Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-11/23/1987Sou£hold, N.Y. 11971 (516) 765-1988 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES November 23, 1987 The Southold Town Planning Board held a regular meeting on Monday, NOvember 23, 1987 at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold at 7:30 p.m. Present were: Bennett Orlowski, Jr., Chairman William F. Mullen, Jr., Member G. Ritchie Latham, Jr., Member Richard G. Ward, Member Kenneth Edwards, Member Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner Victor Lessard, Executvie Administrator Diane M. Schultze, Administrative Assistant 7:30 p.m. Public hearing on the question of approval of the preliminary maps for the major subdivision of Henry Arbeeny located at Kenny's Road and County Route 48, Southold. SCTM ~ 1000-59-7-31. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, I would like t~o call this meeting to order. First order of business is 7:30 p.m. public hearing on the question of approval of the prelminary maps for Henry Arbeeny located at Southold. We have proof of publication fn the Long Island Travler Watchman signed by Pat Wood and notorized by Barbara Forbes. I have proof of publication in the Suffolk Times, signed by Christina Contento and notorized by Mary Deegnan. Everything is in order forthe preliminary hearing and I will ask if there are any objections to this subdivision? Hearing none. Are there any endorsements of this subdivision? Pat Moore, Esq: Mr. Arbeeny is here and we are here if the Board has any questions. Mr. Orlowski: Any other endorsements~of this subdivision? Hearing none. Anyone out there neither pro not con but may have some information pertaining to this subdivision which may be of interest to the Board? Ms. Scopaz: I would just like to suggest to the Board that on this particular subdivision there are three commercial lots, 4, 5, and 6 which but up to Lot No. 3 whether the Board might consider putting up a permanent buffer Planning Board Page 2 11/23/87 Ms. Scopaz: in there between the residential lots and the commercial lots, something like a 10 or 20' conservation easement maybe to be maintained by both lot 3 for lots 3,4,5, and 6 that when the residential sites are developed the adjoining property owners isn't negatively impacted. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, anyone else. James Mulhall: I would lust like to know where the proposal is located. Mr. Orlowski: On Kenny's Road and County Route 48. Mr. Mulhall: I am an adjacent property owner. (Mr. Multhalt stepped forward to review, the subdivision map. Ms. Scopaz reviewed her prior comments.) t would endorse that also. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, any other comments. Hearing none. Any questions from the Board, Mr. Multen, none; Mr. Latham, none; Mr. Ward, none; Valerie, none; okay, no further comments, I will dclare this hearing closed and thank you for coming. Golf View Estates SCTM # 1000-35-2-p/o 16 Mr. Orlowski: Next order of business'is a 7:45 p.m. public hearing on the questionof approval of the minor subdivision map.of Golf View Estates located at East Marion. We have proof of publication in the Suffolk Times signed by Christina Contento and notorized by Mary Degnan and we have proof of publication in the Long Island Traveler Watchman signed by Pat Woods and notorized by Barbara Forbes. At this time everything is in order for the public hearing and I will ask i~ there are any objections to this minor subdivsion? Hearing none. Are~there any endorsements to this minor subdivision? Mr. Henry E. Raynor, Jr.: Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, my name is Henry Raynor, and I am the agent for Golf View. This is a four lot minor subdivision located at the east side of Island's End Golf Club. The plan before you was submitted in January of this year, the Board field inspected in February, the subdivision received sketch plan approval in March, the Department of Transportation granted a curb cut to the applicant in June of this year and in October of this year the Suffolk County Department of Health Services approved this map. Presently we are awaiting the water contracts from the Village of Greenport that are with the Village attorney. I believe all the elements of the subdivision regulations have been met I would request approval of this subdivision. Thank you. Mr. Orlowski: Any other endorsements of this subdivision? Hearing none. Is anyone out there neither pro nor con but may have information pertaining to this subdivision which may be of interest to the Board? Ms. Scopaz? Ms. Scopaz: I would just like to bring to the Board's attention the latest memo that was received the the Town engineer which made a suggestion forrth~ Board to consider. The drainage calculations for the road were based on a blue stone gravel road. And, it stated that if theIBOard were to require theroad to Town specifications at 22' and require asphalt Planning Board Page 3 11/23/87 Ms. Scopaz: paving that the drainage calculations wautd~ have to be revised to accomodate the increased runoff, The Board has not made a determination one,-way or another and I am just bringing this to your attention. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, any other comments. Hearing none, any questions from the Board? Mr. Mullen, None; Mr. Latham, none, Mr. Ward? Mr. Ward: I just think~that the Board should determine the position on the right-of-way and improvements to the right-of-way and make our position to be the 22' of development, there may be some room to shorten this road with a cul-de-sac rather than exactly the way it is shown, rather with the possiblity of flag lot or something or have a turnaround. Mr. Orlowski: Any other comments? Mr. Edwards, none; Valerie, do you have nomments? (none) Does the Board want to make the determination that it be 22'~to Town specs? I think we brought that up before Mr. Ward. Does the applicant have any problems with 22'? Mr. Rayno~: No, Mr. Chairman, as a result of that being a dead end street up there there is no problem withthe 22'. We are of the changes in the specifications and the contractor has been so advised with =egard to the change of bluestone to asphalt. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, being no further questions or comments, I will declare this hearing closed, and thank you for coming down. On a motion made by Mr. Latham, seconded by Mr. Mullen, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board-'~set Monday, December 14, 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, MuIlen, Latham, Ward, Edwards On a motion made by Mr. Edwards, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the minutes of the regular meeting of November 14, 1987. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards ON a motion made by Mr. Edwards, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED'that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, December 14, 1987 at 7:30 p~m. at the Southold Town Hall as the time and place for the public he~ing on theqquestion of approval of the minor subdivision for Verentoitis, et. al., SCTM # 10000-54-3-2!.1. Vote off,he Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mnllen, Latham, Ward, Edwards Planning Board Page 4 11/23/87 Mohring Enterprises at Mattituck $CTM ~ 1000-113-7-19.2. Mr. Orlowski: Board to authorize the Chairman to endorse the minor subdivision map for Mohring Enterprises located at Mattituck. Everything is in order, this is for a set off on that piece of property at County Route 48. Ms. Scopaz: One thing, I don't know if it is too late to dd this, but you might also want to consider the same type of buffering ~hat~'would be the same as for the Arbeeny property for this one also on the two portions of the business property that~hbuts residential property. Mr. Orlowskt: Right, I think we might want to consider that, we can also consider that on the site plan or onthe subdivision since this one is altread~What is the Board's pleasure? ON a motion made by Mr. Multen, seconded by Mr. Ward, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board authorize the Chairman to endorse thm set off for~Mohring Enterprises located at Mattituck. SCTM # 1000- 113-7-19.2 Vote of the Board; Aeys: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, EdwaCds Husing - Nature Conservancy SCTM ~ 1000~t26'7--~8L and 9 Mr. Ortowski: Next, we have Nature Conservance, Mrs.~Husing, Board to take action on the lot line change located at Main Road, Mattituck. I believe everything is in order at this time. What is the Board's ~teasure. Mr. Ward: What was the purpose df that? Mr. Orlowski: Public access to get to the property owned by Nature Conservancy over~the remaining property, from the Main Road, so they are not landlocked. On a motion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr. Latham, it was RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board approve the lot line change for Martha Husing/Nature Conservancy to convey a 30' strip 319.13 feet long fro~_~th~prpperty of Husing to the property of the Nature Conservancy located at Main Road, Mattituck, survey dated as amended April 1, 1986, SCTM # 1000-122-7-8 and 9~ Vote of the Board: Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards~ Tyler Automotive - The Board will hold over discussion on this site plan and recommendation on the issuance of a certificate of occupancy since a site inspection' of thepproperty had not been conducted. Planning Board Page!5 11/23/87 Ana G. Stilto SCTM ~ 1000-14-2-26. Mr. Orlowski: Next, we have Ana~G. S~illo, Board to review this minor subdivision and the decision of ~he Board of Appeals with regard to the right-of-way access. Proposal is located at Orient. Mr. Ward: Mr. Chairman, I think on thislpa~ticutar subdivision we should ask the appilcant to show us the~proof ~r right-of using the right-of-way to the easterly part of the_property. We should have permission from the owners. Mrs. Pat Moore, Esq. I think I should speak on that one. The right,of way, the one that provided access across the property, we have a problem with that in that in order to get approval f~om o~her property owners, it would~-~'~ require us to notify all the people within that right-of-way which would be an enourmous burden to put an applicant through particularly when he wuld have access over another right-of-Way.to the south'~of the property. We checked with the title company and it is my understanding it would be an incredible job to go through it and try to get that application. Mr. Ward: How is lot one serviced? Mrs. Moore: I don't have a file with me, so if I could review a survey, I don't recall the chauges. Oh, I am sorry, I.am looking at the wrong one. I am wrong. Mr. Ward: It looks like you intend to use the right-of-way on the easterly side of the proper~y. Mrs. Moore: Right. Mr. Ward: We need proof that you can use it. Mrs. Moore: We have it, we submitted a,copy of the deed for the subdivision file. It shows that we,'are permitted to provide access to no more than~'~ two lots, if it not in that deed it appears on the Brokaw which I believe we also gave you a copy of that~in the Brokaw file. Mr. Ward: Alright, but you do have right. Mrs. Moore: Oh, yes, by way of the deed. We could not give access to more than two lots. Mr.'Ward: Is that right-of-way used for other lots? Mrs. Moore: I believe that Brokaw is served by that same right~of-way. I apologize for the confusion. Mr. 0rlowskI: I have a copy of the deed, I am not going to go through it. Mrs. Moore: If we have to , we will send you another copy~ Mr. OrlowskI: No, just a question on your appeal to the Zoning Board. Planning Board Page 6 11/23/87 Mr. Orlowski: I assume you are approving access to those two lots over the right-6~vway. Mrs. Moore: They have given 280-a access over the other side, which we then had to go back to the Zoning Board and say, Zoning Board I known you gave us access on the westerly right-of-way, however, we are going to be using the easterly right~of-way and we wouldn't be here if they haven't given us permission so I believe they granted permission. Mr. Orlowski: Okay, I am not quite sure that I understand a~.~far as what the Zoning Board has put down here, but maybe I need a little more studying. But, now that we know that you are going to guarantee access over it. Mrs. Moore: We wouldn't be allowed to use it if we didn't have access. Mr. Orlowski: You will have improve it too. Okay. Mrs. Moore: I believe it was,Mr. Price, at one time had represented Brokaw, and I believe it was in the process of given building permits, or c.o.~s over there it was subject to final ap. proval of the improvements. I believe there~was a final inspection~ I known'that a coup!e~'~oi months ago it was inspected~ Mr. Lessard: If yon call me at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow, I can give you a more definite answer. Ms. Scopaz: Who actually owns the right-of-way. Is it ac~uatly a separate piece or does it run across other people's property. Mrs. Moore: I really don't know it really. It may be part of Brokaw's property as a flag piece or it may be over other property. This whole piece was one large piece of property which was split into two, Brokaw has one and Stillo had the other so it may be just a right-of=way versds a flag lot. Ms. Scopaz: Is Stillo actually the owner or whether it was broken up... Mrs. Moore: Well, it would be subject to a right-of-way and they would desccibe the right-of-way. As I recall that is the way they describe the right-of'~way, it is not metes and bounds description which would say hhat it is a separate piece of property. It is subject to a 20' right-of,way. Ms. Scopaz: Who actumlly pays the taxes on the right-of~way? Mrs Moore: I have a feeling that it may be part of Sledjeski's property. That his property is made subject to a right-df-way. Ms. Scopaz: I guess if we get a copy of the deed .and go through it. Mrs. Moore: We will call Diane tomorrow and verify that yon have a copy of the deed, if you don't we will supply it. I know that this question has been raised a couple of times, so I am sure we have it. Mr. Orlowski: Right, there may be one, but anyway. The Board has approved this back in gune~?~ 29, approved and authoriz~d~he Chairman to sign subject to the following conditions within six months from the date of ~h~ resolution: One, receipt and compliance with the resolution Planning Baord Page 7 11/23/87 Mr. Orlwoski: of the Suffolk County Planning Commission and Two approval of the access road improvements as< per the Board of Appeals decision of April 2 which was jumt amended. So, we would have to amend this resoution or rescind this resolution and make another resolution. And, this resolution would be subject to receiving the deed and I belive the County Plan~ing denied it, but we overr~de it, and subject to road improvements to Town specifications. Mr. Latham: Is there a time limit on it. Mr. Orlowksi: Well, th~ original approval was in Jun~. Mr. La, ham: Well, it is togehher as long as the questions are answered and the two questions are whether they have access to and if they do, they have to comply with the Town specification. Now, may I h~ve that motion to rescind that motion of J~ne 29. Mrs. Moore: Can I make one comment. Town Specifications - the road was improved to 280-a requirements by Brokaw. Mr. Orlowski: That approval no longer ~xists, we have to have improvements as per the Town specifications. Mrs. Moore: So, you are going to override the 280- a and require subdivision. Mr. Orlowski: I am going to override this resoution and this resolution was subject to Suffolk County Planding ...... Mr. Lessard: Who handled the road? Mrs. Moore: I think the road is in the Zoning Board's domain~ So, I am not sure. Ms. Scopaz: The Z/Oning Board decision that~we have does not reference the Brokaw decision. Mr. Orlowski: Technically, it is out of the ~ubdivision, so the Zoning Board handles that. It appears in their decision that they handed it back to us. Mrs. Moore: But, they make it subject to Planning Board improvements. Mr. Orlowski: W~e~you at the Zoning Board hearing? Mrs. Moore: Yes, I don't recall that being the way they .... They still discuss 280-a, that is Zoning Board. Mr. Orlowski: 280-a is access, they are the Zoning Board, they grant a~cess over it, but it appears that they are saying to us, if we approve of the access or the improvements. Mrs. Moore: I have a feeling I will have to go back to the Zoning Board for clarification. Mr. Orlowski: I will hold this up decision on that until you want to clear this up. If they are saying tht to us, there is only one way with this Board and that is to Town Specification. They appear in this decision Planning Board Page 8 11/23/87 Mr. Orlowski: to be doing that. Mrs. Moore: Maybe it should be interoffice, maybe the Planning Board should ask the Zoning Board to clarify it. Mr~ Orlowski: Well, we can hold it, if we make approval it will be subject to our conditions. Mrs. Moore: Why don't we hold off until the next meeting, because it it too unclear. Mr. Ortowski: Okay. Samuels /Steelman site plan SCTM # 1000-109-1-23 Mr. Orlowski: Next we have Samuels/Steelman, site plan for an Architect's Office located at Cutchogue. The final plans are in, the drainage review has not been done since the Town Board has run out of money to pay the engineers. Everything appears to be in order. I can not tell you if the calculations are right, we can do it subjecttto and wait, who knows maybe next week we can have the review. Mr. Ward: Have the plans be changed as per our request. Mr. Orlowski: Have you review this Valerie. Ms. Scopaz: Yes, the map incorporates all th~ comments that were requested bythe Board. They show the entire piece of property including the residentially zoned piece of property and they show an asphalt driveway up to the parking area next to the barn, as requested by the Board, with six parking spaces behind the barn and the eliminationof the front parking area which they had brought in as one of their revisision. So, the plan basically conforms to everything we asked for. Mr. Ward;Okay, we should grant final approval subject to drainage review. Ms. Scopaz: It would have to be subject certification by Victor. Mr. Lessard: This is an amended site plan, not a new one and the prior one was certified. On a motion made by Mr. Ward, seconded by Mr. Mulleh~ it was RESOLVEDthat the Southold Town Planning Board approve the site plan for Samuels/Steelman for an Architect's Cffice located at Cutchogne, site plan dated NoVember 16, 1987 including supplemental plan dated as amended November 24,. 1987, subject to review and consideration of comments with regard to the drainage calnclations. SCTM ~ 1000-109-1-23. Vote of the Board; Ayes: Orlowski, Mullen, Latham, Ward, Edwards Planning Board Page 9 11/23/87 Pindar Vineyards Site Plan SCTM # 1000-85-2~15 Mr. Orlowski: Next, we have Pindar, Board to make recommendation to the Building Department with regard to the ~ssuance of a~certificate~of occupancy. Ms. Scopaz: I went out in the field because they had called the office to ask for~some kind of guidance to find out if they were on the right track. They put loose asphalt but it hasn't been rolled in the property loction were we requested that parking be placed on the southern end of the parking. The only thing that has not been completed is that portion of the parking lot has not been rolled or paved and the wooden post that we had requested be put around the tree to protect ~he tree has not been done and the concrete curb stops have not been placed. So, that is where it is at. So, I will call to let them know that they are on the right track and the parking lot conforms to the site plan and to have them le~ us know when it is finished. Mr. Orlowski: Do you want to wait. Mr. Ward: Yes, wait until it is done. Being no. further business to come before the Board~ on.emotion made by Mr. Mullen, seconded by Mr Latham, and carried, the ~eeting was adjourned~ at 8:14 p.m. Following the meeting, Mr. Michael Hall approached the Board. Mr. Hall stated that he was the attorney representing Mr. Harold Reese with regard to the major subdivision of Hill crest Estates, Section I located at Orient. Mr. Hall questioned the Board's policy with regard to the recommendation on the issuance of certificates of occupancy for vacant lots as well as building permits prior to completion of all improvements. Mr. Orlowski stated that the Board. is waiting for the completion of the fire well which~they feel is the most important improvement for the health,safety and welfare of the people to be in the subdivision. Mr. Orlowksi stated that the Town Attorney had been consulted and the Board could go along with issuance of vacant land certificate's of occupancy however, there would e no builidng permits. The Board stated that the certificates of occupancy would stipulate that there would be absolutly no building permits until the improvements have been completed and approved by the Board. Mr. Hall stated that this would not be a problem and he would contact his client, Mr. Reese to explain~this. Mr. Samuels approached the Board to question the engineer's review and the status of their site plan approval. Mr~ W~rd stated that a review could be made in the office and they should contact the Board. Planning Board Page 10 11/23/87 en~tt Orlo~w~ksi~-Jr% ,~rman Respectfully submitted, ~a~n~ ~. S~ary $outhold Town ?lann±ng Board