HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-11/14/1988Town Hall. 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold. New York 11971
TELEPHONE
{516) 765-1938
PLANNiNG BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
NOVEMBER 14, 1988
The Southold Town Planning Board held a requ!ar meeting on
Monday, November 14, 1988 at 7:30 p.m. at ~he Southold Town
Hall, Main Road, Southold.
PRESENT WERE:
Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman
Member William Mullen
Member G. Ritchie Latham
Member Richard G. Ward
Member Kenneth Edwards
Town Planner Valerie Scopaz
Assistant Planner Melissa Spire
Secretary Jill Thorp
7:30 Joint Planning Board/Town Board public hearing on Norris
Estates/Carr/Wanat.
Present for this hearing were: Supervisor Frank J. Murphy,
Councilwoman Ruth Oliva, Councilwoman Jean Cochzan~ Councilwoman
Ellen Larsen, Councilman George Penny, Councilman Ray Edwards,
Town Attorney James' Schondebare, Town Clerk Judith Terry,
Environmental Consultant David Emilita, Diane Schultz.
Mr. Or!owski: Good Evening. I would like to call this meeting to
order. This is a little different tonight. You will see two
boards sitting in'front of you. That is the Town Board down
below and the Planning Board up here. This is a joint Planning
Board/Town Board pUblic hearing on the Draft Environmental
Impact Statement for khe Nomris Estates.and the Carr/Wanat~
Change of Zone. The Norris Estate Project is a condominium
pro~ect in Mattituck. The Carr/Wanat project is an alternatd to
the Norris Estates project. We dec~ded to hold this hearing for
comments on the Environmental ImPact Statemen~ together. We have
proof of publication in the Suffolk Times and also in the Long
Island Traveler/Watchman. Everything is in order for this
hearing. I will start out in asking for any comments.' Since
there is lot here tonight, we will start on my left. Is there
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 2
any comments from anybody over here. {to the left)?
SCTM ~i000-122-5-4,1000-112-1-16.
Ronnie Wacker: Is this on the first one? Norris Estates?
Mr. Orlowski: Yes.
Mrs. Wacker: My name is Ronnie Wacker and I am representing the
North Fork Environmental Council. I would like to say that I
feel that the Norris property has problems. Not only is it a
plain uninteresting parcel without trees and the physical
attraction, but the water is not much good. In fact it stinks.
It contains a great deal of iron and sulfur. While this does not
oppose a hazard to life, it does have a disagreeable odor.
Presuming that there will be enough people willing to put up
with the smell or agreeable to the use of filtration systems;
pumping of the water for additional residents would cause severe
water problems for those living in the ix~ediate vicinity,
especially down in the Camp Mineola area. Many of them already
suffer salt water intrusion, according to the man who dug the
test wells on the Norris property. Pumping water for twenty five
more houses would be brackish and foul smelling water for many
more of the residents already in the area. Mr, Carr has applied
for twenty four well permits from the County Health Department
for the Norris Property. And for ninety four units on the Wanat
property, where he hopes to use development rights from the
Norris area. We question how he can transfer development rights
he doesn't yet have. The Health Department may not grant
permission to go ahead with pumping which would adversely affect
so many of his neighbors. We contend that the Town, in interest
of the health of the citizens in the area should rezone this
nonconforming parcel to two acres. Which it has been designated
in the latest master plan, but since the Town has zoned the
Norris property hamlet density, this has raised Mr. Carr's hopes
of realizing a greater profit from the parcel then two acre
zoning would allow him. We would like to suggest a compromise,
that he be allowed to transfer the difference in the number of
lots allowed in the two acre zoning and allowed in the one acre
zoning. This may be about twelve lots. If he has twenty five
there, half of that is twelve, twelve and a half, thirtesn. Add
them to the total number of lots allowed on the Wanat property.
Another point we would like make is that, if Mr. Carr did
develop the Norris property in hamlet density, which by law
would allow him one hundred and thirty two units on twenty two
acres, he would have to construct a central water and sewage
treatment plant or bring in public water at tremendous expense.
Now, in permitting him to transfer the development rights that
he could use on the Norris property only if he spent a great
deal of money, the Town in our thinking is making a present to
Mr. Carr of the money he doesn't have to spend for water
treatment systems and thus permitting him to take those
development rights to another property. He doesn't have to spend
this, so he could go over and use those development rights fox
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 3
the other property. Which nobody would, has said no to, so far.
I wonder how much the Town is willing to give away. Perhaps, a
happy compromise would be two acres zoning on the Norris
property and add the twelve lots to the Wanat parcel.
Another reason we find the Environmental Impact Study
deficient, is its assessment of traffic. The project surveyors
metered the road, according to the witnesses in the area, right
in front of the property. They did not count the number of cars
that turned right immediately before the Norris property into
one of the largest marina's on the North Fork, Strong's Marina.
Traffic would be extremely heavy for anyone traveling down that
road to a new development.
On both counts, we feel that the impact statement could be
improved. The assessment of traffic and water.
Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments from this side?
Mr. Onufrak: Good Evening, Ladies and Gentlemen. I am Joseph
Onufrak. I am an attorney representing CANDO, The Committee
Against Norris Downzoning Organization. Which, you all know is a
community group made up of individuals and other community
groups, mostly neighborhood associations, which for almost
fifteen years has been the leading opponent for
condominiumization. For the record, I also happen to be a
resident of the community. I live near the..southwest portion of
the Norris Estates. I will be very brief. I have had
opportunities on behalf of CANDO to speak before this panel of
public officials at the Master Plan hearings and at other
meetings in the Town in the past, so I will be brief. The Town
has, for a very long time, had a problem with respect to the
Norris Estate site. There is a court decision that some thirteen
or fourteen years old, which would argue for the right of the
Town to rezone. Although that decision never indicated that the
condominiums were an appropriate use of the property, never the
less, it appears to the community group, CANDO, and to its
constituents, that the proposal that Mr. Carr has offered in his
Environmental Impact Statement for a yield transfer is an
interesting and creative compromise, that we think this Goes a
long way in solving the community problems and the Towns
problems. There is essentially three difficulties in
consideration of this site for a long time~ As Ronnie Wacker has
indicated, there is a traffic problem. There is a water problem.
