Full Transcript

Thank you. [transcription gap]

Okay, we have no public hearings today, so we're going to go right to discussion items. Number one is Prisco's Calpton Acres with Matt Charters. Good afternoon, board. I'll invite Charles Cuddy up. I'll invite the applicant's attorney on this. If everyone recalls, we did have a public hearing at our last playing board meeting for this application. It's a two-lot subdivision in Calverton. If the board recalls, this is a wine country deli location, which is on lot one. Justin, if we could go to the eye in the sky, please, with an existing mobile home. And then the back lot, which is lot two, is currently in ag production. There's nursery stock there. Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. Okay. Okay. these lots um what i think the d.o.t is probably after uh just because their comments were not very you know didn't explain much but this is the calvertine post office on this property uh as you can see one point of access curving and a sidewalk that's generally what the d.o.t will ask for on development projects so in your packet vinnie's comments are pretty explicit what needs to be done um so here between for lots one and two uh there'll be a common driveway easement that runs the length of the flagpole and the width of that driveway is what matt uh so it'll have to meet whatever is necessary for two-way traffic so that's 24 feet wide generally i wouldn't have an issue as as it's improved because it's potentially just going back to a single family residence that i got more narrow which is fine but the d.o.t the d.o.t has very helpful standard sheets uh that's really plug and play for an engineer and how they need to be designed what the curb cut width needs to be um in the resolution these are all it's covenanted that it has to be a common driveway uh there's several map revisions that need to be done and then the d.o.t work will need to happen before signature of plans because that's really our hook for subdivision reveal

other than that it's pretty straightforward approval this uh application they're going to be curb cuts then a single curb cut for both lots so generally right in this area well i can't see my hand i can't do we normally do curbs and uh it's a sidewalks during a subdivision process so the issue is this is what the state's requiring the applicant is in quote has i believe tom wolfer who's the design professional from young and young is reaching out to the state to see exactly what they want because because i believe in the report it said they recommended it they do um it's their road though so i'm going to stick to whatever there's what their recommendation is i'd hate to say don't do it and then whatever they do on this property the state's just going to make you do it after the fact um as of now i don't think we have a mandate from the state yeah i think we just have a proposal it's stuck it's you know to an extent it's lines on a map but from a planning perspective We go back to the photo. It's a little bit of a free-for-all. I know it's a small deli, but you've got people backing up into traffic. It's going on. So you say he's going to have to stripe it? He's going to have to stripe it. It's pretty small, so I think it only generates about three parking spaces just because of the size of the deli. Yeah, I know. This is a busy place. But it's busy. So there's people sort of parked everywhere. As you can see, they're leading into the farm field. I mean, nothing's really right overhead. You know, some people do park over here. But this will allow good circulation if there's a curb. There's enough room to come around and then back out the front. It's an expense, but this is unfortunately. So it'll just be a single driveway. Single driveway, yep. Shared access for both lots. That's always what the state does. I'm just curious how he's going to be able to lay this parking lot out. I know. It's tight. It's going to be a challenge because the way it works now is people go in and out pretty regularly without too much problem. Yeah. Yeah. But again, we don't know if the state is going to demand that we do it. Yeah, I mean. We don't have a problem with the entranceway. I mean, that's not the deal. But the curbing. Yeah. We don't know for sure if they're going to require curbing and sidewalks. They're definitely going to require a shared access point. But how does that work if you don't have curbs? Yeah. If it's not a single curb. Because if they're saying, hey, you have a common driveway, but then nothing changes, you're still going to go wherever you want. Yeah. I just don't know if we're creating a bigger problem by doing that. But this is unfortunately what happens in a land use application when you come in for something like this. I concur with that. I think we're going to create a much, much bigger problem there. Yeah. I mean, the way I see it, it's not a buyer be aware situation. But when you go to improve your, you're seeking to do something to your property. And in this case, I mean, there's variance requires. There's a site plan application. There's a subdivision application that's before us. That's the really, the only hook is making this happen prior to signature. And it's the state's road. It's there right away. They kind of dictate what goes on. I'm curious to what they say upon further application if they want to make, you know, have sidewalks and curbs going. And then if they say otherwise, I don't have an issue with the app if you're coming back to seek a modification. I see that the post office does have. Yeah. So there's room. But yet on the west side, there's no curb. No. No. And that's. Unfortunately, that's how the state and even the DOT really operate. It's sort of ad hoc is as these sites come in for development or redevelopment, they make you improve. They sort of pass the buck. Probably normally during site plan process, not subdivision. Yeah. I just am very concerned that we're creating a bigger problem. I understand. It's not lost on me, but I don't. It's not really our barely like some. The post office doesn't receive any ways near the amount of traffic. Yeah. All right. Sure. Yeah. From a planning. Perspective, one point of access way safer and way more controlled than having just a wide open curb cut. I understand the functions properly now, but it takes one person backing into traffic to get T-boned. Yeah, I understand.

