The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLL 2010 #12ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE~ RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTI~R OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER R-I~CORI)8 MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF [NPORMATIOI'I OFFICER Town Hall, 53(~5 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (6311 765-614,5 Telephone (631.) 76'~1800 sou tholdtown.northlbrk.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TO~,rN OF SOUTIIOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that thc Town Board of the Tovm of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5, 2010: 7:36pm: Local La in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences 7:38pm: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution Plea~ sign the duplicate oF this letter and return to envelope. Thank you. me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Attachments cc: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenport Email: Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Southold Building Dcpt Southold Trustees Signature, Received by Please priht n~-' , RECEIVED 20]0 DAVID A, PATERSON GOVERNOR STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF STATE ONE COMMERCE PLAZA 99WASHINGTON AVENUE ALBANY, NY 12231-0001 RUTH NOEMI COLON ACTING SECRETARY OF STATE October 27, 2010 Lynda M Rudder Deputy Town Clerk Town Hall, 53095 Main Road PO Box 1179 Southold NY 11971 RECEIVED NOV - 1 20]0 SoutholdTow. Clerk RE: Town of Southold, Local Law 12 2010, filed on October 27, 2010 Dear Sir/Madam: The above referenced material was filed by this office as indicated. Additional local law filing forms can be obtained from out website, www.dos.state.ny.us. Sincerely, State Records and Law Bureau (518) 474-2755 ~NWV.DOS.STATE.NY.US E-MAIL; INFO,DOS.STATE.NY.US ~~ US Airbill Express ~'~ ~663 ..... ~ 9461 6367 1067-7029-8 C~mpo~TOWN OF SOUTHOLD ~dm= 530~5 ROUTE C~80UTHOLD 0384625653 4a E~ress Package Sewice FedEx Priority OverniGht FedE~ Standard OverniGht 4b Express Reight Sewice m .) .; ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD October 25, 2010 Fed Ex Local Law No. 11 of 2010 Town of Southoid, Suffolk County Ms. Linda Lasch Principal Clerk New York State Department of State State Records & Law Bureau One Commerce Plaza 99 Washington Avenue Albany, NY 12231-001 Dear Ms. Lasch: In accordance with provisions of Section 27 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, I am enclosing herewith certified copy of Local Law No. 11 of 2010 of the Town of Southold, suitable for filing in your office. I would appreciate if you would send me a receipt indicating the filing of the enclosures in your office. Thank you. Very truly yours, Lynda M Rudder Deputy Town Clerk Enclosures cc: Town Attorney Local Law Filing NEW ~ORK STATE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 41 STATE STREET ALBANYI NY 12231 (Use this form to file a local law with the Secretary of State.) Text of law should be given as amended. Do not include matter being eliminated and do not use italics or underlining to indicate new matter. v_..I County [] City [] Town of rn Village SOUTHOLD Local Law No. 12 of the year 2010. A Local Law entitled, A l.ocal Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning", in connection with Deer Fences. Be it enacted the Town Board of the: [] County Cl City [] Town of rn Village SOUTHOLD I. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend {}280-105, "height offences, walls and berms" to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. Il. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: ; 280-105. Height offences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: A. When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. B. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. C. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and mar yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed eight feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (If additional space is needed, attach pages the same size as this sheet, and number each.) DOS-239(Rcv (}5/05) (i) Fencing Fabric: high-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with graduated opening; (ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet Deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard of any property. III. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. 2 (Complete the certification in the paragraph that applies to the filing of this local law and strike out that which is not applicable.) 1. (Final adoption by local legislative body only.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. 12 of 20 10 . of the (Czxn?~')(C~')(Town) ('.':.'.'.:.~,z) of SOUTHOLD was duly passed by the TOWN BOARD on October 19 ,20 10 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 2. (Passage by local legislative body with approval, no disapproval or re-passage after disapproval by the Elective Chief Executive Officer*.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20__ of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the on 20 __, and was (approved)(not approved)(re-passed after disapproval) by the and was deemed duly adopted on 20__ in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 3. (Final adoption by referendum.) 1 hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20__ of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the on 20 , and was (approved)(not approved)(repassed after disapproval) by the on 20 . Such local law was submitted to the people by reason ora (mandatory)(permissive) referendum, and received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors voting thereon at the (general)(special)(annual) election held on 20 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. 4. (Subject to permissive referendum and final adoption because no valid petition was filed requesting referendum.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 of the (County)(City)(Town)(Village) of was duly passed by the on 20 , and was (approved)(not approved) (repassed after disapproval) by the on 20__ Such local law was subject to permissive referendum and no valid petition requesting such referendum was filed as of 20 , in accordance with the applicable provisions of law. * Elective Chief Executive Officer means or Includes the chief executive officer of a county elected on a county- wide basis or, If there be none, the chairperson of the county legislative body, the mayor ora city or village, or the supervisor of a town where such officer is vested with the power to approve or veto local laws or ordinances. 3 5. (CiW local law concerning Charter revision proposed by petition.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No. of 20 __ of the City of having been submitted to referendum pursuant to the provisions of section (36)(37) of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of such city voting thereon at the (special)(general) election held on 20 __ became operative. 6. (County local law concerning adoption of Charter.) I hereby certify that the local law annexed hereto, designated as local law No of 20 of the County of State of New York, having been submitted to the electors at the General Election of November 20 , pursuant to subdivisions 5 and 7 of section 33 of the Municipal Home Rule Law, and having received the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified electors of the cities of said county as a unit and a majority of the qualified electors of the towns of said county considered as a unit voting at said general election, became operative. (If any other authorized form of final adoption has been followed, please provide an appropriate certification.) 1 further certify that I have compared the preceding local law with the original on file in this office and that the same is a correct transcript there from and of the whole of such original local law, and was finally adopted in the manner indicated in paragraph I , above. Clerk f~-e CoWbOy'-legislative body. City. Town or (Seal) Village Clerk or officer designated by local legislative body Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk Date: October 21~ 2010 (Certification to be executed by County Attorney, Corporation Counsel, Town Attorney, Village Attorney or other authorized attorney of locality.) STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF SUFFOLK 1, the undersigned, hereby certify that the foregoing local law contai~t text and that all proper proceedings have been had or taken for the enactment of the local law annex~ Signature ~ ' Martin D. Finnegan, Town Attorney Jennifer Andaloro~ Esq. Assistant Town Attorney Title Town of SOUTHOLD Date: October 21~ 2010 4 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 19, 2010 RESOLUTION 2010-818 ADOPTED Item # 6.5 DOC ID: 6270 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-818 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON OCTOBER 19, 2010: WHEREAS there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 7t~ day of September, 2010, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning: in connection with Deer Fences" and WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now therefor be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences" which reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. 12 of 2010 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning"~ in connection with Deer Fences. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend §280-105, "height offences, walls and berms" to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. II. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: § 280-105. Height of fences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: A. When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. B. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. C. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide Generated October 20, 2010 Page 15 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 19, 2010 agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and rear yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed ei~_.~t feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (i) Fencin~ Fabric: hi~h-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with ~raduated opening; (ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet 3. Deer fencing is prohibited in or alon~ the front yard of any property. III. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANZHOUS] HOVER: Albert Krupski Jr., Councilman SECONDER: Vincent Orlando, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Generated October 20, 2010 Page 16 ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5~ 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences O 7:38pm: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments cc: ~nty Dept of Planning[...