Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-03/30/1987Southold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES The Southold Town Planning Board held a regular meeting on Monday, March 30, 1987 at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold NY at 7:30 p.m. ' Present were: Chairman Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Member William F. Mullen, Jr. Member G. Ritchie Latham, Jr. Member Richard Ward Executive Administrator Victor Lessard Planner James Bryer Secretary Diane M. Schultze Absent: Member Kenneth Edwards - due to inclemenn weather 7:30 p.m. Mr. Kevin McLaughlin was present for an informal appointment withthe Board to discuss the major subdivision for Michael Saragas located at Old North Road and County Route 48, Southold. Mr. McLaughlin: I received the Board's correspondence that the Board does not look favorably on the proposal as submitted and would request that we either decrease the size of the individual lots down to one acre lots in the cluster or go with a conventional subdivision and really my main purpose for being here tonight is to inquire of the Board wether they would more favorably consider the map as filed ~f we would put covenants and restrictions on the parcels that the 20% lot coverage would be calculated on the basis as if these lots were 40,000 square foot lots and that way we would keep the open space concept which the Board has expressed an interesn in and at the same time, the property owners would have larger lots although they couldn't cover them with structures to any greater degree than if they were 40,000 square foot lots. Mr. Orlowski: I don't really think so, does the Board have any comment on that? Mr. Ward: Just, generally, the layout that was presented inthe cluster doesn't realy provide open space that will be significant to the community. It is stuck way in the corner. That was our comment looking at it. We would prefer to see substantial half of the property in open space and Planning Board Page 2 3/30/87 Mr. Ward: certainly use up some of the road frontage for open space. What is happening, I think, the snbdivisions we are getting along County Route 48 is to push the development off the road and keep it back. It might mean developing a road in this case. Mr. McLaughlin: We do have one existing house already on County Route 48. So, I think it might be. Mr. Ward: We are at odds with you about the layout. Mr. McLaughlin: You would prefer to see the open space on the Route 48 even withthe existing house. Mr. Ward: Well, essentially, at least the corner. Maybe you could b~ing a cul-de-sac road and bring the one acre lots off the road. At the present time, essentially, there is no indication to the community that there is any open space here at all. Mr. Orlowski: You are taring all the open space and hiding it behind the lots. You mhould be able to see some of the open space. I think what you should do is go hack and change this layout and Mr. Ward do you have any notes there on the map itself? Mr. Ward: We addressed the notes. Mr. McLaughlin: The letter also indicated to me that th~ Board may possibly look favorably to a conventional layout as well as a cluster subdiviion here. Mr. Ward: The comment was basically that this was so close to a conventional that it would be less impact 6n the road if a conventional layout was used. Mr. McLaughlin: Okay, thank you. Mr. Ward: You might also address the drainage.as well, there is an existing low spot. On a motionmade by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, April 13, 1987 at 7:30 p..m. at the Southold Town Hall as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board meeting. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Mullet, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, April 13, 1987 at 7:30 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall as the time and place for the public hearing on the question of approval of the preliminary maps for the major subdivision of Nicholas Aliano located at County Route 48, Peconic. 8 lots~on. 16.8 acres. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Board Page 3 3/30/87 On a motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Mullen, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the minutes of the regular meeting of September 15, 1986. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the minutes of the regular meeting of Monday, October 6, 1986. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward 7:45 p.m. Ms. Abigail Wickham, Esq. was present for an informal appointment to discuss the site plan for San Simeon Retirement Community located at Chapel Lane, Greenport. Paster Ettlemeyer was also present for this appointment. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, next order of business, Ms. Abigail Wickham has scheduled an informal appoint to discuss the site plan for San Simeon Retirement Community located at Chapel Lane, Greenport. Ms. Wickham: I asked for this appointment to review a couple of questions that we had for the Board in the nature of a pre-submission conference. The Church or in this case, the retirement community, wh±eh is a separate coorpertaion is ready to implement a site ptanwhich they have. Just to refresh your memory, 144 units were approved, they have built 8 so far and they are at the point now where they have got to proceed in further construction and developing the project. It has become a very considerable financial burden to the Church or the retirement community because of the delay that they have encountered to the tune of almost $8,000 a month in interest and that is going to be mounting. So,they have had to proceed with looking for mortgage financing. Basically, there are two different things which they want to do. First of all, there are three separate corporations involved with this St. Peters Lutheren Church, the Nursing Home Facility up the road and also San Simeon Retirement Community which is a separate.corporation. Now, in order to proceed with their purposes, they would like at this point and in order to finance a mortgage the retirement community itself, the set off corner property that is on the site plan. One is on the Main Road and Chapel Lane, and that would be to set off to the benefit of the Church for their future plans, we don't know that they ahve any at this point, but at some point when the Church needs tht property, that is where the movie theatre was located. The second thing is their inn was shown here as an intermediary step, pre-nursing home and that they are not ready to proceed on in the future, it is realted to the nursing home and they would like to set that off from the retirement community for future use by the nursing home. At the same, the Pell garage propety which is located where~the garage is located and is going to be cleaned up, that whole parcel is owned bythe Church. That would be merged back into this parc~ in sort of a swap with the corner piece. Plamning Board Page 4 3/30/87 Ms. Wickham: Let me present a survey which shows the lines that they are thinking of. Ail the parcels are owned by the San Simeon Retirement Community, except the garage piece which is owned bythe Church and the nursing home is a separate entity. Pastor Ettlemeyer: 0n~the site plan ther is an inn. The inn is the intermediary or the domiciliary facility which is the step between the cottages and the nursing home. That has a basically the concept is simple cleaning and dining with effeciency kind of apartments for people who need to be looked in on and cared for but not in nursing home kind of fadility. Ms. Wickham: Where the yellow lines are that corner on the Main Road is where the drive in movie theatre was. This piece over here was the future proposal for the inn. Mr. Ward: That would be kept part of the nursing home. Ms. Wickham: I imagine they would want to keep it sepate just because they don't have any definite plans. Pastor Ettlemeyer; This application, the plan always to keep from builidng on the corner of Main Road and~.