Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/02/1970 . t . 00( ~ Southold Town Planning Board SDUTHDLD, L. I., N. Y. 11971 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS John Wickham, Chairman Henry Molsa Alfred Grebe Henry Raynor Frank Coyle Final Information Meeting on Master Plan October 2, 1970 The final information meeting on the proposed Master Plan for Southold Town was held by the Southold Town Planning Board at 8:00 P.M., Friday, October 2, 1970, at the Southold High School. There were present: Messrs: John Wickham, Chairman: Henry MOisa, Vice-Chairman: Henry Raynor: Frank Coyle, present at 8:45 P.M. Also present: Arthur Kunz from the Suffolk County Planning Commission: Howard Terry, Building Inspector. Dr. Claus Robohm submitted the fOllowing speech before the meeting was officially opened: Mr. Chairman: Before this meeting is officially opened, I would like to state that there is no one more interested in the orderly develop- ment of the North Fork than I. There is no one more aware than I of the tremendous amount of time and effort expended by the Planning Board in the production of , . Southold Town Planntls Board -2- 4Itoctober 2, 1970 a zoning ordinance. However, in our Courts of Law, a prospective Judge will eliminate himself from presiding on a case when there is a conflict of interests which may possibly prevent him from rendering an impartial decision. A similar situation exists in our Master Plan for Suffolk County, considering water, sewerage, agriculture, land usuage and wet lands. It would seem wise that the Local Planning Board be made up of an impartial group of individuals whose real estate interests comprise of not more than 5 acres of land or who are not engaged in other complicating business interests. If this were done all activities of the Planning Board, all phases of Zoning could be presented without a conflict of interests. This I put in the form of a recommendation. October 2, 1970 Claus Robohm * * * THE CHAIRMAN: At this time I would like to declare the meeting officially opened and welcome everyone present. It is the duty of the Planning Board to hold such a meeting and we believe we have a moral obligation to hold this meeting before a final decision is made on the adoption of the Master Plan. The last information meeting was held in September of 1969. We dida't think it would be so long before we held another meeting. The lapse of time from the last meeting to the present was due to several requests for in-depth information on the future of agriculture which led to the Agriculture Study. The first request was received from the Vegetable Research Section of the Agricultural College at Cornell University, they wanted to know the outlook for agriculture in Southold Town. The second request was from the local Southold-Peconic Civic Association who questioned the conclusion made by the Development Plan by Raymond & May, which is that agriculture is good for the Town of Southold and should continue in the Town of Southold. Cornell University began an agricultural study of Southold Town in 1963 on which they submitted their report of in May of 1966. The Southold-Peconic Civic Association requested that we have another study to determine if the projections made by Cornell Univeraity at that time were developing as predicted. They felt that another study should be made to see of it would confirm or contradict the Cornell Study, before we adopt the Master Plan on the basis of agriculture being good for the Town of Southold. On the basis of these 2 requests, we proceeded to select the type of material to be studied and the person to conduct the study, after receiving authorization and assistance from the Town Board for the study. We were very fortunate to obtain Dr. Joseph Sullivan from Southampton College, who made a very complete study. His report was received a couple of weeks ago, at which time this meeting was authorized and shortly thereafter a notice was placed in the local papers to inform Southold Town Plan~ Board -3- ... October 2, 1970 the public of the meeting. On looking back, I can only say that we have covered a great deal of ground since the last meeting. I am not going to go into the details of the Agriculture Study right now, I would like to discuss the Development Plan by Raymond & May first, but I might make a few comments on the Agriculture Study. The papers character- ized the report as a gloomy forecast for the future of agriculture in Southold Town. This is not so, as a matter or fact it is right in line with the predictions that Cornell made several years ago. There has been a little more movement out of agriculture than expected, but this is due to the fact that there has been little change in the procedure of operation. There must be some changes if agriculture is to continue. Cornell predicted that in 15 years the number of farmers would be cut to 140 or less. Dr. Sullivan reported that there are approxi- mately 130 at present. It actually shows that slightly more went out of farming than expected. Also, the median age of the farmer has dropped rather sharply, it was 58, now it is in the low 50's. The tenancy figure is almost identical with what it was. Also, the following two developments should be noted. This spring the New York State Dept. of Agriculture and Markets decided that they should make a potato survey of the entire state. We requested their figures for Southold Town and they conform very closely with Dr. Sullivan's figures. The most important develop- ment was the enactment of one acre zoning by the County Board of Health. This removes a great deal of difficulty from the Town Board and the Planning ~oard. I am sure that most of you have heard me say that the Town of Southold gets about as many sub- division applications as all the other towns put together. This is why we are so vitally concerned. One acre zoning has really