Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-100.-4-3.181 Walker Street New York City New York 10013 t 2t2 941 t390 f 212 941 9995 mail~Owbarchitect corn 100-255. © NTS MAY 11,2010 NOTES: 1 ACCESS AREA SHALL MAINTAIN FREE & CLEAR ACCESS & THE PLANNING BOARD GRANTS THIS SITE PLAN FOR A RETAIL WINE-TASTING FACILITY ONLY BUSES ARE PROHIBI~D FROM ENTERING THE SITE PROPOSED SITE PLAN (PARCEL #2) P~G BO~D MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L EDWARDS DONALD J. WILCENSKI JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 76t3-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 June 15,2010 Charles Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Approval: Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard Located at 2000 Oregon Road, on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: A-C Dear Mr. Cuddy: The Southold Town Planning Board, at a meeting held on Monday, June 14, 2010, adopted the following .resolutions: WHEREAS, this proposed site plan is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 979,664 sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. ft. (1.21 acres) in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck, SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1; and WHEREAS, an application for a site plan was submitted on August 11, 2006, including the site plan prepared by William Bartow Bialosky, R.A., dated December 15, 2005; and WHEREAS, on August 21, 2006, the Southold Town Planning Board accepted the application for review; and WHEREAS, on August 22, 2006, the Planning Board, pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-131 C., distributed the application to agencies having jurisdiction for their comments, and the following agencies responded: Town Engineer, Amhitectural Review Committee, LWRP Coordinator; Land Preservation Committee, NCRS, Mattituck Fire Commissioners; and Shinn PaRe Two June 15, 2010 WHEREAS, the comments from those agencies referenced above were received and accepted by the Planning Board, discussed with the applicant, and incorporated into the site plan to the satisfaction of the Planning Board; and WHEREAS, on August 22, 2006, the Planning Board referred the application to the Suffolk County Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on September 12, 2006, the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act, determined that the proposed action was a Type II Action and not subject to review; and WHEREAS, on September 18, 2006, the Suffolk County Planning Commission commented that the proposed action was a matter of local jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, on January 12, 2010, the Southold Town Planning Board referred the application to the Southold Town Land Preservation Committee for review and comments on whether parking would be allowed on the easement area in connection with special events; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2010, the Southold Town Land Preservation Committee responded that the recorded easement does not permit special events such as weddings, parties and catered affairs with tents and/or associated parking on the easement area; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board determined that due to the small size of the site, and the inability of the applicant to use the surrounding preserved land for overflow parking for events, that overflow parking was not feasible on this site plan as it has been on other winery site plans. Instead, the applicant was instructed to add a note to the site plan as follows: "The Planning Board grants this site plan for a retail wine tasting facility only. Buses are prohibited from entering the site" to indicate that the Planning Board did not review or provide for any parking at this site other than that required by the Parking Schedule in the Town Code for retail businesses; and WHEREAS, on April 12, 2010, a public hearing was held and then closed; therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board has reviewed the proposed action under the policies of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program and determined that the action is consistent as outlined in the memo prepared by the LWRP Coordinator; and be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grants approval to the site plan entitled "Proposed Site Plan Parcel #2~, prepared by William Bartow Bialosky, R.A., dated December 15, 2005 and last revised on May 11, 2010, and authorizes the Chairman to endorse the site plan. Shinn Pa.qe Three June 15, 2010 Please also note the following requirements in the Southold Town Code relating to site plans: 1. Any outdoor lighting shall be shielded so the light soume is not visible from adjacent properties and roadways. Lighting fixtures shall focus and direct the light in such a manner as to contain the light and glare within property boundaries. 2. All storm water run-off from grading, driveways and gravel areas must be contained on site. 3. Approved site plans are valid for three years from the date of approval within which time all proposed work must be completed, unless the Planning Board grants an extension. 4. Any changes from the approved site plan shall require Planning Board approval. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Planning Board or its representative must inspect the site to ensure it is in conformity with the approved site plan, and issue a final site inspection approval letter. Should the site be found not in conformance with the approved site plan, no Certificate of Occupancy may be issued unless the Planning Board approves the changes to the plan. A copy of the approved site plan is enclosed for your records. One copy will also be sent to the Building Department and the Town Engineer. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Very truly yours, William J. c~ers~,~ Co-Vice Chairman Encl. cc: Building Dept Town Engineer ~WORK SESSION AGENDA · SOOTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD-' Monday, June 7, 2010 4:00 p.m. Applications Project name: CJCl Corp. I SCTM#: 1 45-4-4.1 Location: 74495 NYS Route 25 Description: This site plan is for the proposed construction of one building of 8,960 sq. ft. with the first floor containing, rental space, contractor's business office garage storage and an apartment on the second floor on a 1.036 acre parcel in the B Zone. Status: New Site Plan Action: Review site plan and comments received. Attachments: Staff Report Project name: T-Mobile Northeast I SCTM~: 1 1000-109-2-17.1 Location: The Presbyterian Church or Society of Cutchogue, 27245 Main Road Description: The applicant requests co-location of a public utility wireless communication facility having interior mounted antennas within an existing church steeple and a related storage equipment area screened from view. As part of the application, the applicant proposes to remove and replace a portion of an existing church steeple to match the existing church building on a 0.91-acre site located in the R-40 Zoning District. Status: New Site Plan Action: Review draft resolution. Attachments: Draft Resolution Project name: Shinn Vineyards I SCTM#: I 1000-100-4-3.1 Location: 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck Description: Proposed site plan for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 979,664 sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. ft. (1.21 acres) in the Agricultural Conservation District. Status: New Site Plan Action: Review draft resolution. Attachments: Draft Resolution Project name: Location: Description: Status: Action: Attachments: Valero Service Station ! SCTIV~:I 1000-102-5-26 on the n/w comer of Main Road and Depot Lane, Cutchogue This site plan is for the conversion of an existing automotive repair shop and gasoline service station to a convenience store and gasoline service station on an 18,473 sq. ft. lot in the Hamlet Business Zoning District. Under Review Review draft resolution. Draft Resolution Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTItOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-906~ June 1, 2010 Shinn Winery 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Attn: Barbara Shinn Dear Ms. Shinn, Please be advised that our office has received comments from the Building Department and the Planning Board, as per my request, regarding your application for a Special Event Permit for an outdoor wedding on June 19, 2010 (see attached correspondence). Based upon concerns for the health and safety of the public caused by the proposed location for on site parking, site circulation, and the size and location of the proposed tent, your application must be denied by the Zoning Board of Appeals. However, it has been brought to my attention that the Town Board will be reviewing your request to utilize the preserved area of your property. Subsequently, the ZBA will hold your $50 application fee for the June 19th event, pending the outcome of the Town Board's discussion. Please feel free to call our office if we can be of assistance. ~~ ~'~~¢'&" 'Y°sile K~;!~ Yw'eisman, Chairperson CC: Town Attorney Assistant Town Attomey Building Department Planning Board Land Preservation Department Police Department Supervisor Code Enfomement PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 To' From: Re: Memorandum Leslie Weisman, Chair Zoning Board of Appeals Joseph Townsend, Vice-Chair Planning Board Shinn Vineyard, LLC SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1 Event Permit # 181 Date: May 26, 2010 RECF..IV~D BOARD OF APPEAL~ As requested, the Planning Board has reviewed the parking diagram submitted with the Evem Permit Application. The parking plan is neither safe, nor feasible. The traffic must enter and exit between the building and the event tent in close proximity to both, creating a potential safety hazard. The plan is not feasible because the parking area is proposed on a long strip of land that is only 10' wide, with land protected by the Agricultural Easement on one side, and the property line on the other. With the width being too narrow to accommodate two cars side by side, this will undoubtedly cause an encroachment onto the protected land as ears are parked and removed. It has already been determined that the driving over and parking of cars for events such as weddings is not an allowed use in the easement area. Page 1 of 1 Andaloro, Jennifer From: Fisher, Robert Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 10:13 AM To: Toth, Vicki; Andalom, Jennifer; Verity, Mike Subject: Shinn Event Permit #181 Vicki and Jennifer Looking at the survey indicating tent placement, parking, and etc I have the following reservations about approval for this affair or others like this. 1. The driveway showing cars parked on one side is not wide enough (approx. 12 feet) to allow cars to pass parked cars. 2. The driveway showing cars parked on one side is not wide enough (approx. 12 feet) to allow access for emergency vehicles, both ambulances and fire/rescue trucks. Fire access roads are required to be a minimum of 20' wide. 3. An incident along the row of parked cars either EMS or fire does not have enough room for emergency personnel to function with required equipment and supplies. 4. The turn around at the end of the 1200 foot + long driveway does not meet fire code requirements for required room to tum emergency fire vehicles around which would require them to back out. The narrow space also precludes sufficient space to conduct an emergency response to an incident. 5. The tent size (scaled 20' x 50' = 1000 sf) is occupancy for only 66 people which would include all staff and ancillary help. A larger tent would decrease the necessary clearance between the tent and the buildings to the north which is an indicated 22 feet. In light of the listed concerns I would recommend that the permit for this affair not be approved. Robert Fisher Fire Inspector robert.fisher@town.southold.ny.us 5/27/2010 'l'o~n 1 lall Annex 54375 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0939 Tclcllhonc (631) 763-1802 Fax (631) 765-9,502 BUILI)ING I)LPAR l MI,N 1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM TO: Martin H. Sidor, Planning Board Chairman FROM: Michael J. Verity, Chief Building Inspector DATE: June 8, 2010 REQUIREMENTS FOR SITE PLAN ELEMENTS & CERTIFICATION Project: Shinn Winery Location: Oregon Road, Mattituck SCTM# 1000 Section 100- Block 4_- Lot 3.1 Date: July 19, 2006 Revised Date: May 11, 2010 1. ALL BUILDINGS AND USES SHALL COMPLY WITH CHAPTERS 144 AND 280 OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN CODE. 2. OFF STREET PARKING BY AUTHORITY OF THE PLANNING BOARD. 3. ALL FENCING, SCREENING AND LANDSCAPING BY AUTHORITY OF THE PLANNING BOARD. 4. THE PROPOSED USE Winery IS A PERMITTED USE IN THIS AC DISTRICT AND IS SO CERTIFIED. Chief Building Inspector Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1547 Rivevhead, NY 11901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRI FFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK May 28, 2010 TEL: (631)36%8200 FAX: (631) 369-9080 E-mail: charles.cuddy@verizon ne~: Ms. Kristy M. Winser, Senior Planner Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyards-Site plan Dear Ms. Winser: Supplementing the submission of the revised site plan, this is to confirm that the fence along northerly line of the vineyard has been moved to the perimeter of the parking area to serve as a car-stop in place of the parking bumpers. We also will note the site plan to indicate the placement of the handicap sign. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC/ik Encls. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Memorandum To: From: Re~ Leslie Weisman, Chair Zoning Board of Appeals Joseph Townsend, Vice-Chair Planning Board Shinn Vineyard, LLC SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 Event Permit #181 Date: May 26, 2010 As requested, the Planning Board has reviewed the parking diagram submitted with the Event Permit Application. The parking plan is neither safe, nor feasible. The traffic must enter and exit between the building and the event tent in close proximity to both, creating a potential safety hazard. The plan is not feasible because the parking area is proposed on a long strip of land that is only 10' wide, with land protected by the Agricultural Easement on one side, and the property line on the other. With the width being too narrow to accommodate two cars side by side, this will undoubtedly cause an encroachment onto the protected land as cars are parked and removed. It has already been determined that the driving over and parking of cars for events such as weddings is not an allowed use in the easement area. · WORK SESSION AGENDA SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Monday, May 24, 2010 4:00 p.m. Site Plans Project name: Shinn Vineyards I SCTM~: I 1000-100-4-3.1 Location: 2000 Oregon Road, on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck Description: Proposed site plan for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft.,of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 979,664 sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. ft. (1.21 acres) in the Agricultural Conservation District. Status: New Site Plan Action: Review re-submission and recommend to schedule the application for final approval. Attachments: Staff Report Project name: Regina'e Garden I SCTM#: I 1000-120-3-5 Location: 1150 Sound Ave., on the south side of Sound Ave., 300 feet west of Aldrich Lane, Mattituck Description: This site plan application is to convert an existing 1,400 s:f. building to~-~ office in connection with the over-all farm use of the site on 1.03 acres located in the A-C Zoning District. Status: New Site Plan Action: Review site plan application and recommend for the Planning Board to accept the application and begin the referral process. Attachments: Staff Report Project name: Valero Service Station I SCTM#: ] 1000-102-5-26 Location: on the n/w corner of Main Road and Depot Lane, Cutchogue Description: This site plan is for the conversion of an existing automotive repair shop and gasoline service station to a convenience store and gasoline service station on an 18,473 sq. ft. lot in the Hamlet Business Zoning District. Status: Under Review Action: Review revised plans. Atta ch~m_e_nt~s_:_ ....... _Staff~Report Project name: Location: Descripti_o~.:_ Status: Action: Southold Free Library Expansion I SCTM# 53705 Main Road, Southold Proposed expansion ZBA is requ_esting comments. Review draft comments. 1000-61-1-14, 15.1 & 15.2 Attachments: Draft Comments Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, Capitol One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 Memorandum TO: The Southold Town Planning Board, Martin Sidor, Chairperson FROM: Leslie Kanes Weisman, ZBA Chairperson RE: Request for Comments on an application for a Winery Permit to Hold an Outdoor Event, Event Permit # 181, Shinn Winery DATE: May 24, 2010 I am attaching the application to the Zoning Board of Appeals by Barbara Shinn of Shiim Winery for a permit to hold an outdoor wedding with 100 guests, on June 19, 2010 from 5:00 - 10:30 PM. The original application was denied because the tent was proposed to be located on preserved land which is not permitted by resolution of the Land Preservation Committee, and the proposed parking was on the Town's R.O.W which is also not permitted, as stated in the permit application instructions. The current proposal locates the tent on the owner's residual with parking along an easement that they own along their property line. Since the applicant has not completed the site plan review process with the Planning Board, ZBA is requesting your review and comments at today's work session since the issuance of a permit is now on hold subject to receipt of same. Thank you for expediting your review and forwarding your comments, Leslie Weisman, Chairperson Zoning Board of Appeals Application WP # .~00/ Revised per TB 7/01 WINERY PERMIT TO HOLD AN · ~ . IOo Name of WInery h~U N V~/~N~z-~ Max. # of Persons At One Time. -. _ Contoct Pemon and Contoct TeL # G~I- go~-o3G1 fl/~.~ 51~) Data of Evenc _ _.~h~:~L~WInery~t000-_/.*0 -_~ _- ~* I lb0 Time Period (Hours): .From ~.~* .~, to StmetAddrass/Locaflon. ~o~o o;~.~ Rc~ /Y/,~:V~,-./.~J~ ~ Mailing Address to Send Pemdt: ~ Nature of Event: Is a Tent being used? ~(] Yes-t ] No (Location plan attaehe~l). I am the Owner of Property where this event is to be h~M and do agree to comply with the laws, rules, regulations, conditions, and requirements of the Code ~r~ T~ ~f 8outhoId, including but not limited to the conditions listed below, as well as all other applioaMe agency rubs and regulations pertaining to the activities under this event. /~. · ,,~ .,,.-~ 5; ~, ~.. RECEIVED WTn~her dlgnature) MAY ~'"'/2010 PERMI~ION~S-HEREBY GRANTED~'SUB;~ECT T~ THE FOLLOWING CONDmONS: BOARD OF APPEALS 2. One "on-premises" sign not larger,than Six thirty (30) days before this event, shall be adequately displayed. Directional parking signs 3. Applicant Indemnifies and holds harmless the Town of So~ from all claims, damages, expenses, sui~ and losses including but not limited to attorney's fees arising from activities under this permit. A Certificate of Liability naming the Town of SoutheM as an additional insured in the amount of One Million ($1,000,000.00) DolLars is hereby filed by Applicant, and said Certificate must remain in full force and effect during this entire event. 4. Tent proposals must receive prior written approval from the Southold Town Building Inspeator before placement on the property and must meet all fire and Safety codeS. 5. This permit is velld only for the time, date, place and use specified above, and for the designated event. Each additional day will require a separate permit application, fee, and related documents f~r review, etc. at least 4~ days prior to this event. 6. Adequate temporary sanitary facilities must be provided by applicant for this event, and Applicant agrees to remove the temporary facilities from the premises within 48 hours of the day of the evenL 7. No on,site food preparation is permitted, although food may be catered subject to all health regulations. 8. Events for three hundred (300) or more people require submission and approval of a traffic control plan, acceptable to the Town. 9. Violations in connection with this event will terminate this permit. Winery Permit Conditions. continued: 8. Events for three hundred (300) or more people require submission and approval of a traffic control plan~ acceptable to the Town. 9. Violations in connection with this event will terminate this permit. 10. Issuance of this permit does not authorize in any manner occupancy of the principal building exceeding the legal limitations under the fire code, or other codes which would prohibit such increased occupancy. 11. Two fire exits shah remain open and unobstructed at ail times to building(s) on the property. 12. Music, when outdoors, is required to stop at 10:30 p.m. 13. Placement of the speakers must be approved by the winery management. 1~ Where possible, live bands ~ather than disc jockeys will be encouraged. 15. When disc jockeys are used, the decibel levels will be monitored to ensure acceptable levels. 16. Organizers of the events will be required to use an approved disc jockey recommended by the winery or have their own disc jockey sign a contract agreeing to the above. If they do not honor the contract, the winery will have the right to remove the disc jockey from the premises. 17. Off-road parking will be provided, either on the winery premises or at another site that is off of the road. Parking assistants will be p~'ovided by the winery for this event, when appropriate. 18. For events over 300 guests, a qualified traffic controller will be provided. 19. Owner assures that all fire, safety, building, and other laws will be complied with. 20. Applicant has represented capacity for this event and will take measures, to the greatest extent event and winery patrons from parking along the north side of practicable, to prev.ent patrons of the ~'/~A~ Route 25 roadway hne. Date,sued: ~/~ ~/t~ '. ZBA Town of Southold RECEIVED MAY ! 72010 BOARD OF APPEALS Office Location: 54375 Main Road (NFB 1st Floor) Southold, NY 11971-0959 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Tel: (631) 765-1809 (press 5012 at voice recording) Fax (631} 765-9064 -2- U~. 10/6/09 Shinn Winery LLC All parking will be attended/directed by a parking attendant. Nature of event: wedding, 5:00 pm to 10:30 pm RECEIVED MAY J~ 2010 BOARD OF APPEALS CERTIFICA',E OF LIABILITY INSURANCE 8H , -2 05/04/10 PRODUCER THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTE ; OF INFORMATIOh Neefus-Stype Agency, Inc. ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE 711 Union Avenue HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND EXTEND OR P.O. ~ox 2340 ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POL ClES BELOW ~quebogue NY 11931-2340 Phone: 631-722-3500 Fax: 631-722-3591 INSURERS AFFORDING COVERAGE NAIC # INSUBED iNSURERA: Peerless Insurance Com~ny 24198 INSURER B: Shinn Vineyards LLC Barbara Shxnn INSURER C: 2000 Ore~on Road INSURERD: Mattltuc~ NY 11952 I INSURER E: COVERAGES THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED. NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT. TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN. THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. AGGREGATE LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAMS. LTR MSK~ I~rPEOEINSURANCE POUCYNUMBER DATEIMM/DD,,yyy~__TEIMMKiG'YYYY UMITS GENERAL uAeUTY EACH C~,CURRENCE S i, 000 f O00 A X X COMMERCL~LGENERALLL~BILITY C~P8006430 02/15/10 02/15/11 P~EM~sEsU~M~'U"="'=U(E,~Umn~) $ 100,000 I CLMMS MADE ~1 OCCUR MED EXP (Any e~e pemo~) $5,000 PERSONAL & ADV INJURY $ 1,, 000 t 000 GENERAL AGGREGATE S 2,000,000 GEN'L AGGREGATE LIMIT APPLIES PER: PRODUCTS - COMP~p AGG $ 2t 000w000 ~ OCCUR [] CLAIMSMADE AGGREGATE A Property CBP8006430 02/15/10 02/15/11 Buildings 382,720 Town of Southold is included as an additional insured as respects to General Liability as requir~%~en and executed contract. .................. :: :,,! ~.- CERTIFICATE HOLDER CANCELLATION SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DE~C~BED POMClES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EX~RA~ON BOARD OF APPB~ou DATETHEREOE. THEISSUINOINSURERWILLENDEAVORTOM~L 15 DAYSWRITTS. NO~CE TO THE DEEIIFICA11~ HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, BUT FAILURE TO DO SO SHALL IMPOSE NO OBUGA~ON OR MABlU~f OF ANY KIND UPON THE INSURE~ ITS AGENTS OR RERRESENTATNES. ~ - ~ 1988-2009 ACORD CORPORATION. All rights reserved. The ACORD name and logo are registered marks of ACORD Town of Southold 53095 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 ~outhold NY 11971 ACORD 25 (2009101) IMPORTANT If the certificate holder is an ADDITIONAL INSURED, the policy(les) must be endorsed. A statement on this certificate does not confer dghts to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). If SUBROGATION IS WAIVED, subject to the terms and conditions of the policy, certain policies may require an endorsement. A statement on this certificate does not confer rights to the certificate holder in lieu of such endorsement(s). DISCLAIMER This Certificate of Insurance does not constitute a contract between the issuing insurer(s), authorized representative or producer, and the certificate holder, nor does it affirmatively or negatively amend, extend or alter the ceverage afforded by the policies listed thereon. RECEIVED MAY ~"7 ZOIO BOARD OF APPEALS ACORD 29 (2009101) Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY [ i971 53095 Main Road PO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.north fork-net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTItOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 ]Fax (631) 765-9064 May 21, 2010 CERTIFIED MAIL - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Shinn Winery 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Re: Event Permit #181 for June 19, 2010 - Wedding Dear Ms. Shinn: It has come to this office's attention that your property is presently undergoing site plan approval by the Planning Board and, as per my cover letter to you dated May 18, 2010, the tent you propose for this event will require review by the Building Department. Since neither the Planning nor Building Departments have been given the opportunity to comment on the special event permit application submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals on May 17, 2010 and granted on May 19, 2010, the permit must be revoked pending the review of these departments. We apologize for any inconverhence this may have caused and hope to have a final determination on or before May 28, 2010. Ver~ruly yours, ~ Chairperson ecs: Town Building Department Town Police Department Town Planning Department JlSUt~VF::'r' OF P~OPFP..TY SITUATE, HATTI'II~K TOI~IN OF 5OUTHOLO SUFFOLK COUNTY, NY _O__r_egon 'Road SURVEYED 11-5-~8 5,UFt=OLK COUNT'F TAX # I000 - I00- 4- ~ ~TI~I~D TO~ BAR~At~kSHINN COMMONk~ALTH LAND TITLE.IN..SURAN~E GOHPAN¥ · MO~T FOUND 6 EAST HAIN STREET RIVERHEAO, N,Y. ~190~ 369-8288 Fax 369-8287 REFERENCE # 98-;~70 Maih.g Address: P.O. Bo>: 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFFING AVENUE RIVERHEAI), NEW YORK May 14, 2010 TEL: (631)369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9(~) E-mail: charles.cuddy@verizon.net Ms. Kristy M. Winser, Senior Planner Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyards-Site plan MAY 1 8 2010 Dear Ms. Winser: We are enclosing seven (7) prints of the revised site plan dated May 11, 2010 with changes requested in the letter of April 20, 2010. Please confirm this satisfies the Planning Board's requirements and the resolution will now be prepared granting final approval. Very truly yours, CRC/ik Encls. Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southo!d, NY 11971 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 May 10, 2010 Shinn Winery 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Attn: Barbara Shinn Dear Ms. Shinn, On May 4, 2010, our office received your four applications for Special Permits to hold outdoor winery events (weddings) on June 19, June 26, July 10 and August 28, 2010 from 5:00-10:30 PM. The Zoning Board of Appeals received a letter, dated March 10, 2010 from Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator (LPC), indicating that the LPC determined by resolution that your recorded easement "does not permit special events such as weddings, parties and catered affairs with tents and associated parking in the easement area". Therefore, we are unable to entertain your applications, and we are returning your applications and checks with this letter. Chairperson Enclosures ccs: Town Building Dept. Town Police Dept. I/AY 2 010 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 April 20, 2010 Mr. Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Shinn Vineyard, LLC - Site Plan Dear Mr. Cuddy: I'm writing as a follow-up to the Planning Board Work Session held on April 19, 2010 in connection to the above-referenced site plan application for a retail wine making facility whereas, the following actions were taken: 1. A memo from the Land Preservation Committee dated March 10, 2010 was discusSed and stated that the recorded easement area does not permit special events such as weddings, parties and catered affairs with tents and associated parking on the easement area. 2. The following map changes are requested: a. Access Roadway: i. Note on the plan that "the access area shall maintain free and clear access". b. Parking: It has been determined that 21 parking spaces should be provided on site that would require the removal and relocation of the parking spaces shown on the site plan received 11/24/2009 in accordance with the following comments: There are 12 spaces shown on the site plan along the rear of the property not 13 as indicated. Please revise accordingly. Also, it should be noted that the said parking area would need to be removed off of the easement area as shown on the site plan prior to approval. Relocate the handicap stall shown to be located on the concrete pad (work area). It is recommended for the applicant to relocate the space to the rear parking area. A hard packed surface and a path to the winery should be provided on the site plan and shown to be in compliance with ADA standards, including signage. Remove 2 parking spaces along east property line and the 2 parking spaces shown within the building referred to as Existing Wood Frame Agricultural Storage. Provide parking bumpers to designate each parking space. c. The following conditions are required to be noted on the site plan: i. The Planning Board grants this site plan for a retail wine tasting facility only. ii. Buses are prohibited from entering the site. Please submit (7) copies of the revised site plan directly the Planning Office for review. Contact the office anytime with questions you may have. Sincerely, Kristy Winser Sr. Planner cc: Planning Board Heather Lanza, Planning Director WORK SESSION AGENDA SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Monday, April 19, 2010 4:00 p.m. Applications Description: i The applicant requests co-location of a public utility wireless i communication facility having interior mounted antennae within an existing church steeple and a related Storage equipment area screened from view. As part of the application, the applicant proposes to remove and replace a portion of an existing church steeple to match the existing Status: ii New Site Plan '~ ~'~;~i'~)ni i '~i'~'~-~'~'~ n~i'~i~'-~'~' ~'~'~ i~'~ived. ' P~Oj~c~'~ame ' Shinn Vineyards Location, s/s/o 0 ~! De~'~i~i0n: ..... P-~0p0~i 'Sit~"l~'i~-for the as-built construction of four (4) bu' d'ngs including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 ~ sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 979,664 ~ sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. Status: i Site Plan Review ...................................................... ~ Atta~hm~.r~t_s__:Staff.ReP~ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 April 13, 2010 Charles Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Close Hearing: Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard Located at 2000 Oregon Road, on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: A-C Dear Mr. Cuddy: A public hearing was held by the Southold Town Planning Board on Monday, April 12, 2010 regarding the above-referenced Site Plan. The public hearing was closed. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Very truly yours, Marlin H. Sidor Chairman Mailing Address: EO. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11.901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFF~NG AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK April 9, 2010 TEL: (631) ~59-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9080 E-mail: charles.cuddy@verizon.net Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Attn: Carol Kalin Re: Shinn Vineyards-Site plan Dear Ms. Kalin: Enclosed is an Affidavit of Posting and Mailing together with the white receipts postmarked by the Post Office as proof of mailing legal notice and the green receipts in reference to the above application to the adjoining property owners. Please make these part of your records. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC/ik Encls. AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as Shinn Vineyards at 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck, NY by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on April 2, 2010 I have sent notices, by certified mail - return receipt~ the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on April 1, 2010 Charles R. Cuddy Your Name (print) Signatur~ ~ 445 Griffing Ave. Riverhea Address ' 1 1'o Dale Notary Public IINONA KODYM Notat~ Publi(~, State of New YoI~ No. 01KO6088388 Qualified in Suffolk Counflt ~:)lnmlMJon Expir# Mamh ~, E0il PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY: 12:00 noon, Fri., 419/10 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard SCTM#s: 1000-100-4-3.1 Date of Hearing: Monday, April 12, 2010, 6:05 p.m. · Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. AJso ~nl~ item 4 if Rest~ Delivery Is ___~[,~1_. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can tatum the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of ~e matiptece, or on the front If space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: Eugene P. Krupski MaryAnn Krupski 2230 Soundview Ave. Mattituck, NY 11952 r'/Insured Mail [] C.O.D, 2. A~:leNumber 7009 0080 0001 8793 PS Form 3811, Februa~ 2004 Domes~ Return Receipt r'~ Total Postage & Feel [~-- 2336 ene P. and M~.TZ~D~..~%.~ ................... 2230 Soundview Ave. or PO Box N~. ~,-~-~ ....... 7 ....... F ........... S'7%~ ........................ ~f?f~£'~-f ]%~ ...................................................................... _~.~_ ~?__~L~_?L .!_O..5..5....Q.r. gmo..n....~.o..a..,j. ................................... { City, State, ZIP+4 . 5 2 ~ John W. Robinso~w~o Roy~r Robinson ' ~t'?~; f ~-t7 ~? ...................... -"~"~ ................................ o~'POBoXNO PO BOX 264 ci~s~,zIP+~ Mattituck, NY 11952 L · Attech ~ ~d to the back of tt~ mallplece, or on the front If ~;,~ permits. B & H Farms LLC 60 Locust Ave. East Moriches, NY 11940 . [] Addressee B. Received by(FgfntedName)~/\t(~/~ate°f Delivery r'l Reg~tered I:~(Return Receipt fo~ Merchanclise [] Insured Mall [] C.O.D. 4. ~ Deliveq~ (EX'Ira Fee) rqye~ 2. Article Number (rmr=fer from ~nace/a~ ' PS Form 3811, Febma~00~ 7009 0080 0001 Don-,estk= Return Receipt 8793 2145 · Complete items 1, 2, and 3. AJso ~xlrtplete Item 4 If Re~tflcted Dellve~ Is de,md. · Print your name and address on the reverse so that we can retum the card to you. · Attach this card to the back of the maJlplece, or on the front If spece permits. John W. Robinson c/o Roger Robinson PO Box 264 Mattituck, NY 11952 ~. Is del~y a~M,~ dlffere~ ;,~.~ gtem 17 if yES, ente~ dellveej addrmm betov~. I-IN• [] Insured Ma# [] C,O.D. 2. A zt~cleNumb~ 7009 0080 0001 8793 2169 PS Form 3811, Febma~ 2004 Domes~ Retum Receipt .io2~..M-lr~O PROJECT SCOPING PLANNING APPLICATIONS Wednesday, March 24, 2010 2:30pm Project name: i Valero Service Station SCTM# 1000-102-5-26 Location: This site is located on the n/w comer of Main Road and Depot Lane, Description: This site plan is for the conversion of an existing automotive repair shop and gasoline service station to a convenience store and gasoline service st~;[!oru?n a ! 8,473 sq~ Status: New Site Plan Action: Review revised site plan and applicants submission including a traffic analysis. Review applicants request to the County to reconsider their original recommendation to deny the I~roject. Attachments: Staff Report, Traffic Analysis, and applicants letter addressed to the County with the response from the County. Location: i.S(.S/.0 0r. egon. Rp.~!.. ~.j.6.~5, e/0 Mi!!..L..a.~e. j~ ~at~J.tu.~k Description: i Proposed site plan for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 ! sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. '~ accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 53,078 ........ parc.e r~ ~h.~.Ag~.cu tura....I~0nservat on Dstr. ct Status: Site Plan Rev ew Action: . Rev ew app cant's subm ss on Att~:hments: .Staff Rep0.rt #9692 STATE OF NEW YORK) ) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) Karen Kine of Mattituck, in said county, being duly sworn, says that she is Principal Clerk of THE SUFFOLK TIMES, a weekly newspaper, published at Mattituck, in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, and that the Notice of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been regularly published in said Newspaper once each week for 1_]_ week(s), successively, commencing on the 1st dayof April, 2010. Sworn to before me this ~ ~ LEGAL NOTICE . Noiic~ ~f-P~bl c H~,Hng NOTICE ,IS ~REB~GIVEN that, pursuant td ~icle ~V ~f fl~c ~de bf the Town~O( ~0uthold; ~ ~qbli~ ~r- lng w~l ~ h~[d 'fi3 tfi~ S6uth01d To~ P~nn~g Board, at the Town Hail, Main Road, Sou~old~ New York on the ~ ~y 0f ~fil ~10 on ~e question of the follo~ng: ~ . ~: · 6:05 p.~:~p~ed Site P an f6r Sh~ Vineyard, LLC, located at 20~ Or- egon Road, on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,t62.35' ~elO ~ ~oe, ~ ~a6ituck, day of Principal Clerk ~'~~ 2010. CHRISTINA VOLINSKI ;~'O;ARY PUBLIC-STATE OF NEW YORK NO, B'I-VO610/~050 Qualified In Suffolk Courity PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAH.ING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hail Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to Article XXV of the Code of the Town of Southold, a public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Planning Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York on the 12th day of April, 2010 on the question of the following: 6:05 p.m. Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard, LLC, located at 2000 Oregon Road, on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. Suffolk County Tax Map Numbers 1000-100-4- 3.1 Dated: 3/25/10 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Martin H. Sidor Chairman PLEASE PRINT ONCE ON THURSDAY, APRIL 1, 2010 AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT TO THIS OFFICE. THANK YOU. COPYSENT TO: The Suffolk Times -. Page 1 of 1 Kalin, Carol From: Candice Schott [legals@timesreview.com] Sent: Friday, March 26, 2010 10:08 AM To: Kalin, Carol Subject: RE: Another Legal Ad for 4/1/10 Suffolk Times edition Good morning Carol, I have received the notice and we are good to go for next week. Thanks and have a groat weekend! Candice From.' Kalin, Carol [mailto:CaroI.Kalin@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 1:46 PM To.' Legals SubJect.' Another Legal Ad for 4/1/10 Suffolk Times edition Please print the attached legal ad for the Shinn Vineyard public hearing to be held on 4/12/10 at 6:05 p.m in the April 1st edition of the Suffolk Times. Kindly send me an e-mail confirmation of receipt. Thanks. Carol Kalin, Secretarial Assistant Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Annex, 54375 NYS Rt. 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Phone: (631 )765 - 1938 Fax: (631)765-3136 Carol. Kalin~town.southold.ny.us 3/26/2010 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 O~ICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 LEGAL NOTICE Notice of Public Hearing NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that, pursuant to Article XXV of the Code of the Town of Southold, a public hearing will be held by the Southold Town Planning Board, at the Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York on the 12th day of April, 2010 on the question of the following: 6:05 p.m. Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard, LLC, located at 2000 Oregon Road, on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk, State of New York. Suffolk County Tax Map Numbers 1000-100-4- 3.1 Dated: 3/25/10 BY ORDER OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Martin H. Sidor Chairman STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) CAROL KALIN, Secretary to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold, New York being duly sworn, says that on the 25th day of March, 2010 she affixed a notice of which the annexed printed notice is a true copy, in a proper and substantial manner, in a most public place in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, to wit: Town Clerk's Bulletin Board~ Southold Town Hall~ 53095 Main Road~ Southold~ New York 4/12/10 Regular Meetin.q: 6:05 p.m. Public Hearing for the proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard, SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1 Carol Kalin Secretary, Southold Town Planning Board SWorn to before me this ,:~-~J~dayof ~ ,2010. Notary P u'btfc MELANIE DOROSk't NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New Yo¢¢ No. 01D04634870 0uaiified in Suffolk County % Jh 1 r~ Commission Expires September 30,-'~'-' ~ '-' PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND DONALD J. WILCENSKI PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 O~'ICE LOCATION: Town Hail Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 March 25, 2010 Charles Cuddy, Esq. P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 Re: Set Hearing: Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard Located at 2000 Oregon Road, on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: A-C Dear Mr. Cuddy: The public hearing regarding the site plan for the above-referenced application has been scheduled for Monday, April 12, 2010, at 6:05 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall. Please refer to the enclosed copy of Chapter 55, Notice of Public Hearing, in regard to the Town's notification procedure. The notification form is enclosed for your use. The sign and the post will need to be picked up at the Planning Board Office, $outhold Town Annex. Please return the enclosed Affidavit of Posting along with the certified mailing receipts AND the siRned green return receipt cards before 12:00 noon on Friday, April 9th. The sign and the post need to be returned to the Planning Board Office after the public hearing. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Very truly yours, Martin H. Sidor Chairman Encls. Southold Town Plannin.q Board Notice to Adiacent Property Owners You ars hereby given notice: 1. That the undersigned has applied to the Planning Board of the Town of Southold for a site plan; 2. That the property which is the subject of the application is located adjacent to your property and is described as follows: SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1; 3. That the property which is the subject of this application is located in the A-C Zoning District; That the application is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 979,664 sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. ft. (1.21 acres) located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck; That the files pertaining to this application are open for your information during normal business days between the hours of 8 a.m. and 4 p.m. in the Planning Department located in the Town Hall Annex on the corner of Youngs Ave. & NYS Rte. 25, Southold (2nd FI., Capital One Bank). If you have any questions, you can call the Planning Board Office at (631)765-1938. 6. Information can also be obtained via the internet by sending an e-mail message to: CaroI.Kalin@town.southold.ny.us; That a public hearing will be held on the matter by the Planning Board on Monday, April 12, 2010 at 6:05 p.m. in the Meeting Hall at Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold; that a notice of such hearing will be published at least five days prior to the date of such hearing in The Suffolk Times; that you or your representative have the right to appear and be heard at such hearing. Petitioner/Owner Name: Barbara Shinn/Shinn Vineyard, LLC Date: 3/25/10 AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING This is to serve notice that I personally posted the property known as by placing the Town's official poster notice(s) within 10 feet of the front property line facing the street(s) where it can be easily seen, and that I have checked to be sure the poster has remained in place for seven days prior to the date of the public hearing on I have sent notices, by certified mail - return receipt, the receipts and green return receipt cards of which are attached, to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across on Your Name (print) Signature Address Date Notary Public PLEASE RETURN THIS AFFIDAVIT, CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIPTS & GREEN RETURN RECEIPT CARDS BY: 12:00 noon~ Fri, 4/9/10 Re: Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Vineyard SCTM#s: 1000-100-4-3.1 Date of Hearing: Monday, April 12, 2010, 6:05 p.m. Town of Southold PC/Codebook for Windows § $5-1. Providing notice of public hearings. [Amended 6-3-2003 by L.L. No. 12-2003] Whenever the Code calls for a public hearing this section shall apply. Upon determining that an application or petition is complete, the board or commission reviewing the same shall fix a time and place for a public hearing thereon. Notice relating to a public hearing on an application or petition shall be provided as follows: A. Town responsibility for publication of notice. The reviewing board or commission shallcause a notice giving the time, date, place and nature of the hearing to be published in the official newspaper within the period prescribed by law. B. Applicant or petitioner responsibility for posting and mailing notice. An application or petition, initiated, proposed or requested by an applicant or petitioner, other than a Town board or commission, shall also be subject to additional notice requirements set forth below: (i) The applicant or petitioner is required to erect the sign provided by the Town, which shall be prominently displayed on the premises facing each public or private street which the property involved in the application or petition abuts, giving notice of the application or petition, the nature of the approval sought thereby and the time and place of the public hearing thereon. The sign shall be set back not more than 10 feet from the property line. The sign shall be displayed for a period of not less than seven days immediately preceding the date of the public hearing. The applicant, petitioner or his/her agent shall file an affidavit that s/he has complied with this provision prior to commencement of the public hearing. (2) The applicant or petitioner is required to send notice to the owners of record of every property which abuts and every property which is across from any public or private street from the property included in the application or petition. Such notice shall be made by certified mail, return receipt requested, posted at least seven days prior to the date of the initial public hearing on the application or petition and addressed to the owners at the addresses listed for them on the local assessment roll. The notice shall include description of the street location and area of the subject property, nature of relief or approval involved, and date, time and place of hearing. The applicant, petitioner or agent shall file an affidavit that s/he has complied with this provision prior to commencement of the public hearing. SHINN VINEYARD, LLC SITE PLAN FOR SHINN VINEYARD, LLC 1000-100-4-3.1 Proposed site plan for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft'O wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 979,664 sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. ft. ( 1.21 acres) in the Agricultural Conservation Zoning District. MONDAY - APRIL 12, 2010 - 6:05 P.M. 4 ~ Z Z ~ 4 ~CTION NO ~"~'~,~.~ .,T. ....... ,~ ~-LO,,~ NOTICE COUIITY OF SUFFOLK ,m.~ SOUTHOLD ~.~,.~,~ ~ o. Reel Property 1'o~ Service A 10 0 ..... ~ ....... ~TICE ~ COUNTY OF S~FOLK ~ ~ ~ ~ S~H~D '~ '" ....... ~ .... ~ Red ~ty T~ ~ce A~ ~ 0 7 MELISSA A. SPIRO LAND PRESERVATION COORDINATOR melissa.spiro~town.southold.ny.us Telephone (631) 765-5711 Facsimile (631) 765-6640 DEPARTMENT OF LAND PRESERVATION TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (comer of Main Rd & Youngs Ave) Southold, New York MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Bill Cremers, Planning Board Vice Chair~,;~:-..~ ,., :~',~ Planning Board Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator SCTM # 1000-100-4-3.1 & 3.2 Shinn Vineyard Property March 10, 2010 The Land Preservation Committee Members reviewed your January 12, 2010 Uemorand um. The Planning Board Memorandum noted that: "It has come to the Board's attention that large events involving 100+ people have been held at the site. Enclosed please find a recent special event permit application that was submitted to the Zoning Board of appeals pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Town Code which includes a survey with hand written notations indicating the area of the event with tent and on-site parking for same. Planning staff has been directed to refer the application to your committee for review and comment on whether a special event with associated parking is an allowed use on the easement area." The Land Preservation Committee reviewed with Counsel, the Deed of Development Right Easement (the "Easement") for the property which was recorded on April 4, 2000. The Easement limits the use of the Property to "agricultural production," and requires that the Property remain in "bona fide agricultural production". The controlling definitions for "agricultural production" referenced in the Easement, General Municipal Law Section 247 and Chapter 25 (now Chapter 70) of the Town Code, require that structures be limited to those necessary for or accessory to agricultural production and that special events such as weddings, parties and catered affairs be prohibited. At the February 9, 2010 meeting, the Land Preservation Committee informed the landowners (David Page and Barbara Shinn) and the landowners' attorney (Charles Cuddy) that the recorded easement does not permit special events such as weddings, parties and catered affairs with tents and associated parking on the Easement area. The Committee did not adopt a formal resolution at the Feb. 9th meeting; however, the following motion was adopted at the Committee's March 9th meeting: Be it RESOLVED that the Land Preservation Committee, upon advice of Counsel, determined that the recorded easement does not permit special events such as weddings, parties and catered affairs with tents and associated parking on the Easement area. The motion was put forth by the Land Preservation Committee Chairman, John Sepenoski, and seconded by Maureen Cullinane. Motion passed: 4 yes John Sepenoski, Maureen Cullinane, Eric Keil, Ray Huntington 1 no Monica Harbes 2 abstained Chris Baiz, Lillian Ball Please let me know if you have any questions regarding the above. CC: Land Preservation Committee Town Board Building Department Zoning Board of Appeals Town Attorney Lisa Kombrink, Esq. Charles Cuddy, Esq. David Page and Barbara Shinn MELISSA A. SPIRO LAND PRESERVATION COORDINATOR meliss~.spiro@town.southold.ny.us Telephone (631 ) 765-5711 Facsimile (631) 765-6640 DEPARTMENT OF LAND PRESERVATION TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (comer of Main Rd & Youngs Ave) Southold, New York MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 January 13,2010 Mr. David Page & Ms. Barbara Shinn 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: SCTM # 1000-100-4-3.2 ..... Shinn Vineyard Property Jan. 5, 2010 request for Land prgservatiot¥c~n~miffee 'ieview o~ revised location for proposed wind turbine on property on which Town owns a development rights easement Dear Mr. Page and Ms. Shinn: The Land Preservation Committee Members, in accordance with Chapter 70 of the Town Code, reviewed your January 5, 2010 letter in which you note that you received approval from the ZBA to install a wind turbine 150.5+ feet from the nearest property line to the east, and request approval from the Land Preservation Committee for this revised location. The recorded easement for this property allows land within the easement to be used for the purpose of agricultural production. Section 70-5 (C) of the Town Code requires that the Committee serve as a review board for the granting of permits for the construction, reconstruction and additions of, and to, structures in, or on agricultural lands in which the development rights have been acquired by the Town. At the January 12, 2010 meeting of the Committee, the Committee adopted a motion to approve the construction of a wind turbine in the location as described in the December 29, 2009 Zoning Board of Appeals Findings, Deliberations and Determination. The December 29, 2009 Findings, Deliberations and Determination granted alternative relief as follows: "A 120 foot high small wind energy system (wind turbine) may be set back from the applicant's easterly property line at no less than 150.5 feet + 2 feet, located on the Town's easement to the west of the applicants' residential property line, in a location that is not currently planted with vines." The Dec. 29th Findings, Deliberations and Determination contained 4 conditions which are not listed here. The Committee is permitting this structure within the development rights easement on the condition that it is compatible with the purpose of the development rights easement and subordinate to the agricultural use of the property. Should you utilize the turbine in a manner that differs in any way from that proposed to the Committee, or to site the turbine at a location that differs from that proposed to the Committee, you will be required to obtain additional approval. The Committee's approval does not mean that you can proceed with construction or that such use will be approved or permitted by other Town Departments or agencies. The Committee's approval allows you to proceed with pursuing any applicable approvals that are required by Town Code. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding the above. Sincerely, Melissa Spiro Land Preservation Coordinator CC: Planning Department Building Department Zoning Board of Appeals Town Attorney P/~4~NNI~G BOARD MARTIN FL SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L EDWARDS DONALD J. WILCENSKI JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Memorandum To.' From: Re: Date: Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator Bill Cremers, Vice Chair ~ Planning Board Site plan for Shinn Vineyard, LLC SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 January 12, 2010 This property is currently before the Planning Board with a site plan application for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. fl. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. t~. flame shed on a 979,664 sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. ft. (1.21 acres) in the Agricultural Conservation District. It has come to the Board's attention that large events involving 100+ people have been held at the site. Enclosed please find a recent special event permit application that was submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Town Code which includes a survey with hand written notations indicating the area of the event and on-site parking for same. Planning Staffhas been directed to refer the application to your committee for review and comment on whether a special event with associated parking is an allowed use on the easement area. Kindly respond with your comments within 10 days of this letter. The file is available for review if necessary. Thank you. Town Annex/First Floor,. Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at You!~gs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 Marline Address: 53095 Main Road RO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.!aorthfork.net Shinn Vineyards LLC 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, New York 11952 Aitn: Barbara .Shirm Re: Event P '.e~t #!74 for September 19, 2009 Wedding Dear Ms Shinn: BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765ri809 Fax (631).765.906~ September 16, 2009 JAN ]2 2010 Pleas6Tmd enclosed the Special Permit for thc winery event planned for September 19,2009. A d ;upli~ate of this permit must be continuously posted during the event. Please be aware that use'~.f a tent will also require an inspection and approvals at least three days before thc event, from th~ Building Depat hnent (765- t 802). Thero"::~e several conditions written into the permit. Please be aware that under the State Fire Code, th&humber ofpersons, occupying the building and/or tent ama is limited,· The runt must be inspe~ed by the Town Building DePartment before occupancy and may be re~mhed at 765~1802 betxileen :the hours of 8.and 4 p.m. All pa~king and traffic controls ar~ the responsl~iliti~ of the winery owner, the event operators, and their agents Note that parking on the County or'State Roads are not'authorized under this perrai~...