Huntington Planning Board Meeting: May 6, 2026 - Public Hearings, Subdivisions, and ZBA Referrals
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
The Huntington Planning Board held a regular meeting on May 6, 2026, at approximately 11:15 AM. The agenda included a pre-application discussion for a subdivision at 27 Dunlop Road, public hearings for the Nawabi plat and the Cold Spring Hill development, approvals of minutes and performance bonds, a transfer of density flow rights, introductions of new applications, and recommendations on several zoning board referrals.
Appointment #1 – 27 Dunlop Road Pre-Application Discussion
- The applicant (Christopher W. Robinson, PE, and attorney Ronald Goldstein) presented two options for accessing a proposed rear lot: a shared driveway with turnarounds (preferred) and a separate driveway requiring retaining walls over 20 feet high on 60% of its length, with cost estimates exceeding $1.2 million based on 2026 bids.
- Board members expressed sympathy regarding the cost-prohibitive nature of the separate driveway and discussed safety of the shared 75-foot section from Dunlop Road to the split. The applicant agreed to widen the final 30 feet of the apron to two-car width to improve ingress/egress.
- The board reached consensus to proceed with the shared driveway design and directed the applicant to incorporate retaining walls as recommended by planning staff. No formal vote was taken.
Public Hearing #1 – Nawabi Plat Preliminary
- Applicant (Andrew Levitt, attorney; Doug Castellano, civil engineer) sought subdivision of a 0.998-acre property at 3 Caroline Drive, Dix Hills, into two lots of 21,744.4 sq ft each, complying with R-40 setbacks. The existing house will remain on Lot 1; a new single-family home is planned for Lot 2.
- The applicant requested a waiver for a sidewalk along Carl Strait Path (existing asphalt). No members of the public spoke. Chairman closed the hearing. No further action was taken at this meeting.
Public Hearing #2 – Map of Cold Spring Hill Development
- Applicant (attorney Patrick Hobish; engineer Doug Castellano) proposed a two-lot subdivision of a 1.09-acre property at 500 West Main Street. Parcel A (>27,000 sq ft) retains the existing house; Parcel B (>20,000 sq ft) would be a new building lot. Lots are oversized relative to the R-7 district minimum of 7,500 sq ft.
- Public Comments: Pat Iannucci (9 St. Mark's Place) and Tammy Wood (11 St. Mark's Place) opposed using the 15-foot-wide private right-of-way (back path) as sole vehicular access for the new lot, citing safety concerns including narrow width, blind curves, lack of turnarounds, and difficulty for emergency vehicles. They urged access from West Main Street (Route 25A). Mayland Antreson (3 Carnegie Avenue) also raised concerns about garbage truck access and emergency response.
- Board Discussion: Board members noted the right-of-way is pre-existing non-conforming and questioned whether adding a new house would exacerbate the problem. They requested consultation with the Highway Department and exploration of alternatives, including a shared driveway with Parcel A (existing driveway onto 25A) or a new driveway directly onto 25A (subject to New York State DOT approval). The hearing was left open for continued discussion at the next meeting.
Discussion Items
- Site Plan #1 – Extenet Amended Approval: After a year-long search for a new pole location due to the original being on private property, the board approved a resolution for a small cellular antenna installation at an alternate site with trees for screening. Motion by Panetta, second by Tintillo; all in favor.
- Site Plan #2 – 406 W. Jericho Egress Modified Architecture: The board gave consensus to architectural changes at West Hills Animal Hospital, including removal of a strip of windows above a garage door, relocation of a door, and smaller front windows. The project expands parking by purchasing the adjacent lot. No formal vote.
- Subdivision #1 – 27 Dunlop Road (Pre-Application): Already discussed under Appointment. The board considered the discussion as the agenda item.
- Subdivision #2 – Map of Willow Gardens, Lots 32-38: Introduction. Staff noted a future sketch determination for two new lots (approx. 6,000 sq ft and 8,000 sq ft) in an R-5 zone, likely requiring Transfer of Density Flow Rights (TDFR). Public hearing to be scheduled.
- Lot Line Change #1 – Akgun-Platkin: Introduction. Owners seek to correct a lingering irregular lot line by swapping a triangle of land. Planning staff found no issues; formal approval expected soon.
- Zone Change #1 – Picklr at Huntington Square Plaza: The board considered a request to modify restrictive covenants to allow operation from 6 a.m. (currently 8 a.m.) for an indoor pickleball facility. Staff had no objections. The board added a condition recommending to the Town Board that the existing buffer (land bank parking) be maintained to protect adjacent residences. Motion as amended by Bontempe, second by Livsen; all in favor.
- ZBA Referral #1 – Ryder-Reese Lot Line Change (23699 & 23701): Staff recommended no objection to lot line straightening and variance for side yard setbacks on a paper street. Board concurred.