taken the pressure off. The Planning Board of the Town of Southold supports one acre zoning. I would like to re-state that this is an information meeting only, not a publiC hearing. It is based primarily on Raymond & May's Plan for Development. It has been available for over a year in the public libraries, at the Town Office, and the Supervisor's Office, for your inspection. We hope that you have familiarized your self with the material. This is also a chance to uncover and discuss the findings of Dr. Sullivan's Agriculture Study. I would now like to go back to Raymond & May's Development Plan. Mr. Henry Moisa will read the section on "Re~idential Land use.", and Mr. Henry Raynor will read the sect10n on "Agriculture Land use." Southold Town Plan~ Board -4- __October 2, 1970 RESIDENTIAL LAND USE PLAN The Town of Southold is primarily a residential and agricultural community and the development plan proposes that the Town remain as such in the future. This policy is to be implemented through the limitation of intensive residential development to the ample vacant lands south of State Route 25 and a narrow strip on the north shore along Long Island Sound. Prime farm land lying north of Route 25 will be preserved for agricultural uses, and any residential develop- ment will be of a very low density. The rate of development should be limited in accord with the provision of public facilities and services in order to maintain tax rates within the economic capacity of the Town. Population Capacity The zoning ordinance, through its various regulations and district boundaries, directly limits the maximum population potential of the Town. At any given point intime, it represents an image of Southold's future land uses and population distribution. The following estimate of the population capacity of the present zoning ordinance is based upon a number of assumptions: a. Farm land will continue in its present use b. Residential development will occur only on privately owned buildable vacant land (not including farmland or wetlands). c. The population estimate relates to permanent residents only. It does not include seasonal residents. d. Family size is assumed to be 3 persons per dwelling. On the basis of these assumptions: a. All the buildable vacant land in Southold currently zoned for residential use was measured. This was found to be 3,639 acres. b. For each area measured, 50% of the land, or a total of 1,819 acres was deducted for accessory facilities (schools, roads. shopping etc.) c. Based on current zoning regulations, the maximum number of dwelling units for all such areas was calculated to be 6,342 dwelling units. d. The figure of 6,342 dwelling units was multiplied by 3 persons per dwelling. The resulting figure which is somewhat in excess.of 19,000 persons, is the theoretical additional population potent1al of the Town. Thus, the 1985 population for Southold based on these assumptions is estimated at approximately 34,000 persons. . " Southold Town Plan~ Board -5- .october 2, 1970 Malcolm Pirnie Engineers have conducted a study on the availibility and the consumption rate of the existing water supply and their relationship to the future population potential of the Town. They have found that the available water resources is equal to an average of 10 million gallons per day. The total estimated withdrawal of ground water in 1966 was an average of 7 million gallons per day, of Which an average of 5.5 million gallons per day was used for irrigating vegetable crops and the remainder used for domestic uses. The above figures indicate that an average of 3 million gallons per day will be available for future domestic'use. Of this 3 million gallon reserve, it is estimated that summer residents will consume an average of about 500,000 gallons per day, during the next 20 years. This will leave approximately 2.5 million gallons available for an increase in permanent residents. Assuming a per capita consumption of 120 gallons per day, the remaining 2.5 million gallons will provide for an additional pop- ulation of approximately 20,000 persons or a total of 35,000 permanent resddents. This estimate is based upon the assumption that the amount of water used for irrigation will remain constant at 5.5 million gallons per day, for the next 20 years. If withdrawal for irrigation is decreasec in the future, there will be water for a greater number of permanent and/ or seasonal residents. It is also interesting to note that Robert Carroll in "A Social Analysis of Southold Town, Long Island", estimates the 1985 population to be in the vicinity of 35,600 permanent residents. This estimate is based upon the assumption that the Town of Southold will continue to house about 2% of Suffolk County's total population. RESIDENTIAL lAND USE The various population estimates indicate that only a portion of the area of the Town of Southold will be needed for residential development over the next 20 years. One of the most important objectives of the Development Plan has been to select those areas most suited for resident-' ial development and, on the other hand, to discourage development in areas presently used for farming in order to preserve the agricultural economy and rural character of the community as long as possible. It has therefore been established as a land use policy on the south shore south of Route 25, and on the north shore along Long Island Sound. The proposal for residential development along the south shore is predicted on the creation of a public water supply system serving this area. The two residential categories shown on the Town Development Plan map area intended to implement this policy. The Agriculture-Residence area covers all of Southold's prime agricultu~ land and is located primarily south of Route 25. Housing types are limited to one family houses and the density recommendations for the one family dwellings vary from .5 to 1 dwelling per net acre, depending upon the availability of a public water system. The Development Plan map shows a low density residential development along the south shore and in a narrow strip on the north shore along Southold Town Pla~ Board -6- ~ October 2. 