~'~'~-) ' · ':~ / ~rara r. Goehringer ~/ Copies of Event permit'to: ~ ' Town,Building Department Town Police Department Applicetion Wp # J 7C/ ~ Name of Winery _'~ F~,U N W INLCta-~ Max. # of Persons At One Time: Contact Person and Contact Tel. # __~1 - Date of Event: S-~p.+~ 19 ,2oo9 WineryParcell000---~t2° - Time Period (Hours): From' ~:0o f~r.~ to t0'..~epn~ .... StreetAddrese/Locatlon: ;~ooo OR.~. uo~..__~_d~_L'Y~-k'-l-,*4~cJ~- Mailing Address to Send Permit: ~a~.~c__~ ' _ ' Nature of Event: _~:L ~ Is a Tent being used? [~(] Yes~[ ] No (Location plan attached). I am the Owner of Property where this event is to be held and do agree to comply with the laws, rules, regulations, conditions, and requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold, including but not limited to the conditions listed below, as well as all other applicable agency rules and regulations pertaining to the activities under this event. WIner~v~er ~ignature) PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. By acceptance of this permit, Applicant agrees to adequately supervise and direct all parking to be on this site, and Applicant agrees to provide additional traffic controls necessary for this event. 2. One "on-premises" sign not larger than six (6) square feet In size may be displayed not longer than thirty (30) days before this event, and removed immediately after the event. Directional parking signs shall be adequately displayed. 3. Applicant Indemnifies and holds harmless the Town of Southold from all claims, damages, expenses, suits and losses Including but not limited to attorney's fees arising from activities under this permit. A Certificate of Liability naming the Town of Southold as an additional insured in the amount of One Million ($1,000,000.00) Dollars is hereby filed by Applicant, and said Certificate must remain In full force and effect during this entire event. 4. Tent proposals must receive prior written approval from the Southold Town Building Inspector before placement on the property and must meet all fire and safety codes. 5. This permit is valid only for the time, date, place and use specified above, and for the designated event. Each additional day will require a separate permit application, fee, and related documents for review, etc. at least 45 days prior to this event. 6. Adequate temporary sanitary facilities must be provided by applicant for this event, and Applicant agrees to remove the temporary facilities from the premises within 48 hours of the day of the event. 7. No on-site food preparation is permitted, although food may be catered subject to all health regulations. 8. Events for three hundred (300) or more people require submission and approval of a traffic control plan, acceptable to the Town. 9. Violations in connection with this event will terminate this permit. Page 2 - Winery Event Permit Winery Event Permi~ continued: 10. Issuance of this permit does not authorize in any manner occupancy of the principal building exceeding the legal limitations under the fire code, or other codes which would prohibit such increased occupancy. 11. Two fire exits shall remain open and unobstructed at all times to building(s) on the property. 12. Music, when outdoors, is required to stop at 10:00 p.m. No loud music or band music after 10:00 p.m. 13. Placement of the speakers must be approved by the winery management. t4. Where possible, live bands rather than disc jockeys will be encouraged. 15. When disc jockeys are used, the decibel levels will be monitored to ensure acceptable levels. 16. Organizers of the events will be required to use an approved disc jockey recommended by the winery or have their own disc jockey sign a contract agreeing to the above. If they do not honor the contract, the winery will have the right to remove the disc jockey from the premises. 17. Off-road parking will be provided, either on the winery premises or at another site that is off of the road. Parking assistants will be provided by the winery for this event, when appropriate. 18. For events over 300 guests, a qualified traffic controller will betided. SEP ! 6 2009 ! .-.,'..... OF A?P[A!..S Shinn Winery LLC All parking will be attended/directed by a parking attendant. Nature of event: wedding, 5:00 pm to 10:30 pm 5URMET' ~ PROPER-Pr' TOI~ Off ~ PIANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L EDWARDS DONALD 3. WILCENSKI JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Memorandum To: From: Re: Date: Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator Bill Cremers, Vice Chair ~(_~ Planning Board Site plan for Shinn Vineyard, LLC SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 January 12, 2010 This property is currently before the Planning Board with a site plan application for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. fl. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. fl. of deck, a 2,730 sq. fl. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. fl. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. fl. frame shed on a 979,664 sq. fi. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. iL (1.21 acres) in the Agricultural Conservation District. It has come to the Board's attention that large events involving 100+ people have been held at the site. Enclosed please find a recent special event pvmfit application that was submitted to the Zoning Board of Appeals pursuant to Chapter 205 of the Town Code which includes a survey with hand written notations indicating the area of the event with tent and on-site parking for same. Planning Staffhas been directed to refer the application to your committee for review and comment on whether a special event with associated parking is an allowed use on the easement area. Kindly respond at your earliest convenience. The file is available for review if necessary. Thank you. WORK SESSION AGENDA SOUTHOLD TOWN PLANNING BOARD Monday, January 11, 2010 4:00 p.m. 4:00 p.m. Review Public Meeting Agenda 4:15 p.m. Site Plans Site Plans _P_r_o_ject ....................................................................... name: Shinn Vineyards l~¥~li~-l-¥~D-~-~ 00-4-3.'~ ................ Location: s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck -~scription: -~roposed site plan for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, an 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1 sq. ft. frame shed on a 979,664 sq. ft. (22.49 acres) parcel whereas, the development area is 53,078 sq. ft. ( 1.21 acres) in the Agricultural Conservation District. Status: Site Plan Review ~r~i Review apjplicant's submission. _A_tt_a_c_hments: ............... _S_~_a_ff R.e_p_ort, Town Engineer's Report, Map_ Pr__oj.ect name: T-Mobi e Northeast ~ SCTM~: I 1000-102-1-17.1 Location: :l'¥e-~sb~-~l~urch or Society of Cutchogue, 27245 ~1 "~i ........... ~:~.~'~-i~i~at~'~-~§pecial Exception & Site Pi-a~-a~val f~new ' wireless communication facility where the antennas are to be mounted within an existing church steep e, and the base station equipment is to be located outside the building in a screened enclosure. As part of the application, the applicant proposes to remove and replace a portion of an existing church steeple to match the existing church building on a 0.91-acre site located in the R-40 .......................... _Zoning District. Status: New Site Plan Action: Review estimate for technical consultant (SEQRA) review. Attachments: Letter from Nelson Pope & Voorhis Subdivisions Project name: Forestbrook at Bayview 1000-79-2-7 Conservation Subdivision Location: n/o North Bayview Road, 180 feet w/o Jacobs Lan~, in Southold Description: 7-lot conservation subdivision. _ S~t. at_Aus_.'- .................................... .Fl._n_ a_l_ Approval Action: Discuss fire-well maintenance issues. _h_m_.e_n_t_s .'_ CHARLES R. CUDDY ATI~ORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 December 31, 2009 TEL: (631) 369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9060 E-maih charles.cud~ly@verizon.net Martin D. Finnegan, Town Attorney Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyard, LLC Dear Mr. Finnegan: I acknowledge receipt of your letter of DecemberS3, 2009. I'm hopeful that you will recall the applicant, in the spirit of cooperating with the Town, agreed to provide the ad~diti0nal documentation to satisfy the outstanding requirements, in particular, drainage and parking. The drainage calculations were to be provided by Allan S. Connell of the US Department of Agriculture. It was my spegific under-standing that once he was satisfied, the Town would be satisfied. The applicant had also revised the map to show adequate parking in accordance with the site plan requirements. This has been done. The appligant completed each of these matters with an understanding that having complied with these conditions site plan approval would be forthcoming. However, you suggest that the applicant provide overflow parking area for special events. As you are aware that is a separate permit and certainly the applicant must satisfy the permit conditions. Nevertheless, the special events' requirements cannot be engrafted onto the site plan requirements. The applicant has provided the additional information required to receive site plan approval: Shinn Vineyard believes that it was progressing toward approval. It does not wish to be engaged in a backward advance. Indeed, I believe we are both anticipating this matter would be promptly resolved without further recourse to the NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets. It may be appropriate to have another meeting to avoid any misunderstanding. CRC/ik Ve~ truly yours; Town Annex/First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 Mailine Address: 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 Fax (631) 765-9064 FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERM~ MEETING OF DECEMBER 29, 2009 ' ',\ ZBA File #6308 - Shirm Vineyards LLC / Barbara Shinn, Applicant Property Location: 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck CTM 1000-100=04-3.1 -- SEQRA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the pr~6~- consideration in this application and determiflqs that this review falls under the T.yp.~ .il r. ateg<o/:y of the State's List of Actions, without further steps under SEQRA. SUFFOLK COUNTY ADMINISTRATIVE COIf'E: This application was referred as required under the Suffolk County Administrative Code Sections A 14=14 to 23, and the Suffolk County Department of Planning issued its reply dated May 18, 2009 stating'that this application is considered a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significafit county-wide or inter-community impact, PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's property is a conforming lot in the AC district which consists of 21+ acres, of which 20+ acres (CTM # 1000,I 00-04-3.2) are subject to a Town of Southold Development Rights Easement sold to the Town in 2000 for purposes of agricultural preservation. The remaining 1.219 acres of the property that is not subject to the Town's Easement has 142.98 foot frontage'along the south side of Oregon Road in Mattituck, and is shown as 53,078 square feet or 1.219 acres on the survey prepared by John C. Ehlers, L.S. dated 6-16-03 (Final 04-23- 07). The property is improved with a two story frame dwelling, a frame barn, a frame shed and two (2) one story frame buildings. To the west and south are 20+ acres of farmland planted in grape vines which the applicants own subject to a Town of Southold Development Rights Easement which they sold to the Town in 2000. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Request for Variances from Town Code Chapter 277-3(B)(1), based on the Building Inspector's April 8, 2009 Notice of Disapproval stating that the proposed small wind energy system is not meeting the code requirement for a minimum distance from a property line, total height of the small wind energy system plus 10 feet, except that it shall be set back at least 300 feet from a property line bordering an existing residential structure. LWRP DETERMINATION: This application is not subject to review under Chapter 268 because the variance relief requested does not involve features that relate to a regulated natural feature or a bulkhead or other shoreline. Page 2- December 29, 2009 ZBA File~6308- Shinn Vineyards LLC CTM: 1000-100-4-3.1 at 2000 Oregon Rd., Matlituck RELIEF REQUESTED: The applicant proposes to erect a small wind energy system (turbine) at 120 ft. high with an 8' x 8 ft. tripod base to be located 136.5 feet from the applicant's easterly property line that adjoins a lot identified as CTM#1000-100-4-4 containing a residential structure ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Comments from the Planning Board were received in a letter to the ZBA dated August 24, 2009, stating that the applicants are currently undergoing site plan review and that over time, the uses on their site have grown from the original farmhouse and agricultural buildings to a farmhouse with a bed and breakfast with four guest rooms, a winery, and retail wine tasting room open to the public, and large events involving 100+ people. The Planning Board expressed concern about the number of uses and public safety on the applicants' 53,078 S.F. lot (the "residual" portion of their property that is not subject to Covenants and Restrictions related to the sale of development rights to the Town). Moreover, they noted that the main public parking area currently shown on the Planning Board's site plan is not legally available for that purpose, because it is located on the protected farmland within the Town's easement, and will have to be re-located to the applicant's 53,078 S.F. residential lot. The Planning Board has recommended that the proposed wind turbine be re-located to some area other than the area currently undergoing site plan review "to protect public safety on a crowded site where site circulation and parking are already substandard" and ''to avoid reducing the applicants' options to successfully complete the site plan application." In a letter dated September 30, 2009, the Southold Town Land Preservation Committee, in accordance with Section 70-5 (C) of the Town Code, has granted approval to the applicants to locate a wind turbine within the Town's easement area, should the Zoning Board of Appeals deny the applicants' request for a variance. A discussion between the Board and the applicants regarding alternative relief took place at the public heating but was inconclusive. Shinn Vineyards has been awarded a $23,375 USDA Rural Development Agency grant to offset the costs of constructing a small wind energy system (wind turbine) on their property, as confirmed by the USDA in their News Release received by the ZBA on November 5, 2009 FINDINGS OF FACT/REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public hearing on this application on August 27, 2009 and re- opened the public hearing, at the request of the applicant, on October 29, 2009, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon all testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board finds the following facts to be true and relevant and makes the following findings: I. VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED 1. Town Law §267-b(3)Co)(3)(1). Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. A). There are currently no other wind turbines in the neighborhood. However the Town has endorsed the use of alternative energy, in this instance, wind energy. The Town Land Page 3-- December 29, 2009 ZBA Fi1¢#6308- Shinn Vineyards LLC CFM: 1000-100-4-3.1 at 2000 Oregon Rd,, Mattituck Preservation Committee has furthermore acknowledged that wind turbines, as agricultural smactures, will primarily be utilized to enhance the agricultural use of the property. The surrounding neighborhood is zoned AC, and as such, wind turbines are in keeping with the general rural character of the area and the policies of the Town. (B). No evidence has been submitted that constructing a wind turbine at the proposed location will be a detriment to nearby properties or that protection of nearby residential structures will be diminished by placing a wind turbine in the proposed location. Testimony by a representative from Green Logic Energy supported the applicants' assurances regarding the safety of the proposed wind turbine regarding the possibility of collapse in high wind situations. Also relevant to safety concerns is the fact that the dwelling on the adjoining property is located more than 420 feet from the proposed wind turbine. 2. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some other method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than the variance requested. The Land Preservation Committee has determined that the proposed wind energy structure can be placed on the preserved farmland property in a location that would not require removing any vines from production, and that would be code compliant. 3. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b](3). The variance requested herein is substantial. The Code requires a set back of at least 300 feet from a property line bordering an existing residential structure, while the applicants' propose a set back of 136.5 feet which would require a 54.5% variance. 4. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(5). The difficulty has been self-created. The applicants' request to erect a wind turbine was made after the enactment of the Town code provision from which relief is sought, and because the applicant's applied for and received a grant from the USDA to construct a small wind energy system in a proposed non-conforming location before obtaining relief for said location from the ZBA. 5. Town Law ~267-b(3)(b)(4). No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The subject property is flat, there are no naturally regulated features on site or nearby, and there are no drainage or runoff issues associated with wind turbines. 6. It is also noted that the applicants sold the development rights to all but 53,078 S.F. of their property and have chosen to maximize the use of their residual property with a bed and breakfast, single family home, wine tasting room, wine storage and various other barns, as well as holding sizeable special events on the property that limit the placement of the wind energy structure within the 53,078 S.F. area. (See ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, above) The Board finds, upon applying the balancing test, that the detriment to the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community outweighs the potential benefit to the applicant as applied for. Page 4-- December 29, 2009 ZBA File#6308- Shinn Vineyards LLC CTM: 1000-100-4-3.1 at 2000 Oregon Rd., Mattituck RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Weisman, seconded by Member Schneider, and duly carried, to DENY the variance as applied for Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehringer, Weisman, Schneider. Members Simon and Homing were absent. This resolution was duly adopted (3-0). II. ALTERNATIVE RELIEF 1. Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(3)(1). Grant of Alternative relief will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. A). There are currently no other wind turbines in the neighborhood. However the Town has endorsed the use of alternative energy, in this instance, wind energy. The Town Land Preservation Committee has furthermore acknowledged that wind turbines, as agricultural structures, will primarily be utilized to enhance the agricultural use of the property. The surrounding neighborhood is zoned AC, and as such, wind turbines are in keeping with the ge. neral rural character of the area and the policies of the Town. (B). No evidence has been submitted that constructing a wind turbine at the proposed location will be a detriment to nearby properties. Safety concerns regarding the possibility of collapse in high wind situations were adequately addressed in a public hearing by a representative from Green Logic Energy. Alternative relief will increase the setback from the base of the proposed wind turbine and the applicants' easterly property line from 136.5 ft. as proposed to 150.5 ft. +/- 2 feet at the closest point, and correspondingly increase the 420-font distance between the wind turbine and the neighboring residence by approximately 15 feet, which further reduces the possible risk to neighbors. 2.Town Law §267-b(3)(b)(2). The benefit sought by the applicant can be achieved by some method other than the variance as requested, but not without considerable additional expense. Although the applicant's have permission from the Land Preservation Committee to locate a proposed wind turbine on the Town's development right easement where no variance relief would be needed, the applicants' have testified that the approved location would be economically unfeasible because it would involve additional costs as a result of further trenching and a longer and more expensive mn of wire. While the Board acknowledges that the increase in cost of erecting the wind turbine in the conforming location approved by Land Preservation is immaterial to this consideration, the Board is sympathetic to the applicants' argument and is granting alternative relief to alleviate this burden on the applicants. 3.Town Law §267-b(3)Co)(3). The variance requested herein is substantial. Alternative relief that brings the setback into greater conformity with the code by increasing the setback from the base of the proposed wind turbine and the applicants' easterly property line from 136.5 ft. as proposed to 150.5 ft. +/- 2 feet at the closest point will reduce the percentage of the variance from 54.5% to 49.8%. The Page 5- December 29, 2009 ZBA Fileg6308- Shinn Vineyards LLC CTM: 1000-100-4-3.1 at 2000 Oregon Rd., Mattituck impact of this variance would be less substantial when considering the fact that the dwelling on the adjoining property, which is also a farm, will be located approximately 430 feet from the proposed wind turbine. 4.Town Law §267-b(3)Co)(5'}. The difficulty has been self-created in that the applicants' request to erect a wind turbine, as proposed, was made after the enactment of the Town code provision from which relief is sought. The difficulty itself is mitigated by the fact that alternative relief for the proposed construction will be in an area from which development rights have been sold to the Town. 5.Town Law §267-b(3)Co~(4~. No evidence has been submitted to suggest that a variance in this residential community will have an adverse impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood. The subject property is flat, there are no naturally regulated features on site or nearby, and there are no drainage or runoff issues associated with wind turbines. 6;The alternative relief granted herein is consistent with the recommendation of the Town Planning Board that the wind turbine be re-located from the applicants' residential lot, based on Planning Board's concerns about public safety on a crowded site where site circulation and parking are already substandard. (See ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, above) The Board finds, upon applying the balancing test, that the benefit to the applicant of alternative relief outweighs the potential detriment to the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD: In considering all of the above factors and applying the balancing test under New York Town Law 267-B, motion was offered by Member Weisman, seconded by Member Schneider, and duly carried, to GRANT ALTERNATIVE RELIEF as follows: A 120 foot high small wind energy system (wind turbine) may be set back froTM the applicant's easterly property line at no less than 150.5 feet +/- 2 feet, located on the Town's easement to the west of the applicants' residential property line, in a location that is not currently planted with vines. Conditions: Approval must be obtained by the applicants' from the Land Preservation Committee, for a proposed alternative location as granted herein, and submitted in writing to the Board of Appeals and the Planning Board. A final survey from a licensed surveyor must be submitted to the Land Preservation Committee, Zoning Board of Appeals, and Planning Board, showing the exact LPC and ZBA approved location of the base of the proposed wind turbine, the setback distance from the easterly property line, and the setback from the existing time barn on the applicant's property. Page 6- December 29, 2009 ZBA File#6308- Shinn Vineyards LLC CTM: 1000-100-4-3. ! at 2000 Oregon Rd., Matlituck 3. No certificate of occupancy for a wind turbine in the alternate location as granted herein and approved by the LPC shall be issued until the Planning Board has completed a site plan review of the applicants' 53,078 S.F. residential property and granted approval. Such approyal shall be communicated to the ZBA in writing with a copy of the approved site plan. 4. An engineered light that complies with the intent of dark skies principles shall be installed at the top of the wind energy structure to prevent potential navigational hazards to aircraft. That the above conditions be written into the Building Inspector's Certificate of Occupancy, when issued. Any deviation from the variance given such as extensions, or demolitions which are not shown on the applicant,s diagrams or survey site maps, are not authorized under this application when involving nonconformities under the zoning code. This action does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. The Board reserves the right to substitute a similar design that is de minimis in nature for an alteration that does not increase the degree of nonconformity. Vote of the Board: Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Goehfinger, Weisman, Schneider. Membem Simon and Homing were absent. This resolution was duly adopted (3-0). Approved for Filing 12/3a/09 ~]ARTIN D. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY martin.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennifer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southol&ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD December 23, 2009 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 RE: Shinn Vineyard ~ Dear Mr. Cuddy: L . ' ...... In response to your letters dated November 20, 2009 and Dece~b~'~:~'~', "~(~ the Town of Southold Planning Department acknowledges the receipt of the revised site plan and drainage calculations as requested by the Planning Board in its letter dated October 27, 2006 and reiterated by staff in a meeting attended by Planning Staff, the Town Attorney's Office and yourself to discuss the outstanding site plan issues on this matter. At the outset, it is noted that Planning Staff also suggested that your client provide an overflow parking area in view of the special events that are regularly held on site, which has not been submitted. The Planning Board will schedule this matter on its next available Work Session to discuss the revised site plan, and drainage calculations submitted by your client and Planning Staff's and Town Engineer's comments thereto. With respect to your reference to the open discourse between the Town and New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets, it is conceded that the Department has suggested that certain site plan requirements, when applied to this site plan application, are unreasonably restrictive. For example, the Department suggested that the Planning Board's request that your client provide an electric fire well, that your client comply with landscaping requirements and the request that your client upgrade internal roads to comply with the Town Code were unreasonably restrictive on Shinn Vineyards. These issues have, for the most part, been resolved and now must be reviewed by the Planning Board. However, the Department of Agriculture did not find that the entire site plan process was unreasonably restrictive. Once the Planning Board determines that your client has submitted the items requested, to its satisfaction, it will process the application as expeditiously as possible. Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. December 23, 2009 Page 2 We appreciate your client's continued cooperation and will advise you when this matter has been placed on the Planning Board's Work Session agenda. Town Attorney MDF/Ik cc: Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFF~NG AVE NUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK Mailing Address: RO. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 December 11, 2009 TEL: (631) 369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-908~ E-mad: charles.cuddy@verizon.net Ms. Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyards-Site plan Dear Ms. Lanza: I received your recent memo regarding this site plan. I recognize that there are a number of matters being reviewed by the Planning Board. I know that you will recall that Shinn Vineyards site plan was the subject of serious review by the NYS Department of Agriculture. The Department strongly suggested that the Town's procedure in reviewing the agricultural site plan was excessive. Nevertheless, at my suggestion and in accordance with your request and that of the Town Attorney, my client agreed to submit additional information. The applicant has complied with all requests including, but not limited to, submission of a drainage plan and parking plan. Again, ifa windmill is approved on the site now under review, the applicant will amend the approved site plan to show that windmill. Yhe application before the Zoning Board of Appeals should not prevent approval of the submitted site plan. Under the cireumstances, I hope that every effort will be made to have this plan promptly approved Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC/ik Encls. cc: Ms. Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant Town Attorney Mailing Address: P.O. Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRI FFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK November 20, 2009 TEL: (631)369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9080 E-mail: ckarles.cuddy@verizon.net Ms. Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Wineries Dear Ms. Lanza: Pursuant to the discussion at our recent conference I am enclosing seven (7) sets of the site plan for Shinn Winery revised to reflect twenty (20) parking spaces, as well as two (2) handicap spaces. It also reflects a twenty (20) foot access point for emergency vehicles along the westerly side of the parcel. I would be pleased to meet with you to further discuss this matter, however, I believe the applicant has me all requirements for site plan approval. Therefore I ask that you submit the application to the Planning Board so a resolution can be adopted approving the special permit. Very truly yours, CRC:ms ! DITUATE.. PIATTITUGK TOi~IN~ 5OUTHOLD SUFFOLK GOUNTY, NY 5U~V~rEO FOUNOATION IOGATION FINAL 04-2~-200g ~FFOLK O~N~ T~ 1000-100-4-~.1 NOT~ MONUMENT FOUNP AREA = 5~D'f5 ~F OR, 1.2.1q AORE5 ®tP.A, PHIC, SC, ALE I"= ~0' 12' z~ Land no~ or Formerlg of: David Parle Barbara ~hlnn and To,In of ~x~uthold Land No~ or i:ormer'l~J of: B , H Farms LLC, JOHN C. EHLERS LAND SURVEYOR 6 EAST MAIN STP, EEl' N.Y.S. LIC. NO. 50202 RIVERHEAD, N.Y. 11901 369-8288 Fax 369-8287 REF.\\CompaqsetveaSprosL00S~98-270~pro SCOTT A. RUSSELL SUPERVISOR TOWN HALL - 53095 MAIN ROAD Fax. (631)-765-9015 JAMES A. RICHTER, R.A. ENGINEER TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971 Tel. (631) - 765 - 1560 JAM IE.RICHTER~TOWN.SOUTHOLD.NY.US OFFI6'E OF Martin H. Sidor ' ~,',~ ~ ~;-/-~ ~ ~ November 5 2009 Chairman - Planning Boar~,~\ .-'~-~' c. ';')%% "\ ' ~ t Town Hall, 53095 Main Ro~d .~,~ - u ? ~ ~ ~,~ Southold, NewYork 11971 ~-':' ~ S~n~tVineyards-SitePlan .... ~go~ Road, Ma.ituck, NY ~.~-- ~ ......~:/~C' ~M ~: 1000-100-04-3.1 Dear Mr. Sidor: ~ .~..-.. ,. - .... · As per a request from your off~ce, 4-have rewewed the Site Plan / Suwey for the above referenced project. This. Site Plan / Su~ey was prepared by the o~ce of John C. Ehlers, LS and has been daCed 04~23~07. Please consider the following: 1. Drainage Calculations have not been provided. Nonetheless, there is a le~er in the file wri~en by Mr. Allan Connell from the National Resource Conse~ation Se~ice and he has indicated that the current Roof Run-Off Management Plans are adequate to handle all of the run-off generated by farm buildings associated with a 10 year storm event. Please note, Mr. Connell's storm-water calculations differ from the Town's requirement to contain a 2" rainfall event over a 24 hour period. In spite of this fact and as Mr. Connell has indicated, the four 8' diameter x 8' deep Leaching Pools shown on the suwey are adequate in size and will contain run-off generated by the existing buildings. Drainage calculations, if provided, would also show that these leaching pools, as proposed, will satisfy the Town Code requirements for run-off generated by the buildings on this site. 2. However, the Drainage Review provided by Mr. Connell did not take into ac~unt the areas of the driveway and gravel parking sudaces. While these gravel areas are somewhat pewious, the Town requires Drainage Calculations using a 60% ~noff Coefficient for these sudaces. It is recommended that additional drainage be installed in these areas. In addition, this su~ey did not show any grade elevations or contours to indicate the flow of storm-water. Does this site shed water out onto Oregon Road or does storm-water ~n-off adve~ely affect adjacent prope~ies in any way? If the answer is yes, drainage plans should address a solution. 3. Have these Leaching Pools shown on the Site Plan been installed? If they have been, a le~er cedified by a design professional should be required. If these pools are proposed, my o~ce should be notified so that I can prepare for an inspection of the wo~. 4. Stone blend driveways and parking areas appear to encroach into adjacent prope~ies to the South & West of this Site Plan. I realize that this prope~ is currently all under the same ownership but what happens if this should ever change? Who will be responsible for the restoration of these encroachments? If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact my Q~ce. cc: Peter Harris ~&~ A. Richter, R.A. {Superintendent of Highways) Mailin¢ Address: Box 1547 Riverhead, NY 11901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRIFFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK October 14, 2009 TEL: (631) 369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9080 E-maih charles.cuddy@verizon.net Ms. Heather Lanza, Director of Plann%-.ng Southotd Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 . Re: Shinn Wineries Dear Ms. Lanza: In connection with our several conver~a.n%qns, enclosed is a statement from Allan S. Connell regardi-n-g drainage at the Shinn Vineyards, LLC site together with a survey used by Mr. Connell. As indicated the site is properly drainage. Based on our discussions there is one remaining issue to be considered and that is parking in connection with the tasting room at this site. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC/ik Encls. cc: Ms. Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant Town Attorney P.S. The colors on each building refer to the drainage rings as shown onthe survey. UNITED STATES DEPT OF AGRICULTURE NRCS Natural Resources Conservation Service 423 Griffing Avenue, Suite 110 Riverhead, New York 11901 Telephone: (631) 727-2315 Ext. 3 FAX: (631) 727-3160 Email: allan.co n nell~,ny.usd a .f:lOV Mr. David Page Shinn Vineyards 2000 Oregon Rd Mattituck, NY 11952 October 6, 2009 Dear David: I have reviewed the roof runoff management plans for your farm buildings. The survey you provided shows the size and location of the buildings. The approximate size and location of the drainage rings servicing each building was sketched onto the survey map. Based upon the information you provided there are 4 areas where two 8 ft. diameter by 4 ft high drain rings with a dome were stacked on top of each other to accept runoff from each roof area. See the attached survey for the location and roof area covered by each drain ring. The runoff from each roof is being piped to these drains. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) standard for Roof Runoff Management requires that the minimum design capacity for any structure accepting roof runoff be capable of handling the runoff generated from a 10 year frequency - 5 minute rainfall precipitation event which on Long Island is equal to 0.65 inches in 5 minutes. A copy of this standard is included for your review. Based upon the information you provided the largest combined roof areas outletting into one drain ring unit was equal to 2648 square feet (green area). Runoff calculations show that the 5 minute rainfall event will require 40 cubic feet of storage to handle the runoff from this roof area. The drain ring unit installed will provide 402 cubic feet of storage. As you can see the unit installed is more than adequate to handle the volume of runoff generated. All of the other roof areas outletting into the other three drains are smaller than this one and they have the same drain capacity so they too are adequate to handle all of the runoff associated with this storm event. The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights. 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. UNITED STATES DEPT OF AGRICULTURE There is one roo£area shown in orange on the survey that does not outlet into any of the drains. I would recommend piping it to the drain located on the northwest side property. This drain has sufficient capacity to handle this additional roof area. If you have questions or need further assistance please contact me. Sincerely, Allan S. Connell District Conservationist The U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of grogram information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD), To file a complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, WashingXon, DC 20250-9410 or call (800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal oppormniiy provider and employer. MELISSA A. SPIRO LAND PRESERVATION COORDINATOR melissa.spiro@town.southold, ny.us Telephone (631) 765-5711 Facsimile (631) 765~640 September 30, 2009 Mr. David Page & Ms. Barbara Shinn 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, NY 11952 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (corner of Main Rd & Youngs Ave) Southold, New York MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 DEPARTMENT OF LAND PRESERVAT ON:,;~,'~,'~;'~' ' . ~ ,~ ~..~-..,~ ~-,~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLI~ ' .... i~' RE: SCTM # 1000-100-4-3.2 Shinn Vineyard Property Request for Land Preservation Committee Review of proposed wind turbine on property on which Town owns a development rights easement Dear Mr. Page and Ms. Shinn: The Land Preservation Committee Members, in accordance with Chapter 70 of the Town Code, reviewed the request you outlined at the meeting of the Committee on September 15, 2009, wherein you proposed the construction of a wind turbine on property subject to a development rights easement benefitting the Town of Southold. The recorded easement for this property allows land within the easement to be used for the purpose of agricultural production. Section 70-5 (C) of the Town Code requires that the Committee serve as a review board for the granting of permits for the construction, reconstruction and additions of, and to, structures in, or on, agricultural lands in which the development rights have been acquired by the Town. At the meeting of the Committee on September 29, 2009, the Committee adopted a motion to approve the construction of a wind turbine in the proposed and "preferred third" location as described in enclosed written description submitted to the Committee and as hand drawn on the attached aerial photograph of the property, as applied for. The Committee is permitting this structure within the development rights easement on the condition that it is compatible with the purpose of the development rights easement and subordinate to the agricultural use of the property. Should you utilize the turbine in a manner that differs in any way from that proposed to the Committee, or to site the turbine at a location that differs from that proposed to the Committee, you will be required to obtain additional approval. The Committee's approval does not mean that you can proceed with construction or that such use will be approved or permitted by other Town Departments or agencies. The Committee's approval allows you to proceed with pursuing any applicable approvals that are required by Town Code. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions regarding the above. Sincerely, Melissa Spiro Land Preservation Coordinator enclosures CC: Planning Department w/encs. Building Department w/encs. Zoning Board of Appeals w/encs. Town Attorney w/encs. The BWC Excel wind turbine we are attempting to install on our farm has a footprint of 64 square feet (8' X 8') and stands 120 feet high. It will produce in excess of 14000 kwh of energy output that will power our vineyard irrigation / fertigation system as well as our grape processing operation. This will save us approximately $4000 in energy costs per year at current LIPA rates. Our farmhouse is powered by a 10kw photovoltaic solar system. Our tasting room is on a separate meter. We have identified three options for locating our turbine. The first and best option requires a variance from the Town zoning board of appeals. The ZBA has been reluctant to grant that variance even though the turbine would be located over 500 feet from the nearest neighbor's home. The second location would require the removal of 276 grape vines, as well as 22 posts and wire. The removal cost would be $1000. Installation of 44 new end posts and anchors would cost $2500. The removal of vines would result in a loss of about 345 bottles of wine per year. At an average cost of $15 per bottle we would lose $5175 in revenue every year. This location would also jeopardize our grant funding, since the USDA recommends that wind turbines not be located on agriculturally productive land. This scenario would create a losing preposition with a net loss of $1175 per year after the cost of installation. The third location is the one that would require a trench of 1200 feet to a location in a break in the vines towards the middle of our vineyard. This location would require larger cable and additional equipment that would cost $9932 which is a 40% increase in our cost. The efficiency of the turbine would be reduced by 2% because of the long distance from our meter. The payback period would be increased by 2 ~ years. BWC EXCEL Installation Manual. S~V Tower 4 2. Tower Height The smooth flow of the wind over the land is interrupted by obstructions and topographical variations. These interruptions bring about two important phenomena: wind shear and turbulence. Wind shear describes the fact that close to the ground the wind is slowed by friction and the influence of obstacles. Thus, wind speed is Iow close to the ground and increases with increasing height above the ground. Wind shear is more pronounced over rough terrain and less pronounced over smooth terrain. Turbulence is essentially rough air caused by the wind passing over obstructions such as trees, buildings or terrain features. Turbulent air reduces energy output and puts greater strain on the wind turbine. The effects of both wind shear and turbulence diminish with height and can be largely overcome simply by putting the machine sufficiently high above the ground. This may be accomplished by putting the machine on the highest possible ground and on the highest feasible tower. As a minimum, the machine should be at least 12 m (40 ft) above any obstructions within 100 m (330 ft) in the prevailing wind direction, and preferably in all directions. Even in perfectly flat areas, we recommend that the tower be at least 24 m(80 ft) high. In areas with trees, please bear in mind that trees grow and the tower height needs to be based on the mature height of trees in the vicinity. Further, because the power in the wind increases as the cube of the wind velocity (P = KV3 means, for example, that doubling the average wind speed increases the energy output by a factor of eight!) a small increase in average wind speed will result in a large increase in long-term energy output. Table 1 shows the influence that tower height can have on annual energy output for the BWC EXCEL wind turbine under typical inland site conditions. Wind speed may increase dramatically with tower height in hilly or wooded areas. Even in flat open areas, power production will increase significantly with tower height. Tower HeiRht Wind Speed at Hub Hei,qht Annual Output Meters Feet Meters/Sec. Miles/Hour kWh 18 60 4.8 10.8 11,000 24 80 5.0 11.2 12,200 30 100 5.2 11.6 13,300 37 120 5.3 11.9 14,300 Table 1: Variation in wind speed and expected annual energy output with tower height. Tower height can range from 18 to 43 m (60 to 140 ft), but 30 and 37 m (100 and 120 ft) are the most common heights. For self-supporting towers, the marginal costs increase rapidly with increased height; higher towers do not provide improved system economics. BWC EXCEL Installation Manual. SSV Tower Figure 3. SSV Tower Elevation and Schedule Town Hall Annex 54375 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1802 Fax (631 ) 765-9502 BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Shinn Vineyard, LLC 2000 Oregon Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 Dear Mr. Page: 2009 Permit for Winery With reference to your application to construct an addition to the vineyard building, we require Site Plan approval fi.om the Southold Planning Board. It is my understanding that the site plan that is currently before the Planning Board does not indicate this proposed addition. Once the site plan is amended & approved we will proceed with our permit approval. Thank you, erely, Permit Examiner Planning L. Sannino PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN H. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETH L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Memorandum To: From: Re: Gerard P. Goehringer, Chairman Zoning Board of Appeals George D. Solomon, Vice-Chairman Planning Board Request for comments: Shinn Vineyard, LLC, Wind Turbine SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 Appeal #6308 Date: August 24, 2009 The Planning Board has received your request for comments on the application referenced above for a proposed wind turbine and offers the following information and recommendation. This property is currently before the Planning Board with a site plan application. Progress on the site plan application has been slow due to the applicant's decision to appeal the Town's site plan process with New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets (Ag & Markets). Although there have been several letters sent between the Town Attorney and Ag & Markets, no formal ruling has come from Ag & Markets, and the Planning Board, working with the Town Attorney, is continuing to work with the applicant to complete the application. We have enclosed the site plan that is before the Planning Board for your information. Our files show that the uses on site have been incrementally increased over time, and what was once a farmhouse and agricultural buildings is now a farmhouse, a bed & breakfast with four guest rooms, a winery, and a retail wine tasting room open to the public. In addition, we found evidence of large events involving 100+ people being held at the site, as well as an advertisement on the applicant's web site (excerpts attached) where it is stated that up to 70 people can be accommodated for a meal cooked in the kitchen on-site. Shinn Wind Turbine Page Two August 21, 2009 The Planning Board's main concern with this site is public health, safety and welfare. It is open to the public, and actively solicits the public to enter, sometimes in large numbers. The area of the site is about 40,000 s.f. (not including a narrow strip of land that accounts for another 12,500 s.f). This is the area of the applicant's property that is not subject to the sale of development rights (the owner of the property sold the development rights to the Town on the other 21.3 acres in 2000). The main parking area shown on the Planning Board's site plan is not legally available for public parking because it is located on the protected farmland where the town purchased the development rights. This significant problem with the site plan may require that the parking area be re-designed - not an easy task on such an intensely developed site, or that an alternative site for parking be provided. The Planning Board feels that locating this structure within the area that is currently going through site plan review will reduce the options open to the applicant and the Planning Board to successfully complete the site plan application. Another issue is the location of the turbine in relation to the activities on site. Although the height of the tower is unclear - the building permit application states 120 feet in height, as does the brochure submitted, however there is a hand-written note that it will only be 80 feet tall, the proposed location seems ill-advised in that the potential fall-zone includes areas where the public congregates regardless of whether it is 80 feet or 120 feet. Thus, the main concerns the Planning Board has regarding the proposed wind turbine are public safety, and its location on a crowded site where site circulation and parking are already substandard and recommends that the applicant relocate the proposed wind turbine. Atts. 2 M2~RTIN D. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY martin.finnegan(~town.southold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennifer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse (~town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August10,2009 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 RE: Shinn Vineyard, LLC Site Plan Dear Mr. Cuddy: Pumuant to our discussion on July 30, 2009 reg~tdk~ {hescreening; drainage, road width and parking requirements of the Town's understanding that the proposed wind turbine was Iocat~d~En the 21+ acres of your client's pmpe~y that is a~ively cultivated (development rights sold to the Town). Upon review of the plan to the ZBA for the approval of an ama vadance for the wind turbine, we have discovered that the proposed location of the turbine is on the .8+ rose.ed area of the prope~y. A copy of the plan is attached. Please clarify and confirm the proposed location of the wind turbine. Furthermore, please note that if your client is proposing to locate the wind turbine as indicated on the attached map, that the location of the turbine should also be reflected on the site plan and that an amended site plan should be submitted to the Planning Board. Attorney JA/Ik Enclosure cc: Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director Martin D. Finnegan, Town Attorney D JOHN C. EHLERS LAND SURVEYOR 6 ~.~ST MAI/¢ $1'RI~I' N.Y.S. LIC. NO. 50202 ~, N.Y. 11~01 J Office Location: Town Annex/First Floor, Capital One Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) Southold, NY 11971 Mailing Address: 53095 Main Road RO. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 http://southoldtown.northfork.net BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 MEMO TO: FROM: DATE: Planning Board Gerard P. Goehdnger, ZBA Chairman August 6, 2009 SUBJECT: Request for Comments ZBA # 6308 Shinn Vineyard, LLC As confirmed with your office, the ZBA is reviewing the following application. Enclosed are copies of the Building Department's Notice of Disapproval, ZBA application, and current map on file. The Planning Board may be involved under the site plan review steps under Chapter 280 (Zoning), and your review and comments'are requested at this time. NAME TAX # ZBA # Code Variance' Date of PREPARER ZONE DIST Section Stamped OF SURVEY Mai3 Shinn Vineyard, 100-4-3.1 & 6308 Article I Wind Turbine 4/23/07 John C. Ehlers LLC 3.2 (formerly Chapter setback & location Land Surveyor 3) AC 277-3(B)(1) Your comments are requested within 30 days of this letter. If desired, the file is available for review of additional documentation. Thank you. Encls. TO: FORM NO. 3 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: April 8, 2009 Shinn Vineyard, LLC 2000 Oregon Road Cutchogue, NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated March 30, 2009 For construction of a wind turbine at Location of property 2000 Oregon Rd., CutChogue County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 100 Block 4 Lot 3.~1 Is retumed herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed construction of a wind turbine on this conforming lot in the AC district is not permitted per Article I Chapter 277-3 (B)(1), which states "A small wind energy system shall be set back from a property line a distance of no less than the total height of the small wind energy system plus 10 feet, except that it.shall be set back at least 300 feet from a property line bordering an existing residential structure. Proposed location is 140 +/- feet from the property line of a bordering property with a residential structure. Authorized Signature Cc: file, ZBA Note to Applicant: Any changes or deviations in the above referenced application may require for review by the Town of Southold Building Departraent. TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 TEL: (631) 765-1802 FAX: (631) 765-9502 SoutholdTown. NorthFork. net PERMIT NO. Approved ,20 , DisapprOVed a/c 30 6LOG. OEl:q'. ..... TOWN OF SOUi'HOLD Building mapper APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT INSTRUCTIONS BUDDING PERM~I~APPLICATION CHECKLIST DO you have or need file follownn~, before applying? Board of Health 4 sets of Building Hans Plarming Board approval Survey_ ~ Check ~ ~,~ te:~Z'5 Cou.,~ ~ '~RA Phone: ~ a_ This application MUST ho completely filled in by typewriter or in ink and submitted to the Building Inspector with 4 se~s of plans, accurate plot plan to scale. Fee ac~erding to schedule. b. Plot plan showing locaiion of lot and of bulldiags on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public streets or areas, and waterways. c. The work covered by this application may not be commenced before issuance of Building Permit. _ d. Upon approval of this application, the Building Iuspecmr will issue a Building Permit to the applicant. Such a penmt shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout the work. e. No building shall be occupied or used in whole or hi part for any purpose what so ever until the Building Inspector issues a Cert/ficate of Occupancy. f. Eveq, building permit shall expire if the work authorized has not commenced within 12 months after the date of issuance or has not been completed within 18 months from such date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting the property have been enacted in the interim, the Buildm~ hiapect0r raay authorize, in writing, the extension of the permit for an addition six months. Thereafter, a new permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Depan~q~eut for the issuance ora Building Pemait pursuant to the Building Zone Ordinance of the Town of Southol6, Suffolk County, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regulations, for the construction of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicant agrees to comply with all applicable laws, or{Finances, building code, housing code. and regulations, and to admit authorized inspectors on premises and in building for necessary inspections. (Signature of appUc~nt or name'~ ~a eo~orgtion) (I~ialling 'address ct~applieant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general comractor, electrician, plumber or builder Name of owner of premises ~ ~ld~. [~bL~_ '~tc~t/~t"(~, ~)04~,e (~ on ~e ~ mil or later d~) If ~pti~t is a ~ion, si~e of d~y au~{o~ Build~ License No. ~ Pl~bers License No. ~ ~ El~ci~ Li~eNo. q ~ - ~ ~ . 1. ~ion of l~d on w~ch pro~s~ work will~ donei Ho~e Nmber S~ ~ H~I~ Co~ T~ M~ No. 1000 S~tion I 00 Block ~ ~t 3. [ Su~ivision Filed Map No. Lot 2. State existing use und occupancy o f premises and intended usc and occupungy of proposed ooustruetion: b. Intended use and 6ccupuncy ~ 3. Nature of work (cheek which applicable): New Building. Addition Alteration Repair Removal Demolition Other Work ~[~l ht~ (Description) 4. Estimated Cost "g~[; ieb{~ ~) Fee 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units t~ $ ~tt~5 o'~ ~.~o be paid on filing this application) ~__ Number 6fSwelling ilaits on each floor If garage, number of cars '" - ~ ~:~ v'c44 6. If business, oommerczal or [taxed oeeupancy, specify nature und extent of each type of use. e 7.Dimemionsofexistingsa'uetures, ifany:Front ~t~/'l/~P~ Rear Depth Height Number of Stories Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front ~J~- Rear Depth Height Number of Stories 8.DimenSions of entire new coustruetion: Front t~f~ Rear Depth Height Number of Stories 9. Size oflot: Front [t~. ! Rear I~,<,t Depth '2~'')c! g. ,0. $ eo, Porm Owne, 11. Zone or usc distriet in which premises are situated 0,~ ~' ( I~ ~[ ~1 ! ~ ~ 12. Does proposed eoustmetion violate any zoninginw, ordinanen or regulation? YES__ NO t~440&C~ ~' 13. Will lot be re-graded? YES. NO_ L~Will excess fill be removed f~om pre~nis_e~? YES NO. __~ Name of Architect . th/A' ~ddress Phone No Nume ° f C°ntraet°(23[~-PJ-n-[J:l~JL--sl.