Full Transcript

Thank you. [transcription gap] and they had no comments. So at this point, as with the prior application, we are going to have a resolution up for a vote to classify secret, to type due action, and schedule a public hearing. Everybody good? Good. Yep. I'll remind you that the Jets, again, has nothing to do with the football team. It's Janet, Teresa, Edward, people in the family. Okay. Okay. Thank you. The farm road access level. Is that going to stay the way it is? Go from one lot to the next? Yeah, so it's an existing dirt gravel road that I showed in my staff report. It traverses that existing lot, and it connects actually to the other subdivision. That's why they're showing the future easement there, I guess in order to maintain access across the farm fields. Just so they can get to both farms.

I did refer it to Benny. So if he has any comments or concerns, he'll let us know when he comes back with a memo. But at this point, it's permanent access at this point. Yep. Yes.

Everybody good? Good. Yep. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thanks, Mr. Kahn. Agenda item number three, the malice property minor subdivision, and I believe that's with Matt. Yep. Come on. How you doing, Matt? How are you? Good. Good.

How you doing? Could you just introduce yourself by the record where you have a seat? Hi. My name is John Almontano. I'm an attorney with File Free. I represent the applicant. Thank you. Thank you. Unknown caller.

Bill? Okay. All right. The Planning Department has received and reviewed a minor subdivision application for Mallet's property. This is just over a one-acre property located at 86 Second Street in South Jamesport. They're proposing to subdivide into two nonconforming lots. Lot one is to contain an existing house and will contain 21,776 square feet. And lot two would currently have, it's a garage and a shed that are going to be demolished and contains 25,567 square feet. It's more particularly identified as Suffolk County Tax Map number 600-92-2-38. It's on the north side of Second Street in South Jamesport between Point and Green Streets. Pretty much everything around it is residential, except for the tiny little post office that's next door to the west. If you look through the staff report, it's an oversized parcel for the area. Obviously, the lots wouldn't conform to the zoning use district, but upon subdivision, it's generally in the character of the neighborhood. In terms of secret, this is an unlisted action. I do have a resolution on today to recommend a neg deck. It does have a CO for a single-family residence with a covered front porch, a rear deck, and a detached two-car garage. Really not too much to this application, absent the relief that will be required from the ZBS, so I'll leave that clear. I'll head over to head over to head over head head head obviously for a lot area they'll also need a lot with on both Lots and then lot one they will need an impervious variance where they have 21.1 percent where the maximum permitted is 15 percent parking rectory they'll need 5,000 for the additional lot being created it's been referred to the water district no comments to date nothing yet from the engineer or the highway department fire marshal had no comments it's been referred to the fire district and we have no comments yet just an update on the landmarks and preservation committee this is in the South Jamesport Historic District they had no comments at this time I just hadn't received them yet when the report went out health department they need an application that hasn't been received yet and then in terms of ship oh cuz this is in the circles and squares map they have no impacts on an archeological the frame garage and the frame shed they're coming down coming down yeah those you see it's a one square ish lot just a can you zoom out please little more yeah that's good yeah so that's the garage here got my finger in the shed they're both coming out building envelope on the proposed lot is here and that's the existing house you're going to keep the gated entry I think I'm gonna do it it depends on the layout if it can be maintained and it doesn't impede access yes I mean we'd like to keep it as consistent as it has been in the community yeah they're all the same size a lot of those Lots on there I don't think we're setting any precedents yeah Matt I just I drove through the neighborhood open and there are probably good half dozen eight more other like side lots and you know yards that can be can be doing the same thing so you're not setting any precedent and I agree all the homes have in a little bit small areas I don't have a problem with it it's a similar character it doesn't meet health department standards for a lot of area based on the ground water management zone that it's in and I'm in the area where we live. yeah. [transcription gap] it's just our zoning that it doesn't comply with. is a particular size house that you cannot go over I mean square footage so I mean basically what you see in terms of a building area is what you could build obviously they'd probably go over there impervious surface in that in that instance but it's not very big so from what you're the drawing that's on the map is right pretty much the size that you would say I believe it's a 27 by 66 foot well model. model. so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so we got further to me that they all should be probably I would say it's probably a good idea your special house special ask with only 39 feet yeah it's really a character with the neighborhood stuff yeah it's not too much here so action today would be unlisted in the neck deck so they can proceed to the ZBA if they get their desired relief then make them back and reschedule public care sounds good good okay all right agenda item number four 11 25 old Country Road facade improvements once again with Matt Jones this is a real point point point point

no staff report on this just a table to amend if you recall I believe it was back May 16 we had the former blockbuster for a administrative site plan they were doing facade work part of their application they were going to regrade the parking lot do a little cut and fill a condition of approval was getting a grading and drainage plan approved by the town engineer that's been submitted and approved which is what you saw in your packet so this would be to administratively approve the grading and drainage plan this is what he had deployed for okay so it's just yes it's complying with the condition of approval from resolution 2024 38 pretty straightforward conditions it just calls out that this is what the approval is for and I think they'll need a 229 permit which is handled through the building department for the importation exportation I've been by there quite a bit of time there you go it looks like it's been approved and approved it looks like it's been approved and approved looks really good nice you live ocean yeah 30 by 100 in the back the dirt area yeah that's his right that's his it's gonna remain grass for now and if he wanted to do a future improvement he'd have to come back to the edge of the fence yeah I did see that they did open the cross access to the West Marine Park lot yeah it's gonna I think help everything out a lot there you did a beautiful job yeah looks good yep all right everybody good yep okay agenda head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head We came with the whole crew, I know. Good. It's a big project. Thank you.