1970 The Development Plan map shows low density residential development along the south shore and in a narrow strip on the north shore along Long Island Sound. It is proposed that development in these areas be limited to single family houses. but at a higher density than in the Agriculture-Residence areas. The densities proposed for these areas are 1 to 2 dwelling units per net acre. depending upon the provision of a public water system. Garden Apartment and Attached House Development The Plan recommends consideration of medium density residential uses on various sites. sometime in the future. when the need and demand for multi-family units develops. Such uses would be strictly controlled by zoning regulations. Specifically. areas which might be considered potentially suitable for multi-family development are those in the immediate vicinity of retail shopping. service. and general commercial areas. Zoning standards would assure low density. adequate landscaping. and sufficient off-street parking spaces so that the developments will be in harmony with the residential development in the remainder of the Town. Approval by the Planning Board of the layout of each apartment site will be required. Hence. the exact location of all structures. facilities. and landscaping. and of all points of ingress and egress would be subject to approval by the Planning Board prior to the issuance of any building permit. In evaluating the desirability of this type of land use. a number of studies relating to multi-family development in other communities were analyzed. These studies were concerned with the effects of such develop- ment on existing community character and municipal services. the number of school age children such a development might bring. the tax revenue produced by this use as compared with other land uses, the type of income levels of the probable residents of such units. and the benefits to be derived by the local shopping establishments. Services can be provided for apartment developments with considerably greater efficiency and economy than for single-family houses. Multi-family developments can add a significant amount of tax revenue to the community base. abd usually house relatively few school age children. In addition. their occupants contribute substantial consumer buying power to the local retail areas. For these reasons. apartments usually require less in municipal services than the taxes they pay. AGRICULTURAL rAND USE PLAN Approximately 47% (13,136 acres) of Southold's 28.150 acres of land area is in agricultural use. The 1965 value of the total farm crop was in excess of eight million dollars. making Southold one of the leading dollar-value agricultural towns in the State of New York. However. over the past decade. there has been a relative decline in the actual number of acrea farmed. and in the total number of farms. There has been a trend toward consolidation into larger singly-held units with Southold Town Plann~ Board -7- ~ October 2, 1970 the application of more motorized equipment, thereby yielding more efficient farming methods. Yet, the price of potatoes has constantly been dropping, with a resultant loss in desire and ability on the part of the farmers to continue their operations. These facts indicate that the future of farming in Southold is threatened, and that in the next twenty years agriculture could become a thing of the pa~t. ~n spite of these trends, the Development Plan recommends the retention of 13,136 acres in agricultural use. This po~icy is based upon the realization that even if agriculture should decline, the transition from an agricultural economy should be gradual as to minimize economic hard- ship. Furthermore, continued haphazard scattered residential development in agricultural areas would create an additional economic burden by necessitating the provision of necessary public services and facilities. The problem of retaining Southold's agricultural heritage is thus primarily one of economics. The financial benefits that attend the transmution of potato farms into speculative real estate has caused many Long ~sland farmers to put out a welcome mat to the residential subdivider. Those on the fringe of the large scale development taking place in western Suffolk County, who did not wish to sell their land to the advancing surburbia, have eventually been forced to change their minds. Slowly, they have been overwhelmed by a series of tax increases needed to defray the mounting costs of new schools, roads, and muni~ipal services. As long as a community truly remains rural, the population remains relatively stable, and schools built by one generation can accomodate the next with slight additions and alterations, the tax base is adequate to support simple communities services without a large annual increase. With surburban development pressure, the situation is altered. ~ the absence of an industrial tax base, the farms have had to bear the brunt of the heavier municipal expenses. Agricultural land is assessed on the assumption that if some of the farm acreage can be sold for a high price to a subdivider, then all of the acreage is worth more money. Such a policy means that it is often impossible to operate a farm at a profit and many farmers eventually succumb to the speculator's offer. For the Town of Southold to achieve the aim in its Development Plan of preserving agriculture and open space, it will have to do more than pass regulatory ordinances. Private ownership and respect for the vested rights inherent in such ownership are established in tradition and law. However, new techniques and approaches