There is essentially an Environmental problem. Generally a
quality of life problem. We think that the compromises that are
offered in Plan B, as it were in the Wanat and the Norris
proposal, meet those objections. This is a compromise in the
community point of view. We have long asked the Town to
reconsider the concerns of the community based on what has
happened in the neighboring co~m~Lunity for nearly thirteen years,
since the court discission. We think that a dramatically lesser
reduction of density will aid our water supply problems
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 4
c~nsiderably. Although they won't conclude our problems. We
think a dramatic reduction in housing in the area will go a long
way in dealing with the traffic problems, which we continue to
be plagued with. New Suffolk Avenue at Main Road is nightmare
right now. Substantially greater density would add to that
nightmare. We think the present proposal with plan B will go a
long way in solving that. The~Third point is a residential one.
That is a review of the neighborhood. A trip into the community,
will help you to realize that the community is a residential one
of single family homes. Although that is not an absolute reason
why condominiumization is inappropriate, nevertheless, the
proposal goes a long way to maintaining the quality of life and
the consistency of the community. My c~m]ents for the record are
based on the assumption that it is our understanding that the
only issue that is being entertained today is the ability to
transfer the density rights. If it is incorrect we would ask the
Board to give the co~m~unit¥ group, this and other community
groups, an opportunity to make a full presentation. We won't
bore you with that tonight, but we would like to make clear for
the record. I have a letter that I have addressed to the Town
Supervisor, the Planning Board Chairman and the member's of the
Council and the Planning Board that state that point of order
for the record. We would appreciate if the Chair would correct
us if that is not the understanding. That is, no entertainment
tonight will be made of the discussion of the rights, the merits
of condominiumization of the Norris Estate. It goes strictly to
the question of the Plan B and whether it is appropriate to
transfer rights to the Wanat Estates.
Mr. Orlowski: We are addressing the Impact Statement right now.
This is co~mtents on the Impact Statement, whether there is an
impact on the Environment. The Environmental Impact Statement,
if you have reviewed it, you can make comment on that right now.
Mr. Onufrak: I am afraid, if you wouldn't mind clarifying. I
have made explicit point of statement, that I am not sure you
are responsive to.
Mr. Orlowski: Tonight we are dealing with the impact statement.
O.K? Whether there exists an impact or not, So any comments
should be addressing the Environmental Impact Statement. Not the
project itself right now.
Mr. Onufrak: Alright, that is understood. I will leave my
comments as they are. Thank you very much. I have written, by
mail today, a copy of this letter to the membership of the
Planning Board and the Town Council.
Supervisor Murphy: Can you sign the letter please?
Mr. Onufrak: The mailed copies are signed.
Supervisor Murphy: I will give this to Judy Terry.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 5
Mr. Orlowski: Are there any other comments from this side?
Mr. Siyman: My name is Ed Siyman. I live on the South side of
the Norris Property. There is a line of four one family houses.
I am speaking for all those people tonight. As you know I've had
a lot to say in the past about this Norris problem. We probably
wouldn't be standing here tonight discussing it at all had we
been mhle to get a fourth vote at the time we brought it before
the Town Board. In reference of making it two acre zoning. Since
we were not able to do that we feel that the change from ninety
five condominiums coming down to twenty five condominiums if
that's what that ProPerty would be able support. We feel that it
is a step in the right direction to solve the problem for the
people living in that area. There is no doubt in our mind that
if ninety five condominiums where built on those twenty seven
acres that it would have to cause a problem for the people
living in that area with their wells. Only four hundred to five
hundred feet from the southwest corner of the Norris Property
there is a well that was put in there a few years ago. That well
will show more salt water today than it did three years ago when
it was put in. So, ou~ feeling was that if ninety five
condominiums went in there it definitely would have to pull the
salt water further from the bay than it has. We feel that at
least we have a fighting chance with our wells if the Town were
to support the twenty five houses or whatever it would hold on
the Norris property. Thank You.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments from this side? Hearing none
any co~mL~ents from the center section?
Mr. Hart: Mr. Chairman, Mr. Supervisor, Gentlemen and Ladies. I
am John Hart. I represent Mr. Carr. I am going to tell you that
I think we have an opportunity here, today, to do something that
would be in the best interest of the people of the Town of
Southold. I think it is an opportunity that very rarely comes to
a Town. Right now there are, under the zoning ordinances in the
Town of Southold, a hundred and seventy three units that can be
built on this property. I am talking about the property which is
the Norris property and the Wanat property. What we propose, is
to do something that is suggested by the Town and by the
Planners in the Town. That is to reach a compromise. A
compromise that would be in the best interest of the everybody
in the Town. It would be in the best interest of th~ people who
live near Camp Mineola Road and it Would be in the best interest
everyone within the Town of Southold. That is to work out
something that is unique. A new concept in the Town of Southold.
Something that I think that your very able planners are
conscious of and are supportive of. That is a new amalgam, so
that we would have a combined unit of the both the Wanat and the
Norris properties that would reduce from the one hundred and
seventy three units as of right, at the moment. So as of the
moment we have one hundred and thirty two units as of right. We
go back to the Court determination, which determines that there
are one hundred and thirty two units as of right on the Norris
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 6
property and the forty one units, as of right on the Wanat
property. We propose that we shall reduce those by sixty six
units. We suggest to you that this is a proposal that would give
to the people on the Camp Mineola Road property twenty five
units on twenty eight point two tenths units, approximately. And
would give to the one hundred and seven units of the one hundred
and seven acres on Wanat or one acre per unit. So that what we
would have in total would be sixty six units less thsn is
presently, legally allowable on those two units. We suggest to
you that it is a proposal that makes a lot of sense both legally
and environmentally. It is something can be looked at. We could
weigh those. I think the Suffolk Times said that they weigh six
pounds. I don't know if they are worth six pounds or ten pounds
or twenty pounds. There has been an enormous amount of time
spent. There has been an enormous amount of time spent by the
Developer, by your planners, and by everyone concerned with
this. I would suggest to you that it is time to go ahead with
it. And to make the change of zone final, to go forward and to
put an end to something that has gone on for, at the moment,
almost twenty years. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments form the center section?