We're going to have a congested parking field. What's that? I said, I believe in looking at it, it's going to be a congested parking field when the state gets through. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, and I'm even open to. It's hard to say without really knowing. I mean, what exactly the state wants you to do. All we have is what their referral comments. Well, you said they're recommending it. Yeah. Yeah. It's the same. You know, when you look at it, the building is tilted. Mm-hmm. Even though when you. Yeah. It's tilted. So the natural, you see how the cars are parked, they're pulling up what looks like straight, but it's not. It's at an angle. How do you. It's hard. No. Even for me, if it was one way in and one. One way out, it might be a little bit easier, but we'd really have to see from the state. And like I said, if something changes in the interim and they go to DOT and DOT says, no, it's a, there's other circumstances at play here where this can't work. I don't have an issue with them coming to see. Matt, could they make more parking in the back if they wanted to with an. They could. Yeah. It's their whole lot. So they. So in other words, they do have an option. They do have an option. That one's fairly big. I mean, I understand the mobile, the mobile home is here, but there's a stone area here. I mean, there's opportunities to adjust and create adequate, more adequate parking facilities.

A little bit of a pickle, but. Yeah, a little bit. Sort of where we're at. Do any of us have any other questions? No, I guess we have a resolution on it tonight, correct? Yeah. Yes. We sure do. That is it. Good night. [transcription gap] Thank you, Mr. Cuddy. Okay, let's move on to discussion item number two, Leo K. Group, 522-526 Pulaski Street with Heather. Okay. All right, so the planning department has received a site plan application seeking approval to legalize some alterations that were made to an existing building and site. The entire site is known as 522-526 Pulaski Street. It's on the corner of Pulaski Street and Sweezy Avenue in Polish Town. More particularly identified is Suffolk County Tax Note number 600-123-4-44.1. It's a little bit of a unique situation in that it's... It's a pre-existing mixed-use parcel, so it's never undergone any sort of formal site plan review. So as the site currently exists, there are two single-family dwellings. So one has access, like a walkway on Sweezy. That's, I think, 314 Sweezy. Then you have the single-family dwelling, the two-story on the corner of Sweezy and Pulaski. And then attached to that is a commercial building. I think the last... Known use on file with the building department was a butcher shop. And then the easternmost building is a two-story building with a first-floor office and then two apartments. There are also a couple of outbuildings. There's sort of a dilapidated frame shed and then a frame garage on the property. So as many of you might be aware already, there was a fire in building 522. You know, so the new owner who purchased the property got a permit. He had to repair some fire damage. Exterior alterations, including some facade work and storefront changes, new siding and roofing were made to 522 Pulaski Street. They also... Which is 522? The one all the way to the east. The one on the corner? No, so the two-story building on the eastern portion of the property. I think there was a western union in there at one point. So they do need to come in for site plan just to legalize. Those alterations they're also proposing. There was an apartment on the first floor of, I think it's 524. That's labeled building number four on the site plan. There was an apartment on the first floor. They're actually converting it back to entire retail on the first floor of that building. And that's a permitted use in Village Center. So they're not looking to establish any non-conforming uses. They're looking to continue what's on site and then get a conforming use into building number four. So that's why they're here for site plan. They did some selective clearing on the property, vegetation removal. They did replant arborvitaes along the property line on Pulaski Street. So they're here today to legalize these alterations and move forward in the process so they can get their proper building permits and COs. As part of the site plan review, this property is not within any parking district. I know that a lot of people park. They're on the road in Polish Town. A lot of people utilize the funeral home parking lot. But they do need to show parking on site. So based on the proposed uses, they are showing 13 stalls where I think they only required have 11 in that stone blend parking area. There's currently a dirt driveway that comes off of Sweezy Avenue to access the rear of that property. They're showing that as a stone driveway. And I will note that in Village Center and Purview surface coverage, that is allowed up to 100%. So we're not looking at any sort of variances in terms of that.