~ port Email: ~d~'~' Town of Southampton ~lanning Dept ~" &~athold-A,~sors V Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Lo~ate Park Commission~ ~lter Island Southold Building Dept So~ahakt Tmsteesl.~'~ Signature, Received by Date Please print name Title Page I of 1 Cooper, Linda From: Cooper, Linda Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 4:03 PM To: Bunch, Connie; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cappabianca, Lucille; Cooper, Linda; Glew, Claire; Lanza, Heather; Randolph, Linda; Scott, Robert; Standish, Lauren; Toth, Vicki; Verity, Mike; Riverhead Town Clerk; Shelter Island Town Clerk; Southampton Town clerk Subject: PH Notice for 10/5/10 TB mtg Attachments: PH Notice_20100914145608.pdf Please send back signed notice either regular mail or via email. Thank you 9/14/2010 ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOVfN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (63]_) 765-]_800 southoldtown.nor thfork, net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5, 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences _p_~: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution ~1 c sign thc duplicate of this letter and return to mc at your earliest convenience in thc self-addressed ope. Thank you. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Attachments ~d cc: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenport Long Island State Park Commission Email: Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors Please print name Town of Shelter Island Southold Building Dept Southold Trustees Date Title RECEIVED SEP 2 0 2010 Southold Town Clerk ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5~ 2010: 7:360m: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences : in relation Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution Local Law to new Chapter 280, Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Attachments cc: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenport~ Long Island State Park Commission Email: Town of Riverhead Ph Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors ture, Receix/~qlY6y Town of Shelter Island Southold Building Dept Southold Trustees se print name Title' ' ' t RECEIVED $£p 2 0 010 Southold Town Clerk ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK I~EGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARI~IAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 zoutholdtown.nor[hfork, net OFFICE OF THE TOWN TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Somhold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5, 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences 7:38pm: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thm~k you. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Attachments c¢: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenport Email: Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors Signature, Received by ~leas¢ p~n~ name Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Southold Building Dept Southold Trustees Date Title R~CEIV~D F.T.TZ~BETH A. NEV~.T.E, RMC, CMC TOWN CT.~.RK R.EGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARKIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 F~x (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF ~ TOWN CI,ARK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOT1CE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5, 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences ~p_~: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution ~nvaSe sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed elope. Thank you. Elizabeth A. Neville Southoid Town Clerk Attachments cc: Sufi`olk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenport Email: Town of Riverhcad Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Southold Building Dept Southold Trustees September 15, 2010 Date Linda Randolph SecretariAl Assistant - Planning Please print name Title ]~LI~,ABETH A. NEVI'I,I,R~ RMC. CMC TOWN CT.~.RK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFPICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Sout~old, Now York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 sout2toldtown, north fork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CI.F. RK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5, 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 21t0 Zoning, Deer Fences 7:38pm: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Nolse Pollution Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Attachments cc: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenport Email: Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept yq~ature, ~.eceivexl~ byff Please print name Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Southold Building Dept Southold Trustees Tide ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box- 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone {631) 765-1800 sou t holdtown.n~)rth fork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14. 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local I,aws listed below on October 5~ 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning; Deer Fences pm: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Attachments cc: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenpon Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Email: Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors Signature, Receivec~y Town of Shelter Island Southold Buildir~g Dept Southold Trustees Date Please print name Title RECEIVED F.I,TT, ABETH A. NEVILLE, R_MC, CMC TOWN' CLERK REOISTHAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRLAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 $outholdtown.north fork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5, 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences 7:38pm: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution ~Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Attachments cc: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Greenport Email: Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island v Southold Building Dept Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors South, Date Please print name Title RECEIVED SoulhoH Tewn ' O. erk ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN (~LERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAC-F.~MENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATIOIq OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork, net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 14, 2010 . PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the Town BOard of the Town of Southold will hold PUBLIC HEARINGS on the proposed Local Laws listed below on October 5, 2010: 7:36pm: Local Law in relation to Chapter 280 Zoning, Deer Fences 7:38om: Local Law in relation to new Chapter 280, Prevention and Control of Noise Pollution Please sign the duplicate of this letter and return to me at your earliest convenience in the self-addressed envelope. Thank you. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Attachments cc: Suffolk County Dept of Planning Village of Gmenport Email: Town of Riverhead Town of Southampton Southold Planning Dept Southold Assessors Long Island State Park Commission Town of Shelter Island Southold Building Dept Southold Trustees S~fi'a~ure, Received by Date Please print name Title RECEIVED Page 1 of 1 Cooper, Linda From: Toth, Vicki Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 2010 8:14 AM To: Cooper, Linda Subject: RE: PH Notice for 10/5/10 TB mtg Hi Linda- RECEIVED 15 2O]O So thol To- ,n C!erk I am acknowledging receipt of the attached PH Notice, I forwarded it to all the Zoning Board members Vicki Toth From: Cooper, Linda Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 4:03 PM To: Bunch, Connie; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Cappabianca, Lucille; Cooper, Linda; Glew, Claire; Lanza, Heather; Randolph, Linda; Scott, Robert; Standish, Lauren; Toth, Vicki; Verity, Mike; Riverhead Town Clerk; Shelter Island Town Clerk; Southampton Town clerk Subject: PH Notice for 10/5/10 TB mtg Please send back signed notice either regular mail or via email. Thank you 9/15/2010 ~RTIN D. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY mar tin.finnegan(g)t own.southold.ny.us JENNIFER ANDALORO ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY jennifer.andaloro@town.southold.ny.us LORI M. HULSE ASSISTANT TOWN ATTORNEY lori.hulse(Wtown.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 MEMORANDUM To: Ms, Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk From: Lynne Krauza Secretary to the Town Attorney October 19, 2010 LUDeer Fences/SEQRA Date: Subject: For your records, I am enclosing the original, fully executed Short Environmental Assessment Form in connection with the referenced matter. We have retained a copy of this document in our file. Also enclosed is a copy of the resolution authorizing Supervisor Russell to execute this document. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Thank you for your attention. Ilk Enclosures 617.20 Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by A~)plicant or Project Sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR /2,PROJECT NAME Town of Southold / Local Law Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, Deer Fences. 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipalriy Southold County Suffolk 4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map) Town-wide 5. PROPOSED ACTION IS: [] New [] Expansion [] Modification/alteration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: The consideration of "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences. 7. AMOUN]~).~ LAND AFFECTED: Initially acres Ultimately NA acres 8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? [] Yes [] No If No, descdbe briefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? [] Residential [] Industrial [] Commercial [] Agriculture [] Park/Forest/Open Space [] Other Describe: Thc proposed local law applies to all land uses, town-wide. 10, DOES ACTION INVOLV~ A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permil/approvals: Filing with thc New York State Department of State if successfully adopted. 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals: NA 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMITIAPPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? []Yes []No I CERTIFY THAT THE I~jORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDOE ~i;iiaC~a;m?ponsor name: To~~ Date: 10/4/10 I If the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment OVER PART II - IMPACT ASSE$$_-',i-'~;T (To be completed by Lea. d Agency) A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.4? If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL FAF. []Yes F~No B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEW AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negative declaration may be superseded by another involved agency. ~'"~ Yes ~lNo C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WiTH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) C1. Existing air quality, suffase or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic paffem, solid waste production or disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain bdefly; None C2. Aesthetic, agricultural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighberhood character? Explain tiriefly: None C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain bdefly: The proposed action(depending on placement) may result in adverse impacts to non-target wildlife mobility by limiting the ability of the non-target wildlife to access certain habitats on medium to large properties. See attached supplement. C4. A community's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain b~efly: None C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed action? Explain briefly: None C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects net identified in Cl -C57 Explain briefly: None C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly: None D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CFA)? [] Yes [] No If Yes, explain briefly: E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? [] Yes [] No If Yes, explain bdefly: PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFtCANCE (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: F~reachadversee~ectMen~edab~ve~determinewhetheritissubstantia~a~ge~imp~rtant~r~thenvIsesign~icant~ Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibility; (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identif~d and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the envimnmentsl characteristics of the CEA. ] Check this box if you have identified one or more potentially large or significant adverse impacts which MAY occur. Then proceed directly to the FUL FAF and/or prepere a positive declaration. [] Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and analysis above sod any supporting documentation, that the pr°p°sed acti°n WILl NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attachments as necessary, the reasons supporting this determination Town of Southold Town Board Name of Lead Agency ~ignature of Resp6nsibts Officer in Lead Agency 10/4/10 Date Supervisor Slgnat~lf differsnt from ~sibl_e~r) SEQRA Short Form Supplement Action: "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences." Part I1. Impact Assessment Supplement - C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: There is a potential adverse impact to non-target wildlife species (medium to large mammals and reptiles) post installation of deer fencing on properties which contain numerous habitat types and freshwater sources. The permitting process to erect a fence is ministerial and therefore, an assessment of potential impacts to non-target wildlife species will not be performed during the process. Section 280-105 Height of fences, walls and berms C, 2. (i) requires "graduated openings" however, a minimum mesh size is not specified. Although many wildlife species could "pass through" varying mesh sizes; fence design should allow the passage of the largest non-target mammal ( e.g. red fox (Vulpes vulpes)). The largest reptile that may require passage is the snapping turtle ( Chelydra serpentine). The duration and irreversibility of the proposed action will vary. Potential impacts to non-target wildlife could occur for the life of a fence or be reversed through the removal of a fence. Correspondingly, the potential impacts to non-target wildlife could further be minimized by requiring that the bottom of the fence be set six inches above grade to allow medium to large non-target wildlife to pass under the fence. This design would require a maximum fence height of 8 feet 6 inches. RESOLUTION 2010-815 ADOPTED DOC ID: 6272 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-815 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON OCTOBER 5, 2010: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zonin~.~ in connection with Deer Fences" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative Declaration for the action, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated October 4, 2010, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review, in accordance with the recommendation of the LWRP Coordinator, Mark Terry, dated October 4, 2010. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUSI MOVER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice SECONDER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Neville, Elizabeth From: Sent: To: Subject: TOWN CLERK COPY Neville, Elizabeth Friday, October 15, 2010 4:20 PM 'Al Krupski'; Andaloro, Jennifer; Christopher Talbot; Evans, Louisa; Finnegan, Martin; Krauza, Lynne; Orlando, Vincent; 'Phillip Beltz'; Russell, Scott; William Ruland; Woodhull, Ruthanne FW:- Deer Fence Proposal FYI Elizabeth A. Neville,~4C Southold Town Clerk PO Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 Tel 631 765-1800 Fax 631 765-6145 ..... Original Message ..... From: Arnold Blair [mailto:blairarnold@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 4:09 PM ~8o: Neville, Elizabeth ubject: [SPAM] - Deer Fence Proposal To the attention of: William Ruland, Councilman Vincent Orlando, Councilman Christopher Talbot, Councilman Albert Krupski Jr., Councilman Louisa P. Evans, Justice <mailto:lpevans@fishersisland.net> Scott Russell, Supervisor RECEIVEI OCT 1 5 2010 ~outhol~l Town ClerJ The proposed law regarding deer fences is flawed and needs further consideration before enactment. By limiting the front yard fence height to 4 feet it is useless in protecting the front yard. This is a serious health issue and concerns the rights of property owners to protect the health of their family. Southold town is not one of cookie-cutter properties and many properties have very large front yards. Property owners should not be deprived of the right to protect the health of their family in their front yard. I fully understand the desire to respect the residential character of neighborhoods, but you Ocannot i~nore the health consequences of a Lyme law. disease, babesiosis as yet unknown illnesses are carried by the ticks that thrive on deer. You are giving farmers the right to protect their crops from deer browsing. Do residential property owners really have less value placed on the health of their family than the crops being protected? I understand the concerns about fences sprouting in front yards affecting the appearance of neighborhoods. What about the appearance of our farm vistas that all residents so generously supported by voting for bond issues to buy development rights? I fully support, as do most residents I am sure, the rights of farmers to protect their crops. We therefor tolerate the appearance of deer fencing all along our main roads marring what we all hoped would be open field and farm vistas. Many more people pass these farms than would pass individual residences. TO deny a property owner the right to a front yard deer fence because a FEW neighbors might object to its appearance is really a double standard, weighted much more heavily to agricultural properties. Agricultural properties have the right to protect ALL of their property. By depriving a homeowner the right to protect their front yard you are saying the health of the residents is of less value than agricultural products. We pay taxes on all our property, not just our rear and side yards. We should have the right to protect all of our property the same way that agricultural landowners do. Many properties in Southold Town have large front yards and smaller rear yards. I have one neighbor whose entire property is his front yard and has about a 10 ft rear yard. I know of many, many other odd shaped parcels whose owners will be deprived of protecting their properties. Not every residence is neatly laid out with a small front yard and a large rear yard. It is wrong to deny such residents the right to deer fencing. The deer problem is only going to get worse. AS unappealing as deer fencing may look, until a real solution to the deer problem is found all residents should have the right to protect the health of our families. The law as proposed has no flexibility. The ZBA has turned down variance applications where the deer fencing in a front yard would be completely screened by plantings - just a lack of common sense in my opinion. You now have the opportunity to have some common sense written into the law. This law was only proposed a few weeks ago. The Town Board must delay voting on this law until it is well publicized and many more residents have an opportunity to voice their concerns. Sincerely, OArnold Blair 4560 Vanston Rd Cutchogue MARTIN D. FINNEGAN TOWN ATTORNEY mar tin.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 To: OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM Ms. Sandi Berliner From: Lynne Krauza Secretary to the Town Attorney Date: October 7, 2010 Subject: LL/Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning/Deer Fences SEQRA I am enclosing an original Short Environmental Assessment Form in connection with the referenced matter. A resolution authorizing Scott to sign this document is also attached hereto. In this regard, kindly have Scott sign this form in both places where indicated and return to me for processing. Thank you for your attention. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. /Ik Enclosures j cc: Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Town Clerk (w/encls.) 617.20 Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by Applicant or Project Sponsor) 2. PROJECT NAME 1.TownAPPLICANT/SPONSORof Southold Loca Law Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, Deer Fences. 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Municipality Southold County Suffolk 4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intersections, prominent landmarks, etc., or provide map) Town-wide 5. PROPOSEDACTION IS: [] New [] F_.~pansion [] Mod~cation/aitaration 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: The consideration of "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences. 7. AMOUNT OF LAND AFFECTED: Initially HA acres Ultimately NA ac~es 8. WiLL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WiTH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? [] Yes [] No If No, describe Ixiefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? [] Residential [] industrial [] Commercial [] Agriculture [] Park/Forest/Open Space [] Other Describe: Thc proposed local law applies to all la~d uses, town-wide. 1 o. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals: Filing with the New York State Department of State if successfully adopted. 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VAMD PERMIT OR APPROVAL? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(s) name and permit/approvals: NA 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? DYes []No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: Town of Southold Town Board Date: 10/4/10 Signature: IIf the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state agency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment I OVER 1 ~ART II - IMPACT ASSE$$M~=NT (To be completed by Leap Agency) A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.47 If yes, coos:linate the review process and use the FULL EAF. ~]Yes ~]No B. WILL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVIEWAS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.67 If No, a negative decJaration may be superseded by another involved agency. [~] Yes ~]No C. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answem may be handwritten, if legibla) C1. Existing air quality, surface or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic pattern, solid waste production m' disposal, potential for erosion, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly; None C2. Aesthetic, agricultural archaeological, historic, or other natural or c4Jttural resources: or community or neighbor, hood character? Explein briefly: None C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: Thc proposed action(dcpanding on placcm~m) may rcsolt in adverse impacts to non-target wildlife mobility by limiting thc ability of the non-target wildlife to access certain habitats on medium to large properties. See attached supplement. C4. A cemmunity's existing plans or goals as officially adopted, or a change in Uss o~ intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly: None C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the pmposod action? Explain briefly: None C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1 -C57 Expidin briefly: None C7. Other impacts (including changes in use of etiher quantity or type of energy)? Explain bbefly: None D. WILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)? [] Yes [] No ff Yes, explain briefly: E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO POTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? [] Yes [] No If Yos, explain bdefly: PART Iti - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or othenvise significant. Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibilily; (e) geographic scope; and (f} magnitude. If necessar/, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identified and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was chedxad yes, the determination of significance must evaluate the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental charactedstica of the CEA. ] Chec~ this bex if you have identified one or more poCentiafly large or significent adverso impacts which MAY occur. Then Pr°need directly t° the FULl EAF and/or prepare a positive deciaretion. [] Chec~ this bex if you have determined, baced on tbe informafion and analysis above and any supporting documentation, that the Pr°Posed actt°n WILl NOT rosult in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attachments as necessarj, the reasons supeorting this determination Town of Southold Town Board 10/4/10 Name of Lead Agency Date - Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead'Agency r~e of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If diifemnt from mspensible officer) SEQRA Short Form Supplement Action: "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences." Part II. Impact Assessment Supplement - C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: There is a potential adverse impact to non-target wildlife species (medium to large mammals and reptiles) post installation of deer fencing on properties which contain numerous habitat types and freshwater soumes. The permitting process to erect a fence is ministerial and therefore, an assessment of potential impacts to non-target wildlife species will not be performed during the process. Section 280-105 Height offences, walls and berms C, 2. (i) requires "graduated openings" however, a minimum mesh size is not specified. Although many wildlife species could "pass through" varying mesh sizes; fence design should allow the passage of the largest non-target mammal ( e.g. red fox ~/ulpes vulpes)). The largest reptile that may require passage is the snapping turtle ( Chelydra serpentine). The duration and irreversibility of the proposed action will vary. Potential impacts to non-target wildlife could occur for the life of a fence or be reversed through the removal of a fence. Correspondingly, the potential impacts to non-target wildlife could further be minimized by requiring that the bottom of the fence be set six inches above grade to allow medium to large non-target wildlife to pass under the fence. This design would require a maximum fence height of 8 feet 6 inches. RESOLUTION 2010-815 ADOPTED DOC ID: 6272 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-815 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON OCTOBER 5, 2010: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoninll~ in connection with Deer Fences" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative Declaration for the action, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated October 4, 2010, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review, in accordance with the recommendation of the LWRP Coordinator, Mark Terry, dated October 4, 2010. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice SECONDER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 5, 2010 RESOLUTION 2010-818 TABLED Item # 5.45 DOC ID: 6270 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-818 WAS TABLED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON OCTOBER 5, 2010: WHEREAS there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 7th day of September, 2010, a Local Law entitled "A LOcal Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences" and WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now therefor be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences "which reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. of 2010 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning"~ in connection with Deer Fences. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend §280-105, "height of fences, walls and berms" to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. II. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: § 280-105. Height offences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: A. When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. B. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. C. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide Generated October 8, 2010 Page 60 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 5, 2010 agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and rear yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed eight feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (i) Fencing Fabric: high-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with ~;raduated opening; (ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet 3. Deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard of any property. III. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: TABLED [UNANIHOUS] Next: 10/19/2010 4:30 PH HOVER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Generated October 8, 2010 Page 61 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 5, 2010 RESOLUTION 2010-818 TABLED Item # 5.45 DOC ID: 6270 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-818 WAS TABLED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON OCTOBER 5, 2010: WHEREAS there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 7 day of September, 2010, a Local Law entitled A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences" and WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now therefor be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences "which reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. of 2010 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning"~ in connection with Deer Fences. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend {}280-105, "height of fences, walls and berms" to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. II. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: § 280-105. Height of fences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: A. When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. B. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. C. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide Generated October 8, 2010 Page 60 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 5, 2010 agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and rear yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed eight feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (i) Fencing Fabric: high-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with graduated opening; (ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet 3. Deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard of any property. III. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: TABLED [UNANIMOUS] Next: 10/19/2010 4:30 PM MOVER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Generated October 8, 2010 Page 61 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 5, 2010 RESOLUTION 2010-815 ADOPTED Item # 5.42 DOC ID: 6272 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-815 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON OCTOBER 5, 2010: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby finds that the proposed "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences" is classified as an Unlisted Action pursuant to SEQRA Rules and Regulations, 6 NYCRR Section 617, and that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby establishes itself as lead agency for the uncoordinated review of this action and issues a Negative Declaration for the action, and authorizes Supervisor Scott A. Russell to sign the short form EAF in accordance with the recommendation of Mark Terry dated October 4, 2010, and is consistent with the LWRP pursuant to Chapter 268 of the Town Code of the Town of Southold, Waterfront Consistency Review, in accordance with the recommendation of the LWRP Coordinator, Mark Terry, dated October 4, 2010. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANZMOUS] MOVER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice SECONDER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Generated October 8, 2010 Page 56 SOUTHOLDTOWNBOARD PUBLIC HEARING October 5, 2010 7:36 PM Present: Supervisor Scott Russell Justice Louisa Evans Councilman Albert Krupski, Jr. Councilman William Ruland Councilman Vincent Orlando Councilman Christopher Talbot Town Clerk Elizabeth Neville Town Attorney Martin Finnegan This hearing was opened at 8:16 PM COUNCILMAN TALBOT: NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 7th day of September, 2010, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences" and NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 5th day of October, 2010 at 7:36 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoninl~ in connection with Deer Fences ' reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. 