for coping with the problem have recently been emerging throughout the nation. the following measures used in concerb may enable Southold to exercise some degree of control over the preservation of its farm lands1 1. Reduce Tax Assessments Current tax assessment practices usually result in a yearly loss of farm acreage. This is due, in part, to the desire of the fammer to sell some of his land and obtain relief from taxes, and secondly, from the need by municipal governments to gain Southo1d Town P1anntIJ Board -8- .ober 2, 1970 greater tax yields from the real property tax. The Town could place a preferential assessment on agricultural land to encourage continued use in such a category. In conjunction with this policy, the system of retroactive taxation might be used. The owner of agricultural tracts would receive an assessment based solely upon its use in that category. When and if the property is sold for developmental purposes, back taxes would have to be paid Which would be representative of what the total taxes would have been without a lowered assessment. This device is being employed in a number of states, notably California, Maryland, and New Jersey. Each State uses a somewhat different method of lowering assessments, and apparently none are completely successful. In New York State under Section 247, of the General municipal Law, owners of open or agricultural land may enter into a contractura1 agreement to convey to the Town a negative easement (not to develop). In return, the assessed valuation is to be based on the existing use of the land. The rate of reduction i~ assessed value which may be granted is limited by law. The terms and conditions of the contract are left open in regard to the type of easement. In addition, a public hearing is required. Although this has been largely over&ooked by agricultural interests, it might well provide a satisfactory vehicle to create a more 1avorab1e economic climate for agriculture in Southo1d and, at the same time, stabl1ize the rural quality of the Town. 2. Purchase of Development Riqhts Under a recent act of the State ~eqis1ature, the Town can purchase the development rights of vacant land, paying the landowner to retain the land in agriculture uses or as open space. The payment is supposed to represent the differential between the market value of the property at its present use and the value if developed for more intensive use. Under this procedure, only one payment is made and the development rights are purchased in perpetuity. The value of such rights is frequently difficult to determine and may cost almost as much as outright purchase of the land.. 3. Zoninq The Town can encourage the agric~ltura1 use of land through various zoning techniques. The cluster zoning provisions of the proposed zoni~g regulations would allow for a relatively concentrated development in the Agriculture-Residence District. while maintaining a low overall density as established by the conventional district regulation~ The developer is allowed to concentrate his construction on a portion of the site, while the balance of the tract would remain in agriculture use. A number of communities throughout the country have adopted an exclusive agriculture zone, providing residential development not relating to farm needs. However, agricultural zoning has only been adopted with the consent of the farmer and therefore should not be considered a perpetual or even a long range protection. 4. Restriction of Municipal services public improvements, i.e, public water The scheduling of proppsed and sewer facilities, could Southold Town Plann4IJ Board -9- . October 2, 1970 have an effect in preserving agricultural lands by limiting construction in these areas. It is recommended that the Town of Southold encourage residential development in the area south of Route 25 by giving this area a higher priority in the programming of a public water system. Conversely, a low priority would be applicable to agricultural lands north of Route 25. THE CHAIRMAN: The foregoing is to refresh everyone on the material, because the Town is contemplating the adoption of the entire plan. I will now read the "Additional Facts and Proposals"; In the more than seven years of continuing study of trends in the Town of Southold many revealing facts have been uncovered and, in general, the Planning Board has tried to present them to the public. At the same time it is recognized that change is the order of the day in Southold and further study is necessary. Nevertheless five years have elapsed since the first reports and projections were made, and there is now an opportunity to evaluate and recapitulate. POPULATION. The 1960 census shows Southold with a population of 13,295 and a population density of .426 persons per acre (Riverhead .334 and Southampton .291). The Cornell study in 1964 showed 14,186 exclusive of Fishers Island~ which agrees with the Lilco figure of 14,626. If present estimates of about 17,000 are correct the population density~ould be .6 persons per acre. Cornell's medium projection for 1970 was 15,885. In 1975 we will have 19,750, in 1980 - 28,000 by the estimates of the Nassau-Suffolk Planning Commission. WATER. The water study made by Malcolm Pirnie Engineers in 1963 and 1964 was made during a series of deficient rainfall years and thus established the danger point. Subsequent years have seen greatly reduced pumpage for irrigation. Pirnie's factor of 40% "run-in" would contribute 16 inches of rainfall per year to the ground water reserve. Since irrigation never exceeds 6 inches per year, and in 1970 was less than 3 inches per acre actually irrigated, it can be seen that open land in agriculture contributes tremendously to Southold's water resource and thus provides for existing areas of denser population. Water must be properly distributed and sources of water adequately protected. AGRICULTURE. Southold