~Chaple Lane because of the possibl~ty of in.pthe future building a new church. They did not, the congregation does not want to have business or anyting else in that area. It is for the purpose of building a church as an advantageous place for that, at one time, they even talked about converting the church into a chaple arrangement with a common barriarn. With regard to the nursing home because it is already_established and doing very well in t~rms of the staffing and everything from meals to homes, the nursing home has become the parent organization to run the domiciliary care facility. With the nutrisionists and everything else you have, it is more advantageous to have it~linked to the nursing home. That is the reason for that. Ms. Wickham: I am a johny-come-lately on this whole project, but I think the original scheme was for a separate set off. So that basically is the jist of the type of subdivision we are proposing. There are a couple of changes onthe site plan itself. In reviewing that~fuzther it has really been decided that that type of large building is not necessary to run this thing, you can mun this from one of the units and instead they thought it might make more sense to make a recreational building. So, what they would like to propose is eiiminationof that building and instead so the residents of this community would have something right in their block. It will also cut down on a rather large parking field that was created for that. The second thing, I would like you advise on, I have another map, on the other side, up here there is an access provided out on to the North Road, we are considering the possiblity of, we thought that should be eliminated for a couple of reasons. Number one, it isa very bad situation for traffic on that corner. Number two that p~rcel is set off separately, the retirement could make, hut they really don't need it because they have other access from here to here. There would be a lot of traffic and there was alot of extra space. Pastor Ettlemeyer: You may recall that the State at one time had not given us permission to have an entrance on the North Road. Planning Board Page 5 3/30/87 Mr. Lessard: Yes, it was turned down by the County. They said no way would we allow that. Ms. Wickham: And, they could also go out here. out better. Would you like me to summarize? Mr. Orlowski: Please Ms. Wickham: Two things, number one, a subdivision, setting off the two corner pieces. Mr. Orlowski: This is for mortgages purposes only. Ms. Wickham: That is how it came to us. Mr. Ward: Working on that step, the business property on the corner, would you put covenants and restrictions on that for its use. Ms. Wickham: I don't know. Pastor Ettlemeyer: As far as I know, the only use they proposed for that was for a church. MR. Lessard: If you cut that off, there is a possiblity that you could loose that business status. That was combined with the M zone back in 1978. If you separate it, you may not be able to use if for business. Mr. Ward: If you subdivide it, it becomes a separate parcel and could be sold. Pastor Ettlemeyer: At one time it was discussed that the administration building would go there, but we are actually eliminating that. Mr. WArd: I guess we can understand the dilema you may be up against, but interms of separation of that, but the concerns we would have as a Planning Board would be if they are separated it means that it coud be sold off. That wold be a concern because what we looked at was an overall plan. Pastor Ettlemeyer: That would be transferred to the Church Mr. Orlowski: So, you are doing it just for title purposes. Pastor Ettlemeyer: I guess that is part of it? Mr. Orlowski: So, you are looking for a three lot subdivsion with an amended site plan. Ms. Wickham: And, merging the lot, and the second thing is an amended s±te plan to eliminate the hotel and some of the parking with it. And redesign the pool house with two tennis courts and the question is what do you want to do about that access. Mr. Orlowski: Have you taken into account any of the density-that has come off with what is there nQw. It would probably work lanning Board Page 6 3/30/87 r. Orlwoski: We will have to run this by our Attorney. astor Ettlemeyer: What if they decided not to do the inn the density or the overall project were based on "x" amount. I know Mr. Wickham equired that then, so the density was brought up along time ago. So~ don't think it wouldmake a difference. Wi~kham: I don~t think it would make a difference, I tried to find in the file, and I couldn't find it. · Orlowski: We will have to look into it, Mr. Bryer will review this. · Wickham: Time is really important, and I wondered if you are going be meeting with Bob. r. Orlowski: Well, we will have to. astor Ettlemeyer: There will be a decrease inconstruction because there ill not be a motel and administration building. r. Orlowski: What we will have to do is calculate that and make sure hat we are not cutting off something that has zero density on it already. here is no problem, but we have to covenant that in any approval and will have to covenant that. r. Ward: In themean time, why don't you look about the possiblity of aving access through the existing parking rather than have it in a cul-de-sac. r. Lessard: They took a hands down on access to 48 right from the first my. astor Ettlemeyer: That is why we moved the Main entrance down on Chapel Rne. Wickham: That is why we thought of eliminating it altogether. Maybe could show that as a future. That map is the same one as the signed ~e. ~stor Ettlemeyer: The arrangement we had on this is that the Pell property nich has the garages on it is still deeded in the Churches because it ~s a mortgage on it. What we are goSng to do is swapping a lot and giving ~e deed to the piece out here to the Church in exchange. It works out ~r us to be able to. ~. Orlowski: Okay, Mr. Bryer will review it and call you following £s review. %e 8:00 p.m. meeting with Mr. Robert Lawless with regard to the site [an proposal for John Xikis was cancelled due to illness. PLanning Board Page 7 3/30/87 The following new proposals were set for a field inspection: 1. Sidney and Robert Olmstead - 3 lots on 3.3 acres at Westphalia Ienue, Mattituck. Mr. Orlowski stated that he would abstain from y discussion with regard to this prposal since he is a relative of he applicant. 2. John Simon Estate - lot line change at County Route 48, Peconic. 3. Adams Associates - 4 lots on 7.6 acres at Cox Neck Lane and Middle Road, Mattituck. ~. Katherine Bitses - amendment to previous subdivision to increase ~ize of the existing lots located at Main Bayview Road, Southold. 5. Frank Sawicki - 3 lots at Soundview Avenue, Southold 5. Chester Mayer - lot line change at King Street, Orient I. Elvira Morgenstern - lot line change at a right-of-way off Indian eck Lane, Peconic. oo Bee Realty -Mr. David Kapell, agent fo~ the applicant was present ~or the Board's review of this proposal. This proposal is for a lot Line change at Lighthouse Road, Southold. Er. Kapell: I would like to give you another set of surveys which have :he directions done bythe surveyor. ~r. Orlowski: Could you give us your intent of the lot line change. ~r. Kapell: To increase the size of the property that includses the pond. Ir. Orlowski: At that point, are you going to subdivide the pond lot. Ir. Kapell: We may, yes. · Ward: Why not get a map with the wole thing. Mr. Kapell: It is two titles, it is not held by the same entities. I would be glad to refer any comments back to the principals to see what they would say. Ir. Orlowski: These are separate. Ir. Kapell : Yes. ir. Ward: Culd you cluster and leave the pond in open space? ~r. Kapell: How many lots would we get? Mr. Ward: Well, you would need a yield map. Planning Board Page 8 3/30/87 Mr. Orlwoski: Do you have stakes here on Lighthouse Road, where the line is going to be moved. Could you stake the existing and proposed lines so the Board can take a look at it. Mr. Kapell: Yes, sure. Mr. Orlowski: Just to give us an idea, and Mr. Ward's comments, if you want to follow up on it. Mr. Kapell: We will take a look at that. Charles Bowman- Mr. Charles Bowman, applicant, was present for the Board's review. Mr. Orlwoski: Next, we have Charles Bowman, 2 lots on 7 acres on North Bayview Road,Southold. I believe this is at the trustees rzght now and they declared a type I action. Mr. Bowman: The Trustees have tabled because there have been some discussions if they should be lead agency or the Planning Board. More appropr±ately it seems it should be in front of this Board. We have received DEC approval and perhaps after your field inspection you would like to contact us to discuss this. I