HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-11/19/2012PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS
DONALD J. WILCENStCI
Chair
WILLIAM J. CREMERS
KENNETH L. EDWARDS
JAMES H. RICH III
MARTIN H. SIDOR
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, November 19, 2012
4:30 p.m.
Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairperson
William J. Cremers, Member
Kenneth L. Edwards, Member
James H. Rich III, Member
Martin H. Sidor, Member
Heather Lanza, Planning Director
Bdan Cummings, Planner
Alyxandra Sabatino, Planner
Carol Kalin, Secretary
RECEIVED
£C 18 1' .'
Sou~old Town Clerk
SETTING OF THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING
Don Wilcenski: Good evening ladies and gentlemen and welcome to the November 19,
2012 regularly-scheduled Southold Town Planning Board's Public Meeting. Our first
order of business is to set Monday, December 17, 2012 at 4:30 p.m. at the Southold
Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, as the time and place for the next regularly-scheduled
Planning Board Meeting.
William Cremers: So moved.
Kenneth Edwards: Second.
Don Wilcenski: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor?.
Ayes.
Don Wilcenski: Motion cardes.
Southold Town Planning Board Pa,qe Two November 19, 2012
PUBLIC HEARINGS
4:30 p.m. - Maaratooka North, LLC - This proposed Open Development Area (ODA)
will create a development area of 4.5 acres in a 22.5-acre parcel with the future
potential to be subdivided into a maximum of three residential lots and one 18-acre
protected farmland parcel in the AC Zoning District. The property is located at 17405
NYS Route 25, on the n/s/o NYS Route 25, approximately 1,185' east of Mill Lane,
Mattituck. SCTM#1000-115-2-6
Donald Wilcenski: At this time, I'd like to ask anyone from the audience if they would
like to approach the podium and address the Planning Board regarding the public
hearing on this application.
Dan Ross for the applicant: As noted, this is a 22.5-acre lot. 18 acres are slated for
development rights sold and 4.5 acres will be the open development area. The yield
calculations that really were negotiated on a broader scale many years ago, result in
this particular case to three lots in the open area. However, the State, which has an
interest in this matter because their money is paying some of the development rights
fee, has requested that only one lot be permitted to be knocked out of that open
development area. I believe there is a letter to the Board to that effect and you will note
that it is specifically indicated on the map. However, there has been a preservation of
the uses that would otherwise be permitted for the three lots. In my experience, that's
the first time there's been that distinction. But that's why that happened. I don't see
Melissa (Spiro) here, but basically, when you run the yield numbers, you have three
permissible lots in the 4.5. But the State said "no--we're paying for this or some of it,
so we only want one lot to be knocked out of that 4.5." We basically agreed to do that
with one lot; however, preserving for that 4.5 uses that would otherwise be permitted for
three lots. That's basically what we are doing here. Any questions?
Donald Wilcenski: Does the Board have any questions for Mr. Ross? Thank you. Is
there anybody else in the audience who would like to address the Planning Board on
Maaratooka North, LLC?
Paul Viviano: I have the farm next door. It was previously owned by Marty Sidor. My
question is: I went yesterday to the Planning Board and the people there were very
nice. They showed us the map. I don't understand the map. There's no specific
locations for the three houses or whatever. I don't see any farm road. How are you
going to get to the back property--the 18 acres? I don't see that there either. I think
it's an incomplete survey, whatever it is.
Donald Wilcenski: I will let Mr. Ross answer the question, but I think those have been
addressed.
Southold Town Planning Board Pa.qe Three November 19, 2012
Paul Viviano: I didn't hear him--sorry.
Dan Ross: I agree. You'll see the earlier renditions of the map was designed as a flag
that went down to the Main Road. What the State has also requested in addition to--
and understand that there's not three lots; there's a yield of three but in the open
development area, legislation that the Town adopted provided that you wouldn't have to
knock out the specific borders in an open development area because maybe no one's
ever going to knock those three lots out. That's why you don't see the lot lines for three
lots in there. But again, the State has insisted that the applicant further restrict the
property so only one additional lot gets knocked out of that 4.5 acreage first. Second,
the State has insisted that there never be a separation of the 18 acres from the other
acreage minus the one lot that they are permitting. They will always be in the same
ownership. Again, the State is requiring the applicant to provide recorded deed
restrictions to that effect. Consequently, they say since the 18 acres and the 4.5 which
may someday be :~.5 will always be in the same ownership, there's no need for a right-
of-way. So why limit yourself to a right-of-way? And they are insisting that there will
always be access between the two--which they don't have to insist on because it's
always going to be under the same ownership. Of course, you may lease the 18 acres
to somebody and you may have a problem there, but what can you do? Did I answer
your question, sir?