So just to go through my referrals. Heather, is there a handicap stall? Yep. So I'm getting to that. So in my review of the application, they did not show an accessible stall. So they're required to have at least one. So I'm asking that as part of any sort of approval. They have to revise the plans. Amongst other things. That they need to change is to put at least one accessible stall. So it'll have to be improved to ADA standards. In the back or is it going to be on Sweezy? I mean, so Sweezy and Pulaski are town roads. And you can't, you know, improve town roads without highway approval. But you also can't utilize on street parking for your required parking. That's an issue that people run into all the time. And again, this site has never been looked at in terms of any. Sort of site plan approval because it's all pre-existing. So I guess realistically, they would either have to try to fit one at the end of that stone driveway. Or they would have to put it probably like the most proximate stall to the buildings in the stone blend parking area. Obviously, we'll have to work that out with the design professionals. But I'm just I didn't designate a location. I want to see where they're going to put it. They'll have to adhere to ADA standards. So 10 by 20 parking stall improved with an eight foot wide access. So that's a good thing. So I'm just asking that. I'll head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head building number one is I'm imagining that if someone's gonna be utilizing one of those commercial uses they're probably gonna park on the street because it's the closest however in terms of site plan we can't count that towards a required parking so that and yes so I did refer it to the town engineer and he said that I received an email from him he determined that the plan was acceptable but we you know in discussing the stone blend parking area the only concern that he had was the underlying soils so that's why as a condition of the approval resolution I said you know any changes required by the town engineer any concerns should be addressed so it might be good for the applicant to provide a soil boring just to see what underlying soils are in that parking area because they're showing you know the five-inch stone blends and then the stable I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry soil base but if there's clay underneath that soil base there's nowhere for the water to percolate I will note that there's I couldn't find anything in town code as to when drainage is required especially in a stone blend parking area but if the soils don't allow for any drainage to occur we might want to see like a like some sort of additional leaching field even though the stone blend parking area they'll typically act as a leaching field themselves but the soils don't work with that then you're going to have water pooling so again it's an interesting site because it's never been looked at in terms of site plan and we want to make sure that they're providing parking pursuant to town code at the same time we don't want to create a drainage issue on the site is there any type of rule as to what size gravel that they use like you don't want small gravel think you wind up out into the street even then millions will crush concrete I think most of these are they can use crushed concrete or millings yeah I don't think we have anything specific I'd have to take a look at you know road and drainage standards but I don't think that covers stoneblend parking areas just wanted that this is a street where they're accessing from all of a sudden becoming littered with you know gravel and stone yeah I mean there's an existing sidewalk on Sweezy so there's a little bit of a transition there but right now they just have like a dirt dirt driveway that's you know it's uneven you know it's uneven you know it's uneven so anything to improve that area I think would be better than what's currently there and again they'll be showing the parking that they're required to provide because even though people park on the street it's not within a parking district so being a commercial site they have to put parking on site Heather the driveway is going to be a stone driveway and the parking area would also be a stone parking is that correct yeah they're calling out a stone blend okay like I said I don't know the specific materials that they're gonna use what are they what do they want to do with the rest of the area which is just dirt they're not they're not proposing anything else I know in my staff report I did make a recommendation that they do some additional planting so they have those are varieties planted along Pulaski Street since this site does a but strict residential uses especially by the parking area I would like to see some additional evergreen plantings just to create some additional so I would like to see so I would like to see so I would like to see so I would like to head head head between right like we talked about can we also ask them maybe just put any type of cover crop on that dirt area uh grass seed or something because it just yeah i mean once it's kind of unsightly keep in mind the construction was ongoing um you know again they're coming here to legalize what they started without the benefit of site plan approval so i'd imagine once everything is done they're not going to want to keep dirt there but i can certainly you know add that so i kept my one condition pretty general i put additional plantings to the satisfaction of the planning department so i think i could work in some sort of grass seed or something there just just to improve the remainder of the site um and then the other thing you know this is a mixed-use site so they're not served by the carter the town garbage carter they're required to have a private carter pick up their garbage there's no dumpster or trash enclosure little location on the site plan. So that's something I already spoke to the applicants representative about. They're going to have to show that amongst the other revisions that I'm asking for. And it'll have to be suitably screened. But you know you have a mix of residential and commercial here. So we don't want an open dumpster with residential waste in it. At the same time you know they might not need a large scale commercial dumpster on site. But we want it to look nice and orderly. So that's something that they're going to have to show on the site plan when they revise it. Does this meet the town's criteria for administrative site plan? Absolutely yeah. I mean based on what they did you know they did facade work to the one building. They're proposing a switch to retail in the existing building. Then they did some plantings and clearing. They're not doing any new building of any sort. It's all existing. Again it's an interesting parcel. But a lot of the parcels in Polishtown are like that. So I expect that if we get other projects in the future especially if we do some sort of corridor study we want to make sure that we have a good quality of the building. So I think that's something that we want to make sure that everybody's in conformance with town code. That their uses are consistent with what we're looking for in Village Center. So based upon the scope of work that they're proposing it's definitely if it's the criteria for administrative review. So no public hearing. They do have to go to the architectural review board. The anticipated meeting date is next Wednesday Matt? The 22nd? Yeah so the 22nd. So ARB will review the as-built elevations. So essentially what they did to the building on the western side. They took out the brick facade. I wish we could get them to put the Polish shutters or decorative shutters in there. That would look nice. Yeah well see what the ARB comes back with. Again it's not a significant deviation from what was there. The materials are different but they didn't add any square footage to the building. They didn't you know significantly change the story. So that's something that we're looking at. So I think that's a good point. Yeah. So the building is going to be a little bit more of a !