think it was the Trustees statement that they could not approve the house without the lot being created. Mr. Orlowski: Alright, we will get down and take a look at it. You are right, they would have declared significant environment impact. Mr. Bowman: I missed the Trustee meeting, but the line on the map was verified by the DEC. Mr. Orlowski: Alright, we will look at it. Irwin Thompson site plan Mr. Garrett Strang was present for a~pre-submission conference to discuss this site plan for Irwin Thompson for construction of a retail store located at Main Road, Southold. Mr. Strang: What I have submitted to the Board at this time, strictly for comments and consideration on behalf of Irwin Thompson is the possibility of developing an additonal building for retail purposes on ~hah site. The site being the corner of Bousseau and MainRoad, where Thompson's Empo=ium presently sits~ What is being proposed is a one-story frame building, 2,000 square feetin area to be situated to the North of the existing frame building there and to the east of the Emporium. The nature of the use of the building, of the 2,000 square feet, we are going to have 1,400 square feet allocated for retail use and the remaining 6,000 squre feet will be for storage. There was or presntly is an existing Planning Board Page 9 3/30/87 Mr. Strang: garage in this general vicinity which is being used as a storage huilidng which will be removed. The storage that that building has provided will be incorporated into the new building. The 1400 square feet necessitates we provide 14 parking spaces which we have tucked in the back there. I believe we are able to meet all the zoning criteria. The question at this point is what the Board's questions and feelings are at this time, if favorable, we will develop this further and make a more formal presentation. Mr. Orlowski: Have this been set off or subdivided, these properties? Mr. STrang: That was, that particular map that you are looking at shows one lot, but to the best of my knowledge, it is two separate lots. Mr. Ward: Mr. Thompson was in with an overall plan about a year ago with one development. Mr. Strang: Right, I think, part of that, I am not sure really benasue I was not a part to that. I know he did mention to the Board at one particular point because he was proposing office use onthe easterly parcel. I believe he may have been considering merging the two separate parcels but this does not have any thing to do with the easterly parcel it is still the westerly parcel which is about an acre, a little over an acre. Mr. Ward: What is happening with the proposed project. Mr. Strang: One of the things we will be doing, the parcel is only 85' in width and he wants to make it 100' so we will move that lot line over. He has no plans onthe easterly parcel other than. M. Mullen: Weren't we looking for some other access. Mr. Ward: We had talked about an east/west access along the railroad track. Mr. Strang: At this point in time, he has no intention or specific ideas in any event. Right now the intention is to develop this and the easterly piece would be developed in the future remains to be seen or whether he sells it or whatever. Mr. Orlwoski: The existing building, what would that be retail sales? Mr. Strang: Presently it is office and I believe there is a building contractor there too. With health associates too. Mr. Mullen: So, there are alot of uses. What about the garage? Mr. STrang; The existing garage will be removed. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, we will get out and look~ any more questions, (none) okay, we will get back to you following a~ field inspection. Planning Board Page 10 3/30/87 John Senko Mr. Garrett Strang explained to the Board that as the architect and agent, he had not received the landscape plans as per the Board's request. Therefore, he asked that the matter be held over for the next meeting so he would have an opportunity to submit the necessary plans. Angel Shores Section I and II Mr. James Cron, Esq. was present to discussth'ese proposals with the Board. Mr. Bodwell and Mr. Reese, of Henderson and Bodwell, engineering consultants, were present to also review this proposal with the Board. Mr. Orlowski: Is this map the same one that the Town Board granted a waiver in regards to the two-acre azoning. Mr. Cron: Are you talking about section I Mr. Ortowski: Section I Mr. Cron: It is the same map with two minor revisions. Mr. Orlwoski: We did take a look at it and the Board had alot of questions. With all this land and putting both projects together Would it be possible to cluster them using the density and staying out of this marsh land or wetland. I think that is our number one question. Mr. Cron: Actually, that hasn't been pursued at all. The propsal is as drawn, we know will meet the requirements of the zoning in the Town of Southold and we would like to proceed as proposed. Mr. Ward: There are some problems with certain lots in that particular map. Our concern is to pull the subdivision out of the fragile area and cluster it. and stay out of the fragile areas. Mr. Cron: Which area. Mr. Ward; I am talking you have roads running th~n~gh low area. Without getting in to nit picking, we just feel that the approach is not good. Mr. Cron: Could you indicate what lots you have a problem with? Mr. Ward: Well, there is alow spot here which will be a problem. Putting houses this close to the wetlands, when we don't have to do it is just not the right way to go. This is an ideal subdivision for a cluster to keep it oun of the problems, and preserve the natural environment. Mr. Bodwell: You understnad the delays in trying to get the one-acre subdivision approved. We have tried to layout so that it complies. We have received DEC wetland area and have so designated it. The only significant change is that we have set a well area which is two lots on the Road. If the well storage is. abandoned then the two lots indicated for the well would revert back to building lots. Planning B~Lord Mr. Cron: expressing if that pal we would wl Page 11 3/30/87 The change came about as a result of the Village of Greenport an interest in extending the water to that area. Obviously 'ticular lots would not be needed for an on-site water supply Lnt them as building ltos. Mr. Bodwell: Most of the lots are oversized and so that we can have significant buffers. Are you suggesting that if we cluster and include both sides of the project onthis side that we could reduce the lot sizes and put the lots on the farmland. Mr. Ward: Within reason, we haven't checked. You have probably developed a yield map. Essentially, what we are saying is if you take a step backwards and determine how you can put it on the map, that is what we wouldlike to look at. Mr. Cron: So, in affect, yon would be preserving the one acre density in the whole area. Mr. Bodwell: Except that they would be reducing the density. Mr. Orlowski: The DEC Said that wasn't significant. Mr. Bodwell: The DEC said that was not significant. Mr. Ward: Rather than make it a hard and fast line, why don't you take the spirit of the ordinance. Put the spirit of what we are talking about together and see what you can come up with. Mr. Orlowski: Is there any reason to cut off that tie to Tery Waters, Rambler Road. Mr. Bodwell: WE felt that there was not reason to continue that road. Mr. Orlowski: If you put the two together and cluster away and have two accesses on you own. We are still looking for another access with the two sections tied together. Using that density and cluster. Mr. Bodwell: You want another access for two sections. Mr. Orlwoski: You will be running another loop system in there I am sure. Mr. Bodwell: I guess what you are saying is you want another access. Mr. Orlwoski: Most likely, both may be onto Bayview. Mr. Wa~d: Also, inthe broad brush when you cluster try to maintain some buffer against Bayview as well as the wetlands. Axctually you are providing water here so on the one acre you could be down to ½ acre on the one acre side ~hich'was grandfathered. Mr. Orlowski: Actually, that is a touchy subject, we have talked to the County. If you have water they might allow less, like 3/4 of an acre. I d~n't know if they will allow less but you might know the answer to tht already. Planning Board Page 12 3/30/87 Mr. Bodwell: I would rather keep one acre recognizing that we