Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-02/08/1988P D 8outhold, N.Y, 11971 (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES February 8, 1988 The Southold Town Planning Board held a regular meeting on Monday, February 8, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold. PRESENT WERE: Chairman Bennet't Orlowski,Jr. MemBer William F. Mullen, Jr. Member G. Ritchie Latham, Jr. Member Richard G. Ward Member Kenneth Edwards Town Planner Valerie Scopaz Planner Melisa Spiro Secretary Jill M. Thorp 7:30 p.m. Public Hearing on the question of approval of the minor subdivision of Y~ung's Avenue Associates. This proposal is for two lots on 20.995 acres off Young!s Avenue in Southold. SCTM Mr. Orlowski: Good Evening, I would like to call this meeting to order, first order of business is a public hearing on the question of approval of the minor subdivision of Youngs Avenu Associates. This proposal is for 2 lots on 20.995 acres off Bergen Avenue in Mattituck. We have proof of public- ation in the Long Island Travler, we have proof of publication in the Suffolk Times. At this time, everything is in order for a public hearing and I will ask if there are any objections on this minor subdivision. Hearing none, are~'there any ecdorsements of this minor subdivision. Mr. Raynor: Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name is Henry Raynor. I'm agent for Youngs Ave. and Associates. I would like to make a little note concerning the topics on your.agenda. The property in question is not on Bergen Ave., its rather Rail Road and Youngs Ave. in Southold. Just for the record. Its a proposed minor subdivision of 2 lots on 20.9 acres. The Northerly lot being 11.4 acres and Southerly lot being 9.6 acres. Both parcels are existing road side. One map would call it Youngs Ave.,another map would call it Railroad Ave. in Southold. Both parcels by far exceen the existing zoning standards. I beleive all the filing fees have been paid. The sketch plans of this propesed subdivision was approved by this Board on January 25th of this year. I think that pretty well completes the file with regard to what'~is necessary for this Board to request approval for the final plot and to request negative declaration by this Board this lead agency under SEQRA~ Planning Board Page 2 2/8/88 I thank you for your consideration. I will be happy to answer any questions pertaning to this. Mr. Orlowski: O.K., are ther any other endorsements of this subdivision? Ms. Scopaz: Yes, I would like to address a question to the applicant in the room. Could you elaborate on what your clients are proposing to do after the 20 acre piece is split into two pieces? Is there any intention... Mr. Raynor: As the agent to the applicant presently, I have'no plans then what exist before you tonight. Mr. Mann: Russell Mann resident of Southold. The agenda I have in my hand says Bergen Ave. in Mattituck and I thought Mr. Raynor said Youngs Ave. and /or Railroad Ave. in Southotd. Is that correct? Mr. Orlowski: Yes, It was a mistake in the agenda. Mr. Mann : Well, will' somebody enlighten me a~ to where... Mr. Orlowski: Its on Youngs Ave. North of Daval. North of 48. Mr. Raynor: Where Parker Davidson used~to live. Mr. Mann: O.K. Thank you very much. Mr. Raynor: I beleive the legal notice that is filed is completly correct. Ms. Spiro: Right Mr. Despirita: Good evining, Carl Despirita, I have a question with the subsequent subdivision. What will be the plans for that, will that be atleast 2 acre zoning in that area? Mr. Orlowski: Well, this is for comments only, this public hearing. Any question to the applicant you can ask the applicant. If you have a comment to make on something we're looking for as far as this subdivision. Address that to the Board. Mr. Raynor: After the hearing I'll be happy to discuss it with the gentlemen. Mr. Despirita: O.K. fine, Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Any other endorsment ? Hearing none, any one out there that's neither pro nor con but may have any information pertaining to this subdivision that would be of any interest to the Board. Any questions from the Board? Mr. Mullen? Mr. Mullen: No Mr. Latham? Mr. Latham: No Mr. Ward? Mr~. Ward: NO Planning Board Page 3 2/8/88 Mr. Edwards? Mr. Edwards: No Ms. Scopaz? Ms. Scopaz: No Mr. 0rlowski: No futher questions I will confirm this hearing closed, and Thank you for comming. ***************************** Mr. Orlowski: John and Catherine Simicich - Board to take final action and to authorize the chairman to endorse the final surveys for this minor subdivision of 2 lots on 45,229 acres off Bergen Avenue in Mattituck. SCTM ~ 1000-t13~7-1.2 and 19. 161. See we just got~a new computer system at the Town Hall and we're all trying to get used to it here and sometimes it automatically makes mistakes with out even trying. So we apologize. What's the pleasur of the Board? Any approval should be subject to a m,~rging of lot number 2 with Thorton Smith, which the applicants already agreed t~. Motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Latham. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded, any questions on the motion? Ti~ose in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board take final action on th monor subdivision of John and Catherine Simicich. Board authorized the Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated July 27, 1987 for this minor subdivision of 2 lots on 45.229 acres off Bergen avenue in Mattituck. SCM # t000-113-7 1.2,19.161. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, ~Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. ***************************** Mr. Orlowski: Papadopolaus and Maragos - Board to accept and request compliance with the engineer'svreport dated January 28, 1988. This proposal is for 5 lots on 14.374 acres off Kenney~s Road in Southold. SCTM # 1000-59-3-17. What's the pleasure of the Board on the report? Mr. Mullen: I made in my complience. Mr. Latham: Seconded. Mr Orlowski: Motion made and seconded, any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept and request compliance with the engineer's report dated January 28, i988 for the subdivision of Papadopolaus and Mararos. This proposal is for 5 lots on 14.374 acres off Kenny's Road,Southold. SCTM # 1000-59-3-17. P~anning Board Page 4 2/8/88 Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Bruer: Can i make a comment on this application at this momment before the Board since the engineer has just submitted his report with respect to what my client has to comply with. Two questions to the Board: 1) Can I get a copy of it? and 2) this being the case can we~have an extension of the time on are conditional approval of which I think expire's this month. In other words we couldn't comply since we didn't have the report since it wasn't even adopted. Mr. Orlowski: Do you have a letter? Mr. Bruer: I have a letter. I may point out the Board that I think the fire well is being installed presently. If it hasn't been, we've contracted with, I think, with Southampton - Jackie Griffs firm - for the dry wells. I should have some of the money if not all of the $10,070 this month. It would seem to me that it would only be fair to extend it so we can comply with the report that the client hasn't even seen it yet. Ms. Scopaz: But if you recall correctly in the file there the applicants approval was conditioned upon in doing the local posting of bonds. I beleive the last correspondence in the file form the 24th to Mr. Bruer made some reference to a Bond estimate drawn up~ However, that bond estimate has not been drawn up because, according to Sidney Bowne, the plans that they have are not sufficient and detailed enough. The Board has 2 options: 1) is to set up a bond estimate and let Mr. Bruers client post a bond, and 2) is to simply specify the work and let him do the work. I don~ know if that's been resolved but I think that's... Mr. Bruer: It's our intension to dot the work as soon as possible. Unfortunatly, I beleive that statutory one hundred and eighty day conditional approval is comming; particularly involving ~omething I don't know anything about yet. Mr. Orlowski: I don't have a problem with granting the extension. Ms. Scopaz: I think it should be specified, at this point, whether your going to go along with doing the work or whether you have a bond estimate set up and let them approve of the work. Mr. Orlowski: What are your intentions? Mr.~Bruer: For the first time tonight I'm hearing that the plans we submitted that was according to Mr. Davis' of a letter of a year or so ago which I thought we were complying with the then engineer. This is the first I've heard there is something different. Mr. Orlowski: Well, we Will give you a copy of the report and grant the extension and get back to us before the next meeting. If there is any problems we will let you'~ know. Mr. Bruer: Fine! I beleive from the conversation with my client we would like to comply so the work can get finished. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Anybody want to make that motion? Mr. Edwards: What would we grant the extension for? 90 days? Mr. Orlowski: 6 months. Motion Made by Mr. Edwards, seconded by Mr. Mullen. Planning Board Page 5 2/8/88 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and sedonded, any questions on ~he'motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a 6 month extension on~ the conditional approval of Papadopolaus and Maragos due to the applicant not receiving the engineerts report. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Next I have August Acres - Board to accept field inspection report SCTM # 1000-53-4-442. Motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Ward. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motions? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept the field inspection report of August Acres. SCTM # 1000-53-4-44.2. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. To be sent to the applicant. ****************************** Mr. Orlowski: O.K. next is Honeysuckle Hills - Board to discuss field inspection report. According to the bond estimat improvements, that have not yet been done. 1) Is the curbs 2) is the drainage swale 3) there's no dead end street sign,there's seeding, there's a problem with lots 1 and 12, and the stairs are still inadequate. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Mullen: To request compliance with the recommendations. Mr. Ward: Seconded. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board discussed the field inspection on Honeysuckle Hills. The Board requests compliance with the following recommendations: according to the bond estimate improvements, the following has not been completed: 1) curbs,2) drainage swale,3) no dead end street sign,4) no seeding,5) there is a problem with lots 1 and 12, 6) the stairs are still inadequate. Voted of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed ? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next Eli]~ah's Lane, Section 2 - - Board to rescind resolution of January 25,1988 pertaining to the SEQRA determination. We're a little premature on that so I will entertain that motion. Mr. Ward: So moved. Planning Board Page 6 2/8/88 Mr. Orlowski: Next Elijah's Lane, Section 2 - Board to rescind resolution of January 25, 1988 pertaining to the SEQRA determination. We're a little premature on that so I will entertain that motion. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Seconded. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion. Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. ****************************** Mr. Oclowski: The Board to set February 22, 1988 at 2:30 for a public hearing for preliminary approval. Motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Edwards. Mr. Olowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Ocl~wski: Opposed? So ordered. ****************************** Mr. Orlowski: We have some extensions of approvals. I have Charles Acres - Board to grant 6 month extension for the filing of the final maps for this major sub- division located at Peconic. SCTM # 1000~86-1-10.3. THey are still waiting for approval for there test wells with the County. What's the pleasure of the Board? Motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward. Mr. O~lowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on'.the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a 6 month extension for the filing of the final maps for the major subdivision of Charles Acres located a~ Peconic. SCTM ~ 1000-86-1-10.3. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next the Marina Bay Club - Board to grant a 90 day extension on the filing of the supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for this site plan located at New Suffolk. SCTM # 1000-117-8-18. We have a letter from the applicant on file requesting this under the agent of the applicant. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Mullen: To grant the extension. Planning Board Page 7 2/8/88 Mr. Latham: Seconded. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a 90 day extension on the filing of the supplemental Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the sit plan of Marina Bay Club located at New Suffolk. SCTM # 1000-117-8-18. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Ms. Scopaz: One question on the exact day the 90 day extension from which day it runs out? Is the 90 day extension from today or the January 11 meeting? Mr. Raynor: The wordage on the letter I refered to is up to 90 days. I would be assured that the controlled supplemental.., to the Board. Ms. Scopaz: Counting the 90 day extension from the January llth meeting? Mr. Raynor: That will be fine. Thats fairly accurate. We stillhave about three or four engineering questions to be answered reguarding to 116 questions that the Board has purposed to us. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have First Class Auto Body - Board to take final action on this site plan for construction of an additon on an automotive repair building at Peconic. SCTM # 1000-75-5-10. It's been certified with few conditions. We've received a varience from the ZBA. What is the pleasure of the Board? The conditions that Mr~ Lessard has put on here is that exterior lights not shown and would require shielding, out-door signs not shown, tree near intersection should be reconsidered, Zoning Board Appeals issue necessary variance's, and one space needed for the handicap. Which I'm sure Mr. Lessard will be addressing the construction. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Latham: That's O.K. as long as he checks into the shielding. Mr. Orlowski: The approval will be subject to these conditions. Mr. Ward: I think the only one you may want to modify is the landscaping that would be provided, we could adjust on sight. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. What's the pleasure of the Board? Mr. Edwards: approved subject to. Mr. Ward:~Seconded. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED~that the Southold Town Planning Board take final action on the site plan of First Class Auto Body of an addition on an automotive repair building at Peconic, subject to the following conditions: Planning Board Page 8 2/8/88 1) exterior lights not shown will require shielding, 2) out-door signs shall be shown, 3) the location of the tree near the intersection shall be deterimined by the Planning Board on site at an inspection, 4) one parking space shall be marked for handicapped use only, in accordance with State Law. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. O~lowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Theodore and Marie Petkas - Board to take action on this site plan for construction of a restaurant located at Greenport. This was held over from ~anuary 25th meeting. SCTM ~ 1000-35-1-8. What's the pleasure of the Baord? Mr. Ward: I would vote for denial on several grounds 1) that the basic zone minimum ~ requirement is 20 thousand sq. ft. what we have here is something a liltle less than 10 thousand sq. ft. also just the intensity of the use of the site and just in terms of the~ site itsel and what's going on, it seems like over use and the fact that it is such a disastrous corner traffic-wise, and the impact on this corner would not be in good keeping with good planning principles. I think on that basis we should deny it and so moved. Mr. Latham: I second that motion. Mr. Orlaowski: Motion made and-seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? Mr. Luchoski: Francis Luchoski with the firm Farelt, Fritz,... at Unio~dale N.Y. My question is what can the applicant do with this commercial piece of property if he's~ not allowed to develop it as a testuarant which is accepted use of the development? Mr. Orlowski: Well, it appears that your A zone is larger thand your B zone so the A zone is the zoning it probmbly should bemused for. Mr. Luchoski: What your suggesting is that he use the portion that is currently zoned commercialed to build a house? Mr. Orlowski: I'm saying that you have one parcel here not all of that is in the B zone. Mr. Luchoski: I understand. Mr. Orlowski: And most of it is in the A zone. Mr. Luchoski: Then this application is to develop the portion in the commercial zone? Mr. Orlowski: Right, and its just too intense, this proposed restuarant, I can't tell you what to do with is, but its just too intense. Mr. Luchoski: Are you able to sugest any alternitive uses that may be acceptable to the Board at this time for commercial use? Mr. Orlowski: This Board does not suggest to make any suggestions as to any use. Planning Board Page 9 2/8/88 Mr. Luchoski: You have'answere my question. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board deny the application for the site plan of Theodore and Marie Petekas for construction of a restaurant located at Greenport. SCTM # 1000-35-1-8. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. OMlowski: Opposed? So ordered. ******************************** Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Arthur Junge - Board to send revised site plan to Building Department for certificantion upon receipt of three revised sit plans in accordance with the planning Board's request of January 29, 19~8. What's the pleasure of the Board? He will be conforming to what we asked for and doing exactly the way we basically drew it out. Mr. Ward: I think we should wait at this point to get the revised plans before we authorize it going to the Building Department. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Alright we'll put that on hold. Mr. Orlowski: Change of Zones: Richard Corazzini - Board to revie~ this change of zone petition for the proposed change from A residential and agrizultural district to side of Cox Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM ~ 1000-84-1-p/o26. We will note that this is consistant wiht the Master Plan. What's the pleasure of the Boardt Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I just suggest that we tack on to our recommendation that the lot coverage and the parking and landscaping requirements.of the proposed zone be in part of the parcel approval if the Town Board if so decides to change zone, so that we be in k~eping with in the proposed Master Plan. Which was really a little bit less intensive use on the property that the zone currently involves. I would like that to be part of our recommondation. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. can I have that in a form of a motion and seconded? Motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Mullen. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend to the Town Board that the change of zone petition of Richard Corazzini from A residential and agricultural district to C-1 industrial district be approved. This proposal is located on the westerly side of Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New York. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. ************************************** Planning Board Page 9a 2/8f88 Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Pudge Corporation/James L. Gray, Sr. - Boarld to review this change of zone petition for the proposed change from A residential and agricultural~~ district to C light Industrial District on property located on the northwesterly corner of Middle Road and Cox Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM # 1000,84-1-p/o 26. Mr. Mullen: Mr. Chairman I move for the zone to the simular conditions, bulk, parking, and landscaping. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. that will be sent in the recommendation to the Town Board. Mr. Latham: I second that. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. motion made and seconded. Any questions of the motion? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend to the Town Board that the change of zone p~tition for Pudge Corporation and Agricultural District to C light industrial district be approved. This proposal is located on the northwesterly corner of Middle Road (R.R 48) and Cox Lane, Cutchogue, New Y~rk. Vote[of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Planning Board Page 10 2/8/88 Mr. Orlowski: Next we go to Road Specifications - which has been a question that everybody has been sitting tight on there seats for and waiting for some type of an answer. I think we've come up With something to keep~everyone happy. We reviewed with the ~ngineer's, Town Highway, and the Superintendent. We basically cut it down quite a bit. Finacially it would not create a hardship. Its not much more I can say about it. Basically its a 20' wide right-of-way with a good top course and drainage to be provided as neccessary if needed. That's basically it. Does the Board have any other comments on this? Mr. Ward: Well, I think the best way to describe it to those that are interested and are here is that if we're to take the Town Road as it stands as per Major subdivisions which is 28' with curbs. If we would take that type of construction and cut it down to 20'. Just took the middle section and develop the road without the curbs, the middle section of pavement in a sence and the drainage as neccessary. Which is as it is anyway, which would be dry wells or positive drainage were needed at low points and things of that sort. So this would give us the ability later on if the road was ever improved or additional lots came into add to with putting the curbs in or go to dedication whatever in the future was to be done at least we would have the basis of a road there. So based on that, Chairman, I'd move that we recommend this to the.., make a motion to recommend this to the Highway Dept. and the Town Board that that be our policy. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. We will let them reveiw it than we'll adopt it. Mr. Horton: Have you got a rough cost onwhat that will cost us a foot? Mr. Orlowski: About 40 dollars. Where the other one was running about one hundred. Mr. Horton: Well, I'm still talking 120 thousan dollars to put 2 houses up. Mr. Bruer: Mr. Chairman as a question, it seems to me that the statutue that presently exists gives the Board a lot of leeway, in terms of what you can do wiht specific standards. I would assume that this would possibly set a standard that in proper instances the Board can vary either upwards or downwards. Mr. Orlowski: How do you figure? Mr. Bruer: Well, I believe the Board can pursuant to the Town order, can require those specifications up to what they require in a major subdivision. Mr. Orlowski: Well, wecan do that now. Mr. Bruer: Thats what I'm saying. Mr. Orlowski: We've been able to do that since... Mr. Bruer: Absoluty. What I'm saying is that with respect to the Board's recommendations as to what type of standard, that's all well and good but the present law I would hope that the Board will always take and assume whatever flexibility would be available to it under the proper circumstances of the proper case and not say it has to be this and it can't go one way or the other. I assume that it could go one way or the other in the proper instance. Mr. Orlwski: Well this is the minimum. Mr. Bruer: In other words what your saying is that this is going to be flat out that this is going to be the minimum period~ Planning Board Page 11 2/8/88 Mr. Orlowski: In reviewing it with the engineers and other types of roads this is not bhat bad. Mr. Bruer: And there's no flexibility other than upward in respect'to this minimum standard. Is that what your saying? Mr. Orlowski: Right. Does the Board agree with me on that? Board: Yes' Mr. Orlowski: Well we haven't voted yet. Mr. Kapelt: Mr. Chairman, just one question, does this still require a paved road? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Kapell: But you're not going to rewuire curbing and swaling? Mr. Orlowski: No. We've always required that the road be a stable road. I mean you've had to go in and do something eith ie. We're trying to have everyone do the same. It gets a little difficult when somebody tells you that this is just as good as this and this is better than that. And we got 5 different types of roads going in and none of them last. So this is the best way to do i~. Mr. Kapell: Then its going to be a prepaved road? Mr. Orlowski: Only 20'. Mr. Townsend: It seems to be a question that if somebody has a lot, a parcel,of 40 acres and he wants to put a subdivision of two houses on there, there should be some encouragement assuming he would be willing and t don't think this is the case here, but assuming he would be able to covenant there would be no further subdivision. One of the goals is to reduce density in rural areas. There could be some sort of flexibility built in that in the planning Board's opinion, for instance the lots be ten acres or more, suppose that somebody wants to designate a forty acre minor subdivision with four lots in it. It might behoove the Planning Board to make it a hard fast rule. Because you could acheive that~low density goal by doing that if you got a convenant that it wouldn't be further subdivided. The use of that road is just not that big for two houses. Mr. Ward: If there's one or two large lots they normally can have frontage on a road and have a driveway. Its usually not a'problem. Its when you got more than that where it becomes a problem. Mr. Townsend: ... before the Board where there's lots are 7 or 8 acres, 4 lots and there's a half mile road, to put the burden of even the cost of $40 sq. ft. and to lose that particular... Mr. Orlowski: Well, let me ask you this, what kind of road would you like to put there? Are you going to put up, how many houses?, Four? Mr. Townsend: Four or two. Mr. Orlowski: I!m sure there going to be quite a bit of money and mayb there will be some elderly people up there. How can this Board sit here and worry about what kind of access they're going to have as faras fire servic, ambulance, emergency services. We can do it and its a great thing. Listen make them all dirt roads. In most cases its buyer beware. When they get up some of these roads and they're stuck up there. Planning Board Page 12 2/8/88 We have to have some type of road that is stable and safe. We went a long ways and on with this and came down quite abit. I don't see how we can come down any more without putting somebody in a spot of jeopardy as far as emergency services. Thats number one. Mr. Townsend: well you know as well as I do that there've been residences on less than acres that have been on dirt roads in this town since the sixteen hundreds probably and there still are and still will be. What I'm saying is that to acheive the goal to mantain rural quality of this area. In certain instances I think you should allow the latitude. If somebody wants to divide 40 acres into two lots and they have to go a half mile and you know theres not going to be much use and'you know its going to stay within one or two families that person has nobody to count on for the p~rpetuation on that road but himself anyway. Mr. Orlowski; If you give us forty acres we'd give you a flag lot and you would have a nice long driveway and you'd give us a covenant with no further subdivision perpetuity and you got it. There's ways to get around it as far as flag lots and things like that. But we have to look at life and safety whan er're doing this. Mr. Mullen: I currently am a victim of this problem right now. The right of way, there are 4 houses we have maybe 8 or 10 acres and the best I can do after scrimping and saving for years is to get them to put a black top on the right of way. P.S. its on the map for 25' and its no more than 10' wide. Its the best I can do. I shudder about fire calls down in my area and I'm very concerned and I think the rest of the members of the Board here in regard to safety equipment getting in and out. God forbid if something happens we would never forgive ourselves. And in additon I am not so happy with this prepetuity word, I'm not going to be here but you will and you're going to see, mark my words, when these so called 10 or 20 acres are going to be further subdivided. I hope I'm wrong. Mr. Townsend: 20' is signifigant... I mean I'm not complaining about it. It's more than half the property from this seat to that wall over there. Two emergency vehicles can get by almost side