HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-12/27/1973Southold Town Planning Board
-=;r'IUTHrlLD~ L. I., N. Y. 11~T1
PLANNING BOARD
MEMBERS
John Wlckham, Chairman
Henry M o.lsa
Alfred Grebe
Henry Raynoe
Frank Coyle
MI NUTBS
SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD
December 27, 1973
A regular meeting of the Southold Town Planning Board was held
at 7:30 p.m.~ Thursday~ December gT~ 1973~ at the Town Clerk's Office~
Main Road~ Southold~ New York.
There were present: Messrs: John Wickham, Chairman; Henry
Moisa~ Vice-Chairman; Henry Raynor.
The Chairman opened the meeting at 7:30 p.m. for the hearing on
the final map of the ~airway Farms subdivision owned by Philip Babcock
and Russell Case. Proof of publication was presented and Mr. Moisa
made a motion~ seconded by Mr. Raynor and Carried that the reading of
the legal description be dispensed with as it was read at the
preliminary hearing.
It was pointed out by the Chairman that a letter was written to
Mr. Gary Olsen, attorney for the applicant, on December 17, 1973 in-
form/ha him that a bond of $32,000 was recommended to the Town Board
for Fairway Farms.
Reference was made to a letter dated December 7~ 1973 from the
Suffolk County Department of Planning stating "The Commission strongly
objects to the fact that the developer was permitted to commence
construction of improvements before the map was referred to it and
before the Commission had an opportunity to render its report."
Mr. Wickham: For the records the County Planning Commission and the
Planning Board of the Town of Southold have a problem in that the
Planning Board -2- December 27~ 1973
County Planning Commission will not consider officially maps until after
they are approved by this Planning Board and our rules and regulations
grant the developer the right to commence construction upon preliminary
approval. Sometime in the future this matter will have to be ironed out.
We have requested that the commission take official action at an earlier
date. These maps were in their hands and we had discussions informally
with them on it on several occasions.
A letter dated November 29~ 1973 from Gary Flanner Olsen~ Esq. to Justice
Demarest was read. The letter indicated the applicant's willingness to
put up a bond pending the final outcome concerning the pond in the
recreational area of the subdivision.
Mr. Demarest's answer to Mr. Olsen was read. Justice Demarest feels
that the Planning Board should be free to hold a final hearing on the
application for development since the area in question is in the play-
ground area and should not'hold up the rest of the development.
The following letter dated December 26, 1973 was received from the U. S.
Department of Agriculture under the signature of Charles R. Barnett:
District Conservationist.
"I have been informally observing the installation of "recharge swales"
on the Fairway Farms subdivision being developed by Russell Case and
Phil Babcock at Cutchogue, New York. Those parts of the installation
that are complete are functioning effectively and meet the general con-
cepts that we originally outlined to the developers.
During the past three weeks I have observed the runoff water movement on
this subdivision during one storm in excess of two inches of rainfall and
have some information regarding another similar storm and its results.
In al/ areas I observed the expected rainfall runoff water quickly and
adequately penetrated the swales and was drained~effectively from the
road and lot areas.
There are a number of steps needed to complete some of the swale areas.
I am concerned that silts from unfinished areas may wash into some of the
remaining swales. Construction around new homes may necessitate further
cleaning of Swales. A driveway presently installed~ does not have the
cross section expected. Areas with shrubs need to be mulched promptly.
The above are examples of steps needed to be taken in timely fashion to
provide even greater success with this type of recharge swale installation.
In general the completed part of the work is functioning effectively."
Mr. Wickham: Mr. Barnett and the District Technician~ Stanley Pauzer~
Justice Demarest and Justice Surer and myself met with the developers
this morning at 9:00 a.m. and inspected the premises and~ in view of the
fact that it rained heavily last night~ the general consensus was the
swale concept was effectively taking care of the runoff ~a~er.
Planning Board -3- December 27, 1973
Mr. Raynor asked if they had looked over the entire subdivision. The
answer was they had not. It was the northern half and particularly the
area to the north where they thought there was some necessity to put in
an additional catch basin and even that area was effectively taking care
of runoff water. It was Mr. Wickham's understanding that the south end
where the swales were not completed~ it was pretty well loaded after the
two-inch rain. Mr. Barnett had indicated that the southeast end was
running into some problems.
Mr. Wick_ham: Is there anyone here present who would like to speak in
objection to the subdivision or are there any questions about it?
Mrs. Tiedke: I think the Department of Environmental Control is concerned
with this situation.
Mr. Wickham: We have a letter from the DEC and they have no objection
to it.
The following letter addressed to Mr. Russell Case dated November 14,
1973 and signed by Daniel J. Larkin, Local Permit Agent, New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation was read into the minutes.
"Please be advised that the subdivision of property referenced above
will not require a permit pursuant to Ehvironmental Conservation Law,
Article 25 or Article 15. However, future alterations to lots nos.
15, 16~ 17, 18, and 19 on the proposed subdivision map will have to file
for permits under the Tidal Wetlands Act."
Mr. Olsen: Anything within 300 feet they cannot give a blanket permission
until they have specific building plans as to location~ etc.
Mr. Wickbam: This was the basis for Justice Demarest's agreement.
Mrs. Tiedke: His agreement to grant the permit. What about the trustees?
What's the purpose of the court case?
Mr. Wickham: The first problem that arose was that one of the ponds
which was shown on the subdivision map was not constructed in the proper
place and the Planning Board when they learned of it by observation
halted all construction then and there as not authorized. Bear in mind
that the Planning Board rules and regulations have controlled dredging
and ditching in this town for about four years before the Town Wetlands
OrdSnance went into effect. So this is one of the things we~have been
active in. Subsequent to that the Town Board instructed the Building
Inspector to issue a summons for violation of the wetlands ordinance.
This Board will not go into the interpretation of the Town Wetlands Ord-
inance but the ordinance specifically allows the reconstruction of
existing dikes and this would be allowed under the ordinance. The
questionais whether or not all the material was used to reconstruct the
dike and this is one which this Board is unable to settle and it is not
in our province anyway.