will be serving the Cove too. We are willing to reduce the lot size and provide a buffer on the road and buffer on the wetlands. Mr, Orlowski: Well, we will like the open space and it may help you out with less roads and drainage. Mr. Cron: I would like to request at this time, since it is such a radical departure from What we presented that the Board outline its specifics and recommendations and requirements in a letter so I can send it to my client. Obviously Mr, Laudis has been through the cluster before and it was not acceptable at that time and without something specific to present to him I would have little or no opportunity to present this for your approval or disapproval. Mr. Orlowski: We can do that , at this time, we can start coordinating and send out to the appropriate agencies with regard to SEQRA. Mr. Bryer:- We also need a Long,.Envi~onmental Assessment~Fo~m on Angel' Shore~ I and fi.' -- 8:30 p.m. Mr. Charles Matthews was present to discuss the major subdivision proposal of Harold Reese for property at East Marion,referred to as "The Cove Properties" Mr. Orlowski: Okay, next order of business is an 8:30 p.m. appointment, Charles Matthews has scheduled an appointment at the Board's request to discuss the subdivision proposal located at East Marion to be known as "Cove Beach"; property owned by Harold Reese. Mr. Matthews: Good evening Mr~ Chairman,-my~name is Charlie Matthews. I am an attorney with offices at 71 ~ew St.,Huntington, Long Island, I am here this evening with Harold Reese and' on his behalf inconjunction with this proposed subdivision map. YOU requested a Environmental. Assessment Form. Mr. Young is here and we have the assessment form. (presented assessment form to Chairman). Mr. Orlowski: Okay, right now we have a 34 lot sketch plan before us, are you going to withdraw that? Mr. Matthews: Well, withdraw or amend it, however you do it, what we want is 40. Mr. Orlowski: Right, what we want to look at is one plan. Planning Baord Page 13 3/30/87 Mr. Matthews: Then we submit one with 40, we will withdraw it and submit the other one. You know where the other lots would go, there is no change in the map except the other lots are situated on that open space near the entrance. Now, you ask that I discuss with you %his Sec%ion A 106-32. I have copies of it here if the Board doesn't, if. you want to pass . . or no~ . them down. This has to dow±th whether~we are entitled to more than 20 lots on this parcel. You have a provision with respect to the subdivision of land that a subdivision containing twenty lots or more and this has more than 20 lots have at least two street ~connections to existing public streets and this has only one street connect&on~~ But, that Section specifically says "if such exists" there is no other street frontage here so it doesn't exist. Consequently, I submit that that section has no applicability to this particular subdivision, since no other street connection exists~but this one. Now, you have a yield formula. I have computations based upon your yield formula, we have here sufficient acreage to warrant, we believe, 42 lots based upon this calculation which I have just handed up, where you.take the acreage, take 20% off of it and you divide by the 80,000 square feet and we come up with 41.985 lots. I know that you have been considering that the 3.9 acre area that is wetland should be some how subtracted from the total acreage. You know, we do have a constitution in this land and that constitution provides that you don't take a persons land unles you can condemn fi and pay for it. So long as Mr. Reese owns all of this acreage including the wetlands, he is entitled consideration of that wetland area. Mr. Matthews: If the State of New York, or the Town of Southold or some other municiple agency wants to condemn the property and pay for it and he no longer owns it, then I can see that you can subtra.ct it. But until that comes to pass it is still his private property and part of the subdivision. And,he is entitled to be considered in conjunction with the clustering which is part and parcel of this proposal. Now, that being the case, he is entitled to 42 lots under your yield formula, we are only asking for 40. I submit that he is entitled to those lots and that anything less than that is confiscation, pure and simple, pure and simple. If we have zoning, we have regulations and were to treat everybody alike under the Constitution, all we are asking for is equal treatment, don't treat us differently. Don't say that because some prior owner indicated to your Board he was willing to accept something less that Mr. Reese has to accept that. Or, that you are imposing this restriction on everybody in Town. If you are going to impose this on everybody in Town, all well and good. But don't single Mr. Reese out and this subdivision out and say well, yea, we have a yield formula but we are going to use a different yield formula for this subdivision. We are willing to take something less than we are entitled to and as I say, under your own yield formula we are entitled to 42 acres no matter how you slice it. And, we are willing to cut that back to 40 and go on that basis. And, that is our proposition and our submission to you and I don't see from a legal standpoint any other way to go, unless you feel that the Constitution ~f ~h~ United · Planning Baord Page 14 3/30/87 States and the Constitution of the State of New York is something that can be just ignored. I was in the Supreme Court this morning arguing the same thing against another municipality. Everybody in this County seems to ~hink that we have got to stop building and private property is of no value to anybody and we are just going to stop people from building period. Except that the Constitution says that you cannot, through regulation, prohibit people from using their property and if you do that is a taking, and you have to pay for it. You don't want to pay for this, there is an awful lot of this property being set aside for common ownership or wetland and it will make a beautiful subdivision. And people will enjoy living here and enjoy this community and I don't know why you want to stop people from being able to so live in this society, and enjoy life as they might like to. I will answer any questions if I can. Mr. Young is here. Mr. Orlowski: Any questions from the Board, Mr. Mullen? Mr. Mullen: Not at this time. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Latham? Mr. Latham: No, I have no questions. Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Ward? Mr. ~ard: Just as we were to treat you equal we would probably go with the twenty lots. Mr. ~atthews: What does this statute say when it says "if suchexists". When itt~o~'t exist it dSesn't exist I can't create it. If you want~a~other public road through there somehow fine, we will have another access. Mr. Orlowski: I believe it says if it doesn't exist.then you are limited to the twenty lots. Mr. Matthews: No, it says such subdivision containing 20 lots or more shall have at least two street connections with existing streets, if they exist. If they don't exist you can't have them. I can see if I had two street frontages End I have a street frontage in the back somewhere and I just wanted to go out to the one street frontage and not to the other street frontage and I have more than 20 lots, you can make me have another access to that other street frontage. But, if it doesn't exist I can't provide and you can't by this statute say, alright since it does not exist, we are going to condemn half of your property. If you are going to condemn half of the property and say that I don't have this zoning, I have six acre zoning or something, fine, pay me for it. You don't take a person~ property that way. If it-existed fine, we would provide it, it doesn't exist. Mr. Mullen: Well, I feel that we are at a disadvantage because we don't have legal counsel here tonight and as far as I am concerned I will have no comment until we have that opportunity to do so. Planing Board Page 15 3/30/87 Mr. Matthews: Alright, we came out two weeks ago and we met with the Town Attorney and with your Chalrman. o. Mr. Orlowski: No. Mr. Latham: our request. Mr. Mullen: You ~wo brought the Town Attorney and not at We did not invite him there. Was that a Board meeting, Sir? Mr. Matthews: No. Mr. Latham: You brought the Town