Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-04/25/1988Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 TELEPHONE ($16) 765-1938 PLANN~G BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD MINUTES April 25, 1988 The Southold Town Planning Board held a regular meeting on Monday, February 22, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold. PRESENT WERE: Chairman Bennett Orlowski,Jr. Member G. Ritchie Latham, JR. Member William F. Mullen,Jr. Member Richard G. ward Member Kenneth Edward~ Town Planner Valerie Sc'opaz Planner Melissa Spiro Secretary Jill Thorp Mr. Orlowski: O.K. I wo~ld like to call this meeting to order. First order of business I wouldlike to set Monday, May 9, 1988 at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board 'meeting. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any question on the motion? All those in Favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning set Monday, May 9, 1988, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Henry Domaleski-Board to set Monday, May 9, 1988, at 7:30 p.m. for a Public Hearing on the final approval for this minor subdivision. This proposal is for 2 lots on 21.7329 acres located off Oregon Road, Cutchogue. SCTM $1000-95-1-p/o11. Planning Board Page 2 April 25, 1988 Mr. Edwards: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, May 9, 1988, at 7:30 for a Public Hearing on the final approval for this minor subdivision. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards° Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. We also have a report from Suffolk County Planning. What is the pleasure on this report? Mr. Ward: Request compliance. Mr. Latham: I'll second the motion. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the Motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept and request compliance with the Suffolk County Planning report dated May 11, 1987. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Steven Sanders and Albert Schwartz-Board to make SEQRA determination. Everything is order for a negative declaration. SCTM ~1000-106-6-36 Mr.Ward: Move for negative declaration. Mr. Edwards: second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board make a SEQRA determination of non-significance. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Board also to consider the Suffolk County Planning Co~m~ission's report. They say it is going to result in a land locked parcel. We know it is not. I think that is a standard comment. What is the pleasure of the Board as far as overriding this? Mr. Latham: I'll move that we override that one condition. Planning Board Page 3 April 25, 1988 Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board override the Suffolk County Planning Commission report dated January 15, 1988. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. We have a report from the Suffolk County Health Department. What is the pleasure on that? To accept their report? Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Edwards: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion Made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept and request compliance with the Suffolk County Health Department of Health Services report dated June 3, 1987. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. What is the Board's ~pleasure on the final surveys? Mr. Latham: Move them. Mr. Orlowski: They will have to be subject to Article 6 compliance. Mr. Latham: Yes. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the final surveys subject to the receipt of the Health Department approval. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Thornton E. Smith Set-off. Board to authorize the Chairman to endorse the surveys dated May 19, 1987, for this set-off located off Bergen Avenue and Sound Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM ~1000-121-1-p/o19 Mr. Ward: So moved. Planning Board Page 4 April 25, 1988 Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse the final surveys dated May 19, 1987, for this set off located off Bergen Avenue and Sound Avenue Mattituck. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Latham: Is that subject to Article 6, the same? Mr. Orlowski: No, they have that already. Mr. Orlowski: Sunbeau Associates-Board to take action on the final maps subject to submission of drainage plans acceptable to the Town Engineer, a revised map showing a 50' east-west dedication for a right-of-way to the Town between lots 3 and 4, and the posting of a bond or a Letter of Credit for road construction. This proposal is for 4 lots on 30.637 acres off Sound View Avenue, Mattituck. Any approval will be subject to C and Rs being placed on the map. What is the pleasure of the Board? SCTM $1000-100-2-5.1 Mr. Ward: Move for approval subject to those conditions. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the final maps subject to submission of drainage plans acceptable to the Town Engineer, a revised map showing a 50' East-West dedication for a Right-of-Way to the Town between lots 3 and 4, and the posting of a bond or letter of credit for road construction, and the Covenants and Restrictions being shown on the final map. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have a Public Hearing, 7:45 p.m. on the question of final approval for the minor subdivision of Robert Melrose. This proposal is for 3 lots on 3.547 acres located off Main Road and Alhertson Lane, Arshamomaque. SCTM ~1000-52-5-58. We have proof of p~,hlication in the Suffolk Times and proof of publication in the Long Island Traveler/Watchman. Everything is in order for the public hearing and I will ask if there are any objections to this minor subdivision? Hearing none, are there any endorsements to this subdivision? Hearing none, is there Planning Board Page 5 April 25, 1988 anyone out there that is neither pro nor con but may have any information pertaining to this subdivision that would have any interest to the Board. Hearing none, are there any questions from the Board. Mr. Mullen? Mr. Mullen: No. Mr. Latham? Mr. Latham: Are these business lots? Mr. Orlowski: I think so. Mr. Ward: Industrial. Mr. Orlowski: Yes industrial. Mr. Ward? Mr. Ward: No. Mr. Edwards: No. Ms. Scopaz: No. Mr. Orlowski: Being no further questions, I will declare this hearing closed thank you for coming. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Elijah's Lane Sec~tion 2-Board to take action on the preliminary maps for this major subdivision. This proposal is for 19 lots on 20 acres located at Elijah's Lane, Mattituck. SCTM $1000-108-4-7.1. Everything is order for approval. What is the pleasure of the Board on the preliminarT map? Mr. Latham: Move to approve the preliminary map. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant preliminary approval on this major subdivision located at Elijah's Lane, Mattituck. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Pudge Corp-Southold-Board to take action on the sketch plan subject to submission of final maps. Mr. Mullen: Mr. Chairman, I must refrain from participating in this situation, because I might have a possible conflict of interest. Planning Board Page 6 April 25, 1988 Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Subject to submission of the final maps showin~ the proposed drainage, submission of road profiles for a 25 foot right-of-way with 20 feet of paving, and Health approval. SCTM ~1000-59-10-3.1. Mr. Ward: Move subject to those conditions. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant sketch plan approval subject to submission of final maps showing the proposed drainage, submission of road profiles for a 25 foot right-of-way with 20 feet of paving, and Health approval. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Mabelle Dempewolf- The Board was going to make a determination in regards to SEQRA, we think it is an unlisted action. But we have not taken Lead Agency yet, so we can not rush the thirty days. I would like a motion to take Lead Agency and proceed from there. Mr. Ward: So moved. Mr. Mullen: second. RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board declare itself Lead Agent under the State Environmental Quality Review Act. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded~ Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. We will not be able to set this for a Public Hearing until our next meeting. We have been in touch with our Attorney about an uncoordinated review which would speed things up. As of yet we have not gotten an answer from him. I thought we would have it tonight, that is why this is on there. But since it is not we will proceed as we have been. Mr. Orlowski: Also with Southold Lumber we will take Lead Agency. Mr. Edwards: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Planning Board Page 7 April 25, 1988 RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board declare itself Lead Agent under the State Environmental Review Act. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have field inspections and Engineer's reports. Young's Marina-Board to accept and request compliance with the Engineer's report dated April 16, 1988. SCTM ~1000-57-1-38.8. Mr. Edwards: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second, Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept and request compliance with the Engineer's report dated April 16, 1988. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. OrlowSki: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: These reports are on file in the office if anyone is interested. Papadopoulos and Maragos-Board to accept and request compliance with the Engineer's report dated April 7, 1988. SCTM $1000-59-3-17. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept and request compliance with the Engineer's report dated April 7, 1988. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards, Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Extensions, Oregon Heights-Board to grant a 90 day extension for final approval. SCTM ~1000-99-3-12.21. We are waiting for updated maps from the Health Department. Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Planning Board Page 8 April 25, 1988 Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a 90 day extension for final approval on this major subdivision. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordezed. Mr. Orlowski: Nicholas Aliano-Board to grant a 90 day extension for determination on the final maps. This proposal is for 8 lots on 16.83 acres off CR 48, Peconic. SCTM $1000-74-4-4. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant a 90 day extension for determination on the final maps. This proposal is for 8 lots on 16.83 acres off CR 48, Peconic. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Harold Reese-Board to make recommendation to the Town Board on the proposed change of zone from "C-I" General Industrial District to "A" Residential and Agricultural District on the property located on the northerly side of Route 25, East Marion, New York. Mr. Mullen: We will reco~m~end it to the Town Board. Mr. Latham: I'll second that. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend approval to the Town Board on the proposed change of zone from "C-i" General Industrial District to "A" Residential and Agricultural District on the property located on the northerly side of Route 25, East Marion, NY. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Planning Board Page 9 April 25, 1988 Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Local Laws-Board to make recommendations to the Town Board on the following proposed Local Laws. "A Local Law in Relation to Zoning" which pertains to amending the definition of "Family". I know all you Board members read these laws. What is the pleasure in the reco~muendation? Mr. Latham: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend approval to the Town Board on the proposed local laws in relation to zoning which pertains to amending the definition of "Family". Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Lath~m, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. "A .Local Law in Relation to Zoning" which pertains to Architectural features. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Ward: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend approval to the Town Board on the proposed local law in relation to zoning which pertains to Architectural features. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. "A Local Law in Relation to Zoning" which pertains to setback from bulkheads. Mr. Mullen: So moved. Mr. Latham: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board recommend approval to the Town Board on the proposed local law in relation to zoning which pertains to setback from bulkheads. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Planning Board Page 10 April 25, 1988 Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Cox's Lane Industrial Park-Board to discuss this application with the applicant. SCTM $1000-84-1-26. Mr. Gray would like to step forward and show you what his intentions are. Mr. Gray: Good Evening my name is Jim Gray and I want to build an Industrial Park on Cox's lane and the North Road. These units will be approximately eighteen hundred and twenty five hundred feet a piece. They will be used for contractors such as electricians, carpenters, painters, tinsmiths, and so on. They will have loading docks and over head doors to keep the trucks inside the building. They will have offices with bathrooms, and landscaping. I have supplied with prints to show you just what each unit would look like. Mr. Orlowski: These will all be for industrial use, no retail? Mr. Gray: No retail, all industrial use. The same as I have on Horton's Lane. Mr. Ward: One of our big questions is the fact that we were curious as to why there was so much visitor parking shown. Mr. Gray: Well, that is the parking you require with the zoning. Mr. Ward: With the intensity of the development here what we are trying to do is make an interior court arrangement rather then have the front of the buildings loaded up with parking. Mr. Gray: Well, the front of the buildings people have to get to. Whoever works in the office, the owner, or people visiting. They will have to park in the front they apparently park in the rear. They will have to walk around the complete building to get in the front. There will be salespeople stopping by. Mr. Ward: I could see parking if it was retail. In a sense, this kind of a building really wouldn't be retail. Mr. Gray: I don't mind taking away parking if you don't mind. It will save me a lot of money as far as drainage and asphalt. They will need it if they hire two girls in the office, his car, his wife's car that is four cars. So you will have to allow for five cars. Mr. Ward: I think our biggest comment was that. The impact of parking on the North Road and Cox's; and maybe the Engineer can take an approach in showing us. I realize you have the potential of doing all this parking. Maybe as a start we could do something substantially less then what would be the minimum required. Planning Board Page 11 April 11, 1988 Mr. Gray: We could take every fourth car out and put shrubbery in it. Mr. Ward: It would seem to me for an industrial use you could do it the other way around. Mr. Gray: Well, you have to have space for industrial use. Workers are going to park there cars in front of the place and in the back is loading and unloading. Industrial building is almost 2,000 square feet allowing 8% parking out front for customers and one of the secretaries. It looks like a lot because its a large building. It is landscaped across the front, the building is low and it is done with early American brick. Mr. Lathem: t have a concern about large trucks unloading and getting in there and getting around. Tractor trailers. Mr. Gray: That has been calculated by engineers. No problem at all. They can get in there, load and unload. Mr. Latham: 65 feet trucks can get in there alright? Mr. Gray: 55, 65 feet trucks can get in there, no problem. Mr. Latham: The engineers are not driving them. Mr. Gray: All the loading and unloading is hidden behind the building. Mr. Orlowski: Is there any way to hide some of this parking in the back or the middle without putting it all out on CR 48? Mr. Gray: The only thing is if you park in the rear how are you going to get in front of the building? Unless by walking around it or cutting