HomeMy WebLinkAboutDepot Ln/Knights of Columbus Zoning Z2-
APR I
NI 19 itP-m-
bear M� �tael( cmd ao
15
Ell'
to cllf�l 61 cd- cc
IN 6L I I
r
e�" 6
(2
-A. 7
1% L
f�� Soll
Wyk, CC, I q
117601 1 So aiq
IJI
-F
tqmlh f
-silo
, '`
1-5
D cc 1; t I f3i eat NO& 10
76)
Edi l lea
-5u FC try K
ub
Sm
LI) A&Z1405f-
e
a)d I e 1�-
0 Lt
Itij j�r)ls o"26pc0-Y"
o ,
7-)Or I t V)�
l2es
9
t
G
, � m l2e'es��1) V,-'!�, �A -2,6) ne
�,-Jlaj
iz
I '-ie, - �" `�
h ) C/ C-7 64
i a a
RECEIVED
MAR 17
2
March 17, 2022
Dear Southold Town Board, Southold Town Clerk
I am a young single dad (42 yrs. old) with full custody of my twin 12 year old sons. I
have been saving for several years to buy a home on the North Fork. My children are in
7th grade and go to Mattituck junior High School. They started kindergarten at
Cutchogue East and have all their friends and memories in Southold Town. I own my
own business, North Fork Designated Driver. It is a unique business where we drive
responsible customers, in their car, to the wineries, breweries, dinner and much more.
This year we celebrate our 10th anniversary! I also provide work for others in the
community as drivers helping to keep our roads safe.
I hope someday the town can help myself and other young people to own a house in
Southold. I know of two people that were lucky to buy a house in the Cottages of
Mattituck years ago. I understand there will be an additional 1/2% from home sales
that might be able to be used for helping first time homebuyers. Something has to be
done to help us, and it is not an apartment like the one proposed on Depot Lane. To
live there, in a tiny apartment house and pay over $2,000 per month rent is a trap
where young people will never be able to afford a house. Riverhead has housing like
that, we don't need it in our beautiful town.
wish as board members you can think outside the box and be creative to help young
people buy a home instead of rent. There are many very wealthy people who have
moved out here in recent years. Maybe you can encourage one or two of them to
develop home ownership for first time buyers. You have leverage when they ask you
for your approval for their next project. That could be a win-win for all! Even condos,
but not just apartments. I was originally interested years ago when I heard Harvest
Point was going to have some affordable units too. It is my understanding that the
developer paid a large sum of money to the town in lieu of building them.
am also concerned about water quality and additional traffic being that I live on Depot
Lane and have young children. Thank you for reading my letter and please do not vote
for the apartments at the old Knights of Columbus property. Thanks for all you do to
make our community special!
Sincerely,
Chris Malkush
890 Depot Lane
Cutchogue, NY
March 16, 2022
Scott Russell
Town Supervisor
53095 Main Rd.
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr. Russell,
We have several concerns about the proposed Affordable Housing Development on Depot Lane in
Cutchogue. My wife Anne McElroy and I moved to the community in June 2018 to 1855 Depot Lane,just
south of the proposed development at the old Knights of Columbus property. Our residence was an
existing bed and breakfast(The Farmhouse B&B) and we re-opened it for business in May of 2019. My
comments are informed by my expertise as an environmental chemist and as a long-time professor in
Stony Brook University's School of Marine and Atmospheric Sciences, and as an active researcher in the
New York State Center for Clean Water Technology that is focused on addressing Long Island's
groundwater quality problems and development and testing of Innovative and Alternative On-Site
Wastewater Treatment Systems (I/A OWTS). Our biggest concerns deal with issues that we believe the
Town should weigh whenever higher density housing is proposed in the Town of Southhold.
First,we are worried that allowing for this zoning change will set precedents that may make it more
likely that development codes will be changed to allow higher density housing throughout the Town.