A few more people in the parking lot. Wait a minute. Clown car. We could go out and charge them for parking. Just kidding. Sorry. Is there a pool? If you gentlemen could just go around the table and introduce yourself. Big person asking, working on the project. Mike Kelly, I'm the applicant. Matthew Elward, civil engineer, R&M Engineering. I'm Phil Giordano, architect, PLD Architecture. John Borkman, counsel for the applicant, Egan and Golden. Greg Bergman, senior planner with the Riverbed Planning Department. Okay. Before we get too far into this, I did have a conversation with a property owner next to HK Ventures, who originally would not submit to a lot line easement. The company? The company. The company.

! Future Cross-Action. Yeah, Future Cross-Action. I did speak to those two owners today. They are willing to do that because I'm sure this project, the state may want to put a light there. Now, if we have a light at HK and a light here, it just doesn't make any sense. If we could do one light at Fresh Pond, I just think... I don't disagree with you, Ed, but before we get into this, just speaking to that, I mean, the applicant, you know, the person who's going to be the head of the project, I think, is going to be the head of the project. So, I think, if we can do one light at Fresh Pond... All right. So, I don't disagree with you, Ed. Before we get into this. So, just speaking to that, I mean, the applicant for that project, in March of 2021, the neighboring property owner denied Future Cross-Access. Right. The applicant went forward with their project, understanding that they could not cross onto that neighboring property. That obviously would have been the fix for that. Yep. But an applicant with frontage on a site... Yeah. ...on a state highway, state can't withhold access. They can't withhold a curb cut. They can't withhold... So, I don't disagree with you, but unfortunately, you know, three years down the road, now that he's unfortunately had some sort of, like, buyer's remorse, I mean, I never got one call from that project saying, hey, what's going on with this? Yeah. He denied it, so I just... It just makes common sense to have a light at Fresh Pond. All the senior citizens that live down there can get in and out, and then eliminate one because they're going to probably have a light. So, we made... So, to get into this, I think we can address some of that. May not necessarily... Let's get through this report, and I will... Okay. I just wanted to bring it up... I will speak... I will speak... I agree with you, and I think that's important... ...and that will be something that will come up and look through the Seeker Review. So, this project, on a high-level overview, involves two applications that are currently before the Planning Board. One is a major subdivision. The other is a site plan application. We can handle these together. What's that? Are they going to be handled together? They have to be. Yes. We're going to... So, they are... Why do they have to be? I mean, we have to consider the impacts from the entire project. So, I mean, this is not just one application independent of the other. This is a subdivision of land and then a future development of those subdivided parcels. So, in terms of Seeker, we can't segment the review. Obviously, if we get... when we get to any types of approvals or anything, there will be separate resolutions, potentially approving a subdivision or a site plan. But when we review this, we have to look at the total action and weigh all of the impacts and consider how everything's going to work out. So, when I... when we talk about the total action, it is the subdivision and the site plan. You know, we're looking at them both concurrently. Okay. Thank you. Excuse me for a second. Did you want to make a comment, sir? That's okay. I was listening to the conversation about the traffic light... Okay. ...and having built quite a number of... Okay. ...similarly situated parcels. We've run into those issues, so... Okay. All right. ...not uncommon, nor... especially on the state highway, we've done that as well. Yeah. I just think why all these projects are ink on paper, it's kind of... Yeah. Good time to put it on the table. So, from our standpoint, my standpoint, I understand it. We'll work however we can with you guys... Yeah. ...and the neighbors to make sure... Okay. Great. ...everything makes sense. Thank you. Thank you. No, it's all right. Thank you. So, again, so the subject property is a vacant wooded 15.8 acre site located on the north side of Middle Country Road. It's located approximately 475 feet west of the intersection of Middle Country Road and Calverton. Subject property is split zoned. Now, on the map here, just for reference, the left side of the paper, this is Middle Country Road. So, you know, maybe I'll... Shh. ...like this, so we can just... Justin, can we zoom out a little bit? All right. So now, can we go more? Can we zoom out more? Let's get the whole thing. There we go. All right. So, Middle Country Road here, so we're looking in a north-south orientation. The northern portion of the property is zoned Residence B40, which is a one-acre residential zone. The front approximately 500 feet are zoned Hamlet Center, which is a zoning district which allows mixed-use commercial and residential. There's approximately 242,000 square feet of Hamlet Center zoning district and about 448,000 square feet of Residence B40 zoning district. The properties, the general, the areas contains a mix of agricultural uses, including Miloski's Poultry Farm directly to the west. Single-family residential uses both to the north and west, which are part of Timber Park residential development. There's also assorted commercial and industrial uses, including J&R Steakhouse, Bean and Bagel Cafe, Calverton Commons development, which is a little bit further to the west. And then, as you recall, we've got the tractor supply site located just south of the intersection of Fresh Pond and Middle Country Road. And that site, for the board may remember, there are also approved three additional units. Okay. Okay. So, there are three additional pad sites at that tractor supply site. So, generally, it's becoming a little bit of a commercial node out in Calverton. The property, the front 485 feet are located within the Riverhead Water District extension 37R Calverton. It's in Suffolk County Groundwater Management Zone 3 with an allowable sanitary density of 4,761 gallons per day based on the property size. The property is located in the Wading River Fire District. And there are no mapped freshwater wetlands or anything on the property. So, it's not encumbered. So, when we talk about SICRA, it is a Type 1 action. The overall development proposes land and ground disturbance in excess of 10 acres, requiring mandatory coordinated review. In my report, I did detail the involved agencies and their level of involvement in review of the project. On page 6 of the staff report, there were just some minor amendments that need to be made. There are some amendments that need to be made to the full environmental assessment form just to clarify and make some accurate statements on it. So, I have shared the report with the applicant. They will amend that full EAF and get it to us before we actually formally distribute the SICRA coordination material. Just some initial things. Again, I haven't, you know, we haven't begun to measure impacts or assess impacts. But just some things that the board will consider will obviously be traffic, water supply, sanitary wastewater management, impacts to groundwater. And then, of course, the SICRA coordination material. So, there will be impacts to the area of residential management, impacts to groundwater, potential impacts to threatened or endangered species, loss of forested lands habitat, impacts of proposed exterior lighting, impacts on critical environmental areas, potential odors from a sewage treatment plant. And the property is located in a potentially archaeologically sensitive area. So there will be, could, will assess potential archaeological impacts. So, I will go through the subdivision first. And then, I will go through the sort of aspect of the area. Okay. of the site plan. So the subdivision will result in a 10-lot subdivision. There will be seven residential lots all right around 40,000 square feet, one going up to about 44,000 square feet plus or minus. There will be a 77,000 square foot sewage treatment parcel. There will be a 217,000 square foot commercial parcel. I'll call it commercial because that's the Hamlet Center portion, which would be up here. And then lot number 10 would be a stormwater management parcel. As shown on the map, all of the lots comply with the dimensional requirements for each of the zoning districts in which they are located. The subdivision map does include a 55-foot-wide right-of-way, which would comply with the town code. And the plans call for the installation of both water mains and sewer mains in that right-of-way. I do know that they are proposing the map does include notes to be that the road is to be dedicated to the town of Riverhead Highway. I would think at this early stage that note should be removed. The highway department hasn't had a chance to review it, so I think it's early to say that that road would be dedicated. However, I do know that they are designing it to town standard. It should be dedicated. Greg, what's the future best for? I see existing and then there's a future. So that's a question I'm going to get to down the road. I'm not sure if that's required by the health department. I know sometimes health departments are going to have to do that. I'm not sure if that's required by the health department. They'll require like future expansion. It's a redundancy. The best system is the name of the system. And then the health department just wants to make sure 30, 40, 50 years from now there's a redundancy. There's enough room to build a new one while they're phased out of the initial. Thank you. So in terms of compliance with the Long Island Workforce Housing Act, they do need to submit a yield map. So when we look at a yield map, we just look for the maximum development potential of a subject property. This map sort of jumps the gun a little bit with the inclusion of the sewage treatment plant. But I do know based on the size of the sewage treatment plant and the size of the lots within the subdivision, they could definitely prepare an eight lot residential subdivision map that would both meet the dimensional requirements of the RB40 zoning district as well as the health department sanitary standards. So I don't think that's a heavy lift to demonstrate that. An eight lot yield map. That said, if the eight lot yield map would be approved, seven lots would represent a reduction in density, which under our current Long Island Workforce Housing Act would be to provide on-site affordable housing. So getting to the site plan, the site plan proposes to develop lot nine of the subdivision with a mixed two-story mixed use building, which will consist of approximately 30,000 square feet of ground floor commercial space, which is ideal. The site plan is identified as retail, along with 36 residential apartments on the upper floors. The residential apartments are identified on the floor plans as a one-bedroom unit, which includes a loft space. So there's a rendering of the development from Middle Country Road. Here is a floor plan.