~' -~Address ~Ph0ne~No. . 15 ~ Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetlan4 or a freshwater weflend? *YES NO * IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES & D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQ~[IRED. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal watland? * YES NO * IF YES, D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to property lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below, must provide topographical data on sur~vey. 18. Are there any covenants and restrictions with respect to this property? * YES__ NO L~ * IF YES, PROVIDE A COPY. STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF~c~ 1~-: ~n:MIr~ ~ t~'~l(~0_~.- beiagdulyswom, deposes aud says that (s)heisthe applicaut (Name ofiadividual signing contract) above named, (S)He is the (~('3Yl~l f.~'~ (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to perform or have performed the said work and to make and file ~ application; that all statements contained ia this application are ~xue to the best of his knowledge and belief; and that the work will be performed ia the manner set forth ia the application filed therewith. · ~it;~E-.~o f A~plicaut APPLICATIO~I~o THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD OF APPEALS Fee: $ Office Notes: -- Filed By:_ For Office Use Only Date Assigned/Assignment No. Parcel House No. 2~0, Street C'reSc~* t?'4 Hamlet ~.~4~'~&) SCTMlOOOSection/~ Block ~/ Lot(s) ~'-D LotSize 22 ~-~cre$ Zone I (VCE) APPEAL THE YVRITTEN DETERMINATION OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DATED: ~//$/~ ~ Applicant/Owner(s): Mailing Telephone: NOTE: In addition to the above please complete below if application is signed by applicant's attorney, agent, architect, builder, contract vendee, etc. and name of person who agent represents: Authorized Representative: ~[Ja.9 Ig for ( ) Owner, or ( ) Other: Telephone: Please check box to specify who you wish correspondence to be mailed to, from the above names: ~:5~kpplicant/Owner(s) [] Authorized Representative [] Other Name/Address: WHEREBY THE BUILDING INSPECTOR DENIED AN APPLICATION DATED FOR: ,Kt. Building Permit [] Certificate of Occupancy [] Pre-Certiflcat~ of Occupancy [] Change of Use [] Permit for As-Built Construction []Other: Provision of the Zoning Ordinance Appealed. Indicate Article, Section, Subsection of Zoning Ordinance by numbers. Do not quote the code. C0~t)S Article / Section 280- J"/7 - 3 ubsection Type of A?peal. An Appeal is made for: ~A Variance to the Zoning Code or Zoning Map. [] A Variance due to lack of access required by New York Town Law-Section 280-A. [] Interpretation of the Town Code, Article Section [] Reversal or Other A prior appea~kas' ~as not been made with respect to this property UNDER Appeal No. Year ~ (Please be sure to research before completing this question or call our office to assist you.). BOA. RD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Sdgthold Town Hall 53095 Maiz Road EO. Box t179 Southold. New York t1971 ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Telephone (631) 765-1809 FINDINGS DEUBERATIONS AND DETERM NAT ON MEET NG OF OCTOBER.19, 2000 : :g~O[~ No. ~.~ SH1NN VINEY~,~I~.JNC./J~ARBARA SHINN 10~0-100-4..3 DA~ 0r.~ua~C ~t~:..'~l~; 20o0 FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACT~[:~E$CRIPTIQ~; The applicant's pmper{y is located on the south side of Omg0n R0ad~ M,at~ 'k The properly is 22 acres with 642.98 ft. of mad frontage. A.survey sketch, altered byStanley leaksen,:Jr., shows the Development Right Easement areas of .appmxi~.~....y 20 a~/~,S- ~, s~arate ~nd designation, shown ag the OWner's 1.826 acres. Is ImProved w~th a idWel itiig and fal~,buildings. The entire acreage~ is. owned by the applicant. BASISOF APPLJCATI~N: 'Building Inspect~Ws July 21, 20~0 NotiCe of Dleappr~v~l for the reason that applicants' proposed ~bower racitity in ~he existing bom constitutes a Secodd dwelling on a single Paine] under Article 111, Section t 00-31A(11 of the Zoning Code. AR.E~, V&RIANCE RELIEF REQUE,,~TED' Applicant was disapproved in her appilcation'to the Building Deperffnent for ah arhendme'nt to Building Permit No. 26038 for a shower facility in an accessory building. EEASONS [.OR BOARD ACTION: Based on the testimony and record before the Board and [ber~on~ ~n$~ec~n, the. Board make the following findings: ( !~ The grant gfthe area valance will not product an uncles mb e change in the clmracter of the aejglYo6th~3od ~a de~rse~ to nearby properties. The appilcants do not live in the principal dweiling' I~ c~l,=~e-.iubject property; th s owe ling is rented. The accessory agricuituml building is d~.~lel~ for thC-care al~'l~lintanance of ~vine grapes planted on the property, anM propos~,d sho~;faciJity whiCh is the'subject of this vadance is to be used solely ~Or ag~cultuml staff. No chan~e inc.-the appeamnse of the character of the neighborhood will result from this vadance. ~ (2) The;benefit~.sought by the ~a[SpliCant cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicantito~reae; O'~er than anarea variance, because the applicants rentthe principal building and do not have. use,o~ a shoWer after pesticide application to the wine grapes as reequired by the Environmental Protac~on Agency standards. (3) The variance granted is not substantial because the agdcoiturel building will remain an accessory: building and in no event shall it be used for sleeping quarters or other habitable purposes. (4) The difficuJtY has t)een in part self-created because the applicants are unable to use the shower in the pdndipal buildihg because it is rented (5~ :No evidence was 'pmsente~ ~ E~lg~t ~t.~t the .ya~n~ ~nted ~11 have an a~a~e effe~ or im~ ~ physi~l or envimnmeh~[ ~di~ns. . ~e a~n set f~ ~low is ~e minim~ n~ a~ ad~uate ~ ~ab~ appli~ ~ meet · e ~uimmen~ ~ Environmental P~on Ag~ s~nda~s by insuring a sh~er ~ ~ ~ barn ~ildi~, ~ile pm~wing a~ pr~e~ng ~e ~a~er of ~e ~ghbo~ and ~e ~Rh, ~fe~ a~ we[faro of t~e ~mmun~, RESOLU~ON/AC~ON: On mofi~ Dy Member G~hd~er (Cha[~, se~nded by Member Dingo, E ~s ~LVEC ~to G~NT ~e vadan~ as applied for. VOTE OF ~E ~ARD: A~S: M~m G~Hnge[ (Chai~), ~ni~o, T~om, ~ns. ~r Ho~ng ~ Fishem Is~nd ~s ab~nt~u~ ~is r~ ~ R~o~on ~ ~ ~rrr~s so~ ~m~mSRS Lydia A. Tor~ora, Chairwoman C~rard E Gochringcr George Homing Ruth D. Oliva V'.,ncent Orlando BOARD OF APPEAI~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Appl. No. 5339 - SHINN VINEYARD. INC./DAVID PAGE 1000-1004-3 STREET & LOCATION: 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck Southold Town Hall 53095 Maia Road ED. Box 1179 Southold, New York t1971-0959 ZBA F~x (631) 765-9064 TelEphone (631) 765-1809 h~p://so utholdtawn.noffilfork.nct RECEIVED "~.~, FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION ,/~:00 F)/'Y'I MEETING OF JULY 10, 2003 ~[J6 4 ~ 'Southold Town Clerk FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's property has 142.98 ft. frontage along the south side of Oregon Road in Maffituck, and is shown as 1.219 acres, or 53,078 sq. ff. on the survey prepared by John C. Ehlem, L.S. dated 6-16-03. The property Is improved with a dwelling ar~ farm buildings, and to the west and south are other lands of the applicants consisting of 20+ acres within a Town of Southold Development Right Easement area. BASIS OF APPLICATION: Building Ir~pector's February 28, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, amended Mard~ 5, 2003, for the reason that applicants wish to demolish an existing nonconforming accessory 18' x 31' building and construct a new accessory 24' x 36' equipment storage building with a 12 fl. side yard setback, instead of the minimum 20 feet required under Code Section 100-31A(2-c). AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicants were disapproved in their permit application to the Building Department for a new 24' x 36' accessory building in the rear yarD, south of the two- story frame dwelling, and. wf~h a setback of 12 feet from the easterly side lot line. The new building s an accessory structure for storage of applicants' equipment and iterc~ related to the dwelling and agricultural uses of the property, ar~3 will be placed in the same yard area as a~ existing nonconforming building located 0.7 feet from the side line. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: Based on the testimony and record before the Beard and personal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: (1) The grant of an area varlanca will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties. The proposed new construction measures 24 feet by 36 feet and s a result of a demolition of the exJsfing accessory building, presently 0.7 feet from this easterly side p[operty ine. The new construction will be an increase of the 0.7 ff. setback to 12 feat to the side line The property adjacent to this property is a cultivated farm field. (2) The benefit sough[ by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, 6ther tha~ an area variance. This is reconslruc~ion of an existipg nonconforming agricultural building which will result In an increase of conformity. Also, access~to the building will be from t~e south end of the building, in order to avoid removal of vines and nearby landscaped areas. (3) The requested area variance is substantial and represents an eight-foot reduction in the minimum 20 ff. code requirement. P~ge 2-July 10. 2003 ZBA Appl. No. 5339 - Shinn Vineyard/D. Page Parcel 100-4-3 at Maaituc~ (4) The difficulty was self-created when the applicant chose to build a new building with access on the south side of the building. (5) No evidence was presented to suggest that the variance granted will have an adverse effect or Impact on physical or environmental conditions. Another accessory building exists further south with setbacks at 10 feet and 13 feet from the easterly side lot line. (6) The action set forth.below Is the minimum necessar~ and adequate to enable applicants to remove the existing nonconforming building and build a new accessory building, while preserving and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION/ACTION: On motion by Member Orlando, seconded by Member Goehringer, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the variance as applied for. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES; IV~mhars Tortora lChalrwoman), Goehrlnger, Oliva, an~ Orlando. (Absent was Member Homing of Fishem Island.) This Resolution was du¥ adopted (4-0). LYDIA &C~ORTORA, ~3HAIRMAN Approved for Filing 7- -,33 OF APPE~tLS BOARD MEMBERS Ruth D. Oliva, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehringer James Dinizio, Jr. Michael A. Simon Leslie Kanes Wei~man h~p://sou~holdtown.north fork.net ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Tel. (631) 765-1809 · Fax (63!) 765-9064 Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road · P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 Town Annex/First Floor, North Fork Bank 54375 Main Road (at Youngs Avenue) · Southold, NY 11971 RECEIV;'D Sou iiold Cle 'k FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF MARCH 9, 2006 ZB File No. 5836-A (Variance) and 5836-B (B&B) - BARBARA SHI]~q; SHINN VINEYARD, LLC Property Location: 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck CTM lg0d~3.1 (or 3) SEORA DETERMINATION: The Zoning Board of Appeals has visited the property under consideration in this application and determines that this review falls under the Type Il category of the State's List of Actions, without an adverse effect on the environment if the project is implemented as planned. PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's 21-acre parcel consists of 20+ acres with a Town of Southoid Development Right Easement area and 1.2~ acres applied to the applicant's single-family dwelling use, as shown on the survey prepared by John C. Ehlers, L.S. dated 6-16-03. FINDINGS OF FACT The Zoning Board of Appeals held a public bearing on this application on March 2, 2006, at which time written and oral evidence were presented. Based upon ali testimony, documentation, personal inspection of the property, and other evidence, the Zoning Board £mds the following facts to be true and relevant: BASIS OF APPLICATIONS: Building Department's December 19, 2005 Notice of Disapproval, citing Section 100-32 in its denial of an application for a building permit to construct a proposed addition st the eastern side of the existing dwelling,~for the reason that the new COnstruction at the front of the dwelling will be less than the code-required 60 feet from the front yard lot line. Also, Zoning Code Section 100-31B(14). APPLICANT'S REOUESTS: 5836-A: AREA VARIANCE: The applicants are proposing an addition at the front of their home for new porch areas. The northwesterly corner of the new porch addition will be 35' 6" at its closest point, and the southwesterly corner will be 39 feet to the front yard lot line facing Oregon Road. ~836-B: SP~ECIAL EXCEPTION: The Applicant-Owner, Barbara Shinn as sole member of Shinn Vineyard, LLC requests a Special Exception pursuant to Article III, Section 100-3lB, sub..section 14 of the Zoning Code, to establish an Accessory Bed and Breakfast within the existing principal building, The applicant Barbara Shinn resides with her husband Dayld Page, in the dwelling, as a single-family dwelling under the Building Department's Certificate of Occupancy No. Z26149 dated 1110811998. Ps~e 2 - March 9, 2006 i File No. 58~6 - Barbara Shinn a~inn Vineyards LLC CTM No. 100-,~3.1 ~A VAmA~Ci~ 1) Grant of the variance will not produce an undesirable change in the character of the neighborhood, or be a detriment to nearby properties. The property is improved with agricultural production (vineyards and a winery), a dwelling, several out buildings and aceessory garage. There are variable setbacks for the older homes that existing in the Immediate area. 2) The 0nly area of construction which requires relief under the 60 fL code setback restriction is for a new porch, replacing the existing porch which is 39 feet from the front yard lot line, and that portion which extends for the gazebo, reducing the existing setback from 39 feet to 35.5 feet, at its closest point. 3) The benefit sought by the appficant cannot be achieved by some other method, feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because house was built in its present nonconforming location more than 50 years ago. 4) Although the over setback is 40% less than the code's requirement for a 60 fi. front ~ethack, the relief amounts to 0nly a 3.5 ft. reduCtion on the westerly end, to aflow for a gazebo, while the remainder of the porch will maintain the existing 39 h. setback. · 5) No evidence has been submitted to indicate that the proposed variance will have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental COnditions in the neighborhood, or diktrict. 6) he difficulty to construct is not self-created and is ~elated to the narrowness of the parcel. 7) The relief granted is the minimum determined necessary and adequate for enjoyment of an addlliun to a single family dwelling, while at the same time protecting and preserving the character of the neighborhood, as well as the health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding community. SPECIAL EXCEPTION In considering this application, the Board has reviewed the code requirements set forth pursuant to Article III, Section 100-31B(13) to establish an Accessory Bed and Breakfast and finds that the applicant complies with the requirements for the reasons noted below: 1. Barbara Shinn, the applicant herein, has been an owner of the property since January 5, 1.999, and as the only member of Shinn Vi~.e. yards LLC, will continue to occupy same as her principal residence while the accessory bed and breakfast facifity.is managed and operated. 2. The applicant's plans comply with the on-site parking requirements and provide for a minimum of six (6) parking spaces~ two for the principal single-family use and four for the Accessory Bed and Breakfast. 3. The applicant complies with the requirements of a dwelling unit as defined in Section 100-13 of the Zoning Code. 4. The Accessory Bed and Breakfast, as applied for, is reasonable in relation to the District in which is located, adjacent use district~, and nearby and adjacent residential uses. 5. The Special Exception use is accessory to the principal use and will not prevent the orderly and reasonable use of adjacent properties. 6. This accessory use will not prevent orderly and reasonable uses proposed or existing in adjacent use districts. 7. No evidence has been submitted to show that the safety, health, welfare, comfort, convenience, order of the Town would be adversely affected. P~e 3 - March 9, 2006 ZB File No. 58:~6 - Barbara Shlnn CTM No. 100~-3.1 Vineyards LLC 8. This zoning use ts authorized by the Zoning Code through the Zoning Board of Appeals, as noted herein, and a CertiQeate for Occupancy from the Building Inspector is a code requirement before on Accessory use may be occupied. 9. No adverse conditions were found after considering items listed under Section 100-263 and 100-264 of the Zoning Code. 10. A Certificate of Compliance or similar document will be necessary for issuance by the Building Inspector certifying that the premises conforms to Ch. 100 of Zoning for an Accessory Bed and Breakfast use. RESOLUTION: On motion by Menther Goehringer, seconded by Chairwoman Ollva, it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the Special Exception application for an Accessory Bed and Breakfast, to be used only' in conjunction with applicant-owner's residence, as applied for, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWLNG CONDIT/ON$: 1. Owner(s) shall occupy this single-family dwelling as her/their principal residence. 2. There shall be no baeldng out of vehicles onto the street. A small 2xl ' sign shall be posted at the parhing 3. area(s) stating "There sholl be no backing out onto Oregon Road". There shall be a flezible chain ladder properly installed for the second-floor bedroom areas. 4. A Cert'~cate of Occupancy or written compliance document shall be obtained from the Building Department before occupancy of the Accessory B & B~ and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, to GRANT the Variance us applied for, as shown on the December 15, 2005 plans prepared by William Blalosky, Architect (BD-1, A-l, Any deviation from the variance given such us extensions, or demolitions which are not shown on the applicant's dingrams or survey rite maps, a~e not authorized under th~s application when involving nonconformities under the zoning code. This a~tion does not authorize or condone any current or future use, setback or other feature of the subject property that may violate the Zoning Code, other than such uses, setbacks and other features as are expressly addressed in this action. Vote of the Board: Ayes: Members Oliva (Chairwoman), G0ebringer, Simon, and Weisman. (Member Dini~o was absent0 This Resolution was duly adopted~ (~ RUTH D.-OLIVA, CHAIRWOMAN 4/17/06 51TUA"~ MA'r'FITUC~ \ ~ 51.,q::~rOLK C,C:~NT~, NY .............................. ~3.~5 -. , JOHN C. EHLERS LAND SURVEYOR :1 REASONS FOR APPEAL (additional sheets maF be used with preparer's signature): AREA VARIANCE REASONS: (1) An undesirable change will not be produced in the CHARACTER of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby properties if granted, because: (2) The benefit sought by the applicant CANNOT be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance, because: (3) The amount of relief requested is not substantial because: (4) The va£iance will NOT have an adverse effect or impact on the physical or environmental conditions in the neighborhood or district becanse: ,'~ (5) Has the alleged difficulty been self-created? ( )Yes- ~ or J~o. Are there Covenants and Restrictions concerning this land: ,f~ No. 13 Yes (please furnish copF). This is the MINIMUM that is necessary and adequate, and at the same time preserve and protect the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety, and welfare of the community. Check this box (~ IF .4 USE VARIANCE IS BEING REQUESTED, AND PLEASE COMPLETE THE ATTACHED USE VARIANCE SHEET: (Please be sure to consult your att?rff~.) Signature of Appellafi~or~uthorized Agent Sworn I~ b,qfore me this Notary Public (Agent must submit wriUen Authorization from Owner) CONNIE D. BUNCH Notary Public. Stale of New Yo~ No. 01BU6185050 Qualifi~ n Suffolk Count~ , ~,omm ssion ~*xpires April 14, Application by: Office Notes: Page 3 Assigned Application No. Part B: REASONS FOR USE VARIANCE (if requestedJ: For Each and Every Permitted Use under the Zoning Regulations for the ParticUlar District Where the Project is Located (please consult your attorney before completing): 1. Applicant cannot realize a reasonable return for each and every permitted use under the zoning regulations for the particular district where the property is located, demonstrated by competent financial evidence. The applicant CANNOT realize o REASONABLE RETURN because: (descnbe on a separate sheet). -Fh~ dee'-f- ~' ~c~c-~h~-O /[- ~.%~ ~ ~ ~ 2. The alleged hardship relating to the prope~y ~s umque because: ~f~ ~ ~. ' 3. The alleged hardship does not apply to a substantial poffion of the district or neighborhood 4. The request will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood because: ~. Ihe alleged hardshi~ has not been ~ell-created because: 6. This is the minimum relief necessa~, while at the same time prese~ing and protecting the character of the neighborhood, and the health, safety and welfare of the community. (Please explain onaseparatesheetffnecessa~.) ~,~ ~,1~] i~ E [~ ~1~ &~r"~V~ ~ 7. The spirit of the ordinance will be obse~ed, public safety and welfare will be secured, and substantial justice wdl be done because (Please explain on a separate sheet ff necessa~.) ( ) Check thls box and complete EAST A, Questions on previous page to apply AEEA VARIANCE STANDARDS. (P/ease consuff your affomey.) Olke~lse, please proceed to the signature and notaq area below. Slgnatur~e~~Agent (Agent must sub, it Authorization from Owner) Sworn lo before me this ,x~ay of .i .~..~...,.~ 200_q (Notary Public) CONNIE D. BUNCH Notary Public, State of New Yor~ No. OtBU6185050 Qualified in Suffolk County Commission Expires April t4.2[} ZBA App 9/30/02 t GREENLOGIC ENERGY 425 Country Road 39A, Suite '10~1, Southampton, NY ~1'1968 Bergey Windpower can offer the first tull 5-year warranty in the small wind turbine industry because we make the most reliable and longest lasting wind turbines available. Unfortunately, some people make the mistake of assuming that all of the major brands of small wind turbines are built equally well. But, this just is not the case. Wind turbines are machines and some machines are designed more conservatively and carefully than others. In an honest effort to find the best value in a small wind turbine, we believe some people look too hard at the price per watt, and not hard enough at the reputation of the manufacturers and their products. The result is far too many failures of small wind turbines. In small wind turbines, reliability Is what sorts out the wheat from the chaff. Here are some of the reasons that Bergey turbines cost more than some other small wind turbines: · Fail-Sate Design: Most other small wind turbines can never be allowed to operate without an electrical load on the generator during high winds, for fear of over- speeding and failing the blades. These turbines use "dump-loads" to limit their speed. But, the whole system can be put at risk if the electrical connection to these dump loads Is lost ... they are not "fail-safe." Bergey turbines can run safely without any load at all, under any wind conditions up to their maximum design wind speeds (120 mph +). · Heavy Weight Construction: Lighter is definitely not better when it comes to wind turbine reliability and longevity. Wind turbines run up to 7,500 hours per year, which is the equivalent of putting 100,000 miles a year on a car. And during dorms they have to endure tremendous forces. While it's cheaper to build a light-weight, fast-turning wind turbine, the history of the industry dating back to the 1920's clearly shows that light-weight turbines don't stand the test of time. The heavy-duty Jacobs turbines from the 1930's can still be found running today. Their light-weight competitors are long gone. · Higher Strength Blades: The blades are the most critical and heavily worked part of a wind turbine. Bergey Windpower pioneered the successful use of pultruded fiberglass blades in 1980. This award-winning technology application results in blades of exceptional strength and durability. In fact, with a tensile strength exceeding 100,000 psi, the blades on Bergey wind turbines are twice as strong as steel. Some less expensive wind turbines now use molded plastic blades with glass or carbon fiber reinforcement. But, the reinforcing fibers must be very short to allow injection molding and this limits strength to approximately 25,000 psi. Many experts doubt that the useful life of these plastic blades will exceed 5-7 years, except at poor wind sites. And using aeroelastlc blade flutter (undamped torsional vibration) for over-speed control, as done by one popular micro-turbine, certainly can't help. · More Rugged Electronics: It's less expensive to cut back on the power or heat handling capacity of the electronics that are used to charge batteries. But, during . GREENLOGIC ENERGY 425 Country Road 39A, Suite '101, Southampton, NY ~1'1968 storms wind turbines can operate at high power levels for hours on end. Some other brands are notorious for burning up electronics because they simply haven't designed in sufficient resewe capacity. We spend more money on electronics and heat sinks to make sure this doesn't happen. eFully-Engineered and Warranted Towers: Bergey Wlndpower offers a wide range of professionally-engineered (PE-stamped) towers, which we back-up with the same 5-year warranty as offered with the wind turbines. Some manufacturers only offer partial kits and some don't offer towers at all. This puts a lot of responsibility and risk back on the customer. C GREENLOGIC ENERGY 425 Country Road 39A, Suite '10'1, Southampton, NY '1'1968 (1) Provide a concise but complete description of the small wind system, including location of the project, proposed turbine specifications: Rergey ExceI-S (See Affachmenf A), tower height and type of tower 120 foot lattice tower with no guy wires, type of energy storage and location of storage if applicable no on-site storage, but the LIPA utility allows for "Net-Metering" which effectively allows the grid to serve as a storage medium, proposed inverter manufacturer and model Grid Tech 10, electric power system interconnection equipment, and application load and load interconnection equipment as applicable, identify possible vendors and models of major system components. Square D switch gear and concrete and trenching subcontractors to be determined and will be licensed and insured. Provide the expected system energy production based on availoble wind resource data on a monthly (when possible) and annual basis and how the energy produced by the system will be used. The system is expected to produce 12,500 KWH per year. This energy will be used to support wine production and storage. (2) Describe the project site and address issues such as access to the wind resource, proximity to the electrical grid or application load the distance from the turbine fo the service panel and meter is approximately 150 feet environmental concerns with emphasis on historic properties the installation is in a vineyard adjacent to other agricultural properties, site visibility, noise, bird and bat populations, and wildlife habitat destruction See Altachment J regarding wildlife Impact from wind turbines and/or fragmentation, construction, and installation issues and whether special circumstances such as proximity to airports exist there are no commercial airports in the vicinity.. See Attachment K - Noise measurements. Provide a 360-degree panoramic photograph of the proposed site, including indication of prevailing winds when possible. See Attachment K - Site Photos. (e) Project development schedule. Identify each significant task: Obtaining the permit, completing the design and engineering 3 to 4 weeks, installation 6 weeks, monitoring 2 years, and maintenance every S years (two days), ifs beginning and end, and ifs relationship to the time needed to initiate and carry the project through startup and shakedown. Provide a detailed description of the project timeline: Week t: Review design with PE, order Bergey Equipment Week 5: Receive delivery from Bergey (turbine, tower, and inverter), procure other necessary equipment Week 6: excavation of footing site, construction of cement form, and pouring of footing Week 7 and 8: Allow footing cement to cure and complete trenching and installation of wire, inverter and switch gear Week 9: Erect tower and turbine and complete electrical connection. Week 10: complete inspection and testing of equipment, schedule inspection , including system and site design, permits and agreements, equipment procurement, and system installation from excavation through startup and shakedown. (f) Project economic assessment. Provide a study that describes the costs and revenues of the proposed project to demonstrate the financial performance of the project, including the calculation of simple payback. Provide a detailed analysis and description of project costs, including design, permitting, equipment, site preparation, system installation, system startup and shakedown, warranties, insurance, financing, professional services, and operations and maintenance costs. Provide a detailed GREENLOGIC ENERGY 425 Country Road 39A, Suite ~10'1, Southampton, NY '1~1968 Attachment A: Bergey Wind Turbine: C, GREENLOGIC ENERGY 425 Country Road 39A. Suite 101, Southampton, NY 11968 Excel--S: G'id-I n:enie A~,O !i:alion$ ] 1 Exce-PD: Pumolng Aoplicatien-· i'10kW) PERFOR ~IANCE C~GREENLOGIC ENERGY 425 Country Road 39A, Suite 101. Southampton. NY '11968 I=LI~TRONICS FOR 'TILE BWG ~X~,E:L WINO TURBINE E GREENLOGIC LONG ISLAND LIGHTING COMPANY d/bis LIPA PARALLEL GENERATION AGREEMENT (PGA) FOR INTERCOHNECTION OF NEW DISTRIEIUTED GENERATION UNITS WITH CAPACITY OF 3G0 kVA OR LESS TO BE OPERATED IN PARALLEL W~TH RADIAL DISTRISUTiON L~NES Cuetomer InforntalJon: Telephone: LiPA 175 East Did Country Road Hlcksville, New York 11801 Att.: Distributed R~ource Management DE FIt, IITiONS Deeicate,d Facllrdae- means tt~e equipment and facJi~les on LIPA's system necessary to permit operation of Unitin parallel with LIPA's syslem SIR or I ntescortriectl, oll Roqulrement~ me;.na the LIPA Interoonnection Requirements ~or New Distributed Generation Un ts ~sith e C-a pacib/of 30(I kVA at Less :o be Obemted in Parallel with Radial Distribution Lines Un it- means the dislrlb~tecl genera'ach unit with a nameplate capec ity o~" 300 kVA or less located on th e Customer's pmmi~es et ~e time LIPA approves r,u=q unit for operation in pa'ariel wHh LIPA's system. This Ag r~=me~lt relates only to such Unit, but a new agreement shall nol be required if the Cb sterner makes physical sitars:ions Io the Unit thai do nol r~sull in (1'~ an incrces~ in its ngmep~ate generaling capacity or (2) noncompliartce ~th Interconne~tion Requirements, The nsmepiste genersting capacity of :he Unit shell not exceed 30n kVA, Version 3:04/07/09 Page 41 GREENLOGIC Aflachment H: LIPA Wind Map: Version 3:04/07/09 Page 42 GREENLOGIC RE: W/~d Trephine Noise Outp?t Kwl~ation Dear Mr. Bcr~cy: Per your requesL on the a/tenxxm o1' ~ Iuly 2~0'1, nc~pm~e~ ~Joh~ 5~p, your ~pr~i~tofivc B~cy installafi~ l~a~d in Ex~l [OkW Chss Wind The whxd durLr~ flw LL'ne ¢,£ measureme~nt w~ ~st~g bcBvcc~ Iq ~nd 24 mph g~er~lty irum a ~ dk~on. I~ wa~ mu~l~y ~d~ ~e m~ site to ~pk at tfi~t~ ~ 2C~ 50, '1~, '1~, and 2~ ~e~ e~pec~vely. The t~ratu~ was ~ the mid-~s wifl~ m~tly ~r ~s. ~ so,~nd ~s~uce m~r wau a c~]ibra~d .~on In:c~eg ~und Teve] Me,er, Model .~ ~r. ~ Oi}~gZ~O. ~h~Sng a ~ 19, 1/2 ~ capsule and (~L) e~h 2~m~ uv~ a pe~od ~ ~ s~co~s t~e with the avera~ exp~s~ ~ ~e ch~t be~w. We ~CaRured ~11~' i~ a. ~ti~ ~in~ the S~L upw~ad m~ ~o fie s~s was m~uu~ab]y less. ~ me~me~t wa~ made ~ a v~eyazd at ~t~.~d ~cl~ t~e ~.. ~ fl~ ~C W~d T~ine wa~ ~n m~sked' ~ the ru~ of ~aazby grape l~v~ ~nd vh~s, wl~ch ~' ~s ~c oi ~.ar bad ~l[y ~ed m Version 3:04/07/09 Page 44 GREENLOGIC The Universiu of Oklahoma 223unc2001 , . ~:am,il Mr. M'ik~ F~g*y. l)m~h.l~m aM Bo'goy WindpuwCr 2001 Priesdey Avenue h'ormarL OK 73069 I~'ar Nk I write coda}' Jr~ re~l'~ol~e tO your ~eque$i I'~r at lett~' oFa.st~'.~.'lmet*L on Ba~. ~ you ~o~ my wit~ (~. P.L. Schwz~cycO ~ 1 ~ up m~ bo~= m 1993 ~ s~fl~ lift.fly hUL~L:dS of hours c~tm'ifl~ hamJirrg, rrr~in~. Jmd [e-~ghLirrg the~e bk~ ~'c~' ~ummcr a~ ~: b~ a mffid-yc~ ~ta ~et that ha* ~'~c ~'mv mo~ib' wc ~c on No~ Ba~ has ~l~e ~m s~i~, most hoLily ~ utopian s~rl~ (.9~?~ yuf~ar/~:,, American ~5~els Plc~c 1¢L mo ka,~v.' if yotr uccd any further delads, Version 3:04/07/09 Page 46 ~~i~GREENLOGIC Attachment K - Site Photos: From North: Version 3:04/07/09 Page 48 GREENLOGIC From South: Version 3:04/07/09 Page 49 ,GREENLOGIC From East: Version 3:04/07/09 Page 50 GREENLOGIC From West: Version 3:04/07/09 Page 51 Installation Manual BWC EXCEL Wind Turbine and Self-Supporting Lattice Towers Revision 2.0 August 5, 2003 Bergey Windpower Co. 2001 Priestley Ave. Norman, OK 73069 TEL: 405-364-4212 FAX: 405-364-2078 C. The length of the wire run. The longer the wire run the larger and more expensive the wire that is required to conduct the electricity with acceptable losses. As a general rule, wire runs over 200 meters (650 ft.) if buried or 400 meters (1,300 ft.) if installed overhead should be avoided for economic reasons. Longer runs can be accommodated with a set of step-up/step-down transformers, but the costs are quite high. A chart showing recommended wire size based on turbine type and length of wire run is included on Appendix Page 10 of this manual. For a grid-connect system it is best to keep the wire run between the inverter and the utility grid as short as possible; try to cover most of the distance with the tower-to-inverter wiring section. APPLICANT'S PRO3ECT DESCRIPTION (For ZBA Reference) Applicant: 3 [~ ~)1:0. ~4}. f~_'pf] ~. L (~ Date Prepared: I. For Demolition of Existing Building Areas Please describe areas being removed: II. New Construction Areas (New Dwelling or New Additions/Extensions): Dimensions of first floor extension: Dimensions of new second floor: Dimensions of floor above second level: Height (from finished ground to top of ridge): Is basement or lowest floor area being constructed? If yes, please provide height (above ground) measured from natural existing grade to first floor: III. Proposed Construction Description (Alterations or Structural Changes) (attach extra sheet if necessary) - Please describe building areas: ' Number of Floors and General Characteristics BEFORE Alterations: Number of Floors and Changes WITH Alterations: IV. Calculations of building areas and lot coverage (from surveyor): Existing square footage of buildings on your property: Proposed increase of building coverage: ~¢ Square footage ofyour lot: ' ~ '~O~ Percentage of coverage of your lot by building ~ea: VI. Please describe the land contours (flat, slope %, heavily wooded, marsh area, etc.) on your land and how it relates to the difficulty in meeting the code requirement(s): Ple~e submit seven (7) p~otos, labeled to show differefit an~le~o~ yard areas after s(a~ng fior~e~s for new construction), and photos of building area to be altered with yard view. 7/2002; 2/2005; 1/2007 5~e QUESTIONNAIRE FOR FII JNG WI'Ill YOUR Z.B.A. APPLICATION Is the subject premises listed on the real estate market for sale? [3Yes f~o i Are there any proposals to change or alter land contours? ~o 121 Yes, please explain on attached sheet. 1) Are there areas that contain sand or wetland grasses? D o 2) Are these areas shown on the map submitted with this application? 3) Is ~he property bulkheaded between the wetlands area and the upland building area? 4) If your property contains wetlands or pond areas, have you contacted the office of the Town Trustees for its determination of jurisdiction? Please confn-m status of your inquitT or application with the Trustees: and if issued, please attach copies of permit with conditions and approved map. Is there a depression or sloping elevation near the area of proposed construction at or below five feet above mean sea level? iq O Are there any patios, concrete barriers, bulkheads or fences that exist and are not shown on the survey map that you are sub~nitting? r~ 0 (Please show area of these structures on a diagram if any exist. Or state "none" on the above line, if applicable.) Do you have any construction taking place at this ti~ne concerning your premises? If yes, please submit a copy of your building permit and map as approved by the Building Department and describe: Authorized ?ignOre and Date Do you or any co-owner also own other land close to this parcel? the Proximity of your lands on your map with this application. Please list present use or operations conducted at this parcel 4~ft~ - b/:rl~te and proposed use e~ting: single-family; prop~os/ed: same with garage or pool, or other description.) 2/05; 1/07 ~ O If yes, please label AP ~RANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE FOG PLICAI~E TO OWNER, CONTRACT VENDEE AND AGENT: The Town of Southold's Code of Ethics prohibits conflicts of interest on thc part of Town officers and employees. The purpose of this form is to provide information, which can alert the Town of possible conflicts of interest and allow it to take whatever action is necessary to avoid same. (Last name, first name, middle initial, unless you are applying in the name of someone else or other entity, such as a company. If so, indicate the other person or company name.) NATURE OF APPLICATION: (Check all that apply.) Variance ~.. Special Exception *Other ~-pproval or Exemption from plat or official map Change of Zone -- Tax Grievance *If"Other" name the activity: Do you personally (or through your company, spouse, sibling, parent, or child) have a relationship with any officer or employee,,o,f the ToWn of S?,,uthold? "Relationship" inc udes~ blood marriage, or business interest. Business interest means a business including~ .t~rtnership, in which the Tova~ officer or__emplo~ has ev~ee'o a ap~l ownersh~ip of (o~ em~_ployrnent by)~a corporation in which the ToWn officer or emlLloyee oWns Lnore th~an 5 °/~e~ xms___ _ NO If you answered "YES'; complete the balance of this form and date attd sign where indicatetL Name of person employed by the Tovm of Southold: Title or position of that person: Describe that relationship between yourself (the applicant, agent or contract vendee) and the Town officer or employee. Either check the appropriate line A through D (below) and/or describe the relationship in the space provided. The ToWn officer or employee or his or her~ spouse, sibling, parent, or child is cheek all that apply): A) the Owner of greater th o an 5 ¼ of the shares of the corporate stock of the applicant (when the applicant is a corporati6n); __ _ B) the legal or beneficial Owner of any interest in a non-corporate entity (when the applicant is not a emporation); ' C) n officer, director, partner, or employee of the applicant; or D) the actual applicant. DESCRIPTION OF RELATIONSHIP Submitted this ~D Signature:_ Print Name: /Pod - OWNER ::~,.-~ TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROiiERTY ISTREET,," ' i VILLAGE , FORMER OWNER ,, N ~ ' ' ,; E ~',,-.:t~ ,',.,~.,,,, ~ O~e~. F~o~:, /I~ ~'~ RECORD CARD Js DIST.i SUB. LOT TYPE OF BUILDING W j RES. SEAS. VL. /~IIo0~GE _ NE'Wl 700 FARM Tillable Woodland Meadowland TOTAL FARM To:to-"[ '"'- ~ House Plot '~ J COMM. CB. MICS. Mkt. Value DATE ] REMARKS I I ' ' [I I - . - , ,~h~lo~ &f~3;~: ~. ~ BUILDING CONDITIO~I , , ~O0e~': ,,,,.,,_,,., /.~Q~AL.¢~ BELOW , ABOVE Acre ' ~olue Per j Ac re £Oq 100-4-3.1 9/01 ~ .i '"'t- '" ~' '~'~ "'" ~' I Extension /6"~'x~ = ~' ~ [ ! J r [ I [ I . , ~i~_.-~.._. - '"'"" ' ~/-:~>'d:' i Or~5~' ~.~ , I I Foundation I ~ ~ c ~ Bath i Dinette ~ 3 x S' = ' D' ~ [ Floors I K. Garage O~f .-~/a ~ ,- . '/' i~'~_W '..~. ;'~'~ Rooms 1st Floor BR. .- ~,,r~,i%.30 x, ~,: ,-~ ~,' ~'0 --"-"-"-"-"-"~ /v~O '1 Rooms2nd Floor FIN. B Extens~ °m~ E xten,%L~Ln Pbrch~K,~ Dect~-~ AC. Garage o ~o(~ Pool 100.--~.3.1 10/07 Ilk/l~= I~l _ .5o .SP O-'F OOLOR Ext Dormer Dock TRIM 1st 2nd ,dation ~c. Fin. B. Bath 5 77- T~('~[ Dinette F COMBO men, ~'--.~m~ Floors Kit. ~aHs ~d~ Interior Finish LR Place / Heat D.R Woodstove BR ~er Baths Fam. Rm. AGRICULTURAL DATA STATEMENT ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD WIIEN TO USE THIS FORM: The form must be completed by the applicant for any special use permi6 site plan approval, Use variance, or subdivision approval on property within an agricultural district OR within 500 feet of a farm operation located in agricultural districL All applications requiring an agricultural data statement must be referred to the Suffolk County Department of Planning in accordance with sections 239- m and 239-n of the General Municipal Law. 1) Name of Applicant: 6) Loeation ofProperty (road and tax map number): ~/'e?a? ge~-/ ~ /o~ .- ~- ]~/t 7) Is the parcel within an agricultural district? [-INo~Yes If yes, Agricultural District NUmber 8) Is this parcel actively farmed? [-']No ~Yes 9) Name and address of any owner(s) of land within the agricultural district containing active farm operation(s) located 500 feet of the boundary of the proposed project. (Information may be available through the Town Assessors Office: Town Hall location (765-1937) or from any public computer at the Town Hall locations by viewing the parcel numbers on the Town of Southold Real Property Tax System. Name and Addre~ /00 .t./--J.,~ 3/77~AJ VINW-"~//q'n~{ /J.-C. ~,,ght:Ta'o {~m (Pleaae me back side of page if more than six property owners are identified.) The 10t numbers may be obtained, in advance, when requested from the Office of the Planning Board at 765- 1938 or the Zo ' g Bqard of Appeals at 765-1809. S1 a~[~lie~t 1. ' t~ fica/the owners of land identified above in order to consider the effset of the proposed action On their farm operation. Solicitation will be made by supplying a copy of this statement. 2. Comments returned to the local board will be taken into consideration as part of the overall review of this application. 3. The clerk to the local beard is reaponsible fur sending copies of the completed Agricultural Data Statement to the propmy owners identified above. The cost for mailing shall be paid by the applicant at the time the application is submitted for review. Failure to pay at such time means the application is not complete and cannot be acted upon by the beard. 1-144)9 BWC EXCEL Installation Manual. SSV Tower 15 Figure 3. Tower Elevation and Schedule 15 Chapter 277 WIND ENERGY ARTICLE I Small Wind Energy Systems § 27%1. Definitions. § 277-2. Application. § 277-3. Development standards. § 277-4. Construction standards. § 277-5. Fees. § 277-6. Abandonment of use. § 277-7. Enforcement; penalties for offenses; remedies for violations. [HISTORY: Adopted by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as indicated in article histories. Amendments noted where applicable.] Zoning- See Ch. 280. GENERAL REFERENCES ARTICLE I Small Wind Energy Systems [Adopted 7-17-2007 by L.L. No. 15-2007] § 277-1. Definitions. As used in this article, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated: SMALL WIND ENERGY SYSTEM-- A wind energy conversion system consisting of a wind turbine (not to exceed 25 kilowatts of production), a tower, and associated control or conversion electronics, which has a rated capacity intended primarily to reduce on-site consumption of utility power. TOWER HEIGHT-- The height above grade of the fixed portion of a tower that is part of a small wind energy system, exclusive of the wind turbine. § 277-2. Application. Applications for small wind energy systems shall be submitted to the Town of Southold Building Department and shall include: Name, address, and telephone number of the applicant. If the applicant will be represented by an agent, the name, address and telephone number of the agent as well as an original signature of the applicant authorizing the agent to represent the applicant. Name, address, and telephone number of the property owner. If the property owner is not the applicant, the application shall include a letter or other written permission signed by the property owner confirming that the property owner is familiar with the proposed applications and authorizing the submission of the application. 277: I 10 - I5 - 2007 § 277-2 SOUTHOLD CODE § 277-3 Address of each proposed tower site, including Tax Map section, block and lot number. Evidence that the proposed tower height does not exceed the height recommended by the manufacturer or distributor of the system. A plot plan at a scale of one inch equals 100 feet depicting the limits of the fall zone, distance from structures, property lines, public roads and projected noise levels (decibels [dba]) from the small wind energy system to the nearest occupied dwellings. A line drawing of the electrical components of the system in sufficient detail to allow for a determination that the manner of installation conforms to the Electric Code. Written evidence that the electric utility service provider that serves the proposed site has been informed of the applicant's intent to install an interconnected customer-owned electricity generator, unless the applicant does not plan, and so states in the application, to connect the system to the electricity grid. § 277-3. Development standards. A. Tower height. Tower height shall not exceed 120 feet. To prevent harmful wind turbulence to the small wind energy system, the minimum height of the lowest part of any horizontal-axis wind turbine blade shall be at least 30 feet above the highest structure or tree within a two-hundred-fifty-foot radius. Modification of this standard may be made when the applicant demonstrates that a lower height will not jeopardize the safety of the wind turbine structure. B. Setbacks. Notwithstanding the provisions of the Bulk Schedule? the following standards shall apply to small wind energy systems: (l) A small wind energy system shall be set back from a property line a distance no less than the total height of the small wind energy system plus 10 feet, except that it shall be set back at least 300 feet from a property line bordering an existing residential structure. In no instance shall the small wind energy system be closer than 100 feet to a property line. (2) No part of the wind system structure, including guy wire anchors, may extend closer than 10 feet to the property boundaries of the installation site. (3) A small wind energy system shall be set back from the nearest public road or right-of-way a distance no less than the total height of the small wind energy system plus 10 feet, and in no instance less than 100 feet. Noise. Small wind energy systems shall not exceed 60 dba, as measured at the closest neighboring inhabited dwelling at the time of installation. The level, however, may be exceeded during short-term events such as utility outages and/or severe wind storms. 1. Editor's Note: The Bulk Sckedules are included at the end of Ch. 280, Zoning. 277:2 lo - 15 - 2007 (b) (c) ZONING § 280-13 The winery shall be on a parcel on which at least 10 acres are devoted to vineyard or other agricultural purposes, and which is owned by the winery owner; The winery structures shall be set back a minimum of 100 feet from a major road; and · (d) The winery shall obtain site plan approval. (5) Small wind energy systems on parcels greater than seven acres in size, which .___~parcels are dedicated primarily to uses necessary for bona fide agricultural production, and subject to the standards provided in Chapter 277 of this Town Code. [Added 7-17-2007 by L.L. No, 15-2007] B. Uses permitted by special exception by the Board of Appeals. The following uses are permitted as special exception by the Board of Appeals, as hereinafter provided, and, except for two-family dwellings and the uses set forth in Subsection B(14) hereof, are subject to site plan approval by the Planning Board: [Amended 12-21-1993 by L.L. No. 27-19931 (I) Two-family dwellings not to exceed one such dwelling on each lot. (2) Places of worship, including parish houses (but excluding a rectory or parsonage, which shall conform to the requirements for a one-family dwelling), subject to the following requirements: (a) No building or part thereof shall be erected nearer than 50 feet to any street line and nearer than 20 feet to any lot line. (b) The total area covered by alt principal and accesso~3, buildings shall not exceed 20% of the area of the lot. (3) Priyate elementary or high schools, colleges and other educational institutions, subject to the following requirements: (a) No building shall be less than 50 feet from any street or lot line. (b) The total area occupied by all principal aod accessory buildings shall not exceed 20% of the area of the lot. (c) Any school shall be a nonprofit organization within the meaning of the Internal Revenue Act and shall be registered effectively thereunder as such. (d) Any such school shall occupy a lot with an area of not less than five acres plus one acre for each 25 pupils for which the building is designed. (4) Nursery schools. (5) Philanthropic, eleemosynary or religious restitutions, health care, continuing care and life facilities, but excluding facilities for the treatment of all types of drug addiction, subject to the following requirelnents: [Amended 12-27-1994 by L.L No. 30-1994; 11-12-1996 by L.L. No. 20-1996] 280:31 to- ~s- 2o0? BWC EXCEL Installation Manual. SSV Tower Figure 3. Tower Elevation and Schedule ]5 5.0A Lille COUNTY OF SUFFOLK (~) I [I /___~I.~L wlw~ SOUTHOLD MARTIN D. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY martin.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennifer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTOR~NEY , TOWN OF SOUTHOLD VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. Counsel's Office NYS Dept. of Agriculture and Markets 10B Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235-0001 RE: Review of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code as it Pertains Shinn Vineyard, LLC Dear Ms. Cordier: This letter serves as a response to your letter of June 1, 2009. While the Town of Southold ("Town") understands the goals and purpose of the Department of Agriculture and Markets ("the Department"), for the reasons explained in more detail below, we respectfully disagree with your conclusion that certain sections of our code are unreasonably restrictive as applied to the Shinn Vineyard, LLC ("Shinn") site plan application. We note at the outset, however, that the Town appreciates the open dialogue and cooperation of the Department that has led to the resolution of certain issues that were initially raised by the Department including the Town's request that Shinn depict an electric firewell on its property. A. History of the Development on site. Shinn purchased the site in January 1999 as part of a larger parcel that included the surrounding vineyard land. The development rights to all but the 1.2 acre subject site were subsequently sold by Shinn to the Town in March 2000. At the time of Shinn's purchase of the property in 1999, the reserved parcel contained a two story farm house with garage, two barns and two small frame buildings.~ A copy of a survey of the property designating the uses and buildings on the site as of March 20002 is attached as item "B". In 1999, 2000, 2002, 2003, 2004 and again in 2006, Shinn obtained separate ~ A copy of the pre-existing Cedificate of Occupancy for the pmper/y prior to the date of Shinn's purchase is attached as item "A". ~ A comparison of the Mamh 2000 survey and the site plan submitted for approval of existing buildings on the site illustrates the change in intensity of uses and limitations of the size of the parcel. See, item "C", a copy of the site plan submitted to the Town by Shinn in August 2006. Danielle C. Cordier, Page 2 July 31, 2009 building permits for "alterations," "additions" and "repairs" to "agriculture storage buildings" on the site. Each permit application did not reflect the intended use of any agricultural storage building as wine making/tasting facility or a catering hall for special events. Despite the ambiguity in those applications, Shinn was permitted to expand the frame barn buildings in the rear of the property and improve the "agricultural storage building" with a shower, a deck and concrete patios, all with building permits granted by the Building Department based upon apparent misrepresentations of the intended use of the property. In addition, in 2007 the existing farm house was doubled in size and converted to a bed and breakfast operation, with the approval of the Town Zoning Board of Appeals. A review of the history of the aforementioned approvals given to Shinn confirms that the Town has repeatedly accommodated Shinn's proposed development with the express understanding that it was in furtherance of an agricultural use. Eventually, Shinn began using one of the agricultural buildings as a wine making and wine tasting facility and began advertising and using the site for special events such as wedding receptions accommodating large numbers (100 +) of guests on the site. Shinn has also advertised the ability to host wedding rehearsal dinners and breakfasts for wedding parties of up to 70 people, all to be catered on-site. (See attached item "D"). (Although the Department has raised no issue with respect to the Town's authority to regulate parking on the site, it is noteworthy that these events result in on street parking of countless cars by attendees which further intensifies the use of this site. Photos illustrating the parking situation on site during the many events held at the Shinn site are attached as item "E".) As is made obvious by the above recited history of the site, Shinn has avoided a comprehensive review of the uses on site by applying for permits on a piecemeal basis and failing to disclose to the Town the intent to utilize the site for retail and commercial uses which cannot reasonably be viewed as bona fide agriculture. The conclusions made by the Department ignore the existence and impact of the multiple uses on the site. As stated in our prior letters of October 19, 20073and September 15, 20084, the Town does not take issue with the individual uses on the site in and of themselves. As stated previously, however, it is the character and aggregate intensity of the various 3 The October 19, 2007 letter states on page 2: "specifically, the Shinn winery application involves a bed and breakfast use and farm winery operation with a tasting room open to the public at large on a 53,000 square foot parcel." The letter further states on page 3 "[a]s noted above, an additional consideration to this ~application is the intensity of use on the available 53,000 square foot site." (emphasis added) The September 15, 2008 letter states as follows: "In this particular case, the applicant is proposing a very intense use, on this 53,000 square foot parcel..." Danielle C. Cordier, Es'~ Page 3 July 31, 2009 uses on this modestly sized site (53,000 square footJ1.29 acres) that necessitates review and regulation.5 To reiterate, the proposed uses on this site included a 4-room bed and breakfast adjacent to a single-family residence totaling 4,368 sq feet, a 2,730 sq foot wine storage facility, and a 1,646 sq foot wine making/tasting facility that is routinely used for large wedding receptions and private events. The Town is frustrated by the Department's failure to take a holistic view of the actual operation and the potential impacts it may have on the health, safety and welfare of our residents and visitors. Historically, the Town has insisted that winery/tasting facilities submit to and comply with the Town's site plan requirements. The Town maintains that, while some of the uses on the site may individually qualify as bona fide agricultural uses, the Department should not countenance Shinn's blatant attempt to utilize §305-a(1) of the Agriculture and Markets Law as a shield to circumvent the site plan requirements in our Town code. The uses on site cannot be evaluated in a vacuum and threats to public health and safety ignored in the name of "agricultural production" when the production and tasting of wine is but one of several actual uses Shinn makes of the site. The Town would urge the Department to recognize that when an owner of an agricultural storage building converts it to a public entertainment facility, all of the existing uses on site must be considered collectively through the site plan approval process so that the Town can insure that requisite improvements are made that protect the public health and safety. Each of the Department's contentions, as set forth in your letter of June 1, that certain of the Town's procedures and requirements, as applied to the Shinn Vineyard operation, are unreasonably restrictive of agriculture, are addressed, seriatim, below. 