Two estates were the focus of the Oyster Bay Cove Planning Board as they considered the final plan for the sump for Bermingham Estates and looked at another proposed lot configuration for Pulling Estates East.

The Bermingham hearing began at 8 p.m. and was over at 8:11 p.m. as Chairman James Glass called that hearing closed. Bermingham Estates attorney Anthony LaMarca and Roger Cocchi, village engineer from Sidney A. Bowne & Son, consulting engineers, reported that the last details had been satisfactorily completed.

Chairman Glass asked if anyone wanted to comment on the issue, cautioning them not to politic on the issue. No one spoke, although several board members attended the meeting, as did Matthew Meng, president of the East Norwich Civic Association. The board voted later, to approve the Bermingham Estates plan as presented. Mr. LaMarca will bring that information back to the Nassau County Planning Board and the Town of Oyster Bay - to complete the requirements for the sale of the Bermingham School property.

The Pulling Estate East hearing was in reality a work session that was open to the public. Copies of the report prepared by Frederick P. Clark Associates - the planning company hired to oversee the plans submitted by the Pulling Estate - were available for those attending.

The new working design for the division of the Pulling Estate has been reduced from 38 to 35 lots. The original designation in line with 2-acre zoning allowed for 48 lots. David Portman of FPCA said, a substantial number of lots didn't meet the zoning requirements nor did the grade of the roads. He reviewed the issues such as steep slopes and the wildlife protection area in the northeast of the property.

It appears no changes were made to the northeast area which has been sectioned off for later development because of a moratorium "of three breeding cycles" during which the hunt for the tiger salamander will take place.

Pulling attorney Steven Ulman explained that if the 25 acre water protection area is discovered to have Tiger Salamanders there, (at the northernmost edge of its habitat,) they will set aside 50 percent of the area forever as a preserve. There is no evidence of its presence at this time. If that continues, the Wildlife protection area designation goes away. If in the next two years, none appear, the area can be developed.

The new plan shortened Buttonwood Road as required and the emergency access road was clearly delineated.

During the meeting, David Portman spoke representing the village as a planning expert and Jed Dioguardi represented the Pulling/Morgan Guaranty Trust Co. interests. Chairman Glass suggested the two groups get in touch with each other to work out the remaining points of disagreement, which he said would be easier done on their computers.

There are issues for the board to consider on how to interpret the Oyster Bay Cove zoning codes in several lots where for example, a funnel shaped road allows a lot to conform to the need to have a 200 ft. minimum frontage on an access road. The funnel answers the rule in an unusual way, but it leads to a long driveway into an ample site. The frontage is technically correct, but the board discussed the implication on the adjoining neighbors, (the new homeowners) and how they would view the land distribution.

Mr. Portman of Frederick P. Clark Associates questioned five sites where he felt the building areas on the lots needed reduction. Mr. Dioguardi provided the board with better copies of those individual sites.

At issue was the question of some lots that exceed four acres. Mr. Portman said, "The board should know now, not five, 10, or 30 years down the road," that the site will be subdivided. He suggested either a restriction written into the resolution accepting the plan or the submission of plans now - that show how the lots might be cut up.

Attorney Steve Ulman said he would have to talk to his clients about restricting the oversize lots. Most of the larger lots are owned by the Pulling family members.

Mr. Portman said a new State Environmental Quality Review is needed for the project. There had been a negative declaration for the original plan, but since this is a new one, the process begins again.

Drainage was a big issue for engineer Roger Cocchi. He had several questions on drainage easements including, who owns those easements; who maintains them; who is responsible for a Drainage Reserve Area.

Jed Dioguardi, P.E. presented the Pulling side, beginning with an overview of the "burdened" land, which the New York Department of Transportation made the recipient of 3.3 million gallons of outside stormwater that has been piped onto the site from 25A. "The cluster concept was chosen to address these issues and to preserve the amenities of the views," he said. Later adding that the drainage concept was originally accepted by the village and the Nassau County Department of Public Works.

Mr. Dioguardi explained that the present plan involves two standard NC sumps and several small DRAs carved into the natural low areas with dry wells. They are interconnected so that if full, the water is directed to the next drainage area for a positive drainage system - a daisy chain for an integrated drainage plan for the area.

One system goes into the Woodland dry sump on Yellow Cote Road and another one leads to the Timber Ridge sump on Cove Road.

Mr. Dioguardi said lot lines can be drawn through DRAs to settle which home owner is responsible for them. The Bowne Report to the village questioned who would take responsibility for them since the water will be coming from sources besides the local homeowners.

Residents were limited to one minute comments or questions. One resident, questioned the aesthetic implications of Nassau County sumps. He asked the average building footprint of the houses on the proposed development and was told 3,000 square feet.

The Bleven's attorney (part of the pond is located on their lot) said they are waiting for the completion of a survey on a buffer area for them on the Pulling property.

A resident asked if the construction phase would take two years and was told that there would be no moving of fill from the site, which would reduce trucking.

Resident John Bralower said the DRA concept has been "Dismissed as an anecdotal matter," although they have been used all over the country over the past 30 to 40 years.

Chairman Glass said, "No one is ruling out the DRAs."

A question was asked about conservation easements and Mr. Glass said, "This is a work session, they are generally not held open. You are learning with us. Nothing is ruled out."

Two land use issues are still being considered. The Village of Oyster Bay Cove can reserve up to 10 percent of a subdivision for parkland purposes. If the board feels there is no appropriate site for a parkland, they can accept a payment in lieu of parklands. That would come to about $70,000 for the village. That is under discussion.

The other land issue is the conservation easement: the Pulling plan proposed 40 foot buffers but Mr. Portman recommended that depth be substantially increased.

Mayor Michael Peregine was invited to speak by Chairman Glass. The mayor said he has been talking to residents and, "They are in the mood to conserve land as much as we can." He said he supported increasing the buffer zone in the plan.

The mayor said there was no question that they would like to eliminate the sumps but that there are serious problems with drainage in the village. There is a great deal of clay which creates unique drainage problems.

He said people are now suffering because of poor planning; two lanes have become saturated and a basement has flooded; a shunt put in to solve a problem in one area resulted in Grace Lane being "wiped out."

He said, "We must bring science to the problem." They need soil studies to determine how much water the soil can take.

Mayor Peregine said he was somewhat disappointed in the planning process, saying the board needs answers to questions before they can get to their Environmental Impact Statement. He was concerned that the village not be perceived as authorizing a plan - it is just looking at suggestions and just giving opinions, but he cautioned, "The village has been stung in the past." He said presently the village is being sued by a developer.

He wants the Pulling representatives to design their own subdivision.

The new plan solved about 44 of a total of 55 non- compliance issues for the existing 38 lots.