Loading...
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