Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-12/14/2009PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 PUBLIC MEETING MINUTES Present were: Monday, December 14, 2009 6:00 p.m. Martin H. Sidor, Chairperson William J. Cremers, Member Kenneth L. Edwards, Member George D. Solomon, Member Joseph L Townsend, Member Heather Lanza, Planning Director Kristy Winser, Planner Carol Kalin, Secretary S~Town Clerk SETTING OF THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING Martin Sidor: This meeting is now called to order. Good evening, and welcome to our regularly scheduled Southold Town Planning Board Public Meeting. Our first order of business is to set Monday, January 11, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, as the time and place for the next regular Planning Board Meeting. Joseph Townsend: So moved. William Cremers: Second. Martin Sidor: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. Southold Town Planning Board Page Two December 14, 2009 PUBLIC HEARINGS 6:00 p.m. - J. P. Mor.qan Chase Bank, Mattituck - This site plan is for the new construction of a 4,200 sq. ft. bank with two drive-through bays on a previously developed 112,647 sq. ft. (2.8 acre) pamel. This parcel is split-zoned General Business (B) and Residential-40 (R-40), and is proposed to be subdivided into two lots. The site plan will be located entirely on proposed Lot 1 in the B Zone portion of the lot. The site is located on the s/s/o NYS Route 25, approximately 133' e/o Marlene Lane, known as 10300 Main Road, Mattituck. SCTM#1000-143-3-33.2 Martin Sidor: Is there anyone that wishes to address the Board on this application? Please step forward to either microphone, state your name and address. Jennifer Porter: Good evening, Board Members, I am an attorney with Gibbons and I am here tonight on behalf of the applicant, JP Morgan Chase Bank. We are here tonight as you know for the public hearing with respect to the site plan component of our application for a proposed Chase Bank with drive-through and the related site improvements. I was planning on having our presentation be very brief tonight in light of the fact that there are no members of the public present and the Board is very familiar with our application. So what i'd like to do is quickly introduce our project team: next to speak will be Ken Garvin (JRS Architects), our architect. We also have our site engineer, Jeff Patanjo from Savik & Murray, LLP, Consulting Engineers, present to answer any questions you may have, and Chuck Olivo, our Traffic Consultant is here to briefly go over our traffic analysis in connection with this site. So what I'd like to do now is turn it over to Ken, who is going to give you a brief overview simply for the record of the architecture and overview of the site plan. Martin Sidor: Thank you. Jennifer Porter: Thank you. Ken Garvin, JRS Architects: Good evening, I am the project architect for Chase. Many of you know the project that we have in front of you. I just want to go over a quick history of it. We came here with a very different building and, with the comments we received from your Board and from Architectural Review Committee, we made many, many changes to create the building that's in front of you that we feel is more befitting of the area. The building itself is 4200 sq. ft.; it's made of brick, cast stone and a moulding material that will be white, an azac material around the entrance. The building will have a drive-up ATM in the back of the building and also a drive-up teller's window that will be operational just during business hours which I believe are 8:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. The building itself is in the front part of the property and the rear part of the property we have a tremendous amount of landscaping. Can I go to the Board and show them? Heather Lanza: You've got to stay on the microphone so that it stays on the record. You can move the microphone. Southold Town Planning Board Page Three December 14, 2009 Ken Garvin, JRS Architects: I'm just going to turn to the site plan real quickly. The site plan here shows in the back how we spoke about possible access to the west and land- banking the parking spaces to the south of the building. This will create a huge buffer between our commercial site and the residential site to the south of us. We also switched out the lighting from our last meeting. We made smaller light poles for the site lighting 14' high; dark sky compliant light fixtures. We added some light in the soffit of the building to also help eliminate some holes on the site and I believe we eliminated five site lighting poles by doing this. Also, with the air conditioning equipment there was a question about that. We have reset part of the roof to hide all the equipment so you will not see it from the ground as you travel around the building. There are sections and details in my presentation. I'd like to conclude my presentation and turn it over to the traffic engineer at this point. Are there any questions? Charles Olivo, Principal, Atlantic Traffic & Design Engineers, Inc., 2002 Orville Drive North, Ronkonkoma: I am the project traffic engineer; I have been working with Mr. Garvin as well as Mr. Patanjo on the site design and the enclave circulation and the driveway design. As part of our analysis, which we have coordinated with Ms. Winser on regarding the subject of the analysis as well as some review of the proposed 7- Eleven convenience store located just west of the site, we conducted a full traffic