So it's there's 522, 524, 526. Those are the buildings that have frontage on Pulaski and then 314 Sweezy is in the back. I understand. But 522 shows multiple gas meters. Yeah so it has two apartments that were existing. Two apartments. Two apartments and then the commercial is the they're calling it an office. Like I said I think it was most recently used for a western union in the front. So it makes sense that they would have multiple meters. No no I understand that. But. So my question is really the other. See what that would be. That would be 526. 526 is listed as being six bedrooms correct? Two story frame house. Yeah six. How many apartments are in there? It's just a single family dwelling with six bedrooms. So there shouldn't be any separate dwelling units. What about the requirements for fire escape in that one? We've already had a problem at that address. I think that had to deal with three. Three. Three story dwellings. I did refer this to the fire marshal and he hasn't gotten me any official correspondence yet. But they're not proposing any changes there and I don't think they met the code changes that occurred. And Eric maybe you can help me out with this. Dealt with three third stories. Yeah they're pre-existing non conforming third stories that are under a rental permit. Okay. Yeah. And I mean they will need to get all of the applicable rental permits. Okay. Okay. [transcription gap] Okay. Okay. and then as far as lighting is concerned they're not proposing anything new um but i am recommending that or requiring that they submit some documentation just to show that the existing pictures on the buildings are all dark style compliant um they appear to be but i wasn't there late at night so i'd like to just make sure that they're not causing any light trespass to other properties um other than that i mean you know we're really waiting on the arb and then they have to make some changes pursuant to comments and my recommendations if the board has any other recommendations i told the representative for the application i would certainly let them know that they would they could just do one wholesale revision before signature yeah and i think we need to see excuse me i think we need to see more landscaping on that on that um eastern side because it if you look at the two photos 23 looks a lot better than 24 and what happened you know i mean you you were you were pretty nice about clearing it wasn't clearing they they wiped out it all pretty much i looked at some of the the photos that they had in the real estate listing this was after the fire had occurred the property was up for sale a lot of it was overgrown brush but again you know good landscaping having trees along the eastern and northern property boundaries particularly evergreens i think would definitely clean it up a little bit and also allow for some buffering between this and the residential uses because as you all know this is how the property is now but it's village center so if someone wants to come in with a different use you know potentially another commercial use you you want to make sure that you have those established buffers between the residential properties okay so i have a resolution on to approve with sort of a laundry list of conditions that they'll need to satisfy prior to signature and uh other than that we'll see what the arb says okay very good um discussion item number three waves llc medical offices site plan with greg