Paul Viviano: No. What you're telling me is (inaudible) to build what you feel. OK. I
don't see where you're going to.. I'm a licensed electrician and I've been in
construction and I own buildings in the city and I've built in the city. Where is the
access to the back property? How do they get there? You lease a property to me, I'm
gonna let you drive through my yard to plow that field? Is that how that's gonna work?
Dan Ross: If you lease the 18 acres in the back, I would suspect that you'd probably
provide in your lease some way to get back there.
Paul Viviano: I'm asking you...
Dan Ross: And I'm saying ..... to provide access to the back if it was a lease situation.
The back acreage and the front acreage will always be owned by the same people.
Donald Wilcenski: Excuse me, gentlemen. You have to address the Board on this.
Mr. Ross, I'll interject and just say that I believe the intentions are that whoever runs the
farm in the back--the 18 acres--will be able to have an agreement with the lease of the
owners the right to cross the front property line to get to the farm. That would make
common sense to me. This is not really a true finished subdivision per se. Am I correct
in saying that, Heather?
Heather Lanza: I can explain what an ODA is a little bit.
Southold Town Plannin.q Board Page Four November 19, 2012
Paul Viviano: I'm curious now. When Mr. Sidor--Barney--I knew Barney very well.
When he sold his rights, why did they put a farm road on his property? They don't have
a farm road. I don't understand the difference here. If I got four acres and a farm road
which is on my property, he doesn't have a farm road. Does he?
Donald Wilcenski: He has access to the back of the farm through the property on the
Main Road.
Paul Viviano: I don't see it on the map.
Donald Wilcenski: Excuse me for a second. Can I just have Heather explain? I'm
going to have Heather-head of Planning-explain what an ODA is and how it works.
This should clarify it.
Paul Viviano: OK.
Heather Lanza: The Open Development Area does not show the lot lines of the future
lots, which is why you don't see where the houses are going to go. So that's number
one. Number two: your question is "why isn't there a farm road shown on the map?"
Paul Viviano: Access to the back property.
Heather Lanza: Mr. Ross has mentioned and I'll just try to explain it in a different way.
You're not separating the front from the back. They are never going to be able to be
subdivided from each other. They're always going to be the same owner. Even if they
lease it out to someone else, they still have access to Route 25. If they are going to
lease it out, they'll tell you where to drive across the front part to get to the back. So we
didn't make them draw a road because they could have it wherever they want in the
future. They just haven't decided where that's going to be yet.
Paul Viviano: I have leased properties in the city by the way. Sometimes the lessees
are not as nice as the renter or the owner. I don't go along with it. It's buying a pig in a
bag. If he tells you where the properties are going to be and how he's getting access to
the back, maybe I'll change my mind. I just don't agree with it.
Donald Wilcenski: What is your concern as a neighbor?
Paul Viviano: My concern (inaudible) houses near me--number one-- and I want to
keep it farmland. Number two: it's why I bought that with the rights sold and I don't
understand what you're putting it there. He's telling you three houses. OK, I can't
argue with that; he has a right to build. I also have a right to know how he's getting to
the back. Going through somebody's yard after you lease the property--it doesn't work
Southold Town Planning Board Page Five November 19, 2012
like that. I have land in New Hampshire that has Indian trails deeded to me, and you're
walking through a guy's barbecue to go to a lake. That's ridiculous, OK?
Donald Wilcenski: To be honest with you, I don't think it is ridiculous. Because the
same person owns the back 18 acres who owns the front and he is going to have
control over where and how that farm is used and where the access to that back farm
will be. I really don't see why it is a concern. It was an actively farmed farm for many
years and there's a barn and a house on the farm.
Paul Viviano: I know the farm.
Donald Wilcenski: OK. Therefore, I think the owner will make sure that if he does
lease the back farmland, it will be within his lease and within his rights to tell the lessor
where to access the back farm.
Paul Viviano: And he will put it in writing that whoever he leases it to will be part of his
operation to lease it or what? Where's my protection? Tractor trailers in there turning
around. I don't know if he's gonna put all the houses right on the line... I have no idea.
I want to see what he's doing exactly. That's my only argument. I don't care about
(inaudible); I like (inaudible). And that's it.
Donald Wilcenski: Dan, would you like to answer?
Dan Ross: Sure. Part of the sale of the development rights. The State is requiring (1)
the title to those two pieces are never separated; they are always in the same person.