has 10,000 cropped acres of some of the most productive land in America. It is probably the Number TWo agricultural town in New York State. An average sized farm of 89 acres in Southold produces enough potatoes to feed 24,000 people with potatoes every year. Clearly Southold farms supply food not only for the loaal market, but also a large area of the eastern seaboard Although total land in farms is somewhat higher that.. the crop~ed acres there has been some movement out of agriculture. Nevertheless tenancy has not increased. Farmers s~ill ow~ ~out 43% of what they operate. Much of what they rent J.S owne former farmers. Southold Town Planni. Board -10- . October 2, 1970 LAND USE. The Plan for Development indicates that in 1963-65 there was in agriculture 13,136 acres or 46.7% of the Townes total area. Development of all kinds was 5,133 acres of 18.2 %, including homes, commercial, industrial and public uses as well as highways. Still remaining in vacant and private open space was 9,881 acres or 35.1% of Southold's land. Since this base period and contrary to trends elsewhere there has been a building boom with June 1970 setting an all-time high for any month. It would seem that a resident population of 28,000 in 1985, being slightly over cornell's medium projection for that year of 26,700, could readily be housed on the 10,000+ acres in the Town not in farms, and that existing land in agriculture might well remain in that use, at least until that time. The study and report just submitted by Dr. Joseph Sullivan for the Town Board indicates considerable interest in this direction on the part of the Town's farmers. This study also points out in detail what has happened to agriculture and the Town in the past 7 years, and our deductions have been drawn as a result of this study. Planning at all levels, National, State, and County all recommend retaining land in agriculture as long as possible. It assures a supply of food for future needs, it relieves the tax burden for all local services as shown by the Suffolk County Planning Commission and by lowering the population density greatly, it enhances Southold both for permanent and part-time residents. Since the Cornell study stresses the importance of maintaining Southold's rural atmosphere, it is hoped that means will be found both to preserve open space in agriculture as well as woodlands, wetlands, scenic areas, and shore front. Progress is being made at the Town level in each of these areas. THE CHAIRMAN: At this time I would like to open the meeting for discussion. MR. JAS. OLSEN, Mattituck: Before you go any further, would you explain to us how you feel about the sod farmers who are using a terrific amount of nitrates and the land is completely useless when they get finished with it. THE CHAIRMAN: We cannot answer this, at the present time. Sod farming is relatively new to this area. We have with us tonight a member of the Suffolk County Extension Service, Mr. Link Wells, perhaps he has some information on it. MR. LINK WELLS, SUFFOLK COUNTY EXTENSION SERVICE: I cannot answer your question at the present time either. We are in the process of studying this noW. We hope to have a report soon. Southold Town plan,..g Board -11-. October 2, 1970 MR. JAB. OLSEN: An example is the old McNulty farm in Laurel. Today it is a nursery, not a farm. Martin Weglicki owns land right along side of it, which he is subdividing. The nitrates have penetrated so far that the County Board of Health disapproved the water. The potato farmers say that the amount of nitrates used by the sod farmer are several times more than what they use for potatoes. Nitrates take a long time to get rid of. Is this land going to become waste after they finish stripping it? What will happen to this land? THE CHAIRMAN: Several months ago, or rather over a year ago, the Planning Board suggested to the Town Board the possibility of enacting legislation to regulate sod farming. We do not know just how much or wha:t harm they might be doing, but there is reason to believe that they use more water and nitrates than the potato farmer. NOW, this was presented to the Town Board who did not see fit to act on it at that time, but this is a matter that could be halted by the Town Board. WILLIAM POLLERT, So-pe Civic Assoc.: We have had meetings with the Planning Board in an effort to be cooperative with the Plan. It is the assocatiorls feeling that perhaps agriculture should not be maintained. There is no basis for the statement that land that is in agriculture should remain so. We were instrumental in discussing with the planning Board the need for this Agriculture Study, but we don't feel that it answers the question of water on land that is in agriculture, should it continue to remain in agriculture? We feel that the Sullivan Report was negative. We want to have a study comparing the agricultural use of water verses the residential use of water, and a study of the taxes for agriculture and the taxes for residentdal. The report pointed out that it will probably be more economical to maintain agriculture based on this report stating that agriculture uses 3" to 6" of the water. We don't feel that we have had the proper study made to determine whether the land in agriculture should be maintained in agriculture. If agriculture is to be maintained, it will have to be subsidized, how are they going to do this, by tax relief? A tax relief will take away from the tax base. We feel it is important for the people to know where we stand on this matter. I JEAN TIEDKE, Chairman, League of Women Voters: I question the conclusions made by the Civic Association on the Agriculture Study and on the Master plan. I think the Planning Board is doing a good job. PAUL STOUTENBURGHi South old: the problem of cesspools should be If we do have another study, included in it. THE CHAIRMAN: Dr. sullivan's report has pin Rointed a lot