Mrs. Simicich: Good Evening. My name is Katherine Simicich. I
reside on.
Supervisor Murphy: Cathy can you turn that down a little? Thank
you.
Mrs. Simicich: My husband and I reside on Bergen Avenue in
Mattituck. We own forty five acres right now in vineyards. We
were the original plaintiffs on this Norris business came up on
Camp Mineola Road. We have moved to Bergen Avenue right now. We
see this compromise coming our way. OUr area is slated for a
large development projected of three hundred homes or more in
Aldrich Lane, Sound Avenue, Bergen Avenue, Cox Neck Road.
Samples of the development: Thornton Smith project, Farmveu,
Long Meadow Estates to name a few. All these developments are to
be built on two acres or more. The Carr/Wanat project on Bergen
Avenue proposesto build one hundred seven homes on one hundred
seven acres. This project will build homes on less than an acre,
which is three quarters of an acre. We oppose the down zoning of
this parcel. The Environment Impact is not conducive to the area
where two acre zoning restrictions exist. Our concern is if
Carr/Wanat is allowed to proceed with this development, future
developments on large tracts of land in that area will demand
the same considerations. We are not opposed to the present
zoning regulations in our area of two acres. I have a few names
on these letters that were signed I would like to present them
to the Town Planning Board and we will come up with a few more.
Thank you.
Mr. OrlOwski: O.K. Any other comments from the center section?
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 7
Mr. Brady: Good Evening Ladies and Gentlemen of both Boards. My
name is Warren Brady and I live on Sound to the west of this
proposed development. I own five acres and also have a thirty
five hundred foot by twenty five foot road going to Bergen
Avenue, so Bergen Avenue has been my original address. In all
the testing they have done for water in their area along Bergen
Avenue, they have not gotten satisfactory water. I feel that if
you set a precedent by allowing this downzoning on the Wanat
property the other three to five acres in the area will insist
on the same thing. I don't think the Town of Southold is set up
to handle the additional services required. To handle all these
people, their garbage and the water problems. I feel the Board
should give this serious consideration before allowing this down
zoning. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other co~ents for the center section?
Mr. Hart: If I may answer Mr. Brady, of whom I've known a long
time. In sofaras Mr. Brady's concerns are important, and they
are very important, I woUld tell you that it is the obligation
of the developer to provide you, Warren, with any kind of water
that you are entitled to. So that there will be denigration of
any rights that you have. There is no question that there will
be sufficient water and there will be, from whatever source,
because they, Suffolk County Water Authority, may require us to
build a deep well and provide you with water. So that there will
be no denigration of your rights whatsoever. I am certain
working with the Town we will be able to provide whatever kinds
of insurances you need.
Mr, Brady: Thank you, Jack. However, I am not really concerned
with water. I am concerned with the entire co~m~unity and
burdening of the community with the services required with the
increase of the population. That is my concern.
Mr. Orlowski: Alright, this comments for the Board not a
question and answer session.
Mr. Wood: I am John Wood. I live on Old Jule Lane. That is west
of the Norris property. Between Norris and James Creek. I just
heard the lawyer for Mr. Carr say, that if the development
affects my water, will he be obligated to supply me with fresh
water. Because right now I dO have fresh water. People in my
neighborhood are slowly going salt. If Mr, Carr builds up
property and I think the regular zoning in the Town is two
acres. I think you are putting twenty five on approximately
twenty five acres. Will he be obligated to supply me with water
if my water goes bad?
Mr. Ortowski: That is question that this Board can't answer and
I don't believe so.
Mr. Wood: I just heard Mr. Carr say that he would supply this
other gentlemen with water? Would he be obligated to supply me
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 8
with water. Another dilemma I have, maybe a simile could explain
it. I wear a size eight shoes. You give me a pair of skoes that
are size five on my left foot. When I complain about it you~say,
take it off your left foot and but it on your right foot and now
you feel better. It seems that we are transferring a problem in
one neighborhood right to the other neighborhood.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments from the center section?
Mr. Zuldessy: My name is William Zuldessy. I live on Bergen
Avenue. I am hearing one hundred and twenty seven condos and
hundreds of acres. I only own a quarter acre with another
quarter acre next to me. It took almost twenty seven years to
realize the dream of a lifetime to get out here. I understand
that you can't stop progress. In relation to what this other
gentlemen was saying about shoes. I am six two and half, I go
into a shoe store. I try on size eleven. But twelves feel so
good, I buy size thirteen, which is my size. What I am trying to
say, is time marches on and things will happen. But little guys
like me and even Mr. Simicich will be drowned in. ~nen I came
here two years ago and really built a dream of a lifetime I ran
into terrible water problems. I reiterate the same question this
other gentlemen said. If I run into problems will the big guys
take care of my water?
Mr. Orlowski: Any other co~m,ents from the center section?
Hearing none, any comments from anyone on my right?
Mr. Ansen: Good Evening. My name is Dean Ansen I am a
Environmental Consultant for CANDO. I briefly reviewed the
EnvirOnmental report and I have several cOmments. I am going to
follow up with written co~Lm~ents later, but my~verbal comments
are addressing two issues that have already been talked about
tonight. Traffic and water supply. The traffic, there are two
issues that I have with the Environmental Impact Statement. One
is that under NEPA, National Environmental Policy Act, when you
develop your base line in traffic you add in all your projects
that are ahead of your project, then you add the existing
condition to that. That is the base line in which you add the
traffic of this project. That was not done. There are two
projects that are ahead of this project. One is the Appel
Property and the other is the Kreh propertY. Both of those are
housing developments with a total of thirteen units. Those
should be added to existing traffic and then Mr~ Carr's added on
top of that. Secondly, a number residents told me that during
the traffic counting, when the meters were on the road, the
hoses were not intact. That is they were not stretch across the
road. So the counts were obviously not accurate. Other traffic
engineers, when they take counts, will check their meters on at
least a daily bases. My understanding is, for several days
traffic meters were not counting cars. When the traffic
projections were made, the existing Department of Transportation
counts were used. These counts have been known to be in error up
to twenty percent.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 9
With regard to the water supply, I think what we are seeing
here is, and I will clock this when I get the rest of the data,
is that as the pumpage rate is increased by the current
residents, the salt water is intruding further and further
inland. What we do is we put the pump station for Mr. Carr's
property up in the northeast corner. I think we are going to see
two things. One is, I think we are going to see further salt
water intrusion. And secondly, I think we are going to see an
effect on Lake Marratooka. I think that Will have a greater
impact further north. These are my brief comments. I will follow
up with more detail of written comments within the regulated
comment period. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other co~m~Lents from this side?