The population density of the East End will continue to increase in the future,threatening both the
environment and our quality of life. The Town and Board Members should set a priority on doing
whatever they canto minimize this growth, particularly when it comes to zoning changes. In terms of
our specific location,we certainly knew Harvest Point was going to significantly change the landscape
when we purchased our home in 2018, but we felt protected by the two acre zoning restrictions for
residential housing which very much influenced our decision to purchase our home and bed & breakfast.
We feel strongly the Board should not change zoning to add to our population resulting in both
increasing water use(the Town of Southhold has clearly been made aware that there are projected
water supply shortages projected over the rest of this decade) and even harder to address increases in
groundwater contamination that threatens both our surface waters as well as neighbors with private
wells nearby to the sewage plume that will emanate especially from certain types of developments.
More importantly, as I pointed out in our 2020 letter to the Southold Town Board when an affordable
housing project on the two acre Knights of Columbus was first proposed, I would like emphasize the real
and potential impacts that this proposed 24 bedroom development will or could have on drinking water..
The proposed development would create a real and hard to assess threat to at least four nearby
neighbors on private wells that could potentially intercept the resulting septic plume,as well as
provide more nitrogen loadings to our groundwaters that control eutrophication of Peconic Bay and
other surface waters.With exceptions of areas in Greenport, all of our sewage wastewater in this region
is discharged to groundwater through on-site systems.Sewage contaminated groundwater is now the
biggest source of nitrogen and eutrophication in Peconic Bay and leads to environmental impacts to
most if not all of our surface waters. On-site wastewater disposal has replaced fertilizer use as the
leading input of nitrogen to Southold's (and Suffolk County in general)groundwaters. Below I provide
important details to back up and expand upon these statements.
• Arguably the biggest water quality management problem facing Long Island centers on nitrogen
loads that increase eutrophicaton to surface waters that are dominated by groundwater
discharge. Sources of nitrogen to groundwater in Suffolk County have shifted over time from
being dominated by agricultural fertilizer to being dominated by on-site sewage disposal. Except
where sewage plumes are anaerobic due to poor siting/planning, most of the nitrogen is in the
form of nitrate which is regulated at an MCL of 10 mg nitrate N/L.
• Local levels of nitrate in our long impacted Upper Glacial Aquifer(which impacts both private
wells and local surface waters) can be expected to roughly be in the range of 4-12 mg N/L(and
in some locations tapped by on-site wells will be even higher as they will be affected by local
sources. My understanding is that the public supply well near Depot Lane has reported nitrate
levels sometimes in excess of 6 mg N/L and a recent measurement of a private well across the
street from us, and about 500-600 feet down-gradient of the Knights of Columbus Hall,yielded a
nitrate concentration of 7 mg/L;so our"background levels" are already relatively high
considering the types and intensity of"upstream nitrogen loadings.
• There are 4 homes along Depot Lane just to the south of Knights of Columbus that are still all on
private wells (#890-1170 Depot Lane). Their wells are on the order of 50-600 feet down-
gradient of what would be much more sewage discharges coming from the proposed
development. I believe they all would potentially be impacted by the resulting septic plume
from the proposed development, given local groundwater hydrology and the fact that the
"groundwater divide" is thought to occur to north of the site, nearer to Route 48.
(I�tti t'Iwww.5ouiholcltowrimiy.t;ov/Docuriic,ritCerater/ 'i(-'w/79:k1/6 Natural Resources Environ
n°ient:al Prou-cHcm?t-*Jlr.J=).The plume will impact the upper levels of what is not a particularly
deep Upper Glacial Aquifer and deepen as it migrates southward. This could easily jeopardize
the water quality and safety of private wells also tapping the Upper Glacial Aquifer. According
to one of those residents, an approximately 12-14-year-old estimate for switching one of those
homes to public water was approximately$10,000. One could assume current costs could
approach $20,000/home or perhaps approximately$80,000 to switch all four homes to public
supply water.