Here's a full head room. upper floors all conform to the permitted uses within the hamlet center zoning district the application right now the only variance that is required based on the plans is for exterior lighting which I'll get to a little bit but aside from the lighting which I believe can be easily amended the application is fully as of right there would not be seeking any variances in terms of access access to the site would be taken from a new right-of-way for middle country road which is proposed along the western side of the project site which will serve as access to both the commercial development as well as the residential subdivision the commercial development would come off middle country road onto the new right-of-way and then be served by a curb cut off of that new right-of-way site plan provides a total of a hundred and seventy seven parking stalls which includes 20 land bank parking stores the land bank stalls here you can zoom out a little bit Justin yep that's good so 177 total parking stalls calculations include parking for the residential apartments at a rate of 1.5 parking stalls per dwelling unit and parking for retail which is based on a rate of 1 for 250 square feet the parking is generally located in the central courtyard as well as it was he going to differentiate between the residents and the commercial there's going to be special spots like in the center in terms of assigned parking yeah yeah because otherwise you're going to have them you'll have the residents parking all over the place yeah I hate to be like the parking police especially on a community like this typically will assign a parking spot for the residential this way they know where they're they're gone so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so day god willing they're all working and they're probably not around for to interfere with the commercial aspect of it but to your point right ensuring that they have a spot wherever that may be will work that out with staff you restrict the this internal area just for commercial that's how we anticipated it that that southern parking perhaps most of the residential would be in the back on the north side right right and then the commercial would be in that little pocket there as well as around the right grass of building and the residents going to park over there they still have to go through the development or through an access way right there's walkways around the building yes there's on both both side on the north side of the building so they can access through there and then walk through well I'm just looking at the at the southern end those parking spots they have to walk through right right yeah access or they could walk or they could enter the building on the north side and then walk through to the south side so they could be inside the building so the building is oriented like this so this would be north this would be south so if you're parking on the north side of the building if you're a resident you can come in through this stairwell and you can actually go through this like hallways along the second floor but yes I mean you will have to walk to your apartments so you'll have to head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head how many seats that could hold. We don't want to get into a situation where it can just be retail. We want to make sure there's enough parking and flexibility. Yeah, someone wants to have a little cafe, a little bistro, a little restaurant, anything, office spaces permitted in Hamlet Center. So there should be, we should just plan for some flexibility. You got cross-access easements on both sides? So I do, I am proposing that. Um, so I do recommend, so town code requires cross-access for future developments. So right now, to the west, Miloski's Poultry Farm is about, I believe, a 20-acre parcel. I'm sorry, 21 acres. It shares the same zoning line. So in the future, there could be a similar development in size and scale in nature. So it would make sense that if this is going to, serve as a right-of-way, we want to make a future cross-access to the west, which would access Poultry, and it would make sense to have those two line up. And I do recommend on page 10 of the staff report, I highlighted a couple of sections. Right now, this is the eastern property boundary. They show a no parking stall, which I'm assuming is a loading berth. It seems like that loading berth could be reconfigured to here, and that this could be left open for future cross-access to J&R. So that's the statehouse. Now, on the topic of future cross-access and where this might present an opportunity down the road to address, and I apologize, this isn't in my staff report, so I'm kind of freestyling a little bit. The neighboring property owner to the east is right now vacant farm field. Development rights are intact. Justin, can we zoom out a little bit?

A little more? A little more? So that we can see the whole... whole picture? There would be potential, and it would make sense, so Fresh Pond Avenue is over here. Allow, when we're doing the subdivision, allow for like a future connector road, where if this property to the east is ever developed, incorporate some type of like tap road, where down the road, you know, I have no indication that Fresh Pond will be signalized. It's ultimately the DOT's decision, but in the event that that's not, this could serve as access. If this is a future signalized intersection, it would provide an opportunity in the future to create a road where people could access a light. Just something to consider down the road for the future planning. Is there any buffering against the northern property line? Is existing houses there? Is there any buffering? So the code doesn't require buffering from residence to residence. 60? [transcription gap] 60? [transcription gap] incorporate as we look through the potential impacts if there's any ways to retain some existing buffers there are no existing but it's just straightforward well I mean it's but the entire property right now is wooded so you know the people to the north the north of the development on South Path they're looking at woods with increased development if this were to be completely cleared which would not recommend but you know that would open up that view shed where they can you know potentially see some street glare so if there's any way we can incorporate some type of buffers between the residents that's something that will definitely consider I think we've got about a 60 foot setback off that back property line yeah it looks like it says we could actually we could absolutely do whatever fencing landscape yeah I mean that that's 60 feet I think it's just demonstrating the required setback so they're sort of identifying the building envelope but that's it like I said there's no requirements in the code buffering residential to residential but it's something that we can definitely consider and I would recommend. Have you built any of these with the I'm thinking looking at a metal roof right yeah yeah it's nice. Have you done any like that? We're doing so we're doing one right now first floor is restaurant second floor is office medical office but it's a it's a metal roof we're doing that but it's a it's a metal roof we're doing that. in Farmingville right now yeah it's it's a nice look for us like a Hamlet Center type of place the one we're doing in Farmingville is actually on horse block Road so it's a pretty well traveled road pretty I yeah eye-catching as far as providing the town water who is responsible for paying for the installation of that so the developer would pay yes I mean what when we send these applications out and we can seek referrals it will obviously be done by the developer. When we send these applications out and we can seek referrals it will obviously be done by the developer. go to the riverhead water district we will seek their input on that definitely I would wait you to say they're gonna have a map and plan to see what they need to do in order to provide water to the site both for potable water as well as fire service. Craig. Yes. Could you just go once again the cross-access is there is the one to the east. So right now the maps the match right now does not show the cross-access that's something that I'm working on. So right now the maps the match right now does not show the cross-access that's something that I'm working on. so right now the maps the match right now does not show the cross-access that's something that I'm working on. [transcription gap] side here with Miloskis and on the east side here for J&R's Steakhouse. And then again potentially we can explore incorporating some future cross access out to Fresh Pond for the north. With these cross access, one is traffic right, but you know you have commercial uses like J&R's and the coffee shop to the west. You know in building that treatment plant, if we can have those conversations with those owners and I don't know them if you have you can refer them to me and Rick and you know if we can take them off of sanitary and put them in there with treatment plant I think it's good for everybody. So just something to think about. So that is something I did discuss I think I've brought up down the road. I don't want to jump around too much so I just want to go through. So loading areas, town code based on the size of the commercial space requires two loading berths. Right now they just really show one loading area so they really they need to incorporate an additional loading area and really they could should consider where commercial deliveries are going to take place. Residential deliveries, Amazon, Uber Eats, DoorDash, that sort of stuff. So they need to incorporate that into the plans. Cross access we touched on. There's a number of design standards which I don't want to go through each of them. Right. Excuse me. I just want to point here. Are you leaning towards requiring us to get the core of easements. So what we. I think it's a great idea. When we review a site plan. We have an applicant. You know obviously we understand that an applicant cannot control property outside their property lines. Right. [transcription gap] Right. Right. So when we review a site plan, we have an applicant. Obviously, we understand that an applicant cannot control property outside their property lines. When we review site plans, we have you file a future cross-access agreement. So, for example, when I say this area, this area would be described by meets and bounds. You would file a future cross-access where, in the event the neighboring property is developed, that's where we're going to seek it through. It's just planning for the future. Yeah. Well, I'm fine with that. And, I mean, honestly, my experience is we should try to do it now. That's what we're doing. Because with wall bounds, it took 20 years. I was on the town board for that one. And even on the other side now for the Zambra building, which they redid, I think they had to do a cross-season recently. And originally, when that whole thing started, they wouldn't do it. Yeah. That's why we're bringing it up now. And, you know, those elements will be incorporated into any design. I know both property owners on this, and I'm pretty sure. We have a pretty good chance of not having a big production if we get cross-season here. Yeah. Well, I mean, again, at this point, when you talk about this development, we're just talking about filing them on your properties. Okay. Now, if the neighboring property owners want to be made aware of the future locations. Well, that's what I was going to say. In other words, do we get it legally, the cross-season, that we don't actually create the cross-season as part of the site plan until later on for the traffic flow? Correct. I mean, now that said, if a neighboring property owner, if it comes in, if you want to construct it now. Again, I don't think Miloski's Poultry Farm needs a cross-access to their site. But, again, for future development, future planning, it makes sense. The development rights are intact on that parcel. That's correct. Someday. That's why I said kind of do it now. Ink on paper at this point. Maybe JR's might want actually now. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, you know, when you go out to that section of Calverton, there's no real formal curb cut. I mean, JR Steakhouse, it's like a wide-open free-for-all. Bean and Bagel, Miloski's Poultry, it's like a free-for-all. It's like, oh, go in where you want, come out where you want, don't hit anybody. So getting some formalized, you know, when we saw a tractor supply get developed, they put curbing, they put in sidewalks. When this gets referred to the DOT, DOT is going to look for curbing, they're going to look for sidewalks. So it'll help bring some order. You know, when you look at neighboring development, it'll help bring some order to that area. So as I mentioned, just very briefly, I don't want to harp on it. Right now, the exterior lighting poles are proposed at 20-foot height, which does not comply with the Darker Skies Code. I think that's a simple, pretty simple redesign. Landscaping and irrigation, they appear to indicate, just based on looking at the plans, it looks like they're proposing to irrigate landscaping with downwater. The Rivet Water District does not allow that, so they would need to incorporate an irrigation well. At some point. I did have some initial conversations with Suffolk County Transit. So right now, there is an existing bus stop just east of Fresh Pond Avenue. As you will recall, the tractor supply did a little turnout on the south side. There's a stop on the north side. Again, there's no formal turnout there. I referred to them, just had a quick conversation. This might be an opportunity to incorporate a turnout here. I mean, there's going to be more people here, employees, residents. It makes sense. So we'll keep the Suffolk County Transit in the loop regarding this development. So to the sewage treatment plant, they are proposing a sewage treatment plant, a biologically engineered single sludge treatment to collect sanitary from the entire development, both the commercial as well as the residential component. They do show that future BESST, again, if it's redundancy. But, you know, with the potential development of the neighboring projects, the parcels, there may be an opportunity where we could allow future connections rather than build a sewage treatment plant here and then another one right next door. And I think that's probably something that the health department will look at and look for future connections rather than just build a bunch of little package plants all over the place. Are you satisfied with the BESST system? Is that what you're going to go with? That's what we're going to go with. So the chromaglass system, I think, had become outdated. We're talking about membranes, really. So the next thing. Yeah. Different type of situation. Better than BESST. Membranes is a local thing. Yeah. It's worked well on other sites that we've had. Okay. You know, the odor control, which is, I think, something that you mentioned in your report, that's something that, you know, I think it's the most modern technology that they have in there. So I've spent a lot of time. Yeah. Odor mitigation. Yeah. So. Might be a little premature to ask, but how are you going to split up that 30,000 commercial? Any idea? I mean, five units of five, units of six? We've had a lot of communication. I've had a lot of communication with the president of Douglas Elliman on the commercial side of things. He's very positive about possible tenancy. I think, really, it's going to be. I think, you know, we're going to have to judge on timing. Who's available. If we can define a start date and an occupancy date, he'll get a heck of a lot more interest. But, you know, it's going from some little niche, like a Trader Joe's, Aldi's, something like that, some medical office, combination thereof. So until we can really formalize it, maybe even a, you know, a pub or a restaurant of some type. So I think that the options really start to solidify once we can. Okay. Formalize this with, you know. You're kind of central to a lot of people. Who work as an EpCal and all the homeowners down on Frederick. Also, it depends on, just my real estate, Hannah, is it a local mom and pop tenant or corporate? The corporate guys, like Applebee's and stuff, they have their own specifications. You know, they say for a 4,400 square foot box, I know it's for a fact, it doesn't matter what the town requirements are for parking. They want more parking. That's how they make money. So, and they don't deviate. So if a corporate guy comes in there, they might take most of the space or you can split it up. But I agree with you. I think until you get an idea who's interested in renting the bulk space and then it will be billed to sue. It will be billed to sue. That's all. So I see there's no drive on the east part of the building, on the back of the building. So all entrances, all deliveries would come from the west. Is that correct, Greg? Yes. So yes, there would be, there is one access point. Again, I think the logic was to probably put some distance separation between Fresh Pond Avenue and the access point. The property is about 490 feet wide. So I mean, you pick up an extra 475 feet when you, rather than putting the project, you know, the site access on the east side. So yes. All development, all access to both the residence and the commercial would come from the new right of way. And deliveries go into where? So yeah, that's something that the applicant needs to address. Right now they just show the one potential loading area back here. Again, by code they need two. I don't know if the feasibility to have, you know. So in other words, if someone's, if a delivery driver is making a delivery here for a potential retail or commercial tenant on the south side, there's no walkway, so they'd have to right now walk around the whole site. I think that's just something the applicant needs to refine and demonstrate where they're going to put an additional loading area. So the site plan and subdivision would be subject to park and recreation fees enumerated in town code. As I stated, it's in the Rivet Water District. You had a mistake when you said J-1. Yes. You said James Boyd. Oh yes, I apologize. That's a holdover from a previous report. It is in the Calverton 32R extension. So really we will get comments once the applicant revises that EAF. I do have a resolution on the classifier as a type 1 and just initiate that coordination. Upon submission of the revised EAF, we'll send those documents out to involved agencies and start soliciting comments. So. Okay. Thank you. This is very early. We'll have time to talk about setbacks, landscaping, and all that later. Any other specific questions the Board wants to ask or get into? So the next step, Greg, is we have to get back to you on the corrections, and then you're going to do a resolution with the planning board. So we already have a resolution. Oh, so you're going to do that today. So once you get the amended EAF and have the documentation. Then you'll pass it around. We can send it out to the involved agencies. We'll start the CEQA process. Okay. And then after that we'll determine how to handle the type 1 action, scoping, one and a half, stuff like that. Yep. Whatever. Okay. Your resolution number seven for tonight. Good. All right. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. [transcription gap] Okay. Item number six is Seacrest Estates. Previously the bill was at Roanoke. Okay. So the bill is at Roanoke. Okay. So the bill is at Roanoke. Okay. So the bill is at Roanoke. Three clear. [transcription gap] Three clear. [transcription gap] Justin, can we just zoom in on this map please? Alright, thank you. Good. Zoom out a little bit. Good, thank you. Alright, so this is just a quick follow-up discussion for the Seacrest Estates major subdivision, previously the Villas at Roanoke. As the Board will recall, the Board approved a 14-lot major residential subdivision, which is this one. One of those lots within that subdivision was a density bonus that resulted from the Long Island Workforce Housing Act. That lot was going to be developed and sold as an affordable lot. The applicant has requested to amend the map in accordance with our Long Island Workforce Housing Act. What they have proposed is a reduction to 13 lots. Again, within the same development footprint, they're not changing the open space buffer area. Essentially what they did was sort of just combine lots 12, 13, and 14 and made those lots larger. And in lieu of that density bonus within that subdivision, the applicant has agreed to pay. There is a provision in the Workforce Housing Act that allows for a fee in lieu of that density bonus. And that's prescribed in our town code. So, if the applicant requests, I have an approval on to amend the map to allow the 13-lot subdivision and authorize the acceptance of that payment. How much is it? I believe it's $210.00. Okay. So, it's $280,500 in that neighborhood. And that money is going to be set aside in a separate account which will be created by the town board. And the sole purpose of that account, it cannot be commingled with any other funds. It cannot be applied to a general fund. The purpose of that fund is spelled out in New York General Municipal Law 699B, the Long Island Workforce Housing Act. And it is specifically to be used for creation. For creation of work, construction of workforce housing, purchase of land to be used for workforce housing or other... So, it's dedicated. Correct. It's dedicated. It's not just going into a general coffer to be used to pay for budget. It will be in a dedicated fund. Any interest accrued in that money will stay in that fund and be used towards that purpose. And we're prepared to pay that now. Yeah. Just out of curiosity, why do they do that? I think that they have a lot of reservation as to... [transcription gap] How the workforce housing would fit in. How the workforce housing would fit in. Okay. With that area. Okay. With that area. Yeah. It definitely makes it a more valuable project. I point that point. Yeah. And again. Yeah. So, I. And again. According to the Town Code. We've had conversations with Don. The Town can really do a lot of good with money that's gonna be in these funds. So. I do have a resolution. And I do just want to bring to the board's attention. About the development. I did get some complaints. About the point. [transcription gap] some complaints from neighboring residences located directly across the street to Soundshore Road. The complaints in nature, so there were two complaints. One of them was impacts from the development that's going on up there in the construction was leading to an increase of the groundwater elevation in the area. People's properties across the street, ground was wet, water was coming into basements. I had the applicant's engineer basically inform them of the complaints. I had them do an engineering memo. At the time when we were getting these complaints, we had had historic levels of rainfall. I mean, we've gotten calls from other areas of town where people have never had water issues or having water in their basement. Both the town engineer and Vinnie Gaudiello reviewed that memo. Essentially, because of the level of rainfall that we've had and the nature of the area of Soundshore Road, there's a lot of clayey soils. It essentially becomes perched. That this was not a localized issue that was due to the development going on on Soundshore Road. So that was one complaint, and then I did receive another complaint which was investigated and was validated. There was a breakdown in the erosion protection structures on the east side of the property. So I received a video. There was basically a chocolate river of mud going down this right of way down to Soundshore Road. Again, that complaint was followed up on by the town engineer and their SWP officer. They corrected those on-site deficiencies. They bolstered all of the hay bales. They reinforced the silt fencing. So overland runoff coming off the site is definitely a valid complaint. But to the raising of the groundwater, both, like I said, our town engineering and the town care. So that was a point of care. Vinnie Gaudiello upon review of the memo and the plans that we've done so far they were comfortable in saying that the development here is not raising the ground ponding area that's on the on the west side is a low area to stop correct so this is a low area and event you know any overflow will continue on into the wetlands which are on the the North Fork Reserve but so I just wanted to bring that to the board's attention that we have had some drainage complaints up there one was founded to be valid and addressed the other one both engineers were comfortable that it was not a result of the development happening on Central Road but as you stated which is true there was so much water people had water in there I had water in my building I never got water in my brother yeah not not just what years I never got water I got water yeah yeah so that was that was not a localized issue to the South Shore Road it's possibly just exacerbated because again the clay soil is it just the water gets in there and it becomes perched and will take a long long time to drain so we're just doing one less lot because of the pavement that's great that's good thank you all right agenda item number seven Diaz lot line modification and Greg's going to tell us all about it so she's head head head head So this is an application. This has actually been before the board several years ago. It went inactive. The applicant has since submitted a new application. So long and short of it, this is a lot line modification being proposed between Mr. and Mrs. Diaz's property, which is located at 718 Roanoke Avenue. It's just opposite the intersection of Roanoke Avenue and Pulaski Street. They are proposing to take about a 14 foot wide stretch of the right of way, which is right now part of the Lakeside Trailer Court mobile home park. Right now that actually connects, that right of way goes from Roanoke Avenue straight through to Pondview Road. Through the previous application, we had identified that the owners at, it's called Young Street, we had identified that the owner of 1 Young Street, and 3 Young Street both had interest in that right of way to traverse that right of way. Since the initial application, Mrs. Diaz has taken ownership of 1 Young Street, and they have submitted a document from the owner of 3 Young Street agreeing to relinquish their interest in the right of way up to this point. So they will still need to be able to exit through the Young Street right of way to Pondview Road. Where are those mobile homes? So the mobile homes are shown on the plan here, all the mobile homes. Yeah. No, no, where is 1 Young Street? So 1 Young Street, if you look on this, 1 Young Street is right here. Where? Right here. Right, it says now we're formally of Charles Mechner. Oh, okay. And then 3 Young Street is where it says now we're formally. Patricia Cavanaugh. Okay. So the Diaz's have taken ownership of 1 Young Street, and the owner of 3 Young Street has agreed to relinquish the right of way up to that point. So they will now access solely from Pondview. They will no longer have access to go the entire right of way. We had a contract of sale from the original application. I would just like to see that that's updated. I just want to make sure that several years down the road, the Lakeside mobile home, the home park is still aware that the application is active. Beyond that, I noted that 1 Young Street is not currently connected to sewer. No objection to the lot line modification, but we should just reserve a future sewer easement in the event that that lot ever connects. I did actually speak to the sewer department, and he told me that 1 and 3 would be easier to hook up to the trailer park, and they would go out on Franklin. That's what he told me. But because of the... Because we own the house, we have no problems if it has to go the other way. It's simple. I mean, if they're going to connect that, it's fine. It just couldn't hurt to have the future easement. I know your house because you always have such nice landscaping. I know. That's my husband. He spends a fortune. Well, it shows. Well, you should see what we find in the flowers. Oh, really? Yeah, I mean, this right of way, you almost have no idea. It looks like a driveway. You don't realize. I didn't until I got the application and went back to it. You almost have no idea that it's back there. Yeah, when I was a kid, we used to use that all the time. So we did get comments from the fire marshal. So they just do need to install a Knox gate or a Knox lock in the event of emergency access. They need to get an ambulance in there. And I don't think a ladder truck is ever going to need to get back there. It would have the turning access, but just in any kind of emergency case. So, again, once we get the updated contract of sale, I think we can move forward and schedule a plan. We'll have a public hearing on the application. Moving forward. No objections to the application. You guys good? Yep. Okay. Very good. Okay. So I'll do an updated thing? Yep. And we'll get a public hearing and get you going. Perfect. Awesome. Thank you. Thank you.

Alrighty. Public comments on resolutions? Just real quick, if we could just have a walk-on addition for the 2nd Street townhome discussion on the site plan. Okay. Okay.

So, real quickly, the board recalls this is an update on the 2nd Street townhome site plan application. This is the vacant lot at 46 East 2nd Street, which was the site of House that burned down a few years ago. It's currently vacant with the exception of the garage in the back corner. The site plan application proposes right now an 8-year-old. Okay. So, there's 8-unit townhouse development. So, there's 8 residential units. Each unit is a 2-bedroom unit. Based on our town code, each unit, the parking is 1.5 parking stalls per dwelling unit. They require 12 parking stalls. The initial version of the site plan included 11 parking stalls behind the units, inclusive of one handicap stall and accessible aisle. They sought a 1.5 parking stall per dwelling unit. They sought a 3.5 parking stall per headlet. [transcription gap] in redesigning the project the applicant was able to submit a plan which shows one additional parking stall in the front yard here at the southeast corner of the property it would require its own curb cut it would essentially be a dedicated one parking stall for that use while it's not ideal it does reduce the landscaping in the front yard the board did approve a park a similar arrangement at the 48 3rd street townhomes project which is the four-unit development on the north side of third street if you look if you're looking at the building they have a main parking lot on the left side of that development and then they have a similar case where they have just one parking stall on the corner so this is a back out yeah i mean back out back in it would be one parking stall on 7th street um there were i spoke with the developer and there were a couple of different you know could have taken some different approaches one different approach was to reduce the number of units so instead of having eight two bedroom units as of right he could have had a seven unit development could have potentially made instead of having eight two bedrooms he could have had five two bedroom units and then he could have made one of the buildings larger and incorporated potentially two three bedroom units now i mean when we turn when we talk in terms of realistic impacts on parking supply it's more likely that redesigning the project to incorporate more two three bedroom units would probably exacerbate the parking requirements more than i agree more than that so um while it's not ultimately ideal and town code in its design guidelines does say parking shall not be permitted in the front yard. That is a guideline that the board has discretion and has authorized and approved on-site parking. Greg, didn't we discuss putting an extra spot in the back of one of those buildings? So right now they have 24 feet. I'm talking about right adjacent to the bunning of one of those buildings. What, in the back here? No, no, no. Right along there, where your pen is. So these are the parking stalls. This is the required 24-foot-wide drive aisle. So it's very tight. There's nowhere additionally to park that. Now I do note, when I conferred with Deputy Town Attorney, Danielle Hurley, this project does incorporate one handicapped accessible parking stall, as well as a handicapped aisle. I asked her to look into ADA requirements in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Because this project has no public component, meaning there's no public facing, you know, a rental office, a community space, they weren't required to comply with the ADA requirements. But there was also a component of the Federal Fair Housing Act. When Councillor Hurley looked at that, because they're not seeking any federal funding, they technically didn't need it. So we're in a case where our Town Code requires the handicap accessible stall, but it's not actually required pursuant to ADA or federal housing. It's just a function of our code. So they could put it in there? Yeah. I... Just my point. Just my personal opinion. I don't want to see the handicap stall go away. No, I'm not saying... It's required by our code. It's just that situation where the reality of it is, someone's probably going to park there. Yeah. That's correct. I'm not recommending... If you like, I'll straw poll the board and see where we're at. Are those 10 foot wide or 9s? So when we first brought this to the board, I asked, they are proposed, the 9 by 20 double stripe, which typically for commercial developments... Yeah, right. The board's always going by 10 by 20. When we initially came to the board, I asked the board that question. Being that this is a housing development where you're going to know who's living in your building, the board agreed to go for the 9 by 20 double stripe for this. So they are... Is there room to put the handicap on the street and provide a curb cut? It's not wide enough there. No. No, I mean, and that... I mean, parking's allowed on the south side. You know, this sort of ties into the board's recommendation that was transmitted to the town board recently about parking on 2nd Street. So... Gotcha. Here before the board to see if they're amenable with the additional parking stall on the front yard. Again, that would make it fully compliant with the parking requirements of the code. It is in the board's purview to allow that additional parking stall on the front. And it would allow the application to move forward. Yeah. Is there any possibility of being able to put a parking spot behind the building, but parallel with the building? That's George's answer. Yeah, no. So this 24 foot from the stall to the back of the building is 24 feet. So there's no... There's nothing. If you put a parking stall there, you'd be like 10 foot. You couldn't get it. Okay. If the handicapped spot were to be eliminated, would there be enough room then for an extra spot? Yes. I'm not recommending that. I know you're not. Yes. But if they did not have to have that accessible aisle, they could put a bank of 12 parking stalls along that back row and then be fully compliant. You know, I don't know how everybody else feels. But I just don't like the backing out on Rowan Oak Avenue. No. I don't like it. There's very little landscaping in the front of this as it is. I think we've got at least one out this way. Yeah. So we'll put... Should it be put in the back where the containers are? Where the dumpsters are? Yeah. It's the same, you have the same amount of real estate back there. Can you pull in this way? So the one thing with that is, they're able to kind of squeeze it in here and it kind of impedes on the, you know, this person's, what I'll call their little rear outdoor patio. If you were to put that parking stall here, you're literally parking right behind, you know, this is going to be looking at your car. I'm not necessarily in favor of it, so, gentlemen. I'll go with the handicap removal. Well, right now, so without a code amendment, that's not an option. I was just discussing that for the board's knowledge. You know, again, if you want to, if we want to discuss, you know, making the recommendation to a code amendment. But again, if someone... Yeah. I'm not in favor of it. Not in favor of parking lot, parking space on the street. Greg, as we discussed, I don't like the idea of getting rid of the handicap. I don't think it's fair. And this gentleman knows that it's brand new construction. He's created a hardship that, you know, he wants us to deal with instead of him. So in other words, if he can shorten the size of the building or whatever, I'm not crazy about putting the parking in front. I don't know. I don't know. Try to, you know, make the building a little smaller so we can just find one someplace or something. So not in favor of the parking stall on the front yard. I am not. Kenny? It's the back and out. I don't know if there was a way to turn it around. Fine. I don't think it's fair. [transcription gap] I don't think we have the support for it. And it's still ink on paper, so he's going to have to figure out a more creative way to make it work. Some of your, you know. And Greg, we like the project. It's another project. Yeah. We do. All right. Sorry about that. No, it's all right. I'll give the applicant the feedback. Yeah. We're happy to work with them, but. All right. [transcription gap] We'll head over to you next. Okay. We'll head over to you next. Okay. We'll head over to you next. Okay. Public comments on resolutions. I will just. The 1309 OCR resolution. There were three minor typos. There was a recital that states they are not putting a fire hydrant. There was two. Right now, they should read, they are now proposing. So that's located. Which example is that? File. 1309 OCR. you know nice okay so is it correct in the resolution so I'm going to recite it here on page

I'm sorry so on page two of the resolution number five should say is now proposed along Osborne Avenue and number six will read dry wells are now proposed within Osborne Avenue and then on page three of the resolution

I thought I thought was on page six of the resolution the second to last resolved it says this preliminary approval shall be valid for 36 months we're gonna fix that to say this final approval okay so I'll make those and we'll vote on it as amended very good you don't want to Osborne ever number five yeah yeah page two number five says a fire hydrant per fire marshals request okay what's that great I thought you were questioning the minutes yes resolution you said number five yeah yeah why don't you know we're talking this is resolution number five number five the 1309 OCR right occasion okay page two of that resolution you gotta go to the resolution okay so I'm fixing two typos where it says not we're gonna make them now and then on page six instead of saying this preliminary approval it'll say this final of gotcha okay thank you okay no public comments so let's move into resolutions gentlemen all right I'll move resolution 2024 46 for jets 139 LLC minus subdivision the classifying action pursuant to secret and schedule a public hearing for the subdivision so moved second moved and seconded mr. Zelnicki and I have to abstain because it's family oriented I was told by no problem mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro hi mr. bear yes yes the motion carries 4 0 1 a move resolution number 47 which is classified type 2 action in pursuit with sequence scheduling a public hearing for a minor subdivision on Madeline so moved and I'll move resolution 244 for jets 139 LLC second moved and seconded gentlemen while we vote mr. Zelnicki abstain mr. Hogan yes I know mr. bear yes I have all right so the motion carries 4 0 to 1 I move resolution 2024 48 malice property minus subdivision resolution classifying an action pursuant to seeker assumes lead agency and issues negative a declaration for the minor subdivision so moved second moved in check mr. Zelnicki yes second moved and seconded mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro hi mr. bear yes and I vote aye the motion carries resolution 2024 049 1125 country road facade improvements amended resolution granting administrative approval to amend a previously approved site plan second moved and seconded mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro hi mr. bear yes and I vote aye resolution carries I'll move 2024 05 08 so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved so moved [transcription gap] to reduce yield to 13 lot in the same development footprint. Second. Moved and second. Mr. Zelnicki. Yes. Mr. Hogan. Yes. Mr. De Niro. Aye. Mr. Baer. Yes. And I vote yes. The motion carries. I move Resolution No. 2024-052-TJOC, State Holdings LLC, Resolution Classifying Action, including a site plan and major subdivision considered as the whole action as a Type 1 action pursuant to CEQA. So moved. Second. Moved and second. Mr. Zelnicki. Yes. Mr. Hogan. Yes. Mr. De Niro. Aye. Mr. Baer. Yes. And I vote yes. The motion carries.

Okay. Public comments on any matter? Just gave me a hint to cool off. I'll move the minutes of June 6, 2024. So moved. Second. Moved and second. All in favor? Aye. I move the minutes. Move to June 20, 2024. Second. Moved and second. You may have a vote, please. Aye. Aye. Okay. Minutes carried. Other business staff? No. All good? All good. All right. Good. Our next meeting date will be August 1 at 6 o'clock. Thank you very much. Have a great weekend.

Have a great weekend.