Southold Town Plan~ Board -12- ~ October 2, 1970 of the problems, but not all of them. The Cornell Study was good too, but it didn't cover everything that the Sullivan Report did. I wish we could have another study to get even more answers, we need another study. The Town Board has been cooperative, they have backed the Planning Board all the way and we have backed them. We have a very good working relationship between the ?lanning Board and the Town Board, and we have a good relation- ship with the County Planning Board and the Board of Health. WILLIAM POLLERT: We are not against the Development Plan or agriculture, we are merely looking for further study to justify the statement that agriculture should be maintained. ALBERT ZANOWSKI, farmer from Cutchogue: We are engaged in growing potatoes. It costs us $2.50 to grow them and we receive $2.00 for them. We have to compete with other regions of the nation. out West they own land by the square acre, which is 640 acres of land. We pay more taxes here for 4 acres of land than they payout there for 640 acres. I don't think tax relief is the answer for us. Farming here is under great stress and strain. We have to abide by many regulations. We don't have the best of help, but it is the only available to us and we have to provide their housing too. We have several groups of people who are harming us, the do-gooders like the Board of Health with all their regulations, and then we have the people who want to ban insecticides. Without insecticideSKwe would have no crop. I don't think agriculture can survive. So we must have reasonable zoning and restrictions so that the farmer can ease himself out of the land and have a little money left for retirement. We have no young people in farming today. It is all old people who are waiting for Social Security. DAVID MUDD, Southold: You stated that the Planning Board is in agreement with one acre zoning? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, to limit the subdivision applications. We might as well face it, there just is not enough room on Eastern Long Island to make a play~round for eve=yone in New York City. We don't feel that it is right that we should get six times as many subdividion applications as the Town of Riverhead. DAVID MUDD: I don't disagree, but I don't have the energy tocut the grass on an acre lot. THE CHAIRMAN: You don't have to plant it all in grass. Plant a lot of trees, or if the lot is wooded, leave it entirely wooded. This is not the problem, water and sewerage is the problem. One acre of land makes a home entirely self sufficient as to water and Southold Town Pla~ Board -13- ~october 2, 1970 sewerage. We have some of the most beautiful waterfront in Qur Town, yet people are placing wells so close to the shoreline that we are one day going to have salt water intrusion and will not be able to supply these people with fresh water. LLOYD TERRY: I love farming, it has been a wonderful way of life for me. In 1927 there were 33 farmers in Orient, at the present there are 4. I would like to stay in it as long as I can, but we farmers are not without our problems. The longer we hold out the more we are faced with difficulties. Our taxes are being raised because we own land on the water. Yet you say that people should not build there, but the assessors are raising our taxes. We have been blessed with a good crop this year. But we have a surplus of cabbage. We have beautiful cabbage and we are losing money on it. My whole family has been brought up on the farm. But how many mad years can we stand, there are more downs than there are ups. The one acre subdivision lots are fine, but some people don't want 1 acre of land for their retirement years, it is too tiring. This one acre is necessary to maintain water. If the Health Dept. had acted soon enough to restrict detergents, we would not need one acre zoning. I think this is an infringememt'on our constitutional rights. JOHN RAPP, Southold: On speaking of Dr. Sullivan's Report in reference to subsidy, what if we have to give the farmers an abatment? I am not against this. We know that speculators have come into Southold Town in large numbers.n HOW will we tell the difference between the farmer and the speculator? THE CHAIRMAN: I can't even attempt to answer this. But I don't think there was any mention made of subsidy, the question as asked was - would you be in favor of a plan to preserve agriculture? I would like to go back and speak in answer to some of the other questions. There is no real basis for thinking that agriculture can continue if we constantly lose money. Mr. Terry, there is no doubt about it, agriculture has almost disappeared from Orient, compared to what it used to be. Potatoes do not even cover the cost of producing them. ~ don't know the answers. But we can't hope to have a plan that will deliver agriculture out of all of its prOblems. The Planning Board has some suggestions. There are provisions under the General Municipal Law for doing some of the things which our neighboring states are doing. New Jersey fruit farmers have very low taxes, we have high land taxes, and we get the same or a lower price for 'our produ:e. New York doesn't see fit to give us the same break. We would like to have the opportunity to maintain agriculture in the Town of southold. WM. SCHRIEVER, Orient: I attended a couple of these .Maste~ Plan meetings last year, and it seems to me that we are d1SCUS~~g the same things. It has been going on for 6 or 7 year~. I th1nk farming is dying, and the farmers seem to agree. I th1nk the far . Southold Town Plann.., Board -14- 4It October 2, 1970 land must be preserved in mpen area. The farmer can't do it by himself, he needs help. I think if we are going to preserve the land, 1 acre zoning is not the answer. The government should purchase the land and lease it to the farmer at a reasonable cost, so if they retire