• The proposed development should be required to install an approved Innovative and very
expensive Innovative and Alternative On-sight Wasterwater Treatment System (I/A OWTS),
These technologies are required to take total nitrogen (which converts to nitrate) levels down to
19 mg N/L and while lots of variability between different installations of the same technologies
have been observed, one might expect levels of nitrate to be around 12-15 mg N/L and
depending on technology can vary greatly as a function of season.The goals for these
technologies are to significantly decrease loadings to local surface waters, not to protect
proximal well water used for drinking. In contrast,the advanced treatment systems at the
Greenport and Riverhead wastewater treatment plants emit much less nitrogen, around 3 mg
N/L.
• As a result of scale and much less monitoring,these I/A OWTS systems are not as reliable as that
at municipal wastewater treatment plants, perform much less well in in cold winter months, and
failures are not rare. While yearly monitoring would be required for a few years, over time the
monitoring frequency drops, so at individual locations, nearby wells could be impacted by much
higher than expected levels of nitrate and other sewage contaminants.
• Currently, nitrate is not regulated as carcinogen and the 10 mg nitrate N/L regulation is based
on risk of methemoglobinemia. I do not want to scare anyone, especially local residents, as
much much more research is needed, but there are now over 20 peer reviewed epidemiological
papers that together suggest increased risks of cancers at nitrate levels as low as 3 mg N/L. This
would lead to nightmare of a problem for Suffolk County in particular with our rising nitrate
levels coming from sewage. Normally, I would not worry about such correlative analyses, but it
is known that there is potential for nitrate to be converted in the body to nitrosamines which
are known carcinogens.
• I/A OWTS systems are only designed to remove approximately 70-80%of nitrogen when
operating properly, and because there are different treatment technologies (all involving
biological denitrification), it is hard to generalize how much of other sewage contaminants
would be treated by such systems. In particular there are suspected carcinogens such as 1,4-
dioxane and PFAS that exist at elevated levels in most wastewaters that would not be highly
removed by such systems. For very nearby neighbors, my bigger concern might be related to
human pathogens and possible effects on proximal private wells. It has long been known that
viable viruses can both persist longer(several months) and be transported farther through
sandy aquifers than bacterial pathogens. In a quick browse of the primary literature, I see that
there are septic plume studies suggesting viruses in groundwater septic plumes can persist for
several months and be transported at least over 100 feet from point of discharge. The distance
would depend in part on local groundwater flow which might be hard to estimate when adding
in the flow from the development that would perhaps exceed 2500 gallons/day
• With 12 units, 24 bedrooms, and perhaps 40-48 residents, and assuming an I/A OWTS works
properly,the proposed development is arguably not enough by itself to alter pollution of
Peconic Bay again (groundwater flow is in that direction). However, if only a couple
developments of this type were installed locally, it would increase modeled sub-regional
groundwater levels of nitrate to where the type of model dependent wastewater regulations
Suffolk County is working on could potentially trigger designation of treatment zones that would
require expensive upgrades to I/A OWTS for individual residences (ballpark$25,000 in
installation costs plus operating and long-term replacement costs) now using conventional
cesspools and septic tanks.
• Based on the points raised above, if we were one of the 4 homes on private wells just down-
gradient of the Knights of Columbus and this project is approved,we would not completely
feel safe remaining on well water for drinking, and we would encourage our neighbors to
band together to demand the Town or the developer to cover those non-trivial costs.
• Developer Goggins has argued directly or inferred that Depot Lane is not pristine when it comes
to sewage impacts (nothing sanitary about"sanitary flow", and has mentioned that church,the
former Knights of Columbus Hall, other businesses located up near Rt48 and even our bed &
breakfast, were or are similarly impacting the environment.This may sound intuitive, but this is
not the case. The Church and the former Knights of Columbus only host people for short
periods of time a couple to a several hrs/week. Even people working during the day at the local
businesses do not have the water usage of those living 24/7 in their homes; and our B&B on two
acres of land on average might not recharge more sewage to groundwater than would one or
slightly more than one of the 12 proposed units would.
When it comes to the quality of drinking water, and even more importantly increasing pollution of
streams/ponds/small lakes/tributaries/bays, we strongly believe Southold Town should take a more
active approach in trying to steer future developments that involve significant sewage and nitrogen
inputs, whether housing developments, hotels, or large entertainment venues. And as I point out
above,the risks are not only to surface waters that receive groundwater discharge, but to human health
of citizens/residents that are on private wells. I think that the Town should (and perhaps already does)
have a map of all of residences and businesses that are still on private wells (I've seen different
estimates but seems that at least 5,000 in the Town of Southold), and work with the County or expert
consultants to assess potential cumulative impacts of all new high density housing proposals. Suffolk
County and its contracted engineering firm has a long history of expert knowledge and modeling skills
that are beyond what is available to the Town. I encourage Southold to consider and hopefully explore a
stronger long-term partnership with the County that could allow for wise planning and fair-minded
decision making going forward. Waiting for the County's approval for"sanitary flows" on approved new
developments is not something that would guide policy and decision making.
Sincerely,
Bruce J Brownawell, PhD.
1855 Depot Lane, Cutchogue
631-379-6166
Bruce.brownawell@stonybrook.edu
RECEIVED
Southold Town Board VAR 14 W, March 14, 2022
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, NY 11971 Southold Town Clerk
To the members of the Southold Town Board,
We are writing to you to reiterate our strong opposition to the change in variance request at
2050 Depot Lane in Cutchogue. The proposed 12-unit apartment building on the 2-acre lot
at 2050 Depot Lane, is an aesthetic substantially out of character with the 2-acre zoning that
we and our Depot Lane neighbors are required to adhere to
This "new" proposal is substantially the same as the one previously voted down, and to
which over 200 residents signed a petition against. For those new to the Board, please don't
accept Mr. Goggin's statement that there were only a "handful" of complaints and that the
surrounding neighbors are in agreement. Dozens of residents wrote opposition letters and
200 signed a petition within days. And to be crystal clear, I am a neighbor, my home is 3
parcels from the location, and I am absolutely NOT in agreement.
As taxpayers and members of the community,we implore you to deny any request for a
variance for 2050 Depot and to maintain its current residential zoning.
Whether 12 or 16 units, the proposed variance is significant and would decimate the
character of the neighborhood, especially coming on the heels of the development at
Harvest Pointe, which has already converted 46 acres of farmland into 124 condo units.
Incredibly,the proposal at 2050 Depot Lane, even at 12 units,would be double the density
of that Harvest Pointe. Have we seen a rendering of the newest iteration of the proposed
apartment building? Let's remember this is just a 2-acre parcel. Are apartment buildings
congruent with the character of the North Fork? How could you possibly consider
overturning the current zoning for a project that is sight unseen?
By his own admission,this newest version of the project is expected to be a for-profit
project that will take more than a decade to be profitable. What kind of experience will an
unprofitable landlord provide for his residents? What kind of neighbor will he be?Are all
promises broken if the small partnership who runs the project is unable or unwilling to
weather the decade of losses?Then what?The project will become a blight on its residents
and the neighborhood. All while the "local" developer and manager is over a thousand miles
away in Florida.
Across the North Fork,the community is outraged about overbuilding on residential lots for
a myriad of valid reasons. There is similar outrage for hotels, apartments and parking lots, so
don't be lulled by this apartment building because the developer keenly conflated it with
the affordable housing issue. We all agree that workforce housing is needed, but don't be
fooled by this project and destroy the residential zoning as a result. It's debatable whether
$2,000 per month rents meet the definition of affordable housing, which the federal
government caps at a 30% income ceiling. This rent is only "affordable" to those with
income over$80,000 per year,which excludes all the 50%of families in need who fall
UNDER the median $81,000 income on the North Fork. Further, don't let Mr. Goggins pull at
the public's heartstrings for affordable family housing when the units he plans to build are
only two bedrooms and 800 square feet. Our community needs young families to stay and
thrive in the area, but Mr. Goggins is suggesting that a family of 4 or 5 with a dog squeeze
into an 800 square foot apartment. Mr. Goggins has stated that his apartment building is
not viable, unless he packs in at least 12 units, which is why he is not delivering an
adequate product that really meets the needs of the community. Consider the success of
the Cottages at Mattituck, and how this proposed project could not be more different. The
Cottages provide stable, affordable housing because it is a small housing development, NOT
a rental apartment complex. And by the way, the Cottages have almost 4 times the acreage,
with only 10 more units, which are 40% larger.The project proposed at 2050 Depot is not as
altruistic as it sounds, but the overturning of the local zoning that it rests on has infinitely
more downside.