2010 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning"~ in connection with Deer Fences. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend §280-105, "height offences, walls and berms' to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. II. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: § 280-105. Height offences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: A. When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 2 October 5, 2010 B. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. C. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and rear yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed eight feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (i) Fencing Fabric: high-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with graduated opening; (ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet 3. Deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard of any property. Ill. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. JUSTICE EVANS: Not... COUNCILMAN TALBOT: Should be a maximum of.... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Four feet. COUNCILMAN TALBOT: Staying at four feet and a front yard setback. So it is only in the rear and side yards and the residential areas it can only be a four foot maximum. Okay, we have a copy of the notice that was posted on the Town Clerk's bulletin board on the 14th of September. We also have a notice that it was posted in the Suffolk Times on the 23rd of September and I have a few other communications here. From the Suffolk County Department of Planning, again, 'the above referenced application which has been submitted to the SC Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for local determination as there is no apparent significant countywide or intercommunity impact. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or a disapproval. I have a letter from Martin Sidor, the chairman of the Sonthold Town Planning Board. 'Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed local law referenced above. The Planning Board has reviewed the proposed legislation and supports it with the following changes recommended: I. Consider adding a condition which prevents locating fencing in public right of ways, on public lands or across legally recognized easements and/or other recognized areas granting access to public areas. 2. Property boundaries bisect and include wildlife habitat that contain freshwater sources. The impacts on wildlife dependent upon corridors for survival (reptiles, amphibians, small mammals) will not be assessed if only a building permit is required. Consider Amendments to Chapter 280~ Deer Fencing 3 October 5, 2010 adding the ability for a town official to be consulted if the deer fencing is proposed to be placed in o r around wildlife corridors or significant habitat. And 3. Consider prohibiting deer fencing over or around natural protective features (e.g. beaches, down the face of bluffs, over dune systems). 4. Consider adding the ability for a town official to inspect the property before and after fence installation." We also have communication from Mark Terry the Principal Planner and LWRP coordinator. "The proposed local law has been reviewed to Chapter 268, Waterfront Consistency Review of the Town of Southold Town Code and the Local Waterfront Revitalization Program policy standards. Based upon the information provided to this department as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is consistent with the LWRP policy standards and therefore is consistent with the LWRP. It is recommended to further the below listed policy that the following is considered for medium to large sized properties containing wildlife habitat and/or a freshwater source. 6.4 Protect vulnerable fish, wildlife and plant species, and rare ecological communities. Section 280-105 Height of fences, walls and berms C,2. (i) requires "graduated openings" however, a minimum mesh size is not specified. Although many wildlife species could 'pass through' varying mesh sizes, fence design should allow the passage of the largest non-target mammal (e.g. red fox, Vulpes vulpes). The largest reptile that may require passage is the snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentine). Further, potential impacts to non-target wildlife could be minimized by requiring that the bottom of the fence be set six inches above grade to allow medium to large non-target wildlife to pass under the fence. This design would require a maximum fence height of 8 feet 6 inches. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Town Board shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action.' There are a couple of letters from the public, 'To whom it may concern, this letter is in regards to Chapter 280 of our local law you are considering amending. You are thinking about the requiring residents in residential neighborhoods to get a building permit to erect deer fences around their property. This is not a good idea! Why? Because by the time a resident gets this building permit, the resident deer could have entirely eaten up all their expensive landscaping. Perhaps the local landscaper would love this amendment, regular folks should be able to protect their shrubs and vegetable gardens from these pests. So, unless you will instruct the building department to fast track these types of permits and our town is absolutely broke financially, forget about this idea. Sincerely, Joy McKasty" from Orient. And one last letter from Leslie Weisman, who is the chairman of the ZBA, 'As per your request, here are my comments on the proposed draft legislation for a local law on deer fencing. The proposed language and limitations to rear and side yards is simple and straightforward. The only thing I suggest for your consideration is stipulating a maximum diameter or width in the case of fiat metal posts, on the posts used for deer fencing on residential properties. While I don't think it is necessary to describe the type of post, materials etc., I am concerned that the use of very large posts, similar to those used on Ag properties, could really be out of scale with residential character and lot sizes.' And that is it. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anybody like to address the Town Board on this public hearing? Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 4 October 5, 2010 ARNOLD BLAIR: Hi, my name is Arnold Blair, I live in Cutchogue. I want to thank the Town Board for finally addressing this issue, it is long overdue but I think this legislation is somewhat misguided in terms of residential deer fencing. I have deer fencing on my property, I put it up early this summer. Actually, I put it up last year, it didn't work, I had to refine it. My wife has had Lyme's disease twice, I have had Lyme disease. The deer in Cutchogue have become as they have throughout Southold Town, so invasive that they were invading our living space. We have a patio outside our kitchen where we eat three meals a day in the spring and summertime, you know, we enjoy the front yard of our property and to distinguish between the residential and commercial properties, in this case, doesn't make sense. Why not tell commercial properties that they should have a four foot height in the front, because it doesn't work. The deer will jump a four foot fence. So what is the purpose of having 6 ½ foot fence around three sides of your property where the deer will not get in and then a four foot fence in the front where they will jump it as easily as anything because that is what deer do. A more logical approach, I think, would be to have allowed residential and deer fencing to a 6 ½ foot height but require that it be perhaps camouflaged with plantings. In my particular case, you can't see the deer fencing from the road. I have 6 IA foot deer fencing in front of my property but you can't see it because it is behind trees, shrubs, privet and so on. If you limit residential properties to 4 foot fence in the front yard, you might as well not have a fence at all. They walk up and down the roms as ii~ they own them and if there is a 4 foot fence and there is something inside they want to eat, they will jump it. I have got four young grandchildren under the age of 4, they come out, they play in the front yard. You know, this is property owners rights and I think you are all Republicans, you should recognize that we are entitled to our property .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: First we haven't figured out what Albert is yet but let me tell you, just so there is clarity, when you read the law and it makes references to 6 lA feet, that is the old code. The new code would allow to 8 feet in rear and side yards. MR. BLAIR: Rear and side but the from you are still saying 4 feet. It doesn't make sense ..... COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: But otherwise you are living in a cage. You are living in a cage, you let the deer win. MR. BLAIR: For years and years I resisted putting deer fencing on my property because I didn't want to feel fenced in. COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: Right. MR. BLA.IR: It became intolerable. I have got, you know, I have got deer droppings all over my patio where I dine, it is unhealthy. You know, we have three cats, they are outdoor cats. My wife puts Frontline on them every summer, she is still picking ticks off t hem all the time. This year she said you know, she hasn't had to pick any ticks offthe cats and she hasn't even put Frontline on them. The deer fencing has kept them confined within our property and it has kept the deer out. So we don't have ticks, we don't have to Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 5 October 5, 2010 worry about Lyme disease, I don't have to worry about the health of my grandchildren. I ask you to please reconsider this code, really, because you are doing a disservice to any residential property owner that wants to have deer fencing. I understand that you don't want to disturb the character of neighborhoods, require them to put shrubbery in front of it so that it is not visible fi.om the road. That makes a lot more sense, it is a lot more logical code. Now, just as an example, I happened to call Pat Moore today just to see if she was up on this. She told me for example that she represented a client who applied for deer fencing permit, was referred to the ZBA, she said her clients had 12 foot privet fence in front of the property. The deer fencing was behind the privet fence, it couldn't be seen. The ZBA denied the application. There is time for logic and there is time for bureaucracy and this is really the time for logic. You have finally addressed this, do the right thing, allow property owners to protect their residential property and the health of their family. You know, I put deer fencing up as a last resort. It was recommended to me years ago and I absolutely resisted, I didn't want to feel fenced in. But I did it in a way that it is not too obvious, it is really not very obvious at all. I used locust posts instead of you know, the commercial stuff so that it blends in, it is natural. I think there are ways to address allowing residential property owners to protect their property in a way that benefits everybody. Four foot fencing is useless to deal with something. You might as well not have any fencing. Why go to the expense of putting fencing around three parts of your property when the deer are going to jump it from the road side. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: We had long discussions at code committee about the location of the fencing and it was actually the Supervisor's suggestion, when it says the side and back yards, it would basically be attached to the house, so the side and back yards would be 8 feet high. The front yard really wouldn't be fenced at all then. So it would only be the side and the back yard that would be protected. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: All this does, it mirrors the existing fencing code. It just simply allows for 8 feet installation of fencing. Under the current code, you can go to 6 V2 feet again, with the side yard and rear yard. Generally when you see the stockade fences out there, you will see them coming up and then cutting in to each side of the house. To cut into each side of the house. That is what is allowed under current code. You are not allowed to take those 6 ~ foot stockade fences and nm them in the fi.ont. All this does is it ups the ante to allow for 8 feet with the installation of deer fencing. You know, it is amazing how much opposition we got to even include side yards and rear yards coverage and the amount of opposition we received for the deer fencing throughout the town. You know, we are trying to balance the needs of the community and the need to control this pest, at the same time we are trying to protect the residential character of the community. I happen to be familiar with your property and have no doubt a fence around the whole place probably wouldn't be intrusive but you live in a very unique situation with a very unique property. If you imagine Mattituck Estates or an area with half acre lots, then you imagine 8 foot fencing around the entirety of any of those parcels, clearly that is out of character with that community. So we are trying to balance the community's needs with the needs of the homeowner. That is what we are trying to address with this. we are hoping that down the road we are going to be much more Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 6 October 5, 2010 successful with the deer management program. Reduce the numbers and then reduce the need for the fencing but that is our next challenge. MR. BLAIR: Can you clarify for me, I am not clear, when you say from the side of the house. What happens in the front of the house, what height deer fencing? COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: Four feet. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: It is basically unprotected. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is unprotected. The front is unprotected. MR. BLAIR: So what is the purpose of having deer fencing? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: To protect the rear and side yards. MR. BLAIR: But you, the deer come in from any direction .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: They can't come in from the rear because you have 8 foot fencing .... MR. BLAIR: They come in from the front yard. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Yes, but what I am suggesting is your side yards and rear yards would be fully enclosed and tied into the house so that you will have an 8 foot wall for the rear yard and side yard that ties right into the home, the sides of the home so that the deer can't access the side yard and rear yard but yes, they still will be able to access the front yards. Again, it is a balancing act. We are trying to protect residential character and at the same time provide for protection. MR. BLAIR: You know, the town has done a great effort in farmland preservation. When you drive down the road, it is a shame to have to see all of the agricultural properties with deer fencing all around them. It is not attractive aesthetically but I tmderstand that agricultural properties have to be protected because they have got a lot at stake, so as unattractive as it is, you are making, you are proposing a law that allows them to do it because there is a common sense factor there. I think there is a common sense factor about residential properties too, if it can be done aesthetically pleasing. I ask the town not to vote, I don't know whether you are planning to vote on this tonight but to really consider an option of allowing whatever height you want in the front yard, provided that it is screened from the road so that it is not visible from the road. It is a logical approach that gives private property owners the same protection that agricultural property owners have. I don't think it is fair to discriminate in this sense because the scenic beauty of Southold to a certain extent is being marred by the existing agricultural deer fencing. But we live with it, we know they need to protect their livelihood. Let private homeowners protect their health in a way that makes sense. Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 7 October 5, 2010 COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: And like you said, Mr. Blair. This is a last resort. This is why the fences are going up. Absolutely the last resort. MR. BLAIR: The last resort for me. I didn't want it. You know, it became, they became so invasive .... COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Oh, I understand completely. Sure. MR. BLAIR: Well, that is my piece. I hope you can take into consideration what I said. Thank you. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you. ANN HOPKINS: My name is Ann Hopkins and I am in Orient. My situation is quite different. I live on Platt Road which is just a straight road. Used to be a farm road. And across from is 10 acres and two years ago it was going to be farmed and Jim Latham and Sep combined to put a solid deer fence all the way down. My neighbors hated it, they said they felt it was like Stalag 17 but we have gotten used to it and I am totally supportive and I myself have what I think I know several people in Orient have, which is, we haven't fenced in our whole yard but we have fenced in an enclave and I am here I guess to support the ordinance and also to I am afraid, very much disagree with the previous speaker because I think it would be terrible, certainly on Platt Road if you had fencing along the front because you just expect the deer are there and you protect the back and side but what a lot of us have is an enclosure. Mine is, I am about to have one upgraded because I have had steel posts and wire mesh but the deer have gone through that and it hasn't worked and so, I am going to, ifI can afford it, have an enclosure but it will only be a total of about 25 or 30 feet by 12 feet and so I am here to question the limitations of defining the fencing fabric and the spacing of 20 feet for the posts because I certainly think my posts will be closer together but it will only be a small portion of my side yard, which otherwise has trees and grass on it. And I know of several places, people in Orient who already have similar enclosures. They have enclosed one section of their property. So I hope that the regulations will be passed but will be flexible enough to allow for that kind of thing and I do hope you will stick to not allowing 8 foot fencing on front yards. Thank you. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Thank you. Just to clarify one thing, we have samples of fencing here and the third sample on the bottom is pretty much what the code is talking about, the wider spacing. Now that is 4x6. The standard agricultural fence is 3x6 at the bottom, it is graduated fence. It goes up to 4x6 and then eventually at the top 6x6, it allows and I have seen all kinds of between cats and raccoons, possums, I have seen box turtles go past, freely through that. And that is why, instead of going with the chicken wire or turkey wire, something that wildlife couldn't pass through and you are never going to stop a raccoon anyway, you might as well allow for the free passage and stop the deer at the same time. That is why we supported that type of fence. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Mrs. Gilvarry? Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 8 October 5, 2010 JUST1NE GILVARRY: Justine Gilvarry fro~hthe Bayview area. Fir. st of all, I would like to commend the Board. On September 28t , the Board had a meeting at the Peconic center. It was an outstanding presentation and I thank you very much. The information given them and the gentleman that first spoke, I hope he was here to get the information, was not only informative but also very nervous or very serious. And I wrote a little write-up and if it is alright if I could pass this out, because it does go over the importance of the deer population under control. And I read your face, Supervisor Russell, and I knew the frustration especially from the DEC's officer was very straightforward, he was excellent. And he said it is our problem, you must have to deal with it and you need our support and that is what it says here. When I got home the next day, I got two, because I am interested in the disease factor, that is where my focus is, it is important about the deer but it is the deer and the diseases that are hitting Southold is my main focus. And Assemblyman Ed Romaine and Assemblyman Marc Alessi called me up and we sat down and talked about or talked over the phone that a conference is in need and hopefully in November there will be one and CDC also came through that week and saying that one of the five controllable problems that they have obesity and pregnancy and all but one of those five were personal infectious diseases. So that is a positive thought them, too. So it is alright if I could just let somebody pass these around. I don't have as many, if other people could make copies and send them to other people in the area to support this Board who is trying very, very hard. I am very happy about the deer fencing because I have gotten to the end of my rope also. We have tried everything in our area in the way of sprays, I used a boat horn and ail kinds of things and I know that this gentleman talked about the feces on the lawn, they will tear up the roots of many of the trees and bushes. Most of my bushes only have another, well, last one more year. A six foot