Fir. Cuddy: My name is Charles Cuddy. I am appear for myself at
this point. I live nearby the Norris Property. I have a question
for the Board, in fact I have two questions. The first one is,
when does the public comments end? That is when does the public
conu~ent period finished. Is there a day certain that that is on?
Mr. Orlowski: It ends November the nineteenth, but we have a
request from the New York State Coastal Management for a
extension of time so that they can answer. This Board will
probably extend it when we close this hearing.
Mr. Cuddy: My second question is partly in form of a statement.
I think it is laudable, if my Understanding.~is correct and if it
is not, my understanding is, and I think that Mr. Hart is
suggesting this, that what is being done tonight is that these
two Boards are considering the question of the transfer of
development rights and the effect that the Environmental Impact
Statement has upon that transfer. Not necessarily the entire
merits, the condominium verses non-condominium. It is very
important that there be an distinction that is made. The
transfer ~f development rights, I think base upon what lawyers
would call prima facie case, that is their Environmental Impact
Statement convinces you that it is sufficient to go ahead and
transfer these development rights because the water at that site
is adequate. There are a number of people here, myself and
others, that might take issue with that finding. If were made
after full hearing, after a debate and so on. That is not what
we are doing here tonight. At least, that is my understanding we
are not doing that tonight. What I believe that is being done is
that you are being asked to look at their statement and to
decide, if on its face, if their statement is sufficient to
cause that transfer. That is an important distinction. If that
can be done, that is fine. If not, and if that is not what is
really happening, you are saying this is the condominium
project. This the transfer project. This is the whole thing
rapped into ~one. I would request that there be additional time.
Because there are a lot of people who have not understood that,
including myself. I realize from your statement before, that Mr.
Onufrak had asked you, what is being done. Maybe that is not
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 10
clear. If that is not so, a number of people will, I am sure,
offer opposition very different then what has been offered here
tonight. I think that Mr. Hart is probably correct, that it is
time to end fourteen years. I was there in December 1974, as
other people were. Many of us would like to bring this to a
conclusion. I am very hopeful that the point I am making is
clear. That is, that we are just talking about the transfer of
those development rights.
Mr. Orlowski: The transfer is an alternate and addressed in the
Impact Statement. From the Norris Impact Statement, which this
Board is addressing. On the Norris project. The Town Board is
here addressing the alternate, which is transferring the rights.
Relieving one area and putting it into another area. So that is
why we are here together. It appears, that I think the Board
vote to extend it for another thirty (30) days, as requested by
Coastal Management.
Mr. Cudd¥: If we could during that time, get further
classification. Because, again it is important for those who
have taken position for fourteen years. Opposed to the project.
To know whether or not, in fact, we are talking about the
marriage of the condominiums at that site or whether we are
talking about the question, which is a refined question, of
whether or not the water at this point is satisfactory based
upon their reports. And if we can do that, that is fine. If you
can get back to me and let me know. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K.
Mr. Sigman: Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask that question in a
different way. Because I don~t understand sometimes when lawyers
talk what the answers are. I want to ask you a simple question.
If you were to turn down the switch, would you be making a
decision at the same time that says that Carr has the right to
build the condominium on the Norris property. Or would get
another public hearing if you turned it down? Will we get
another public, where we can talk in reference to the
condominium project?
Mr. Schondebare: This is the SEQRA hearing on the whole total
package condominiums and the alternate site of Wanat property.
This is the SEQRA hearing on the Condominiums. As a proposed
alternate plan, is the Carr/Wanat property. This is it. Now the
Board finishes tonight. Ends co~m~tent period. That is just the
end of the SEQRA process. You would still have with regards to
the change of zone a further hearing. We are just doing SEQRA
now. The SEQRA process, on what we are having hear tonight is on
the condos. It is on the water. It is the condos as an alternate
plan. It is also Carr/Wanat. It is both.
Mr. Sigman: Let me ask you, even simpler if I can. If you were
to turn down the switch and we said nothing tonight about the
situation of the water on the Norris property. Would that mean
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page i1
you are accepting the thought that we are in favor of ninety
five condominiums on the Norris Property?
Mr. Schondebare: I don't know how I can answer that one.
Mr. Sigman: I can't ask it any simpler.
Mr. Schondebare: I think you made your point clear, here
tonight. That you are in favor of alternate, that you call plan
B not plan A. But we are doing the SEQRA on plan A and the
alternate site B.
Mr. Sigman: Look, everyone of you people up there know that when
you went around to find out about making your master plan for
the entire area you know that the people that did the
investigating for you said that that area at the Norris property
should be two acre zoning. There must be a damn good reason that
they said it should be two acre zoning. Because the water
wouldn't support ninety five condominiums. I said before tonight
that I felt that coming along with a proposal of one acre lots
over there would at least give us a fighting chance as far as
our wells are concerned. I'll tell you right now, ninety five
Condominiums on that same twenty seven acres would never be able
to have anything but trouble for our wells. If you have salt
water coming in now with nothing being done with that property,
not even being watered for farm land or anything. Where no water
is being taken out of there and if houses are still getting salt
water intrusion. Once you start to pull lo, ninety five
condominiums at that point you got to s~ck more salt water in.