through one building. Mr. Orlowski: Well, since these uses will not be a retail type use. Mr. Gray: It is not a retail. You figure you have a 2,000 foot building you are going to have five cars out front. You are going to have one girl or two girls, a husband and wife, a salesmen stopping in about his jobs. Somebody else stops in. Mr. Ward: Mr. Gray take a look at this. What about taking this element out and taking the parking for that end and make a big island in the middle. Reduce some of this out here and leave some more landscaping. Mr. Gray: Do you mean pull this out of here? Mr. Ward: Yes, and this will give you a big area in here where you could take something like this. Mr. Gray: We did this, but this looks like a huge motel down here. This would be almost 400 hundred feet long. We broke it up to show from here. We are going to put up a flag pole here and a Planning Board Page 12 April 25, 1988 flag pole here. Then this is landscaping completely across here. These are trees. Mr. Ward: I know, but you are looking across 55 foot of pavement before you hit the building. Mr. Gray: No matter where, you are going to see the paving. ~he buildings are cut low. There is landscaping right in front of the Building too. I think I submitted a colored map showing all the landscaping. I would like you to see that, it really gives you a pict,~re of what it looks like. Ms. Scopaz: Is there any reason why there has to be 10 feet of sidewalk in front? Mr. Gray: Why it has to be? Mr. Ward: I.t is not 10 feet. Mr. Gray: I am sure it is not 10 feet. We could reduce it to four feet, but you are going to have people walking past each other. If somebody goes down here and wants to talk to this fellow, you have to have some means of walking. Ms. Scopaz: You actually could get more parking the back then what you have. Is there any possibility of, for instance, some of the entrances being on the inside rather than. In other words, some of these shops have enough frontage that they could have an entry. This here shows as a regular door, that could be the entry to the premises. Mr. Gray: I don't follow what you mean. That is the back door, the emergency door. By law you have to have an emergency door. Ms. Scopaz: Could that be your front door as well? Mr. Gray: You mean put the office in the back of the building and load in this end? You don't want to load here. Ms. Scopaz: Or just divide the space up inside differently then. Mr. Ward: What did you provide per unit, in terms of parking out front? Do you know roughly? In numbers. Mr. Gray: I think on these units it was five cars per unit. If you tell me to cut down twenty cars. I'll cut out twenty cars, I'll cut out here four cars, here four cars, here four cars and cut out ten cars here. Make this a nice big patch. I'll do it if you want to do it. I feel you are going to run into a traffic problem. These things, you are not going to see them. Its going to be landscaping in the front. The building is going to have attractive landscaping in the front. Mr. Ward: So you put in five space for parking plus what other parking. Planning Board Page 13 April 25, 1988 Mr. Gray: Parking will be in the rear. The front five is for the office help. Mr. Ward: It seems like an awful lot. Mr. Gray: You go down these small streets were they have these small units there is no parking there so they park in the street. Mr. Orlowski: How may units are there? Mr. Gray: 34 units. Mr. Ward: These are service back in here. Mr. Gray: The parking for these units are back in here. Mr. Latham: Let me just go back to what I asked before. A truck comes in, where does he come in? Mr. Gray: O.K. He can come in through here, he could go a~ound through here and he could unload here or he could stay in, here and back in here and load here. Come along here, back in ~ere, back in here, back in here, back here and then go out. Mr. Latham: Yes, a small truck. But the big trucks are going to have a problem. Mr. Gray: No, this has all been calculat~d~by an engineer,, Mr. Grimmis. You know Mr. Grimmis, John Grimmis. Mr. Latham: Does he ever drive a tractor trailer? Mr. Gray: No but they have a... Mr. Latham: They are big trailers. Mr. Gray: I know it is a job to drive a tractor trailer. Mr. Latham: They are 65 feet now. There is no length room for the trailers. And you get some big ones. Mr. Ward: You wouldn't be able to turn this way. Mr. Latham: Well, you got to turn this way and then back around this way. Mr. Gray: I asked him ~bout this corner and he says that he uses the chart. They have special charts. That is the front door here. They come into a class window, they talk through the girl there in the office. There maybe one girl or two girls in the office. This is a private office. There are partners that could be sitting in that. The bathroom and then it goes to the shop. The truck sits in here and the men are working. This is the emergency door and this the loading, were they come loading in and out. They pull the trucks in here at night time, one or two trucks or whatever. These fellows that work here have to park out back here. Planning Board Page 14 April 25, 1988 Ms. Scopaz: I think it might be useful if he could produce a floor plan with the total amount of square footage of the office space and the space for parking on the square footage of office space. Mr. Ward: I wonder what you have here, this is probably 10,12 foot by what. Mro Gray: That is thirty feet. that's ten, twenty, thirty feet lengthwise. Ten by fifteen. 