by side. Mr. Mullen: Joe, have ever driven a pumper or a hook and ladder? Mr. Townsend: Yes. Mr. Mullen: It's not that easy, is it? Mr. Townsend: It!s not worth a debate. I saw this as a way as somehow 'defeating that. Mr Orlowski: Any other questions? Mr. Horton: It would seem to me that, I have 40 acres and we're asking for 4 lots, and you just said again and you said it the other night when we were here that in the event that we would covenant like 30 acres that we would never ever subdivide it. You would agree to this and on the one hand you say wou're worried about the safety of those four families but on the other hand you say if I covenant the property you're not worried about their Safety. Mr. Olowski: I never said that. I said if we had a 40 acre parcel and they wanted to covenant the 40 acres and cut out the parcel we could do it in different ways. We might be able to do it with a flag lot allowing access off of the road and being part of that 40 acres. But as far as access into a number of houses you have to provide proper access. Mr. Horton: Our road is and you know that Camp Amaweda's been down there since before you were born and I was born and 2 out of the 5 houses would be there have been there that long and its going to create such a hardship that we will have to go-to a major. Planning Board page 13 2/8/88 So I guess as soon as I can, I~ll call your secretary for another appointment to see because know I understand we're in this water table and we'r~ back to a minor subdivision which we approached you about 4 years ago. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Any other questions? Ail those in favor? RESOLVED that Southold Town Planning Board recommend to the Town Board the following road specification: The~'~minimum standards for any roads consturcted within a residential subdivision shall be as follows: Ail specifications set forth in Chapter Al08 for a major subdivision shall be adhered to except that the curbs shall be eliminated; the subgrade width shall be 22', the width of the fine grading shall be 21'; and the width of the binding and wearing courses shall be 20' each, as shown in the attached diagram. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? Mr. Edwards voted in the negative. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Rose and Richard Sahm - Board to review response to Planning Board's request of January 25, 1988. I see Mr. Strang is here. He could probably tell us better then reading this letter. Mr. Strang: I understand at the last meeting there was some question~ from Mr. Lessard to the site plan to this property. I beleive I have a copy of his question and he gives me 7 of them. I did address in the letters to the Planning Board the origninal site plan that was submitted was a survey, really, of the existing conditions that are there now. The use as indicated was to be an antique shop in a relatively small area of sq. ft. to retail sales and in essence the owners are looking to just continue the use on the property with the parking that's there as is. Retail'nse can fall into several areas. I think antique sales, for one, is a light business use for all intents and purposes. The amount of traffic that would be generated and the need for parking is limited and the site does have several constraints as to how any additional parking can be provided. The parking that is presently there is accessible from the Main Road, which would be the transient parking for the customer of the antique shop. The proprietor or the owner or the mananger's of the property will park their vehicle down,below on the lower level so they would not be using any spaces for the customers. Their request is basically for the Board to allow them to instate their business with the site that existed. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Mr. Lessard has not certified this, he has his questions on here. I would suggest we send this back to Mr. Lessard and you address those to Mr. Lessard. He is the building inspector and I think you should work that out with him before we give any approval. Does the Board have anything to say about this? Mr. Strang: The other thing a might add is'.that the business use has been in that building for some time. Its only recently discontinued. The site did function at that time with a light load. What I feel is that my client is putting in the same type which is comparable with the same type of traffic pattern which is minimal. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Lessard h~s to certify before we give final approval. He's raising the questions. Does the Board have any other questions? Mr. Ward: No I donYt think so. I think what he has raised we could address. Mr. Strang: Can a copy of my letter be sent over to Mr. Lessard? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. We,ll send this over with the plans and I suggest you work that out with him and make an appointment with him to address it for reversal. P~anning Board Page 14 2/8/88 Mr. Strang: Is it safe to assume that the Board, if Mr. Lessard is satisfied and certified, that it will be on the next agenda for the Board? Mr. Orlowski: Yes. O.K. All those in favor? RESOLVED that the $outhold Town Planning Board send a copy of the letter from Garrett Strang in regard to Rose and Richard Sahm to the Building Department for the±r review. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Oclowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: I know you have nothing left on your agenda's. I have the thing that keeps popping up on my agenda every meeting and that's Tartan Oil and the lights in Peconic. It appears weTre going around with some type of game here. We have an operation running without a approved site plan. I don't know, somebody is either hard of hearing on the other end or just doesn't care. Does the Board have anything to say about this? Mr. Ward: My opion at the last meeting was what they did do in terms of changing the lights did make a minor improvement but not substancial enough for us to grant approval to the set up as it is. I know the rest of the members will take a look at it. Mr. Latham: ItTs better but its not enough. Mr. Mullen: I have a copy of the vary's minutes and notes. They are completely in violation of the oringinal approval. They are oporating as a convinience store. We have letters to the affect that they are only going to have certain products on the premises and they have exceed that grossly. It is a super, super 7/11. In there minutes and I have them quoted. "This will not be like a Hess or 7/11". It is equal to if not superior. I visited the premises a half a dozen months ago and they have everthing from ladies stockings to charcoal. Now there advertising Hot dogs and sandwichs. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. we will send those comments to Mr. Lessard. Mr. Ward: I think they also need to take care of the miscealanous signs that don~t belong. Mr. Mullen: I will supply Melisa with the backup on that so she dosen't have to research it again. Mr. Ward: I think that we also should encourage in theletter that also the fact that they have done one thing that is helpful, that is when its closed they have been turning the lights off. I think that we should acknowl~ge that we appreciate that affect that there doing because it does make the place dark. Mr. Orlowski: Alright, we will send the comments over. I have nothing left on the agenda I would like to intraduce Jill Thorp, our new secretary. She has joined on. If there are no further questions I~ll entertain the motion. Mr. Ward: ~$econded. Mrs. Wacker: I would like to ask for an extention for the Tidemark Motel. Some information has come to our attention which we would think would be some interest to you. We haven't the details of it. We won't get them til about Thursday which is the dead line. So we wondered if we might have an extension of a few days or a week. . 218188 ?lanning Board Page 15 Ms. Scopaz: When you called we checked with the town attorney to find out what the Planning Board could do. Evedently, the Planning Board does not have the discretion of expending a public comment period. One, It has set that public comment period at a public meeting and stated for the record that the period would be for a certain period of time. What you can do at this point is give some guide lines or indications to the Board or in your letter you submit on Thursday til 5 O'clock. You can give some, indication as to what your concerns are so that ~he Board can consider them even though you might no have the details you wish to present to the Board. Mrs. Wacker: By that time we may very well 'nave it. Mr. Orlowski~ Ail those in favor? Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed?.So ordered. Mrs. Oliva: Do they have site plan approval at Southold Squares? The 11 stores on the North Road. Mr. Orlowski: Yes. Mr. Ward: They don't have excepteance. Mrs Oliva: You mean those lights are just as bad as the lights at the Mobile station? Mr. Ward: Yes, they are. Mrs. Oliva: In fact, the one night it was raining so bad, it was such a dark ~ight, it really blinded you as to see the road. Mr. Orlowski: We have noted that problem and its going to be in one of our inspections.~ Everybody is complaining about it and we will have to change that lighting. It is offensive and it's not on site which its suppose to be. We have a letter to go out to the applicants. Being no further business to come before the Board, on a motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Edwards, and carried, the meeting was adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, /~ill M. TholeD, ~ecre~aLy . (.gouthold Town Planning Boar~ RECEIVED AND FILED BY ~ SOUTHOLD TOV~N CLERK Town Clerk, ~.own of Sou~old