We are saying, I don't want to say we, I am saying for the
people that I was talking for, that we would be willing to
accept one acre zoning or one acre lots because of, at least, we
feel maybe the salt water wouldn't come in in that fashion. But
we know damn well with ninety five condominiums, with two and
three bedrooms, the salt water has to come into that area. So I
am saying that tonight because of the answer that you gave me.
Since you are saying that we could wake up and find bulldozers
working in the back on ninety five condominiums. If you turn
down the switch. We don't want to see any bulldozers.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. I am still on this side here (the right). Are
there any other comments from this side? Hearing none, are there
any other comments?
Mrs. Wacker: I just wanted to not exactly answer Ed Sigman. But
it is my understanding that, according to the Environmental
Impact Statement, that if the condominiums were to go in that
there would have to be a central water system and sewage system.
A public water system. I think that that is right. Isn't it?
Mr. Orlowski: Yes, it is. No further comments from the audience.
Any comments from the members of the Town Board?
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 12
Mr. Brady: I would like to make another remark, if I may. One of
the things that I have notheard discussed is that presently
when you have vacant land every time it rains we are recharging
the aquifer under that land. When you cover that land with
houses and paved roads you reduce the amount of water that gets
back into aquifer. So that magnifies this problem with water and
salt water intrusion. We have not have serious droughts in
recent years, but fifteen, twenty years ago the lake started to
dry up in the area. We had a really serious drought. Now if that
happens the Water Authority has to get the water from some were.
They can't pull it out of the skies. I don't think we are going
to have any desalinization plants set up. My concern is that we
just can't handle real dense residential construction or any
type of construction that is going to be density area due to our
water situation. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other coimuents.
Mr. Onufrak: I would like both Council's indulgement for just a
moment. Again I am Joseph Onufrak. I am attorney for a very
large community organization that represents in the vicinity of
three hundred people. One of the major reasons that the master
plan public hearing was so prolific with people, Ladies and
Gentlemen, is because CANDO got them there. Before we go on I
would like to speak to Mr. Hart, to who I made three public
requests for a conversation. I would like a stipulation from Mr.
Hart and Mr. Carr. Since the tone of the conversation that is
involved tonight is inconsistent with dis~uMsions between the
parties and Town officials. That in the event that the Board is
not prepared to go forward with the transfer plan B. Which is
what was proposed by the Town Board officials to us is the scope
of this meeting. Then Mr. Hart and Mr. Carr would stipulate to
another public hearing with respect to condominiumization of the
Norris Estates. If that is not the case then I will ask for
adjournment to bring in witnesses appropriate to the
transaction, so that both Boards can be fully informed. We have
been through this process now for a considerable period of time
and there is little doubt that the reason asked by half a dozen
people tonight is because, flatly and without question, the
scope of the discussions today, even with respect to the minutes
that have been handed out, go to the appropriateness of the
alternate plan B. A review of the Environmental I~,pact Statement
calls for Mr. Hart and Mr. Carr to advise that B will be the
discussion of issue, not A.
Mr. Hart: There is no question, Mr. Onufrak, that what we are
talking about is the alternative plan.
Mr. Onufrak: Do you stipulate for the record, that in the
event...
Mr. Hart: Yes. No question on it.
Mr. Onufrak: Could have that writing please.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 13
Mr. Hart: Yes, question about that.
Mr. Onufrak: Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Is there anybody else? Comments from the Town
Board?
Supervisor Murphy: Ruth?
Mrs. Oliva: I just have a couple of questions that I really
would like to have answered. On the Norris property I commend
the idea of the transfer of development rights. But I wondered
even on the Norris property with one acre zoning. You do not
have any test results as far as the quality of the water. I
would really like to see more of a study done just to see if it
could support one acre zoning and not affect the wells
surrounding that area. Are we going to be drawing salt water in
all over the place down there? Because it is just a insulated
peninsula down there and other People have problems with water.
I am wondering if it could support the one acre zoning on that.
As far as the Carr/Wanat property is concerned. I notice that
the proposed wells, again there is no criteria in here as far as
the quality of water on the Carr/Wanat property, which I would
like to see. I also notice that the three wells proposed are
really in between the ponds and the two wetlands. I wonder what
effect that would have on both the wetlands and the pond. And
what the zone of influence would be surrounding that whole area.
I do have questions about releasing brine.~into the Long Island
Sound, even though it is a minute quantity, per se will be
diluted. But then again we could have other projects come along
wanting to do the same thing. And again the Town does not have a
basic water system that we can say, from the middle of the
Island we can pump out to you. Do we want all these tiny little
water systems with nobody knowing who is going to operate and
manage if they are drawn to exact specification. I have
questions about that. I also have a question as to your zone
change is for multiple. That and the end result can lead to
condominiums on half acre zoning with public water system. Is
this going to be single and separate lots or condominiums? If it
perceives to be condominiums. I would like to see a cost
analysis as to the assessed valuation of between single lots and
condominiums. Condominiums are assessed at a lower value then
single family homes. That Will be a detriment to our own tax
rolls.
Supervisor Murphy: George, any comment?
Mr. Penny: No.
Supervisor Murphy: Jean?
Mrs. Cochran: No.
Supervisor Murphy: Ellen?
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 14
Mrs. Larsen: The only conmLent that I would like to make is that,
once again, when the public has the opportunity to speak on
densities, high density areas, that traffic and water supply are
raised again and again from the public in the neighboring areas.
In regard to major subdivisions. Of course, the public is
concerned with the lack of open space, the loss of scenic areas
of the Town and the increase in suburbanization of the Town as
consequence of this increased development. These are the
considerations from the public that I would like addressed.
Supervisor Murphy: Raymond?
Mr. Edwardm: Nothing Francis, thank you.
Supervisor Murphy: Ben, it's all yours.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Emilita do you have any co~m~,ents?
Mr. Emilita: No.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Any questions from the Board? Mr. Mullen?
Mr. Mullen: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Latham?
Mr. Latham: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Ward?