450 square feet of office space. Mr. Ward: When you take out things like toilets and ..., so you are really down to, probably, 300 square feet. Two cars, but you are saying that you think that five is the right number? Mr. Gray: I feel five is the right number. If you tell me to take out thirty parking spaces, I'll take out thirty parking spaces. There going to be parking in the street. I go down to see people I can't get in the parking space. In my own building that I rent out. I can't get there so I have to park in the street. This is not retail, this is industrial use. This to get the electricians and the carpenters out of the houses and into these factories. This will do it. Mr. Latham: That is 170 cars if it is all rented. Mr. Gray: Yes. It is going to be all rented. Mr. Latham: That is a lot of cars. It is intense. It is a good idea, a great idea. Mr. Ward: When we reco~m~ended to the Town Board that this go to this zone, we reco~,ended that they upgraded the coverage here. But they did not do that. Mr. Gray: This is a really nice set up. It will get a lot of trucks off private property, off the side roads. Fellows with bulldozers can even pull in here. They can come in with there trucks and work on thief bulldozers. Get them out of site. I have fifteen of these rented already on a hand shake. They are dying to get in them. Mr. Latham: I believe it, its a good idea. It still seems like a beck of a lot of cars. ar. Gray: I rented a building on Hortons Lane to the North Fork Water Supply, Deer Park Water. He was working out of a garage, Illegally. He knew he was going to get caught. If he got caught he would have no place to move, so he moved ahead of time. The fellows that have talked to me about this are scared that they are going to get caught. They want to get ready and get moved a head of time. Ms. Scopaz: I am willing to sit do~w~ with who ever drew up the plans. I think you can, with a little less paving get the same amount of parking. Maybe we can reduce the parking a little bit and have more landscaping. This is going to make an impact on Planning Board Page 15 April 25, 1988 the environment. It is going to be the first large industrial park of its type in town. I think it is important that we set the tone for the future parks. There are parks in some other towns where it is all black top. I don't think that... Mr. Ward: You are going to come along an oasis here on the North Road and boom you are going to have pavement and a building. Mr. Gray: This is going to look pretty. This is not a paved parking field. Mr. Ward: But look at the impact verses nothing. Mr. Gray: If I came in and asked to build two units there would be no problem. And the next six months another two units, two units and another two. This is going to be done beautiful. The building is low and it is broken in. This cost more to do it then a straight line. Mr. Ward: There is some advantage in doing it this way but it may take a look at this and put the parking up against the building. It would be a little safer getting out of the car. Mr. Gray: I know what you mean. That is a good idea. Mr. Ward: If you eliminated some. Mr. Gray: Look, move these cars up here and eliminate all this parking down here. Make this all landscaPing here and move this up in here. Mr. Ward: And also, see if you can't, on the building lines, divide it so you can put a tree in or something. You know, eliminate a car here and there. Mr. Gray: It is a little difficult. You don't want a tree too close to a building. These are going to be big trees, you know. Mr. Ward: You don't have to be that close. By the time you came in with one of these, put the tree out here. You are twenty feet from the building. If the road way was here you could break it Mr. Gray: If you want we could reverse the parking. Say every fifth or eighth one we will give you an island. We will give you an island here, an island here, an island here, an island here, break it up like that. It will eliminate ten or fifteen cars. Mr. Lessard: That will cut your truck spacs down. Mr. Edwards: That's good, we don't want all that. Mr. Lessard: That is what I am saying, it will cut the trucks from running around the property~ Mr. Latham: Maybe there is less trucks then I am talking about. Planning Board Pagel6 April 25, 1988 Mr. Gray: They are going to be small trucks. That won't be very big trucks. Mr. Ward: And a spot like this to: If this is, in actuality, a traffic lane out here, you can play this game at the corner then and open this up a little bit. Mr. Gray: Yes, and the impact is not so great over here. Mr. Ward: It is a littler safer that way. Mr. Lessard: You are going to need 15 feet here. Mr. Ward: You are going to get 25. Mr. Lessard: Well, if you are going to get more than 15, fine. Mr. Ward: He right now has 45 across, which is good. Mr. Latham: How many parking spaces do you have on your plan now? Mr. Ward: I would say also if you closed, like we were talking about here, let's say you lost this one you, You could really come in and do something like that. Mr. Gray: You have 32 cars out of there already. I don't care as long as you approve it. It is O.K. by me. Mr. Ward: Why don't you instead of five per unit, work with three? Mr. Gray: O.K. I'll reduce it. I'll put grass right here. I think this is a nice idea, this tapering down like that. Eliminate this out of here completely. I know they are going to make me put a joint one in here. Which is