Planning Board -4-
December 27, 1973
Mrs. Tiedke: It is in the Trustee's province?
Mr. Wickbam: It is in the Town ~oard's province and this case was called
before Justice Demarest and he has told us in writing that he feels this
subdivision should be processed.
Mrs. Tiedke: In other words, the Town Board is bringing suit?
Mr. Wickham: Yes and this Board has officially written to the Town Board
and said that this is an approved subdivision, that the developers were
entitled to dredge where they did to establish a pond because we gave
the approval to rebuild a dike under the town wetlands ordinance. It
doesn't come before this Board. When we found that the subdividers were
digging in the wrong place, we had it stopped immediately.
Mrs. Tiedke: Until the case is settled, can you give them permission to
go ahead?
Mr. Wickham: Because Justice Demarest said this is the way it should be
done.
Mrs. Tiedke: I understood he said he couldn't release it until someone
appears in court and says to release it.
Mr. Wickham: Right. All wetlands as of the first day of Septembers al/
work in wetlands has got to be cleared by the DEC, by the Trustees of
the Town of Southold~ by the Town Board under the act and~ if it is a
subdivision~ by the Planning Board of the Town of Southold. If it is a
subdivision~ the Planning Board comes first. The County Planning Commission
also will not review any of these things unless they have the approval of
the DEC~ the trustees because they are operating under a permit~ the
Planning Board because we have approved it under the preliminary hearing~
the Planning Commission has not had time to do it but they have told us
that if they have the approval of the DBC~ there is no problem and we
have the letter from Justice Demarest as justice.
Mrs. Tiedke: The Town Board has not given their approval?
Mr. Wickham: The Town Board does not get involved. This is why they
were given a summons but if the justice is prepared to dispose of the
case and he is and so informed me.
Mrs. Tiedke: I don't like maneuvering.
Mr. Wickham: It is not maneuvering. The Town Board's action was almost
completely without basis because the wetlands ordinance says specifically
that you are allowed to rebuild dikes and all of this fill went to exist-
ing dikes.
Mrs. Tiedke: It looks like one big pile on top of another.
Mr. Wickham: This material had to be rehandled, it was put in piles and
then moved.
Planning Board -5- December 27, 1973
Mr. Olsen: If you see it from the road you are seeing the dirt out of
the swale system~ too.
Mrs. Tiedke: The pond is to take the runoff?
Mr. Wickham: NOD it is a recreational pond and it was approved. There
is no question they were given permission to build the pond.
Mr. Raynor: It is not properly located. It is at present in variance
to planning board recommemdations.
Mr. Wi ckham: DEC told me personally that the developers would be allowed
to fill in the pond. They said they would refill the pond and put it
back and just to make sure the attorney went to talk with the DEC and
they said you have to get a permit which will take two years. Justice
Demarest said this is unnecessary. Then the DEC backed off /be other
part and said they were not involved.
Mrs. Tiedke: I talked to Mr. Hatcher this morning and I was told that
there were no decisions on any of these cases in Southold Town.
Mr. Wickham: They told me in good faith and then he backed off completely.
This is the reason Justice Demarest said you can't stall this for two
years without being willing to pay the costs.
Mrs. Tiedke: There seemed to be various things going on that seem to
get adjusted which~ in my view~ don't come into the open until it is
complete.
Mr. Wickham: Just bear in mind that I personally was opposed to the
wetlands ordinance and I said they should do something to protect owners
of diked agricultural land. Mr. Case diked this property after discussing
it with the Planning P~hard. I presented the case for the owners of diked
lands. The ordinance was made to include this and Mr. Case thought he
was operating under the exception because this land had been diked and
he gave us the reason. Now he wants to build it up higher. My property
is next door and I have ten thousand feet of dikes and I am well aware
of the problem. Frankly~ Mr. Case and Mr. Babcock have come to me for
my suggestions a great many times because they felt I was experienced
as to dike procedures and I honestly tried to steer them so that every
step would be legal and in accordance with the Town~ State, etc. It is
my belief that the DEC has absolutely no authority here.
Mrs. Tiedke: There is a court to decide that.
Mr. Wickham: Oh, no. As much as over a year ago I wrote to the Speaker
of the Assembly telling him there were conflicts that had to be cleared
up. I have written him and a few other people and spent a great deal of
time.
Mr. Olsen: It should be very clear on one point that the summons is still
outstanding and due to the confusion of the town or state jurisdiction~
it was decided that there is no valid legal purpose in holding up the
entire subdivision. The legal issue has to somehow be resolved and we
Planning Board -6- December 27, 1973
have indicated to the Planning Board that we will abide by whatever
the final outcome will be. We are admitting no guilt but the Town cannot
hold up because of the outstanding summons which still must be resolved.
The point is the Town cannot legally hold up scheduling this subdivision
for final approval because of an outstanding summons. We were even
willing to bond to the Town that we will abide by the final outcome.
It has not been whitewashed or maneuvered. The legal issues will take a
long time to resolve. It is not fair to the subdividers.
Mrs. Tiedke: What is the reference to the five lots?
Mr. Olsen: The re£erence is you must get a permit on any building near
wetlands. The point is before anybody can build on a piece of property
within 300 feet of wetlands they must get a permit. The state is saying
that at this point we cannot give you a permit. There isn't going to
be any problem getting the permits because those are not wetlands lots.
It is just going to be a pro forma thing. That is what he is referring
to.
Mr. Raynor: Have you made any progress toward resolving the problem?
Mr. Olsen: I haven't done anything. It is not up to me to prosecute
the case.
Mr. Raynor: We asked about a reserved lot and at the time they said they
would covenant at the time of the hearing. Do you have that here this
evening?
Mr. Olsen: I don't know what.you are talking about.
Mr. Raynor: We had some questions. We talked at length of the possibility
of reserving the lot until the drainage system had proved itself. We
talked about reserving a piece of property out of this i£ they ran into
difficulties during this trill ~eriod.