it will go back into the land bank. I don't think the Planning Board has made very much progress on the Master Plan in the last year. I would like to see it progress in some direction. THE CHAIRMAN: I am going to ask Mr. Kunz to answer this question. MR. KUNZ, Suffolk County Planning Commission: This point is correct. Some way must be found to preserve the land. If we lost the agriculture, we will lose the residential too. The seasonal people pay half of your taxes, if the rural atmosphere disappears, the taxes will rise higher. If the land converts to year round houses, the taxes will rise. We in the County have been studying ways to file abatments or subsidize the farmers. but we still have to find a way to preserve the farm land. We are working with the pressure of the developers, something has to be done in the near future. We feel we are getting down to a reasonable level. We would like the development to be in the western half of the county, not the eastern section. DR. ROBOHM: It seems to me that the government agencies are working against one another. You say that the County doesn't want to develop the eastern section, yet the State is building roads to bring the people out here. MRS. CUNNINGHAM, New Suffolk: None of these plans will work very well unless they have economics behind them. New York has to compete with Maine in growing potatoes. The taxes in Maine are lower and the cost of producing them are less, yet we get the same or a lower price. THE CHAIRMAN: It is my personal feeling that this is not the most meaningful approach. It is the difference in the cost that is the most meaningful, in the long run. Up until now we have been keeping away from specifics, we have been speaking in general. We have no program to move forward on, but we do have provisions for use-assessment contracts which can be put into effect under Section 247 of the General Municipal Law. This specifies that owners of open land may enter into contracts with the Town Board and promise not to develop the land or some similar limitation and in turn the Town Board will gove some preferrential assessment. The most important part of the ~se-assessment contract is that it carries into another phase, the gift tax. It limits the transfer or in~eritance tax on your property. Maybe you haven't made a lot of money, but you would like to pass the farm onto the family. So the use-assessment contract will not only give you a preferrential '., Southold Town Plann4i' Board -15- . October 2, 1970 assessment. but it will also limit the inheritance tax on your property. MR. WACKER, Nassau Pt.. Cutchogue: Couldn't the classification of Residential~gricultural be changed so that those who are buying the land must obtain a special permit to use it for residential purposes? THE CHAIRMAN: This is what we call "green-belt zoning", the farmers don't like it. The land is the only equity the farmer has. WM. POLLERT, So-Pe Civic Assoc.: As we break down from farms to residential it will be disasterous. what plans are being made by this Planning Board in reference to the County level. THE CHAIRMAN: We feel that asking any government agency to buy land or development rights in the Town of Southold is unrealistic/ I think we can see such an operation underway in Easthampton. But they only have 1.500 acres of open land. we have 15,000 acres. Easthampton stood it. we can't. I am not Willing to look to the County of Suffolk to bail the Town of Sou thold out. If we can't solve our own problems, it is too bad. I think we can. LLOYD TERRY: We are going around the real issue here tonight. It is not just the Town of Southold that is in trouble. it is all of the 700.000 farmers in the nation. We are going out of business because we have to dispose of our products on the open market. We have tohave a minimum price on everything. just like they do on manufactured goods. Taxes don't amount to that much. If we got a decent price we could pay the taxes. The Union is the culprit. they dictate what we pay. We are fed up with it. our only hope of retirement is by selling our land. We should have legislation to get a minimum price for our products. We have to pay the minimum wage. Inspectors come around to inspect my books to see what I am paying the help, but they don't ask about my profits becawse they know that there aren't any. JEAN TIEDKE. Chairman. League of Women Voters: The Southold unit of the League of Women voters believes that the general guide- lines laid down by the Southold Town Development Plan are in the best interests of both the year-round and the summer resident tax- payers. These guidelines provide a useful framework within which the orderly development of the Town's residential. natural and recreational areas. as well as industrial & commercial growth, can occur. The Southold League members have studied certain sections of the Development Plan and in June forwarded their comments (concerning Open Space & Recreation. Agriculture. 'Industry & Commerce. and zoningl to the Town Planning Board. the Town Board, and other groups. .J South old Town Plann-.r Board -16- 4Iftober 2. 