great. It will go right through here so the cars can go right through. Mr. Ward: Then what you can do is a couple of these. Mr. Gray: This would make a nice island here and here. So that is 2,4,6,8 more that is 40 cars you got rid of. Mr. Ward: Your getting there. Ms. Scopaz: There is one other issue. That was the current elevation is 756 and they're talking about digging into retaining walls. I don't see why we need retaining walls. The property is very flat there. Mr. Gray: These are loading Docks. Ms. Scopaz: I know. Mr. Gray: With loading docks you have to go down to the ground so the truck is level. Mr. Ward: what about your impacts on the neighbors here. Planning Board Page 17 April 25, 1988 Mr'. Gray: This is all industrial now. On this side it is all Corizzini asphalt Plant. There is no problem. This is North Fork Iron Works. He is going to put an iron works. Arthur Junge you just gave him his approval over there. There is no impact. I'm proud of what I do. Mr. Ward: You should talk to this guy and see if you can do this. Mr. Gray: There is ne problem getting this O.K.'d. This is O.K. probably what we will do is: he has use of this driveway all the way up here. A joint driveway. The problem with the driveway there will be no fence there. We have put a fence there. I'd rather not put a fence there. Just make the asphalt go right across to his side too. If a truck goes in here he can turn right around and go back out again. Mr. grimmis is drawing this set of prints to. It is the same architect. We could have one over lap the other. Mr. Orlowski: Is everybody happ~ down there. Mr. Gray: If that is O.K. I will get a site plan like that up for you. You can look at that. Mr. Lessard: You should come down and file for that 239K right away to make sure we know were you are going. I have the papers in my office. Ms. Scopaz: I would like to see a landscape, buffer along here. Ten feet along the building property line. Mr. Gray: No way in the world can you put ao.. This is an asphalt plant here. All I would have there is beer cans laying all over there. Ms. Scopaz: Regardless of what goes in I think you have the room here. Mr. Gray: No, this will be a three foot fence. We can give you a three buffer with Ivy on the fence. Nobody is going to look at this fenCe except the workers from here and the workers from here. There is nobody going to take care of it except myself and there is going to be beer cans and garbage cans here. Look what you made me do with Founders Village, put that fence up there with slats in it. Go look how many beer cans are up there now. Ms. Scopaz: I didn't... Mr. Gray: Yes, you did. You asked for slats on it. O.K. I will draw the sketch like this and get it back to you for a another viewing. O.K.? Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Mr. Gray: Thank you for you time. Planning Board Page 18 April 25, 1988 Mr. Orlowski: O.K. I know you have nothing left on your agenda but on mine Gail Wickham asked to discuss Henr~ Lytle. About the C & R's. Ms. Wickham: Thank you, I appreciate you seeing me. We had asked the Board to schedule a hearing on the minor subdivision. I sent down Covenants and Restrictions and I received a call today or the other day that you wanted covenants in perpetuity. That is what I want to discuss with you. I don't know if you remember because it goes back a number of months. I came down here on a number of occasions to discuss that issue with you. You kept telling me, yes you wanted them in perpetuity. Then we subsequently discussed it with the Town Attorney, Mr. Tasker, and you did agree to language that he approved. I have that language here. I think the covenants I gave you the other day refer to. It did not have exactly the right language in it. He wanted language saying that there will be no further subdivision in without the approval of your Board or an successor Board and I have revised them and will give them to you. We have rehashed this issue at great length. On December 9th, you sent be a letter by which the sketch plan was approved and indicated that the covenants would be those submitted and approved by the Town Attorney at that time. If you could refresh your memor~b¥ going through the file. There were two conditions one was the covenants and the other was an elimination of a small parcel for which we have a deed. Mr. Orlowski: Do you have a problem in g~ving it in perpetuity? Do you plan any other subdivision of this property? Ms. Wickham: Well, the reason we have had a problem is because we are asking for a subdivision of nine acres into two lots. Each containing approximately four and a half acres and they are long narrow lots. There is no intent at this point to subdivide. Since I was before you last on, this many things have happened. Mr. Lytle became very ill and subsequently died. We have been to the Health DePartment, they have approved it. Now we are back here. Mrs. Lytle is living in the house on one of the parcels, parcel two. She needs to sell parcel one and that is her intent just as soon as this is approved and she wiT1 sell this in its entireties. What those people do with it I don't know. Her intent at this point is to keep her house with the 4.6 acres on lot two. She has no plans to subdivide, but she has a family and I just didn't feel that it was right given the size of the property and the size of the surrounding lots to restrict it in future perpetuity. To think about future planning in general. There is a subdivision