1. Streamlined Site Plan Review. Without consideration for the stated purpose and legislative intent of the Town's site plan legislation, the Department has taken the position that Shinn should only be subject to the streamlined site plan process described in the Department's Guideline for Review of Local Zoning and Planning Laws because Shinn is not constructing "new structures" on site, but is simply legalizing the wine tasting facility, that holds and caters weddings. As previously explained, Shinn was permitted to alter and repair the three main agricultural buildings on the site (that are now used as a wine storage barn and a wine making/wine tasting building) without site plan approval because it represented to the Town that it was making alterations and repairs to existing agricultural storage buildings. Shinn did not disclose to the Town that it would be changing the use of one of its buildings from an agricultural storage building to a wine tasting room. As previously set forth in our October 19, 2007 letter, the Town does provide accommodations for 5 It is also noted that the Shinn operation does not comply with the bulk schedule minimum lot size regulation that requires 80,000 sf. ft. of lot area per use on land within the Agricultural Conservation (AC) district. As there are at least two distinct uses on the site (single-family residence/bed and breakfast and wine tasting facility/catering hall), the site is required to have 160,000 sq. ft. Danielle C. Cordier, Page 4 July 31, 2009 agricultural site plan reviews, however the Town has determined that such accommodations should not be applied to retail winery operations where the public at large is routinely invited onto the property for special events such as wedding receptions.6 Moreover, the Town does not believe that a streamlined site plan review is mandated in this instance by the Department's Guidelines for Review of Local Laws Affecting Direct Farm Marketing Activities. Those guidelines indicate that the special events held at wineries may be part of a farm operation under certain conditions, to wit, that the sales of the farm's wine at such events, on an annual basis, exceed the fees charged for the facility rental. This guideline presumably acknowledges that winedes will host events to showcase their wines with the primary intent of selling the farm's wine. With respect to Shinn, it is arguable that if the Department includes in its calculation of fees charged for facility rental the income generated from providing rooms for guests of such events at the onsite bed and breakfast as well as the income from catedng the event, rehearsal dinners and breakfasts for the guests, that sum would far exceed the revenue Shinn generates from the sale of its wines. The Department's suggestion that a streamlined site plan is appropriate is devoid of any reference to this analysis and the Town is not aware that Shinn has provided any revenue data upon which the Department could base a determination that, under the foregoing guidelines, Shinn is a bona fide farm operation. Additionally, the necessity of adhering to the Town's site plan review process is underscored by the existence of the single-family residence and bed and breakfast on site. As mentioned previously, while, each use, by itself, may not implicate site plan approval, it would be inappropriate for the Town to evaluate the site, as Shinn has suggested, in a segmented, piecemeal fashion. Shinn has chosen to convert a traditional winery operation to a special event destination and, as such, the Town retains its position that Shinn be required to complete the site plan review as provided in Town Code Article XXIV. The Town Code provisions requiring screening, the submission of drainage calculations and that internal roads meet Town highway standards are not unreasonably restrictive. The Department has suggested that Town Code provisions that require screening, the submission of drainage calculations and that internal roads meet Town highway standards, when applied to the Shinn Vineyard site, are unreasonably restrictive in violation of the Agriculture and Markets Law. The Town respectfully submits that this position is incorrect and premature. 6 Our October 19, 2007 letter sets forth the Town's reasoning for not making accommodations to retail winery operations: "The review of retail winery facilities in the Town of Southold should be taken in its proper context. It is estimated that over one million visitors enjoyed the East End wineries in 2006. As public transportation is not typical, these visitom come to Southold by car, pdvate coach bus and limousine. It has been the long-standing practice of the Town to require site plan review on wineries to ensure adequate parking, drainage, traffic flow, lighting, public utilities and handicapped access." Danielle C. Cordier', Es~ Page .5 July 31, 2009 Shinn submitted its site plan application on August 11, 2006 to legalize the winery/tasting room after it was notified that the change of use of an agricultural storage building to a wine tasting room without site plan approval was a violation of the Town Code. After an initial review, the Planning Board office, by letter dated October 27, 2006, requested that Shinn supply additional information and changes to its site plan including drainage calculations, modification of internal roads to meet Town highway standards and the provision of screening along a property line. A copy of this letter is attached as item "F". Shinn failed to supply any of the requested additional information or respond to the Planning Board's request. Instead, Shinn sought the Department's opinion regarding whether the Town's site plan requirements were unreasonably restrictive. The Department began its review and the Planning Board took no further action on the application and as such, had no opportunity to evaluate the issues of drainage, screening and road width. a. Drainage The Department has taken the position that the Town's request that Shinn "indicate the location of all drainage including calculations on the revised site plan" is unreasonably restrictive to the agricultural use of the property. Curiously, the Department acknowledges that drainage calculations can be obtained and submitted by Shinn for free but nevertheless state that the requirement that drainage calculations be submitted is unreasonably restrictive. That conclusion is seemingly based on the Department's analysis of information provided by Shinn that was never supplied to the Town. The Department also erroneously suggests that the Town request was unreasonable because the Town did not demonstrate that there is a stormwater runoff issue on site. Setting aside the obvious fact that it is not the Town's burden to establish the existence of any condition on a site, it is entirely inappropriate and premature for the Department to opine that the requirement is unreasonable as applied to the site, when the Planning Board has not had the opportunity to review the information provided to the Department. It is quite possible that the Planning Board, if given the opportunity, would come to the same conclusion as the Department. Arguably, the fact that the Department has been given information by Shinn regarding drainage on the site and the fact that Shinn has installed drainage improvements on site is an acknowledgment that such a request is not only reasonable, but necessary for the Planning Board to make its determination. Here, the Planning Board should have had the ability to assess the drainage provided on the site, prior to the Department's intervention. Upon the Planning Board's assessment of the drainage issues, if any, the Department's intervention would be warranted if, and only if, the Board's application of the code was unreasonably restrictive (i.e. the Planning Board requiring that Shinn install additional drainage measures at groat cost to the Shinn). In summary, as the Town's Planning Board did not have the opportunity to apply the Town Code with respect to the drainage on-site, it is without question that the Code, on its face, is not unreasonably restrictive. Danielle C. Cordier, Page 6 July 31, 2009 b. Screening In the Department's letter of June 1, 2009, the Department acknowledged that screening is a reasonable requirement of the Code where it is warranted by special local conditions or to address a threat to the public health or safety. The Department also noted that the adjacent land use to the Shinn property is a potato farm with a large barn, and farm worker housing. The screening requirements, as applied in this instance, were requested to protect the customers of the Shinn operation and to enhance the aesthetics of the site for the advantage of the public at large that visits the site on a regular basis, most notably patrons of the wine tasting room, guests of special events and the bed and breakfast. Such screening will prevent future complaints from the Shinn property against the adjacent potato farm. Upon information and belief, Shinn has already provided screening on a substantial portion of the site that is adjacent to the potato farm, thus implicitly acknowledging that the screening requirements of the code are warranted and are not unreasonably restrictive. Again, Shinn has provided no information to the Town indicating that the landscaping buffer requirement is unreasonable or made any suggestions as to how to meet this objective in a different manner. In turn, the Town has not had the opportunity to evaluate the issue in its entirety, nor has it had the opportunity to consider a waiver of this requirement or to apply our Code. The Department, without conducting a proper review, including (1) an analysis of the cost of such landscaping; (2) whether the requirement will cause a lengthy delay in the construction of a farm building and or implementation of a practice; (3) whether the requirement adversely affects Shinn's ability to manage the farm operation effectively and efficiently; (4) whether the requirement restricts production options that affect the viability of the farm; and (5) the availability of less onerous means to achieve the Town's objective has simply, and without any justification, concluded that such a requirement is unreasonably restrictive of the Shinn operation. Based on the information provided, the Town must respectfully reject this conclusion. Until such time that the Town has the opportunity to review the adequacy of the existing screening on site, and/or consideration of a proper request by Shinn to waive said requirements, the Town will retain the position that the Code is not unreasonably restrictive and that the conclusions of the Department are unsubstantiated and premature. c. Interior Roads As with the drainage and screening issues, the Department has concluded that the Town's request that all interior reads be a width of 15 feet is unreasonably restrictive in complete reliance on statements made by Shinn indicating the following: That the current road is sufficient for the Shinn operation That the internal roads have handled traffic safely for several years Danielle C. Cordier, Page '7 July 31, 2009 That Shinn cannot widen the road because it has sold the development rights of the adjacent propertX (where the vines are located) and cannot p ace the road thereon.' If the Shinn operation solely consisted of agricultural storage buildings and the 4 room bed and breakfast, the Town would have much greater flexibility with this requirement. However, the Town has provided the Department with a letter from the Mattituck Fire District requesting that the roads be widened for proper emergency access and has provided the Department with additional information on the Shinn operation that illustrates the necessity of having proper emergency access on the site. For example, the Town has sent the Department tent permits granted to Shinn for special events with over 100 attendees on the rear of the site (behind and/or within the wine tasting facility). Furthermore, the wine tasting facility located at the rear of the site itself invites the public at large onto the property on a regular basis. Therefore the site must have proper access for emergency vehicles in the event of a fire or a medical emergency. In light of the information provided to the Department regarding the nature of the Shinn operation, it is completely inappropriate for the Department to rely solely on statements made by Shinn and to ignore the public health and safety dsks should the Town fail to require the internal roads to be 15 feet wide. While the Town is willing to work with Shinn to ensure that there is proper emergency access to the site, the Town does not concede that the requirement is unreasonably restrictive and in violation of the Agriculture and Markets Law. Given the long agricultural history and importance of agriculture in the Town, the Town will always strive to accommodate agricultural operations if health and safety concerns can be satisfied. In this instance, the Shinn operation goes far beyond a traditional agricultural operation. Nevertheless, should Shinn provide proper emergency access to the entire site and proper circulation for emergency vehicles to the satisfaction of the Town, most notably the areas where members of the public at large visit regularly, the Town may consider relaxing this requirement. Since Shinn has not provided such information, but has instead taken the position that the restriction is unreasonable, the Town has not been given the opportunity to consider possible alternatives that may work on the site. Based on the foregoing, the Town respectfully disagrees with the conclusions set forth in the Department's letter of June 1, 2009. The Town maintains that, based on the intensity and variety of uses in existence on the subject property, and the Town's standing policy to require site plan review of such uses to insure the health and safety of our residents and visitors, the procedures and requirements set forth in our Town Code are in no way unreasonably restrictive as applied to the Shinn operation. 7 It is noted that pdor to selling the development dghts to the Town, the Town suggested, given the number of buildings on the site in 2000, that Shinn reserve more than 1.2 acres for its future development. See item "G' attached hereto. However, Shinn consciously chose to sell the development rights on all but 1.2 acres and accepted valuable consideration for that sale. As such, Shinn should not be heard to use the substandard size of the reserved parcel as a justification for failing to comply with the Town Code. Danielle C. Cordier Page 8 July 31, 2009 We remain available to discuss this matter with the Department in more detail. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Assistant Town Attorney, Jennifer Andaloro, with any questions. MDF/Ik Enclosures cc: Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor (w/encls.) Members of the Town Board (w/encls.) Members of the Planning Board (w/encls.)~~' Ms. Elizabeth Neville, Town Clerk (w/encls.) Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director (w/encls.) FORM NO. 4 TOW~ OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTHENT office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. PRE EXISTING CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY Not Z- 26149 THIS CERTIFIES that the bulldog DWELLING Location of Property 2000 OREGON RD HATTITUCK (HCUSE ~0.) (S~REE~) COunty Tax Map No. 473889 Seotion 100 Block 0004 Lot 003 Subdivision Filed Hap No. __Lot No. __ conforms nubstantially to the Requirements for a ONE FAMILY DWELLING built prior to APRIL 9¢ 1957 pursuant to, which CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NUMBER Z- 26149 dated NOVEMBER 8, 1998 was lseued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is The certificate is issued to ALLYN R TUTHILL a ORS. (OW~a) of the aforesaid building. SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH APPROVAL ELECTRICAL CERTIFICATE NO. PLUMBERS CERTIFicATION DATED *PLEASE SEE ATTACHED INSPECTION REPORT. Rev. PATIO TYPE: one shed VOL 9B 1242 .$ ~URVE_¥ OF ~=~OLt~ COUNt~ TAX # OOO- IOO- 4- ~ D^VIO PAC~-E ~OH~ON~ALTH 1AN~ tI~ IN~U~ANGE Road $ d¢o1~' EAST MAIN STREET SGALE I"= I00' REFERENCE ~ 98-270 51,,IRVt~'r' OF PROPER-Pr' J ITEM "D" Eyents at Shinn Page 1 of 1 Events at Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse We host weddings, receptions, wine dinners, tasting, conferences and other event that suits your needs. All events can be tailored to reflect your personal taste. Events or wedding for groups of over 50 people are held outside under a tent provided by the client. Smaller events or weddings can be held in several private areas on our estate including our tasting room, barrel cellar and winery. The cost of events on the estate ranges from a price per person cost ranging between 20 dollars for wine tasting and tour and up to $7,000 which includes 4 double occupancy rooms for 2 nights at Shinn Estate Farmhouse and the exclusive use of the entire property. A Rehearsal Dinner and/or Sunday Brunch can be offered to wedding parties and the rates can be tailored to your budget. We can accommodate up to 40 people for a rehegl:tal__0ir~ and un tn 70 people far a hmneh. These meal~would be prepared by our Farmhouse kitchen under the direotion of Chef David Page. Shinn Estate Farmhouse does not cater weddings at this time. Tents, tables, food, walt staff, and all other accessories are provided by the client. We have an outdoor space where a tent can be placed. It is adjacent to the vineyard, and faces the winery. Most couples opt to hold the wedding ceremony in the vineyard, and you are welcome to do so at no additional cost. On Saturdays and Sundays, events can begin after our tasting room closes at 5:00 pm. If you would like more information, you can contact us at 631-804-0367. We can assure you that you and your guests will be well taken care of by Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse. Barbara Shinn and David Page Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse http://www.shinnvineyard.recipes fromhome.eom/EventDetails.htm 7/29/2009 Shinn Vineyard. Saturday, June 27, 2009. View East on Oregon Road. Event tent is visible to the right, 40 cars parked along the street. Driveway entrance to Shinn Vineyards - parking for the event being held in the tent is directed to the street in the yellow sign above. Shinn I~ineyard l~hotos (continued) View on Oregon Road, facing east towards Slfinn Vineyard. Cars parked along Oregon Road, attending event at Shinn Vineyard. The vineyard's residence, B&B, Wine s~orage building, and tasting room can all be seen in the photo above. (40 Cars counted when photo taken on 6_27_09). 2 PI~kNNING BOARD MEMBERS JERII~YN B. WOODHOUSE Cha/r KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND October 27, 2006 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN 0F SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southoid, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main P~d. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: (~31 765-3;186 Deborah Dow, Esq. 670 West Creek Avenue P.O. Box 1181 Cutchogue, NY 11935 Proposed NewSite Plan for Shinn Winery Located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck SCI'M//: 1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: Agricultural Conservation .(AC) Dear Ms. DoW. In order to continue review of .your ske plan, the site plan/application will need to include/correct the following: · Please define the specific use/purpose of buildings E, H & I. Please be specific when defining tl~e use as wine/agricultural including a square footage breakdown: · Additional site plan fees in the amount of $189.75 are required. · Indicate the location of all drainage, including drainage calculations on the revised site plan. · The proposed parking in B~ding H does not provide proper access for 2 cars as shown. Please revise the site plan and, if necessary, the parking calculations accordingly. / · Attached is a response from Matfituck Fire District requesting an electric fire welL;be installed. Please review and address their requirements. Please indicate the location of the proposed electric fire well on the revised site plan. · Town Code $280-78 D, Access, states, "access shall consist of at least one fifteen-foot lane for parking areas". Please ensure the revised site plan conforms to this requirement. · All handicap packing stalls and access aisles must complywith New York State Code and ADA requirements. Please be awa/c the existing grate in the proposed access aisle will provide difficult access; please revise the site plan as necessary. In addition, please show that handicap access has been provided from the parking area to the building. · As per the Planning Board, please provide a minimum four (4) foot landscape buffer extending approximately 130' south along the eastern properffllne 15egmning at the northern side of Building FL · Please provide for commercial truck access, regress/egress, turn around, etc. · Please show dimensions for all aisles, curb cuts, cleared distances, etc. · Existing and/or proposed hndscaping should be included on the revised site plan. · The proposed access aisle east of the existing concrete patio must be a minimum of 15 feet. In addition, a minimum 15' aisle must be provided west of the two (2) proposed9' X 23' parallel parking spaces. Please revise the site plan as necessary. Shinn Winery Page Two October 27, 2006 This is to notify you that the Planning Department will need to obtain the following approvals and/or comments before the Planning Board can approve this site plan: LWRP, Town Engineer, Southold Town Land Preservation and Southold Town Building Department. You are required to verify agency requirements, submit required agency documents and obtain approvals from Suffolk County Department of Health Services and Suffolk County Water Authority As a courtesy, you maysubmit one Il) sketch revised site plan incorporating all of the above referenced changes to this Department for an initial review prior to submitting all of the necessary copies. Once the Planning Board has reviewed and accepted the necessary changes, please submit the required copies of the revised site plan to this office so that it maybe distributed to all necessary agencies. Please do not hesitate to contact this office should you have any questions or.need further assistance. Sincerely, Senior Planner File Planning Board Building Department Town Attorney Land Preservation Town Engineer Enc: Letter from Mattituck Fire District ITEM "G" Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P,O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (516~765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-1800 LAND PRESERVATION COMMITTEE TOWN OF sOUTHOLD December 8, 1999 Barbara Shlnn/David Page 1965 Soundview Avenue Southold; NY 11971 Re: Town of Southold Agricultural Lands Preservation SCTM #1000-100-04-003 Dear Ms. Shinn/Mr. Page: A review of the survey you provided for the above-noted transaction, .by both the Land Preservation Committee (LPC) and the Planning Board staff h~ resulted in an issue of concern. The delineated "reserved area" encompassing the farmstead, by itself, does not conform to the zoning requirements for lot frontage and lot area. Thi.s is not a problem if you intend that ownership and use of this area always remain as an integral part of the larger parcel. If the reserved area were in the future to be separated and conveyed from the larger parcel, the part conveyed would be non-conforming. Should there be a future need for increases to the then-existing structure footprints withi, n the part conveyed, it is most likely variances would be required from the Zoning Board of Appeals. Alternatively, if it were then proposed to utilize some of the larger par6el subject to the Development Rights easement, in order to satisfy lot area and lot frentage requirements, it would be necessary to obtain the approval of the LPC ~an~l perhaps the Town Board). Because the "hardships" or "practical difficulties" requiring varia.nce relief or LPC permission were self-created, as the result of the Development Rights sale, it may be that the applications for relief at that future time would be denied. Please advise the LPC if you intend that the reserved area of the farmland remain as presently mapped or if you will amend the survey to enlarge the area to con- form as though it were a separate parcel in a 80,000 SF zoning, enjoying a frontage of 175 feet. TOWN ATTORNEY'S '-:r~WN OF sou!~o~. -2- T'he survey is otherwise satisfactory for the purposes of the conveyance of the Offered Development Rights easement, pursuant to Chapter 25 of the Town Code. It is my understanding that you are in the process of securing some form of a¢¢omodation from the holder of your mortgage, such that this matter can then Close. Please Gall me if you have any questions. R~R:jw ~c - Planning Dept. To~n Attorney Sincerely yours, Richard C. Ryan Chairman MARTIN D. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY mar tin.flnnegan@town.southold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennifer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex. 54375 P~oute 25~- P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile ~ 831) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. 445 Griffing Avenue Riverhead, NY 11901 RE: Shinn Vineyard, LLC Site Plan July 7, 2009 Dear Mr. Cuddy: .... ~;¢- In response to your letter to Heather Lanza, D rector of P anmng, dated June 30. 2009, please be advised that the Town is continuing its discussions with the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets regarding their questions about your client's site plan application. It is the Town's position that, pending the issuance of an Order from the Department of Agriculture and Markets, all site plan regulations will apply to the Shinn Vineyard, LLC site plan application. As such, the Planning Board cannot proceed with your client's application until a complete application, including the items set forth in the October 27, 2006 letter from the Planning Board office to Deborah Doty, Esq. are addressed and submitted. However, in the interim, the Town would be open to scheduling a meeting to discuss your client's options. In the meantime, in light of your representation of the applicant, we would prefer that all communication with this office come from you rather than your client. Very truly yours, JNIk cc: Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director Martin D. Finnegan, Town Attorney Mailin~ Address: Box 1547 Riverheacl, NY 11901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRI FFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK July 6, 2009 TEL: (631)369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9087 E-mail: charles.cuddy@verizon.net Ms. Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY ! 1971 Re: Shinn Vineyard, LLC-Site Plan Dear Ms. Lanza: It was disappointing and disturbing to hear from you on July 2, 2009, that you could not meet with me to review the Shinn Vineyard site plan. As I understand it the Town Attorney, apparently at the request of same Town Official(s), is contesting the conclusions set forth in the June 1, 2009, letter from the Department of Agriculture and Markets. Words and deeds seem to be at odds. Town Officials state they favor farming but their actions impose burdensome restrictions upon farmers. While Southold attempts to impose extensive limitations and conditions on certain commercial site plans, state law intervenes and controls what may be required of the farming community. In fact New York State, through the Department of Agriculture and Markets, restricts the burdens that may be imposed on farming. As a lawyer I am troubled by the Town's failure to follow the State's directions. However, I'm hopeful, that upon reflection the Town will recognize the limitations placed upon its power to regulate farming. Based upon the June 1, 2009, letter from Datfielle C Cordier, Senior Altorney, State of New York Department of Agriculture and Markets I look forward to meeting with you. We can then proceed with the necessary steps to have the Shinn Vineyard site plan approved. CRC/ik Encls. cc: Southold Town Attorney Very truly yours, C ares .C dd;~ Ma~hng Address: P.O. Box 1547 Riverheac[, NY 11901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRI FFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK June 30, 2009 TEL: (631) 369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9080 E-mail: charles cuddyQ)verizon.net Ms. Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Bcx 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyard, LLC-Site Plan Dear Ms. Lanza: A month ago you received a letter from the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets concerning the site plan requirements for Shinn Vineyard. Based on that letter, at best, there are minimum requirements to be complied with. I had requested that we meet to discuss any further site planning requirements you believe are applicable. You indicated that you would schedule such a meeting. Unless the Town is further contesting the determination of the Department of Agricultural and Markets, I would appreciate your scheduling the meeting to review this matter. Thank you. CRC/ik Encls. cc: David Page, Shinn Vineyard MARTIN D. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY martin.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennifer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11~971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD June 24,2009 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. Counsel's Office NYS Dept. of Agriculture and Markets 10B Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235-0001 RE: Review of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code as it Pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC Dear Ms. Cordier: Please allow this letter to confirm our conversation wherein it wa~ agreed that the Town of Southold's time period for responding to your letter dated June 1, 2009 has been extended to July 31, 2009. Thank you for your courtesy. Ver,y~truly yours,~]~ ~As~lstant T, bwn°r~°ttorney JNIk cc: Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director Mailing Address: RO. Box 1547 Riverhead, NYll901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT LAW 445 GRI FFING AVENUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK June 5, 2009 TEL: (631) 369-8200 FAX: (631) 369-9O80 E-mail: charles.cuddy@verizon.net Ms. Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Southoid Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyard, LLC-Site Plan Dear Ms. Lanza: Although you may have become aware of the Department of Agriculture and Markets letter of June 1, 2009, I'm enclosing a copy. At your earliest convenience I would like to review with you the status of the Shinn Vineyard site plan application so we may agree upon what is necessary to obtain site plan approval. Please let me hear from you. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy CRC/ik Encls. JU I-S 2009 Office of the Counsel Tel. #(518)457-1059 FAX (518)457-8842 TDD (518) 485-7784 STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS 10B Airline Drive, Albany, New York 12235 1-800-554-4501 www.agmkt.state, ny.us TDD (518) 485-7784 June 1, 2009 Jennifer Andaloro, Esq. Office of the Town Attorney Town of Southold P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Re: Review of the Administration of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code as it Pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC, Which is Located Within Suffolk County Agricultural District No. 1 Dear Ms. Andaloro: The Department appreciates the Town of Southold's efforts to work with the Department to resolve many of the issues involved in this review. The Department has completed its review of the Town's Zoning Code as it pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC, for compliance with Agriculture and Markets Law (AML) §305-a(1). The Department's investigation included a field review conducted on October 2, 2008; a review of correspondence from the Town and other local agencies including the Planning Board, Town of Southold Department of Land Preservation, Architectural Review Committee, the Mattituck Fire District and Suffolk County concerning Shinn Vineyard, LLC; letters, with enclosures, from the Town to Department of Agriculture and Markets staff, dated October 19, 2007, September 15, 2008, and May 15, 2009; information from and conversations with Ms. Patricia A. Finnegan, yourself, David Page, co-owner of Shinn Vineyards; correspondence from Shinn Vineyard's attorney, Charles Cuddy, Esq.; and an examination of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code. I have discussed this matter with the Division of Agricultural Protection and Development Services (AP&DS) which has authorized me to respond as follows. By letter dated September 13, 2007, William Kimball, Director of the Division of AP&DS, notified Supervisor Scott Russell and the Chair of the Town of Southold Planning Board that the Department received a request from David Page for a formal review of the Town's Zoning Code for compliance with Agriculture and Markets Law as it pertains to site plan review requirements for a winery constructed and operating within existing farm buildings. By my letter dated July 8, 2008, the Department concluded that based upon a review of the Town of Southold's Code, and the administration of the same by the Town and the Planning Board, requiring Shinn Vineyard, LLC to submit to a full site plan, which involves Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant ~ Attorney Town of Southold , Page.2 the assistance of licensed professional(s), development of on-site drainage calculations, compliance with landscaping requirements, construction of an electric fire well and upgrading of interior roads to be consistent with the Town's minimum road requirements, unreasonably restricts the Shinn Vineyard, LLC farm operation in possible violation of AML §305-a(1). The Department requested that the Town and Planning Board provide any documentation or other evidence that it may have that the public health or safety is threatened by the farm operation's activities which are the subject of this review. In a letter from Ms. Finnegan to Mr. Kimball dated October 19, 2007, she indicated that the Town places importance on its site plan review process to protect the health and safety of the public when they visit wineries with tasting room facilities. Ms. Finnegan further stated in a letter dated September 15, 2008, that the Town has traditionally subjected wineries with tasting room facilities to site plan review because "the health and safety of the visiting public warrants such a practice." She indicated that it is important that such amenities as parking, ingress and egress, lighting, drainage and handicapped access are included on these sites. Further, it was noted that Shinn Vineyard hosts weddings and events (copies of tent permits were attached) and that the Town has an interest in promoting the health and safety of visitors to the site. On April 6, 2009, the Department sent a letter to the Town of Southold Attorney, requesting that the Town provide rationale for the requirement to install an electric fire well and any supporting information where such facilities have been required for other farms of similar size and scope within the Town. In a letter dated May 15, 2009, you forwarded a revised recommendation from the Mattituck Fire District to the Southold Planning Board indicating that "no additional firewell is needed; only that all drives and roads must meet the Southold Town access requirements." The Department has the following comments concerning the Town's September 15, 2008 correspondence: As stated in my July 8th letter, it is our understanding that Shinn Vineyard is not proposing to construct new buildings or exterior modifications to any of its existing buildings. It is our general position that the construction of on-farm buildings should not be subject to site plan review. However, the Department developed a model streamlined site plan review process which could be used for farm operations located within county adopted, State certified agricultural districts that are subject to site plan review. In the Department's view, if Shinn Vineyard, LLC is subject to site plan review, the Town should utilize the Department's streamlined site plan review process described in the Department's Guideline for Review of Local Zoning and Planning Laws in the conduct of such a review. In Ms. Finnegan's September 15, 2008 letter, she indicated that Shinn Vineyard, LLC must provide drainage points and calculations to show that storm water from the retail and public operations are contained on-site, and there is no unreasonable flooding to neighboring properties or the public road. She noted that this is important for the health and safety of the neighbors, the public traveling on Oregon Road, and visitors to the site. She indicated that such calculations may be obtained from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) at no charge to the farm operation. As part of this review, however, the Town has not demonstrated that there is any storm water runoff issue either for the Vineyard, adjoining properties, or the adjacent highway. Furthermore, based upon information received from Mr. Page, and verified through the Department's field inspection, the existing buildings are Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant ~ Attorney Town of Southold Page 3 guttered and the downspouts are connected to dry wells. Storm water within the wells is released to a rapidly permeable substratum (mapped as Haven loam soils by the USDA NRCS). Therefore, to require Shinn Vineyard, LLC, a farm operation located within an agricultural district, to provide drainage calculations to the Planning Board for an as-built site plan review, where there has not been identification of any storm water issues is unreasonably restrictive in violation of the AML. The Department in its July 8, 2008 letter noted that in past reviews the Department has supported the need to meet road construction standards for that portion of the farm road located within the Town right of way, but not beyond. Ms. Finnegan indicated in her letter that the Planning Board requested that two locations on the site plan indicate a 15' access and that the Board would be willing to work with the farm to relax or waive these standards if they could not practicably be accomplished. Mr. Page indicates that the current road is 12' wide and is sufficient for their operation as it has safely handled traffic for several years. Mr. Page indicates that he cannot practicably widen the road to 15' since the only way to do so would be to expand the road into the adjacent property, which is subject to a conservation easement held by the Town. In the Department's view requiring all interior roads to meet Town highway standards is unreasonably restrictive in violation of the AML. The farm's interior roads appear to be adequate for their existing uses. In Ms. Finnegan's September 2008 letter she noted that Shinn Vineyard has already done a site plan with the assistance of a licensed professional. She indicated that if the Planning Board required changes to the plan, depending on the changes, it may be reasonable for the farm to sketch them on the submitted site plan, to scale. The Department appreciates this accommodation. The Department understands that some changes to a site plan may require professional assistance. In general, however, the farm should be allowed to sketch any changes or modifications to the existing site plan without the further assistance of a professional engineer or surveyor. In the Department's July 8, 2008 and April 6, 2009 letters to the Town I indicated that a requirement to install an electric fire well may be unreasonably restrictive. The Department requested that the Town provide a rationale for such requirement and any supporting information where such facilities have been required for other farms of similar size within the Town. You indicated in a telephone conversation that you would forward our correspondence to the Mattituck Fire District and request a response to our inquiry. By your May 15, 2009 letter, you forwarded a response from the Mattituck Fire District recommending that "no additional firewell is needed; only that drives and roads meet the Southold Town access requirements." The Department appreciates the Town's efforts to resolve this issue. The Department noted in its July 8, 2008 letter that farmers should not have to bear the extra costs of screening unless warranted by special local conditions or to address a threat to the public health or safety. While aesthetics are an appropriate and important consideration under zoning and planning laws, the purpose of the Agricultural Districts Law is to conserve and protect agricultural lands by promoting the retention of farmland in active agricultural use. Ms. Finnegan noted in her correspondence that in the Town of Southold the rural community character is significant and many businesses are required to screen the ,~ Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant ~ Attorney Town of $outhold . Page 4 parking associated with their business from neighbors and/or passersby. However, it appears from aerial imagery and based upon the Department's field visit that the surrounding land uses are.agricultural. The adjacent land use is a potato farm, with a large barn, and a mobile home used for farm worker housing. The Town has not demonstrated that complaints have been received concerning this farm operation due to loud noises, glare from interior lighting and/or from automobile headlights. Further, screening along the edges of the property would require the farm operator to plant vegetation within the existing interior roadways. Ms. Finnegan indicated that the Planning Board would be willing to work with Shinn Vineyard, LLC on an acceptable solution, which may require screening in some areas and a waiver in others. However, in the Department's view requiring Shinn Vineyard, LLC to plant screening is unreasonably restrictive in violation of AML §305-a (1). Based upon its review and investigation, the Department has concluded that the Town of Southold Zoning Code and its administration by the Town and the Planning Board to require that Shinn Vineyards, LLC submit a full site plan, which requires the assistance of licensed professional(s), development of drainage calculations, compliance with landscaping requirements, and upgrading of interior roads to be consistent with the Town's minimum road requirements, unreasonably restricts the farm operation in violation of AML §305-a(1). The Department has further concluded that the Town has not demonstrated that the public health or safety is threatened by the Shinn Vineyard, LLC farm operation. To comply with AML §305-a(1), the Town, through its officials including the Code Enforcement Officer and the Planning Board, must not require full site plan review, but may utilize the Department's streamlined site plan review process. Furthermore, the Town must not require Shinn Vineyard, LLC to upgrade its interior roads to comply with Town highway standards, require the planting of screening or require drainage calculations to the Town Planning Board as part of its site plan review process. The Department requests that the Town confirm within 30 days of the date of this letter that it will not impose such requirements and will otherwise use a streamlined site plan process. If steps to comply are not taken, the Department may take appropriate action to enforce the provisions of AM L §305-a (1). The Department appreciates the Town's cooperation and efforts to resolve this matter and hopes that the remaining issues will be resolved expeditiously. If you have any questions, please contact me at (518) 457-2449. If Supervisor Russell has any questions, he may contact Bob Somers, Manager, Agricultural Protection Unit, at (518) 457-2713. CC: Sincerely,, Danielle C. Cordier Senior Attorney Hon. Marc S. Alessi, Assemblyman Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant ~ Attorney Town of'Southold · pa~e 5 Martin H. Sidor, Chair, Tow~ Planning Board Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. ~" Barbara Shinn and David Page, Shinn Vineyard, LLC Ken Schmitt, Chair, Suffolk County AFPB Robert Haggerty, First Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Jerry Cosgrove, Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Ruth A. Moore, Counsel, Dept. of A&M William Kimball, Director APDS, Dept. of A&M Dr. Robert Somers, Dept. of A&M STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKE]'S-;,;L 10B Airline Drive, Albany, New York '1~2,~5-~;; 1-800-554-4501 , ~,"~ www.ag m kt..s],.,~¥, u s TDD( )518 485-7784 : ~ "' " Jenn'ferAndaloro, Esq. ,.~ ~ ~"~ ~- ~ r. Office of the Town A~orney ~, ~.-: Town of Southold ~ ~:~..:.:'~" P.O. Box Southo~d, New York 11971-0959 :~ Re: Roviow of tho Administration of the/own of Southold's Zonin~ Codo as it ~o~ains to Shinn Vineyard, kkC, Which is kocatod Within Suffolk County A~dcultural Distdct ~o. Dear Ms. Andaloro: The Department appreciates the Town of Southold's efforts to work with the Department to resolve many of the issues involved in this review. The Department has completed its review of the Town's Zoning Code as it pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC, for compliance with Agriculture and Markets Law (AML) §305-a(1). The Department's investigation included a field review conducted on October 2, 2008; a review of correspondence from the Town and other local agencies including the Planning Board, Town of Southold Department of Land Preservation, Architectural Review Committee, the Mattituck Fire District and Suffolk County concerning Shinn Vineyard, LLC; letters, with enclosures, from the Town to Department of Agriculture and Markets staff, dated October 19, 2007, September 15, 2008, and May 15, 2009; information from and conversations with Ms. Patricia A. Finnegan, yourself, David Page, co-owner of Shinn Vineyards; correspondence from Shinn Vineyard's attorney, Charles Cuddy, Esq.; and an examination of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code. I have discussed this matter with the Division of Agricultural Protection and Development Services (AP&DS) which has authorized me to respond as follows. By letter dated September 13, 2007, William Kimball, Director of the Division of AP&DS, notified Supervisor Scott Russell and the Chair of the Town of Southold Planning Board that the Department received a request from David Page for a formal review of the Town's Zoning Code for compliance with Agriculture and Markets Law as it pertains to site plan review requirements for a winery constructed and operating within existing farm buildings. By my letter dated July 8, 2008, the Department concluded that based upon a review of the Town of Southold's Code, and the administration of the same by the Town and the Planning Board, requiring Shinn Vineyard, LLC to submit to a full site plan, which involves Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant '~n Attorney Town o~Southold Paste 2 the assistance of licensed professional(s), development of on-site drainage calculations, compliance with landscaping requirements, construction of an electric fire well and upgrading of interior roads to be consistent with the Town's minimum road requirements, unreasonably restricts the Shinn Vineyard, LLC farm operation in possible violation of AML §305-a(1). The Department requested that the Town and Planning Board provide any documentation or other evidence that it may have that the public health or safety is threatened by the farm operation's activities which are the subject of this review. In a letter from Ms. Finnegan to Mr. Kimball dated October 19, 2007, she indicated that the Town places importance on its site plan review process to protect the health and safety of the public when they visit wineries with tasting room facilities. Ms. Finnegan further stated in a letter dated September 15, 2008, that the Town has traditionally subjected wineries with tasting room facilities to site plan review because "the health and safety of the visiting public warrants such a practice." She indicated that it is important that such amenities as parking, ingress and egress, lighting, drainage and handicapped access are included on these sites. Further, it was noted that Shinn Vineyard hosts weddings and events (copies of tent permits were attached) and that the Town has an interest in promoting the health and safety of visitors to the site. On April 8, 2009, the Department sent a letter to the Town of Southold Attorney, requesting that the Town provide rationale for the requirement to install an electric fire well and any supporting information where such facilities have been required for other farms of similar size and scope within the Town. In a letter dated May 15, 2009, you forwarded a revised recommendation from the Mattituck Fire District to the Southold Planning Board indicating that "no additional firewell is needed; only that all drives and roads must meet the Southold Town access requirements." The Department has the following comments concerning the Town's September 15, 2008 correspondence: As stated in my July 8th letter, it is our understanding that Shinn Vineyard is not proposing to construct new buildings or exterior modifications to any of its existing buildings. It is our general position that the construction of on-farm buildings should not be subject to site plan review. However, the Department developed a model streamlined site plan review process which could be used for farm operations located within county adopted, State certified agricultural districts that are subject to site plan review. In the Department's view, if Shinn Vineyard, LLC is subject to site plan review, the Town should utilize the Department's streamlined site plan review process described in the Department's Guideline for Review of Local Zoning and Planning Laws in the conduct of such a review. In Ms. Finnegan's September 15, 2008 letter, she indicated that Shinn Vineyard, LLC must provide drainage points and calculations to show that storm water from the retail and public operations are contained on-site, and there is no unreasonable flooding to neighboring properties or the public road. She noted that this is important for the health and safety of the neighbors, the public traveling on Oregon Road, and visitors to the site. She indicated that such calculations may be obtained from the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) at no charge to the farm operation. As part of this review, however, the Town has not demonstrated that there is any storm water runoff issue either for the Vineyard, adjoining properties, or the adjacent highway. Furthermore, based upon information received from Mr. Page, and verified through the Department's field inspection, the existing buildings are Shinn Vineyard. Saturday, June 27, 2009. View East on Oregon Road. Event tent is visible to the right, 40 cars parked along the street. Driveway entrance to Shinn Vineyards - parking fbr the event being held in the tent is directed to the street ~n the yellow sign above. Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant ~ Attorney Town oCSouthold Page 3 guttered and the downspouts are connected to dry wells. Storm water within the wells is released to a rapidly permeable substratum (mapped as Haven loam soils by the USDA NRCS). Therefore, to require Shinn Vineyard, LLC, a farm operation located within an agricultural district, to provide drainage calculations to the Planning Board for an as-built site plan review, where there has not been identification of any storm water issues is unreasonably restrictive in violation of the AML. The Department in its July 8, 2008 letter noted that in past reviews the Department has supported the need to meet road construction standards for that portion of the farm road located within the Town right of way, but not beyond. Ms. Finnegan indicated in her letter that the Planning Board requested that two locations on the site plan indicate a 15' access and that the Board would be willing to work with the farm to relax or waive these standards if they could not practicably be accomplished. Mr. Page indicates that the current road is 12' wide and is sufficient for their operation as it has safely handled traffic for several years. Mr. Page indicates that he cannot practicably widen the road to 15' since the only way to do so would be to expand the road into the adjacent property, which is subject to a conservation easement held by the Town. In the Department's view requiring all interior roads to meet Town highway standards is unreasonably restrictive in violation of the AML. The farm's interior roads appear to be adequate for their existing uses. In Ms. Finnegan's September 2008 letter she noted that Shinn Vineyard has already done a site plan with the assistance of a licensed professional. She indicated that if the Planning Board required changes to the plan, depending on the changes, it may be reasonable for the farm to sketch them on the submitted site plan, to scale. The Department appreciates this accommodation. The Department understands that some changes to a site plan may require professional assistance. In general, however, the farm should be allowed to sketch any changes or modifications to the existing site plan without the further assistance of a professional engineer or surveyor. In the Department's July 8, 2008 and April 6, 2009 letters to the Town I indicated that a requirement to install an electric fire well may be unreasonably restrictive. The Department requested that the Town provide a rationale for such requirement and any supporting information where such facilities have been required for other farms of similar size within the Town. You indicated in a telephone conversation that you would forward our correspondence to the Mattituck Fire District and request a response to our inquiry. By your May 15, 2009 letter, you forwarded a response from the Mattituck Fire District recommending that "no additional firewell is needed; only that drives and roads meet the Southold Town access requirements." The Department appreciates the Town's efforts to resolve this issue. The Department noted in its July 8, 2008 letter that farmers should not have to bear the extra costs of screening unless warranted by special local conditions or to address a threat to the public health or safety. While aesthetics are an appropriate and important consideration under zoning and planning laws, the purpose of the Agricultural Districts Law is to conserve and protect agricultural lands by promoting the retention of farmland in active agricultural use. Ms. Finnegan noted in her correspondence that in the Town of Southold the rural community character is significant and many businesses are required to screen the Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant '~n Attorney Town o~ Southold Page 4 parking associated with their business from neighbors and/or passersby. However, it appears from aerial imagery and based upon the Department's field visit that the surrounding land uses are agricultural. The adjacent land use is a potato farm, with a large barn, and a mobile home used for farm worker housing. The Town has not demonstrated that complaints have been received concerning this farm operation due to loud noises, glare from interior lighting and/or from automobile headlights. Further, screening along the edges of the property would require the farm operator to plant vegetation within the existing interior roadways. Ms. Finnegan indicated that the Planning Board would be willing to work with Shinn Vineyard, LLC on an acceptable solution, which may require screening in some areas and a waiver in others. However, in the Department's view requiring Shinn Vineyard, LLC to plant screening is unreasonably restrictive in violation of AML §305-a (1). Based upon its review and investigation, the Department has concluded that the Town of Southold Zoning Code and its administration by the Town and the Planning Board to require that Shinn Vineyards, LLC submit a full site plan, which requires the assistance of licensed professional(s), development of drainage calculations, compliance with landscaping requirements, and upgrading of interior roads to be consistent with the Town's minimum road requirements, unreasonably restricts the farm operation in violation of AML §305-a(1). The Department has further concluded that the Town has not demonstrated that the public health or safety is threatened by the Shinn Vineyard, LLC farm operation. To comply with AML §305-a(1), the Town, through its officials including the Code Enforcement Officer and the Planning Board, must not require full site plan review, but may utilize the Department's streamlined site plan review process. Furthermore, the Town must not require Shinn Vineyard, LLC to upgrade its interior roads to comply with Town highway standards, require the planting of screening or require drainage calculations to the Town Planning Board as part of its site plan review process. The Department requests that the Town confirm within 30 days of the date of this letter that it will not impose such requirements and will otherwise use a streamlined site plan process. If steps to comply are not taken, the Department may take appropriate action to enforce the provisions of AML §305-a (1). The Department appreciates the Town's cooperation and efforts to resolve this matter and hopes that the remaining issues will be resolved expeditiously. If you have any questions, please contact me at (518) 457-2449. If Supervisor Russell has any questions, he may contact Bob Somers, Manager, Agricultural Protection Unit, at (518) 457-2713. CC; Sincerely, · Danielle C. Cordier Senior Attorney Hon. Marc S. Alessi, Assemblyman Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant ~ Attorney Town of Southold Page 5 Martin H. Sidor, Chair, Town Planning Board J Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. Barbara Shinn and David Page, Shinn Vineyard, LLC Ken Schmitt, Chair, Suffolk County AFPB Robert Haggerty, First Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Jerry Cosgrove, Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Ruth A. Moore, Counsel, Dept. of A&M William Kimball, Director APDS, Dept. of A&M Dr. Robert Somers, Dept. of A&M .PATRICIA A. FINNEGANI TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.finnegan @town.sout hold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennlfer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 15, 2009 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAlL Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. Counsel's Office NYS Dept. of Agriculture and Markets 10B Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235-0001 RE: Review of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code a~ it I=e~tains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC Dear Ms. Cordier: In response to your inquiry of April 6, 2009, we have obtained a revised recommendation from the Mattituck Fire District, a copy of which is attached. Please call me to discuss upon your review. Thank you. Very truly~ yours, ~S~rney JA/Ik Enclosure cc: Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor (w/encl.) Members of the Town Board (w/encl.) / Members of the Planning Board (w/encl.) ~'~ Ms. Elizabeth Neville, Town Clerk (w/encl.) Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director (w/ench) tA'I'I'ITUCK FIRE DISTRIC' PO BOX 666, PIKE STREET MATI'ITUCK,' NEW YORK 11952-0666 Commlsslonem David F, Hn~,, Chain.an Nom~. A. Rellly, Jr. Sr., Vice Chairman Mo~n L. Gdmn Lloyd H. Relseaberg WIIl(m~ G. Young Jolm C. Hanlson, Secretary Barbara Dlckerson, Treasurer May13,2009 Southold Town Planning Board Ms. Heather Lanza, Town Plant, lng. Director P O Box 1179 Southold. NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyards 2000 Oregon Rd., Mattituck. NY SCTM#: 1000-i00-4:3.1 Dear Ms. Lanza; At the regular meeting of the Board of Fire Commissioners of the Matt[tuck Fire District last evening the board re-visited the recommendation for the installation of a firewell on the Shinn Vineyard p~O. perty. '~§eBb~d of.'Fire'Com~nissioners had requested the Chief to test the we I itl the ~icinity of' ~he p~perty.and make: A recommendation1. The Chief stated that he believed that n01A~lditl~l f~ejl W~i~ tequired. The .Board 'Of Fire Commissioners acted, on the Chief's recommendation and voted to amend their recommendation to,he Southeid Town Planning Board to "no additidnalflrewell is needed; only that all drtVes and roads meet the Southold Town access_requirements" If you require any additional info ,rfnation please do not hesitate.-t,,.o~htact me. Jo-EffC. Harrison Secretary/Fire District Manager ~o: ~oard of Rte Commissioners Chief . Office (631) 298-8837 Facsimile (631) 298-8841 A'I-FITUCK FIRE DISTRIC PO BOX 666, PIKE STREET MA'I'rlTUCK, NEW' YORK 11952-0666 David F. Haas, Chairman Matin L. Griffin Uoyd H. Relsenberg William G. Young John C. Harrison, Sasretap/ Barbara Dickerasn, Treasurer May 13, 2009 Southold Town Planning Board Ms. Heather Lanza, Town Planning Director P O Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyards 2000 Oregon Rd., Mattituck, NY SCTM#: 1000-100-4-3.1 Dear Ms. Lanza; At the regular meeting of the Board of Fire Commissioners of the Mattituck Fire District last evening the board re-visited the recommendation for the installation of a firewell on the Shinn Vineyard property. The Board of Fire Commissioners had requested the Chief to test the well in the vicinity of the property and make a recommendation. The Chief stated that he believed that no additional firewell was required. The Board of Fire Commissioners acted on the Chief's recommendation and voted to amend their recommendation to the Southold Town Planning Board to "no additional firewell is needed; only that all drives and reads meet the Southold Town access requirements" Secretary/Fire District Manager If you require any additional information please do not hesitate to'~Ohtact me. cc: Board of Fire Commissioners Chief Office (63l) 298-8837 Facsimile (631) 298-8841 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS MARTIN Iq. SIDOR Chair WILLIAM J. CREMERS KENNETIq L. EDWARDS GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND April 29, 2009 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Mr. John Harrison cio Mattituck Fire District P.O. Box 666 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Shinn Vineyard 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: AC Dear Mr. Harrison: Enclosed please find a letter from the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets. They are responding to your district's request that the applicant for the site referenced above install a fire well because the nearest one was 1000 feet away. In their letter, they say they found a fire well only 540 feet from the site (they used the easternmost of the two driveways in their measurement). Could you please re-examine this site for fire safety, and let us know in more detail what is needed and why? In particular, the State Ag & Markets Department is asking the following: 1. What is adequate water flow to protect a site like Shinn Vineyard? 2. Why is it necessary to install an additional fire well for this site (i.e. why isn't the fire well to the east of the site adequate protection)? 3. Is there anything about this site that is different than other farms that would require a fire well to be closer than the one available down the road? 4. Can you recall asking other vineyards of similar size to have a fire well? (I will also look into this question in the Town's records). Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call with any questions. Sincerely, Heather Lanza, AICP Town Planning Director cc: Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant Town Attorney STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS Division of Agricultural Protection and Development Services 518-457-7076 Fax. 518-457-2716 10B Airline Drive Albany, New York 12235 April 6, 2009 Patricia A. Finnegan, Esq. Town of Southold Attorney P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Re: Review of Town of Southold's Zoning Code as it Pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC, Dear Ms. Finnegan: In the Department's July 8, 2008 letter we requested that the Town and Planning Board provide any documentation or other evidence that it may have that the public health or safety is threatened by the farm operation's activities which are the subject of this review. The Department also requested that the Town provide rationale for the requirement to install an electric fire well and any supporting information where such facilities have been required for other farms of similar size and scope within the Town. You provided correspondence from the Mattituck Fire District which states that "Although there is an existing fire well at the outer limits of 1000 feet from the driveway entrance, the depth, density and configuration of the structures adds to the difficulty to supply adequate water flow to combat the possible fire load." However, according to the Department's site inspection an existing fire well is located approximately 540' from the subject property (see attached image). In light of this discrepancy, we would appreciate it if you would provide information that clarifies what is adequate water flow, demonstrates the necessity of an additional fire well despite the close proximity of the existing firewell, and demonstrates where facilities have been required for other farms of similar size and scope within the Town. If you have any questions, please contact me at (518) 457-2449. Dr. Robert Somers, Manager, Agricultural Protection Unit, may be reached at (518) 457-2713 concerning the agricultural issues identified. Thank you for your cooperation. · Oanielle C. Cordier Senior Attorney CC; Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Ms. Jeri Woodhouse, Chair, Town Planning Board Patricia Finnegan, Town Attorney Town of Southold Page 2 Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. Barbara Shinn and David Page, Shinn Vineyard, LLC Ken Schmitt, Chair, Suffolk County ^FPB Robert Haggerty, First Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Jerry Cosgrove, Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Ruth A. Moore, Counsel, Dept. of A&M William Kimball, Director APDS, Dept. of A&M Dr. Robert Somers, Dept. of A&M PATRICIA A. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.finnegan(q)town.southold.ny.us KIERAN M, COItCORAN ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY kieran .cot coran(q)town.southold.ny.us LOrtI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse(q)town, soul,hold, ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 15, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. Counsel's Office NYS Dept. of Agriculture and Markets 1 OB Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235-0001 RE: Shinn Vineyard, LLC Dear Ms. Cordier: ..... Please allow this letter to serve as the Town of Southold's response to your letter dated July 8, 2008. The Town of Southold is home to numerous wineries with tasting room facilities which are welcome attractions for both our tourist and local population. These facilities have traditionally been subject to site plan review because the health and safety of the visiting public warrants such a practice. It is important that such amenities as safe parking, ingress and egress, lighting, drainage and handicapped access are included on these sites. In the case of Shinn Vineyard, the public is invited onto the premises for the purpose of sampling the wines in the tasting facility and enjoying vineyard walks. The facility is also the home to a four-room bed and breakfast. The vineyard hosts weddings and events throughout the year. I have attached information from the Shinn Vineyards website, which indicates that they host "weddings, receptions, wine dinners, tasting, conferences and other event(s)...." on the property. I have also attached several applications for tent permits this past summer, including one that indicates a wedding with 110-128 guests was held there last weekend. The Town has an interest in promoting the health and safety of visitors to the site. You asked for the Town's comments on several points raised in your letter, specifically: Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. September 15, 2008 Page 2 The Planning Department's letter of October 27, 2006 requested the location of drainage, including drainage calculations. Your letter indicates that this request may be unreasonably restrictive of the farm operation. Information regarding drainage is requested to show that the stormwater from the retail and public operations are contained on-site, and there is not unreasonable flooding to neighboring properties or the public road. This is important for the health and safety of the neighbors, the public travelling on Oregon Road, and visitors to the site. The Natural Resource Conservation Service at Cornell Cooperative provides a free service to farmers which could be utilized by Shinn Vineyards, and would be acceptable to the Planning Board. They perform a review of the drainage on a site, and will provide an evaluation indicating the extent of any runoff issues. This is a service used by other farmers in our community, and is not unduly burdensome. The Planning Board letter requested that two locations indicate a 15' access as they are areas expected to be accessed by the public attending events at the tasting room facility. This requirement is in the Code to provide the visiting public with safe access and traffic flow to parking areas. The Planning Board would be willing to work with the applicant on a possible waiver or relaxation of this requirement if this cannot practicably be accomplished. It is not the intention to unduly burden the applicant. Please be reminded that the applicant here did not respond to the Planning Board request at all, and did not request a waiver of certain requirements. Waivers of requirements can be granted when the Planning Board is satisfied that the safety of the public will not be compromised. You indicate that it may be unduly burdensome to require the applicant to submit a site plan that requires the assistance of a licensed professional. In some cases, for instance, if an applicant is building a barn, it may be acceptable to sketch the dimensions on an existing survey. This has been accepted in the past by the Planning Board and Zoning Board if appropriate. In this particular case, the applicant is proposing a very intense use on this 53,000 square foot parcel and he already has a professional site plan done. Accordingly, in this instance, it does not seem to be burdensome on this applicant. If the Planning Board required changes to the submitted site plan, depending on the changes, it may be reasonable for the applicant to sketch them on the submitted site plan, to scale, provided the plan remains accurate. Your letter indicates that the requirement to screen a farm operation has been found to be unreasonably restrictive. However, that is not really what the Planning Board seeks here. In the Town of Southold, particularly with wineries that invite large public crowds, the Planning Board has successfully required screening on the parking areas that are required for this intense public use. The screening provides a buffer to neighbors from the noise and the parking lot lighting, including headlights. The weddings and events at Shinn Vineyards are frequently at night. You indicate that farms should not be required to screen when other forms of land use do not have the same requirement. However, in the Town of Southold, the rural community character is significant, and many businesses are required to screen the parking associated with their business from neighbors and/or passersby. The Planning Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. September 15, 2008 Page 3 Board would be willing to work with the applicant to arrive at an acceptable solution, which may require screening on certain public parking areas and a waiver of the requirement on other areas. You have indicated that the requirement to install an electric fire well may be unreasonably restrictive. I am attaching correspondence from the Mattituck Board of Fire Commissioners, Mattituck Fire District, setting forth their rationale for requiring the installation. Clearly, this is a significant public safety issue and should not be waived, over the recommendation of the local fire authority. Please keep in mind that the Town of Southold is a farming community, and the Town Board is updating the Town Code to encourage agriculture, farm stands, etc. But please also note that wineries, such as Shinn Vineyards, have operations that attract the public in substantial quantity and intensity of use. This is not simply a barn, it is a tasting room and event location that attracts many visitors. As such, the Town takes its role seriously to ensure that the public health and safety are not jeopardized. PAF/Ik cc: Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor (w/encls.) Members of the Town Board (w/encls.) ~ Members of the Planning Board (w/encls.)~ Ms. Elizabeth Neville, Town Clerk (w/encls.) Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director (w/encls.) Contact Us Page 1 of I http://www.shinnvineyard.recipesfromhome.com/Weddings.htm 9/4/2008 Events at Shinn Page 1 of 1 Events at Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse We host weddings, receptions, wine dinners, tasting, conferences and other event that suits your needs. All events can be tailored to reflect your personal taste. Events or wedding for groups of over 50 people are held outside under a tent provided by the client. Smaller events or weddings can be held in several private areas on our estate including our tasting room, bmxel cellar and winery. The cost of events on the estate ranges from a price per person cost ranging between 20 dollars for wine tasting and tour and up to $7,000 which includes 4 double occupancy rooms for 2 nights at Shinn Estate Farmhouse and the exclusive use of the entire property. A Rehearsal Dinner and/or Sunday Brunch can be offered to wedding parties and the rates can be tailored to your budget. We can accommodate up to 40 people for a rehearsal dinner and up to 70 people for a brunch. These meals would be prepared by our Farmhouse kitchen under the direction of Chef David Page. Sbinn Estate Farmhouse does not cater weddings at this time. Tents, tables, food, wait stall; and all other accessories are provided by the client. We have an outdoor space where a tent can be placed. It is adjacent to the vineyard, and faces the winery. Most couples opt to hold the wedding ceremony in the vineyard, and you are welcome to do so at no additional cost. On Saturdays and Sundays, events can begin after our tasting room closes at 5:00 pm. If you would like more information, you can contact us at 631-804-0367. We can assure you that you and your guests will be well taken care of by Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse. Barbara Shinn and David Page Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse . . · . - ,. ~ 9/4/2008 http://www.sh~nnvmeyard.rec~pesfi omhome.com/EventDetmls.htn Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P. O. Box 1179 Soulhold, New York 11971 SCTM # Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516') 765-1802 OFFICE OF THE BUILDING INSPECTOR TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ,:;'-' APPLICATION FOR A TENT PERMIT Fee: $35 Cheque No: Application fl Permit # Supplier ofT,ent P.J.McBride Inc.-8, Lamar Street, West Babylon, NY_ 11704 Proposed Tent Use Date Erected {o i,~- Size ofTent(s)d)iBo~,¥~ ~ 70 Flame Retardant Ce~ificate Attached Proposed Tent Site Owner of Site Corot I,.) art2 ( )No Telephone No, at Site Mailing Address of Client Date PEILMIT EXPIRES 30 DAYS FROM DATE QF ISSUE rbw97 Parking Exit Garden 20'x30' Restroom Exit Exit 20'x40' Service 10 10 10 OOOO eeoc Exit Exit Vineyards Vineyards P.J. McBride inc. Date 6/13/08 631-643-2848 Project Location Shinn Winery Design by Doug Purslow $3095 Ml~ln ~ York 'FOW~ OF SOWI'HOLD APPLICATION FOR A TENT PERMIT Fee: $35 Date: Application # Permit # Flame Retardant Certificate Attached: (y~) Yes ( ) No Proposed Tent Site: ~'~]Jq ~/l'~t,L/{]~d -~O/~D MailingAddressofClient:_!~ {) ~)/'{/i ti,, ~ro- &~! ~m,'a ( ) Disapproved b ' Building Inspector Date PERMIT EXPIRES 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF 1SSUE MA'/3 0 21/.8 /t ~The Event Store Nacht / Oneil Wedding 40x60 Pole Tent Path 15' ~n~aM 20x30 Caterer's Tent Music Area ' 8'Buffet 8'Buffet [~ 30" 8'Buffet 8'Buffet z,,,'t ~' [--I [--I (~) [] I 80' < Vineyard Shed Post & Rail Fence Tasting Room New York Tent Company Date: June 21, 2008 Project: Nacht / Oneil Wedding The Event b'tore Designed by: Danielle Grant APPLICATION FOR A TENT PERMIT Application # SCTM #1000- Permit # Supplier of Tent: P~oposed Tent Use: {JO e~dd t'r~ d Date Erected: r~ / l l / {~ * ~/I Size of Tent(s): qO~ l C~ Color: Flame Retardant Certificate Attached: ~:~) Yes Proposed Tent Site: $ h ;n n ~' ~ + a ~ e. Vi ~ e ~ c~ cA 5 OwnerofSite: ¢Or~>Qrc1 8~lir~n Telephone No. at Site: ~ 31- ;O4- O3¢ ¢ ) No 2_000 Ore%o~ Cci.' N~c~+~-iI-~CY._, <y Mailing Address of Client: ~060 O'Ca~O~ ~ . ~Ctnc~c[3LbfC~t/~/~/ I tq53 ( )Approved ( )Disapproved Building Inspector Date PERMIT EXPIRES 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF ISSUE APPLICATION FOR A TENT PERMIT FEE: $35.00 APPLICATION # PERMIT # DATE ERECTED: q--/ ~W USED: I ~ /~ O ~E~OVED: S'ZE OF TE"T(S) C?) t"¢6''~;'"~' ~V~ T~''O'-- COLOR: FLAME RETARDANT CERTIFICATE: r~.-4'NCLUDED TENT ( ) APPROVED ( ) DISAPPROVED BUILDING INSPECTOR DATE PERMIT EXPIRES 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF ISSUE. TentApp-07-01 .doc Garda R~.~rvoci 20 ~ 20 fl. T~nt Shinn Estates 8.1 6.0_8 nulI.DflqG DI:.~A RI'IviI~I','T 'Z'OWI'q O~ ~OTYt'~OLD A['~LICATION FOR A TENT .ERM]T Fee: $35 Date: Application # Flame Retardant Certificate Attached: Permit # I j Removed:_ co,or: (V~) Yes ( )No ( ) Approved ( ) Disapproved Building Inspector Date PERMIT EXPIRES 30 DAYS FROM DATE OF ISSUE Shinn Vineyard Gordon Braun (110- 128 Guests) Path 15' Shed gineyards Bar t Post & Rail Fence 80' Driveway Tasting Room New York Tent Company Date: 916108 ] I~roje~ Shinn Vineyard ] Owner. Gordon Braun / The Event Store Designed by: Danielle Grant 'SE,P. II.2008 2:05PM Town Hall Annex 54375 Mare Road 'rol~flb.l~xS~plt~ blaln I~oad Southo[d, N ex~ 'Y~)'r ~ ~ t 91/117~8959 $oulhold, flew Yo~ 11971 HOLD SUPERVISORS 012 P. 1 Telephone (631 ) 765-1802 Fax (63 I) 765-9502 Fax (515) 765. 18:3 Telephone (5~) 765 ~ao2 BUILDING DEPARTMENT O FFIcTEO~4II~ ~li~l~Gl[°~$ pE CiO R TOWN OF 8OUTHOLD · PuCXr oN A SCTM # Fee: $35 Cheque No: _~ Application # - Permit fit =. _ SupplierofT~nt p.j.Mcl3ride I.n,c.-8, LaJaxar Street, We~t Ba_b~ylon,.N. f_. 11704 ?roposed Tent U~e, Size ofTent(~So~o tlD_~D,cr.t_o Color /_~ ~-/'~ . -~~ ;t--&o ' Flame R~t ~ifi~te A~chcd (~ ( ) No Om~ of Site _. ~k~d ~ d~ ~ Telephone No, at Si~ ~- ~¢ -a&~ 7 ( ) ~pprov~ ( ) Disapproved Building I.nspcctor ?EI~MIT EXPIKE$ 30 DAY~ FROM DATE O,,F ISSUE Date SLF,}1.2008 2:05PM NO, 012 P, 2 Town Hall An6ex 54375 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631 ) 765-1802 Fax (631 ) 765-9502 " p ~m~-~ ~1 Date: Se r r. 2008 To: ~own of Southold Offic8 of the Building Inspector At'tn: Mr. Fisher Fa~ C~31-64~-2879 From: Patrice Thomas Dear Mr. Fisher, The f611owing client has requested P.d'.MkBride to inatalI an additional 20x30 Fiesta Tent for th.e. tr Restroom. In this regard, we are sending off t you far your records, a copy of the reviacd tent permit and all of the relev tnt Certificates of Flame Resistance that cover this tent. Plea ~,feel fr call should you havc any qucstio~_~, our kind assistance. Patrie~/rhomas . Helpi~g Create A Lifetime of Memorie~ Pad(lng Garden Service ~o Restr0em Dinner/Dance P.J. ,McBride Inc. 631-643-2848....._'-'] 0§/27/2008 WED 10:21 FAX 631 8841 Mattltucl( Fire Dlstrl. ct MATTiTUCK FIRE DISTRICT PO BOX 666, PIKE STREET MATTITUCK, NEVi/YORK 11952-0666 Jeroi~e £Zuho~kl.~Chalr~dh Marlin L. Gflffin, Sr, Vl~e Ohalr~an · Nomtafl A. ReBy, Jr. Oavl~l F. Haas LlOyd H, Reb~enberg John C. Ha~n, Se~'dtd~y August 27, 2008 Southold Town Planning Board Ms. Healher Lanza, Town Plannln P 0 Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinr~ Vineyards, Dear Ms. Lanza, Tile Board 1. The ( 2. ~lnal driveway 3, The p this ade( injur 4. If you require an~., Sincerely, · Harrison Secretary/Fire District Manager cc: Board of Fire Commissioners Chief File ty of providing loss and possible .~ Ma~ituck I~!r~;:District tO relieve any '"'' ':~. AUG 2 7 2008 AUG 2 7 2008 · Office (63:1.) 298-8837 Facsimile (631) 298-8841 PATRICIA A. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us KIERAN M. CORCORAN ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY kieran.corcoran@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 5, 2008 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. Counsel's Office NYS Dept. of Agriculture and Markets 10B Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235-0001 RE: Shinn Vineyard, LLC Dear Ms. Cordier: Please allow this letter to confirm our conversation wherein it was agreed that the Town of Southold's time period for responding to your letter dated July 8, 2008 has been extended to September 12, 2008. Thank you for your courtesy. PAF/Ik cc: Ms. Heather Lanza, Planning Director Patricia A. Finne~r Town Attorney A'I'rlTUCK FIRE DISTRIC P PO BOX 666, PIKE STREET MA'I'rlTUCK, NEW YORK 11952-0666 Jerome E. Zuhcekl., Chairman Martin L Gdffln, Sr., Vice Chairman Nom~an A. Rellly, Jr. David F. Haas Lloyd H. Relcenberg John C, Harrison, Secretary Barbara Dlckerson, Treasurer August 27, 2008 Southold Town Planning Board Ms. Heather Lanza, Town Planning Director PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Vineyards, Oregon Road, Mattituck, NY SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 Dear Ms. Lanza, The Board of Fire Commissioners is in receipt of your letter of August 26, 2008 and at their regular meeting on the same date discussed your request, reviewed the original request and offers their response below: 1. The original request (September 13, 2006) came due to the change in use of the original structure to its current usage· 2. Although there is an existing firewell at the outer limits of 1000' feet from the driveway entrance the depth, density and configuration of the structures adds to the difficulty to supplying adequate water flow combat the possible fire load. 3. The protection of the owners, employees, guests, responding firefighters and their property is the paramount concern of the Board of Fire Commissioners in their decision in this matter; although they are cognizant of the cost they believe the inability of providing adequate water supply to this scene could lead to catastrophic property loss and possible injury or loss of life. 4. After the installation of the requested firewell the Mattituck Fire District will assume all maintenance of the firewell upon its release to the Mattituck Fire District to relieve any future expense from the Shinn Vineyards. If you require any other information please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, · Harrison Secretary/Fire District Manager cc: Board of Fire Commissioners Chief File Office (631) 298-8837 Facsimile (631) 298-8841 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND MAILING ADDRESS': P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August 26, 2008 John Harrison, Secretary/Fire District Manager Mattituck Fire District P.O. Box 666 Mattituck, NY 11952 Re: Shinn Vineyards, Oregon Road, Mattituck, SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 Dear Mr. Harrison: Last year we referred the above-referenced site plan to you for your review and recommendations. At that time your district recommended an electric fire well be installed at the property. The owner has subsequently petitioned New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets to ask for relief from site plan requirements, including installing the suggested fire well, citing the high cost of doing so. The NYS Department of Agriculture and Markets responded asking us to provide the rationale for why the fire well was necessary. They wondered why a fire well would be necessary if there is already one within 1000' of the property (the applicant told Ag & Markets there is one, however I do not know where exactly it might be located). We have a short time-frame to respond to the state (by September 8) and would appreciate a reply from you by September 3 if possible, letting us know whether the fire well recommendation can be waived, or if not, the reasons why it must be provided. Thank you for your attention to this matter. SH~eatherely' Town Planning Director cc: Patricia Finnegan, Town Attorney PATRICIA A. FINNE(~AN TOWN ATTORNEY patricia.finnegan@town.southold.ny.us KIERAN M. CORCORAN ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY kieran.corcoran@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route'~ P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York :L1971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1,939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD August6,2008 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAlL Danielle C. Cordier, Esq. Counsel's Office NYS Dept. of Agriculture and Markets 10B Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235-0001 RE: Shinn Vineyard, LLC Dear Ms. Cordier: Please allow this letter to confirm our conversation wherein it was agreed that the Town of Southold's time period for responding to your letter dated July 8, 2008 has been extended to September 8, 2008. Thank you for your courtesy. PatriciaA. Fih~feg~n / / Town Attorne~_.~ ~ PAF/Ik cc: Members of the Town Board Members of the Planning Board STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS 'IOB Airline Drive Division of Agricultural Protection and Development Services 518-457-7076 Fax. 518-457.2716 Albany, New York '12235 Patricia A. Finnegan Office of the Town Attorney Town of Southold P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Re: Review of the Administration of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code as it Pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC, Which is Located Within Suffolk County Agricultural District No. t Dear Ms. Finnegan: By letter dated October 19, 2007 you responded to William Kimball's September 13, 2007 letter concerning the Department's review of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code with respect to site plan review requirements for Shinn Vineyard, LLC and for compliance with Agriculture and Markets Law (AML) §305-a, subdivision 1. I have discussed this matter with the Division of Agricultural Protection and Development Services which has authorized me to respond as follows. Shinn Vineyard consists of two adjoining parcels. One parcel, approximately 1.2 acres in size, contains the farm structures and the primary residence. The second parcel, consisting of approximately 21.3 acres, is planted to vinifera wine grapes and is subject to a development rights easement that is held by the Town of Southold. According to information received from Barbara Shinn and David Page, the site is operated as a vineyard, farm winery and a small four-room inn. Structures on the farm include a farm house and five additional buildings, including a wine storage building and barrel cellar, a 125 year old barn that serves as the winery, a tasting room in the 125 year old barn, a shed, and an equipment storage building. According to Ms. Shinn and Mr. Page, the farm has been in operation since 2004 and receives an agricultural assessment. The winery produces 2,500 cases of wine annually. The farm is located within the Town's Agricultural-Conservation Zoning Use District and Suffolk County Agricultural District No. 1, a county adopted, State certified agricultural district. Patricia A. Finnegan, Town Attorney Page 2 Pursuant to AML §305-a, subd. 1, local governments are prohibited from enacting and administering laws that would unreasonably restrict farm operations located within an agricultural district unless it can be shown that the public health or safety is threatened. A farm operation is defined, in part, as "the land and on-farm buildings, equipment, manure processing and handling facilities and practices which contribute to the production, preparation and marketing of crops, livestock and livestock products as a commercial enterprise." (AML §301, subd. 11). "Fruits," including "...apples, peaches, grapes, cherries and berries" are included in the definition of "crops, livestock and livestock products" in AML §301, subd. 2(b). Therefore, the on- farm production, preparation and marketing of grapes are considered part of a farm operation.. As long as the wine that is prepared is composed primarily (i.e., 51% or more) of gra~PeS produced on the farm, the processing and fermentation activity and the on-farm buildings and equipment which are needed to produce and store the grapes, which are processed on the farm, are all part of the farm operation and considered part of the "production and preparation" of wine. The on-farm marketing of the wine is also part of the farm operation. The use of the existing home as a bed-and-breakfast provides needed income and tourism/marketing opportunities to Shinn Vineyards, however, it is not part of a farm operation as defined in AML § 301, subd. 11. Based upon documentation submitted by Barbara Shinn and David Page, and Charles R. Cuddy, an attorney representing Shinn Vineyard, the Department has determined that Shinn Vineyard, LLC is a "farm operation" as defined by AML §305-a, subd. 11. Town of Southold Zoning Code §280-13, subd. A (4) provides that wineries are a permitted use within the Agricultural-Conservation Use Zoning District when the wine is produced primarily from grapes grown and sold on Long Island, the winery is located on a parcel with at least 10 acres used as a vineyard or other agricultural purpose and which is owned by the winery owner, the winery structures are set back at least 100 feet from a major road, and the winery has obtained site plan approval. Ms. Shinn and Mr. Page requested that the Department review the Town of Southold's site plan requirements and their application to the winery. In your October 19th letter, you indicate that site plan review is necessary to address property access (ingress/egress) to the winery; adequate road width, traffic flow, parking (including handicap access) and pedestrian movement on the site; fire safety; lighting; public utilities; drainage and environmental considerations. The Department understands that Shinn Vineyard is not proposing to construct new buildings or exterior modifications to any of the existing buildings. The winery intends to use the existing structures on the property to conduct the operation. Based upon aerial imagery of the site from 1994, 2001 and 2004, very few modifications to the footprint of the structures and interior roads have been made to the property. The only apparent change is the relocation of an access road from the northeastern side of the barn to the southwestern side of the same barn. It appears that gravel may have also been applied to the access road and parking area. Patricia A. Finnegan, Town Attorney Page 3 It is the Department's general position that the construction of on-farm buildings should not be subject to site plan review. The application of site plan requirements to farm operations, particularly for farms that use existing structures and do not plan to construct new facilities on a property, can have significant adverse impacts on such operations. Site plan review, depending upon the specific requirements in a local law, can be expensive due to the need to retain professional assistance to certify plans or simply to prepare the type of detailed plans required by the law. For example, in this case, site plan review would be costly as the assistance of a surveyor and/or engineer is needed to comply with Southold Zoning Code §280-133(B) (1) (k) [survey with a map scale of one inch - 20 feet or larger to clearly show required information on the site plan] and §280-133(B) (2) (a), which requires, in part, a two foot contour map of the property. In addition, the applicant would have to submit to architectural review, landscaping/screening requirements, a time consuming review process, a public hearing and other requirements. In the Department's view, generally, a farm operation within a State certified agricultural district should not have to retain professional assistance to undergo site plan review. The lengthy approval process in some local laws can also be burdensome, especially considering a farm's need to undertake management and production practices in a timely and efficient manner. The Department, however, recognizes that local governments may wish to review agricultural development and projects within their borders. As a result, the Department developed a model streamlined site plan review process which attempts to respond to the farmers' concerns while ensuring the ability to have local issues examined. The process could be used for farm buildings and structures (new and significant expansions) proposed for a site, but should not be required for non-structural agricultural uses. The Department's Guidelines for Review of Local Zoning and Planning Laws, a copy of which was provided to you with William Kimball's September 13, 2007 ietter, includes additional information on this topic. It is the Department's recommendation that if farm operations, including Shinn Vineyard, located within county adopted, State certified agricultrual districts, are to be subject to site plan review, that the Town utilize a streamlined process as described in the Department's Guidelines. According to your October 19th letter, Shinn Vineyard LLC began the site plan review process by submission of its site plan application on August 10, 2006. Upon receipt of the application, the Town Planning Board made a SEQRA Type 2 determination and on August 22, 2006, referred the application to applicable agencies for comment. The Mattituck Fire District requested the installation of an electric fire well and required that all drives and roadways within the farm be improved to meet the Town's minimum highway specifications. The Planning Board also received responses from Land Preservation, Suffolk County Planning and Architectural Review. On October 27, 2006 the Southold Planning Department provided the farm operation with a list of elements that must be incorporated into the application. You indicate that the applicant has not responded to the Planning Department's request. Upon a review of the Southold Planning Department's letter the Department has the following comments. Patricia A. Finnegan, Town Attorney Page 4 The Planning Department's October 27, 2006 letter requested drainage calculations, installation of an electric fire well, a fifteen-foot wide road, and four foot landscape buffer. In this instance there does not appear to be stormwater runoff issues and no new construction is proposed. The buildings are pre;existing and the roads are pervious. Therefore, in the Department's view, drainage calculations should not be necessary. Please provide any information which the Town believes supports the need for drainage calculations in this situation. In past reviews, the Department has supported the need to meet road construction standards for that portion of the farm read that is located within the Town right-of-way, but not beyond the right-of-way. In the Department's view, requiring all interior roads to meet such standards is unreasonably restrictive in possible violation of the AML. The Department not has found a town's application of the New York State Uniform Building Code to buildings on the farm that are accessed by the public at large and are not exempt from the Uniform Code to be unreasonably restrictive. A requirement to install an electric fire well may be unreasonably restrictive. According to David Page, the cost to install an electric fire well would be between thirty and thirty-five thousand dollars. Mr. Page indicated that an existing electric fire well is located less than 1000 feet from the farm. The Mattituck Fire Department informed Dr. Robert Somers, Manager of the Department's Agricultural Protection Unit, that when such a well is constructed, it becomes the property of the fire department; and that the wells are used to fill the trucks that travel to the fire. In the Department's view, it is not necessary to construct a fire well on the Shinn Vineyard property due to the close proximity of an existing well and construction should not be mandated through the Town's. site plan review process. The Department requests that the Town provide a rationale for such a requirement and any supporting information where such facilities have been required for other farms of similar size and scope within the Town. Compliance with Federal and State handicapped parking requirements is not unreasonably restrictive. A requirement to screen a farm operation or agricultural structures from view has been found by the Department to be unreasonably restrictive. Screening requirements suggest that farm operations and associated structures are, in some way, objectionable or different from other forms of land use that do not have to be screened. Farmers should not be required to bear the extra costs to provide screening unless such requirements are otherwise warranted by special local conditions or necessary to address a threat to the public health or safety. For the reasons set forth above, the Department finds that the Town of Southold's Zoning Code and its administration by the Town and the Planning Board to require that Shinn Vineyards submit a full site plan, which requires the assistance of licensed professional(s), development of drainage calculations, compliance with landscaping requirements, construction of an electric fire hydrant and upgrading of interior roads to be consistent with the Town's minimum road requirements, unreasonably restricts the farm operation in possible violation of AML §305-a, subd. 1. Patricia A. Finnegan, Town Attorney Page 5 The Department would, however, like to hear from the Town and Planning Board on the issues raised. If the Town or Planning Board believes that the public health or safety is threatened by the farm operation's activities which are the subject of this review, please provide us with any documentation or other evidence you may have to that effect. We request that you respond in writing within 30 days of receipt of this letter. The Department will consider your responses in evaluating whether the Zoning Code and its administration are in compliance with AML §305-a, subd. 1. The Department would like to work with the Town and the Planning Board to resolve the issues concerning the Town's Zoning Code and ^ML §305-a. Dr. Robert Somers, Manager of the Agricultural Protection Unit; may be contacted at (518) 457- 2713 concerning the agricultural issues identified. If you have any questions, please contact me at (518) 457-2449. Thank you for your cooperation. S~.~.~rel~,i--r~ v , Danielle C. Cordier Senior Attorney CC: Hon. Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Ms. Jeri Woodhouse, Chair, Town Planning Board Charles R. Cuddy, Esq. Barbara Shinn and David Page, Shinn Vineyard, LLC Ken Schmitt, Chair, Suffolk County AFPB Robert Haggerty, First Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of ^&M Jerry Cosgrove, Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Ruth A. Moore, Counsel, Dept. of A&M William Kimball, Director APDS, Dept. of A&M Dr. Robert Somers, Dept. of A&M ~ATRICIA A. FINNEGAN ~;UWN ATTORNEY patricia, finnegan @town.southold.ny.us KIERAN M. CORCORAN ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY kieran.corcoran@town.southold.ny.us LOKI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY ]ori.montefusco@town.southold.ny.us SCOTT A. RUSSELL Supervisor Town Hall Annex, 54375 Route 25 P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Telephone (631) 765-1939 Facsimile (631) 765-6639 OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Mr. William Kimball, Director NYS Dept. of Agriculture and Markets 10B Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235 RE: October 19. 2007 t .... Review of the Administration of the To~,. ~ South01d;s Z~)ning Code as it Pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC, w~i(~'t~ is Located within Suffolk County Agricultural District No. I Dear Mr. Kimball: I write in response to your letter dated September 13, 2007, received on September 17, 2007, relating to the above-referenced matter. The Town of Southold Site Plan Requirements are found at Section 280-127 of the Town Code, and I understand you have been provided with a copy of that law. The site plan process is intended to provide for review of various site elements that impact primarily upon public health and safety, in addition to other valuable planning considerations. In padicular, where the citizens of the Town and the public at large are invited to visit the proposed site, attention is paid to safe and efficient ingress and egress to and from the site, safe navigation within the site, safe parking and pedestrian movement on the site, appropriate fire safety consideration, drainage and environmental considerations, among others. With respect to agricultural applications that do not affect the visitation of the site by the public at large, the Town Code provides flexibility to streamline the process and waive numerous elements of the review process. For example, although a public hearing is required for site plan approval, the Town amended the site plan regulations in 2004 to give the Planning Board the authority to waive the public hearing requirement and any other technical requirements "for uses strictly relating to agriculture (but excepting retail winery operations)", Section 280-131(H) & 133(C). This amendment was made to give accommodation to agricultural operations, but not to those retail Mr. William Kimball October 19, 2007 Page 2 winery operations where the public regularly comes on the property. In fact, the Planning Board recently did waive the public hearing requirement on a site plan for a winery which did not include a public retail operation on the site. The review of retail winery facilities in the Town of Southold should be taken in its proper context. It is estimated that over one million visitors enjoyed the East End wineries in 2006. As public transpodation is not typical, these visitors come to Southold wineries by car, private coach bus and limousine. It has been the long-standing practice of the Town to require site plan review on wineries to ensure adequate parking, drainage, traffic flow, lighting, public utilities, and handicapped access. The application is referred to the Suffolk County Planning Commission, local fire department, the Town Building Department, Town Engineer, and the County or State Depadment of Transportation, as applicable. With the cooperation of the applicant, the process moves swiftly, and can be completed in a few months. As you note, the needs of each agricultural site plan must be evaluated on its individual merits. Specifically, the Shinn Winery application involves a bed and breakfast use and farm winery operation with a tasting room open to the public at large, on a 53,000 square foot parcel. Your letter indicates that Shinn Vineyards consists of 22.5 acres of land, however, it is important to note that development rights have been sold to the Town of Southold on all but the 53,000 square foot parcel known as SCTM No. 1000-100-4-3. Thus, the bed and breakfast and the retail winery operation, and associated parking, access and other necessary site improvements, are to be located on the SCTM No. 1000-100-4-3.1 parcel. A copy of the development rights easement is attached for your reference. This application is an "as built" application, meaning that the structures were built without the prior site plan approval, and, to the knowledge of the Town, have been and are open to the public on an ongoing basis. This fact is notable because the applicant can claim to be suffering no delay from the site plan review process, and because the Town has made every effort to bring the applicant into compliance without code enforcement activity. In that vein, please see the attached letter from the Building Department dated April 17, 2006, asking the applicant to begin the process of obtaining the necessary Town and other agency approvals for the completed work. The Shinn Winery site plan application was received on August 10, 2006. The application was referred to applicable agencies on August 22, 2006. On September 12, 2006, the Planning Board made a SEQRA (Type 2) determination. A September 13, 2006 letter from the Mattituck Fire District requested the installation of an electric fire well and required that all drives and roadways adhere to the Southold Town minimum highway specifications. Responses from Land Preservation, Suffolk County Planning and Architectural Review were received by Planning during September and October. Mr. William Kimball October 19, 2007 Page 3 On October 27, 2006, the Southold Planning Department sent a letter to the agent for the applicant listing the elements that needed to be incorporated into the application to move towards approval. A copy of that letter is attached. Among the items listed were questions relating to: · the location of proper drainage; · location of an electric fire well requested by the local Fire District; · appropriate size, number and location of parking stalls; · appropriate handicapped parking as required by law; · commercial truck ingress/egress; and · dimensions for curb cuts and aisles. These inquiries are all directly related to public safety issues. Additional requests related to landscape buffers were minimal and incidental to these safety requests. Although this letter was sent over a year ago, the applicant has not responded. As noted above, an additional consideration relating to this application is the intensity of use on the available 53,000 square foot site. While you note in your letter that the site consists of "22.5 acres of land", the remainder of the 22.5 acres of property is subject to the aforementioned preservation easement bargained for and granted in favor of the Town of Southold, restricting the retail commercial use of such land. Any attempt to use a portion of the preserved land for the benefit of a retail commercial use or for the retail commercial portion of this site is subject to the negotiated terms of the easement and review of the Town's Land Preservation Committee. I hope this response provides you with some context for your analysis, and the Town looks forward to addressing any issues you may find warrant further discussion. PAF/Ik Enclosure cc: Members of the Town Board Members of the Planning Board V/~,~, u ly yours~/~/ Town Attorney Number of pages TORRENS RE. Al, F,qTATE APR 0 4 2000 T RIdq..qFER TAX ,SUFFOLK 35549 Deed / Mortgage Tax Stamp FEES EDWARD P. ROHAIIIE CLERK OF SUFFOLK COUNTY Recording / Filing Slamps Page / Filing Fee TP-584 Nolation EA-52 17 (Colmiy) EA 5217 (SHte) RPTSA __ 500 P, cal Propeay ]'ax Service Agency Verification Lot Satisfactions/Discharges/Releases List Property Owners l~ a g Addres ~,~//~/2t _ . , · Morlgage Amt. I. Basic Tax 2. Additional Tax Sub Total Spec./Assit. Or Spec./Add TOT. MTG. TAX Iteld for Apportionment -- Transfer Tax ~) Mansion Tax Ihe properly covered~y this mo~gag~Ts or will be improved by a one or two family dwelling only. YES or NO If NO, see appropriate tax clause ~n page # _ of this instrument. Connnunity Preservation Fund Consideration Amount $/~jP,, Z~. CPF Tax Due $ 0 R~S~EiVED 'o?d -- $ ant Land APR 0 4 2000 i' / CC,MMUNFr't' ,: -- Title Company Information Title # ~ Suftblk County Recording & ~ment Page (S)ECIFY TYPE OF ~'I1U J~ ) / - l]~e prenfises herein is sitmted h~ S~FOLK COUP', ~W YO~ In fl~e VILLAGE (OVERI DEED OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS THIS INDENTURE, made this 20th day of March, 2000 BETWEEN David Page and Barbara Shinn, residin9 at 19965 Soundview Avenue, Southold, New York 11971, party of the first part, AND the TOWN OF SOUTHOLD, a municipal corporation having its office and principal place of business at Main Road, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, party of the second part; WITNESSETH, that the party of the first part, in consideration of $183,600.00 (One Hundred Eighty-three Thousand Six Hundred Dollars) lawful money of the United States and other good and varuable consideration paid by the party of the second part, DOES HEREBY GRANT AND RELEASE unto the party of the second part, its successors and assigns forever, THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, by which is meant the permanent legal interest and right, as authorized by section 247 of the New York State General Municipal Law, as amended, to permit, require or restrict the use of the premises exclusively for agricultural production as that term is presently defined in Chapter 25 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, and the right to prohibit or restrict the use of the premises for any purpose other than agricultural production, to the property described as follows: ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being in the Town of Southold, County of Suffolk and State of New York, bounded and described as follows: AMENDED 3/20/2000 SCHEDULE A - DESCRIPTION ALL that certain plot, piece or parcel of land, situate, lying and being at Hattituck, in the Town of Southold, Counly of Suffolk and S~ate of New York, bounded and described as follows: BEGINNING at a point located on the southerly side of Oregon Road distant 662,35 feet easterly from the Intersection of Oregon Road with the easterly side of Mill Lane, and from said point of boglnnlng continuing along the southerly side of Oregon Road easterly on a course, North 59 degrees 10 minutes 19 seconds East, 500.00 feet to a point; THENCE southerly along the lands of Page and Shlnn, South 21 degrees 27 minutes 00 seconds East, 267.07 feet to a point; THENCE continuing along the lands of Page and Shlnn, North 67 degrees 34 minutes 12 seconds East~ 235.94 feet; THENCE southerly and paraltel being ten (10) feet off the property line of Page and Shinn with Sidor, owner to the east, South 22 degrees 25 minutes 48 seconds East, 1,229.25 feet to a point; THENCE South 37 degrees 26 minutes 00 seconds West, 50.60 fee: to a point and the lands of Courtney and the Town of $outhold (having development rights thereto); THENCE westerly, South 64 degrees 29 minutes 00 seconds West, 600,00 feet to the lands of Krupski and $idor; THENCE along said lands, North 27. degrees 47 minutes O0 seconds West, ~.,4cJ2.80 feet to the point or place of BEGINNING. TOGETHER with the non-exclusive right, if any, of the party of the first part as to the use for ingress and egress of any streets and roads abutting the above described premises to the center lines thereof. TOGETHER with the appurtenances and all the estate and rights of the party of the first part in and to said premises, insofar as the rights granted hereunder are concerned. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said Development Rights in the premises herein granted unto the party of the second part, its successors and assigns, forever; AND the party of the first part covenants that the party of the first part has not done or suffered anything whereby the said premises have been encumbered in any way whatever, except as aforesaid. The party of the first part, as a covenant running with the land in perpetuity, further covenants and agrees for the party of the first part, and the heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of the party of the first part, to use the premises on and after the date of this instrument solely for the purpose of agricultural production as defined herein. AND the party of the first part, as a covenant running with the land in perpetuity, further covenants and agrees for the party of the first part, and the heirs, legal representatives, succesors and assigns of the party of the first part, that the parcels of real property described herein are open agricultural lands actually used in bona fide agricultural production as defined in GML section 247 3 as shall remain open lands actually used in bona fide agricultural production. This covenant shall run with the land in perpetuity. AND the party of the first part, covenants in all aspects to comply with Section 13 of the Lien Law, as same applies with said conveyance. THE pady of the first part and the party of the second part do hereby convenant and agree in perpetuity that either of them or their respective heirs, successors, legal representatives or assigns, shall only use the premises on and after this date for the purpose of such agricultural production and the grantor covenants and agrees that the underlying fee title to the property described herein may not be subdivided into plots by the filing of a subdivision map pursuant to Sections 265, 276 and 277 of the Town Law and Section 335 of the Real Property Law, or any of such sections of the Town or Real Property Law or any laws replacing or in furtherance of them. The underlying fee may be divided by conveyance of parts thereof to heirs and next of kin, by will or by operation of law, or with the written recordable consent of the Purchaser. This covenant shall run with the land in perpetuity. THE word "party" shall be construed as if it reads "parties" whenever the sense of this indenture so requires. THE party of the first part, the heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of the pady of the first part covenants and agrees that it will (a) not generate, store or dispose of hazardous substances on the premises, nor allow 4 others to do so; (b) comply with all of the Environmental Laws; allow party of the second part and its agents reasonable access to the premises for purposes of ascertaining site conditions and for inspection of the premises for compliance with this agreement after notice. This covenant shall not preclude lawful, normal and proper application of legal fertilizers, pesticides and fungicides for legitimate agricultural purposes. This covenant shall run with the land in perpetuity. THE party of the first part, its heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns of the party of the first part covenants and agrees that it shall indemnify and hold party of the second part and any of its officers, agents, employees, and, their respeciive successors and assigns; harmless from and against any and all damages, claims, losses, liabilities and expenses, including, without limitation, responsibility for legal, consulting, engineering and other costs and expenses which may arise out of (1) any misrepresentation in any representation or warranty made by seller in this agreement; (2) the breach or non-performance of any convenants required by this agreement to be performed by the party of the first part, subsequent to the closing of title herein; or (3) any action, suit, claim, or proceeding seeking money damages, injunctive relief, remedial action, or other remedy by a party other than Purchaser, its agents or employees, by reason of a violation or non-compliance with any environmental law; or the improper disposal, discharge or release of solid wastes, pollutants or hazardous substances; or exposure to any chemical substances, noises or vibrations to the extent they arise from the ownership, operation, and/or condition of the premises prior to or subsequent to the execution of the deed of Development Rights. This covenant shall run with the land in perpetuity. AS set forth in Chapter 25 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS acquired by the Town pursuant to the provisions of that chapter shall not thereafter be alienated, except upon the affirmative vote of a majority of the Town Board after a public hearing and upon the approval of the electors of the Town voting on a proposition submitted at a special or biennial town election. No subsequent amendment of the provisions of this subsection shall alter the limitations imposed upon the alienation of development rights acquired by the Town prior to any such amendment. This covenant shall run with the land in perpetuity. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the party of the first part has duly executed this deed the day and year first written above. BARBARA SHINN Purchaser: Town of Southold JEAN V~L COCHRAN, SUPERVISOR 6 STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) )SS: On the 20th day of March, 2000, before me personally appeared DAVID PAGE, personally known to me or provided to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that be executed the same in Ills capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument, the individual, or the person upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed the instrument. Notay Publ{~:ff '~ ~/d~ KAREN J. HAGEN NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York No, 02HA4927029 Oualified In Suffolk County STATE OF NEW YORK) )SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) On the 20th day of March, 2000, before me personally appeared BARBARA SITfNN, personally known, to me or provided to me ou the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that she executed the same in her capacity, and that by her signature on the instrument, the indMdnal, or the person]q>on bebalf of which the indMdual acted, executed the ins~me~t Nota~' Pubic ~- ~REN J. HAGEN ~T~Y PUBMG, State o~ New York No. 02HA4927029 ~uallfled" in Suffolk Count0 ~ ~ ~ STATE OF NEW YORK) COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) )SS: On the 20th day of March, 2000, before me personally appeared JEAN W. COCHRAN, personally known to me or provided to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the individual whose name is subscribed to the within iustrument and acknowledged to me that sbe executed the same m her capacity, and that by her signature on the instrument, the individual, o~ tile muuicipal c(~)rporation upon behalf of which the individual acted, executed tile instrnm.eat. / Notary Public - ' d~REN. J. HA . . NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New Yom No. 02HA4927029 Qualified in Suffolk County ~ommission Expires March 21,20 ~ § 25-30. Definitions. As used m this chapter, the terms used herein are defined as follows: AGRICULTURAL LANDS -- Lands used in bona fide agricultural production. AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION -- The production for commercial purposes of crops, livestock aud livestock products, but not land or po~l. ions thereof used for processing or retail merchandising of such crops, livestock or livestock products. Land used in "agricultural production" shall also include fences, equipment storage buildings, livestock barns, irrigation systems and any other structures used exclusively for agricultural purposes. Mailing Address: EO. Bo× 1547 Riv,.rhead, NY 11901 CHARLES R. CUDDY ATTORNEY AT L AW 445 GRI FFING AVE NUE RIVERHEAD, NEW YORK October 2, 2007 TEL: (631) 369-82~) FA~X: (631) 369-90~) a' · chades.cuddy(u venzon.net Ms. Heather Lanza, Director of Planning Southold Planning Department Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Shinn Wineries Dear Ms. Lanza: As requested, I am enclosing copies of opinion letters from the Department of Agriculture and Markets. I am hopeful that the Town, in responding to that Department, will deal directly with the issue of whether the Town's site plan requirements overly restrict agriculture uses. I expect the Town will deal with that issue and not resort to collateral matters to either explain, justify or rationalize its position with respect to the Shinn Winery. If you wish, I would be pleased to further discuss this matter with you. Very truly yours, Charles R. Cuddy~/ CRC/pc Encls. cc: Patricia Finnegan, Town Attorney ~00~/005 STAT~ OF NEW YORK DEPAR'llJE~T OF ASRICULTORE A~ln MARKETS Na~ L. ~udg~s Co~iss]~x~er :duly lO, 2002 John G. Torgersen 189 Mill Lane Middleburgh. New York 12122 Dear Mr, Torgemen: On May 30, 2002, He Department received your request for an opinion pursuant to AgriCulture a~d Markets Law (AML) ~308, subdivision 4 as to whether the growing of corn and rye and the processing of such crops Into whiskey ia considered 'agricultural in nature." The evaluation of land uses pursuant to AML §308, aubd. 4 is conducted on a case-by-case basis and in consultation with the Advis~pj Council on Agriculture. In your May 29. 2002 le~er, you indicate that on property located within a county adopte~i, ~ate certified agricultural district in Middleburgh, New York, you intend to grow corn ~nd rye, ferment and distill the grains Into whiskey, and whole~ale the whiskey to licensed distributom. AML §301, subd. 11 defines "farm operation' as ~[t]he land and on-farm buildings, equipment, manure processing and handling facilities, and practices which contnbute to the production, preparation and marketing of crops, livestock and livestock products as a commercial enterprise, including a 'commercial home boarding operat~n' as. defined in subdivisfon thirteen of this section.' AML §301, subd. 2 defines 'crops, livestock and livestock products" to include, but net be limited to. a number of agricultural commodities, Under subdivision 2.a., 'crops" includes %,corn, wheat, oats, rye. bar~ey, hay, potatoes and dh/ beans," Therefore, the on-farm production, preparation and marketing of ~crops," as defined In AML §301, eubd. 2.a, ia a farm operation. Agricultural comrnodlties produced 'on-farm" include any products that may have been produced by a farmer on their 'farm operation," which ceuld include a number of land parcels owned or leased by that farmer throughout a town, county, or the State. The Department considers all such land, when it is located in a State certified agricultural district, as part of the farm operation. John G. Torgersen (c~nt.) Page 2 As Ion9 as the whiskey that is prepmed is composed primarily of ingredients produced on the farm, the distilling a~vlty and the nn.farm buildings and equipment which are needed tO distill and store the (:om and rye which is processed on the farm are part otr the farm operation. The on-farm marketing of the whiskey i3 a. lso part of the farm c~erat~en. Based upon the information you have provided and applicable law, and upon consultation w~th Ihs A~visory Council on Agriculture, it is my opinion thal the use of the land in question for ',he production of corn and rye, the dlstillalion of such crops to produce whiskey, and the on-larm marketing of the whiskey, is agrioultura~ in nature. These activities are, ot' course, Sul:~ect to any State or federal requirements applicable to the processing, storage and sale of alcoholic products. Sincerely, Nathan L R~dgers Commissioner NLR/rcs Advisory Council on Agdcultu~'e Schoharle County Agricultural and Farmland Protection Board STATE OF HEW YORK AJbany, New Yolk 12235 Hon. William Tully. Supervisor Town of Chester 1786 Kings Highway Chester, NY 10918 Hon. Donald L. Semtta. Chair Tow~ of Chester Zoning Board of Appeals 1786 Kings Highway Chester, NY 10918 Hon. Raymond Johanson, Chair Town of Chester Planning Board 1786 Kings Highway Chester, NY 10918 Re-' Review of Me Town of Chester's Zoning Cocla and the Administration of the on a Farm Operation Located Within Orange County Agricultural Cqstrict No. 1 Dear Supervisor Tully and Messrs. Johanson and Semtta: As indicated in my February 5, 2004 letter to Supervisor Tully, the Oepadment received a request from Kenneth B. Lifshitz for a review of the Town of Chester's Zoning Code as it pertains to the estalflishment of a farm winery for compliance with Agri~lture and Markets Law (AML} §305-a, subdiv~ion 1. Based on information received from Mr. Lifshl~ and a farm visit on March 18, 2004 by Dr. Robert Seiners, Chief of the Division's Agricultural Protection Unit, Mr. Lifshitz produces several varieties of grapes on hi~ property, including Cabemet Franc, Chardonnay, Traminette Hybrid and Gew~rztmminer. He intends to place additional acreage Into produ~on in the near future by planting either Traminette or Riealing varieties. Mr. L~hltT_ also indicates he iS interested in converting a portion of his residence into a wine testing room and constructing an addition onto the back of his residence for the processing and storage of the wine made from the grapes grown in his vineyard and from other growers. The four parcels of Mr. Lifshilz's land (Tax Pamel ID Numbers 15-1-32, 15-1- 33.1, 15-1-3t.2 and 15-1-35) to be used for producing grapes and making wine are within Orange County Agricuitura! Dis~ct No. I (added in January 2004) and the Town's SR-2.5 zoning district. Hon. William Tully, Supervisor Messrs. Johanson and Serotta Page 2 Dr. Somem was aocx~mpanlad on the farm vim by Stove Mc, Kay, Multi*County Comm=roial 6mall Fn~it. Cra~=, Extanoion Edu0ator tOr C, ornell Cae~eralNR Extension. Dr. Seiners obsen~ed that most of the opemUon was obscured by either natural topography ow trees/vngefatio~. Mr. McKay examined the v~nes and the trellia system and disc~sesd pruning technique~ with Mr. Lifshilz. The vines were malure and of fruit bearing age. Each vine had been pruned and was ready to support this year's production of grapes. The area where Mr. I.ifshitz proposed the wine tasting morn is easily accessible from the parking area and the I:m3posed site for the processing and storage of wine was readily accessible to the vineyard. The Schedule of District Regulations for the SR-2.5 zoning disMcl in the Town's Zoning Cede does not list farm ~narles (or agrlcutiurai uses or farms) as pdndpal pem~ilf, ed uaes or sp~ial permit uses, Applications submitted by M~. Lif'.shilz plier to 2004 to establish a farm winery were, therefore, denied by the Tov~ Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals Pursuant to AML §305-a, subd, 1, local governments are proh~ited from e~acting and admi~isterlag laws that would unreasonably restrict farm operations located within an agricultural district unless It can be shown that the public health or safety is threatem~d. A farm operatinn is defined sa 'the land and o~-farm buildings, equipment, manure proee'~ging and handling facilities, and pme~oes whioh oont~'bute to the production, prspataUon and marketing of crops, livestock and INestcx~ preducts as o ~ommer~ist entoq~o, including e 'oommemiel homo boarding opnmUon' aS doiinod in subdl~on thirteen of this section. Such farm opereiJon may consist of one or mom parcels of owned or rented land, which parcels may be contiguous or noncontiguous to eacl~ other.' (AML f~301, subd. 11). 'Fruits,' including '...apples, peaches, grapes, cherries and berries' are included in fha dnflnlti~n nf 'nrnf'~. Ilvc~ffr~,k ~nrl IIv~=~h'~ pmdlmls' in AMI §3Q1. Sllbl'J, 2.h,, Therefore, the on-farm preduction, preparation and marketing of grapes Is a farm opera,on. As long as the wine that is prepared is compeaed i~ma~ly (i.e., 51% or mom) of grapes produced on the farm, the processing and fermentation acfivi~ and the on-farm buildings and equipment which are needed to ixoduca and store the grapes, which are pmcassed on the farm, are all part of the [arm operation and =onsidemcl part of the "production and prep3ration" of wine, The on-farm marketing of t~a wine Is aaa part of'ha farm operation. Mr. Lifshilz indicates that, Initially, aplxoxJmately 51% of the juice used to pmcluce ~ wine will come from the farm's own grapes while 4g% will be purchased from Finger Lakes and Long Island grape growers. He indicates that he eventually would like to produce most of the juice needed to make his wine. The Town Zoning Code, which does not list agriculture es a principal permitted use or special permit use In the $R-1, SR-2.5, SR-6. Re, LB-SL, LB, GC, OP, IP and I Zoning Distficls. would prohibit a c, tart-up farm on land that ia located w~in an agricultural dislrid and such zoning districts. The Zoning Code would present difficulties to existing farms as they attempt to expand or change the scope of an Hon. William Tully, Supervisor Messrs. Johanson and Serotta Page 3 operation in such dl~-Irlct=. Pre-existln0 a0rir~J~ml uses may b~ auld in ~e Town C~c, ~cle III, {9~8, as a pt~fi~ ~n~ing use. T~y am, non~e~, non~nf~mi~ ~ u~er ~e C~e. N~nfo~ng ~ under ~e ~ing ~e subj~ fa~ ~erafi~s ~ sign~t ~fion6 a~ lime.ns w~ allow~ ~ am not required ~ o~e u~. Fu~, ~ Is wall k~ ~t far pu~ses of ~ning law, ~nforming u¢.~, ~e I~al, am ~t e~m~ ~r d~l~ ~ I~ons on '~eir ~anuan~ am o~n des~n~ ~ er~nate ~em. Under A~de II1, {98~(A)(2) of · e C~e, a ~n~i~ u~ '...sha~ not be enla~, e~end~, ~m~ed or pl~ on a diff~ ~bn of ~e ~ o~p~ by ~ uses..., nor ~NI ~y e~emal ~e~e ~ s~h u~ ~ ~c~s~ by any ~ w~ver.' ~n~g uses ~A and shall ~ be m~M~ E s~ use h~ been di~nu~ ~r any m~ ~r a ~ of one ~ or ~m. [~(AX3) and (4~. The ~n~lng u~ limi~tions ~uM pmve~ ~e use ~ ~ la~ ~r a~ pu~s by ~e f~r or a new ~rm ~ if ~e I~d Is Io~tod in a ~ w~ch d~s n~ ~E ag~c~=m a~ · e ~e ~ar pe~ has pa~. For ~m~e, ~la~ may ~ ~nay ~ in agar.mi pmd~on d~ ~ ~ doa~ of ~e fa~ o~ra~, a ~a~ b~, or ~linlon in a ~n~gn m~e p~mm. In general, the constrdctlon of on-farm buildings and the use of land for agricultural pul-poses should not be subject to site plan review, special use permits Or non.conforming use requirements when COnducted In a coun[.j adopted, State ce~'ifled agricultural distd¢L The purpose of an agdcultmal district is to encourage the development and improvement of agficuRural land end the use of agricultural land fo~ the pruduu[~ull u[ f~(I al',d eth~ a~eyieultu1131 plx:duct~ wflich Is set forth ~ ~ lx-di~y of the State in the New York State Constitution, Arlfcle XlV, Section 4. Therefore, generally, ag~tJl~ral Jl~.,~ ~md the ~Olla~gtj~n of on-tare buildi~ls as part of a farm operation should be allowed uses when the farm opera,on is located withIn an agricultural distrlcL Enclosed is a copy of the Department's guidance dooument COncerning 'Local Zen/nB end Planning Laws' for your Information. For the masons set fmlh above, the Department has concluded that the Town of Chester Zu.il~l Cud='6 prehlbifi~ of agrloultural uae~ on lend Iocate~ in the Zoning Disthct that ~ within an agrbulN~ d~mct, as administered by the Planning Board and the ZBA to prohibit the co~sf~uction and operation of a farm winery by the Lif~hib: farm operation a~ described above, unreasonably restricts the farm ol3e~tJon ill possible violation of AML §305-a, The Department would, however, like to hear from the Town, 7_.BA and Planning Board on the issues raised. I1' the Town, ZBA or Planning Board believe that the public health or safety is threatened by the farm operation, please provide us with any documentation or other evidence you may have to lhat effect. We request that y~J respond in writing within 30 days of recei~ of this leffer. The Depara31erl! will ConsiDer your i~-'upu~m~ in evalueSng whether the :Zoning CoclR and ito odminictration are in comlfliance with AML §305-a, subd. 1. Hon. William Tully, Supennsc~r Messrs. Johanson and Serotta Page 4 The Depa~'nent would like to work with the Town to resolve the Issues concerning the Town's Zoning Co<Je and AML §305-a. Rot~ert Seiners, Chief of the Agricultural Protectio~ Unit may be contacted at (518) 457-2713 concerning the agricultural issues identified. If the Town's attemey has any questions, he may contact John Rusnica, Associate Attorney, at (518) 457-2449. ~m T. Blot Director cc; Kenneth L~hitz Jacl~ Hoeffller, Chair, Orange County AFPB David A, Donovan, Esq., Town Attorney Robert Some, m, DepL of A&M John Rusnica, Associale Attorney, Dept. of ASM Ruth A. Moore, First Deputy Commissioner, DepL of A&M Rick 23mrnennan, Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of A&M Joan A. Kehoe, Esq., Counsel, Dept. of A&M STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND MARKETS 10B Airline Drive Albany, New York 12235 -- Division of Agricultural Protection and Development Services 518-457-7076 Fax. 5~8-457.2716 September 13, 2007 Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Town of Southold Planning Board Chair PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Re: Review of the Administration of the Town of Southold's Zoning Code as it Pertains to Shinn Vineyard, LLC, Which is Located Within Suffolk County Agricultural District No. 1 Dear Supervisor Russell: The Department received a request from Barbara Shinn to review the Town of Southold's Zoning Code as it pertains to site plan review requirements for a winery that w~t~ constructed and is operating within existing farm buildings. From information received, Shinn Vineyards consists of 22.5 acres of land, of which 20 acres are planted with vinifera wine grapes. The farm produces eight separate wines and has been in production since 2004. Pursuant to AML §305-a, subdivision 1, local governments ara prohibited from enacting and administering laws that would unreasonably restrict farm operations located within an agricultural district unless it can be shown that the public health or safety is threatened. AML §301, subd. 11 defines "farm operation" as "...the land and on-farm buildings, equipment, manure processing and handling facilities, and practices which contribute to the production, preparation and marketing of crops, livestock and livestock products as a commercial enterprise, including a 'commercial horse boarding operation' as defined in subdivision thirteen of this section and 'timber processing' as defined in subdivision fourteen of this section. Such farm operation may consist of one or more parcels of owned or rented land, which parcels may be contiguous or noncontiguous to each other." The Department performs all reviews on a case-by-case basis, based on the specific facts of a situation. In examining whether a local law is unreasonably restrictive, the Department considers several factors, including, but not limited to: the cost of compliance for the farm operation affected; whether the requirements will cause Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Town of Southold Planning Board Chair Page 2 a lengthy delay in the construction of a farm building or implementation of a practice; whether the requirements adversely affect the farm operator's ability to manage the farm operation effectively and efficiently; whether the requirements restrict production options which could affect the economic viability of the farm; and the availability of less onerous means to achieve the Iocality's objective. The Department also considers whether a State law, regulation or standard applies to the regulated activity. The Department evaluates whether an unreasonable restriction exists and, if it does, whether it can be shown that the public health or safety is threatened by the farm operation or activity which the Town seeks to regulate. Prior to making a decision as to whether a local law unreasonably restricts a farm operation within an agricultural district, the Department considers all pertinent information submitted by the affected farm operator, and the provisions of the local law involved. We also take into account any facts or circumstances that the locality may wish to bring to our attention regarding the issue presented. Therefore, the Town is encouraged to submit, within 30 days of receipt of this letter, any information or documentation which it would like the Department to consider in this review. Thereafter, the Department will inform the Town of its determination and, if it is concluded that an unreasonable restriction exists, we will ask the Town to provide any evidence it may have of a threat to the public health or safety. Enclosed is a copy of AML §305-a and the Department's guidance document, Local Laws and Agricultural Districts: How Do They Relate? for your reference. I have also enclosed a copy of the Department's guidance documents concerning "Local Zoning and Planning Laws." Pages 4 to 7 of the document discusses the site plan review process. If you have any questions, or if you would like to discuss the review process, please contact Bob Somers, Chief of the Department's Agricultural Protection Unit at (518) 457-2713. If the Town's attorney has any questions, he or she may contact John Rusnica, Associate Attorney, at (518) 457-6468. Sincerely, Director Enclosures cc: Barbara Shinn and David Page, Landowners Ken Schmitt, Chair, Suffolk County AFPB Local Laws and Agricultural Districts: How Do They Relate? Counties, towns and villages in New York State have broad powers to enact laws to govern their own affairs. However, State laws impose certain restrictions on local government authority. One such restriction is found in Section 305-a of the Agriculture and Markets Law which contains the following mandate: "Local governments, when exercising their powers to enact and administer comprehensive plans and local laws, ordinances, roles or regulations, shall exercise these powers in such manner as may realize the policy and goals set forth in this article [Article 25-AA of the Agriculture and Markets Law], and shall not unreasonably restrict or regulate farm op- erations within agricultural districts in contraven- tion of the purposes of this article unless it can be shown that the public health or safety is threat- ened.'' This brochure has been prepared by the New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets to assist municipalities in drafting and administering local laws and ordinances which may affect farming in an agricul- tural district. It should not be substituted for legal ad- vice from a municipality's attorney. The brochure also offers guidance to farmers and municipalities on the ap- plicatinn of Section 305-a. The Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets may independently initiate a review of a proposed or existing local law or ordinance or proceed upon the request of a farmer or municipality in an agricultural district. The following describes the procedure for requesting review, how the local requirements are analyzed, and remedi- ated, if necessary. PROCEDURE Questions concerning the impact of local laws and ordinances on farm operations are solved far more easily at the drafting stage than after the provision is in place. Municipalities are, therefore, encouraged to contact the Department, either by phone or in writing, in advance of enacting a law or ordinance which may restrict fanning in an agricultural district. The Department will provide Eliot Spitzer Patrick Hooker Governor Commissioner 3/1/07 a response to such inquiries. Similarly, a farmer or other affected party in a district may seek the Department's opinion on a proposed or existing law or ordinance without filing a complaint. Farmers A request for review must be provided in writing and include at least the following information: · the location of the farm operation and identification of the agricultural district in which it is situated; · a description of the affected farm operation (e.g. size of farm, type of enterprise, years in operation); · a description of the specific farm buildings, equip- ment or practices involved and how they are af- fected; · a copy of the complete local law or ordinance and identification of the specific section or sections in- volved; · a listing of involved parties who can be contacted for further information (including addresses and phone numbers). Subsequent to receiving a request for review of a local law or ordinance, the Department will contact the municipality involved and provide them with an oppor- tunity to respond. Municipalities A request for review must be provided in writing and include at least the following information: · the identification of the agricultural district(s) af- fected; · a description of the specific law or proposed law and how farm buildings, equipment or practices are or may be affected · a copy of the complete local law or ordinance and identification of the specific section or sections in- volved; · a listing of involved parties who can be contacted for further information (including addresses and phone numbers). ANALYSIS The Department examines several factors in evaluat- ing whether a local law or ordinance is in compliance with Section 305-a. Tests that must be met in each case are as follows: · Is the affected farm located within an agricultural district? Section 305-a only applies to farm operations in an agricultural district. · Does the regulated activity encompass farm opera- tions? Section 301(11) of the Agriculture and Markets Law defines "Farm Operation" as meaning: "...the land and on-farm buildings, equipment, manure processing and handling facilities, and practices which contribute to the production, preparation and marketing of crops, livestock and livestock products as a commercial en- terprise, includ{ng a 'commercial horse boarding op- eration' as defined in subdivision thirteen of this sec- tion and 'timber processing' as defined in subdivision fourteen of this section. Such farm operation may consist of one or more parcels of owned or rented land, which parcels may be contiguous or noncontigu- ous to each other." The definition of "crops, livestock and livestock products" is found in Section 301 (2). Only farm operations are protected by Section 305-a. The Department draws on the expertise of its program and legal staff, and other resources as needed, to make these determinations. · Does the local law or ordinance unreasonably re- strict or regulate? The evaluation of reasonableness consists of two parts: 1) whether the law or ordinance is unreasonably restrictive "on its face," and 2) whether it is unrea- sonably restrictive as applied to a particular situation. Some laws or ordinances are so vague that they inhibit farmers from undertaking certain activities or con- stmcting certain buildings out of concern for violating the law or ordinance. In this case, it is possible that the law or ordinance, because of its vague construc- tion, could be construed as unreasonably restricting a farm operation. An ordinance may also appear reasonable in the ab- sa'act, but may unreasonably restrict or regulate a par- ticular farmer. For example, many zoning ordinances impose setback requirements for structures in the in- terest of public safety or even aesthetics. These set- backs may be entirely reasonable under usual condi- tions, but may be construed as being unreasonably re- strictive if applied to a farmer who, for example, con- stxucts a building on a dead-end street, shielded from view, and near the only available water source. A reasonable exercise of authority in one locality may translate into an unduly burdensome restriction on farming in another. In sum, reasonableness depends on the totality of circumstances in each case. · Is the public health or safety threatened by the regulated activity? Even if the Department determines that a particular law or ordinance is unreasonably restrictive, it must also 3/1/07 · ask whether ' '~' 1' me pun ~c health or safety is threatened by the regulated activity. If so, it could withstand the limi- tatinns of Section 305-a. REMEDIES If the Department determines that a local law or or- dinance unreasonably restricts or regulates farm opera- tions in an agricultural district, it will notify the in- volved municipality to that effect and attempt to arrive at a mutually satisfactory resolution. In the case where a municipality rejects the Department's attempts at reme- diation, the Commissioner of Agriculture and Markets is explicitly authorized by law to bring an action to enforce Section 305-a. Alternatively, the Commissioner may issue an Order to comply, pursuant to Section 36 of the Agriculture and Markets Law. Requests for general information or assistance, and formal written complaints alleging violations of Section 305-a, should be directed to: Agricultural Districts Program Administrator New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets 10B Airline Drive Albany, NY 12235 Phone: (518) 457-2713 Guidelines for Review of Local Zoning and Planning Laws Background and Objective As communities adopt or amend zoning regulations, potential conflicts between farm operations and local land use controls may increase. This, coupled with continuing exurban development pressures on many of the State's agricultural communities, increases the need to better coordinate local planning and the agricultural districts program, and to develop guidelines to help address conflicts which may occur. Proactively, guidelines can aid in crafting zoning regulations by municipalities with significant farming activities. Zoning and Farm Operations: Practical Limitations and Problems Farms ara host to several discrete but interdependent land uses which may include barns, commodity sheds, farm worker housing, garages, direct farm markets, silos, manure storage facilities, milking parlors, stables, poultry houses and greenhouses, to name but a few. The typical zoning regulation, in addition to establishing minimum lot sizes and separations between uses, often prohibits more than one "pdncipar' structure on each pamel of record. Many zoning devices, then, are unable to distinguish between on-farm structures as part of a farm operation from the same building when it is used for an independent, freestanding use. The minimum separation and "yard" requirements of zoning are designed to avoid over concentration, maintain adequate spaces for light and air, and to reduce fire hazard in more urban environments. The application of suoh requirements to suburban and rural communities and farm operations often results in the unintended regulation of farm operations and uses not as an integrated whole, but as separate improvements. The rapidly changing nature of the agricultural industry does not always allow zoning and the comprehensive planning process to keep pace. This can result in the application of outdated regulations to contemporary land uses and gives dse to potentially unreasonable restrictions. Local governments may run afoul of the letter and intent of the Agricultural Districts Law by limiting the type and intensity of agricultural uses in their communities and by narrowly defining "farm" or "agricultural activity." This is sometimes problematic even in municipalities with a significant base of large, "production" level farming operations. Inadequately defined terms also give dse to conflict between the zoning device and farm operations. Because of the inherent nature of zoning, there is essentially no discrete administrative authority to waive its standards, even when those standards are at variance with the community's land use policy and what may be deemed its "intent." A municipal zoning board of appeals may, consistent with specific tests 9/16/03 I found in Town, Village and City Law, vary the use and area standards of a zoning regulation, and reverse or affirm determinations of the zoning administrative official. Such a remedy: i.e., an area or use variance, may, however, in and of itself be considered "unreasonably restrictive" if it is the only means available to establish, expand or improve a '~arm operation" in a county adopted, State certified agricultural district. These and other limitations and problems that can lead to AML §305-a violations may be avoided in the first instance by sound comprehensive planning. The Town Law, Village Law, General City Law and the Agricultural Districts Law are designed to encourage coordination of local planning and land use decision making with the agricultural districts program. Agricultural Districts and County Agricultural and Farmland Protection Plans: Their Influence on the Municipal Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Process The preparation, adoption and administration of a municipal comprehensive plan and zoning regulation are not independent actions of local government, but should be part of a well thought out, seamless process. A zoning regulation is, in the final analysis, simply a device to implement the community plan and, in fact, ... must be in accordance with a comprehensive plan ..." [Town Law §272- a(ll)(a)] The State Legislature has codified the intent, definition and content of the comprehensive plan (Town Law §272-a, Village Law §7-722 and General City Law §28-a). In so doing, the Legislature has given significant status to "agricultural uses" in general, and State certified agricultural districts and county agricultural and farmland protection plans created under Agriculture and Markets Law Articles 25-AA and 25-AAA in particular. Town Law §272-a (9) requires agricultural review and coordination with the comprehensive planning process: "A town comprehensive plan and any amendments thereto, for a town containing all or part of an agricultural district or /ands receiving agricultural assessments within its jurisdiction, shall continue to be subject to the provisions of article twenty-five-AA of the agriculture and markets law relating to the enactment and administration of local laws, ordinances, rules or regulations. A newly adopted or amended town comprehensive plan shall take into consideration applicable county agricultural and farmland protection plans as created under article twenty-five-AAA of the agriculture and markets law.' (The same language is found in Village Law and General City Law.) Thus, the statutory influence the Agricultural Districts Law and the Agricultural and Farmland Protection programs have on the comprehensive planning process and zoning regulations is significant. State cedified agricultural districts and 9/16/03 2 county agricultural and farmland protection plans are community shaping influences in much the same way as existing and proposed infrastructure; wetlands, floodplains, topographical features; cultural, historic and social amenities; economic needs; etc. are viewed. The Agricultural Districts Law is a valuable planning tool to conserve, protect and encourage the development and improvement of the agricultural economy; protect agricultural lands as valued natural and ecological resources; and preserve open space. In addition to AML {305-a, limitations on local authority in Town Law {283-a and Village Law {7-739 were enacted to ensure that agricultural interests are taken into consideration during the review of specific land use proposals. Town Law {283~a (1) and Village Law {}7-739(1), as recently amended by Chapter 331 of the Laws of 2002, require local governments to "...exercise their powers to enact local laws, ordinances, rules or regulations that apply to farm operations in an agricultural district in a manner which does not unreasonably restrict or regulate farm operations in contravention of the purposes of article twenty-five- AA of the agriculture and markets law, unless it can be shown that the public health or safety is threatened." The recent amendments make the Town and Village Law provisions consistent with AML {305-a regarding showing a threat to the public health or safety. AML {305-a, subd.1 is not a stand-alone requirement for coordination of local planning and land use decision making with the agricultural districts program. Rather, it is one that is fully integrated with the comprehensive planning, zoning and land use review process. Application of Local Laws to Farm Operations within Agricultural Districts In general, the construction of on-farm buildings and the use of land for agricultural purposes should not be subject to site plan review, special use permits or non-conforming use requirements when conducted in a county adopted, State certified agricultural district. The purpose of an agricultural distdct is to encourage the development and improvement of agricultural land and the use of agricultural land for the production of food and other agricultural products as recognized by the New York State Constitution, Article XIV, Section 4. Therefore, generally, agricultural uses and the construction of on-farm buildings as part of a farm operation should be allowed uses when the farm operation is located within an agricultural district. Town Law §274-b, subdivision 1 allows a town board to authorize a planning board or other designated administrative body to grant special use permits as set forth in a zoning ordinance or local law. "Special use permit" is defined as "...an authorization of a particular land use which is permitted in a zoning ordinance or local law to assure that the proposed use is in harmony with such zoning ordinance or local law and will not adversely affect the neighborhood if such requirements are met." Agricultural uses in an agricultural district are not, however, "special uses." They are constitutionally recognized land uses which are protected by AML {305-a, subd.1. Further, agricultural districts are created 9/16/03 3 and reviewed locally threugh a precess which includes public notice and hearing, much like zoning laws are adopted and amended. Therefore, absent any showing of an overriding local concern, generelly, an exemption frem special use permit requirements should be previded to farm operations located within an agricultural district. The application of site plan and special permit requirements to farm operations can have significant adverse impacts on such operations. Site plan and special permit review, depending upon the specific requirements in a local law, can be expensive due to the need to retain professional assistance to certify plans or simply to prepare the type of detailed plans required by the law. The lengthy approval precess in some local laws can be burdensome, especially considering a farm's need to undertake management and production practices in a timely and efficient manner. Site plan and special permit fees can be especially costly for start-up farm operations. Generally, farmers should exhaust their local administrative remedies and seek, for example, permits, exemptions available under local law or area variances before the Department reviews the administration of a local law. However, an administrative requirement/precess may, itself, be unreasonably restrictive. The Department evaluates the reasonableness of the specific requirement/precess, as well as the substantive requirements imposed on the farm operation. The Department has found local laws which regulate the health and safety aspects of the construction of farm buildings threugh previsions to meet local building codes or the State Building Code (unless exempt frem the State Building Code 4) and Health Department requirements not to be unreasonably restrictive. Requirements for local building permits and certificates of occupancy to ensure that health and safety requirements are met are also generally not unreasonably restrictive. Site Plan Review for Farm Operations within an Agricultural District Many local governments share the Department's view that farm operations should not have to undergo site plan review and exempt farms from that requirement. However, the Department recognizes the desire of some local governments to have an opportunity to review agricultural development and projects within their borders, as well as the need of farmers for an efficient, economical, and predictable precess. In view of both interests, the Department developed a model streamlined site plan review precess which attempts to respond to the farmers' concerns while ensudng the ability to have local issues examined. The precess could be used for farm buildings and structures (new and significant expansions) preposed for a site, but should not be required for non-structural agricultural uses. For example, to require farm operations in an agricultural distirct to undergo site plan review to enage in the preduction, discussion of the New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code follows below. 9/16/03 4 preparation and marketing of crops, livestock and livestock products, would generally be unreasonably restricitve. The authorizing statutes for requiring site plan review are quite broad and under "home rule" muncipalities retain signicant flexibility in crafting specialized procedures (e.g., the selection of a reviewing board; uses which trigger submission of site plans; whether to have a public hearing and the length of time to review an application). Town Law §274-a and Village Law §7-725-a define a site plan as "a rendering, drawing, or sketch prepared to specifications and containing necessary elements as set forth in the applicable zoning ordinance or local law which shows the arrangement, layout and design of the proposed use of a single parcel of land .... "These sections of law further outline a list of potential site plan elements including parking, means of access, screening, signs, landscaping, architectural features, location and dimensions of buildings, adjacent land uses and physical features meant to protect adjacent land uses as well as additional elements. Many municipalities have also added optional phases to the site plan review. While a preliminary conference, preliminary site plan review and public hearings may assist the applicant eadier in the review process and provide the public an opportunity to respond to a project, they can result in a costly delay for the farmer. For the sake of simplicity, the model site plan process and the following guidance presume that the planning board is the reviewing authority. Site Plan Process The applicant for site plan review and approval shall submit the following: 1) Sketch of the parcel on a location map (e.g., tax map) showing boundaries and dimensions of the parcel of land involved and identifying contiguous properties and any known easements or rights-of-way and roadways. Show the existing features of the site including land and water areas, water or sewer systems and the approximate location of all existing structures on or immediately adjacent to the site. 2) Show the proposed location and arrangement of buildings and uses on the site, including means of ingress and egress, parking and circulation of traffic. 3) Sketch of any proposed building, structure or sign, dimensions and elevations of front, side and rear views. any available blueprints, plans or drawings. including extedor Include copies of 9/16/03 5 4) Provide a description of the project and a narrative of the intended use of such proposed buildings, structures or signs, including any anticipated changes in the existing topography and natural features of the parcel to accommodate the changes. Include the name and address of the applicant and any professional advisors. If the applicant is not the owner of the property, provide authorization of the owner. 5) If any new structures are going to be located adjacent to a stream or wetland provide a copy of the floodplain map and wetland map that corresponds with the boundaries of the property. 6) Application form and fee (if required). If the municipality issues a permit for the structure, the Code Enforcement Officer (CEO) determines if the structures are subject to and comply with the local building code or New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code prior to issuing the permit. Similarly, the Zoning Enforcement Officer (or the CEO in certain municipalities) would ensure compliance with applicable zoning provisions. The Department urges local governments to take into account the size and nature of the particular farm buildings and structures when setting and administering any site plan requirements for farm operations. The review process, as outlined above, should generally not require professional assistance (e.g., architects,engineers or surveyors) to complete or review and could be completed relatively quickly.2 The Department understands, however, that in some cases, a public headng and/or a more detailed review of the project which may include submission of a survey, architectural or engineering drawings or plans, etc., may be necessary. The degree of regulation that may be considered unreasonably restrictive depends on the nature of the proposed activities, the size and complexity of the proposed buildings or structures and whether a State agricultural exemption applies. Time Frame for Review and Decision Town Law §274-a and Village Law §7-725-a require that a decision on a site plan application be made within a maximum of 62 days after receipt of the application or date of a public hearing, if one is required. Town and Village Law authorize town boards and village boards of trustees to adopt public headng requirements and local laws often provide planning boards with the discretion whether to hold a public headng. The Department recommends that if the municipality requires construction of farm buildings and structures within a state certified agricultural district to undergo site plan review, that the review and decision be expedited within 45 days, with no public hearing. The Department recognizes that the Town Law allows municipalities to determine which uses 2 Please see discussion of Agricultural Exemptions below. 9/16/03 6 must undergo site plan review, the time frame for review (within the 62 day maximum), and whether to conduct a public headng. A protracted review of most agricultural projects could, however, result in significant economic impacts to farmers. The process outlined above affords the community an opportunity to examine a proposed agricultural project and to evaluate and mitigage potential impacts in light of public health, safety and welfare without unduly burdening farm operations. Of course, the "process" must also be adminstered in a manner that does not unreasonably restdct or regulate farm operations. For example, conditions placed upon an approval or the cost and time involved to complete the review process could be unreasonably restrictive. Agricultural Exemptions State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Agricultural farm management practices, including construction, maintenance and repair of farm buildings and structures, and land use changes consistent with "generally accepted principles of farming" are designated as Type II actions which do not require preparation of an Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) and are not subject to compliance with State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR). 6 NYCRR §617.5(a), (c)(3). [See In the Matter of Pure Air and Water Inc. of Chemung County v. Davidsen, 246 A.D.2d 786, 668 N.Y.S.2d 248 (3rd Dept. 1998), for application of the exemption to the manure management activities of a hog farm.] The SEQR regulations require localities to recognize the Type II actions contained in the statewide list. New York State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code - While farmers, must comply with local requirements which regulate health and safety aspects of the construction of farm buildings, many farm buildings are exempt from the State Uniform Fire Prevention and Building Code ("Uniform Code"). The Uniform Code recently underwent major revisions and now is comprised of seven sub-codes (the Building Code, Fire Code, Residential Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Fuel Gas Code, and the Property Maintenance Code). The exemption for agricultural buildings has been incorporated in the following portions of the revised Uniform Code and the Energy Conservation Construction Code, which became fully effective on January 1, 2003. Agricultural building is defined in §202 of the Building Code as "A structure designed and constructed to house farm implements, hay, grain, poultry, livestock, or other horticultural products. This structure shall not be a place of human habitation or a place of employment where agricultural products ara processed, treated or packaged, nor shall it be a place used by the public." 9/16/03 7 Building Code §101.2(2) provides an exemption from the Building Code for "[a]gdcultural buildings used solely in the raising, growing or storage of agricultural products by a farmer engaged in a farming operation." Section 102.1(5) of the Fire Code of New York State provides that "[a]gricultural buildings used solely in the raising, growing or storage of agricultural products by a farmer engaged in a farming operation" ara exempt from the provisions of the Fira Code pertaining to construction but are subject to applicable requirements of fira safety practice and methodology. Section 101.4.2.5 of the Energy Conservation Construction Code ("ECCC") exempts "nonrasidential farm buildings, including barns, sheds, poultry houses and other buildings and equipment on the pramises used diractly and solely for agricultural purposes" from the provisions of the ECCC. The above briefly highlights the agricultural buildings exemptions. Any specific questions ragarding the interpratation and applicability of the revised State Uniform Fira Protection and Building Code should be directed to the Department of State's Codes Division at (518) 474-4073. Professionally Stamped Plans - Education Law §7209(1) provides that no official of the State or any city? county, town or village charged with the enforcement of laws, ordinances or ragulations may accept or approve any plans or specifications that ara not stamped with the seal of an architect, or professional engineer, or land surveyor licensed or authorized to practice in the State. Thus, whera local laws, ordinances or regulations requira that plans and specifications for pdvate construction be accepted or approved, they may not be accepted or approved without the raquirad seal, subject to the exceptions set forth in the statute. 1981 Op Arty Gen April 27 (Informal). However, the exceptions contained in Education Law §7209(7)(b) include "farm buildings, including barns, sheds, poultry houses and other buildings used diractly and solely for agdcuitural purposes." As a rasult, plans and specifications for such buildings ara not required to be stamped by an architect, professional engineer or land surveyor.3 Against this backdrop, specific guidelines for raview of zoning and planning ragulations by local govemments and the Department can best be understood. Generic Review Guidelines Generic raviews are those of entira zoning regulations or sections of zoning ragulations that impact the municipality's farm community as a class or several farm operations in the same way. Examples of actions which might rasult in a generic raview include the adoption or administration of an entiraly new or 3 Similar requirements and exceptions are also provided in Education Law §7307(1 ) and (5). 9/16/03 8 substantially amended zoning regulation that results in a material change in the use and area standards applied to farm operations in a State certified agricultural district. In such cases, the Department recommends that the municipality ask itself the following questions: · Do the regulations materially limit the definition of farm operation, farm or agriculture in a way that conflicts with the definition of "farm operation" in AML {}301, subd.117 Do the regulations relegate any farm operations in agricultural districts to "non-conforming" status? · Is the production, preparation and marketing of any crop, livestock or livestock product as a commemial enterprise materially limited, resticted or prohibited? · Are certain classes of agriculture subject to more intensive reviews or permitting requirements than others? For example, is "animal agriculture" treated differently than crop production without demonstrated links to a specific and meaningful public health or safety standard designed to address a real and tangible threat? · Are any classes of agricultural activities meeting the definition of "farm operation" subject to special permit, site plan review or other original jurisdiction review standard over and above ministerial review?. · Are "farm operations" subject to more intensive reviews than non-farm uses in the same zoning district? · Are "farm operations" treated as integrated and interdependent uses, or collections of independent and competing uses on the same property? · Is the regulation in accordance with a comprehensive plan and is such a plan crafted consistent with AML Article 25-AA as reqired by law?. If the answer to any of the first six questions is "yes," or if the answer to either of the last two is "no," the zoning regulations under review are likely to be problematic and may be in violatiotion of AML §305-a, subd.1. Certainly such regulations would appear to be on their "face" inconsistent with the statutory requirement that "Local governments ...shall exercise these powers in such manner as may realize the policy and goals set forth in this article [Article 25AA- Agricultural Districts].' Guidelines for Site Specific Reviews AML §305-a zoning case reviews often involve application of zoning regulations to a specific farm operation. Such cases typically result from applying the site plan, special use permit, use or non-conforming use sections, yard requirements, or lot density sections of the municipal zoning device to an existing farm operation. 9/16/03 9 These cases often evolve because although the zoning regulation may appear to be consistent with the agricultural districts law, its application to a specific issue or set of facts is not. In such cases, the Department recommends that the municipality ask itself the following questions: · Is. the zoning regulation or restriction being applied to a use normally and customarily associated with a "[arm operation" as defined in AML Article 25-AA? · Does the regulation or restriction materially limit the expansion or improvement of the operation without offering some compelling public benefit? · Is the regulation or restriction applicable to the specific farm operation in question or, under the same circumstances, would it apply to other farm operations in the community?. · Does the zoning regulation impose greater regulation or restriction on a use or farming activity than may already be imposed by State or federal statute, rule or regulation? · Is the regulation or restriction the result of legislative action that rendered the farm operation a "non-conforming use"? If the answer to any of these questions is yes, then the zoning regulation or restriction under review is likely to be problematic and may be in violation of the statutory prohibitions against unreasonably restrictive regulation of farm operations in an agricultural district, unless a threat to the public health or safety is demonstrated. Guidance on Specific Zoning Issues The following are some specific factors that the Department considers when reviewing local zoning laws4: A. Minimum and Maximum Dimensions Generally the Department will consider whether minimum and maximum dimensions imposed by a local law can accommodate existing and/or future farm needs. For example, many roadside stands are located within existing garages, barns, and outbuildings that may have dimensions greater than those set by a local ordinance. Also, buildings specifically designed and constructed to accommodate farm activities may not meet the local size requirements (e.g., silos and barns which may exceed maximum height limitations). The size and scope of the farm operation should also be considered. Larger farms, for example, cannot effectively market their produce through a traditional roadside 4 Please see other Department guidance documents for further information on issues related to specific types of farm buildings and practices. 