Mr. Wickham: We had a letter from Barnett who said, after discussing it
with Ray Dean, the Engineer~ that they put additional drainage ponds
and this has been discussed also and there hasn't been a decision.
The following letter dated July 31, 1973 was received from Charles R.
Barnett~ District Conservationist, U. S. Department of Agriculture.
'~t your request I have given further consideration to th.e proposal for
creating one or more recharge basins within the subdivision called Fairway
Farms. I would offer you the following observations and suggestions:
L. The proposal that lot number 10 be held for two years as a
possible location for a recharge basin has some distinct drawbacks and
should be reconsidered. Among other things it is a location which would
dbsfigure the subdivision and it is not located so as to be a convenient
collecting point for runoff water from most of the subdivision.
2. There are two potential recharge basin locations just east of
lots 17 and 20. These sites appear to have adequate size to accommodate
Planning Board -7- December 27, 1973
two pond-recharge basins each having a surface area of about 3/4 of an
acre. Normally it would require about 1.$ acres of area for each such
pond-recharge basin.
In the unlikely event that the recharge swales proposed are not fully
satisfactory, the two mentioned pond-recharge basins sites could be de-
signed to store up to a total of 5 acre feet of runoff water which I
believe would be more than adequate to meet any future need.
3. I would further suggest that if the pond-recharge basins are
constructed that they be designed with gradual side slopes both above
and below their water line, so that the ponds will not require fencing,
and so that they will have the appearance and configuration of natural
ponds.
My recommendation is, therefore, that if land must be set aside for
future runoff water Storage capacity, that such storage be provided above
the surface of two artifi6ially created permanent ponds, each of about
3/4 of an acre. The ponds can be designed to provide successful fishing,
serve esthetic purposes and provide ample emergency water storage if
that should be needed. No chainlink fencing of these ponds should be
necessary."
The above letter was addressed to Philip Babcock.
Mr. Wickham then asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor
of the subdivisions'
Mr. Olsen: I represent the applicants. The Board is well aware of this
entire project. The s~bdividers have been creative, have tried to
introduce new innovations as far as the road is concemned which should
be an attractive community. They have practically finished the roads
and have attempted to meet every standard and every reasonable request
that the Planning Board and any other agency have requested and I
strongly urge that final approval be granted tonight.
Mr. Case: The subdivision speaks for itself and if people will take the
trouble to look at it they will be convinced.
Mrs. Robert Winternitz: Anyone who has any objection should look at
it and see how he has worked every step of the way. He is more interested
in conservation than anyone else in this room and I feel anything he has
done he has done it with the best interests of the Town.
Mr. Wi ckham: The Planning Board is empowered to approve, disapprove,
to approve with conditions and I will further say that because I am a
next door landowner that I have not voted on this when it has been
presented and so there will be no decision made tonight because without
me there will not be a quorum but I want to say that I talked with the
attorney tonight on this and we will have some conditions. One of them
will be that we will want an affidavit or legal instrument stating your
deed restrictions that should be filed with the map. Bear in mind that
the subdivision map cannot be filed until the Town Board accepts the bond
and serves notice on us that they have accepted it. The Town Clerk has
to notify us that they have it. Basically~ this takes two or three
Planning Board -8- December 27,, 1973
weeks. Chances are we can have these other things straightened out at
the same time. At the next meeting we can have a decision. We will
discuss it tonight and if the board is in agreement I think we can move
quite rapidly. We may meet on the fourth of January.
Mrs. Winternitz: What holds this up? We have alot of problems that
never came up before.
Mr. Raynor: The pond location and the elevation pertinent to the wetlands
and the diking areas both of which are still in variance to the map which
you are proposing and filing. The town attorney tells me that if you
have our signature it becomes automatically binding on the town despite
any restrictions that you may assume. I hope we can make some progress
in this. I am speaking strictly of Planning Board regulations as the
map is in variance to the regulations.
Mr. Wickham: We stopped the construction because the pond is in the
wrong place.
Mr. Raynor: (showing the map) You are stuck with this map. It is not
there what the map shows.
Mr. Olsen: Are you saying that this is a material aspect?
Mr. Raynor: I say this section is in variance. This is not presently
on the property. If this map is filed, at some point you may come into
a problem with it. This is the town attorney's opinion. He is rather
adamant because we have run into problems of this nature before.
Mr. Wickham: This brings up an entirely different aspect. You presented
some time ago a tentative plan for development of the recreational area.
What he is saying is we cannot approve this subdivision map because if
weedo this will put you strictly behind the eight-ball because it doesn't
show the right elevations, the right ponds. What we are saying is what
map are you presenting for your final map of the subdivision? We
obviously shouldn't approve this one because you will be stuck with it.
Mr. Olsen: Most don't have elevations on them.
Mr. Raynor: Get a waiver from the Board on the park and playground area
and hold this in obeisance~ rather than hold the whole thing up. There
is nothing to stop you people from filing this subject to the survey on
this part. File it subject to a waiver from the Planning Board. Then
you have time to resolve your problem. You are not jeopardizing the first
part.
Mr. Wickham: We have a public hearing on a map. If that hearing goes
as we like to have them go and we approve the map as shown and/or with
suggested alterations and when all our recommendations are met it is
that map that gets filed with the County Clerk and that is the one you
have to operate on from then on.
Mr. Olsen: Can't you approve tonight this map with the condition that
before it is filed a line be added to the recreation area that this is
Planning Board -9- December 27, 1973
not part of the subdivision and is to be filed at a later date?
Mr. Raynor: You have to include it or your engineering doesn't prove.
It has to be counted as acreage.
Mr. Olsen: I will call the town attorney tomorrow morning and see how
he would like it worded and a date on the map and that the property
owner will maintain his part of the swale.
The hearing was declared closed at 8:45 p.m.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9:00 p.m. for the hearing on the
preliminary map of the Greenfields subdivision owned by Gorwitz and
Barnett at Southold.