just to the northeast of this which was recently divided up and those lots are narrower then these. They are about 65 thousand and 76 thousand square feet, respectively. So those are smaller then either of these properties would be if they were subdivided. I didn't think that it-was prudent that that restriction be applied now. It may be that those people may want to keep those lots like that. They are beautiful like that and they form a nice estate. Mr. Ward: Do the lots you mention run directly to the sound? Planning Board Page 19 April 25, 1988 Ms. Wickham: They do. They run from Sound View Avenue to the Sound. They are approximately 1400 feet long. They are very cumbersome. It is conceivable given the proper health department and all the other approvals that you would need that they could subdivide it. Mr. Mullen: Does the applicant desire to keep these two lots? They have no desire to give us the C & Rs in perpetuity. Ms. Wickham: She is going to sell one of the lots immediately and keep the other lot, for the time being. Unless her circumstances require some change. I'm not sure if I understand your question. Mr. Mullen: Does she desire to keep them as is or would she consider the C & Rs of perpetuity at this time. Ms. Wickham: No, once she agrees not to subdivide in perpetuity she would be foreclosed or her successors would be foreclosed. Mr. Mullen: That is what I want to find out. Is that her desire, not to give us the C & Rs of perpetuity. Ms. Wickham: That's right. I thought we had, well, we did get your approval to eliminate that condition. Agreed that if there would be a future subdivision, of course, they would have to come back to the Board. But not to foreclose that possibility now. Just as a precaution. Primarily becauseof the size of the property and the uncertainty of the what she is going to do with it or what the other guy is going to do with it. Mr. Ward: A good half of the property is substantially lower then what you would be allowed to build on. Ms. Wickham: I don't know about that. It is much lower. It is that dune type thing. That would have to be a consideration at that time. If and when it ever came up. That is why I mentioned that you would have to go to the Health Department and you would probably have to go to the DEC. You would have to go to the DEC. So there would be that consideration. Right know there are a couple of bungalows those are temporary. I believe the Board has considered this issue a number of times and did resolve to accept those covenants that Mr. Tasker had reviewed with us. So I asked that you do that tonight so we could schedule a public hearing. Mr. Orlowski: What is the pleasure? Mr. Ward: Are the C and Rs in there at that point? Mr. Orlowski: The C and Rs in here now that we have neither of the lots shall be further subdivided without the approval of the Planning Board or the zoning Board of Appeals of the Town of Southold. That is how it reads now. Ms. Wickham: The way Mr. Tasker wanted it rather then referring to the Zoning Board, is the Planning Board or any successor Planning Board Page 20 April 25, 1988 Board having jurisdiction over subdivisions in the Town of Southold. so that particular language, Benny, is wrong. It should be this. Mr. Orlowski: Since they are substandard right now in width, I think we could leave the Zoning Board in. Ms. Wickham: That would be fine, but Mr. Tasker did want that other language. I don't why there would be a successor Board, but he felt that that was the right way to word things. Mr. Ward: Our point would be is that if in the future it was subdivided, the ideal way to do this would be a cluster on the up land. On the upland side rather then the way it is being divided. So you making an awkward subdivision at this time by doing the split. If you really want the four lots, it is really not the way you would subdivide that property. Ms. Wickham: I think you could still cluster anyway, but I guess what we are trying to do is that we are trying to avoid going with four lots because that may never come up. Otherwise I would have to go in for four lots now. I thought, I know this has all been determined back in December of '86. Mr. Ward: But the thesis to this is was that this was only going to be two lots forever. If the thought is to further subdivide, I think they are precluding some of their options. Mrs. Lytle's grandson: There is absolutely no thought to further subdivide. Mr. Edwards: Does the applicant have any objection to using perpetuity? Ms. Wickham: Yes we do. Strenuous objection. Mr. Ward: Then there is always the possibility of further subdivision. Ms. Wickham: Of course. That is my point. There should be possibility if you approve that application. But then again that application would have to be made. Mrs. Lytle: Mr. Chairman, may I say a word or two? Mr. Orlowski: Yes, you may. Mrs. Lytle: Thank you. I have not interfered before. My husband has been dead for almost two years, prior to that, we were planning to sell. No differently then we want to sell now. I would like to keep the four acres on which my home is on. There happen to be two cottages on the front by the shore. They were built years ago when it was considered the thing to do. We have been here for 44 years and we have owned that property for 44 years. We now need income. Nobody is working, I need to use a walker, so I must have extra money. Therefore, we decided, before my husband died, to sell the other four acres. As one Planning Board Page 21 April 25, 1988 piece, just as ours is. Quite of few of the places along there are built that way. Shore to road, no cuts. And that is the permission I want. I am not interested in cottages or building or anything like that. I just want to sell it to someone else who will build a home. That income will keep me in the win. Maybe not cost the town money too. Mr. Orlowski: Do you mind the language of in perpetuity as far as leaving the lots how they are, never being further subdivided? Mrs. Lytle: If I die what difference does it make to me. Ms. Wickham: If I could answer that. Yes, as her attorney I would have to say she does have the objection to that. Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Ms. Wickham: Our point is that I don't think it is fair of the Board to impose that restriction now. Particularly since you have already acted on it. Mr. Orlowski: I don't think we did Gail. I think that the... Ms. Wickham: If I could read the letter to you, dated December 9, 1986. Mr. Orlowski: I have a copy of it right hear and I can read it to you if you want. It says... Mrs. Lytle: I would appreciate anything that will not hold it up. I just want to keep my home... Mr. Orlowski: Filing Covenants and Restrictions stating no further subdivision with the county Clerk that is all it says. But it is up to the Board on what you want to do. Ms. Wickham: These Covenants and Restrictions are previously submitted and approved by the Town Attorney. I have a letter to the Town Attorney, Mr. Tasker, Dear Bob. May I read it. Mrs. Lytle: Mr. Chairman may I ask what this path of different things have to do with what my husband and I were both asking for? Mr. Orlowski: We are just looking into the future and if it is just four lots we might want to do it different. It is in discussion with the Board right now. Mrs. Lytle: I don't want it as four lots. I'm not asking for four lots. Mr. Orlowski: Right. Ms. Wickham: I don't want to have to come in now for four lots because it doesn't seem right to have to divide a property into four lots if it may never be. On the other hand, I don't want you to tell her she could never divide an almost five acre Planning Board Page 22 April 25, 1988 parcel in two when a lot of the other properties around it have been divided that way. It's not right. My correspondence with Mr. Tasker relating to your Board was very specific as to exactly the language of that covenant. Mrs. Lytle: The place on our left is acres from water to road that we sold many years ago. We did not start breaking it up at all and we don't want to break it up now. Because it is much nicer that way. Plus you have the problem with high tide at times and water and things. Ms. Wickham: We already reached this issue, we should not have to re-decide it. Mr. Latham: I want, whatever we do, our town attorney present I want our town attorney to look at it. Ms. Wickham: I have no problem with that. Although the Board has already acted and decided this issue and lapse of time. Mr. Latham: I am not talking about in perpetuity, I'm talking about this language. Ms. Wickham: This current language? I'll be happy to refer it to the Town Attorney. Mrs. Lytle: Mr. Chairman, one last thing. My husband and I brought that property 44 years ago. Nothing.has been on there but trees that were planted there ... we have not damaged the road or any other natural thing that was there. To our left, there is a very nice house to which we sold to people. To the right is the piece of land we want to sell to somebody that will put a nice house on. Why do we have to go through all the details of possibilities and future? Mr. Orlowski: That is our job to look to the future. Mrs. Lytle: But the future it is set aside for one lot, four acres who is going to change it with the way you can arrange the laws. Would let me build another house on the piece of property? Mr. Orlowski: Do you have any problem with that? Ms. Wickham: I didn't hear what you said. Mr. Orlowski: Any further subdivision on either lot would be a cluster on the upland. Mrs. Lytle: I don't want it as two lots. Ms. Wickham: I understand that. We are not asking for that now Mrs. Lytle. Mr. Orlowski: No, we are not asking for that. Planning Board Page 23 April 25, 1988 Ms. Wickham: I do not know how you would do that conceptually. Just have open space down at the? I would like to discuss it with the family. Mr. Ward: That is our concern with the future, that any further subdivision will be on the upland. Ms. Wickham: I do want to say just for the record that that was not your approval earlier. But I will at least discuss it with the Town Attorney. Mr. Orlowski: How about setting this for a public hearing anyway and we will work out the rest of this. O.K. Mr. Edwards: So moved. Mr. Mullen: Second. Ms. Wickham: That would be excellent. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. I figure within the next two weeks and after that forty five days we all can come up with a solution. Ms. Wickham: Can you give me an idea of what the date of hearing would be on? Mr. Orlowski: May 9th. Being nothing further business on my agenda. Mr. Latham: I move we adjourn. Mr. Mullen: Second. Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor? Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards. Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. The meeting was adjourned at 8:40p.m. BENNETT ORf, OW~I, JR CH~kMAN / RespectfullY.~submit~ed, .i ¢$11 . ~6uthoid Board