thank you so this is just a quick follow-up discussion on the seven waves llc medical office site plan which is the last vacant parcel in the warsaw park commerce drive subdivision on the north side of 58. um i did have a conversation with richard israel the project sponsor uh in my staff report i initially proposed the sidewalks and we did have some discussion regarding sidewalks after discussing with mr israel i looked at the existing subdivision which currently has no sidewalks throughout the entire subdivision with the exception of the harley davidson justin can we just zoom out a little bit

so the entire subdivision the commerce drive medical office park was all built out there's no sidewalks anywhere in that subdivision again with the exception of the harley davidson dealer across the street um all of these street trees that were installed and planted in that subdivision are actually right within the right of way where a sidewalk would go so the realities of installing sidewalks is something that's not necessarily realistic at this point while it is a good planning tool creating sidewalks we don't know how to do that but we do know how to do that and we'll see how we can do that in the next few weeks. um [transcription gap] um um um um um um um so so so so There's no sidewalks or any connection to facilitate it anywhere. This would be like the post office. It's just there. Everything else on either side is nothing. And you see them all the time. The sidewalks to nowhere. It creates a maintenance issue where in the event of a snowstorm they've got to go out and shovel that walkway, which really would serve no purpose. I didn't want to beat the dead horse with the bush, so to speak. So I'm willing to sort of yield on the sidewalk. However, where I do feel is very, our last sort of chance to facilitate any formal future cross access. I do recommend, and the preliminary approval resolution as before you for this afternoon requires to show the location of a future cross access. It could be facilitated here. Now, I do understand that the Warners Plaza to the west that location is sort of behind the building. It wouldn't really be known. Again, we would just be requiring a future cross access. We can't compel that neighboring property owner to come in and push through until such time that they come in for any type of site plan application. That being said, this is kind of the last crack that we have to get any type of cross access. So it's better than nothing. It would have obviously been more appropriate at probably the Panera as it's located. I think it's a little bit more along 58. People are more aware of it. I did have the conversation with Mr. Israel. He will look to facilitate that cross access at a later date if it's possible through the Panera property. Which again, that way people shopping in Warners Plaza, if they're looking to travel east on 58 they can in theory go from Warners through the Panera. Does he own the Panera? Yes, he does. So again, that property is not under site plan review. There's no method to compel them within the resolution. That being said, Mr. Israel has always been a man of his word in at least my dealings. So I'll take his word for it. And I did also, there were some recommendations the southbound travel lanes coming off of Commerce Drive onto 58 previously there were no stripings or no delineations. They worked with the county. The county came in and did the measurements. They did restripe that intersection coming off of Commerce Drive onto 58 so now there are defined lanes of travel rather than just sort of a free for all and like who's turning left, who's turning right. So it just provides a little bit more order there. So do have the preliminary approval resolution on. You know, they've got to get the standard stuff. They need the storm water pollution prevention plan. They'll need to come in to show the future cross access. Beyond that, once that stuff's done, we can move on to a final. So is that conversation that you have with Mr. Israel, is that reflected in your resolution? So again, this is a discussion that we're having with Mr. Israel. The conversation regarding Panera, it's not really, there's no mechanism because this is not in any way on the site plan review. So it was really a gentleman's conversation. Like I said, I'll take his word for it. He's always done right by us. So I will, again, I do have the language in there about the future cross access on this piece just because it is the last shot that we have. It's better than nothing if nothing ever comes out of it. We have the ability to do it. At least we have something. Greg, I agree with you. We talked about it. It's actually a better spot for the cross access. If it's taken in good faith and you trust Mr. Israel, I'm fine with that. I think it's a better place for it. So I think it's the way to go. All right. Everybody good? Good. Okay. Moving right along. Straight air, Greg. We need you up here again. Yep. Number four, Overlook Homes, major subdivision.