Mr. Raynor made a motion to dispense with the reading of the metes and
bounds until the final hearing. Mr. Moisa seconded the motion and it
was carried.
Affidavits of publication were read. The receipt of twelve copies of
the survey was acknowledged. A letter was read from the Superintendent
of Highways approving the road layout. A letter was read addressed to
Lawrence Tuthill~ P.M. asking him to prepare the bond estimate~
The ~ollowing letter from Mr. Barnett of the U. S. Department of
Agriculture was read under date of October 1~ 1973:
"The following review is based on the pretminary subdivision plat maps
by Roderick VanTuyl~ dated June 27~ 1973 for Go~witz and Barnett and
titled "Greenfields at Southold".
The soils on this property are mapped as Haven loam, from 0% to 6% slope
and having medium texture with a loamy mantle overlying coarse sand and
grav~t at depths of 20 to 36 inches. While these soils have,almost no
limitations for homesite development they are easily eroded during the
construction process. Erosion control during construction is of some
importance because of the possible silting of the nearby recharge basin
that may result from uncontrolled erosion. We recommend that all disturbed
areas be seeded to a temporary cover of Rye grass immediately following
rough grading. Care should be taken to retain al/ top soil on the site.
We believe that there wiil be a sizeable increase in the amount of runoff
water that will result from rainstorms when this parcel is developed for
homesites. Por example there will be about 300,000 gallons increased
runoff from these 22 acres from a 10 year frequency 24 hour storm as a
result of development according to our runoff estimates. The increase
will be from about 803,000 gallons runoff from a t0 year storm when
undeveloped to 1,100,000 gallons from a 10 year storm after development.
Therefore we recommend that some provision be made for accommodating the
increased runoff of some 300,000 gallons so that neighboring properties
are not at a disadvantage unduly. There are even greater runoff increases
to be expected during the period of construction when extensive soil areas
are bare of vegetation.
Planning Board -10- December 27, 1973
Lots number 1 and 2 and the playground area will receive runoff waters
from 7 to 9 other lots and may be disadvantaged by this runoff. Filling
on lot number 1 could cause backup and temporary flooding of the play-
ground area. Therefore we recommend that some provision be made for
providing 10 year frequency storm drainage or storm water disposal for
the iow part of the proposed playground. Efforts should be made to
obtain permission to discharge water safely to Tucker Lane where it can
travel to the recharge basin.
We note with concern that these soils and this land composes part of the
best agricultural land in the Town of Southold because of the high
quality and productivity of the soils in this area. However we recognize
that this land is close to a developing community and therefore residential
land use may be a necessary choice".
Mr. Wickham: There are a couple of things to point out. In meeting with
the Town Board this afternoon I was informed that the Highway Committee
henceforth could not be expected to approve catch basins and leaching
pools. They will insist on recharge areas because the Town has had to
much trouble with leaching pools silting up. The County Planning Commission
has informed us that although we require a subdivider to take care of
drainage areas including 200 feet uphill from any part of their subdivision~
the county now requires ~00 feet. Discussing it today with the town
attorney~ he informed me that the Planning Board to protect the health,
safety and welfare of the people of the Town of Sou/hold should require
even greater distances where there are extensive open fields which slope
toward the subdivision. It is obvious that we are going to have to feel
our way in this but the town is finding some real problems in subdivisions
that are adjacent to large fields which silt in and some have put up
dikes when they have no right to divert the water. This is what causes
the problems in our town. It is going to be the responsibility of the
developer because the Town is completely unwilling to do so. I am not
sure that this is applicable to this subdivision and we will want to
look at it with this in mind. I think all of us recognize that All of
the land in the Town of Southold has a north to south slope and in winter
weather and particularly without a cover crop: a subdivisSon on the
southern extremity will have to be made to dispose of this winter water.
Mr. Raynor: Is it your interpretation that all leaching basins will have
to be tied into a recharge area?
Mr. Wickham: The Highway Committee says they will not approve leaching
pools. One of our problems is curbs and gutters which under some circum-
stances channel the water and the Superintendent of Highway~s specifica-
tions require them and the Town Highway specifications probably need to
be changed in this general area. It has been the intention of the Board
to bring these matters before you so you will know why we stand where we
do.
Mr. Wi ckham then asked if anyone would like to be heard in opposition to
granting preliminary approval of this subdivision.
Mrs. Tiedke: Is this likely to come in for a multiple?
Planning Board -11- December 27, 1973
Mr. Wi ckham: No, this is strictly residential.
Mr. Wickham: Who is Barnett?
Mr. Olsen: The name is Judith Barnett and is in the disclosure statement.
Mr. Wickham then asked if there was anyone who wished to speak in favor
of granting preliminary approval.
Mr. Olsen: (representing the applicants) I have been before this Board
informally with regard to this subdivision and we got to the point where
the Board felt it was in order to schedule this for a preliminary hearing.
I am open to any requirements that are reasonable and any suggestions so
that we can go ahead and schedule a final hearing.
Mr. Wickham: We would like to see contours shown 500 feet beyond the
limits of the sHbdivision. The drainage has to be computed for 500 feet
uphill according to the new county regulations. Although the Highway
Committee has not officially given us a directive I would be inclined to
advise or confer with the Highway Committee about a drainage area ~nstead
of leaching pools.
Lawrence M. Tuthill~ P.E. submitted the following letter to the Board
under date of December 27~ 1973:
"I would like to make the following recommendations for possible
consideration in reference to the subdivision entitled "Greenfields at
Southold. F
1. That the road grades be raised approximately one foot to
prevent the roads from becmming drainage channels.
2. Elimination of the catch basins etc. as of little value at
the junction of Greenfield Lane and Tucker Lane.
3. Elimination of leaching basins on Greenfield Lane at the
entrance to the park and run all the water to the recharge basin.
4. That the 18"~ pipe to be continuous from the catch basins on
Greenfield Lane at the park entrance to the recharge basin~ with a
manhole at the change of direction near the recharge basin.