Mr. Ward: Just one comment. Is the fact that the Carr/Wanat
property if actually is the "M" zone with the restrictions on it
per density. The "M" zone does give the Town a greater
flexibility of clustering and doing less impact upon the overall
property then going with a one acre or two acre zone. The
overall impact in the surrounding coau~Lunity could be
substantially reduced by a cluster subdivision.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Edwards?
Mr. Kenneth Edwards: No.
Mr. Orlowski: Hearing no further co~m~ents from the Board. Would
you consent to extending the c~m,ient period an additional thirty
days? I'll ask the applicant. Mr. Carr?
Mr. Carr: May I say a word?
Mr. Orlowski: Yes.
Mr. Carr: My name is Dick Carr. I am the applicant. This has
been going on for the last three or four years and I realize the
pressure on all the different groups. As a group and also the
individuals that try to reach a compromise that fits everybody's
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 15
goal. I am afraid I can not do all of those things. I am trying
to achieve something that is sensible, is practical, is
financial feasible, meets the criteria of as many people as I
can satisfy. Obviously, even from tonight's discussion we may be
getting close but we are still not there. Every time the Town
Board or the Planning has asked me to do something on a project
I have developed in the Town of Southold, I've complied with. I
have accepted every request, I have accepted every suggestion we
have put into our plan. You cough, we get pneumonia in terms of
the processing and the amoun~ of money involved. I adopted this
solution because I thought it was a better solution. It would be
a quicker solution. It would be better for everyone. Once again
I will accept a request for thirty day extension for more
comments. I accept Mr. Onufrack's request that public c~ent
period is available, in fact, we are going to go ahead with the
condominium program on Norris. But I also like to suggest that
we developers also have some rights, It is our money. I bought
these properties subject to what was legally permitted to be
done. I realize everyone wants it to be done the way I want it
to be done or what's on the books to be done. There is going to
be a point, I think, that the Town of Southold has to accept
that we can't keep accommodating inanimately. There is going to
be groups of people, individuals, that do not like what we are
purposing to dO. The development is here. The wave is here.
Moratoriums, postponements, delays are really not the answers.
Guys like me have to be accommodated. We really want to
accommodate you and of course the people you represent. So again
I will accept your request. I will accept Mr. Onufrak's request
for another public hearing if in fact we can not come to an
agreement on the alternative plan. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. As you all understand, you all have an
additional thirty days, or will have,-when the Board makes a
motion to make co~m~ent to either Board on the Environmental
Impact. That should extend it to the nineteenth of December.
will entertain that motion to the Board.
Mr. Mullen: So moved.
Mr. Ward: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded to extend it an
additional thirty days from the nineteenth. 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 will declare this hearing
closed and thank you for coming down.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 16
Mr. Orlowski: Next Order of business is a public hearing on
Cliffside/Tidemark- This is the public hearing on the
Supplement to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. SCTM
~1000-45-1-1. We have proof of publication in the Suffolk Times
and also in the Long Island Traveler/Watchman. Everything is in
order for this public hearing. I will ask if there are any
comments to the Supplement tothe Draft Environmental Impact
Statement. Again I will start to my left~
Mrs. Wacker: Representing once again the North Fork
Environmental Council. We feel that that the traffic study as
given by the applicant is not quite accurate. When we were
talking with the Department of Transportation they had different
figures for that area, with just about fifty percent higher. I
think that the problem of traffic at that site, right across
from the San Simion Nursing Home is something to be concerned
about.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Anyone else on my left? Moving to the center,
any conm~ents from anyone in the center? Any comments from anyone
on my right?
Mr. Graseck: Hello, my name is Steven Graseck. I currently
reside at 309 North Road, just a couple of hundred yards east of
the proposed project. Whether the car population going through
there is accurate or not, according to the study, I am not
really sure. But living there and drivin~ past it every day of
my life now, I have seen accidents. There has been some serious
accidents at the corner of Chapel Lane and North Road. There
have been many, many deer accidents there from the deer
population going through the ravine that goes through the
proposed project. I personally think it is an extremely
dangerous intersection and to have a fifty car parking lot with
those cars that go through there and coming out at the
intersection there would be extremely dangerous to anybody
traveling in that area. For instance the San Simion Nursing Home
across the Street finally put in some No Parking signs on both
sides of the Street to facilitate some kind of order with the
parking azea there. What is to prevent people from the motels
quoting the same type of problem there? Some people have been
seriously hurt there and I don't think it should be done again
that way. Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments from anyone on my right?
Hearing none, are there any other comments? Mr. Emilita, do you
have any other co~mL~ents?
Mr. Emilita: No comments.
Mr. Orlowski: Any questions from the Board? Mr. Mullen, Mr.
Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards?
Comments from the Board: None.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 17
Mr. Orlowski: No further comments I will declare this hearing
closed. Thank you for coming.
Mr. Orlowski: Next order of business is Fazmveau Associates-
public hearing on the question of a determination on the
preliminary maps. This major subdivision is on 111.672 acres
located at Mattituck. SCTM %1000-121-3-2. We have proof of
publication in the Suffolk Times and also in the Long Island
Traveler/Watchman. At this time everything is in order for a
preliminary hearing. I will ask if there are any comments? Is
there anyone in favor of this project.
Mr. Cron: If it pleases the Board. I represent the applicant,
Farmveu Associates. My name is Richard J. Cron. I think if the
Board looks at the record in this case, you will find that this
subdivision has been pending before the Board for a great deal
of time. In excess of two years. We have met in the past with
the Board itself and we have met on numerous occasions with
Valerie Scopaz, the Town Planner, I believe what has now
resulted as a result of those meetings is mostly recommendations
that have been made by the Board or by the Planner which we have
fully complied with. I think the subdivision as it is now layed
out meets all the requirements of the zoning ordinance. It is a
clustered subdivision. We have complied with the Board's request
to set up a buffer zone on Sound Avenue, all of which we
believed to have great merit. We think the map as it now lays
out deserves the preliminary approval and~,~e request that of the
Board.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Anyone else in favor of this subdivision?
Anyone opposed to this subdivision? Hearing none, any co~maents
from the Board? Mr. Mullen, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards?