Another--and this is a letter that went to the Planning Board--in this deal we reserve
the right of ingress and egress from the Main Road to that portion of the Open
Development Area that is not included in the allowable one-acre lot to the 18-acre
development right easement in the back. So, the State is insisting on this--not that the
owner wouldn't--but the State is insisting that the owner in this subdivision in the sale
of these development rights, covenants in writing and filed at County Center, that they
will never prevent the access. Now you don't see a specific road because they don't
want to lock it in. You may want to put it on the other side someday.
Paul Viviano: So how come I'm locked in? I don't understand that. Now you're telling
me (inaudible) they gave him a road. Why was he locked in? Did the Town take
advantage of an old man? I don't understand this now; I'm so confused.
Donald Wilcenski: Excuse me, we are talking about the application that is before us
here. We can't talk about something else.
Southold Town Plannin.q Board Page Six November 19, 2012
Paul Viviano: I'm just telling you what I've witnessed living here for 30 years, OK? I'm
just mentioning my property had to lock in a road. He don't have to lock in a road. I'm
confused. Are they special people?
Donald Wilcenski: No. I can see why you're concerned, but the owner owns both
pieces of property so he has control. Personally, I would have concern if two different
people owned the two separate parcels. Then you might get into a conflict of what
people might want. But in this case, one person is the owner of both parcels. Right
now this is an ODA where they are selling 18 acres of farmland. From what Dan is
explaining, the State doesn't require them to show lot lines for the other lots in the front.
Dan Ross: It may be, sir, that you are allowed to separate your back acreage from your
open development area.
Paul Viviano: I can. I checked it out.
Dan Ross: Because you can, they have to create a road to make sure there will always
be access. We are agreeing that there will always be access and the State is saying
there shall never be a separation. So, the owner of the two lots will be the same.
Donald Wilcenski: Excuse me, you have to address the Board. Please use the
microphone. The proper form is to address the Board. And you have to address this
application. Do you have any other questions?
Paul Viviano: Yeah, I don't think he should be giving it. OK? I could deny it. It's an
open thing--nobody knows. Nobody is going to come to me when he decides to put
the road wherever he decides and bring in tractor trailers. (Inaudible) to say I didn't
want the road there. The only place he's gonna put it is next to me and I don't want it
there. He has to show me where it's going. I don't see it's such a big problem. If they
had the rights, they should have thought this beforehand. Mr. Sidor sold the rights
because he was an elderly man and I believe he was taken advantage of. They're all
young guys. They should have figured it out. You're gonna put three houses where?
Don't say this other nonsense--sporadic building--whatever the hell that is. I don't
understand it--you put one here, you put one there, what? How does that work?
Donald Wilcenski: Do you have anything else to add?
Paul Viviano: No. I'm against it. I don't want to get involved with a legal battle after he
does what he wants to do and I'm not happy with what he came up with and have to
hire a lawyer to fight him so the other guy could make money. It's ridiculous.
Donald Wilcenski: OK. Please sign your name for the record. Thank you very much.
Paul Viviano: Thank you.
Southold Town Planninq Board Pa.qe Seven November 19, 2012
Donald Wilcenski: Does anybody else have a comment or need to address the
Planning Board on this issue of Maaratooka North, LLC? Any staff or Board Members
have any questions for Mr. Ross? Hearing none ......
James Rich: I make a motion to close the hearing.
William Cremers: Second.
Donald Wilcenski: Motion made and seconded. Any discussion? All in favor?
Ayes.
Donald Wilcenski: Motion carries. Thank you very much for your comments.
4:32 p.m. - Surrey Lane~ LLC - This site plan is for the proposed construction of a 90'
x 42' (3,780 sq. ft.) agricultural equipment storage building on a Suffolk County
Development Rights property of 43.7 acres in the A-C Zoning District. The property is
located at 46975 NYS Route 25 and fronts Lower Road & NYS Route 25, Southold.
SCTM#1000-69-5-18.6
Donald Wilcenski: At this time, I'd like to ask anyone from the audience if they would
like to address the Planning Board on this application.
Bill Kelly, authorized argent for the owner: I am here so if there are any questions the
Board wishes to ask, I am authorized to answer.
Emily Gei.qer, 2345 Ackerly Pond Lane, Southold: I would like to address the Board.
Do we have a copy of the map? I saw the proposed plan in the Planning Office.
Donald Wilcenski: There's a map in the foyer. Hanging on an easel outside.
Emily GeiRger: I've seen it. But it would be nice if we could take it .....
Donald Wilcenski: OK. While Heather is bringing that in, would you please state your
name and write your name for the record?
Emily Gei.qer: Is Surrey Lane Sparkling Pointe? Any connection?
Donald Wilcenski: No connection with Sparkling Pointe.