5. That the recharge basin be 110' x 100' (fence perimeter) and
a depth of 5'
6. That 2 additional leaching basins be added on Greenfield at
station 8 - 50."
Mr. Tuthill presented a bond estimate to the Board in the amount of
$62~000.
Mr. Otsen requested that copies of all governmental correspondence on
cases which he represent~ be~Tforwarded to him.
Mr. Olsen was directed to get a copy of the 500 foot contours and submit
it to the Superintendent of Highways as soon as possible. It was also
Planning Board -12- December 27, 1973
recommended that the engineer look at it again to see if there are
extensive open fields uphill.
The hearing was closed at 9:15 p.m.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9:20 p.m. in the matter of the
preliminary hearing for property of Robert Casola at Orient, New York.
This is a minor subdivision.
Mr. Wickham: Alot of the area is too low to build on and I think it is
entirely possible that the board might say there should be no building
on number 3 and if there are buildings on 1 and 4 they should be on such
and such location. It would be better to have the contours right here so
we can see where the building should be.
Mr. Olsen: You wanz the four lots shown on the contour map?
Mr. Wickham: Or put the contours on the plotted area.
The following letter was received from the U. S. Department of Agriculture
under the signature of Charles Barnett and dated November 27, 1973.
"This review is made at the request of the Suffolk County Soil and Water
Conservation District for the town of Southold. It is based on maps
submitted by Roderick VanTuyl, dated October 127 1973 and July 9, 1973.
There are two principal soils which we have mapped on the property
including the lower area mapped as Tidal Marsh Soils and the higher
elevation portion of the property mapped as Haven Loam. However both
soil areas are influenced by tide ~evel shallow water table.
There is a low earthen dike running a&ng King Street which apparently
excludes normal high tide from the low parts of this property. Our, soil
maps indicate, and existing vegetation bares out that at one time the
south westerly section of this property was subject to regular tidal
flooding.
We advise against building on land lower than five feet in elevation.
On this property the land lower than five feet comprises almost 80% of
the area.
We also recommend that in areas such as this where storm tide flooding can
occur, that the main floor of all residential buildings be constructed at at
least eight feet of elevation above mean high tide. We would also
recommend that utilities for any houses in such an area be located at
least eight feet above mean high tide.
There have been instances where land owners have excavated ponds inside of
dikes that exclude tide waters, so that the excavated material can be
used to raise the general level of adjoining land. We do not recommend
this procedure. We understand that the New York State Department of
Hnvironmental Conservation may consider such action improper or illegal
where land that was normally marine wetlands is involved.
Planning Board -13- December 27, 1973
We strongly recommend that the Town consider the adoption of a regulation
~r an ordinance that would control the indiscriminent construction of
ponds within its boundaries. In some other towns in New York State local
governments have required that land owners have adequately prepared pond
designs reviewed and approved by the County Soil and Water Conservation
District before pond building permits can be issued. There is no charge
for such District service.
We note that much of the lowest land in the proposed subdivision has been
represented on Mr. VanTuyl's survey as having a general elevation of 1.5
io 3.1 feet above mean sea level. We recommend that in the future the
developer be required to show elevation in feet above mean high tide.
This will present a much more accurate picture of the land surface relation-
ship to tidal flooding.
Finally, please note that there is a substantial wildlife food shrub border
along King Street presently producing large amounts of berries and other
food for birds and small mammals. We would hope that if development does
occur on this property, this wildlife food border can be considered care-
fully for preservation."
The following letter was received from Mr. Robert A. Villa, P.E., Suffolk
County Department of Health.
"We have reviewed the preliminary and topographic map for the above
referenced project, and our comments follow:
It is necessary to have at least 8 feet between the water table
and finished grade in order to install a sewage disposal system
that will meet our standards.
We require the fill to be placed prior to any approval by this
office, as we do not want any individual buyer to have this
responsibility passed on to him.
3. We would also require a test well to determine the amount and
quality of water available."
Mr. Raynor: Have they done some water tests on the property?
Mr. Olsen: Yes, it was done back in May. The nitrate was 6.3, iron
none and magnesium none.
Mr. Wickham: There has to be an awful lot of fill to meet the Board of
Health requirements except in the lot which you call number 1 and some
will be required there. Mr. Villa says eight feet between the water table
and the finished grade and Mr. VanTuyl's elevations are shown in feet
above mean sea level. This is water table and the more inland you go
the more it is above. The very highest is 5.9 feet so it is less than
six feet above sea level which means it is even less than that above
water table and in order to meet the requirements of the Board of Health
two feet of fill has got to be placed on that to have a sewage disposal.
Planning Board -14- December 27, 1973
Mr. Olsen: There is no question that the minimum standards of the Health
Department are going to have to be met where the cesspools are located.
Mr. Wickham: Then you need a permit from the town to fill the land under
the Sand and Gravel Ordinance. There is no reason it shouldn't be granted
for one or two lots but to raise four lots and a couple of them will have
to have about four feet of fill over the whole thing. Mr. Barnett
recommends that you shouldn't build on land Sower than five feet and~ in
general~ we ask for six feet.
Mr. Olsen: It meets the requirements of the Town for a subdivision.
Mr. Wickham: No~ my own thinking is that this land is too Iow and this
is borne out by Mr. Barnett's statement and the County Board of Health.
We have a rough rule of thumb we operate under. We might say go to the
Town and see how they feel to give you a permit to fill because this is
what you are going to be faced with.
Mr. Raynor: We do operate under general health and welfare and any time
the Board decides that this is not in the public interest. I would
suggest that we discuss it after the hearing.
Mr. Wickham: Would anyone wish to speak in opposition to this minor
subdivision?
Mrs. Tiedke: I would speak generally in opposition to building on any
Iow land as far as general health and welfare of the town~ it is not a
good idea.
Mr. Olsen: Where are we left with this?
Mr. Wickham: I think it is fair to assume we wouldn't have asked the
Soil and Water Conservation to inspect the premises and report unless we
had some rather grave reservations.
The hearing was declared closed at 9:40 p.m.