- ZBA Referral #2 – McDonald’s USA (23704): The board expressed strong support for a drive-through restaurant at a vacant former bank site on Pulaski Road, noting the site has been vacant for a decade. Motion to support variances and special use permits; all in favor.
- ZBA Referral #3 – Splash Development Car Wash (23703): Staff found no issues with the car wash layout including a 50-foot buffer to residences. Board satisfied, no objection.
- ZBA Referral #4 – Wildlife Center of Long Island (23682): Application for a veterinary office special use permit and parking relief for a rear building, using a municipal lot across the street. Board had no objection.
Key Outcomes
- Minutes of April 15, 2026: Approved unanimously. Motion by Tintillo, second by Bontempe.
- Performance Bond Extensions: Roderick Court Plat (extended to 12/17/2026) and Seasons at East Northport (extended to 5/11/2027) approved unanimously. Motion by Becker, second by Tintillo.
- Site Plan #1 – Extenet: Amended approval granted unanimously.
- Transfer of Density Flow Rights – 8 Ruth Plat: Approved unanimously (purchase of credits from Comac Library). Motion by Bontempe.
- Zone Change Recommendation – Picklr: Approved as amended with buffer preservation condition. Motion carried unanimously.
- ZBA Referrals: Board issued recommendations as noted; no votes taken on referrals themselves.
Meeting Transcript
That's mine. Okay. Good evening once again, everyone. Please rise and join me for the Pledge of Allegiance. Thank you, everyone. Before we go into our regular agenda, we have an appointment and two public hearings. We're going to begin with the appointment 27 Dunlap Road Platte. And if there's a representative for that application wants to address the board planning board. One was to create a separate driveway for the rear lot. And the alternate was to uh to create turnarounds on the shared driveway so that there wouldn't be any case where Mr. Judge Lipson brought up that anyone anybody backing down in the road. So we came up with a revision to the map. If you can go back to the proposed PSM plan. We showed the uh turnaround on lot one so it connects to the driveway that goes to lot two. We created a teardrop turnaround at lot two so cars can turn around and head back down. We also create a little bit of a pull-off on the lot two driveway, so if two cars were passing, one could pull over. The whole idea of the shared driveway here is to preserve what is extremely steep slopes along Dunlop Road. You can see the tightness of those contours in that picture. And to preserve all that, the existing natural wooded area, the grades in that area, and provide a reasonable driveway to the rear lot. The driveway on the north already exists for the existing house that's on lot one. Uh and we feel that this is the preferred method. We saw the uh comment here from uh Miss Walsh indicating we should add a couple of short retaining walls on either side, which would make a lot of sense and make the grading work a little bit better. Uh the alternate plan that specifically uh Ms. Marin asked for creating a separate driveway. We spoke about it that evening that it would denute all of the vegetation and the excavation require an extremely amount large amount of excavation in order to build it. The retaining walls on the west, which is the bottom of the screen, those retaining walls are over 20 feet high for almost 60 percent of that driveway, and the retaining walls on the upper part of that driveway, the uh the uh easterly side are eight to ten feet high. Uh I put a letter together to the board to show what we would do. The the the retaining walls here based on actual 2026 bids we have on some walls in Northport would cost over 1.2 million dollars to build. Excuse me. In order to create a separate driveway, we would have to put in about 1.2 million dollars worth of retaining walls that exceed 20 feet in height along the west side in order to create a driveway and wipe out all the existing vegetation. Okay, if I may, my name is Ronald Goldstein. I'm the law from Goldstein Road to Goldseed, the Fazio PC. The original plan that we placed before this board in an informal setting, um, did not have as many turnaround areas as Judge Lifson brought to our attention. So the revised plan has greater turnaround areas. We have removed pools and outer structures on the second lot. We have provided for we're amenable to have a conservation easement on the front of lot one, in addition to one that we have proposed um before we came in the other night. The alternative, Ms. Baron uh planning board member Marin asked if we would study and we could put in a second driveway. It is that second driveway that is cost prohibitive. It would cost greater than a million dollars to put it in. It would require tearing down vegetation, it would require retaining walls, we'd have to go before the zoning board as well, and it disrupts the aesthetics of the plan that we want, which is to have but one driveway. So pursuant to 1981 2A, which is why we're here before the board, one of the items of the board is to take into account is the topography. So the topography warrants what we were suggesting. And the aesthetics, the aesthetics for this plan far exceed or far better than the alternate approach. And so Mr. Robinson was describing the alternative approach, which the applicant has no desire to participate in, but because the board asked about it, we're presenting information. Well, we were always interested in preserving the vegetation and you know that that's a very large, really long stretch of vegetation and slope there. I I you know I think I don't think I think it's the safety of the ingress and egress greatly outweighs that. I'm very sympathetic to the cost prohibitive uh net extreme amount of money, and of course it would make it almost impossible probably for you to do your subdivision. So um very sympathetic to that.
openpublica.com