9/16/03 10 stand and may require larger farm markets with utilities, parking, sanitary facilities, etc. B. Lot Size Establishing a minimum lot size for farm operations within a zoning distdct that includes land within a State certified agricultural district might be unreasonably restrictive. The definition of "farm operation" in AML {}301, subd. 11 does not include an acreage threshold. Therefore, the Department has not set a minimum acreage necessary for protection under AML §305-a and conducts reviews on a case-by-case basis. For example, a nursery/greenhouse operation conducted on less than 5 or 10 acres may be protected as a "farm operation" under §305-a if the operation is a "commercial enterprise" and more than a hobby farm. For agricultural assessment purposes, however, AML §301, subd. 4 states that a farm must have "land used in agricultural production" to qualify (either seven or more acres and gross sales of an average of $10,000 or more in the preceding two years or have less than seven acres and average gross sales of more than $50,000 in the preceding two years). A recent amendment to AML §301, subd. 4 also provides for an agricultural assessment on seven or more acres which has an annual gross sales of $10,000 or more "...when such land is owned or rented by a newly established farm operation in the first year of operation." AML §301, subd. 4.h. Laws of 2003, Chapter 479, effective September 9, 2003. Local requirements for minimum lot sizes for farm buildings raises concerns similar to those involving minimum and maximum building dimensions. A farmer may be unable to meet a minimum lot size due to the configuration of the land used for production or lying fallow as part of a conservation reserve program. The need to be proximate to existing farm roads, a water supply, sewage disposal and other utilities is also essential. Farm buildings are usually located on the same property that supports other farm structures. Presumably, minimum lot size requirements are adopted to prevent over concentration of buildings and to assure an adequate area to install any necessary utilities. Farm buildings should be allowed to be sited on the same lot as other agricultural use structures subject to the provision of adequate water and sewage disposal facilities and meeting minimum setbacks between structures. C. Setbacks Minimum setbacks from front, back and side yards for farm buildings have not been viewed as unreasonably restrictive unless a setback distance is unusually long. Setbacks that coincide with those required for other similar structures have, in general, been viewed as reasonable. 9/16/03 11 A farm operation's bams, storage buildings and other facilities may already be located within a required setback, or the farm operation may need to locate new facilities within the setback to meet the farm operation's needs. Also, adjoining land may consist of vacant land, woodland or farmland. The establishment of unreasonable setback distances increases the cost of doing business for farmers because the infrastructure needed to support the operation (e.g., water supply, utilities and farm roads) is often already located within, and adjacent to, the farmstead 'area or existing farm structures. Setbacks can also increase the cost of, or make it impracticable to construct new structures for the farm operation. D. Sign Limitations: Whether or not a limitation on the size and/or number of signs that may be used to advertise a farm operation is unreasonably restrictive of a farm operation depends upon the location of the farm and the type of operation. A farmer who is located on a principally traveled road probably will not need as many signs as one who is located on a less traveled road and who may need directional signs to direct the public to the farm. The size of a sign needed may depend on whether the sign is used to advertise the farm's produce or services (e.g., for a commercial horse boarding operation) as part of the farm's direct marketing, or just for directional purposes. E. Maximum Lot Coverage Establishing a maximum lot coverage that may be occupied by structures may be unreasonably restrictive. For example, it may be difficult for horticultural operations to recoup their investment in the purchase of land if they ara not allowed to more fully utilize a lot/acreage for greenhouses. Farm operations within an agricultural district should be allowed the maximum use of available land, consistent with the need to protect the public health or safety. Generally, if setbacks between buildings are met and adequate space is available for interior roads, parking areas (where required), and safe operation of vehicles and equipment, health and safety concerns are minimized. F. Screening and Buffers Some municipalities impose buffer requirements, including setbacks where vegetation, landscaping, a wall or fencing is required to partially or completely screen adjacent land uses. Often, the buffer area cannot be used or encroached upon by any activities on the lot. Requirements for buffers or setbacks to graze animals, construct fences and otherwise use land for agricultural purposes are generally unreasonably restrictive. Buffers and associated setbacks may require farmers to remove land from production or otherwise remove land from use for the farm operation. The impact on nursery/greenhouse operations is especially significant since they are often 9/16/03 12 conducted on smaller pamels of land. Maintenance of the buffer also creates a hardship to the landowner. If a setback is required for fencing, the farmer may have to incur the expense of double fencing the perimeter of the property, or portion thereof, to prevent encroachment by neighboring property owners. A requirement to screen a farm operation or agricultural structures such as farm labor housing or greenhouses from view has been found by the Department to be unreasonably restrictive. Screening requirements suggest that farm operations and associated structures are, in some way, objectionable or different from other forms of land use that do not have to be screened. Farmers should not be required to bear the extra costs to provide screening unless such requirements are otherwise warranted by special local conditions or necessary to address a threat to the public health or safety. While aesthetics are an appropriate and important consideration under zoning and planning laws, the purpose of the Agricultural Districts Law is to conserve and protect agricultural lands by promoting the retention of farmland in active agricultural use. 9/16/03 13 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE November 6, 2006 Ms. Jerilyn B. Woodhouse, Chairperson Town of Southold Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Chairperson Woodhouse: Re: Shinn Vineyards During our November work session meeting, there was f~rther'cOtisideration of the Shinn Vineyards (SCTM #1000-100-4-3.1) application. A summary of our discussion is below. The Committee would be pleased to discuss any of these issues further with Planning Board, if it would be considered helpful. There is inadequate space for landscaping around existing structures and around perimeter of site. We seek more information about existing and proposed trees and plant materials. There is concern that the application is for approval of 5 buildings and a deck, involving 4 distinct uses, none of which is a winery. As the title makes clear, it is primarily a winery, which would constitute the major and most restrictive use of the project. The project is currently in operation for all the above uses. When determining the lot coverage for the project, it is of concern that all structures be counted, including any exterior concrete crushing pad or impermeable surfaces. The on site parking is clearly inadequate. Parking requirements should be additive for each use and include loading dock and truck turnaround, handicap parking and access, and bus parking with turnaround. Satisfaction of the above requirements will create over intensity of use on the 53,000sf lot. Sincerely, The Architectural Review Committee PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN ti. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 To: PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD To~vn of Southold Planning Board From: Mark Terry, LWRP Coordinator Senior Environmental Planner Date: October 30, 2006 Rc: Proposed New Site Plan for Shinn Winery Located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, ,162.35 e/o Mill Lane m Mammck SCTM #: 1000-100 4 3.1 Zoning District: Agricultural Conservation (AC) The applicant is proposing this nexv site plan is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, a 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1' sq. foot frame shed, on a 53,078 sq. ft. parcel in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck. The proposed action has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program (LWRP) Policy Standards. Based upon the information provided on the LWRP Consistency Assessment Form submitted to this department as well as the records available to me, it is my determination that the proposed action is generally CONSISTENT with the Policy Standards and therefore is CONSISTENT with the LWRP. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Planning Board shall consider this recommendation in preparing its ~vritten dctermiuation regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Cc: File PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND October 27, 2006 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN ~F SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Deborah Doty, Esq. 670 West Creek Avenue P.O. Box 1181 Cutchogue, NY 11935 Re: Proposed New Site Plan for Shinn Winery Located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck SCTM #: 1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: Agricultural Conservation (AC) Dear Ms. Dot3a. In order to continue review of your site plan, the site plan/application will need to include/correct the following: * Please define the specific use/purpose of buildings E, H & I. Please be specific when defining the use as wine/agricultural including a square footage breakdown. · Additional site plan fees in the amount of $189.75 are required. · Indicate the location of all drainage, including drainage calculations on the revised site plan. · The proposed parking in Building H does not provide proper access for 2 cars as shown. Please revise the site plan and, if necessary, the parking calculations accordingly. / · Attached is a response from Mattituck Fire District requesting an electric fire well be installed. Please review and address their requirements. Please indicate the location of the proposed electric fire well on the revised site plan. · Town Code ~280-78 D, Access, states, "access shall consist of at least one fifteen-foot lane for parking areas". Please ensure the revised site plan conforms to this requirement. · All handicap parking stalls and access aisles must comply with New York State Code and ADA requirements. Please be aware the existing grate in the proposed access aisle will provide difficult access; please revise the site plan as necessary. In addition, please show that handicap access has been provided from the parking area to the building. · As per the Planning Board, please provide a minimum four (4) foot landscape buffer extending approximately 130' south along the eastern property line beginning at the northern side of Building H. · Please provide for commercial truck access, ingress/egress, turn around, etc. · Please show dimensions for all aisles, curb cuts, cleared distances, etc. · Existing and/or proposed landscaping should be included on the revised ske plan. · The proposed access aisle east of the existing concrete patio must be a minimum of 15 feet. In addition, a minimum 15' aisle must be provided west of the two (2) proposed 9' X 23' parallel parking spaces. Please revise the site plan as necessary. Shinn Winery Page Two October 27, 2006 This is to notify you that the Planning Department will need to obtain the following approvals and/or comments before the Planning Board can approve this site plan: LWRP, Town Engineer, $outhold Town Land Preservation and Southold Town Building Department. You are required to verify agency requirements, submit required agency documents and obtain approvals from Suffolk County Department of Health Services and Suffolk County Water Authority As a courtesy, you may submit one (1) sketch revised site plan incorporating all of the above referenced changes to this Department for an initial review prior to submitting all of the necessary copies. Once the Planning Board has reviewed and accepted the necessary changes, please submit the required copies of the revised site plan to this office so that k may be distributed to all necessary agencies. Please do not hesitate to contact this office should you have any questions or need further assistance. Sincerely, Senior Planner File Planning Board Building Department Town Attorney Land Preservation Town Engineer Enc: Letter from Mattituck Fire District TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE October 10, 2006 Ms. Jerilyn B. Woodhouse, Chairperson Town of Southold Planning Board P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Dear Chairperson Woodhouse: During September's ARC meeting, Shinn Vineyards (SCTM #1000-100-4-3.1) came before this comrff~ttee for a second review of proposed renovations to existing agricultural use buildings located on the south side of Oregon Road in Mattituck. We approved the plans submitted for review, pending Town of Southold Land Preservation Department approval and review of future landscaping efforts. The following is pertinent copy from the meeting minutes as taken by Linda Randolph, our recording secretary: "Assuming Site Plan is approved by Land Preservation, approve Site Plan pending submission of letter describing landscaping on w/s/o potato barn. Motion: Howard; Second: Sandy (vote: 3 in favor, 1 opposed, 1 abstention because "ARC members shouM not be commenting on the development (parking area) of preserved land" We are concerned about the precedent that may have been set by the Committee's actions and ask if there is any recourse. Furthermore, although we genuinely favor and approve of the concept of this project (again, without fair commentary due to the nature of the "as built" application), we have tremendous concerns about the development of preserved farmland and the overall density on an approximately 53,000 sq. ft. parcel; as such, should the Shinn project be granted permission to place their entrance driveway and parking (approximately 12 cars with no allowance for oversized vehicles, limousines or buses) on preserved land - does this open the gate for other individuals to also develop their properties or expand in ways inconsistent with the spirit of the law restricting development of preserved ag land? Again, we cannot stress how much we favor the concept proposed by the Shinns, but wish to be on record voicing our concerns that they are 'building' outside of the property allotted for development within their parcel without meeting requirements that other applicants need to fulfill. Respectfully yours, The Town of Southold Architectural Review Comm~i;! ~[ ("~ DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STEVE LEVY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE September 18, 2006 THOMAS ISLES, AICP DIRECTOR OF PLANNING Town of Southold Planning Bd. 53095 Main Road - P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Attn: Amy Ford, Sr. Planner Pursuant to Section 239L & M of the General Municipal Law, the following site plan which have been submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is/are considered to be a matter for local determination as there appears to be no significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval. Site Plan SCTM No. Shinn Winery 1000-100-04-3.1 NOTE: Does not constitute acceptance of any zoning action(s) associated therewith before any other local regulatory board. Very truly yours, Thomas Isles, AICP Director of Planning , ~, j_~.__._-----.~ Chief Planner APF:cc LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H. LEE DENNISON BLDG. - 41H FLOOR · P.O. BOX 6100 (631) 853-5190 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER (631) 853-4044 MELISSA A. SPIRO LAND PRESERVATION COORDINATOR melissa.spiro@town.southold.ny.us Telephone (631) 765-5711 Facsimile (631) 765-6640 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hail Annex 54375 State Route 25 (comer of Main Road & Youngs Avenue) Southold, New York MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971-0959 DEPARTMENT OF LAND PRESERVATION TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 15, 2006 Deborah Dory 670 West Creek Avenue P.O. Box 1181 Cutchogue, NY 11935-0876 RE: Shinn Vineyard SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 & SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.2 Dear Ms. Doty: The Land Preservation Committee reviewed your letter of August 10' 2006, at the Committee's August 22nd meeting. The Town owns a Development Rights Easement on the 21.3 acre area known as SCTM #1000-100-4-3.2. The site plan submitted with your letter shows twelve (12) existing parking spaces and a proposed encroachment of the westerly stone driveway within the Easement Area. Parking Spaces The survey prepared at the time of the Town's purchase of the Easement did not show the parking spaces. The Committee is not in favor of allowing the parking spaces within the Easement Area. The parking spaces should be designed within the non-easement area (SCTM #1000-100-4-3.1 ). Driveway Encroachment It appears from the survey that the driveway encroachment can be minimized by designing the stone driveway as close to Building E (Existing Agricultural Storage Building/Future Wine Storage Barn) as legally acceptable. The Committee would like 1o see the encroachment minimized as much as possible. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions regarding the above. In addition, please accept my apology for the delay in sending out the Committee's response tour letter Sincer, e[y,i~ ~/" ~ Melissa Spiro ~ Land Preservation Coordinator cc: Planning Board Commissioners Norman A. Rellly, Jr., Chairman James D. Roache, Vice Chairman Martin L Griffin, Sr. Jerome Zuheskl David F. Haas I TFITUCK FIRE DISTRk, PO BOX 666, PIKE STREET MATrlTUCK, NEW YORK 11952~666 Secretary, John C, Harrison Treasurer, Barbara A. DIckerson September 13, 2006 Ms. Amy Ford Senior Planner Southold Town Planning Board P 0 Box 1,1.79 Southold, NY 11971-0959 RE: SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 Dear Ms, Ford. At the Regular meeting of the Board of Fire Commissioners. the Board reviewed the site plan for Shinn Winery (SCTM# 1000-10G.4-3.1) at your request, their recommendations: 1. That due to the unavailability of SCWA hydrants in the area that a electric fire well (as per Mattituck Fire District specifications) be installed in close proximity to the site for access by fire apparatus in case of an emergency, location to be approved by Mattituck Fire District. 2. That all drives and roadways adhere to the Southold Town minimum clearance specifications Thank you for the opportunity to review this site plan and if you have any questions do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~ C. Harrison Secretary/Fire District Manager cc: Board of Fire Commissioners Chief Office (631) 298-8837 Facsimile (631) 298-8841 DEBORAH DOTY ATTORNEY AT LAW 670 WEST C~EK AVENUE P.O. BOX 1181 CUTCHOGUE. NY 11935-0876 Fax 631-734-7702 631-734-6648 September 14, 2006 BY HAND Amy Ford Southold Planning Departmem Town Hall Annex 54375 Main Road Southold, NY 11971 SE? I 5 2336 RE: Proposed Site Plan for Shinn Winery s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, Mattituck, NY (SCTM # 1000-100-4-3.1) Dear Amy: Enclosed are additional photographs of the site. For your information, the pictures were taken on September 14, 2006. Very truly yours, Deborah Doty Encl. DD:bdr ~t~uthwest corner of buildi~g E North side of building E Fixture on south side of building E Fixtures on east side of building E Fixture oxer door on building F ~.×B~r~ OV¢~ doo~ on building G East side of building E, south sides ot building F & G, and existing landscaping I IVIATrlTUCK FIRE DISTR )i' PO BOX 666, PIKE STREET MATrlTUCK, NEW YORK 11952~)666 Commissioners Norman A. Rellly, Jr., Chairman James D. Roache, Vice Chairman Martin L Gdffln, Sr. Jerome Zuhmdd David F. Haas Secmtmy, John C. Harrison Troesuror, Barbara A. Dlckemon September 13, 2006 Ms. Amy Ford Senior Planner Southold Town Planning Board P 0 Box 1~1_79 Southold, NY 11971-0959 RE: SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1 Dear Ms. Ford, At the Regular meeting of the Board of Fire Commissioners, the Board reviewed the site plan for Shinn Winery (SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1) at your request, their recommendations: 1. That due to the unavailability of SCWA hydrants in the area that a electric fire well (as per Mattituck Fire District specifications) be installed in close proximity to the site for access by fire apparatus in case of an emergency, location to be approved by Mattituck Fire District. 2. That all drives and roadways adhere to the Southold Town minimum clearance specifications Thank you for the opportunity to review this site plan and if you have any questions do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, · Harrison Secretary/Fire District Manager Board of Fire Commissioners Chief cc: Office (631) 298-8837 Facsimile (631) 298-8841 PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTFIOLD September 12, 2006 Deborah Doty, Esq. 670 West Creek Avenue P.O. Box 1181 Cutchogue, New York 11935 Re: Proposed New Site Plan for Shinn Winery Located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck SCTM #: 1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: Agricultural Conservation (AC) Dear Ms. Dory: The following resolution was adopted by the Southold Town Planning Board at a meeting held on Monday, September 11, 2006: WHEREAS, this new site plan is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, a 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1' sq. foot frame shed, on a 53,078 sq. ft. parcel in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck. SCTM #: 1000-100-4-3.1; be it therefore RESOLVED that the Southold Town Planning Board, acting under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (6 NYCRR), Part 617.5 c (2), makes a determination that the proposed action is a Type II and not subject to review. If you have any questions regarding the above, please contact this office. Very truly yours, ~yn B. Woodhouse Chairperson Cc: Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer File Suffolk County Department of Health Services Suffolk County Planning Commission Southold Town Land Preservation Committee PLANNING BOARD MEMBEI~ JERIL¥'N B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 To: Melissa Spiro, Land Preservation Coordinator From AmyFord, Senior Planner......(r- Date: August 22, 2006 Shinn Winery 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck SCTM#: 1000-100-4-3.1 Please be aware the Planning Board has received a site plan application for the above reference property. The site plan reflects the current build out of this site. This new ske plan is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, a 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1' sq. foot frame shed, on a 53,078 sq. ft. parcel in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattimck. SCTM #: 1000-100-4- 3.1. This application is being referred to you became of the encroachmem onto preserved land. Please review and advise. Thank you in advance. Cc: File PLANNING BOARD MEMBE~ JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals Southold Town Clerk for Southold Town Board Scott Russell, Southold Town Supervisor Southold Town Board of Trustees Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Engineer Southold Town LWRP Coordinator Southold Town Land Preservation Committee Architectural Review Committee Suffolk County Department of Health Services NYSDEC- Stony Brook Suffolk County Water Authority From: Amy Ford, Senior Planner~ Date: August 22, 2006 RE: Agency referral requests required as per Southold Town Code Article XXV 100-254 Review Procedure Part C, the Planning Board refers this site plan for concerns, comments and jurisdiction requirements, if applicable. Dear Reviewer: The site plan status is a New Active Site Plan. The following is site plan application information pertaining to the listed project: Shinn Winery 2000 Oregon Road, Mattimck SCTM#: 1000-100-4-3.1 This new site plan is for the as- built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, a 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1' sq. foot frame shed, on a 53,078 sq. ft. parcel in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattimck SCTM #: 1000-100-4- 3.1. Attached is a copy of the site plan application for your review. Thank you in advance. Cc: File Enc.: Site plan application PLANNING BOARD MEMBER~ JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 Michael J. Verity, Chief Building Inspector James Richter, Town Engineer Mark Terry, Local Water Revkalization Program Coordinator Front AmyFord, Senior Planner~ Date: August 22, 2006 Shinn W'mery 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck SCTM#: 1000-100-4-3.1 In reference to the above, attached you will find a site plan and application. The site plan reflects the current proposed build out of this site. Please review for comments, concerns and certification. This new site plan is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, a 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1' sq. foot frame shed, on a 53,078 sq. ft. parcel in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck. SCTM #: 1000-100-4- 3.1. The enclosed site plan is for your review and records and does not need to be returned to the Planning Board. Thank you in advance. Cc: File Eric.: 1 site plan prepared by William Bialosky Architect last revised July 19, 2006 LWRP Consistency Assessment Form (LWRP Coordinator only) PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L~ TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTttOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cot. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 August 22, 2006 John C Harrison Mattimck Fire District P.O. Box 666 Matrimclg New York 11952 Shirm Winery 2000 Oregon Road, Mattimck SCTM#: 1000-100-4-3.1 Dear Mr. Harrison: Enclosed please find a site plan application and one (1) site plan prepared byWzlliam BialoskyArchitect last revised July 19, 2006 for the above referenced project. This new site plan is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage barn, a 884.1 sq. ft. accessory storage building and a 206.1' sq. foot frame shed, on a 53,078 sq. ft. parcel in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in lVLattituck. SCTM #: 1000-100-4- 3.1. The enclosed site plan is being referred to you for fire access review and for your recommendations. Thank you for your cooperation. Senior Planner Cc: File Enc.: 1 site plan prepared byWdliam Bialosky Architect last revised July 19, 2006 Site phn application PLANNING BOARD MEMBER~- JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 August 22, 2006 Suffolk County Phnning Commission Mr. Andrew P. Freleng, AICP, Chief Planner II. Lee Dennison Building, 4th Floor 100 Veterans Memorial Highway Hauppauge, New York 11788-0099 Planning Commission Comments on the Site Phn for Shinn Winery 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck SCTM #: 1000-100-4-3.1 Zoning District: A-C Dear Mr. Freleng, Pursuant to Section 239L &M of the General Municipal Law, the following site plan is being referred to you for comments. Attached are the site plan, EAF and site plan application. This new site plan is for the as-built construction of four (4) buildings including a 1,646 sq. ft. wine making and wine tasting building with 336.3 sq. ft. of deck, a 2,730 sq. ft. wine storage bam, a 884.1 sq. ft. accessot7 storage building and a 206.1' sq. foot frame shed, on a 53,078 sq. ft. parcel in the Agricultural Conservation District located on the s/s/o Oregon Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane in Mattituck SCIM #: 1000-100-4- 3.1. If there are any questions you can contact us at (631) 765-1938 between the hours of 8:00 a.n~ and 4:00 p.m. Senior Phrmer Cc: File Enc. 1 site plan prepared by Wfllhm Bialosky Architect last revised July 19, 2006 Environmental assessment form Site plan application BY H~ NO Members of the Southold Planning Board Town Hall Annex $4375 Main Road PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 DOTY TTORNEY AT LAW WEST CREEK AVENUE ~P.O. BOX 1181 -~OGUE. NY 11935-0876 F^× 631-734-7702 631-734-6648 August 10, 2006 Shinn Vineyard, LLC, 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck, NY (SCTM # 1000-100-4-3.1) Winery Site Plan Application Dear Members of the Board: I represent Shinn Vineyard, LLC and Barbara Shirm, who is the sole member of the LLC. Since the 1998 purchase of the Tuthill farm, some of the pre-existing agricultural buildings were renovated with an eye to the future creation of a winery on the premises. My client now seeks the Board's approval of the winery site plan. You will note that applicant is seeking a winery designation with respect to two of the buildings which already exist on the property. The existing agricultural storage barn (the "potato barn" designated on the site plan as building E) currently is being renovated to become a wine storage barn. The eastern portion of the previously renovated agricultural storage barn is to be converted into'Ii Wine making room (designated as building F). The western portion of the previously renovated agricultural storage barn is to become a wine tasting room (designated as building G). Enclosed please find the following: (a) the site plan application form, (b) applicant's affidavit, (c) agent authorization, (d) environmental assessment form, (e) nine copies of site plan and elevations, (f) pictures of existing structures, landscaping and lighting, (g) the 1998 survey of the premises, the annotated survey for the development rights sale, and an annotated 2003 survey reflecting the pre-C/O, C/Os and current building pe~its, (h) notice of disapproval from Building Department, (i) LWRP Consistency Assessn)~nC~o~ml fit~ff(j) the current building permit for building E. Also enclosed is a check in the amo}a~ of $1,500.00 foXq~ the base fee in connection with the application. Please call me about the sq~g~o~tage pay~ich will be by separate check. ~,-'~hank you for your consideration. \q,o~LF Respectfully submitted, Deborah Doty cc: Barbara Shinn Melissa Spiro Encls. DD:bdr DEBORAH DOTY ATTORNEY AT LAW 670 WEST CREEK AVENUE PO BOX I t8t C~TCHOGUE, NY t 1935-0876 63 l-734-6648 BY HAND Aug t 1 Melissa Spiro Town Hall Annex 54375 Main Road PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 RE: Shinn Vineyard, LLC, 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck, Winery Site Plan Application Dear Melissa: I represent Shinn Vineyard, LLC and Barbara Shinn, who is the sole member of the LLC. In 2000, the Town purchased the development rights to lot #1000-100-4-3.2. Since the Page-Shinn 1998 purchase of the Tuthill farm, some of the pre-existing agricultural buildings were renovated with an eye to the future creation of a winery on the premises. My client has applied to the Planning Board for approval of the winery site plan. Enclosed for your reference is a copy of my cover letter to the Planning Board. Also enclosed is a copy of the site plan for the premises. Because of the Town's requirement that the access way be 15' wide, the western portion of the stone driveway encroaches on to Lot #3.2. In addition, parking for the vineyard, accessory structure, storage barn and tasting/making room is reflected in the north end of the open field to the south of lot #3.1. We will appreciate your favorable response to this matter. Respectfully submitted, Deborah Doty Encls. cc: B/arbara Shinn ~Bruno Semon at Planning Department DD:bdr TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MINUTES August 3, 2006 4:00 p.m. Town Hall Meeting Hall Present were: Chairman Sanford Hanauer, members Joseph "Skip" Lee, Ronald McGreevy, Howard Meinke, Nicholas Planamento, Ural Talgat, Elizabeth- Thompson, Senior Site Plan Reviewer Bruno Semon, Senior Planner Amy Ford, ARC Secr-etary Linda Randolph, and project representatives. The minutes of the July 13, 2006 meeting were accepted. Motion: Ural; Second: Elizabeth. Copies of the meeting agenda were circulated. Revisited Applications: Peconic Recycling & Transfer SCTM: 1000-95-2-7 Recommendations: Resubmit. Applicant to go back to architect to further break down visual scale of building elevations; suggest using horizontal bands, colors, striping and panel doors. In addition, landscaping (combination of native evergreen and deciduous) without berm. Colors: sage brush & tan and evergreen roof OK. Motion: Ural; Second: Elizabeth. Warex Project 2006 SCTM: 1000-142-1-27 Applicant not present at meeting. Recommendation: Redesign canopy and color based on Hess plan from 2-3 years ago. Suggest applicant look at Hess Station in Southampton and/or Easthampton for design. Motion: Sandy; Second: Elizabeth. New Applications: Shinn Vineyards (Pre-submission: SCTM: 1000-100-4-3.1 existing potato barn) In favor of project. Note that it is advertised as a winery. Recommendations: Continue to pick up colors & detailing from existing buildings and add to potato barn. Suggest using cross-gabling, dormers, cupolas, false doom/windows. Add landscaping, identify trees and sizes. Bring photos of all four sides, signage, lighting cuts. It should also be noted that construction work has started on the potato barn. Motion: Ural; Second: Elizabeth. Cingular Wireless/MGH Enterprises SCTM: 1000-15-9-8 Flagpole approved with following conditions: Color- white. Illuminate from ground 365 days/year from sunset to sunrise. Gold globe and red beacon light atop pole. Motion: Ural; Second: Howard. ARC Meeting Minutes Page Two August3,2006 Sandy Hanauer suggested ARC members should meet at the 4:30 p.m. August 24 Work Session of the Planning Board to discuss the ARC's role in dealing with "as built" structures. Ural Talgat commended the work of Planning Dept. staff members Bruno, Amy and Linda in cooperation with the ARC (getting electronic information to the Committee Members). Elizabeth Thompson suggested having a copy of "Barns of the Nodh Fork" available to applicants as a reference. The meeting adjourned at 6:10 p.m. ARC Secretary FORM NO. 3 NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: May 4, 2006 TO: Deborah Doty a/c Shinn Vineyard POBox 1181 Cutchogue, NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated April 27, 2006 For permit for an as built winery and tasting room at Location of property: 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 100 Block4 Lot 3.~1 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The as built construction on this conforming lot in the AC district requires site plan approval from the SoutholcLT-o~a~l~ard. Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Planning Board Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-9502 Telephone (631) 765-1802 BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 17, 2006 Shinn Vineyard, LLC 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, NY 11952 To Whom This May Concern: It has come to our attention that a winery/tasting room is currently being operated on your property at 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck (SCTM# 1000-100-4-3.1), without the benefit of the proper approvals from Southold Town. Currently, your property has the following certificates of occupancy on file with the Southold Town Building Department: 1. Z-26149: A pre-existing certificate of occupancy, issued on 11/8/98, lists the following uses on the property: A single family dwelling, a three-car wood frame garage, two wood frame storage sheds, and two barns. 2. Z-27532: A certificate of occupancy, issued on 1/25/01, for: An alteration and repair of an existing agricultural storage building per ZBA approval #4868. 3. Z-30001: A certificate of occupancy, issued on 2/4/4, for: Construction of a new accessory storage building as applied for per ZBA approval #5339. I know that it is your contention that you believed that the use of your property was legal and you had the required permits in place. Unfortunately, this is not the case. However, I look forward to working with you to ensure that this process moves along as smoothly as possible. In order to being this process the following is required to be submitted to this office: 1. A completed building permit application: Although you are not proposing any new construction, our building permit application is universal will be used to initiate the process needed to legalize your winery/tasting room. A building permit will only be issued if new construction is proposed, if construction has occurred without the benefit of a permit, or if construction is required as a result of the proposed use change. 2. An updated site plan: Noting the use of each and every building on the property. 3. A floor plan of both the tasting room and winemaking facility: Please note that any changes from the original permits related to the certificates of occupancy mentioned above will require a permit. Furthermore, the change in use may trigger additional alterations based on New York State Code requirements. 4. Site plan approval: Using the above referenced materials, our office will issue a Notice of Disapproval, which will be your ticket into the planning department for site plan approval. Once you have received site plan approval, the building department will either issue a building permit (if there is construction on the property) or amend your existing certificate of occupancy to reflect the winery/tasting room use. Please be aware that at this time, we do not expect that approvals from any other agency will be required. However, after we have reviewed the materials above, there is a possibility that other approvals may be required (including, but not limited to ZBA approval and Suffolk County Health Department Approval. In addition, if you have any other future plans for this property this may be an opportune time to address them with the Planning Department. I thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I am issuing your building permit for alterations to an existing farm building as applied for. However, your certificate of occupancy for this construction will be contingent upon clearing up the issue referenced above. Furthermore, if the above referenced issue is not addressed in a timely fashion, the Southold Town Building Department reserves the fight to revoke this new permit. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (631) 765-1802, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. l~am~ Rdlis, Permit Examiner Cc: Edward Forrester, Code Enforcement; File Shinn Vineyard. Saturda~ne 27, 2009. View' East on Oregon Road. Event tent is visible to the right, 40 cars parked along the street. Driveway entrance to Shinn Vineyards parking for the event being held in the tent is directed to the street in the yellow sign above. Shinn b'in~Fard photos (continued? View- on Oregon Road, facing east towards Shinn Vineyard. Cars parked along Oregon Road, attending event at Shinn Vineyard. The vineyard's residence, B&B, Wine storage baitding, and tasting room can all be seen in the photo above. (40 cars counted when photo taken on 627_09). Shinn Vineyard. Saturday,l~ne 27, 2009. View East on Oregon Road. Event tent is visible to the right, 40 cars parked along the street. Driveway entrance to Shinn Vineyards - parking for the event being held in the tent is directed to the street in the yellow sign above. Town of Southold - Proposed Site Plan Shinn Winery 2000 Oregon Road, Mattimck SCTM #: 1000-100-4-3.1 Existing landscaping to east Building E Existing trees west of house (Buildiug A) All applicants for permits* includthg Town of Southo]d proposed actions that are subject to the Town of Southold WMerfront Consistency Revi~.~L. a.~_ assessment is intended to supplement other information u~d~-Tb'~-WS-5~d~'fi~ld making a detenuination of consistency. *Except minor exempt actio~ts including Building Permits and other mir~isterial permits not located within the Coastal Erosion Hazctrd Area. Before answering the questions in Section C, the preparer of this form should review the exempt minor action list, policies and explanations of each policy contained in the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Progrmn. A proposed action will be evaluated as to its si~ificant beneficial and adverse effects upon the coastal area (which includes all of Southold Town). If any question in Section C on this form is answered "yes" or "no", then the proposed action will affect the achievement of the LWRP policy standards and conditions contained in the consistency review law. Thus~ each answer must be explained in detail~ listing both supporting and non- supporting facts. If an action cannot be certified as consistent with the LWRP policy standards and conditions, it shall not be undertaken. A copy of the LWRP is available in the following places: online at the Town of Southold's website (southoldtown.northfork.net), the Board of Trustees Office, the Plmming Department, all local libraries and the Town Clerk's office. B. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND PROPOSED ACTION SCTM# 1000 100 - 4-3.1 PROJECT NAME Shinn Winery The Application has been submitted to (check appropriate response): TownBoard [~ PlanningBoard[-~ Building Dept. [~ BoardofTrustees [] Category of Town of Southold agency action (check appropriate response): (a) Action undertaken directly by Town agency (e.g. capital construction, planning activity, agency regulation, land transaction) (b) Financial assistance (e.g. grant, loan, subsidy) (c) Permit, approval, license, certification: [] Nature and extent of action: Establishment of a winerv with wine tasting ro~m~ wine makin9 roo~; and bathroom on 1.219 acre parcel in AC zone. Winery will utilize existing structures on the premises. Location of action: Site acreage: Oregon Road, Mattituck, NY 1.219 acres Single family with approved special exception for B&B, and frame barn,* Presentland use: shed, fran~building~ & acc~g.qo~ g~rag~ hnSl~ing Present zoning classification: A/C If an application for the proposed action has been filed with the Town of Southold agency, the following information shall be provided: Barbara Shinn, as sole member of Shinn Vineyard, LLC (owner) (a) Name of applicant: (b) Mailing address: c/o Deborah Doty, Esq., PO Box 1181, Cutchogue, NY 11935 (c) Telephone number: Area Code ( ) 631-734-6648 (d) Application number, if any: Will the action be directly undertaken, require fundh~g, or approval by a state or federal agency? Yes [-~ No [-~ If yes, which state or federal agency? C. Evaluate the project to the following policies by analyzing how the project will further support or not support the policies. Provide all proposed Best Management Practices that will further each policy. Incomplete answers will require that the form be returned for completion. DEVELOPED COAST POLICY Policy 1. Foster a pattern of development in the Town of Southold that enhances community character, preserves open space, makes efficient use of infrastructure, makes beneficial use of a coastal location, and minimizes adverse effects of development. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Page 2 for evaluation criteria. [~Yes [~ No [~ Not Applicable AC~ach additional sheets if necessary Policy 2. Protect and preserve historic and archaeological resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 3 through 6 for evaluation criteria ~-~ Yes [] No ~] Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 3. Enhance visual quality and protect scenic resources throughout the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 6 through 7 for evaluation criteria Yes ~-~ No [-~ Not Applicable Atlach additional sheets if necessary NATURAL COAST POLICIES Policy 4. Minimize loss of life, structures, and natoral resources from flooding and erosion. See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 8 through 16 for evaluation criteria ~ Yes ~] No ~-~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 5. Protect and improve water quality and supply in the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III -Policies Pages 16 through 21 for evaluation criteria ~ Yes ~-] No ~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 6. Protect and restore the quality and function of the Town of Southold ecosystems including Significant Coastal Fish _a_n~d __W_ildli~fe Habit_a_~._a?_d wetlan__ds.__S~_e. ~}V_RP_S_ect~ion I~II_.- Pgli~c_i~Paggs 22 through 32 for evaluation criteria. A~ach additional sheets if necessary Policy 7. Protect and improve air quality in the Town of Southold, See LWRP Section III - Policies Pages 32 through 34 for evaluation criteria. [-q Yes ~ No ~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 8. Minimize enviromnentai degradation in Town of Southold from solid waste and hazardous substances and wastes. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 34 through 38 for evaluation criteria. ~] yes [-q No ~] Not Applicable PUBLIC COAST POLICIES Policy 9. Provide for public access to, and recreational use of, coastal waters, public lands, and public resources of the Town of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 38 through 46 for evaluation criteria. [] Yes~ No ~ Not Applicable Atlach additional sheets if necessary WORKING COAST POLICIES Policy 10. Protect Southold's water-dependent uses and promote siting of new water-dependent uses in suitable locations. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 47 through 56 for evaluation criteria. [~}Yes [-~ Nb ~bt A~-pqik-aq5 el~ ............. Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 11. Promote sustainable use of living marine resources in Long Island Sound, the Peconic Estuary and Town waters. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 57 through 62 for evaluation criteria. [~ Yes [] No [~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 12. Protect agricultural lands in the Town' of Southold. See LWRP Section III - Policies; pages 62 through 65 for evaluation criteria. [] Yes ~ No [~ Not Applicable Attach additional sheets if necessary Policy 13. Promote appropriate use and development of energy and mineral resources. See LWRP Section III - Policies; Pages 65 through 68 for evaluation criteria. [] Yes ~-~ No [-~ Not Applicable Created on 5/25/05 1!.'20 AM ISITE PLAN TYPE: AMENDED NEW PROJECT NAME: t,-~htrt,'l ~d {Vl.~91, . LOCATION: v SCTM ,OOO-_ 43 SI~LAN STATUS REPORT WITHDRAWN ZONEI: ZONE2: HAMLET: ZONE3: OWNER NAME: APPLICANT NAME: AGENT NAME: TEL# TEL# (__) TEL# (__) PROJECT DESCRIPTION: EXISTING USE: PROPOSED USE: DATE BUILDING DEPARTMENT NOTICE: S/P REQUIRED Y OR N ZBA APPEAL REQUIRED Y OR N PRE-SUBMISSION CONFERENCE (WITHIN 30 DAYS OF WRITTEN REQUEST) NOTES: INFORMAL REQUEST FOR REVISIONS: APPLICATION RECEIVED DATE: / / APPLICATION PROCESS DATE: PAYMENT RECEWED: AMOUNT RECEIVED:$ i %--00 NEW SP: $500./ACRE &. 10/SF, AMENDED SP: $250. +. 10/SF, AGRiC SP: FLAT $500 'q°(D "-G°ct ''~ FEEAMOUNT:($~::z~OOX i. Zlq~=}(e~,~''' )+($.]ox43':F4, SF4 '~5¢.~ )4 ISq'k. tO NEW ^PPUCA'nON WOP. K SESSION (WITnr~ ]0 DAYS OF RECErPT), Pa ACCEPTED Y OR N APPLICANT ADVISED OF NECESSARY REVISIONS (WITHIN 30 DAYS OF REVIEW) BUILDING DEPARTMENT MEEETING I00-254B3 (WITHIN 30 DAYS) NOTES: REVISED SUBMISSION RECEIVED: NOTES: REFERRED AGENCIES: (WITH MAPS=W/P) ~_/ZZ/X~ STZBA~_,STBD~$TC/TB~, m~ STBT~,STE~,SCDHS~,NYSDEC~,USACORPS__,NYSDOT__, SCWA X , SCPD~, SCDPW__, LWILP ,~_ RF~PONSESNOTES NOTES: /,,/ ACTION TYPE: COOI~31NATEI~: UI)JC,O.Q~R. DINATE[~, . (TYPE1: __ TYPE2: ~ UNLISTED: ) SEQRA DETERMiNATION :NEG DEC Y OR N, J ~PPROVALS REQUIRED: REFERRED DATE NOTES APPROVAL DATE NOTES ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW COMMITTEE: ~ /~(~ / / LWRP COORDINATOR: ~/ / ~-~/~ / / BUILDING DEPARTMENT CERTIFICATION: <~ /ZZ/ (~ / / FIRE COMMISSIONERS: q /.72, c:C ~f--/4¢/O? ,~O¢?reo~el! TOWN ENGINEER APPROVAL: ~/ 2~1 0¢ I / DEP.OF TRANSPORTATION: DOT~, DPW__, TOS / / / / SUFFOLKCOUNTYDEPARTMENTOFPLANNING: ~ / ~--~0G ~/ / /~/~ /4;(~ SUFFOLK COUNTY DEPT OF HEALTH: PERMIT #: / / OPTIONAL APPROVALS: ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS: APPEAL#: / / / / BOARD OF TRUSTEE'S: / / / / NYS DEC WETLANDS/TIDAL/SPDES / / / / ® BOAR? A%%Ov S; CONDITIONAL FINAL:~/__/ FINAL: ENDORSEMENT OF SITE PLAN: FIELD INSPECTION FOR C/O: NOTES DISTRIBUTE APPROVED SITE PLANS TO: BUILDING DEPT ! / TOWN ENG / / GENERAL NOTES: I 10/4/2005 Shinn Estate Vineyards Island, New York Page 1 of 1 ShinnSte eyard Ordering The tasting room is open Daily from 12:00 PM. to 5:00 PM. Join us every Saturday and Sunday afternoon at 1:30 PM. when we open the vineyard for a walking tour and wine tasting. The walk highlights the growing cycle of the vines and addresses the sustainable farming practices of the estate. Owners David Page and Barbara Shinn host the 20 - 30 minute walk and tasting. Our limited production estate wine is poured after the walk and is available for purchase. The tour is $8.50 which includes the wine tasting. Call for reservations 631-804-0367. Shinn house d Brea~,fest Start Philosophy Wines Viticulture Photo Gallery Press Clippings Directions Contact Us Weddings-El http://www.shinnvineyard.recipes fromhomc .conffFrameSet.htm 8/16/2007 Events at Shirm Page 1 of 1 Events at Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse We host weddings, receptions, wine dinners, tasting, conferences and other event that suits your needs. All events can be tailored to reflect your personal taste. Events or wedding for groups of over 50 people are held outside under a tent provided by the client. Smaller events or weddings can be held in several private areas on our estate including our tasting room, barrel cellar and winery. The cost of events on the estate ranges from a price per person cost ranging between 20 dollars for wine tasting and tour and up to $5,200 which includes 4 double occupancy rooms for 2 nights at Shinn Estate Farmhouse and the exclusive use of the entire property. A Rehearsal Dinner and/or Sunday Brunch can be offered to wedding parties and the rates can be tailored to your budget. We can accommodate up to 40 people for a rehearsal dinner and up to 70 people for a bnmch. These meals would be prepared by our Farmhouse kitchen under the direction of Chef David Page. Shinn Estate Farmhouse does not cater weddings at this time. Tents, tables, food, wait staff, and all other accessories are provided by the client. We have an outdoor space where a tent can be placed. It is adjacent to the vineyard, and faces the winery. Most couples opt to hold the wedding ceremony in the vineyard, and you are welcome to do so at no additional cost. On Saturdays and Sundays, events can begin after our tasting room closes at 5:00 pm. If you would like more information, you can contact us at 631-804-0367. We can assure you that you and your guests will be well taken care of by Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse. Barbara Shinn and David Page Shinn Estate Vineyards and Farmhouse http://www.shinnvineyard.recipesfromhome.com/EventDetails.htm 8/16/2007 TYR CO # 473889 100.-4-3.1 NU~R# DATE o/oo/oo 0/00/00 PERMIT 29676 8/27/03 PERMIT 30001 31915 4/18/06 PERMIT 31977 5/09/06 PERMIT o/oo/oo -Z&O 55 o/oo/oo o/oo/oo o/oo/oo 0/00/00 OWNER: VINEYARD LLC SHINN USE/DESCRIPTIOI~ SINGLE FAMILY R~IDENCE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ACCESSORY FARM ADDITION%/ALTERATIONS Fl=More F7=Permit Detail F8=Co Detail F9=Preco F12=New Swis/Parcel F3=Exi ~BPX0'i *** BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION *** 8/18/06 10:35:1 .............. ..... ....... OWNER: DAVID PAGE ADDR: 19965 SOUNDVIEW AVE SOUTHOLD NY 11971 APPLY DATE: 8/11/03 VERIFIED BY: PMC USE CODE: USE: SUBDIVISION RO#: ZONING DISTRICT: YARDS SETBACK FRONT: PERMIT OWNER/AGENT: ADDRESS: CITY: MAP: LOC: 2000 HAMLET MATTITUCK PERMIT DATE: 8/27/03 VERIFY DATE: --~ ACCESSORY LOT: OREGON RD DENY DATE: EXPIRATION: BUILDING#: MAX HGT: PLOT SIZE: AREA: SIDES: REAR: ~HINN VINEYARD LLC 19965 SOUNDVIEW AVE 0/00/00 0 OF: SOUTHOLD STATE: NY ZiP: 11971 DESCRIPTION: CONSTRUCTION OF AN ACCESSORY STORAGE BUILDING IN THE REAR YARD AS APPLIED FOR PER ZBA DECISION #5339 WETLANDS Y/N: COASTAL EROSION Y/N: TRUSTEES APPROVAL DATE: -0/00/00 PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL DATE: DEC APPROVAL DATE: ~ ZBA APPROVAL DATE: FLOOR AREA: 864 VALUE OF WORK: 20,000.00 FEE CODE: ACY FEE: ADD/CHG/DEL: CHANGE Fl=Next Permit F --~mmary F3=Exit F7=Reprint F8=CO F9=Denial -0/00/00 184.20 F12=Clear ~r~s ~o~.D ~m~m~Rs Lydia A. Tortora, Chairwoman Gerard P. Goehxiager George Homing Ruth D. Oliva 'v'mc~n t Orlando BOARD OF APPEALS TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Appl. No. 5339 - SHINN VINEYARD. INC./DAVID PAGE 1000-100-4-3 STREET & LOCATION: 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 ZBA Fax (631) 765-9064 Telephone (631) 765-1809 htrp://southoldtown.nor ttfforkatet RECEIVED ~'~ & ~ FINDINGS, DELIBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF JULY 10, 2003 FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACT$/DESCR, IPTION: The applicant's preperbJ has 142.98 ft. frontage along the south side of Oregon Road in Matfituck, and is shown as 1.219 acres, or 53,078 sq. ff. on the survey prepared by John C. Ehlem, L.S. dated 6-16-03. The property is improved with a dwelling and farm buildings, and to the west and south are other lands of the applicants consisting of 20+ acres within a Town of Southoid Development Right Easement area. BASIS QF APPLICATION: Building Inspector's February 28, 2003 Notice of Disapproval, amended March 5, 2003, for the reason that applicants wish to demolish an extsting nonconforming accessory 18' x 31' building and construct a new accessory 24' x 36' equipment storage building with a 12 ft. side yard setback, instead of the minimum 20 feet required under Code Section 100-31A(2-c). AREA VARIANCE RELIEF REQUESTED: Applicants were disapproved in their permit application to the Building Depmtment for a new 24' x 36' accessory building in the rear yard, south of the t~o- story frame dwelling, and with a setback of 12 feet from the easterly side lot line, The new building is an accessory structure for storage of applicants' equipment and items related to the dwelling and agricultural uses of the property, and will be placad in the same yard area as an existing nonconforming building located 0.7 feet from the side line. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: Based on the testimony and record before the Board and pemonal inspection, the Board makes the following findings: (1) The grant of an area variance will not produce an undesirabts change in the character of the neighborhood or a detriment to nearby proper0ea. The proposed new construction measures 24 feet by 36 feet and is a result of a demolition of the existing accessory building, presenfiy 0.7 feet from this easterly side property line. The new construction will be an increase of the 0.7 fi- setback to 12 feet to the side line. The property adjacent to this properbj is a cultivated farm field. : (2) The benefit sought by the applicant cannot be achieved by some method feasible for the applicant to pursue, other than an area variance. This is reconstruction of an existipg nonconforming agricultural building which will result in an increase of conformity. Also, acces%to the building will be from the south end of the building, in order to avoid removal of vines a~nd nearby landscaped areas. [ (3) The requested area variance is substanfia[ and represents an eight*font reduction in I~e minimum 20 ft. code requirement. ~ · P~'ge 2 - Ju]y 10, 2003 ' ZBA AppL No. 5339- Shinn Vineyard/D, Page Parcel 100-4-3 at MaSJtuck (4) The difficulty was self-created when the applicant chose to build a new bui]ding with access on the south side of the building. (5) No evidence was presented to suggest that the variance granted will have an adverse effect or impact on physical or environmental conditions, Another accessory building exists further south with setbacks at 10 feet and 13 feet from the easterly side lot line. (6) The action set forth below is the minimum necessary and adequate to enable applicants to remove the existing nonconforming building and build a new accessory building, while prese~ng and protecting the character of the neighborhood and the health, safety and welfare of the community. RESOLUTION/ACTiON: On motion by Member Orlando, seconded by Member Gcehringer, itwas RESOLVED, to GRANT the vadance as applied for. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Members Tortora (Chairwoman), Goehdnger, Ol[va, and Odando. (Absent was Member Homing of Fishers Island.) This Resolutton was duly adopted (4-0). LYDIA &C~ORTORA, ~;HAIRMAN Approved for Filing ?- ,~3 FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD, N.Y. NOTICE OF DISAPPROVAL DATE: Febraaw28, 2003 AMENDED: March 5, 2003 TO: Sandra Sikorski & William Kelly PO Box 1680 Southold, NY, 11971 .Please take notice that your application dated February 28, 2003 For permit for demolition ofar~ accessory building and the constmcfi0!a of an accessory equipmga_I _storage building at Location of property 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck CounW Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 100 Block4 Lot 3.1 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The proposed construction, on this 52,968 square foot lot in the Agricultural Conservation District, is ~no~ permitted pursuant to Article III Section 100-31, A (2) c.. which states; ' .~ams, stor.age buildings, greenl~ouses (including plastic or covered) and other related ~tructures. provided that sucli buildings shall conform to the yard requirements for principal b]aildin gs" Principal single side yard setback is 20 feet. The ao~licant nroposes an equipment buil&hag 12 feet from the side yard line. The existing accessory building, which will be demohshed as part of the applicants proposal, is note~l as.beijag located +/- 0 feet t~om the side yard line, Total lot coverage, following the prgposed construction, will be --/-~LTpercem ~ This Notice of Disapproval was amended on March 5, 2003, to correct errors on behalf of the building department. Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require "further review by the Southold Town Building Department. 8CC: ZBA, File · ~P~TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PROPERTY OWNER STRE~ '~ ~ ~ ~ V l LLAGE LOT :FORME~, OWNER i SEAS... LAND. -IMF', VL. N U S FARM ~Ti SUB. 'TYPE.OF BUILDING CB. MICS. Mkt. Value FARM Tillable AGE ] NEW NORMAL BELOW ABOVE Woodland ,Meadowl~d . House Plot TOTAl.:. ' DATE REMARKS ' '.. - . I ~"" - / , ' ' ~l~/~'' ~ ' ~ . ' c~ ' ~ ' · ~ .~. ' ' ' ' II/ .... , ' BUILDIN~ CONDITION Acre Value Per · Acre Value FRONTAGE ON WATER FRONTAGE ON ROAD DEPTH BULKHEAD 4g' DOCK i SCTM# DISTRICT: t,000, SF_L'TtON: B D - E EXAMINER~C ADDRESS: CITY: BUILDING PERMITS OPENfEXPIRED: PRE CO: Y OR N ~P -Z ~ C/0 Z- , INFO /BP BP -Z / C/0 Z- , lliFO / BP BLOCK: __~ LOT: __ ZONING DISTRICT: -Z/C/0 Z- -Z / C/0 Z- .. DATE REVIEWED:. / '/03 DAT~Sta~Mrm'EO. / /~ SUBDIVISION: . CONFORMING? , INFO , INFO · SINGLE & SEPARAIE CERTIFICATION-REQDIR~D NOTES: Lo'rE 40,000SF-100-24. Lot recognifion.(CRBATED b~fore June 30, 1983). D'NDEP,~IZlgD LOTS FROM JAN.1997 100-25, Mgg*r.(A nlmoonformiag at any t~m¢ att~' 7~ REQ. LOTSIZE: ACT. LOT SIZE: REQ. FRONT PROP. FRONT _ REQ. REAR PROP. PEAR :PROJECT DES'CRiPTION; RBQ. LOT COV. ACT. LOT COV. REQ. HEIGHT P~,O~. ItEIGHT ESTIMA~D PROJECT COST: ARCHITECT/ENGINEER: WATERFRONT? DESCREPTION: PANEL FLOOD ZONE: APPROVALS REQUIRED SUFFOLK COUNTY HEALTH DEPT: YES or NO, (BED #): DTE: ,__/ PERMIT fi: TOWN SEPTIC RECEIPT: Y or N NEW YORK STATE DEC: r~-OEC 9an5 YES or NO DTE: / / PERMIT fi: SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES: YES or NO DTE: / PERMIT #: · TOWN ZONING BOARD APPROVAL: YES or NO DTE: / PERMIT #: TOWN PLAN. BOARD APPROVAL: YES or NO DTE: / PERMIT #: TOWN HISTORICAL PRE (SPLIA): YES or NO NEW YORK STATE CODE COMPLIANCE (SEE PAGE 2): YES or NO FEE STRUCTUR.E: FOUNDATION: SF F~RST FLOOR: SF SECOND FLOOR: SF OTHER: SF LNIT OTHER TOTAL TOTAL: SF FEE FEE FEE 1. (. SF)- { SF)= SF X $ =$ 2. ( SF}- ( .$F)= SF X $ =$ 3. ( SF)- ( .. SF)= SF X $ =$ +$ +$ = $ +$ +$ = $. __+$ +$ = $ FINAL TOTAL: $ FORM NO- 4 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY NO: Z-30001 Date: 02/04/04 THIS CERTIFIES ~hat the building ACCESSORY Location of Property: 2000 ORE~ON RD MATTITUCK (HOUSE NO.) (STREET) (H~LET) County Ta~ap ~O. 473889 Section 100 Block ~ Lot 3.1 Skibdivislon Filed Map NO. Lot No. conforms substantially mo the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in tkLis office dated AUGUST 11, 2003 pursuant to which Building Peru~t No. 29676-Z dated AUGUST 27~ 2003 was issued, and conforms Ko all of the requirements of the applicable provmslons of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is ACCESSORY STOPJ%GE BUII/DING AS APPLIED FOR PER ZBA ~5339 DATED 7/10/03. The certificate is issued to SHINN VINEYARD LLC (OWtqER) of the aforesaid building. S'uFFOLK CO~ DEPART~T~ OF HEALTH ~PPROIL~L ELECTRICAL CERTIFICA_TENO. PLIERS CERqE[FICATIONDAT~KD 83326C 01/14/04 Bev. 1/81 t BPXD1 *** BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION *** 8/18/06 10:35:2 .............. ..... ....... OWNER: VINEYARD LLC SHINN ADDR: 19965 SOUNDVIEW AVE SOUTHOLD NY 11971 APPLY DATE: 4/18/06 VERIFIED BY: bPR USE CODE: ~ USE: SUBDIVISION RO#: ZONING DISTRICT: YARDS SETBACK FRONT: PERMIT OWNER/AGENT: ADDRESS: CITY: DESCRIPTION: ALTERATIONS MAP: LOC: 2000 HAMLET MATTITUCK PERMIT DATE: 4/18/06 VERIFY DATE: ~ FARM BUILDING LOT: OREGON RD DENY DATE: EXPIRATION: BUILDING#: MAX HGT: PLOT SIZE: AREA: SIDES: REAR: VINEYARD LLC SHINN 19965 SOUNDVIEW AVE 0/00/00 OF: SOUTHOLD STATE: NY ZIP: 11971 TO AN EXISTING FARM BUILDING AS APPLIED FOR. AGRICULTURAL USE ONLY! WETLANDS Y/N: TRUSTEES APPROVAL DATE: -0/00/00 DEC APPROVAL DATE: ~ FLOOR AREA: ~ VALUE OF WORK: .00 ADD/CHG/DEL: CHANGE Fl=Next COASTAL EROSION Y/N: PLANNING BOARD APPROVAL DATE: ZBA APPROVAL DATE: FEE CODE: NEW FEE: -o/oo/oo 150.00 Permit F~--Summary F3=Exit F7=Reprint F8=CO F9=Denial F12=Clear Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971-0959 Fax (631) 765-9502 Telephone (631) 765-1802 BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN OF SOUTI-IOLD April 17, 2006 Shinn Vineyard, LLC 2000 Oregon Road Mattituck, NY 11952 To Whom This May Concern: It has come to our attention that a winery/tasting room is currently being operated on your property at 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck (SCTM#1000-100-4-3.1), without the benefit of the proper approvals from Southold Town. Currently, your property has the following certificates of occupancy on file with the Southold Town Building Department: 1. Z-26149: A pre-existing certificate of occupancy, issued on 11/8/98, lists the following uses on the property: A single family dwelling, a three-car wood frame garage, two wood frame storage sheds, and two barns. 2. Z-27532: A certificate of occupancy, issued on 1/25/01, for: An alteration and repair of an existing agricultural storage building per ZBA approval #4868. 3. Z-30001: A certificate of occupancy, issued on 2/4/4, for: Construction of a new accessory storage building as applied for per ZBA approval #5339. -B! ~ ~e~' r~, 31°~q3 I know that it is your contention that you believed that the use of your property was legal and you had the required permits in place. Unfortunately, this is not the case. However, I look forward to working with you to ensure that this process moves along as smoothly as possible. In order to being this process the following is required to be submitted to this office: 1. A completed building permit application: Although you are not proposing any new construction, our building permit application is universal will be used to initiate the process needed to legalize your winery/tasting room. A building permit will only be issued if new construction is proposed, if construction has occurred without the benefit of a permit, or if construction is required as a result of the proposed use change. An updated site plan: Noting the use of each and every building on the property. 3. A floor plan of both the tasting room and winemaking facility: Please note that any changes from the original permits related to the certificates of occupancy mentioned above will require a permit. Furthermore, thc change in usc may trigger additional alterations based on New York State Code requirements. 4. Site plan approval: Using the above referenced materials, our office will issue a Notice of Disapproval, which will be your ticket into thc planning department for site plan approval. Once you have received site plan approval, the building department will either issue a building permit (if there is construction on the property) or amend your existing certificate of occupancy to reflect the winery/tasting room use. Please be aware that at this time, we do not expect that approvals from any other agency will be required. However, after we have reviewed the materials above, there is a possibility that other approvals may be required (including, but not limited to ZBA approval and Suffolk County Health Depamnent Approval. In addition, if you have any other future plans for this property this may be an opportune time to address them with the Planning Department. I thank you for your prompt attention to this matter. I am issuing your building permit for alterations to an existing farm building as applied for. However, your certificate of occupancy for this construction will be contingent upon cleating up the issue referenced above. Furthermore, if the above referenced issue is not addressed in a timely fashion, the Southold Town Building Department reserves the right to revoke this new permit. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (631) 765-1802, between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Efam~ R~lis, Permit Examiner Cc: Edward Forrester, Code Enforcement; File FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Hall Southold, N.Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) PERMIT NO. 31915 Z Date APRIL 18, 2006 Permission is hereby granted to: VINEYARD LLC SHINN 19965 SOUNDVIEW AVE SOUTHOLD,NY 11971 for : ALTER3~TIONS TO AN EXISTING FARM BUILDING AS APPLIED FOR. AGRICULTURAL USE ONLY! at premises located at County Tax Map No. 473889 Section 100 pursuant to application dated APRIL Building Inspector to expire on OCTOBER Fee $ 150.00 2000 OREGON RD MATTITUCK Block 0004 Lot No. 003.001 18, 2006 and approved by the 18, 2007. ORIGINAL Rev. 5/8/02 FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Hall Southold, N.Y. BUILDING PERMIT (THIS PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) PERMIT NO. 26038 Z Date OCTOBER 19~ 1999 Permission is hereby granted to: DAVID PAGE & BARBARA SHINN NEW YORK,NY 10014 for ~ ALTERATION/REPAIR TO AGRICULTURAL STORAGE BUILDING AS APPLIED FOR. at premises located at 2000 OREGON RD MATTITUCK County Tax Map No. 473889 Section 100 Block 0004 Lot No. 003 pursuant to application dated SEPTEMBER 17 1999 and approved by the Building Inspector. Fee $ 50.00 / Autho z~ Signature ORIGINAL Rev. 2/19/98 FORM NO. 4 TOWN OP SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMElgT Office of the Building Inspector Town Hall Southold, N.Y. CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY No: Z-27532 Date: 01/25/01 THIS u~TIFIES that the building ALTERATION Location of Property: 2000 OREGON RD MATTITUCK (HOUSE NO.) (STREET) (HAMLET) County Tax Map NO. 473889 Section 100 Block 4 Lot 3 Subdivision File~ Map No. __ Lot No. __ conforms substantially to the Application for Building Permit heretofore filed in this office dated SEPTEMBER 17~ 1999 ~ursu~nt to which Buildlng Perm/t No. 26038-~ dated OCTOBER 19t 1999 was issued, and conforms to all of the requirements of the applicable provisions of the law. The occupancy for which this certificate is issued is ALTERATION & REPAIR TO EXISTING AGRICULTURAL STORAGE BUILDING AS APPLIED FORd & AS PER ZBA #4868. The certificate is issued to DAVID PAGE & BARBARA SHINlg (OWNER) of the aforesaid building. uuF~OLKCOUNTYDRPARTMENTOF~EALTHAPPROVAL ~r.~-i~ICAL C~TIFICATENO. PLU~8~RS ~U~TIFICATION DA-&A~U 12/12/00 ~/A H-070266 12/28/00 NORTH PORK PLUMB. & HEAT. Rev. 1/81 TOWN OF $OUTHOLD BUH,DING DEPARTMENT SOUTHOLD, N.Y. DATE; Sulv 21. 2000 TO David Page 2000 Oregon Rd Mattituck NY Please take notice that your application dated ,lglv 18. 2000 For vanendment to permit for alteration to _a~ioaltural building ( add shower Location of propeny 2000 Ore_iron Road M~tu~k County Tax Map No. i000- S eciion 100 Block 4 _ Lot_3 Subdivision Filed Map # Lot # Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds; Proposed add/t/on of a shower into the stmclure, ha addition to the commode and sink approved on ori~ns! pelmit (/~26038 ), not permitted pursuant to Arlicle Ill Section 100-3 lA. 1 which states; In A-C, R-gO, R-120, R-200 and R-400 Districts, no building or premises shall be used and no building ~r pa~t ora building shall be erected or altered which is ananged, intended or designed ~o be used, in '~ ~:.~h0~ or in part, for any uses era~ept the following: ,,. ~.A._ Pern~tted uses. ' !~:0) One-£amily detached dwellings, not to exceed one dwelling on each lot. It has be~n determ~n~ that thc dcs~8~ and presen~ o£a fi~l bath within the structure constitutes a second dwelling unit on the parcel. TOWN OF .OLD ~o.~. RECORD CAR~ NOP-MAL APPEAL FROM DECISION OF BUILDING INSPECTOR APPEAL TO THE ZONING B~ OF AP~ TOWN OF ], ~w,)~,,~.~...~o~ .~..~_~ ............................ WHEREBY ~HE ~ILDING [N~R DENI~ ............ ~"D"~,~nt ~,'~.,~," - ......... ........... .............. J ) P~IT TO USE' ( ) PERMIT FOR ~CUPANCY ~. L~ON OF ~U~ .~..~ ........ ]9~ ................ St~et /~let / '~ D~trlct ~ Z~i~'~p Dfs~1c~ 1000 Se~fo~ ~ Block ~ Lo~ ~, Curren~ Mop No. -~ No. Prto~ Owne~. 2. PROVISION (S) OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE s~tion ~nd Paragraph of t~ Z~ing O~Jnonce bY number. ~ ~t qu~e the Ordinate.) A~t~cle~ Section I~-~IA *j 3. ~PE OF ~P~L'~I is ~e health for (pleas~ c~ck a~prlate ~x) (~ ~ V~RIA~ to. the Z~Dina Ordi~nce or Zoning ~op Art. J6 S~. 28~ S~SKtI~ 3 ) 4. PREVIOUS AP?EAL A previous ~ppeaI (~,as) (~s~ ~een made with re~oect to thlll decision of the Building Inspector or v~th, , respect to this property, Such appeal was ( ) ;request for o' special permit ( ) ~equest for a variance and was made in Appeo! No ................................. Doted .................................................... REASON FOR APPEAL A Variance te Section 280A Subsection 3 A VoHonce to the Zoning O~l~nce r~ue~ted for the ~s~that ~ ~ ~ O~~ ~ DO~ ~ · gz (Continue on other si~) ~/~' APPEALS BOARD MEMBERS G~mrd P, Goehringer, Chahman James Dinizio, Jr. Ly~a ~ To.fa George Hom~ BOARD OF APPEALS TOV~N OF SOUTHOLD Southold Town ~ 53095 Ma~] Road EO. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Z~A Fax (631) 765.9064 Telephone (631.) 765-1.809 FINDINGS, DEUBERATIONS AND DETERMINATION MEETING OF OCTOBER 19. 2000 AppL No~ ~6~ - SHINN VINE-YARD.JNC./BARBARA SHINN 1000-100-4-3 STREET & ~+OCA~TIO~:.. 2~00~dm~gO~ I~ad, Mattituck DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING;.. October. 10, 2000 FINDINGS OF FACT PROPERTY FACTS/DESCRIPTION: The applicant's property is located on the so~th side of Oregon Road in Matti(UCk. The prope~'y is 22 acres with 642.98 ff. of road frontage. A.survey sketch, altered by Stanley lsaksen. Jr., shows the Development Right Easement areas of appreoxireately 20 ecrus, A separate land designation, shown as the owner's 1.828 acres, is improved with a ~wotiir~l and tan'n buildings. The entire acreage is.owned by the applicant. BASIS OF Ap_P, LID.:~,TION:, Bailc~ing b~specthr's July 21, 2000 Noti(:e of Disapproval for the reason that applicants pr0p6sed ~hower facility in the existing ham constitutes a second dwelling on a single parcel under Article III. Section 100-31A(1) of the Zoning Code, AREA VARIANCE. RELIEF REQUE,,~TED: Applicant was disapproved in her application to the Building Department for an amendment to Building Permit No. 26038 for a shower facility in an accessory building. REASONS FOR BOARD ACTION: Based on the testimony and record before the Board and i~emOnal:insp~aofion, the Board reake the following findings: (3.)~ The grant of the area variance wi not product an undesirable change in the character of the nelgbbe~l~od or, a detrireant to nea~y properties. The applicants do not live in the principal dwe ling Io~ed on .the subject proparty this dwelling is rented. The accessory agricultural building is "'~d~,seiel~ for the;.cam an~ maintenance of wine grapes planted on the property, and proposed sho~ fac~lity which s the'subject of this variance is to be used solely for agricultural staff. No change in the appearance of the chareclar of the neighborhood will resutt from this variance. (2) The~b;r~ef'~ sought:~'t~e'~[~ilcant cannot be achieved by some reethod feasible for the applicant!to,pursue, other than anaraa variance, because the applicants rent the principal building and do not have use of a shower after pesticide application to the wine grapes as required by me Environmental Protection Agency standards (3) The variance granted is not substantial because the agdcuitural building will remain a~ accessory building and n no event shal! it be Used for sleeping quarters or other habitable purposes (4) The difficulty has been In part self-created because the apphcants are unable to use the Shower in the pdnciual building because it is rented. (5) No evidence was presented ~ ~'ege,~t Sat the ~vadance granted will have an adverse effect ar impact on ~hysical or environmental ~>nditions. The action set fo[th below is the minimum neceesa~ and adequate to enable applicants to meet the requirements of Environmental Protection Agency standards by installing a shower facility in the barn building, while preserving and prote~ng the character of the neighborheed and the health, safet~ and welfare of the community. RESQLUTION/ACTION: On motion by Member Goehdnger (Chairman), seconded by Member Dinizio. it was RESOLVED, to GRANT the vadance as applied for. VOTE OF THE BOARD: AYES: Members Goehringer (Chairman), Dinizio. To~tore Collins. (Member Homing of Fishers Island was absent-during this ~ This Resolution was duly SECTION A: Site Plan Name and Location Application Date: 08 / 10 / 2006 Site Plan Name: Shirm Winery Suffolk County Tax Map #1000- 100 - 4 Other SCTM #s: 1000-100-4-3.2 (vineyard) SOUTHOLD PLANNIN OARD SITE PLAN APPLICAnt'-" 3.1 Street Address: 2000 Oregon Road Hamlet: Mattituck Distance to nearest intersection: 1,162.35' east of Mill Lane Type of Site Plan: x New Amended If Amended, last approval date: / / Residential SECTION B: Owners/Agent Contact Information Please list name, mailing address, and £hone number for the people below: Property Owner Shinn Vineyard, LD2 Street 2000 Oregon Road City Mattituck State NY Zip__11952 Home Telephone 631-298-0216 Other Applicant Barbara Shinn, as sole member of LLC Street 2000 Oregon Road City. Mattituck State NY Home Telephone 631-298-0216 Other Zip 11952 Applicant's Agent or Representative: Contact Person(s)* Deborah Dety, Esq. Street 670 West Creek Avenue, PO Box 11.81 City_ Cutchogue State NY Zip. 11935 Office Telephone 631-734-6648 Other 631-734-7702 (FAX) *Unless otherwise requested, correspondence will be sent only to the contact person noted here. 10/05/05 Page 1 of 2 SE(~TION C: Site Data Proposed construction type: New x Property total acreage or square footage: Site Plan build-out acreage or squ are footage:53, 000-+ Modification of Existing Structure Change of use x 53,078 ac./sq, ft. ac./sq, ft. x __Agricultural Is there an existing or proposed Sale of Development Rights on the property? Yes x No __  If yes, expl~n: Develo[~nent riqhts to ~1000-100-4-3.2 (vineyard) sold to Town Property Zoning District(s): AC Building Department Notice of Disapproval Date: 05 /04 / 2006 Is an application to the Southold Town Zoning Board of Appeals required? Yes __ If yes, have you submitted an application to the ZBA? Yes __ No __ If yes, attach a copy of the application packet, ]No x Show all uses proposed and existing. Indicate which building will have which use. If more then one use is proposed per building, indicate square footage of floor area per use. Single family with approved special exception for B&B, and frame List all existing property uses: barn,* shed, frame building, & accessory storage building Single family dwelling with B&B, winery with wine tasting rocm, wine List all uses: making room & bathroon, wine storage barn, accessory storage proposed property building, and shed Other accessory uses: See above Existing lot coverage: 16.6 % Proposed lot coverage: 16.6 % Gross floor area of existing structure(s): 8,786.4' sq. ft. Gross floor area of proposed structure(s): 8,786.4* * includes floor are~ o~ a~ion to dwelling which is under cons~-u~ Parking Space Data: For Wine Tasting, Making & Storage only # of existing spaces: n/a # of proposed spaces: 12 Loading Berth: Yes No x Landscaping Details: Landscaping to remain; see photographs for details Existing landscape coverage: n/a % Proposed landscape coverage: n/a % ~[ Waterfront Data: lis this property within 500" of a wetland area? Yes __ No x If yes explain: I, the undersigned, certify that all the above information is tree. Signature of Prep~j~.~~ Date: Pag6 2 10/05/05 08/10/2006 APPLICANPS AFFIDAVIT STATE OF NEW YORK COUNIY OF SUFFOLK ~ ~ she . being dUly sworn, deposes and says tha~esides at 2000 _O~re~oI/ R0ad~, Mat_tit~ck, ..... she is the sole member of S~,~r%/~I~AR~.~ ~,.~LLC, in U~e State ¢ New York, '~ ~ ~ ................. wb&cb Ls ~e ~e~ o~ ~e p=~ses ~ as 2000 0~o~ R~, ~tt~tuck, ~ wh~c~is hereby making application; that there are no existing structures or Improvements on ~e land which are not shown on U~e Site Plan; ~at the title to the entire parcel, Including all rights-of-way, has been clearly es~blisl~ed and is shown on said Plan; U~at no pa~ ¢ ~e Plan Infringes upon any duly filed plan which has not been abandoned bo~ as to Io~ and as to roads; ~at~e has examined all rules and regula~ons adopted by the Planning Board for Be filing of Site Plans and will comply with same; ~at the plans subml~d, as approved, will not be altered or changed in any manner wl~out Se approval ¢ ~e Planning Board; and that ~he actual physical Improvements will be Installed In strict accordance With ~e plans subml~ed. (OwneO Signed (Partner or Corporate officer and Tide} Sworn to me mis "?'"~ day of Auqu__st Public) August, 2006 Deborah Dory, Esq. 670 West Creek Avenue P.O. Box 1181 Cutchogue, NY 11935 RE: Shinn Vineyard, LLC BARBARA SHINN 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck, NY 11952 Dear Deborah: I am the sole member of the above-referenced New York limited liability company which is the owner of the premises known as 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck, NY (SCTM # 1000-100-4-3.1). With respect to said property, I hereby authorize you to sign all applications to the Town of Southold and/or other governmental authorities in connection with building permits, certificates of occupancy, variances, waivers of merger, subdivision process, site plans, and/or other matters before the Town or other governmental entities, including but limited to, New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, and Suffolk County Department of Health Services. Very truly yours, Barbara Shinn TO: Deborah Dory a/c Shinn Vineyard PO Box 1181 Cutchogue, NY 11935 Please take notice that your application dated April 27, 2006 For permit for an as built winery and tasting room at Location of property: 2000 Oregon Road, Mattituck County Tax Map No. 1000 - Section 100 Block_4 Lot 3.~1 Is returned herewith and disapproved on the following grounds: The as built construction on this conforming lot in the AC district requires site plan approval from the Southold Town Planning Board. ure '} -- Note to Applicant: Any change or deviation to the above referenced application, may require further review by the Southold Town Building Department. CC: file, Planning Board TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT TOWN HALL SOUTHOLD, NY 11971 TEL: (631) 765-1802 FAX: (631) 765-9502 www. northfork, net/Southold/ Examined /, 20__ Approved ~.~¢, 20 Disapproved a/c Expiation ,20 PERMIT NO. BUILDING PE~IT APPLICATION CHECKLIST Building Inspec-'g~ Do you have or need the following, before applying? Board of Health 4 sets of Building Plans plaanmg Board approval Survey Check Septic Form N.Y.S.D.EC. Trustees Contact: Mail to:_ DoJrx~rah Dol-y,. ~.~q _ i:~3g 1181: ~t-ohc.y;e, _.mt 11935 Phone:__ 631-734-66~,R ,i~ 2 '/ APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT . _ ~ Date April 25 ,2006 i INSTRUCTIONS a. This apphcation MUST be completely filled in by typewriter or in h~k and sabmitted to the Building Inspector with 3 sets 'plans, accurate plot plait to scale. Fee according to schedule. b. Plot plan showiug location of lot and of buildings on premises, relationship to adjoining premises or public sireets or areas mid waterways. c. The work covered by this applicatiou may not be conuneuced before issuance of Building Permit. d. Upou approval of this applicafiou, the Building Inspector will issue a Buildiug Permit to tile applicant. Such a permit shall be kept on the premises available for inspection throughout tile work. e. No bnilding shall be occupied or used in whole or in part for any purpose what so ever antil the Building Iuspector issues a Certificate of Occupancy. f. Every building permit shall expire ff the work authorized has not colmneuced within 12 months after the date of issuance or Ires not been completed witlinl 18 mouths from sucb date. If no zoning amendments or other regulations affecting file property have beeo enacted hr the interhn, die Building Iuspector may anthorize in writing, the extension uffl~e permit for an additiou six months. Thereafter, a uew permit shall be required. APPLICATION IS HEREBY MADE to the Building Depamnent for file issuance of a Building Permit pursuant to the Building Zoae Ordinance of the Toval of Southold, Suffolk Coanty, New York, and other applicable Laws, Ordinances or Regalations, for the consmmtion of buildings, additions, or alterations or for removal or demolition as herein described. The applicaut agrees to comply with all applicable laws, ordinmmes, building code, housing code, mid regulations, and to adinit authorized inspectors ou premises and iii building for necessary inspections. ~oration) PO Box 1181, Cutchogue, NY 11935 (Mailing address of applicant) State whether applicant is owner, lessee, agent, architect, engineer, general contractor, electrician, plumber or builder Attorney for owner Name ofowner of premises Shinn Vineyard, LLC (As on the tax roll or latest deed) If applicant is a corporation, signature of duly authorized officer (Name and title of corporate officer) Builders License No. Plumbers License No. Eleclricians License No. Other Trade's License No Location of land on which proposed work will be done: 2000 Oreqon Road, Mattituck House Number Street Hamlet Block 4 Filed MapNo. Lot 3.1 Lot Counly Tax Map No. 1000 Section 100 Subdivision (Name) 2. State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing use and occupancy sin_~ far0ilx_dwellinq w/ accessory street--s [B B~cial -- ~ exception ] same with tasting room and wine[l;_in ~ood frame east b. Intended use and occupancy. barn 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building_ Repair_ __ Removal __ Demolition 4. Estimated Cost Fee 8. Dimensions of entire new construction: Front Height Number of Stories Addition_ __ Other Work Alteration (Deschption) (To be paid on filing this application) If dwelling, number of dwelling units. Number of dwelling units on each floor If garage, number of cars If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front Rear Depth _ Height Number of Stories Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front Rear Depth Height. Number of Stories Rear Depth _ Rear Depth _ 9. Size of lot: Front 10. Date of Purchase_ 03/31/03 Name ofF0n~er Owner David Paqe & Barbara Shinn 11. Zone or use district in which pre~nises are situated AC 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES 13. Will lot be re-graded? YES NO x NO x Will excess fill be removed from prenfises? YES_ NO x 14 Names of Owner of premises Shinn Vineyard/Address 2000 Oreqon Rd PhoneNo. Name of Architect Address Phone No Nanre of Contractor Address Phone No. 15 a. is this property witlfin 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES NO __ * IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES & D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUI~-ED. b. Is this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES _ NO x * IF YES, D.EC. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to properly lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below, must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: cOUNTY OF. SUFFOLI¢ DEBORAH ~ being duly sworn, deposes mad says that (s)he is the applicant (Name of individual signing coancact) above nmned, (S)He is file attorney (Contractor, Agent, Corporate Officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, mzd is dnly anthonzed to perform or have performed the said work and to make aud file this application; that all statements contained hz this application are tree to the best of his ka~owledge mzd belief; mzd that d~e work will be performed in the maaner set forth in the application filed therewith. day of April __ ~NNotary Pub ]c 20_06 Signature of Applicant (THIS FORM NO. 3 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD BUILDING DEPARTMENT Town Hall Southold, N.Y. BUILDING PERMIT PERMIT MUST BE KEPT ON THE PREMISES UNTIL FULL COMPLETION OF THE WORK AUTHORIZED) PERMIT NO. 31915 Z Date APRIL 18, 2006 Permission is hereby granted to: VINEYARD LLC SHIN-N 19965 SOUNDVIEW AVE SOUTHOLD,NY 11971 for : ALTEPJITIONS TO AN EXISTING FARM BUILDING AS APPLIED FOR. AGRICULTURAL USE ONLY! at premises located at County Tax Map No. 473889 Section 100 pursuant to application dated APRIL Building Inspector to expire on OCTOBER Fee $ 150.00 2000 OREGON RD MATTITUCK Block 0004 Lot No. 003.001 18, 2006 and approved by the 18, 2007. ~/z~d Signature Rev. 5/8/02 COPY FOR INTERNAL USE ONLY SITE PLAN USE DETERMINATION Initial Determination Date: Project Name: Project Address: Date Sent: Suffolk County Tax Map Ne.:1000- I00 - "~ - 5.) Zoning District: (Note: Copy of Building Permit Application and supporting documentation as to proposed use or uses should be submitted.) , Initial Determination as to whether use is permitted: Initial Determination as to whether site plan is required: Signature of B~~7~-,~' Planning Department (P.D.) Referral:. ~ ._~ _ ~,~ ., P.D. Date Received: ~ /,,~,¢--_./<~ Date Sig~ Final Determination Date: / / Decision: Signature of Building Inspector 2. State existing use and occupancy of premises and intended use and occupancy of proposed construction: a. Existing uge and occupancy single family dwellinq w/ accessory structures [B&B by_ special exception ] b. Intended use and occupancy same with tasting room and winery in existing wood frame east 3. Nature of work (check which applicable): New Building Addition Alteration Repair Removal Demolition Other Work 4. Estimated Cost Fee 5. If dwelling, number of dwelling units If garage, number of cars (Description) (To be paid on filing this application) Number of dwelling umts on each floor 6. If business, commercial or mixed occupancy, specify nature and extent of each type of use. 7. Dimensions of existing structures, if any: Front Height Number of Stohes Rear Depth Dimensions of same structure with alterations or additions: Front Depth. Height Number of Stories Rear Dimensions of entire new construction: Front Height Number of Stories Rear Depth Size of lot: Front Rear Depth 10. Date of Purchase 03/31/03 Name of Former Owner 11. Zone or use district in which premises are situated David Paqe & Barbara Shinn AC 12. Does proposed construction violate any zoning law, ordinance or regulation? YES__ NO x 13. Will lot be re-graded? YES NO x Will excess fill be removed from premises? YES NO x 14. Names of Owner of premises Name of Architect Name of Contractor Shinn Vineyard/Address 2000 Oreqon Rd Address Address PhoneNo. PhoneNo Phone No. 15 a. Is this property within 100 feet of a tidal wetland or a freshwater wetland? *YES * IF YES, SOUTHOLD TOWN TRUSTEES & D.EC. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. b. ls this property within 300 feet of a tidal wetland? * YES NO x * IF YES, D.E.C. PERMITS MAY BE REQUIRED. NO 16. Provide survey, to scale, with accurate foundation plan and distances to proper~y lines. 17. If elevation at any point on property is at 10 feet or below, must provide topographical data on survey. STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLI9 DEBORAH DOTY being duly sworn, deposes and says that (s)he is file applicaut (Name of individual sig~ing con~'ac0 above named, (S)He is the attorney (Contractor, Ageut, Corporate Officer, etc.) of said owner or owners, and is duly authorized to peffomz or have performed the said work and to make and file this application; that all statements contained in this application are true to file best of his lmowledge and belief; and that the work will be perfonued in file manner set forth in the application filed therewith. Sworn t b~ore me this ~ day of April 2O 06 Signature of Applicant File Edit Vie~ Toolbar Vv'indow Help 100.-4-3.1 , Re~ :: LandAV: ~.?00 t EXISTING NEoN CONSTRUCT ON E;'IST~NG CONSTRUCTION NEW EXISTING '-~"~,."¢ ~ L~E~, DECK ~:~o I~--J ' FX~STING WOOD FqAME EAST BARN PORCH F'ORCH EXISTrN, G WCO FRAM~ AGR~CULTURAL[~TORAGE EXfST NG 2 STORY WOOD FRAME qCUSE PROPOSED SITE PLAN FO" (PARCEL Ci%TIVATED FiE D ,CULTIVATED FIELD CENTERLINE OF OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL TRANSMISSION LINES P-ARM S 22~' 25, 48,, ~549 48' Ct~?VATED FIELD ~POSED SITE PLAN 'PARCEL 1"= 150' EXISTING PARCEL ONE Z EDGE OF C!JLT'bATED F~ELD OCERHEAD UTIUT~ES ~ ~ SEE ~ EOf FOR PARr-Ei #2 SITE PLAN Y reqdtred II rE ENERGY I CONSTRUCTION CODE ENVELOPE REQUIREMENTS: taDle 502 2 4 t sqft 29305sqft 36279sqft 275sqft xRA~R ON wif~dows 03 OdOrS (c~m sqft at door a~ea) shders swinging 03 05 O01 DRAWING INDEX DWG ¢ DRAWING 0ESCRIPT~ON ' ~SSUE DATE REV DATE ARCHITECTURAL BD! SiTE ~'~,N ZONiNG ANALYSTS DRAWING INDE): 12 15 05 602 GENERAL NOTES. FAS%EN4NC, SCHEDULE ~2 15 05 DO 1st & 2nd FLOOR DEMOLITION PLAIN RISER DIAGRAM ~2 15 05 AO FOUNDATION P~AN 12 i5 05 A 1 ! si ~LCOR CO NS~qUCTtON PLAN : 2 15 05 A2 2nd FLOOR CONSTRUCTION PLAN 12 15 05 A3 ROOF PLAN ~2 1505 A4 O NORTH & WEST ELEVATfONS t2 15 05 A4 1 SOUTH & EAST ELEVATIONS ~2 I5 05 A5 O BUILDING SECTIONS ~2 ~5 05 AZ ~ BUILDING SECTIONS !2 15 05 Ae WALL SECTIONS ~2 15 05 A~ SCHEDULES :2 15 05 Architect 81 Walker Street New York City New York 10013 t. 212.941. 1390 f. 212.94l. 9995 mail@wbarchitect.com Date: DECEMBER 15, 20~ PERMff SEf SITE PLAN ENERGY CALCULA]]ONS DRAWING INDEX AS NOTED I I\~ \'~ / / I \ ~,, ,"'~ PROPOSED SITE P~N (PARCEL ~, ED1 / 1/16" = 1'¢' New Site PLan Shinn Vineyards 200 Oregon Road, Mattituck NY SCTM 100-4-3.1 State Environmental Ouality Review ~U ~ '" F L ENVIRON MENTAL ASSESSMEN~~/;~:----'-JI Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an or~r action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequently~ a project that are subjective or unmeasurable. It is also understood that those who dot ~..~Si{#l~f~ h~/e li'~le or no fbrrna~ knowledge of the environment or may not be technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible enough to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action. Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part I: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. THIS AREA FOR LEAD AGENCY USE ONLY DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE -- Type I and Unlisted Actions Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: U Part1 LU Part2 LU Part3 Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magnitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: DA. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared. DB, Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required, therefore e CONDITIONED negative declaration will be prepared.* The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a positive declaration will be prepared. Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions Name of Action Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsib{e Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer) website Date Page 1 of 21 PART 1--PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may have a significant effect on the environment. Please complete the entire term, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considered ss pad of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additional information you believe will be needed to complete Pads 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently avaitable and witt not involve new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring s'uch additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify each instance. Name of Action St*~.rLn. Winery Location of Action (include Street Address, Municipality and County) 2000 Oregon Road, Ha~et of Mattituck, Town of Southold, County of Suffolk Name of Applican~Sp0nsor Barbara Shinn, as sole member of LLC, by Deborah Doty, Esq. Address 670 West Creek Avenue, PO Box 1181 City / PO Cutchogue State NY Zip Code 11935 Business Telephone 631-734-6648 Name of Owner (if different) Shir~?' Vineyard, LLC Address 2000 Oregon Road City / PO Mattituck State NY Zip Code __ Business Telephone 631-298-021 6 Description of Action: Establishment of a winery with wine tasting room, wine making room, and bathroom on 1.219 acre parcel in AC zone Winery will utilize existing structures on premises Page 2 of 21 Please Complete Each Question--Indicate N,A, if not applicable A, SITE DESCRIPTION Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present Land Use:DUrban Dlndustrial [] Forest [] Agriculture 2. Total acreage of project area: D Commercial [] Residential (suburban) [] Rural (non-farm) r~other single family o~wellinq with approved B&B, frame barn (being converted into wine storage) shed, frame building, accessory storage building 1.219 acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE Meadow or Brushland (Non-agricultural) Forested Agricultural (Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc,) Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24,25 of ECL) Water Surface Area Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill( Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces Other (Indicate type) with 20.4 adjoining acres planted with grape vines PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0 acres 0.5± acres 0.5± acres What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? a. Soil drainage; []Well drained 100 % of site []Poorly drained __% of site D Moderately well drained % of site. b. If any agricultural land is involved, how many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the NYS Land Classification System? n/a acres (see 1 NYCRR 370). Are there bedrock outcroppings onprolect site? ~ Yes [] No a. What is depth to bedrock (in feet) 5. Approximate percentage of proposed project site with slopes: ~0-10% % ~I0- 15% % [] 15% or greater__% 6 Is proiect substantially contiguous to, or contain a building, s~te, or district, listed on the State or National Registers of Historic Places? ~ Yes ~ No 9 []Yes 10 Do hunting, fishing or shell hshmg opportunities presently exist in the prelect area? Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? [] Yes E~No What is the depth of the water table? 38 (in feet) Is site located over e pdmary, pnncipsl, or soJe source aquifer? Page 3 of 21 1 1. Does project'site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered? DYes ~ No According to: Identify each species: 12. Are there any uniqua or unusual land forms on the proiact site? li,a. cliffs~ dunes, other geological formations? []Yes [~No Describe: 1 3. Is the project site presently used by ti,e community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? BYes r~No If yes, explain: 1 4. Does the present site i~clude scenic views known to be important to the community? 1 5, Streams within or contiguous to project area: INone ...... a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 1 6, Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: U--]Yes r'~No None b. Size (in acres): Pa§e 4 of 21 I 7. Is the site served by existing public utilities? [] Yes [] No a. If YES, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? BYes b. If YES, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? BNo DYes 18 Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA, Section 303 and 304? r'~Yes ~'~No 19. Is the site located in or substantiall~_ontiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8 of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 6177 r-~Yes F~No 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? B. Project Description 1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate). owner a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project ~ b. Project acreage to be developed: 1.2 acres initially; 1.2 c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped: 0 acres. d. Length of project, in miles: n/a lif appropriate) e. If the project is an expansion, indicate percent of expansion proposed. __ f. g. h. E~Yes r~No 20. ~ acres. acres ultimately. % Number of off-street parking spaces existing 1 0-+ ; proposed 16 Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour: 2+ (upo~completion of project)? If residential: Number and type of housing units: One Family Initially yes r~n~ Ultimately O1'18 (none owned by sponsor) Two Family Multiple Family Condominium width; length. 4 Dimensions (in feet) of largest proposed structure: -k height; j. Linear feet of frontage along a public thoroughfare project will occupy is? 1 42.98 ft. How much natural material li.e. rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site? 0 tons/cubic yards. Will disturbed areas be rec,aimed []Yes r--]No BN/A a. If yes, for what intended purpose is the site being reclaimed? b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? BYes [] No c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? []Yes ~ No How m3nv acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? 0 acres Page 5 of 21 5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important vegetation be removed by this project? [~] Yes r~No 6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction: 0 months, (including demolition) 7. if multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated __ (number( b. Anticipated data of commencement phase 1: __ month __ year, (including demolition) c. Approximate completion date of final phase: __ month __ year. d. is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? ~ Yes [] No 8. Will blasting occur during construction? [] Yes ~ No 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction n/a ; after project is complet~ 10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project 0 11. Will project require relocation of any prelects or facilities? [] Yes [] No If yes, explain: 12. is surface liquid waste disposal involved? La Yes ~X~No a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc) and amount b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged 13, Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? ~ Yes ~ No Type sanitary systems 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? [] Yes [] No If yes, explain: 1 §. Is proiect or any portion of proiect located in a 1 O0 year flood plain? [] Yes 16. Will the project generate solid waste? [] Yes L~No a. If yes, what is the amount per month? ~ less tlha~ 1 'con b. If yea, will an existing solid waste facility be used? [] Yes ~ No c. If yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? []Yes [] No Page 6 of 21 e. If yes, explain: 17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? []Yes r~No e. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? .-- b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? __ years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? ['-]Yes [] No 19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? DYes 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the Iocat ambient noise levels7 F~Yes ~No 21, Will project result in an increase in energy use? [] Yes r~ No less than 1 ton/month If yes, indicate type{s) 22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity 32 gallons/minute. 23, Total anticipated water usage per day ]00-+ gallons/day. 24. Does project involve Local, State or Federal funding? [] Yes [] No If yes, explain: Page 7 of 21 2B. Approvals Required: City, Town, Village Board -']Yes [] No Type Submittal Date City, Town, Village Planning Board [] Yes ~ No site plan City, Town Zoning Board -k ~ Yes ~ No * 4/17/2006 ZBA appl. #5836-A (area variance - front yard set back) & #5836-B (special exception for B&B) - both relating to dwelling structure City, County Health Department ** [] Yes FI No ** Determination pending Other Local Agencies []Yes [~ No / Other Regional Agencies ~ Yes [] No State Agencies []Yes [] No winery (approval already received) Federal Agencies DYes I~No Zoning and Planning Information Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? r~Yes if Yes, indicate decision required: ..:.. ~ Zoning amendment ~Site plan , BI Zoning variance r~'J special use permit D New/revision of master plan L~ Resource management plan D Subdivision D 0thor Page 8 of 21 What is the zoning classification(si of the site? I A /C What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning? 20 %_ i~___c°verag~. ......................... What is the proposed zoning of the site? What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? I 20% lot coverage I Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? [] Yes [] bio What are the predominant land use(s} and zoning classifications within a Y~ mile radius~.o~/proposed action? A/C & single family dwellings Is the proposed action compatible with adjoining/surrounding land uses with a F4 mile? if the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? What is the minlmom lot size proposed? Page 9 of 21 10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? [] Yes [] No 1 1. Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police, fire protection? []Yes ~"'~ No 12. a. If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? [] Yes [] No Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? L~ Yes [] No a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic. Informational Details ' DYes ~ No Attach any ad~iitional information as may be~eeded to clarify your project. If there are or may be any adverse impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss 9[~ch impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification / I certify that the information provided above is true to the best of my knowledge. Applicant/Sponsor Name DoDorc~h. Doty~ Esqo for Sh±rln V±neyard~ ~ Bate 08/16/2006 SignetS. Title Attorney If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment. Page 10 of 2t PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS JERILYN B. WOODHOUSE Chair KENNETH L. EDWARDS MARTIN H. SIDOR GEORGE D. SOLOMON JOSEPH L. TOWNSEND PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southald, NY Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 To: Elizabeth Neville, Town Clerk From: Planning Department Date: September 28, 2006 Re: Checks Enclosed herewith are the checks listed below. Please return a receipt to us. Thank you. Project Name & Type Tax Map # Amount Date of Check Mark Baxter Stand. Sub. 78-7-5.3 $7,000. P & P 3/6/06 Shinn Vineyard SP 10o-4-3] $1,500 app fee 8/10/06 North Fork Foster Sites 96-1-1.5 $2,500. sketch 8/17/06 Std. Sub. Sandy Ground LLChan~)e 63-4-5.1 $500 app fee 8/29/06 FI Community Center SP 12-1-5.1 $1,000 opp fee 5/1/06 Ovlasid Subdiv. 89-3-1.1 $3,250 app fee 9/13/06 Cutchogue/New Suffolk 109-6-2.2 $1,000 opp fee 9/14/06 Free Library 5P Orlowski Hardware 5P 140-3-3.4 $500 opp fee 8/25/06 Wexler, Allan & Ellen ,Sub.79-8-18.1 $1,750 opp. 9/20/06 Oregon/Morrell Subdiv 83-2-11.§ $17,500 P&P 9/28/06 ~ASER FICHE FORM Planning Board Site Plans and Amended Site Plans SPFile Type: Approved Project Type: Site Plans Status: Final- Pendin,q Inspection SCTM #: 1000 - 100.-4-3.1 Proiect Name: Shinn Vineyard Address: 2000 Ore,qon Road, Mattituck Hamlet: Mattituck Applicant Name: Barbara Shinn, Shinn Vineyard, LLC Owner Name: Shinn Vineyard, LLC Zone 1: A-C Approval Date: 6/14/2010 OPTIONAL ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A date indicates that we have received the related information End SP Date: 6/18/2010 Zone 2: Location: s/s/o Ore.qon SC Filin.q Date: C and R's: Home Assoc: R and M A.qreement: Zone 3: Road, 1,162.35' e/o Mill Lane, in Mattituck SCAN Date: SCANNED ~ Records Management EXISTING DECK ACCESS William Biabsky Architect 81 Walker Street Now York Ci~ Now York 10013 t. 212. 941. 1390 f. 212. 941. 9995 mail@wbarchitect.com PROPOSED SITE PLAN (PARCEL #2) ~ N.T.S. NOVEMBER 13, 2009 WOoD FENCE PATH .SURME¥ OF: PROPERTh' 51TUAtE.' HATTITUCK TOhN.' ~gUtHOLD ,SUFFOLK GOUNT~, FOUNDATION LOCATION FINAL O4-23-2OO-/ SUFFOLK COUNTY' TAX IOOO-IOO-4-~.1 C'~'~'~u~O TO: ~. HONUHENT FOUND A~A = 5~,,O98 SF OF~ 1.21~ AC.,RE-~ ~P-.APHIC SCALE I"= :BO' $67'>34' 12"W 135.94' E,~orl::XsIro ~Ynl?n ond 53.85' Loncl No~ or ~ormcrkJ oh JOHN C. EHLERS LAND SURVEYOR 6 EAST MAIN STREET N.Y.S. LIC. NO. 50202 R1VERHEAD, N.Y. 11901 369-8288 Fax 369-8287 REF.\\Compaqserver\pros\90S\98-270a.pro RVt:::"r' ~ITUATE~ PIATTI'rUGK TOlalN OF 50UTHOLD 5UF:FOLK ~OUNTY, NY SUFFOLK COUNTY TAX ~ IOOO - IOO - 4 - ~,1.~-3,~. GERTIF:IED TO~ Ore R ad II tI BARBARA 5HINN GOHI,'FONP'tEALTH LANO TITLE .INSURANCE COI,4PAN¥ ~'00. 6 EAST NAIN STREET RIVERHEAD, N.y. ~Jg0~ 369-8288 Fax 369-B287 ®RAPHIC SCALE I"= IOO' REFERENCE # 98-270 ZONING COMPLIANCE - TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHOLD 2000 OREGON ROAD, MA'rrlTUCK NY 11952 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING IN AGRICULI'URAL CONSERVATION (AC) DISfRICT PROPOSED USE: OWNER OCCUPIED BED & BREAKFAST ITEMS: LOT SITE (SQUARE FEET) LOT W~DTH (FEET} LOT DEPTH (FEET) FRONT YARD (FEET) SIDE YARD (FEET) BOTH SIDE YARDS (FEET) REAR YARC (FEET) MAXIMUM PERMIT[ED DIMENSIONS (SO, FT.): A) EXISTING 1st FLOOR PROPOSED 1st FLOOR ADDITION EXISTING PORCH PROPOSED PORCH PROPOSED DECK C) EXISTING 2nd FLOOR OF BLDG. A D) PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR ADDITION OF BLDG. B E) EX. AGRICULTURAL STORAGE BARN FUTURE WINE STORAGE BARN F) EX AGRICULTURALSTORAGE BARN FUTURE WINE MAKING BARN G) EX. AGRICULTURAL STORAGE BARN FUTURE WiNE TAS RNG ROOM EXISTING DECK PROPOSED DECK H) EXISTING ACCESSORY BLDG. I) EXISTING FRAME SHED LOT COVERAGE (PERCENT) .. A+B+E+F+G+H +1 MIN. LIVABLE FLR. AREA (SQ. FT/DWELUNG UNIT) -- 1 +2 1,) EXISTING + PROPOSED ls! FLOOR 2.) EXISTING + PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR BUILDING HEIGHT (FEET) NUMBER OF STORIES PARKING: REQDIRED 80,00R 175 25O 6O 2O 45 75 20% ~3.000 85O 35 21/2 A & B SPECIAL EXCEPTION RECEIVED PROVIDED VARIANCE PARCEL 2 I PARCEL 1 +2 53,078 979,598 141.5 I 635.9 .. 267 J 1492.8 35.5 J 35.5 g,~8 ~ 587.8 14(~3 I 1405,3 .. 1,014 1,240 271.3 146.1 36O 99O 7O7 2,730 974 672 BED AND BREAKFAST- B SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING - A & B WINE STORAGE BARN - E (1:1000 SQ. FT ) '~-I(~/'~ WINE MAKING ~ WINE TASTING ROOM - G (1:200 SQ. FT.) '/' ~ -- ACCESSORY STORAGE BLDG - H (1:1000 SQ. FT.) TOTAE ~f-A-~SiBLE SPACE REQ'O) 288.8 47.5 884.1 206.1 16.6% 8833.9 3,540.9 2,057.2 1,483.7 25'-0 3/4" 2 0.9% 883,' PROPOS 1" = 100' ZONING COMPLIANCE - TOWNSHIP OF SOUTIdOLD 2000 OREGON ROAD, MATTITUCK NY 11952 MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED DWELLING iN AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION (AC) DISTRICT PROPOSED USE: OWNER OCCUPIED BED & BREAKFAST ~!.DG A 8, B SPECIAL EXCEPTION RECBVED ITbMS: REQUI~ED PROVIDED VARIANCE RARCEL 2 PARCEL 1 +2 LOT SITE (SQUARE FEET) 80r800 53~078 979,598 LOT WIDTH (FEET) ~ 75 141.5 63&9 LOT DEPTH (FEEq} 250 267 1'4§2,8 FRONT YARD (FEET) 60 355 35~5 YES SIDE YARD (FEET) 20 31,9 31.9 -- BOTH SIDE YARDS (FEET) 45 94,8 5878 -- REAR YARD (FEET) 75 1403 1405,3 -- MAXIMUM RERMI%FED DIMENSIONS (SO FT): A) EXISTING 1st FLOOR ~,0~4 B) PROPOSED 1st FLOOR ADDITION 1,240 EXISTING PORCH 271,3 PROPOSED PORCH 146 1 PROPOSED DECK 360 C) EXISTING 2nd FLOOR OF BLDG A 990 D) PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR ADDITION OF BLDG B 707 E) EX. AGRtCULTURAL STORAGE BARN 2,730 FUTURE WINE STORAGE BARN F) EX AGRICULTURAL STORAGE BARN 974 FUTURE WINE MAKING BARN G) EX AGRICULTURALSTORAGE BARN 672 FUTURE WINE TASTING ROOM EXfSTING DECK 288,8 PROPOSED DECK 47,5 H) EX~STING ACCESSORY BLDG 884.1 I) EXISTING FRAME SHED 206.1 ,,, LOT COVERAGE (PERCENT) __ A*B+E+F+G+H+I 20% ~5000 16.6% 8833,9 09% 88339 MIN LIVABLE FLR, AREA (SO FT/DWELLING UNfT) - 1 '-2 850 3,540,9 1 ) EXISTING + PROPOSED 1st FLOOR 2,057.2 2) EXISTING + PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR 1,483.7 BUILDING HEIGHT (FEET) 35 25'-0 3/4' NUMBER OF STORIES 2 1/2 2 PARKING: BED AND BREAKFAST- B 4 4 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING - A & B 2 2 WINE STORAGE BARN - E (1:1000 SQ. FT) 3 4 WINE MAKING BARN- F (1: 000SO FT) I 2 WINE TASTING ROOM - G (1 20O SQ. FT.) 4 6 ACCESSORY STORAGE BLDG - H (1:4000 SQ FT) 1 1 TOTAL (1 ACCESSIBLE SPACE REQ'D) 15 / / ZONING COMPLIANCE TOWNSHIP OF SOUTHOLD PARCEL ONE PROPOSED SITE PLAN (PARCEL #1 & #2) ~ LJ OPOSED EAST ELEVATION O_POSED WEST ELEVATION LJ PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION LJ PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION NEW SUDING DOOR 5¸3" William Biolosky Architect 81 Walker Street New York City New York 10013 t.212.94L 1390 f. 212.94~. 9995 mail@wbarchJtect.com Dale: MAY 25, 2006 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE JULY ] 9 2006 I S WAY SWITCH THREE WAy SWITCH SW~TCH LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE WINE STORAGE BC~RN WINE TASTING ROOM _~ATHROOM FUTURE WINE MAKING BARN & WINE TASTING ROOM ZONING COMPLIANCE - TOWNSHIP OF SO,JTHOLD 2000 OREGON ROAO, MAI'[ITUCK NY 11952 MINIMUM REQUIREMBNTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETADHED DWEI AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION (AC) DISTRICT PROPOSED USE, OWNER OCCUPIED BED & BREAKFAST BLDG A & B SPECIAL EXOEP RON RECEIVED PROVIDED I~FMS RE DUIRED VARIANCE PARCEL2 PARCEl 112 LOT SITE (SQUARE FEET) 80,')00 53,078 979,598 LOT WIDTH (FEET) ~ F~ 141,5 535 9 LOT DEPTH (FEET) 2bil 267 1492 8 FRONT YARD (FEET) 80 35 5 355 YES SIDE YARD (F E ~q~ BOTH SIDE YARDS (FEE~ ,15 948 587 8 REAR YARD (FEE~ 75 140 3 1405 3 MAXIMUM PERMI O'ED DIMENSIONS (SQFT A) EXISTING I si FLOOR 1,014 B) PROPOSED 1 st FLOOR ADDITION 1,240 EXISTING PORCH 271 3 PROPOSED PORCH 145 1 PROPOSED DECK 360 C) EXISTING 2nd FLOOR OF BLDG A 99O D) PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR ADDITION OF BLDG$ ~07 E) EX AGRiCULTURALSTORAGE BARN 2,73B FUTURE WINE STORAGE BARN F) EX AGRICULTURALSTORAGE BARN 974 FUTURE WINE MAKING BARN G) EX AGRICULTURALSTORAGE BARN 872 FUTURE WiNE TAS~ NG ROOM EXISTING DECK 288 8 PROPOSED DECK 47 5 H) EXISTING ACCESSORY BLDG 884 1 I) EXISTING FRAME SHED 2081 LOTCOMERAGE(PERCENT) A~B~EIF, G4N kl 20~; 16,000 166%88339 ag% 88339 MIN UVASLE FLR AREAiSQ FT/DWELLINGUNIT)- 112 BSO 3,5409 1 ) EXISTING t PROPOSED 1 sl FLOOR 2,057 2 2 ) EXISTING b PROPOSED 2nd FLOOR 1,483 7 BUILDING HEIGkF (FEE~) 35 25'-0 3/4" NUMBER OF STORIES 2 1/~ 2 PARKING BED AND BREAKFAST - B 4 4 SINGLE FAMILY DWELDNG A&B '2 2 WINE STORAGE BARN E (t 1000SO FT) 3 4 WINE MAKING BARN - F (1:10DO SQ PT) I 2 WINETASTINGROOM G(I:2OL)SQ Fl',) 4 fa ACCESSORYSTORAGEBLBG H(1:100BSQ FT) I 1 TOTAL (1 ACCESSIBLE SPACE REQ'D) 15 FA~tM ROAD PROPOSED SITE PLAN (PARCEL #1 & #2) 1": 100' EXISTING CQNS I~UCTION NEW CONS~:~UCTION PARCEL ONE F EXISTING CONSIRUOTION NOTE EXISTING SHRLJBS AND GR2~5S NYS LIC NO 50502 O AU0 11 2006 William Bialosky Architect 81 Walker Street New York City New York 10013 t. 212. 941. 1390 f. 212.941. 9995 mail@wbarchitect.com Dale: MAY 25, 2006 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE JULY 19, 2006 SffE PLAN ZONING COMPLIANCE Scale: AB NOTED Shee I Numbor: EXISTING RIDGE ELEV, 4/- 19'-0" ABOVE GRADE EXISTING EAVE IGLEB (TIMBERUNE//240 ASPHALT SHINGLFS) J LI i~ EXISTING EAVB ELEV. +E 10'~" ABOVE GRADE NEW1 SIDING, 4A/2" EXPOSURE bJ DOOR NBN GARAGE BOOR bJ PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION EXISTING RIDGE ELEV b/- 19'-0" ABOVE GRADE NEW SIDING, 4-1/2~ -EX POSURE 4GLES (TIMBERLINE #240 ASPHALT SHINGLES) ELEV +/- 19'-O'ABOVE GRADE SUBING BOOR BOX TRACK, BARN DOOR HARDWARE (STANLEY W2650], TRACK (STANLEYW2641) ~ EXISTING EAVE ELEV +h 10'-6" ABOVE GRADE NEW1 BIDING, 4 I/2" EXPOSURE (TIMBERGNE//240 ASPHALT SHINGLESI LJ bJ EAVE BOARDS CONCRETE APRON PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 1/8"= 1LO'' PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION 1/8"= 1'.3" 8'-3" 2' 107 NE'Ct4'x12'X4"REINFORCEB CONCRETEARRON, CENTEREDONNEWGOOR SLOPBDN 42'-7" WATER pL- HOSE CONTROLJOINT NEW O?~ORETE SLAB I ~ ELEV. 0 O' ABOVE GRADE WATER NEW HVAC IN A%FIC F 1 ABOVE CEIUNG F-I ×xI N~MECH, ~ /N " ~ -- ~ VENTSABOVE ~ -- ~ ",, 8LOPEDN / DRY \ / \ / \ / 90' 0" J :UTURE WINE STORAGE BARN 1/4" = 1' 0" EXISTING AGRICULTURRL STORAGE BUILDING FUTURE WINE STORAGE BASN (UNDER ALT PER BP #31915-Z) NEW 4k12'"x4" REINFORCEG CONCRETE APRON, CENTERED ON NEW DOOR William Bialosky Architect 81 Walker Street New York City New York 10013 t. 212. 941. 1390 f. 212.941. 9995 mail@wbarchitect.com Date: MAY 25, 2006 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE JULY 19, 2006 Tit[e: WINE STORAGE BARN PLANS & ELEVATIONS Scale: AS NOFED Sheet Number: ELECTRICAL SYMBOLS FOUR WAY SWITCH ~ QUAD OUTLET -~ DISHWASHER OUTLET ~- CLG, MOUNTED RECESSED FIXTURE THREE WAY SWITCH ~ ~'~ WEATHER RROOF ENCLOSURE -E~ SINGLE OUTLET -4 )- CLG SURFACE M OU NrFt:D FI)CI URE SWITCH ~ ~ RANGE OUTLET ~ SWITCHED OUTLET ~ WALL MOUNTED FIXTURE DfMMER SWITCH ~ tn GROUND FAULT INTERRUPTER '~ TELEPHONE JACK STRIP LIGHT FfXTURE DUPLEX RECEPTACLE OUTLET ~ WASHER/DRYER OLrR.ET [] CABLE TV (~) SMOKE DETECTOR I LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE WINE STORAGE BARN REV TYPE DESCRIP1]ON MANUFACTURER MODEL# I WAT-AGE VOLTAGE REVlARNS E-1 COMPACT FLUOR STONCO TLXlSOWHFLI 150W 120V W~ILL MO UNTED~ EXTERIOR E-2 COMPADT FLUOR, STONCO VWlGC 100W 120V WF,LL MOUNTED, EXTERIOR, CAST GUARD AND GLASS GLOBE F-1 COMPACT FLUOR COLUMBIA LTG VL4-232-LE120WL 32W 120V SURFACE MOUNIED EXISTING WOO[ -- TRELLIS ABOVE EXISTING / BLUESTONE PATH NEW WOOD DECK, FLUSH W/EXISTING DECN & EX~STING CONCRETE SLAB EXISTING WOOD FENCE t WINE TASTING ROOM t NEWWD DOOR rN EXISTING FENCE HO PARKING ERSTING .SPACE CONCRETE SL&B \ / \ / EXISTING DRY WELL BENF~IR WINE MAKING ROOM WASTE LINE BOILER -ELEC PANEL BATHROOM FUTURE WINE MAKING BARN & WINE TASTING ROOM 1/4" = 1LO'' TASTING COUNTER SANITARY UNE ~ \ / \ / \ o William Bialosky Archi'l'ecf 81 Walker Street New York City New York 10013 t. 212. 941. 1390 f. 212. 941. 9995 mail@wbarchitect.com Date: MAY 25,2006 PLANNING BOARD OFF{CE JULY 19, 2006 Title: WINE MAKING BARN WINE TASTING ROOM ELECTRICAL FIXTURE SCHEDULE Scale: AS NOTED Sheet Number: