision of Peconic Homes that already exist a cut in access which has been used thirty, forty, fifty years perhaps longer, that is on the South Side and not the North side as you have the intersection of the North Road and Bergen Avenue given as your criteria. The question of the water study area is just that, it is a study area. It does not mean it is a critical area and its been taken under an advisory committee only and as such should not be an objection to processing a subdivision application. I would also like to bring to the boards attention 810632F calls for two access roads when the subdivision applications in access of twenty homes. This is not the case with this application. In going through 61712 the State Environmental Quality Review Act, I can in no way find that any of the thresholds on this particular subdivision would indicate noncumulitive or cumuliti~e type one for that action to be called. Nor do I find a list existing from the Planning Office which is called for on the sEQ~A to give ex- ception which is what the board is proposing to do this evening. I would think that you would take these things into consideration prior to going on the number of subdivisions in this area. Peter Dinowski: I didn't realize Mr. Raynor was going to speak. I represent Mr. Macari on his subdivision and I know you people have been on the board for some number of years are aware of this particular subdivision because you actually granted a preliminary map of approval on this very same land in the year 1980 for a total number of forty-nine lots. Prior to doing so you issued a negative declaration and replet within your own files are facts asserting such statements as the North Fork Environmental Council has reviewed the map and finds the engineering detail meeting good sound environmental principles. You have already~ considered this particular area and just remark- ing upon Mr. Raynor's comments in that particular earlier subdivision of forty-nine lots you addressed the question of dual access and said that dual access question awaive in this particular area for this particular parcel of land. We have the same land, we have approximately half the number of lots because after the conditional preliminary approval, the town rezoned the area two acre. I think there were some issues then raised about whether this was going to apply to this particular map. Now we've come in here, we've met with the local civic association, we've gone to the time and the trouble of preparing a booklet that we submitted to you that preliminarily reviewed the factors such as traffic, access points, and we met with your staff. We tried to do every thing possible to submit a quality, two acre yield plan that had previously been the same site that got negative declaration and was preliminarily approved. I don't believe its fair to my particular applicant PLANNING BOARD PAGE 14 JANUARY 9, 1989 to tell him~that ~you think h~ could possibly be positive declaration on this project. If there are particular issues, we are certainly willing to meet with your staff and review this at board meetings but I think its been about ten months since we submitted the original application and I'm certainly in favor of lead agency. I would like that to have been done before. I willing to consider and sit down and discuss any of your concerns. I think to put us through a long winded environmental review would be unfair especially since we have taken the trouble to prepare document and I have sent a copy of that document to Mr. Emilita some time ago. What I'm looking to do is to have this board consider the information we've given to you, consider the entire file on this matter and I think its about a ten year old file because different arguments and ~types of development were proposed in the past. I think tha points that are covered in this resolution should be reconsidered and I think we should get a negative declaration at some point or a conditional negative declaration. Certainly the lead agency aspect I have no objeCtion to at all. Mr. Orlowski: I have a motion made and seconded, any questions on themotion? Ail those in favor? Vote of Board: Ayes: Latham, Ward, Edwards, Orlowski, Mullen. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Myrtle Hendrickson - Board to make a determination under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. This lot line change is located at Southold. SCTM #1000-70-4-44 & 45. Everything is in order for a negative declaration. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Edwards, Orlowski, Mullen, Ward, Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 15 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Gatz & McDowell - Board to make a determination under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. This major subdivision is on 30.3565 acres located at Cutchogue. SCTM #1000-95-4-7 & 14. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor. Vote Of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Edwards, Mullen, Latham, Ward.~ Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: I would like to set a preliminary hearing for January 23, 1989 at 8:00 p.m. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Mullen, Edwards, Latham, Ward, Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Harbor View - Board to review the Engineer's report dated December 29, 1988. This major sub- division is 49.14 acres located at Mattituck. SCTM #1000-115-17-17. Ail these reports are on file. The board is taking a look at them. What's the pleasure of the board? Mr. Ward: I move for compliance. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. the motion? Ail those in favor. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Mullen. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Any questions on Latham, Ward, Edwards, Orlowski, PLANNING BOARD PAGE 16 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: Next, John Beebe - Board to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission report dated December 22, 1988. This minor subdivision is on 97,035 sq. ft. located at Cutchogue. SCTM #1000-103-3.5. In reviewing this the board has no problem with the recommendations but I think we all agree improving the alignment of Beebe Drive by the use of a larger radius curb in place of an angular bend is not needed. This improvement would bring the alignment of the road up to the modern standards and would enhance a street scape that is pre-existing and it has been there for a long, long time and that we let it be and remove that one requirement from the report and just improve the rest. Mr. Mullen: So move. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Latham, Mullen, Ward, Edwards, Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: George Furse - Board to review the Suffolk County Planning Commission report dated December 9, 1988. This minor subdivision is on 3.64 acres located at Fishers Island. SCTM #1000-9-3-2. Mr. Edwards: Mr. Chairman, I have reviewed the Suffolk County Report and agree with them. I think we should accept their report. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Edwards, Orlowski, Ward, Latham, Mullen. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 17 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: Charles Simmons - Board to review the bond dated December 7, 1988 for this minor subdivision located at Peconic. SCTM #1000-112-1-8~ As of yet we have no comment from the Fire Commisioners, a letter was se~/on Novembe~ 4', '1988. Sidney Baums bond estimate is $219,507 and we were going to add $10,000 for a fire well to make that $219,507. Resolved ~ha~ the Planning Board recommend to the Town Board to accept th%s DonG. ~r. Ward: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Mullen, Latham, Orlowski, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Chardonnay Woods - Board to review the bond dated December 21, 1988 for this major subdivision located at Southold. SCTM #1000-51-3-3. This bond estimate is for $423,549. Every- thing is in order with that one. What is the pleasure of the board? Resolved that the Planning Board recommend to the Town Board to accept this bond. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions? Ail those in favor. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Elijah's Lane Estates, Section~III Board to review the bond dated November 28, 1988 for this major sub- division located at Mattituck. SCTM #1000-108-4-7.1. The bond is for $177,618. Every thing is in order with that one. Resolved that the Plannin9 Board recommend to the Town Board to Mr. Mullen: So moved, accept this bond. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Latham, Ward, Edwards,Mullen Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. PLANNING iBOARD . PAGE JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: Oliver Campbell - Board to send this site plan to the Building Department for certification. This site plan is on Cox Lane at Cutchogue. SCTM #1000-84-3-5. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Seconded. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Ward, Edwards, Latham, Mullen. Mr. Orlowski: Discussions: James Cohill - Board to discuss this application with the applicant. This major subdivision is on 18.9108 acres located at Mattituck. SCTM #1000-107-1-2. Mr. Danowski: I think what happened here historically was that before I began to represent Jim, he had come in to this board and had different plans and discussed them with you and there was one question regarding water quality. That was resolved to satisfaction of the Health Department I came-in with Howie Young and we discussed different ways that we thought the land could be developed. We talked about things like driveways,~ standard subdivision plans, the open space. I also spoke briefly to Jim Schondebare about the towns own policy what they considered space as opposed to other towns such as Riverhead, or Easthampton where the open space area owned by a lot owner. (Couldn't hear a portion of this conversation). I also understand your town code provision leaves an open question mark there about any other way of handling open space subject to the approval of the Town Board. I can't understand why the Town Board wouldn't, maybe they have and maybe your going to tell me that's a bad idea given me the ~other ~option to say if you wanted to that you'd create these open space areas old and restricted to have restricted covenances on them filed with the County Clerk. We would continue the open space where a lot owner would own them. That seems to be a better way of handling it in my mind. Regardless of that the other idea was there are small standard subdivisions such as this that have been recently approved not that far away. I think maybe Howie you've got the names of these. Oregon Heights, Howie is saying is one of them. Jimmy follows through on these things with great detail and he's telling me the other day he w~nt down th.e streets and he'll tell you the number of driveways that PLANNING BOARD PAGE 19 JANUARY 9, 1989 go off these side streets on other developements and other houses that have been created. Mr. Cohill: Between where the creek bridge on Grand Avenue goes up to my farm there are 36 driveways and two of them were congested area of town. Go north of me on Reeves, there are twenty five driveways. It's in keeping with the area that Howard designed it only to have two double driveways. My driveways would represent three percent of the driveways on that stretch and yet my stretch of road probably represents twenty five percent of the road. Mr. ~anowski: I think what we're trying to do is anticipate every problem question you might pose back to us. So we said "what can be wrong with this plan"? We said maybe the board will say they don't want driveways out to the road. So Jimmy went out and did his own personal survey to answer that question. If you said that you did'nt want the large lot areas to belong to a lot owner because some of that conflicts with some within the town. Then why not throw them out, I think what he's trying to say is "hey I don't have 100 lots to spend a great deal of money here, do you really want us to put pavement"~ It would look a lot more pleasing not to have a big roadway cutting into the development~" Obviously, this point of view its less expensive. Mr. Cohill: With the water situation in the Town of Southold it just doesn't make sense for me to take this nice farmland and cover it with asphalt. The reason I bought the property was to have all this road frontage. Mr. Orlowski: Does the board have any comments on these two layouts? Mr. Ward: Just a question, Which one do you prefer. Mr. Danowski: I think we're talking about the open space area belonging to a lot labeled number 2. That seemed to be, because when Jimmy first came to us he said look, I have a house there that I live in. I might like to build a new house myself and some agricultural use of that open space area. If he continues to maybe live in a new house and farm grapes, or whatever he wants to do with the open space, for his own personal use. Mr. Ward: Didn't we approve of that? PLANNING BOARD PAGE 20 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Danowski: I think before I got into this you went and discussed it and went around and around on it and he was dealing with the water situation and I think the last thing you told him was that an extension to get approvals was denied. We would like to tell you that the water question has been answered now and we need to say well, its not a huge subdivision is there a problem with that plan? Howard Young: We had an earlier sketch plan approval and a preliminary phase and we got bogged down with drainage on the corner there. Mr. Ward: Didn't that original one have one less lot on Grand and have a flag lot in there or something? Howard Young: Something like that, yes. Mr. Ward: In other words if you have six and this back lot nine. Howar.d Young: With all the time that's spent on it I added anothe!r lot just to recover some of the Basically six th:rough nine were about the same. Mr. Waird: I just think there was more open space on the road then what's shown. Mr. Banowski: I think we tried to discuss other alternatives one of tlhem was to shade the backs of lots. Mr. Orlo~ski: Just one other one because we have another one here. Mr. Howard: There's just four lots on the same location. Mr. Co'kill: I do some living in this house right now on lot t~kree, that has the old farm house, it was one of those houses you could either bulldoze or spend money, I spent money. When I drilled the well I drilled it to the west of that where I would like to build a house. I also drilled a well on the other side and that's the one where we went deeper and got good water over on eight and nine. Mr. Orlowski: Department? Mr. Danowski: stamp. What map did you get stamped at the Health They haven't approved it yet? When we go file it then we'll go for the PLANNING BOARD PAGE 21 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Ward: The agricultural open space easement, that is the open space right? Mr. Danowski: Right, I think the question is who's going to own the open space, and should he have to go to the attorney general and form a homeowners association or keep it for the benefit of those lot owners or as another town would you say its completely shaded to restrict and file with the County Clerk no structures to be put on it. Nothing could be done except agricultural use and if it belongs to a particular lot owner. In this particular case we say lot one. Howard Young: We think simple and easier and in some ways better but this wouldn't alter the map if we were to split this across here. Mr. Cohill: This land would please the neighbors there who are use to having farm land behind them the ones that on are Grand now. I know they would prefer that to any other. Mr. Ward: You're asking two questions, Layout and home owners verses a private ownership. Mr. Da~Qw~ki: Yes I think so, that's one of those things that I'm hearing second and third hand information about it so I don't know what I'm saying is accurate but you can not do it or do not want to do it and I don't know if thats the case or not. Mr. Cohill: I've heard that they are having problems with these associations all over Long Island. Mr. Danowski: I think its an extra expense and some planning boards direct me and tell me they have problems with maintenance. No one cares about it and no one takes care of it, it ~ay not be the problem with small areas. Mr. Young: I think also that if this map was favored the ownership of the so called open space we could deal with over the course of the rest of the procedure if this layout was appropriate then we could get on with our prelimi~ary map back to the preliminary map stage and let that question forward PLANNING BOARD PAGE 22 JANAUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Cohill: I did have a tenant farmer for a few years and then I was afraid he was loading it with nitrates so I stopped that. Right now its just meadow land. Mr. Young: We said we would access all these lots from here. We have the driveway and the two access points, Mr. Orlowski: What is lot number one suppose to be? Mr. Danowski: Ail that does is you can have that all in white. But the building envelope that would limit you. Mr. Chill: Lot number one is a total of eleven acres. Mr. Danowski: That would eliminate the need for a homeowners association. Mr. Ward: If we couldn't go along with that they we'd have to do the homeowners association. Mr. Danowski: I think the answer was whether it was my application or anybody elses why either meeting with the town board by resolution amending that section to added to give them the permission when they want to to do this and have it as an added tool. Mr. Orlowski: Do you want to wait for the town board to amend the code? (Ha! Ha!) Mr. Danowski: No but I'm trying to find out why one hasn't been done to date? Ms. Scopaz: Are you talking about the recent amendment? Mr. DRnowski: I'm saying if you consider this a valuable aid that if the Planning Board wanted to do this from time to time why they wouldn't amend that section of the ordinance to allow them to do that. Ms. Scopaz: Well, I think one of them has to do with the intention o~f the state law. Mr. Danow~ki: We discussed this with every other town. Mr. Ward: Why don't we recoup on it and get back to you. Mr. Cohill: We saw Ray Jacobs and made these plans according to him, isn't that right Howie? Mr. Orlowski: He has stated to us that he's having a problem with all these curbs as far as drainage onto his roads. Mr. Young: One_way or another you're going to have traffic_ coming out eventually. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 23 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Orlowski: We'll run it by him now that we know what you're talking about. Mr. Cohill: Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Lucas Ford Board to discuss this application with the applicant. This site plan is on Hortons Lane at Southold. SCTM #1000-59-3-32.1. Mr. Mullen: I would like to refrain from this application because of a possible conflict of interest. Mr. Ward: I think we have gone around in a circle with the owner the 35 foot setback as shown in the front in other words hold everything the same just as your showing it make that 75. Mr. Gray Jr.: 75, what would that do? Mr. Ward: Keep the plan exactly as is and just change that to 75, all it would do is just pull this back a little bit more. Mr. Gray: O.K., so what you're saying is that if we go back 75 feet with this. Mr. Ward: Ail it does is just move this back a little bit, in other words you would hold the parking, just giving a little more buffer to this. Mr. Gray: O.K., so we're adding 40 feet, is that correct? Mr. Ward: That's right. Mr. Gray: We're all set? The plan is approved as it stands. Mr. Orlowski: Make the changes and bring it back. Mr. Ward: That's our comments on it. I think we're at a point of special exception. Mr. Gray: In other words, this is the only comment. Mr. Ward: If you make that to 75, then you're in business. Just push the whole thing back 40 feet. Mr. Gray: How does that sound fellows? Everyone happy with that? PLANNING BOARD PAGE 24 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Gray: Called up Mr. iLnc~s ~r~ and Mr. ~a~ Jr. to discuss recommendations. Mr. Ward: I think you're misreading what we're asking. We are not - changing the site plan, you have plenty of room. Mr. Lucas: What we would like to do is 20 feet. Mr. Orlowski: 20 feet of what. Mr. Lucas: Instead of the 40, 20. Originally we presented this it was 25. Mr. Ward: You know you've got a very liberal site here we're trying to pull it back and get less impact on the road and you're not changing the site plan you've got plenty of room. Mr. Ford: Would the trees go along the road then? Mr. Ward: Sure, just as you showed. Mr. Ward: Ail we're saying is give the town a little more buffer between the town and you. Laurie Solomon: I live to the north of where this car dealership would be, I was wondering if there was going to be any other public discussion on this before any approvals are made where I, myself just found out about this today. I saw it in the Watchman, I know quite a few residents on Hortons Lane are too happy about it. Is there something we have to do, if there is a petition to bring before the board. Mr. Orlowski: The Zoning Board of Appeals will have a hearing. That's where you bring your comments. Mr. Ward: The Zoning Board of Appeals asked us for our comments on the site plan, ultimately if they get the approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals to allow them to build this facility they have to then come here to the Planning Board for site plan approval. Mrs. Solomon: We have until Thursday, when the hearing is scheduled. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 25 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Paterson: A group of us here are neighbors in Bay Haven, Cedar Beach. We don't have any professional with us to guide us or to help us with the timing of things. We are concerned about our area, we're afraid that unless we can alert you to the dangers its going to become a kind of Levittown and there- fore, may I suggest you might walk the area where we live. I didn't really mean to speak at this time on that. I had thought previously I could but I missed the beat. I suggest if I may a general comment. Obviously this whole procedure is pretty well planned before you come in here so you can save time I guess. Professionals know that, know how to respond and when to get it in fast but I think that you have another responsiblity to the people who live here who don't know the sullities of this kind of thing because they are only here for one thing. Like that lady who was just here before me. She's surprised and so on. We don't bounce from town to town, we don't know anything about this stuff. I would think that at the beginning of the meeting it might be a good idea, % mean this as a positive suggestion, the beginning of the meeting you explain how you work to the audience, half of whom don't understand they have been to a meeting before. If you're not going to have any questions, so be it then there are no questions from anybody. From anybody. Not just from me because these other individuals can slip in fast and get it done. Now I was being polite to wait until you finiah Mr. Orlowski, that's why I didn't yell out or something. Obviously, I was foolish. I should have roared out or something like that. I think that if you explain this ahead of time then give everyone a chance respond including those like this group that you will be a more effective instrument for your neighbors who live here and, who are very concerned about things as you know. I'm not at all implying that your not doing a good job, or don't mean to do a fine job but this would help us a great deal. Did you notice the reaction when I wasn't allowed to speak here. People were upset. Technically, your right I'm sure. I think you coul~d change it and be a little more flexible in the future. I really urge this in a positive way. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: I would just like to say, I would like youinot to feel bad but we do have a lot of applications that we go through there is probably 180 to 200 applications~that we are reviewing right now. The applicant was on the agenda to make a determination on the impact statement whether it be complete or not, that's all. The agenda is available Monday morning for anybody to review PLANNING BOARD PAGE 26 JANUARY 9, 1989 You can come in the office and go through the records. The board has walked that property three times already so we are very much in contact with the situation in the area and the impact down there. I would love to let everybody here talk all night long but we just so much talking does absolutely nothing. I forget everything in the first thirty minutes. We ask that you put everything in writing. I read everything and the board reads everything. But if I don't put a stop to it abruptly, then the applicant would want to talk again and you would want to talk again and we would be listening to an argument getting no benefit of anything. Mr. Paterson: Let me make a brief response. I don~t mean to debate or harass you at all. I asked for the impact statement early in the afternoon and I couldn't get it. Mr. 0rlowski: Because its incomplete. We just deemed it incomplete. Miss Spiro: We're there to help you in the office. Mr. Paterson: I'm not trying to put the office down, as I recall I asked for it and couldn't get it then. Mr. Orlowski: The records are all open and you can go through them. Mr. Paterson: O.K. now here's the next thing. If you say you have 180, I'm sure you do, I'm sure your swamped with work. Don't let him talk if you won't let me talk. Mr. Orlowski: Ail I did is tell him what to do. He was very annoyed at that, I'm sure he would like to talk all night but you notice he didn't. It's not a public hearing and no time for public comments so we moved on. We stopped, he's incomplete. I mean we're not even going to address it until we get all the answers we want. I just want to assure you that down there we are very concerned and we have been over that property. Mr. Paterson: Thank you I'm delighted to hear it. I'm encouraged, I'm not being sarcastic. In fact, Mr. Orlowski: I know and I know its hard to accept you're told you cannot talk but if we allowed it to happen it would be carried away and nothing would be accomplished. We've had that happen before and gotten nothing out of it. PLANNING BOARD PAGE 27 JANUARY 9, 1989 Mr. Paterson: May I end up saying, I commend your planning office they are polite and helpful and extremely efficent so if I went in today and asked the question I probably didn;t understand. I want to thank them because they are always that way. I been there two or three times. Thank you for listening. Mr. Mullen: May I make a suggestion sir. I suggest you and other people in the town come down here more frequently, to see what is going on and learn the planning process. Believe me, we are here for everybody. You people are our boss, so please come down, we have plenty of room. Mr. Paterson: Thank you very much, we don't want to be your boss we want to be your neighbor. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Any questions on the board? Mr. Mullen, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards. Entertain a motion. Mr. Ward: So moved Mr. Orlowski: Ail those in favor. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Mr. Latham, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Ward, Mr. Orlowski. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So moved. Meeting adjourned at 8:55 p.m. E~.TT O~OW~S~I, ~R. CH~N Jane Rousseau Southold Town Planning Board ~OUR Tovm C!ezk, Town