We ask the Southold Town Board, in their duty to protect the long-term needs of the
township,to deny the request for such a dangerous variance. Approving this variance will
have an adverse impact on the physical and environmental conditions in the neighborhood.
Further, it will set precedent for future decimation, as the developmental rights are intact
for the 20-acre farm across the street, currently being farmed by Sang Lee farms.
There is no need for this variance. The developer's request for a variance is a self-created
hardship. HALO zones exist for a reason in Southold and the developer could achieve his
desired goals elsewhere,within the limits of the existing regulations.
Sincerely,
Kristina &Stephen Russo
980 Depot Lane
Cutchogue, NY
RECEIVED
MAR 1 ? March 13, 2022
Members of the Southold Town Board, SOUthold Town Clerk
I am writing this letter to oppose the new proposal by Mr. Goggins requesting a residential zoning
change so he can build affordable/workforce housing on Depot Lane.
I've decided to speak out because Cutchogue and every other Southold hamlet are under attack. I am
not against affordable housing, but spot zoning this residential property at his request is wrong.The
current zoning allows for high density development in hamlet centers,this is not the case in the
proposed Depot Lane proposal.
Undoing work of the hamlet stakeholders group and set a precedence that puts every Southold
homeowner at risk.
As Al Krupski stated at last year's meetings leading up to the prior Board's rejection of Goggins' earlier
proposal,there are other areas in Cutchogue more suitable for affordable housing.We had 200
residents express their opposition to this proposal. If it weren't for Covid restrictions there would have
been many more.
The lawyer that let me know that Mr. Goggins was selling his house and moving to Florida recently told
me Goggins now lives in Florida.Absentee management of this sensitive project would be unacceptable.
Let's talk about that he will able to control the list of applicants so that only Southold Town applications
will be selected. Impossible!This is clearly discrimination.According to legal counsel allowing him to
proceed on this path will result in lawsuits,with both the developer and the Town of Southold names as
defendants.
Let's discuss the impact of lawsuits for the Town of Southold:
• Negative publicity
• Litigation expenses
• Settlement expenses
• Voter unrest
• Board Members judge ment/legacy in the limelight
• Southold under the microscope by government agencies
Please do the right thing for all residents of Cutchogue and other Southold hamlets, reject this proposal!
Adrienne Fuchs
1070 Depot Lane
RECEIVED
�i 1 4 2022 March 13, 2022
Southold 'Towin Clerk
Members of the Southold Town Board,
I'm writing this letter in opposition to converting the residentially zoned Knights of Columbus property
on Depot Lane to 12 high-density apartments. I applaud the previous Board's action in rejecting the
initial 16 unit proposal and believe the current Board will reach a similar decision. In viewing the recent
Town Zoom meeting,the resubmitted proposal is basically unchanged, reducing the units from 16 to 12.
The decisions to reject these proposals are soundly based on reasonable resident concerns related to
traffic, safety, quality of life, non-compliance with regulations, pollution and severe impact on a single
family residential neighborhood. The homeowners of Southold have reacted strongly in opposition to
these projects despite developer Bill Goggins'claim that the community did not. Petitions were signed,
and letters were written as many voters expressed their opposition.The unrest was not directed
towards workforce/affordable housing, but to the uncertainty everyone has to this haphazard down-
zoning in a residential neighborhood and the legal and financial exposure the Town and its residents will
incur.