The Chairman opened the hearing at 9:45 p.m. for the hearing on the final
map of ~lijah's Lane Estates, Section I subdivision owned by Joseph
Saland in Mattituck.
Mr. Raynor read the legal notice and description of the property with
metes and bounds.
The following letter was read from Charles G. Lind, Suffolk County
Department of Planning dated December 67 1973.
'The Suffolk County Planning Commission at its regular meeting~
December 5~ 19737 reviewed the above captioned map which w~s referred to
it in accordance with the requirements of Section 1333~ Article XIII~
Suffolk County Charter and it rendered the following decision.
Planning Board
-15-
December 277 1973
The
Bstates~
proposed subdivision plat entitled, "Map of Blijah's Lane
Section 1" was disapproved for the following reasons:
1. Insufficient information was provided regarding storm water
drainage particularly at the low spot on Blijah's Lane;
2. It is felt that the location of Rebeka's Road adjacent to
the L.I.R.R. right-of-way could create a traffic safety
problem and that it should be moved about 250-300 feet
south.
3. The design is generally limited to a modified grid by the
restriction o~ the use of cul-de-sacs.
4. Eighteen lots have direct access to a town road which can
develop into a major town collector thereby creating possible
traffic problems."
The bond estimate was presented as received from Lawrence Tuthill, P.B.
in the amount of $25,000.
A letter was presented from the Superintendent of Highways granting approval.
There was a letter read from the Department of Health granting approval.
Mr. Wickham: If there is anyone who wishes to speak in opposition to this
subdivision~ I will hear them now. Hearing none, I will ask if there is
anyone who wishes to speak in favor of it.
Mr. Saland: I think it is a good subdivision. I think the lots are ample
and well laid out~ the contours are good.
Mr. Wickham: You have heard before the recommendations from Charles
Barnett and he suggested that the level of Blijah's Lane be raised but
Mr. Dean didn't buy it so there is no problem there as far as we are
concerned. I think those of us who are familiar with the area know that
water is going to come into the subdivision not only from Blijah's Lane
but the recharge area between lots 5 and 6 is in a low spot and it has
not only drained Elijah's Lane for some thousand feet in each direction
except to the south~ it has also drained some of the fields to the east.
I see no real problem for the first section but your drainage area is
engineered for the entire subdivision.
Mr. Saland: It is also engineered for fifteen acres on the other side
of the subdivision and for the road. I think Mr. Barnett recommended
290 thousand cubic feet and we made it 293 thousand cubic feet.
Mr. Wickham: It might be necessary at the time the second or third
section was presented to enlarge this and I see no real reason you
couldn't enlarge it at that time. This concept that the town attorney
presented to me this afternoon and the 500 feet are fresh in my mind but
there is no real problem here ~n this section but I think you ought to
face realistically that when the second and third sections are submitted
either the Town or County requirements might have changed. I think you
have the ideal area and it can be done. If there is no one else who
wishes to speak I will declare the hearing closed and you will have an
opinion by tomorrow morning.
Hearing closed at 9:55 p.m.
Planning Board -16-
December 27, 1973
Mr. Steve Tsontakis and Mr. Nelson Axien appeared to try to resolve a
boundary dispute between Mr. Tsontakis (Peconic Knolls) and adjacent
property owners. They had been instructed at the December 8, 1973
meeting to bring in their surveys.
Mr. Axien: We have been doing alot of work. I think we can resolve this
because I had a long talk with Mr. Young. I had a talk with Mr. VanTuyl
and asked if they were going to get together. Mr. ganTuyl said they were
going to wait for the title company. I went there and saw a map filed
there. They state my boundaries are firm and good and the CPP boundaries
are not. We are all innocents.
Mr. Axien read into the minutes the following letter dated December 23,
1973 addressed to Mr. Conforti of The Title Guarantee Company signed by
Mr. Axien.
"Mr. Wm. B. Edwards and I went over the above files consisting of
the boundary errors of the SPF Corp. which you have aiSoiinsured. You
confirm my boundaries as corredt.
As I can see, there has been a tremendous amount of work involving
inter company conferences reduced to writing~ conferences with Mr. VanTuyl
and Mr. Sherwood, the surveyors admitting the errors, corrected maps
drawn to show the errors a~d also quit claim deeds outlined in writing~
from CPF Corp. to the various owners which shows real progress.
The reason for this letter is to ask if you will please assign this
file to someone in a position to clean it up~ as soon as possible. Mr.
Underwood I understand has put in alot of good work and time on this.
In order to expedite this~ I shall be at your service to answer for
the Axien property. You can call during the day. My phone Southold 5-
3155.
The Hehn property has been sold. Mr. Stanley Waimey of Cutchogue
his phone 734 - 6690 (Four Sales Realty) will also be able to answer
your questions during the day: covering this property.
The CPF Land Corp is before the Southold Town Planning Board on
preliminary hearings for a subdivision. They should be most helpful at
this time. Mr. Alexander Fusaro of 429 Lenox Road, Huntington Station~
N. Y. appears to be the active person here.
In several days, we shall make a call to ascertain ~itho~homswe may
confer with~ %0 bring this to a conclusion as soon as possible."
Mr. Raynor: Are you saying this property is not affected by a boundary
dispute?
Mr. Axien: No. The title company has quitclaim deeds from CPP to Peconic
Knolls as well as to myself.
Mr. Tsontakis: I am perfectly content with what I have here. I will
reject a deed from them. Here is a letter I received from Young and Young
addressed to my title company.
Planning Board -17- December 27~ 1973
The following letter was presented dated December 21, 1973 to Chicago
Title Insurance Company and signed by Alden W. Young.
"After Mr. Axien had during the presentation of the preliminary
plan for a realty subdivision entitled "Peconic Knolls, Inc." to the
Planning Board of the Town of Southold stated that the outline survey of
subdivision was incorrect. The realty subdivision encompassed the land
which Four Sails Realty, Inc. and/or lands of Stanley Waimey and Jack
Driscoll had acquired from F. Hehn. It is my hnderstanding that this
land is under contract of sale to Peconic ~nolls, Inc. and the principal
of this corporation is Mr. Steven Tsontakis. The Planning Board advised
that they would not consider this subdivision until the boundaries of the
property had been settled.
Messrs. Waimey and Driscoll immediately contacted you, because the
Company bad insured their title and thereafter came to my office as we
had prepared three individual surveys of the land acquired from F. Hehn.
The three surveys encompassed the entire parcel of land of F. Hehn. In
preparing these surveys, we followed the line of the land as monumented
and in accordance with description in deed to CPF Land Corporation and
the line of the subdivision entitled "Peconic Homes, Section 2" as shown
on a map filed in the Suffolk County Clerk's Office. The monument at the
northwest corner of this land had been shown to my field party by Mr.
Axien.
Messrs. Waimey and Driscoll went to the office of Rodney VanTuyl,
Licensed Lane Surveyor, of Greenport, and obtained maps to this parcel
of land, the land of Axien and of CPF Land Corporation. They were advised
that an error had been made in the survey for CP~ Land Corporation and
Mr. VanTuyl was preparing a new map for a boundary line agreement.
I told Messrs. Waimey and Driscoll it was not a matter of title
and that the survey, which had been prepared~ should be acceptable unless
they wished to obtain small strips of land based on the deed to them
rather than line as monumented and as described in deeds. They did not
wish to expend monies to clear title to such a small strip of land.
Transmitted herewith is a survey, which~we have prepared to show
the lines of deeds. In order to show the different lines, we had to
exaggerate the scaling. The distances are set forth on the survey.
Mr. Axien cal~ed me and I basically informed him of the data shown
on the survey enclosed. I told him in no uncertain words that I felt he
was trying to use the Planning Board as a whip to correct description in
deed to CPP Land Corporation as a part of his land was also included in
that description.
Messrs. Waimey, Driscoll and Tsontakis are willing to accept our
survey as their land, as it is nor encumbered."
At this time the Planning Board and the two people involved looked at the
maps.
Mr. Raynor: Are you within 500 feet to anything belonging to the County?
Planning Board -18-
December 27, 1973
Mr. Tsontakis: I don't think so.
Mr. Wickham: There is no reason we can't use this map for a preliminary
map.
Mr. Axien: Some of us plan to accept the right of way easements in
exchange for the other easements. I can talk for eleven out of fourteen
property owners so I don't think it will be any real problem. It is only
one thing that is that our right of way is shown on this map in proper
sca~ and position which it is not now. It is important to us because this
is the right of way drawn by Young which is accurate and particularly
where the right of way comes to Henry's Lane.
Mr. Raynor: When we file the map with the County Clerk the prese~h~right
of way is extinguished.
Mr. Axien: We have access to Henry's Lane.
Mr. Wickham: This Board doesn't care as long as you enter into an agree-
ment with these people.
Mr. Raynor: That is for you people to work out for yourselves.
Mr. Axien: I think it is important that it is shown to scale° In the
event that we should have a contract and the map is approved and then
something happens to the builder and he cannot finish this road.
Mr. Raynor: He is bonded so he has to do it or the Town comes in and
builds it if something happens.
Mr. Axien: All I am asking is that we use the survey of the right of way.
Mr. Wickham: When you agree to define a right of way, the existing right
of way is automatically extinguished. We can hold a hearing but it
cannot be filed until there is an agreement either on the existing right
of way or defining a new right of way and extinguishing the old.
Mr. Tsontakis: For the record, I received a letter from the Suffolk
County Mosquito Control Commission. We made use of a pond area and runoff
to Autumn Lake and they approve of it.
Following is a letter dated December 7, 1973 addressed to Mr. Steve
Tsontakis and signed by Joseph Sanzone~ Superintendent of the Suffolk
County Mosquito Control Commission.
"In reply to your letter of December 6, 1973, the drainage pond and
sluice gate that you plan to construct in the proposed subdivision of
Peconic Knolls appears to be adequate for mosquito control purposes.
The Suffolk County Mosquito Control Commission approves of this
plan and has no objections to your developing this site."
Mr. Tsontakis: If we can't get an agreement on a new right of way we
will leave the old right of way there. I believe this is going to cause
an inordinate delay.
Planning Board -19- December 27, 1973
In reference to Inlet Bast subdivision, the following letter was received
by the Planning Board from Lawrence M. Tuthill, P.B. dated December 12,
1973.
"With reference to your letter of Dec. 11, my recommendations for
Inlet Bast Estates are as follows:
1. That the road profile be redesigned so that the artificial hill at
station 1-50 be removed and that the road in this area conform more to
the existing ground. As presently shown on the "Road Profile & Section"
dated Jan. 22: 1973, a hazardous condition exists at the intersection of
Harborview Avenue~ when a car traveling north tries to stop at the
intersection under icy conditions.
2. That catch basins and leaching basins be provided near the inter-
section of Harborview Avenue.
3. That if a recharge basin is to be built, a more detailed study of
the basin be made, and include a road into the basin. The study should
contain crossections of the dike into the hill sides, and in the vicinity
and across the natural drain, which drains a considerable area of the
adjacent property. A map showing the proposed contour lines in the
vicinity of the recharge basin would be of value.
I would like to discuss with the Planning Board and Highway Super-
intendent the possibility of the use of catch basins and leaching basins
along with a wide drainage easement toward the creek in place of a
recharge basin. The ~rea to be drained is relatively small. During a
heavy rain the excess water could be discharged into the creek, eliminating
the possibility of ponding at this point."
A letter was read from the Superintendent of Highways
acceptance after the October 24~ 1973 Town Bngineer's
recommending
report has been met.
Mr. Dennis: We went through all these hearings and I think we are
complying with the wishes of the Planning Board and now we get this
letter. I don't understand what you want. (Referring to letter giving
Mr. Tuthill's recommendations).
Mr. Wickham: As of today, the Highway Committee informed me that they
weren't going to agree to leaching basins any more. I feel we have held
you up too long on this and I think we can post this for a final hearing.