Comments of the Board: None. Ms. Scopaz?
Ms. Scopaz: No.
Mr. Orlowski: No further comments, I will declare this hearing
closed and thank you for coming.
Mr. Orlowski: Next order of business is Long Meadow Estates-
public hearing on the question of a determination on the
preliminary map. This major subdivision is on 36.9636 acres
located at Mattituck. SCTM ~1000-113-7-19.2. We have proof of
publication in the Long Island Traveler/Watchman and in the
Suffolk Times. At this time everything is in order for a
preliminary hearing. I will ask if there is anyone in favor of
this subdivision?
Mr. Cardinale: Good Evening. Phil Cardinale, as you know for the
applicant. We are hear to answer any questions that might arise.
Obviously we urge your approval of this subdivision, it has been
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 18
around for some time and I think it is worthy of approval on
preliminary.
Mr. Orlowski: Any other endorsements of this subdivision?
Hearing none, any objections to this subdivision?
Woman from NFEC: I wanted to ask one. Ail those are all along
the line, they just keep going don~t they? If they are all
approved we are going to have solid house's there.
Mr. Orlowski: That is right. Any other objections to this
subdivision? Hearing none, any co~m~ents from the Board? Mr.
Mullen, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards?
Comments of the Board: None.
Mr. Orlowski: Ms. Scopaz?
Ms. Scopaz: No.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Being no further questions, I will declare
this hearing closed and thank you for coming.
Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Hiawatha's Path- First the Board to
make a determination under the State Environmental Quality
Review Act. This is a two lot subdivision being done by the Town
for the Affordable Housing project. We ha~e been advised that we
can do an uncoordinated review. We would have to do that with a
conditional negative dec. subject to Health Department approval
which they don't have yet. That would cover the grounds and take
care of the°..
Mr. Ward: I recommend that we take lead agency and then...
Mr. Orlowski: We would do it as a uncoordinated review.
Mr. Ward: Yes.
Mr. Orlowski: With a conditional negative dec. subject to Health
Department approval?
Mr. Ward: So moved.
Mr. Mullen: So moved.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. ~y questions on the
motion? All those in ~avor?
Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mutlen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered. Next we will go onto a public
hearing on the question of a determination on the final maps for
this affordable housing subdivision on Town owned property on
Planning Board November 14,1988 Page 19
Himwatha's Path. This minor subdivision is on 1.9769 acres
located at Southold. SCTM ~1000-78-3-51. I will ask if there are
any objections to this subdiviSion? Hearing none, are there any
endorsements of this subdivision? Hearing none, are there any
coLm,ents from the Board? Mr. Multen?
Woman from NFEC: Excuse me Mr. Chairman. Is that two acre zoning?
Mr. Orlowski: One acre~ It is affordable housing.
Mr. Mullen: I suggest we move along on it. It is a affordable
housing project and we should do everything we can to expedite
it.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr~ Latham?
Mr. Latham: I agree with Bill's comment.
Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards?
Mr. Ward: No comment.
Mr. Edwards: I think we should move along with it.
Mr. Orlowski: Ms. Scopaz do you have any comments?
Ms. Scopaz: No.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Being no further co~Lm~ents I will declare this
hearing closed.
Mr. Orlowski: Walsh Park- Board to keep this public hearing
open from October 14, 1988 pending receipt of revised
preliminary maps. This affordmble housing project is located on
Fishers Island. SCTM ~1000-6-2-3.1.
Mr. Edwards: 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, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Ortowski: Board to set Monday, December 5, i988 at 7:30 p.m.
at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold as the time and
place for the next regular Planning Board meeting.
Mr. Mullen: So moved.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 20
Mr. Edwards: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Vote of the Board; Ayes: Ortowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the regular meeting of March 21,
1988.
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, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting of April 11, 1988.
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: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Orlowski: Board to approve the minutes of the regular
meeting of April 25, 1988.
Mr. Edwards: 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, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 21
Mr. Orlowski: On to subdivisions Final: Peter Blank- Board to
set Monday, December 5, 1988, at 7:30 p.m. for a public hearing
on the question of a determination on the final maps dated as
amended October 14, 1988. This minor subdivision is on 160,000.
Sg.ft. located at Orient. SCTM ~1000-27-4-p/o 10.1.
Mr. Edwards: So moved.
Mr. Ward: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Ward, Edwards.
abstain: Latham.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ~rdered.
Mr. Orlowski: Next we have CofamRealty Company- Board to
review the final maps for this minor subdivision on 4.178 acres
located at Mattituck. SCTM 91000-122-7-3. We still have not
received comments from the Suffolk County Planning Commission.
This is a two lot subdivision. What is the pleasure of the
Board. Do we want to extend the forty five day period with
consent from the applicant? If he would like to.
Mr. Cuddy: Would the Board consider making it subject to the
approval of the report from the Suffolk County Planning
Commission? This is simply a two lot division in an area that
will allow much more that two lots.
Mr. Orlowski: What is the pleasure of the Board? It would have
to be subject to.
Mr. Latham: I would think that we could approve it subject to,
unless you don't want to do that.
Mr. Orlowski: That is fine. It is a small two lot subdivision. I
don't see any problem with it.
Mr. Edwards: I move it subject to the Suffolk County Planning
Commission report.
Mr. Ward: 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.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 22
Mr. Orlowski: We have North Grove Estates- Board to make a
determination on the preliminary maps for this major subdivision
on 46.5712 acres located at Cutchogue. SCTM ~1000-95-4-4.1. The
maps came in today but no one has looked at them.
Mr. Cuddy: I apologize in delaying the maps. We obviously had a
problem with the surveyor. He pasted away.
Mr. Orlowski: Are you agreeable to extend that till the Board
gets to review the maps?
Mr. Cuddy: Yes. I understand.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. We will extended for another forty five days.
Mr. Cuddy: Could you make it shorter?
Mr. Edwards: It should be on for the next meeting.
Mr. Orlowski: We will extend it until the next meeting. I will
entertain that motion.