Okay. As most of the board will remember, we do have a. This was the major subdivision of Overlook Homes, which is located on Overlook Drive and Akribog. The board approved the final flat for the major subdivision back in August of 2021. Since then, the applicants got health department approval. The map has been filed. They've been doing the work. There was the requirement roadway improvements within that subdivision Vinnie Gordiello did initially prepare that performance bond in the amount of two hundred and eighty three thousand dollars which was posted to the which was accepted by the town board back in the 20 to early 2024 the applicant has undergone significant construction on that roadway Vinnie did a follow-up inspection to gauge the status of that he did prepare a revised performance security estimate dated January 2nd it identified the items completed to date as well as the outstanding items and indicated that that performance bond should be reduced to two hundred and fourteen thousand dollars from the original two hundred and eighty three thousand so we have a resolution to recommend the reduction of that performance bond that resolution gets transmitted to the town board and then the town board would authorize a resolution authorizing a refund of a portion of that performance bond so they're well on their way that roadway I know I would gotten a lot of calls from residents down there they were very very interested in when the construction was going to start so he's well on his way okay all right Greg we have a item number five Calvin industrial park LLC for minor subdivision and we're going to go ahead and get this done so we're going to go ahead and get this done Justin can we zoom out a bit so we can get this whole thank you alright so this is a follow-up on a minor industrial subdivision and we're going to go ahead and get this done so this is a middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle middle Back then, it was Zone Industrial A. Since the adoption of that preliminary approval resolution, the town board recently, as a follow-up to the comprehensive plan update, they did rezone this area to Calverton Industrial. It did not change the lot sizes or the minimum lot size requirements. Although the zoning district did change, the minimum lot size stayed the same, so all of the lots within this subdivision still meet the minimum dimensional requirements for the new Calverton Industrial Zone. There were some minor changes to the sizes of the lots within the subdivision. For example, the original map had lot dimensions. The original map showed that this headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland headland head 2.24 acres now shown as 13.42 acres. Again, all the lots still comply with the minimum dimensional requirements for the Calverton Industrial Subdivision, the Calverton Industrial Zoning District, and the shifting around of sizes within the subdivision did not change the overall allowable build-out within the subdivision. You know, it just means that you could build a little bit more on lot two, but you're getting a little bit less on lot three. So the overall total build-out that the board reviewed and did their analysis on, the total build-out didn't change. It just sort of shifts around a little bit of the development within the subdivision. So the initial analysis is consistent with the negative declaration that we issued. The proposed access to the subdivision is going to be along the eastern property boundary. That is going to be a private road. It is not going to be dedicated to the town. It will be developed to the industrial world. It will be based on road standards. It will need to be kept clear. Mr. Cuddy did provide some draft language regarding that easement and access. I did have, there were some conversations back and forth with the town attorney's office. They made some recommendations just to that language. But that will serve as the access to the rear end of the subdivision. It's presumed that that road would get built out as we get an application. We did have the condition, even though these lots will now no longer front directly on 25, any of these developments on these, you know, either lots 2, 3, or 4 will be referred to the DOT for their review and comment because they are exiting obviously onto Middle Country Road. That's it. I mean they got help. Is it going to be storage again? What's that? Is it going to be another storage building? I don't know if this, I'm not aware of any particular. That's what I understand. I mean there are a pretty wide range of permitted uses in the Calverton Industrial Zoning District. We now have a use table. So really any conforming use could come in for a development application. I did speak with a couple of the members regarding future cross-access. Within our subdivision code, there's no requirement for future cross-access when we do a subdivision plat. Future cross-access is something that we could facilitate when any of these lots come in for future development. The thought being that, you know, you've got, if there was a way to facilitate a cross-access, you could put a traffic out to Edwards Avenue rather than put additional traffic out to Middle Country Road that would make a left onto Edwards even though that intersection is going to be improved in the near future. It would just be a nice relief valve where if a truck or a car exiting the site has the ability to get out to Edwards. So that's something that we can address when they actually come in for site plan where it is a requirement. Beyond that, they got the Health Department approval. They satisfied all the conditions of that preliminary plat. So we have a resolution on to authorize the approval of the final plat. We have, did we get engineering review? We would have gotten engineering review back when we did this in 2019. This would have been referred to Vinnie Gordiello at that point and I mean we wouldn't have wouldn't have approved it without any type of engineering review.