1970 It is on the matter of land usuage that we wish to be heard tonight. In our opinion the most important consideration in the Development Plan is the emphasis on protection and husbanding of the limited water supply in the Town of Southold. Rainfall is our only source of water. Every road. every parking lot. every building reduces the amount of land available for absorption of rain into the ground water supply. This increases the amount of water lost through storm sewers. much of which runs off into our creeks. and bays. thus increasing the pollution of these waters. Zoning is a tool which can be effectively used to help preserve the fresh water supply available to us. It can help keep our costal and bay waters healthy. our drinking water pure. our open space and recreational areas live and well. The uses of marshlands should be reconsidered in terms of their great economic value as home base for two-thirds of the East Coast commercial fish population. The Leaqge believes that regulations to reduce sand and gravel mining. filling. bulkheading. and unnecessary dredging of our marsh- lands and lowlands would help. It would help also to prevent the intrusion of salt water into our water table. Wetlands such as these also serve as valuable storm buffers and as gilters for natural run-off water from the land. The proposed Development Plan presents these considerations very clearly. Controls to limit run-off from cesspools. agricultural fertilizers and pesticides can also be set uP. further protecting our marshlands which are economically more productive than agricultural lands. The wise management of our unique natural resoucces is of major importance in maintaining tourism as an economic asset in this area. The League believes that every effort should be made to increase and protect available public open space and beaches. Zoning can likewise serve directly the needs of every section of our population including the small family. the less-privileged and the elderly. It can provide for residential areas of varying size and cost and still remain within the recommended population density in relation to our water supply. The use of cluster zoning and multi-family development. as suggested in the Development Plan. merits attention as a means of preserving open space in the form of agricultural lands. woodlands and recreational areas. Such development also results in a more economic distribution of Town and village utilities and roads. Acceptance of the proposed Plan by the Planning Board. as official policy in no way precludes further study of reassessment of specific items as future needs arise. The Southold Unit of the League of Women Voters urges adoption of the Town Development Plan as a valuable guideline for the future. Respectfully submitted. Jean Tiedke. Chairman Southold unit. L.W.V. '4 South old Town Plann4lf Board -17-- 411Pctober 2. 1970 QUESTION: Is there any plan for industry in the Town? HENRY RAYNOR: We have provisions in the Development Plan for several parcels of land to be zoned industrial. We would like to see industry that would be good for the area. not the kind that will require heavy amounts of water. Attracting industry is at the discretion of the Town Board. not the Planning Board. MRS. JURZENIA, Greenport: I disagree with one acre zoning. It will not preserve the open spaces. We should have cluster zoning. THE CHAIRMAN: We are trying to set up a framework under which we can operate. a general outline of what we would like to do. Nothing will be done just by adopting the plan, it has to be implemented. MIKE ~SH. Candidate for State Senator: The Planning Board is only setting guide lines for the Town Board. It is up to you. the people to recommend to the Town Board what specific plans to follow. MR. JAS. OLSEN: One acre zoning is unrealistic because it is pushing too many people out of the category for building a home. The young people and the old people will be forced out of the area, because they can't afford a 'one acre lot. MR. KUNZ: We are trying to limit the number of people in Southold Town. Wec,are trying to plan for this. It should be developed. but in limitation. We want to give the farmer some return on his land. We want to hold the land in agriculture as long as possible. MR. JAB. OLSEN: There have been several applications made to the Town Board for senior citizens apartments and they have been turned down. Why? Where will the old people go. they can't afford to build a house on a one acre lot. THE CHAIRMAN: The Town of Southold had nothing to do with putting one acre zoning into effect. This one acre zoning is a ruling of the County Board of Health. but we support it. We are the most densely populated of the eastern towns. DR. ROBOHM: Does one acre zoning apply to previously subdivided, undeveloped lands? THE CHAIRMAN: The County Board of Health has the privelege of reviewing subdivisions periodically. If a certain percentage of the lots have not been sold and developed. the County may require the subdivider to update them to the current area requirement. .4. South old Town Plan1llF Board -18e October 2, 1970 HELEN CUNNINGHAM, New Suffolk: Couldn't the plan be adopted first, as a general guideline, and the specific problems solved later? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, this is precisely what we plan to do. DR. SULL~: It is urgent for you to make a decision. !f you don't the decision will be made for you in piece meal, which will contradict the whole concept of planning. STEWARD DORMAN: I would like to compliment Mr. Wickham, on the meeting tonight. We are fortunate to have him working for us. I am in favor of getting on with it, and modifying it as we go along. A hand count was taken of the people for and against the Development Plan. The majority of the people present, about 140, said that they were for adopting the plan. A small minority, about 10 said no. Mrs. Jurzenia asked the Chairman to explain a scenic easement. The Chairman explained that a scenic easement limits the use that the property can be put to. Because the use is limited, therefore the assessment must be limited and the appraisal for transfer taxes must be limited. The Town Board has been presented with several applications for scenic easements which they are working on. The Chairman informed Dr. Robohm that his comments will be forwarded to the Town Board. In closing the Chairman thanked everyone present for attending the meeting and declared the meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M. 'In" ~iCkh~: Respectfully submitted, B~e;;i~ecretarY Southold Town Planning Board G 0 -_,t. ( ." Chairman ~~g~ , /&6 r .?{j',,:.t Pb~t' :-;>/ ~I" ~r . . ," . .