Mr. Edwards: So moved.
Mr. Ward: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded to extend it with the
applicants permission as noted in the minutes~ Any questions on
the motion? All those in favor?
Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Orlowski: Franklinville Homes- Board to make a
determination under the State Environmental Quality Review Act.
This major subdivision is on 35.8 acres located at Laurel.
SCTM $1000-125-2-2.2.
Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I think we could go with a negative dec.
subject to them providing a site specific sediment and erosion
control plan. Our only concern is some of the slopes.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K.
Mr. Mullen: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 23
Mr. Orlowski: Cove Beach Estates- Board to take a thirty day
extension for reviewing the supplement information to ~he Draft
Environmental Impact Statement from November 25 to December 25,
1988. This parcel is located at East Marion.
SCTM ~000-22-3-15.1 & 18.~. We will do it before December 25.
Most l$kely December 19th. We plan on meeting then. I entertain
a moti6n to take that extension.
Mr. Latham: I'll move it.
Mr. Ward: 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.
Mr. Orlowski: We also have Angel Shores- Board to take a
thirty day extension for reviewing the Revised Draft
Environmental Impact Statement from December 2, 1988 to January
2, 1989. SCTM ~1~00-88-1-6~4,5.
Mr. Mullen: So moved.
Mr. Ward: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Vote of the Board; Ayes: O~lowski, Multen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ~rdered.
******************************
Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Long Pond Estates~$ec. I- Board to
review the release of the ~ond Estimate for this major
s~bdivision located at Southold. SCTM ~1000-56-1-2. We have an
agreement on file for a on~ year review of the trees. If they
should die, they will be replaced. What is the recommendation to
the Town Board?
Mr. Latham: Recommend that the Town Board reduce the bond with a
one year review by the Planning Board.
Mr. Wa~d: Second.
Mr. Orlowski: Motion made and seconded. Any questions on the
motion? All those in favor?
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 24
Vote of the Board; Ayes: O~lowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Mr. Orlowski: Next we have North Road Associates- Board to
review the Bond Estimate dated October 19, 1988. This minor
subdivision is on 16+ acres located at Orient.
SCTM ~1000-18-4-1. The bond is for $157,590.00 without the
inspection fee.
Mr. McLaughlin: Members of the Board my name Kevin McLaughlin. I
am appearing tonight of council to Edson and Bruer on behalf of
the applicant, North Road Associates. We ask you at this point
to approve the bond estimate that you just recited on the
property at this time.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. What is the pleasure of the Board?
Mr. Mullen: What amount is going to be on?
Mr. Orlowski: It will be a total of $165,469.50 with the
inspection fees.
Mr. Mullen: O.K. Fine. I make a motion to accept it.
Mr. Latham: 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. That will be moved to the
Town Board for their final approval.
Mr. McClauglin: If I might also address the Board briefly on
this? My client has asked if I can obtain a clarification from
the Board regarding issuance of vacant land C.O.'s on this minor
subdivision? It is our position that once we have complied with
the bonding requirements and have obtained the signing of on the
subdivision map and have filed it, that we would be able to
obtain vacant land C.O.'s. I know the Board has in the past
taken a position that not only does the bond have to be filed
but that the actually requirements have to be completed before
C.O.'s can be issued.
Mr. Orlowski: Vacant Land C.O.s, we don't make recommendations
whether to be issued oz not to be issued. That is in the
Building Department. Our concern is issuing a building permit on
a lot up there that has no access. We are not in favor of that.
Vacant Land C.O. we realize that banks foreclose and do things
like that. They are issued by the Building Department and no
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 25
zecommendation has come from this Board to issue Vacant Land
C.O.s.
Mr. McClauglin: But it is your recommendation that building
permits not be issued until the improvements are complete?
Mr. Orlowski: Until the improvements are complete.
Mr. McClauglin: Thank You.
Mr. Orlowski: Gristina Vineyards- Board to make a final
determination on the map dated as amended November 2, 1988. This
site plan'is located on the Main Road, Cutchogue. SCTM
%1000-109-1-p/o13. It has been certified. What is the pleasure
of the Board?
Mr. Ward: Move for final approval.
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.
Mr. Orlowski: Being as I have noting left on my agenda, are
there any comments or questions from the audience?
Mr. Angel: There is nothing left on you agenda at all?
Mr. Orlowski: Nothing.
Mr. Angel: My name is Steve Angel. I am here on an application
we wrote you on. It is ~he application of John Xikis. We have
some correspondence to the BOard. I have aSked, what I have
asked is that it be placed on the agenda, for determination, or
consideration, in accordance with the Planning Board's
requirements for tonight. Back in a letter written to you in
October, it was advised today that it was not placed on the
agenda. I would like to renew my request that it be treated. It
zs an application for approval of a site plan for a small
shopping center on the North Road in Greenport. From my review
of the application, and including the revisions that were done,
it seems like a fully conforming application. As I say, I
respectably request that you act upon it.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Well I think your correspondence came in on
Thursday, which was too late to put it on the agenda.
Planning Board November 14, 1988 Page 26
Mr. Angel: There is a prior letter Mr. Chairman which I
requested...
Mr. Orlowski: I think we sent you back a letter from our work
sessions.
Mr. Angel: Correct.
Mr. Orlowski: The Board will review your coam~ents and probably
have it on the next agenda.
Mr. Angel: We will be here. When is the next meeting?
Mr. Orlowski: December 5th.
Mr. Angel: Thank you.
Mr. Orlowski: O.K. Any other questions or comments? Questions
from the Board? Mr. Mullen, Mr. Latham, Mr. Ward, Mr. Edwards.
Questions from Board: None.
Mr. Orlowski: Being no further co~uents, I will entertain a
motion to adjourn.
Mr. Edwards: 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: Orlowski, Mullsn, Latham, Ward, Edwards.
Mr. Orlowski: Opposed? So ordered.
Meeting was adjourned at 9:00 p.m.
Bennett Orlow~-ki,~Jr. Ch~rman
Respectfully Submitted,
~11 M. Thor~,~ e~cretary
Southold Town Planning Board