We would have gotten head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head engineering plans Engineering comments great just the The change in lot sizes Everything's been recorded for the tax map to Suffolk County Well, so upon the signature of the final plat the map will get filed with Suffolk County. Oh, okay. Okay Okay. Yeah, this is where we've got a resolution on to approve the final plat and we have learned just through prior subdivisions in terms of the Sequencing of events that needs to happen when easements are filed on subdivisions basically, the subdivision map has to get filed and then the owner can file the covenants on that property because essentially the county clerk won't let you file a You know declaration or a covenant on a parcel that doesn't exist yet so there is language in there and it's going to be standard language going forward that We're going to authorize signature of the map upon the filing Signature of the map it'll be filed with the county clerk There's language in here that says will not accept any type of site plan development Applications until that language regarding the easement and the covenants is recorded Just to have a little safeguard that we don't you know, nothing really gets away from us Okay. So this this is the final subdivision. These lots will not be subdivided. Oh again. Is that accurate? I mean, they could be subdivided with you know with a further review from the Planning Board again chain, you know if lot two, which right? Now is seven point three acres if they wanted to come in and split that into two They you'd get into three and a half acre Lots which care again wouldn't if anything it would probably Decrease the amount of allowable because then you're dealing with additional setbacks So really any further subdivision is just if they have a smaller tenant they want to you know Chop up the lots a little more they would need to come into the Planning Board for another sub But if they did that Greg you go from a minor to a major subdivision after four or after five If they can Without a major subdivision is five or more. So would they have to improve the easement? also, just thinking this So I mean, I don't want I don't want to kind of go back into history. But the way this was done Again, the road itself is gonna have to be a sufficient with to facilitate the industrial traffic, but up in the northeast corner of this property is There's a little substation a little electrical switch which I'm assuming is the Feed from the solar farm how it ties into the grid so the location of that just from the initial planning standpoint sort of precluded us from designing a Fully compliant industrial roadway that would be suitable for dedication to the town Which is why we went through the 55 foot wide access easements I Guess good All right, thanks Greg We're gonna move on to Discussion item number six Kathy Lane LLC made subdivision only known as Northwalk developers

At the end of your presentation, would you be willing to say it on the record about the memorial? Thank you

All right

All right, so wrapping up another long-standing application that we've got This is the final plat for a major sub major residential subdivision known as Kathy Lane LLC, which was formerly Norfolk developers LLC This is an approximately 13 acre piece of property which is located east of rabbit run at the end of the existing dead end of Kathy Lane This goes back to the planning board granted the preliminary plat approval back in November of 2021 for a 10 lot major residential subdivision The original approved yield on this subdivision map was 11 lots the applicant at that time voluntarily reduced the density to Comply with the Long Island Workforce Housing Act. So these will be all market rate So the preliminary plat included like there was requirements for there's a several temporary grading and drainage easements within the right-of-way There's a 35 foot There's an existing drainage swale on the east end of the property We require language for that drainage swale There's also a common driveway easement, which is going to serve lot numbers three and four So the applicant has prepared those they've been reviewed by the town attorney's office the town attorney's office has signed off on them The applicant did receive approval from the Health Department back in June They received approval for their stormwater pollution prevention plan in August of 2023 so we have a resolution on to approve the final plat subject to the obviously the filing of the covenants a Performance bond for the roadway improvements, which will be prepared by the board's consulting engineer the payment of the fee for the chapter 229 excavation permit which shows an excavation of approximately 799 cubic yards of soil And there's also park and rec fees in the amount of $5,000 per lot within the subdivision and again Sequencing in terms of filing those covenants the map will get filed with the county clerk and then they can file those easements on that On the map again. I do have language in here that just says no building permit shall issue until those covenants are recorded on the property again, just as a safeguard so This gets another another application that's been around for a little while gets it over the finish line Allows for the recording and signature of the map Has okay, we have a resolution on for a little bit later. Thank you We're gonna go into public comments now Miss Judge if you would come up and tell she you're complete Tell us what's going on with your project