attorney, we did not. Mr. Matthews: Alright, but we had these same qnestions before the Town Attorney and he agreed With my position. Mr. Latham: He came to defend your position and not help us and he certainly did. Mr. Matthews: We lawyers, I suppose, should go home. We look at these things as lawyers should look at them. There is a Constitution and there are rules and there are interpretations. Mr. Latham: Well, you brought Mr. Tasker, the Town Attorney, along at your bequest, not at ours. Mr~ Matthews: No, it was not at my request. Mr. Latham: Well, Mr.' Reese did then. Mr. Matthews: No, it was not ~at my request. Mr. Latham: Well, at whose request then, Mr. Reese's? Mr. Matthews: I had called him to see if he could arrange a meeting with you and he finally arranged it and he came out. What I am trying to~do it avoid litigation. And, this is the way to try to avoid it, work something out. But, if litigiation is all you ask for, it doesn't bother me. Mr. Mullen: I would still like to refer it to our attorney. Mr. Matthews: Alright, you can, that is why we met with him. Mr. Mullen: You mention that meeting, sir, that was an informal meeting and I was not present and other people were not there, I think there were but two members that were there. I still think, you mentioned the Constitution, to have legal counsel I am not an attorney, unfortunately. Mr. Matthews: I appreciate tha~. Planning Board Page 16 3/30/ 87 Mr. Orlowski: We will review a map here. have any more questions? Mr. Ward: No questions. Mr. Ward do you Mr. Orlowski: Mr. Bryer do you have any questions? Mr. Bryer: I have two. I read the part that you ]ust gave us and I think you are taking that out of text, I think that "if such exists" refers to the Official Map of the Town of Southold, if you would read that again if your English is grammatically correct and then if you also look at Section 100-33 F you. will see that dead end streets will not exceed 800 feet in length and that is a dead end street. And that is all I have to say, if you would just let us know what you feel about those two points and we will listen. Mr. Matthews: On blocks exceeding 800 feet it says the Planning Boardmay. require reservation of a 10 foot easement, to provide for the crossing of underground utilities. I don't see where that has any application at all. Mr. Bryer- : It says blocks shall not exceed 800 feet in length .... Mr. Orlowski: Okay, what we, what the Board wants now is a letter in writing withdrawing the sketch approval that you have right now on the property and a letter submitted a map that you would like to submit and at this time, to speed things up, we can start the coordinate with the other agencies and send an environmental Assessment Form to those other agencies Mr. Oriowski: and start the SEQRA process. Mr. Matthew: Okay. Mr. Orlowski: Okay. Mr. Matthew: Thank you. Hanoch and Watts Mr. David Kapell, agent, was present for the Board's review and. decision with regard to this minor subdivision. On a motion made byMr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Baord grant sketch plan approval to the minor subdivsion of Giora Hanoch and Harold Watts located at Alvah's Lane and County Route 48, Cutchogue for 4 lots on 12.6 acres, survey dated as amended January 7, 1987 subject to: Planning Board Page 17 3/30/87 1. Covenants and restrictions for no further subdivision in perpetuity on Lots No. 3 and 4, filed withthe County Clerk's office. 2. Indicating a 200' setback from County Route 48 on Lots No. 3 and 4 on the final survey. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward, the following action was taken: NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of th~ Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that the Southold Town Planning board as lead agency for the action described as follows has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTIONOF ACTION The minor subdivision of Hanoch and Watts located at County Route 48 and Alvah's Lane, Cutchogue is for 4 l~ts on 12.6 acres, tax map no. 1000-101-1-14.1. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assesment has been submitted which idicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. There was no response from the Suffolk County Department of health SErvices in the alotted ~lme, nnerefore, it is assumed that there are no-comments or objections from that agency. Ther was no remponse from teh NYS Department of Environmenal Conservation in the alotted time, therfore, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from that agency. The project will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Townof Southold Subdivision of Land REgulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze, Secretary Southold Town Planning Baor, Main Raod, Southold, Ny 11971. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Board Page 18 3/30/87 On a motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Mullen, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board gramt sketch plan approval to the minor subdivision of Petrol Stations, LTD. located at Main Road, Cutchogue for 3 lots on 5~ acres(Lot No. 3 ina B-1 zoning district) survey dated as amended February 5, 1987. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED tha the Southold Town Planning Board declare themselves lead agency under the State Environmental Quality Review Act for the minor subdivision of Petrol Stations Ltd. located at Main Road, Cutchogue for 3 lot son 5.8 acres (lot No. 3 in a B-1 zoning district ) sruvey dated as amended February 5, 1987. An initial determination of non-significance has been made. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Plum Gut Properties - Mr. David Kapell, as agent, was present for the Board's review and action with regard to this minor subdivision proposal, located at Orient. On a motinn made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Latham,~it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board declare themselves lead agency under the State Environmenal Quality Review Act for the set off of Shapiro, Plum Gut Properties, LTD., and Townsend located at Orient. An initial determination of non-significance has been made. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Ward, seconded byMr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant approval to the set off of Gary Shapiro, Plum Gut Properties, LTD, and Joseph L. Townsend, Jr. located off a right-of-way from Main Road, .Orient, see off 2.984 acres from 18.6 survey dated February 2, 1987; subject to: to 1. Covenants and Restrictions, filed in the Office of the County Clerk, that any further subdivision on the remaining property must be a minor subdivision of no more than 4 lots. 2. Approval of the Suffolk CountyDepartment of Health Services, purusuant to Article 6. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Blard On a motio~ made by Mr. Ward was taken: NE4 Pursuant to Article ~ Environmental Quality Review and Chapte= 44 of the Code of given that Southold Town Pla~ described ~elow has determine efect on t~e environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION The set off of Plum Gut Prope Orient to set off 2.984 acres The project has been on the environmen for An environmenal asses that no significant a to occur should the p Because there has bbe ENvironmental Conserv tha~ there are no com Becuase ther has been of health Services in are no comments or ob The project will meet Town of Southold Sub, Further information can be o! Secretary, Southold Town Plan: 11971. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlo~ On a motion made by Mr. Ward, RESOLVED that the Southold To~ to the major subdivision for at Depot Lane, Cutchogue, in February 9, 1987. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orl. Page 19 3/30/87 seconded by Mr. Latham, the following action ATIVE DECLARATION of the Environmenal Conservation Law State Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 the Town of Southold, notice is hereby ning Board as lead agency for the action that the project will not have a significant ties, LTD, et. al. is located at Main Road, from 18.6 acres. ~etermined not to haev a significant effect the following reasons: ~ment has been submitted which indicated ~verse effects to the envornment were likely ~oject be implemented as planned. ~ no response from the NYS Department of ~tion in the alotted time, it is assumed nents or objections from that agency. no response from the Suffolk County Department the alotted time, it is assumed that there ections from that agency. all the requirements of the Code of the [vision of Land Regulations. :ained by contacting Diane M. Schultze, ina Board, Main Road, Southold, New York Tski, Mullen, Latham, Ward ~econded byMr. Mullen, it was m Planning Board grant sketch plan approval ;teve Fuchs for 13 lots on 29 acres located .he cluster concept, survey dated as revised 'ski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Board Page 20 3/30/87 On a motion made by Mr. Latham,seconded by Mr. Mullen, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Plannig Board declare themselves lead agency under the State Environmental quality Review Act for the set off of Albin Pietrewicz located at County Route 48, Cutchogue. An initial determiniation of non-significance has been made. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Mullen, the following action was taken: NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law, State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION The minor subdivision of Albin Pietrewicz is located at County Route 48, Cutchogue for a set off of 6.250 acres from 13.5 acres. Tax map no . 1000-84-1-26. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assesement has been submitted which indicated tht no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the praject be implemented as planned. Becasue there has been no correspondence from the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation in the alotted time, it is assumed that tehre are no comments or objections fromthat agency. The Suffolk county Department of health Services has no o~jection to our designation of lead agency, there is insufficient information for technical comments and there is no record of an application to this department. The site is adjacent to the Southold town Landfill; therefore, more detailed information is required befor approval for subdivision is considered. A long Environmental Assessment Form should be completed. Detailed information on groundwater quality, methane migration, vector control, odors and other health related matters should be considered. Our department does not allow water supply well construction within 300' of the boundaries of a landfill and has concerns for any wells within 1000' of landfills. Detailed technical comment will require an application to be submitted to our department along with outther documentaion to support the suitabliity of the site for subdividing° Planning Board Page 21 3/30/87 The project will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southotd Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze, Secretary , Southold Town Planning Board, Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, 11971. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold town Plmnning Board grant approval to the set off of Albin Pietrewicz located at County Route 48, Cutchogue, to set off 6.520 acres from 13.5 acres, survey dated as amended January 7, 1987, subject to: 1. Review and consideration of comments from the Suffolk County Planning Commission since this proposal abuts a County Highway. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Latham, the following action was taken: CONDITIONAL NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determined that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION The minor subdivision of Barry Savits is for four lots on 12.4 acres located at Sound View Avenue, Peconic, tax map no. 1000-68-4-15 and 16. CONDITIONS OF DECLARATION This Negative Declaration is declared with th~ provision that the Department of Health Services, Office of the Ecology, comments are addressed satisfactorily by the applicant. Planning Board Page 2,7~2 3/30/87 REASONS SUPPORTING Tt{i~S~-~.~iNATi6N - '- The project ~s been determined not ~to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. The Department of Environmental Conservation has made no comments in the alotted time, therefore, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from that agency. The Suffolk County Department of Health Services, Office of Ecology, has no objection to our designation of lead agency. An application has been filed with the Health Department. The proposed action appears to conform to Article for lot size. The applicant is required to show the wetlands a~d open water on the survey. The followihg information is required prior to final action by the Health Department: Test hole and test well data, cross sectiQnal subSurface sanitary disposal system diagram, DEC - approved delineation of all freshwater wetland boundaries on the parcel, discussin of freshwater wetland protection, erosion control, and landscape plans, building envelope on Lot No.3. The project will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward :% :% :% :% :% :% :% :% * On a motion made by Mr. Ward~ seconded by Mr Latham it was RESOLVED that the Southo!d town Planning Board grant approval to the set off of Donnalee Relyea located at Franklinville Raod Laurel to set off 44 159 square feet from 2.D27 acres survey dated December 16 1986 for Richard and Donna!ee Relyea subejct to 1. approval from the Suffolk County Department of Health Servicesl pursuant to Article 6. 2- Review and consideration of comments from the Suffolk County Planning Commission, Vote of the Board: Ayes Orlowski Mui!en Latham Ward Planning Board Page 23 3/30/87 On a motion made by Mr~ Ward seconded by Mr, Latham- the following action was taken~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuant to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law State Environmental Quality Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determined that the project will not have a szgnificant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION The minor subdivision of Donnalee Relyea is located at Franklinville Road, Laurel for 2 lots on 2.027 acres, tax map no. 1000-125-2-1.24. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no significant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. Because there has been no correspondence from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services in the alotted time, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from that agency. Because there has been no correspondence from the NYS Department of Environmental Conservation in the alotted time, it is assumed that there are no comments or objections from that agency~ The projeqt will meet all the requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contacting Diane M. Schultze, Secretary Southold Town Planning Board, Main Road, Southold, New York, 11971. Vote of the Board: Ayes: 0rlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Board Page 24 3/30/'87 On a motion made by Mr. Latham~ s.ecQnded by Mr.Mu!len~ the following action was taken: ~ NEGATIVE DECLARATION Pursuan~ to Article 8 of the Environmental Conservation Law State Environmental Quality.Review Act and 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.10 and Chapter 44 of the Code of the Town of Southold, notice is hereby given that Southold Town Planning Board as lead agency for the action described below has determzned that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. DESCRIPTION OF ACTION The minor subdivision of Sunbow Associates is for four lots on 3~6 acres located at Soundview Avenue, Laurel, tax map no. 1000-100-2-5.1. The project has been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment for the following reasons: An environmental assessment has been submitted which indicated that no szgnificant adverse effects to the environment were likely to occur should the project be implemented as planned. Because there has been no correspondence from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services in the alotted time, it is assumed that there-are no comments or objections from that agency. The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation has responded questioning if the present zoning "A" meen the definition in 6NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.12. This zoning catagory does not meet this definition. The project will meet all the Kequirements of the Code of the Town of Southold Subdivision of Land Regulations. Further information can be obtained by contactinq Diane M. Schultze, Secretary Southold Town Planning Board~ Main Road Southold, New York, 11971. ' Vote of the Board~' Ayes~ Orlowski. Mu!len: Latham, Ward Planning Board On a motion made by Mr. Mullen Page 25 3/30/87 seconded by Mr. Latham~ it was RESOLVED that the Southo!d Town Planning Board grant a sketch plan approval to the m~nor subdivision for Sunbow Associates located at Laurel fdr 4 lo~s on 30.6 acres~ survey dated January 8 1987; subject to° 1. Covenants and restrictions filed in the office of the County Clerk that there will be no further subdivision of Lots 1 2~ 3, and 4 in perpetuity. Vote of the Board: Ayes~ Orlowski~ Mullen~ Latham- Ward On a motion made by Mr. Mullen~ seconded by Mr. Ward~ it was RESOLVED ~hat the Southold Town Planning Board declare themselves lead agency under the State Environmenatl Quality Review Act for the site planfor 84 townhouses located at Moore's Lane~ Greenport to be known as "Mooresland". Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski~ Mullen~ Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Mullen? seconded by Mr. Latham~ it was RESOLVED that the .Southold Town Planning Board approve the sketch plan for the affordable housing proposal to be known as "Cedarfields" located at Moores' Lane and County Route 48= Greenport for 84 lots on 26 acres~ survey dated November 24, 1986. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski~ Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Ward~ seconded by Mr. Latham, was taken: the following action WHEREAS, ~ohn Costello~ Diane Carroll and Donald Bracken have applied tothe Sou~hold Town Planning Board for a site pan for 84 townhouses on 22 acres locatd at County Route 48 and Moores's Lane, Greenport~ NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. That pursuant to the provision of Articl 8 of th Environmental Conservation Law;~Part 617 of Title 6 of the New York State Codes, Rules and Regulations, and Chapter 44 of the Southold Town Code~ th.e Southold Town Plann proposed i environmen as require, lng Board as lead agency does hereby determine that the action Type I and is likely to have a significant effect on the That the Planning Board shall file and circulate such determination by the aforementioned law~ rules, and code. 3. That the Planning Board immediately notify the applican'ts Planning Board Page 26 3/30/87 agent~ Merlon appicant's age~ accordance wit] and Town Plann~ Vote of the Bo~ On a motion ma~ RESOLVED that agency under t! subdivision of I, located at has been made. Vote of the Bo~ On a motion mac RESOLVED that for the minor Mattituck to dated at amendE Vote of the Boa On a motion mad RESOLVED that t to the Southold of Aha G. Still The pro three 1 and the Vote of the Boa On a motion mac ~. Wiggin, of this determination, and further request said ~t to prepare a Draft Environmental Impact Statement in ~the scope and contents required by the Planning Board ir, all in accordance with said rules and code. Lrd: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward ~e bymr. Ward, seconded by 'Mr. Latham, it was .he Southold Town Planning Board declare themselves lead ~e State Environmental Quality Review Act for the minor Maunsbach and Leeds, The Fields at Mattituck, Section [attituck. An in itial determinatin o'f non significance rd: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward e by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was he Southold town Planning Board approve the sketch plan ubdivision of Kay Maunsbach and Helen Leeds located at known as "The Fields at Mattituck, Section I" survey March 15, 1987 for 3 lots on 5.5 acres. rd: Ayes: Orlowski~ Mullen, Latham, Ward by Mr. Wa~d~ seconded by Mr. Latham, it was e Southold Town Planning Board give the following input Town Board of Appeals with regard to teh subdivision for two lots on 3.2 acres located at Orient; osal for two lots, although revised from the previous ~t application, does not meet the current two acre zoning Board cannot endorse it. Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that ~reas, a formal application for the approval of a sudiv~sion plat entitled ";alvatore Catapano" located at Southold was submitted to the Planning Board on'January 16~ 1986, and filing fee was'paid,and WHEREAS, a pub_lc hearing was held on said subdivision application and plan at the Sou:hold Town Hall, Southold, New York, on March 9, 1987 at 7:45 p.m., al~d WHEREAS, the requirements of Subdivision Regulations of the Town of Southold have,been met b said subdivision plat and application, Planaing Board Page 27 3/30/87 NOW, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the application of Salvatore and Jeanne Catapano for approval of said subdivision plat prepared by Rod Van Tuyl, dated as amended May 6, 1986, be approved and the Chairman be authorized to endorse approval on said subdivision plat, subject to: 1. Filing the covenants and restrictions as requested in the Office of the County Clerk. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board refer the site plan for the Church of the Open Door for construction of a church with related ministries located at Main Bayview Road, Southold to the Building Department for certification. Site plan dated as amended february 6, 1987. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Latham, ±~ was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, following a public hearing, approve the preliminary map for the major subdivision of James Cohill located at Mill Road and Grand Avenue, Mattituck for 7 lots on 18.9 acres in the cluster concept, survey dated November 12, 1986 subject to: 1. Receipt and approval of a drainage plan. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Wacd, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept Inspector John W. Davis' report No. 570 with regard to the improvements on the minor subdivision access raod for Gertrude Duchow -- now K and L Properties. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Mullen, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept and r~equest compliance with the March 13, 1987 correspondence from Highway Superintendent, Raymond L. Jacobs, with regard to drainage within the subdivision for East Marion Woods located at East Marion. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Board Page 28 3/30/87 On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board accept and refer to the Town Board for acceptance the performance bond in the amount of $100,000 for bluff plantings for the condominium proposal to be known as "Breakers at Lands End" located at Greenport. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, following a field inspection, refer the site plan of William H. Price for construction of an addition on an existing building to the Building Department for certification, proposal located at Main Road, Greenport, site plan dated as amended February 26, 1987; subject to: 1. Evaluating the amount of parking proposed in relation to that needed and eliminating some in order to provide more landscaping. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold town Planning Board refer the following input to the Board of Appeals with regard to the set off of Flint Street Corp./ River Circle Corp. located at Greenport to set off 5,628 square feet from 11, 256 square feet: 1. tt was noted that it appears to have been the intent of the original owners to keep both lots as one house lot which is indicated by the placement of the house three feet from the former rear property line. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seeonded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold tonw Planning Board approve the sketch map for the minor subdivision of Golf View Associates, located at Main Road, East Marion for 4 lots on 8 acres, survey dated January 15, 1987, subject to: 1. Receipt of a curb cut approval from the NYS Department of Transportation, for the right-of-way proposed. 2. Receipt of amended surveys indicating the correct metes and bounds description with regard to the Rutkowski parcel (to the South). Vote of the Board: Ayes:.~Orlowski,. Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Board Page 29 3/30/87 Stephen Kalaijian Minor subdivision - set off Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr., agent, was present for the Board's re iew of this proposal to create 2 lots on 3.9 acres at Oregon Road, Mat Mr. Raynor explained that Mr. Kalaijian intended to keep one bu lot for himself and the other lot would be for his in-laws for of a home for them. Mr. Bryer questioned the lot width or dept proposal. It was requested that the set back line for lot dept on the survey as well as the building envelopes. It was also the right - of - way should be 25' in width. It was the consen ~s of the Board to hold action until revised~maps are received and reviewed. tituck. ilding construction of the ~ be indicated pted tha Michael Adams Subdivision at Peconic Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr., agent, was present for the Board's re iew of this proposal for 23 lots on 52 acres at County Route 48, Peco~c. It was noted that there is only one ingress/egress and there are more than 20 lots proposed, this is not permitted as per the Code. It was also noted that the cul-de-sac exceeds 800' in length which is also not permiteed as per the Code. Mr Raynor asked if the Board could suggest anything which would enable compliance. It was suggested that a cross street be established for future connection. It was also suggested that the proposal be revised for 20 lots since there~±s only one access road into the subdivision (pursuant to Section A106-32). The remaining lots may be created upon establishment of a second access road, and could be a future section. It was the consensus of the Board to hold action and an environmental review until the revised maps are received. The Board would further review the road layout with the Planner and advise Mr. Raynor if they have any further comments. Theodore Petikas site plan Petikas - Mr. James Cron~ esq. was present for the Board's review of this site plan located at County 48, and Sound Road, Greenport for construction of a restaurant. The Board questioned if all the parking proposed was necessary for a take-out restaurant. Mr. Cron stated that for the number of ~ustomers expected to be served it is necessary. Mr. Orlowski questioned if curbing would be on the corner of County Route 48 and Main Road. Mr. Cron stated that there would be curbin9 there and no curb cut, no access to County 48, the access will be off of Sound Road, at the northeast corner. Mr. Latham stated that this was a bad intersection and there was a fatal accident at this intersection a short time ago. Mr. Latham stated that he did not feel that it was a suitable place for this type of propoaal since the intersection is danwerous. Mr. Bryer stated that the way the proposal is drawn on the sate plan it appears that the B zoned property is separate from the ~ zoned property~ because there is a line with metes and bounds separatin9 the two zones. Mr. Bryer stated that if Planing Board page 30 3/30/87 the A zone is considered part of the landscaping th~ it meets the required landscaping, however, if the landscaping is only in the B zone, then more landscaping is needed. Mr. Bryer stated that it was his recommendation that the lot be shown as one lot without the proposed lot line running through it. Mr. Cron stated that it is not one lot, according to the zoning map which he has, it is shown as two, and it always has been shown as two. Mr. Cron stated that the line which Mr. Bryer was referring to was a use line between the light and the A - residential. Mr. Orlowski que~stioned if the property was single and separate. Mr. Cron stated that it was not single and separate as far as owne~hip but as far as use. Mr. Orlowski questioned Mr. Lessard with.regard to his-opinion on this matter. Mr. Lessard stated that this ms a unique situation by the fact that you have so much of the area as an A zone, under Section 100-22. Mr. Cron requested clarification of this section. Mr. Lessard stated that this would mean that the property would have to be treated as an A zone since more of it was zoned that way. Mr. Lessard stated that he would have to check with the Town Attorney with regard to this. Mr. Cron stated that he disagreed with Mr. Lessard stating that this section speaks of one ownership, which they have; however, it also speaks of more than 50% in a less restrictive district and this is not the case with this property. Mr. Cron stated that what it involves is an extension of the more restrictive use into the less restricted district, in effect, it is almost an amnesty for 30' Mr. Cron stated that they are not asking for that, they are asking for this property, be used soley for a commercial venture without any regard to the A-residential piece. Mr. Cron stated that Mr. Lessard's interpretation is contradictory to what the Code says. Mr. Lessard stated that Mr. Cron's interpretation is completely opposite from what is stated. Mr. Lessard questioned if the A zone is less restrictive than the B zone in Mr. Cron's opinion. Mr. Cron stated no, and that is why that section does not apply. Mr. Cron stated that if more than 50% of the area of the lot lies in the less restrictive district and Mr. Cron.stated that the approximately 9,000 square feet is less than 11,000 square feet so the more restricted area is not more than 50% of the lot, it is less than 50%. Mr. Cron stated that if the lot were greater than the A-residential piece that 30' of that area could be used, however, he was not proposing to do this, so he did not see how this section applied. Mr. Lessard stated that Mr. Cron's opinion was exactly the opposite of the code. Mr. Lessard stated that if the lot in the less restricted is greater than 50~ you can use 30' in the more restricted area. Mr. Bryer questioned if the lots were merged. Mr. Cron stated that they were not merged. Mr. Lessard stated that they were merged and in the same ownership. Mr. Cron stated that the common ownership only has to do with the ownership of both parcels, but nothing to do with the use. Mr. Lessard stated that the lots are merged. Mr. Cron stated that he disagreed with-this because the reason there are two separate uses are because there are two separate zones. Mr. Bryer Planning Board Page 31 3/30/87 Petikas cont. stated that a zoning lin~does n6~ ~ut~mati~ally ~k~a s~bdivision. Mr. Cron stated that it does as far as use. Mr. Bryer stated that the was referring to the subdivision of land, not the subdivision of uses. Mr. Cron stated that you use land as far as what is permitted. Mr. Bryer stated that the lots are merged and Mr .Cron stated that the lots would become merged only if you have the same zoning on both lots. Mr. Lessard stated that that is not the law. Mr. Orlowski stated that the Board would not refer this to the Building Department for certification since there was a disagreement. Mr. Orlowski requested that Mr. Cron address this matter in writing to the Board and they will refer to the matter to their attorney to determine the legalities of this. Mr. Cron stated that he would submit a letter to the Board addressing Section 100-22 for the Board to review with their attorney. On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board amend the site plan approval (resolution of June 9, 1986) to read as follows: "RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the site plan for Pindar Vineyards for a winery located at Main Road, Peconic, survey dated as amended May 28, 1986 and also revised March 20, and March 30, 1987, subject to: 1. Ail pavement to be crushed recycled concrete of an adequate base depth of no less than four inches, covered by tar and impregnated with blue stone gravel 2. A six-month review." Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward On a motion made byMr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planing Board grant a final 90-day extension on the completion of the conditions for the conditional final approval of the major subdivision to be known as Harbor View. This extension shall run 90 days from April 12,1987, the last date of the previous extension. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward Planning Board Page 32 3/30/87 Being no further business to come before the Board, on a motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Ward, and carried the meeting was adjourned at 10:13 p.m. Be~ett O~%ow~kl, Jr , Chapman RECEIVED FILED THE SOuTHOLD TO\?~I CLEBK Respectfully submitted, I)iane M. 8¢hultze, Secretary 8outhold Town ?lann±ng Board DATE 7-/~- [~o~ HOUR