We will try to work this out with the Highway Department and get back to
Mr. Barnett. We will get back to you with a determination.
The following letter was received from the Southold Town Board of Appeals.
Dated December 27~ 1973.
"At a hearing of the Board of Appeals on December 20, 1973, the Board
granted approval of division of property, as outlined in survey dated
October 8, 1969, for Mr. Gasper Pisacano~ Cedar Beach Road, Southold~
subject to the following condition:
Planning Board -20- December 27, 1973
'That the proposed division of applicant's property be subject to
approval of the Planning Board since it involves the creation of three
lots.'
In his application Mr. Pisacano stated that when he originally
purchased his home on Cedar Beach Road it was his understanding that he
had a total of five lots. It seems that someone had drawn five lots on
a map. However, it is not a subdivision.
After investigation and inspection the Board found that applicant
is largely surrounded by lots that are one quarter acre or less in size
and believes that the proposed lots are a most reasonable disposition of
square footage.
We would appreciate receiving your recommendation at your earliest
convenience~"
The Board discussed the proposal and determined that they have been
told very clearly that they cannot approve any lots less than forty
thousand square feet under any circumstances.
The Chairman directed that a letter be written to Richard Cron, Esq.
representing Orient Point as follows:
The County normally requires subdividers in areas where bank
erosion can be expected to put on their map a line one hundred feet
back from the rep of the bank and we suggest this.
In addition~ under Section A106-42(9) the Southold Town Planning
Board requires the approximate location and size of all water lines~ etc.
if this is going to be served by a central water system. Under Section
A106-42(10) a storm drainage plan is necessary including the approximate
location and size of the proposed lines and connection to storm water
recharge basins. Both of these are prerequisites for a preliminary
hearing.
Also, we will probably require that the park and playground area
include the very end of the island.
After a report from the Superintendent of Highways and completion
of the above, we will be able to set a preliminary hearing.
The Board decided to continue 'imembership in the New York State Planning
Federation.
A letter was received from the Planning Department of the County regarding
dredging at Conkling's Point.
Planning Board -21-
December 27, 1973
The Planning Board recommends that the dredging should be in an easterly
location indicated on the map because there is relatively little tide
action, there is relatively little along-the-shore littoral drift and
there is relatively deep water on the bay side. There is also a hard
bottom. At this time, it would probably be good business to dredge a
small amount of spoil from the opposite side of the creek and dover the
old cars and build up the berm of the beach in the general location of
the old inlet.
A complaint was received regarding the Mattituck Shopping Center relative
to loitering and littering. The Board will look into the matter.
The following letter was received from the Town Clerk dated December 12,
1973.
"The original ~etition of William Wickham requesting a change of
zone on certain property situated at Arshamomaque, near Greenport, New
York, from '~" Residential and Agricultural District to "B" Light
Business District is in the files in the office of the Planning Board
at Southold, New York.
You~are instructed to prepare an official report defining the
conditions described in the petition and determine the area so affected
with the recommendation of your Board."
Mr. Wickham refrained from taking action because he is part owner of this
property. Consequently~ there was no quorum present and the matter was
tabled until the next regular meeting.
The following letter was received from the Town Clerk dated December 12~
1973.
"The original petition of Richard C. Wilton and John C. Clanton
requesting a change of zone on certain property situated at Greenport,
New York, from "A" Residential and Agricultural District to "M-i" General
.Multiple Residence District and "B" Light Business District is in the
files in the office of the Planning Board at Southold, New York.
You are instructed to prepare an official report defining the
conditions described in the petition and determine the area so affected
with the recommendation of your Board." ~
The Board directed that a letter be written to Mr. Barnett asking him
to take a look at it and give us a soil interpretation as it does not
appear that they will hook up to the Greenport Sewer.
Planning Board ,22- December 27, 197B
The Chairman directed that a letter be written to Mr. DeRosa of Blue
Horizons (~PF Land Corporation) asking them how they are making out with
their new test holes.
Maps were received from William W. Schriever, Orient~ and he will be
scheduled for a review of the maps for the January meeting.
Re Walt Whitman Federal Savings & Loan, in answer to a letter from the
Suffolk County Health Department, a letter was directed to be written to
the surveyors, DeNigris & Mater, requesting the location of the well
points and the location of the leaching pools on the site plan.
ReSyloret, the county requires'and the Board concurs that there be
legend on both lots 16 and 17 and no access will be allowed from CR 27.
The maps were to be sent back to VanTuyl and when they are returned to
the Planning 8oard, they are to be resubmitted to the County Planning
Commission.
A letter was directed to be written to Aetna Insurance Company re
Harbor Lights Estate Section 1 subdivision informing them that the
subdivider has been in close contact withathe Town Board on this matter
and we will await developments.
Mr. Wickham made a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting of
December 6, 1973. Mr. Raynor seconded the motion and it was carried.
On motion made by Mr. Moisa, seconded by Mr. Rayn0r, it was
RBSOLVBD that the Southold Town Planning Board deny preliminary approval
of the minor subdivision of Robert Casola consisting of a parcel of land
at Orient~ in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New
York: because it is not in the best interests of the health, safety and
welfare of the residents of Southold Town. If it is possible to obtain
filling permission~ one residence could be erected on the property.
Vote of the Board: Aye - Raynor, Moisa, Wickham
Planning Board -23-
December 27, i973
On motion made by Mr. Raynor, seconded by Mr. Moisa, it was
RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board grant final approval to
~lijah's Lane Estates subdivision owned by Joseph Saland, consisting of
a parcel of land, situate, lying and being at ~attituck, in the Town of
Sou/hold, County of Suffolk and State of New York.
Vote of the Board: Aye - Raynor, Moisa, Wickham
The next meeting was scheduled for January 15, 1974.
Meeting adjourned at 11:15 p.m.
Respect~fully submitt~
Murie~-~r~-s4~i-S.~c/retary
Southold Town Planning Board
, Chairman