Kimberly Judge 737 améric Ave this is not in reference to a project that I'm doing before the Planning Board. It's just to advise the Board that the Suffolk County Historical Society here in Riverhead, known as the museum, they're doing a Grumman exhibit. They've had two curators who are going to be working on the project and they're soliciting artifacts from any former employees, family members. I know there were a lot of engineers, a lot of people in Riverhead that worked there. Riverhead Roto used to do the barbecue every year. They found quite a few pictures and artifacts and so forth that the museum will be displaying. They will do a exhibit and the person lending or loaning the artifacts would have to agree to exhibit them for one year. And if there's anybody that's interested, please contact me. I would be very happy to help out and put you in touch with Victoria Berger, who is the Executive Director over at the Historical Society. And she looks forward to exhibiting this. John Aucott, Jr.: Yeah, that's great. I'm looking forward to it. When is it going to start? Do you know? Victoria Berger, Jr.: They don't know yet because we're still putting it in. But I don't know if the Board recalls Port Jefferson Library did a Grumman exhibit quite a few years ago. So the same two individuals who curated that project for Port Jefferson, they're doing it for the Historical Society here in Riverhead. John Aucott, Jr.: Okay. Keep us informed. Thank you very much. And I'm going to ask everybody, engineers, employees, people who worked in personnel, thank you. John Aucott, Jr.: Thank you. John Aucott, Jr.: Public comments? Anybody else? Okay. Gentlemen, let's move into resolutions. John Aucott, Jr.: I'll move Resolution 2025-002, Prisco, Calvert and Acres, the resolution granting minor approval for the subdivision. So moved. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Hogan? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Nannero? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Baer? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: And I vote aye. The motion carries. John Aucott, Jr.: I'll move Resolution 2025-003, grants administrative approval to Leo K. Group. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Hogan? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Nannero? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Baer? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: And I vote aye. The motion carries. John Aucott, Jr.: I move Resolution Number 2025-004, Overlook Homes Major Subdivision, Performance Security Reduction Number 1, Resolution Recommending Performance Security Reduction Subdivision, approved by the Planning Board by resolution. John Aucott, Jr.: Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Hogan? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Nannero? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Baer? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: And I vote aye. The motion carries. John Aucott, Jr.: Resolution 2025-005, Calverton Industrial Park LLC, Resolution granting approval for a final plant for a four-lot minor subdivision. John Aucott, Jr.: Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Hogan? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: And I vote aye. The motion carries. John Aucott, Jr.: I move Resolution 2025-006 for 27 Waves LLC, granting preliminary approval for the site plan application. So moved. John Aucott, Jr.: Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Hogan? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Nannero? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Baer? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: And I vote aye. The motion carries. John Aucott, Jr.: I move Resolution number 20-025, Resolution number 7, grants approval for the final plant for a 10-lot subdivision for Cathy Lowe. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Hogan? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Nannero? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: Mr. Baer? Yes. John Aucott, Jr.: And I vote aye. The motion carries. Okay. That's the end of resolutions. We open up to public comments for anybody. Okay. No secret actions today, Greg? All right. Somebody want to move some minutes? Greg Nassar, Director of the Center for Public Relations and the Department of Transportation, November 21, 2024 I'll move the minutes of November 21, 2024. So moved. John Aucott, Jr.: Second. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. All in favor? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: All opposed? Motion carries. I'll move resolution. I'll move Planning Board Minutes of December 5, 2024. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Before we get going on that. I'm sorry? Were we on December 19th? We're doing December 5th. John Aucott, Jr.: Oh, okay. All right. Never mind. Okay. December 5th. Moved and seconded. All in favor? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: All opposed? Now December 5th. All in favor? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: All opposed? All in favor? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: All opposed? All in favor? All opposed? Now December 19th. John Aucott, Jr.: Now December 19th. Now December 19th. So December 19th, there is a… John Aucott, Jr.: I'll move resolution number. Hold on one second, John. John Aucott, Jr.: Hold on one second, John. John Aucott, Jr.: What's that? Hold on one second. John Aucott, Jr.: So we just have to correct the minutes because the Board voted on one resolution twice. Yeah, nine to six. John Aucott, Jr.: There was one that should have come off the table, and it did come off the table, but then it wasn't voted on. So we're just going to make a motion to correct the minutes to reflect that resolution. John Aucott, Jr.: Okay. John Aucott, Jr.: So the motion 54 was moved off the table. It was moved and seconded, and then it was voted with approval instead of voting on 96 twice. Okay. Very good. Thank you for the clarification. Somebody want to move that? John Aucott, Jr.: I'll move December 19th minutes as amended. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Moved and seconded. All in favor? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. All opposed? Motion carries. Staff, any other business? Aye. John Aucott, Jr.: All in favor? All in favor? Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. John Aucott, Jr.: Aye. Second. 6 p.m. Anybody want to close the meeting? Motion to close. Second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? You can stay here if you're opposed. Thank you, everybody. Have a great day.

Thank you.