I understand the Board is in a very tough position;the need for affordable workforce housing,supplying
labor to local businesses clearly exists. Our opposition does not hinge on disputing that fact, but rather
on the inadequacy of the proposed solution and the impact it will have on our neighborhood and
Southold Town.
On review and advice of counsel, my assessment is that the Town, its leadership and voters"will pay a
high price if this proposal is approved, and there are no guarantees that it will contribute anything
towards solving the problem of providing housing for local labor".Why?While income parameters can
be set for housing applications,you'll invite a host of legal challenges if you restrict acceptance to
applicants who live and work in Southold.
The legal framework for this proposed endeavor is broken and weak.Should the Board approve the
zoning change and grant sewerage credits you will have exposed the Town to legal challenges.You will
inadvertently create a larger problem than the one you set out to solve!
Respectfully,
Joseph Fuchs
1070 Depot Lane
Cutchogue, New York
March 11, 2022
Knights of Columbus RECEIVED
VAR I
Scott Russell
Town Supervisor
53095 Main Rd. Southold
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mr. Russell„
Knights of Columbus is zoned residential. It is surrounded by houses. It i.S_mrr n
..0ang I Phis from residential zoning t aaff .- . . le housing — especially, when
the local residents and people in the community don't want it. Mr. Goggins makes
it sound like a handful of people initially opposed his apartment house on Depot
Lane. A partition with over 200 signatures (within a few days) from all over
Southold Town, was submitted to the town board last year. To make this change
just opens up "Pandora's Box" for future zoning changes throughout Southold
Town.
Suffolk County Legislator Al Krupski, who was also a former Southold Town
Board member, said last year; "people who live in hamlets throughout town had
worked for years to define halo zones, which is where more intense development
could be allowed. °`:his- r j ti not in a halo zone! Mr. Krupski said," the zone
change would constitute spot zoning."
It is my understanding that legally Southold Town cannot limit participation to only
local residents. If this happens with Knights of Columbus, future lawsuits against
the town and the developer are inevitable. There are many people from "up the
island" that I am sure would apply through a lottery. Do we really want high
density apartments for more people to move out here and commute to their jobs
up west? And how long will the developer(s) keep this property before cashing
in? He clearly outlined how it will be all paid for in about 10 -12 years. Then
what? Lower the rent? Give the units to the tenants that just paid for them?
That's not likely. That would be our definition of true affordable housing. People
need to get out of rentals and be able to purchase condos or houses, like "The
Cottages" in Mattituck.
Mr. Goggins states in the Suffolk Times that; "the affordable housing zone
change is less intensive than the property's previous use as a fraternal Catholic
organization that sometimes operated as a facility for fundraising or catering."
Knights of Columbus, occasionally rented out the hall for an event, sometimes
held meetings there and had a monthly pancake fundraising breakfast. He is
proposing 12 two bedroom apartments. At least 12 families and most likely over
50 people will be living in this apartment house 24/7. There is no comparison.
What is happening to our beautiful Cutchogue? First 124 units at Harvest Point,
which is still being built. Now Cutchogue Woods and Knights of Columbus are
being proposed. There is just too much going on around Depot Lane and
Cutchogue in general. We purchased our house over 18 years ago because it
was two acre zoning. We are concerned if approved, this zone change and high
density housing would set a precedent for several large parcels of unprotected
farmland on the west side of Depot Lane and throughout Southold Town. Both
Joe Gratten's 20 plus acres directly across the street from Knights of Columbus
and also the old Vineyard 48 vineyards just north of that are not protected.
We are against rezoning this property, not against affordable housing, Knights of
Columbus is just the wrong location to put 12 units! Hopefully someday the
existing building will be re-purposed into a private house on the lot that is zoned
residential. Board members, please do not approve a zone change to this
property. It is short sighted and will create other problems in the future
development of Southold.
Thank you,
Sincerely,
Michael and Carol Malkush
890 Depot Lane
Cutchogue, NY 11935