impact analysis of the proposed trips that would be generated by the Chase Bank. As part of that study, we have utilized the Institute of Transportation Engineers, the industry standard manual, to determine the projected site traffic to bank use such as this. It's important to note that just recently, the Institute of Transportation Engineers conducted many studies and what they have done essentially is they have thrown out bank traffic data from prior to 2001 because the banking industry has changed so drastically since the advent of really online banking and banking by phone as well as the extended hours of bank uses. What's happened as a result of the traffic generation of banks is there has been a significant decrease during the peak hours of traffic to and from bank sites. So we have incorporated the most recent data published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers as part of the project and then conducted a full traffic impact analysis. It is important to note that the NYS Dept. of Transportation has jurisdiction over the proposed access or the full movement access points of the site, which I will just flip to site plan. The proposed full movement access points of Main Road has been reviewed by the DoT and based on discussions we have had with them as recently I believe as about a month ago, they have fully approved the design and the level of access that we'd be providing here. In addition to full movement egress from the site, you can't see it on this because of where the binder clip is, but there's also a proposed left turn bank into the site which is support for progression on the read of people turning into the site would be able to stop within the bay and then travel into the site without impeding the westbound traffic flow on the roadway. We've analyzed that driveway, we've also reviewed the on-site circulation patterns just generally speaking as you enter the site there is a short two-way access aisle in front of the Chase. And as you travel around the building, it's a one-way circulation pattern which is not uncommon for bank uses. Should someone want to use the walk-in service, they would park in the angled stall and simply walk into the site. Two drive-through lanes will be provided, as Mr. Garvin stated, one for the ATM service and one that would be manned essentially with a teller. In addition, we've spoken with Ms. Winser regarding the cross-access point Southold Town Plannin.q Board Page Four December 14, 2009 and how we would anticipate that would be utilized. Cross-access, as you probably know, is a highly recommended access management type of technique. The reason for that is it reduces redundant traffic movements to the adjacent roadway network. This particular cross-access point I think would be useful for those living southwest of the site coming from Marlene Lane in that area and travel northerly along Marlene Lane and then be able to make a right turn to the hairdresser and the Prudential Real Estate office without traveling onto the state highway. Likewise, if you were to make a left turn into the site and you want to travel after doing your banking back to Marlene Lane, what you could do is simply exit through the cross-access point, make a left turn onto Marlene Lane, which would be reducing a left turn out of the site and then a left turn onto Marlene Lane. So you are taking those trips off the road which adds to the vehicle progression on the roadway and helps everything to function in a better, more efficient manner. Our conclusions in the traffic analysis which have been submitted and, I believe, reviewed in detail, are that there would not be significant impact on traffic operations based on the industry standard methods of analysis. If there are any questions, I'd be more than happy to answer them. Joseph Townsend: I have one question. On Table 2, Page 11 of your study: I was sort of confused as to why you got the westbound through right, the existing is 57, and the no-build option is 91 and the build option is 99. Why is that so much greater than all the other ones which show maybe a 10% increase with a no-build, maybe a 15%. Why is that one number so out of the ordinary? Charles Olivo: That's a very good question. As far as the existing to no-build analysis, the differential that's in there are two developments located nearby: you may recall the Hudson City Savings Bank, which is located east of the site. The traffic study was prepared in May of 2008. What we've done to prepare the no-build analysis is to take the trip generation from that study and add it to the network. They have a very substantial amount of vehicles traveling west after (inaudible), so we've incorporated those. Also, the proposed 7-Eleven at the comer of that intersection, because it's right in and right out only on both frontages, essentially the way you would enter and leave the site is through the westbound flow or through the northbound flow. So, all of the trip generation of that 7-Eleven is associated with that westbound (inaudible). Joseph Townsend: It was my understanding though that the first one that you presented, which was done in November, didn't include the 7-Eleven. Charles Olivo: It did not include the 7-Eleven. I had seen the 7-Eleven review letter, that it was undergoing review by the Dept. of Transportation, but it was not to my knowledge that it had been approved and would be billed. Based on how we put traffic analyses together, sometimes there is some discretion used in whether or not you consider every single development that's being considered or whether or not there's going to be a development actually built there. After speaking with Ms. Winser, she stated that she would like us to incorporate that as part of the analysis. So the last revised traffic study incorporated that traffic model. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Five December 14, 2009 Joseph Townsend: But the difference between the two, it is not that great. I think I'm really sort of interested in the "no-build" option. Charles Olivo: Well, the no-build, if you look, the differential is quite large: it's almost 40 seconds, probably around 35 seconds of delay. Now also part of the sliding scale of level of services, as you get to a level of service "E" which is at capacity, and you add vehicles to that approach, the delay starts to increase exponentially rather than on the average rate when you're looking at say, a "C" to a "D". I don't have to get too technical, but certainly your point is a very astute point, and it has to do with as you reach that threshold of capacity to failure, just the slightest increase in traffic volume could increase the delay significantly. I recommended to Ms. Winser, as part of the 7- Eleven application (I know they are seeking DoT review and approval), that there is an opportunity to modify this traffic signal timing. I looked into it this afternoon: just by shifting two seconds of green time, you can take that level of service up and make it possible a level service "D". It's interesting, though, the traffic signal report that was published by a Joint Committee of Traffic Engineers throughout the country noted that this country is not necessarily good at retiming traffic signals and to make changes through peak hours and land usage change. There are often many times opportunities to go back and look at running a traffic signal in a more efficient manner. This traffic signal may be one of those. There is inefficiency built in here because of the offset nature of Sigsbee and Factory, which causes split timing, (inaudible) and adds delay to the signal. But I believe there are some improvements proposed as part of the 7- Eleven that the DoT is requesting. That site is located right on the corner and seems to be, again, if you look at the "no-build" to build, which is the impact essentially in our development, there is an 8-second delay, if you look at the existing to "no-build" there's a much greater. Taking into consideration what those impacts would be and how they could be mitigated is something that should be or can be discussed with the 7-Eleven application. Joseph Townsend: Just let me get it straight: the traffic study that you completed on November 5, did that include the 7-Eleven or not? Charles Olivo: No. The December 4 included 7-Eleven. It included some background growth, Hudson City Savings Bank, and not the 7-Eleven traffic (inaudible). Joseph Townsend: Thanks. Charles Olivo: You're welcome. If there are any questions regarding the site, we have Jeff here from Savik & Murray. Jeff Patanio, Savik & Murray Consultinq Engineers: Just a couple of follow-up items: the site was redesigned with respect to storm drainage based on getting the site to work due to the grade change at cross-access. So we redesigned the site to raise the grade back in the back section of the property so you can have cross-access. So it will work on the bank side. In addition, we are pending the resubmission of the Health Department application for both the subdivision and for the site application itself. We are waiting on SEQR determination which, apparently, I believe we are getting tonight, Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Six December 14, 2009 and Covenants and Restricitons for the subdivision. So the site plan Health Dept. application will not be approved until the subdivision is approved. That's all I wanted to add. Are there any other questions? Martin Sidor: Thank you. Ken Edwards: I make a motion to close the hearing. William Cremers: Second the motion. Martin Sidor: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. Kenneth Edwards: I would like to offer the following resolution: WHEREAS, this site plan is for the new construction of a 4,200 sq. ft. bank with two drive-through bays on a previously developed 112,647 sq. ft. (2.8 acre) parcel. This parcel is split-zoned General Business (B) and Residential-40 (R-40), and is proposed to be subdivided into two lots. The site plan will be located entirely on proposed Lot 1 in the B Zone portion of the lot. The site is located on the s/s/o NYS Route 25, approximately 133' e/o Marlene Lane, known as 10300 Main Road, Mattituck. SCTM#1000-143-3-33.2; and WHEREAS, an application was submitted October 24, 2008 to subdivide a 2.618-acre parcel into two lots where Lot 1 equals 49,262.82 sq. ft. in the B Zoning District and having a 25' transitional buffer in the R-40 Zoning District in connection with the proposed site plan for a bank use, and Lot 2 equals 63,480.41 sq. ft. in the R-40 Zoning District; and WHEREAS, an application for a site plan was submitted on March 28, 2008, including a site plan prepared by prepared by John Sorrenti, R.A. and Thomas E. Murray, P.E.; and WHEREAS, the Office of the Southold Town Engineer, on December 5, 2008, provided comments to the Planning Board on the proposed access to the site; and WHEREAS, on April 14, 2008, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to Part 617, Article 6 of the Environmental Conservation Law acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, initiated the SEQR lead agency coordination process for this unlisted action; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, performed a coordinated review of this Unlisted Action. The Planning Board establishes itself as lead agency and, as lead agency, makes a determination of non-significance and grants a Negative Declaration. Southold Town Planninq Board Page Seven December 14, 2009 William Cremers: Second the motion. Martin Sidor: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor?. Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. CONSERVATION SUBDIVISIONS, STANDARD SUBDIVISIONS, RE- SUBDIVISIONS (Lot Line Changes) Final Determinations: Onufrak~ Peter & Gloria - This proposal is for a standard subdivision of a 7.0415-acre parcel into two lots where Lot 1 equals 1.84 acres and Lot 2 equals 5.20 acres, inclusive of a 1.19-acre building envelope and 4.0096 acres of subdivision Open Space that will be permanently preserved by Covenants and Restrictions. The property is located on the n/e/c/o CR 48 and Mary's Road in Mattituck. SCTM#1000-114-5-1 Joseph Townsend: WHEREAS, this proposal is for a standard subdivision of a 7.0415-acre parcel into two lots where Lot 1 equals 1.84 acres and Lot 2 equals 5.20 acres, inclusive of a 1.19-acre building envelope and 4.0096 acres of subdivision Open Space that will be permanently preserved by Covenants and Restrictions; and WHEREAS, the Covenants and Restrictions were filed with the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk on June 8, 2009 on Liber D00012590, Page 354; and WHEREAS, on July 13, 2009, the Southold Town Planning Board granted Conditional Final Approval for the action; and WHEREAS, on November 17, 2009, the Southold Town Board granted the request to defer the payment of the Park and Playground Fee in the amount of $7,000.00 subject to any terms of the agreement dated and executed November 10, 2009; and WHEREAS, agreement terms specify that the Building Department will withhold the issuance of a final Certificate of Occupancy on the properties until the client has paid in full the Park and Playground Fee; and WHEREAS, all conditions specified in the Conditional Final Approval have been met; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board hereby grant Final Plat Approval upon the plat prepared by John T. Metzger, L.S. dated as last revised May 18, 2009, and authorize the Chairman to endorse the Final Plat. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Eight December 14, 2009 George Solomon: Second the motion. Martin Sidor: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor?. Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. Set Preliminary Hearings: Batta~llial Joseph & Heidi - This is a proposed standard subdivision of 95,846 sq. ft. into two lots where Lot One will equal 41,280 sq. ft. and Lot Two will equal 54,074 sq. ft. in the R-40 Zoning District. This site is located at 1720 Hobart Road on the w/s/o Hobart Road approximately 1,059' n/o Terry Lane in Southold. SCTM#1000-64-3-3 George Solomon: I would like to offer the following resolution: be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, January 11, 2010 at 6:05 p.m. for a public hearing on the preliminary plat prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin III, L.S., dated May 28, 2008, and last revised April 18, 2009. William Cremers: Second the motion. Martin Sidor: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor?. Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. SITE PLANS Set Hearing: T-Mobile Northeast, LLC at the Cutcho~lue Presbyterian Church - The applicant requests a Special Exception & Site Plan approval for a new wireless communication facility where the antennas are to be mounted within an existing church steeple, and the base station equipment is to be located outside the building in a screened enclosure. As part of the application, the applicant proposes to remove and replace a portion of an existing church steeple to match the existing church building on a 0.91-acre site located in the R-40 Zoning District. The property is located at 27245 Main Road, on the n/e corner of Main Road and Highland Road in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-109-2-17.1 Southold Town Planninq Board Page Nine December 14, 2009 William Cremers: I will offer the following resolution: be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board set Monday, January 11, 2010 at 6:00 p.m. regarding the special exception consideration and site plan prepared by Neil Alexander MacDonald, R.A., dated October 8, 2008, last revised December 16, 2008. Joseph Townsend: Second. Martin Sidor: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Martin Sidor: We need a motion to approve the Planning Board minutes of November 9, 2009. William Cremers: So moved. Kenneth Edwards: Second. Martin Sidor: Moved and seconded; any discussion? All in favor?. Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. Is there any Board Member who wishes to get anything on the minutes? Hearing none, we need a motion to adjourn. Geor.qe Solomon: So moved. William Cremers: Second. Martin Sidor: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor?. Ayes. Martin Sidor: Motion carries. Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Ten December 14, 2009 There being no further business to come before the meeting, it was ADJOURNED at 6:22 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Linda Randolp~Transcribin0 Secretary Martin H. Sidor, Chair