fencing was a piece of cake and so the elevation of it is important. Many of the people did say, the gentleman, that they did put fences in the front and it is done with taste, some of them, and again, it is a problem there because we are so inundated with the deer. I put the fences up towards my house, towards and front, not towards the back because the most important bushes which are the indigenous, I used to go around before houses were built and I would take the lady slippers and transplant them and that is were they are and there is hardly anything left. And that is why the fencing had to go up. So if I move them back, then I lose everything again. So I do have precautionary reason why I put them where they are and I try to be in good taste, try vines and all but have to be careful because they defeat my purpose of beautifying it and most of the deer fencing that I have seen so far has been very nice. And so if it is in, one gentleman painted his post like wood, so it looks like the wooded areas that we are in. The second part is the fencing actually is a good thing because it is forcing the deer to go into smaller areas and I interviewed a hunter over the weekend and he found 16 and then later on 22 in a small tiny area where the hunting is allowed. He was disappointed. He got two does within 20 minutes and here he had all Saturday and Sunday, he had to go run down to Ridge, go get two more and I spoke to him about donating the deer to the (inaudible) down in Peconic and he was willing and that day, between those two days, he probably could have filled up that refrigerator locker. And he is willing to come back in two weeks or so and I asked him if he could take out four and then donate them to our locker for the poor people that we have that nutrition could be of value. And .... Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 9 October 5, 2010 COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: Tell him to take out 40. MS. GILVARRY: I know. When we talked to the gentleman who said he would come in if we pay him, what was it? Up to $1,700 to take out .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is the USDA. MS. GILVARRY: But you know what? At the rate we are going, the problems we are having, we might have to resort to that. To get it under control. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is very much a part of the discussion. The USDA has a special feature, they can tromp state law, state regulatory processes, so they can go into areas and hake numbers that we can't under the current permitting process. But I just want to address the issue of the deer fencing again. Again, the Town Board was very, we understand the unpleasantness of the deer fencing, particularly in residential areas. We are trying to address a public health and economic and environmental crisis with the deer. The reason we went with the side yard, rear yard was because we are going to lose a few battles and a couple of front yards along the way might be some of the battles we are going to lose while we are trying to win the war which is the reduction of numbers overall. I am not sure the Town Board was willing the sacrifice the character of residential communities just to save the front yards. In other words, there has to be a tipping point where we say at what costs can we protect everything? The side yard, rear yard solution was give people that enclave, let them protect what amounts to in most cases, three quarters of their property but we will probably lose the battle in the front yard because again with the screening and we talked about screening, the problem is you can't really plant live screening that is going to survive the deer. They eat, they are known to eat everything including poison ivy when they are hungry. So that is a problem, we did try to address the aesthetic issues but what we said, let's get this on the books and from here we can always revisit it down the road but we are anxious to get something on the books and start with that, you know, that notion of keeping the deer from getting to the food source. That was the reason why we went with the rear yard, side yard. Also, there is no permit, despite the comments that were read, there is no permit requirement. You don't need a building permit to erect a fence in Southold and you won't need a permit to erect a deer fence in Southold as it is currently drafted. COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: If we could only get the deer to eat phragmites, we would be alright. MS. GILVARRY: But I think that truthfully, I would not like to see the fences too but we are in a position where we have gone past the point, as we discussed on September 28. So I understand and I would like to be able to say that maybe in two years or three years, we have the deer under control and we can take down these fences and once more have it the way it should be. Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 10 October 5, 2010 SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is certainly our long term hope. Thank you. I am sorry, let me just clarify here. Actually I didn't realize that we do require a building permit for the rear yard and side yard installation of deer fencing under this code. I am sorry, I misspoke. Go ahead. GARRET STRANG: Good evening. I appreciate the opportunity to speak this evening. I would also like to echo the previous speaker in commending and expressing appreciation to the Board for hosting the deer forum a few weeks ago. It was extremely informative. And anyone who was unable to attend that really missed out on getting educated to many of the issues and possibly some of the solutions for those issues that were discussed that evening. I am afraid I am going to take a little bit of a different tact this evening with respect to my thoughts that I would like to share here. My feeling is that this fencing situation is a band-aid, at best. It doesn't address the real issue, which is deer management. It doesn't prevent ticks from migrating onto your property, it doesn't prevent fecal matter from leeching into the ground water source that we have here. It doesn't prevent the defoliation of the landscape that is outside of the fenced area, which then causes, as was discussed at the open forum additional runoff into our creeks and bays. There is a big issue here as we all know. Fencing is really not the way to go. I don't know if anyone has addressed the thought or addressed the idea of the cost of installing 8 foot high fencing, the specifications which are in this proposal. I did a preliminary cost estimate myself just on regular vinyl deer fencing which is relatively cost effective if you wilt. Not actually effective against the deer but it is less costly than what is being proposed here. And it was going to run around $3,000 to $4,000 on acre property to do that, just for material let alone installation. Now that to me means that many, many people are not going to be able to afford that investment. So we are not really going to be able to, I think, accomplish what the idea of this legislation is trying to accomplish. And if we were able to even do that and fence in the majority of properties that way, all we are doing as was previously mentioned, is moving the numbers, moving the deer into more concentrated areas or more concentrated groups in tighter areas, smaller areas. Creating more damage than they already do now and also creating them more to go out onto the roads, with automobile accidents, people suffering personal property damage. I don't know that is what we really want to do. Also, from appearance point of view, everyone seems to have I think the same idea, that well, the fences aren't pretty but they are a necessary evil. I don't necessarily agree that they are a necessary evil. Taxpayers have invested millions of dollars to preserve the rural character of Southold Town through the preservation programs that we have, which are commendable. This fencing is visually going to totally change the character of this community and what we are trying to maintain. I don't think it is the answer. It is essentially, I equate the deer fencing to address this particular issue to the next hearing you are going to have, is asking Southold Town residents to put in ear plugs to address the noise issue. The town really needs to be much more aggressive about managing this program at both local, county, state and federal levels. It is going to take some money, it is going to take some effort but I think that is what we need to do. We need to manage the deer population not just put fences up. Thank you for your attention. Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 11 October 5, 2010 SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you. Would anybody else like to address the Town Board? MARYANN LIBRATOR: Hi, I am Maryann Librator. I wasn't planning to speak tonight. I have had Lyme's disease four times since 1995. It has gotten to the point now that when I call up my internist, he just, he doesn't even test me anymore he just says come in and let me write up a prescription. ! live in Orient and my, believe it or not, one of my major concerns is for all of the lovely nurseries that we support here on the north fork. I haven't bought anything for my property in two years because they eat everything. They have eaten everything. I have 100 foot of border that is absolutely buck naked because they have eaten everything. They have eaten my grandmother's roses that I can't replace, they eat everything. And I don't think 8 foot is going to protect anything because I have seen, we have on Orchard Street what we call our own personal deer herd, because one of our neighbors feeds them cracked corn every night. Summer and winter. And we have watched, we purchased our house in 2004, we have watched our personal deer herd go from one or two, we now have 25. And they come out to a certain house at 4:00 or 5:00 in the afternoon every day and walt to be fed. Last summer, the summer of 2009, my visitors from New York City thought I had dogs because there were two fawns that were birthed on my property and I guess they imprinted that this was their home and they didn't go to bed on time at dawn every morning, so they would hang out until like 11:00 am every morning and certain folks have visited us, thought that we had dogs. And it was two fawns. They were twins because our personal deer herd is very well nutrioned, so most of the does give birth to twins. And so I think just to protect the nursery industry which is vital to the north fork, you would want to do something about these deer and I have seen members of my personal deer herd jump my privet, which is 10 feet tall, from a standing start. These things are like, they are like super, they just bound around like kangaroos. So I really would encourage you to perhaps, I think it is admirable to try to do something, I would kill them all. I think they are a health hazard, they are a health hazard. There are two men in Orient, one of whom almost died in June from, I hope I am pronouncing this correctly, from babesiosis and he is still walking around with the pain after he went to Burke rehab up in Westchester for weeks and weeks. So this is really very serious and I would really hope that you would go to 10 feet and I would really hope that you would adopt the Shelter Island precedent of trying to sterilize them all because they are just duplicating themselves like rabbits. Thank you very much. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Just a quick clarification. Actually, Shelter Island has, it is not a sterilization program, that is not permitted under state and county health law, what it is, is a four poster program which inoculates for, actually it is a deterrent for the ticks. They feed the deer and they go into this poster program that is a tick repellant but they don't have a sterilization because they are not permitted under state law as we are. But we are looking at every angle and you need to understand that there is no one silver lining, there is no singular solution and we are working with wildlife biologists. One of these issues is to reduce the food supply. The reason we suggested 8 feet is that is how they are manufactured, in 8 foot rolls. But we are working, you know, the idea is deny them access to the food so that they stop having two and three calves in a season and you Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 12 October 5, 2010 know with the hunt, all of those things are ail part of this globai integrated plan to try to reduce these numbers. COUNCILMAN ORLANDO: And I agree with what you and Garret said, that the fencing is a band-aid. Absolutely no denying it is a band-aid effect but we are also doing the deer management program. We are trying to eliminate some of the herd by opening up town owned property to hunters and we have the refrigerated trailer now at the Rec center for all hunters to bring down their deer and we will bring it down to Oakdale. You read that resolution, we are renting a refrigerated trailer so hunters with nuisance permits can shoot as many as they want, bring them down to the Rec center, we will put them in the refrigerated trailer and we will bring them down to Oakdaie where this person butchers them up and brings them to food shelters. So we are trying our best, we know the fences are band-aids, we are aiso trying to eliminate some of the herd as well, in the meantime. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Chris? CHRIS BAIZ: Good evening everyone. My name is Chris Baiz, my wife and I live here in Southold and operate a farm. I am fascinated with this, there is a lot to say. Didn't somebody once say good fences make good neighbors? And I hear this echo in the room but I have a couple of points here about your specifications in the law. You are requiting the 12 ½ gauge, 96 inch high wire fencing, a 330 foot role weighs about 600 lbs so that means a 100 foot section of that weighs about 200 lbs and you are allowing only a minimum spacing in between posts of 20 feet; your end posts are going to have to be quite strong to hold the tension that is required in relatively short section. Usually in 1,000 or 1,500 foot long sections, it is virtually the weight of the role or the wire itself just hooked up or stapled onto the line posts that gives it its tension and holds it in place but in short runs, just like in short vineyard rows with trellises, you can crank all you want to try to tighten those wires but you can't get them tight enough. And then the 20 feet doesn't necessarily take care of the H braces that are needed in the comers, those H braces are going to have a horizontal post 10 to 12 feet long and then you are going to have a second post within 12 feet of the comer to make that H brace. More to, so I hope you consider some of those issues that maybe a post on the far tight that you have got there would be an adequate end post in a residentiai area. These are not going to do it. they would have to be .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: We are not, these are the ..... MR. BAIZ: I know, I .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Those are specifications we got from the installer. That is why 20 feet was selected. That was sitting down with the installer .... MR. BAIZ: Well, that is the typical spacing. We sort of cheat so we can save ourselves a few bucks on a 12 foot post and we did it at 25 feet, so that, you know, every I00 feet you save yourself a post of $12.95 or $14.95 or whatever. Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 13 October 5, 2010 COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: But you are right about the comer bracing, that should be put in here. MR. BAIZ: Yes, the comer bracing needs to be in there. Especially if you are going to · use the high tensile 12 ½ gauge galvanized, not tie knotted wire. I do not recommend woven wire that goes like this. That is not a good idea. You want tie knotted wire. There is a local vendor here in the north fork area who supplies this stuff. He gets it straight from a wire mill down in Arkansas and that is the one wire mill in this country that also will deliver it to you painted black. So it is unobtrusive, doesn't reflect light like galvanized wire. Deer fencing is not a band-aid, it saves our crops and it saves our livelihoods and it is probably the only reason why you have got some agriculture left here in the Town of Southold, number one. Several years ago the DEC invited members of the agricultural industry out here on the north fork and the east end to a seminar on all of this, on how to control the deer and they said we have got three ways to do it. One is contraceptive, the second is our regular hunter program and the third is our nuisance permit program. And they basically said none of them work. The contraceptive program doesn't work because a doe will have to eat the contraceptive inoculated feed for 180 continuous days before it is effective. So contraception does not work practically. The deer hunter program, we have become such a sophisticated Waldbaum's and IGA society that we don't think about how we used to have to provide for our food and go slaughter our own meat three generations ago and so we just buy it in cellophane down at the local IGA and so we are not creating as many hunters as there used to be 30 or 40 years ago or people who like to go out and do that. And number three, the nuisance permit program has its own problems, so that even though somebody can be on a farm property 7 days a week, 365 days a year to retire some deer, that is an awful lot of dedicated time in order to do that. And then have to go through the various problems of driving up to Ridge with the deer and calling in, the landowner has to call in in the afternoon and say I am going to be hunting tonight or have somebody hunting tonight and then you have to call back to the DEC in the morning to say I am done hunting now and we got something or we didn't get anything, so the whole process is a little difficult. So the DEC, they said there is a fourth solution to the problem right now and that is fence your property in. And that is the only method that works right now. and all of this is borne out of legislation that was put in place back in the early 1950's because back in the early 1950's there were only two small pods of deer identified in the entire state of New York and some folks got a hold of that and of course, Walt Disney did too, because Bambi came out at that time, the movie and that result, we basically New York State at that time invented an endangered species level law for deer in this state and that law has not changed since. And if anybody wants to do anything about this, you have to get the state legislature to recognize that deer are no longer an endangered species and are willing to change that law. And right now, that is our only, that is our only way out of this morass is to get them to change the law that we have a nuisance population rather than an endangered species. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Thank you. I just want to stress again that this is a public hearing for deer fencing in the residential zones. None of this applies to the agricultural community. They are absolutely permitted to fence property as a function of ag and Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 14 October 5, 2010 markets law. This would just be in the residential zones. Also we are working everyday with the higher ups in the DEC to get them to understand that we are no longer managing wildlife, we are in the pest control mode. And we are getting, we are making progress, albeit slowly with those groups. MR. BAIZ: And I am totally for residential areas being able to help protect themselves. I, my family has a couple of residential properties and they are benefitting from the deer fencing on the back side of their properties from my farm. I am glad I would now be able to enclose their sides. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Would anybody else like to address the Town Board on this issue? BENJA SCHWARTZ: Good evening, Benja Schwartz, Cutchogue. I don't see any tick fences over there. So we have got more than one pest that we are dealing with here. Couple of things that I would like to put in a plug for a movie. Only five libraries in Suffolk County have this movie but three of them are here in Southold; Cutchogue, Mattituck and Greenport have a movie called 'Under our Skin' which does a pretty good job of explaining that we are not just dealing with Lyme disease which is a bacterial infection which gets into ticks, we are not just dealing with TBE which is a viral infection in the ticks that attacks the brain and the meningus, I think that is how you pronounce it, I didn't even know what the menigus' were but apparently the coating of our nervous system throughout the whole body. There are many diseases in the ticks and they are not just in the ticks, the ticks are coming from the deer but it is a, I think there is a real issue whether fencing and hunting are going to help or they could hurt, especially if they are not done properly. So I think we need more information to enact a law. I live down on the beach, we don't have a whole lot of deer right now but I just, I live next to the Fleet's Neck property owners beach which is supposed to be limited to members of our property owners association. So we got this new director a couple of years ago, he said no problem. We posted guards, it didn't help. Everybody comes down to our beach. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I don't want to be rude. I just want to stay focused on deer fencing in residential zones. MR. SCHWARTZ: I will. I will. But that is what he wanted to do, is fence in the beach. You can't fence in the beach. You can't fence in Southold Town. What you can do is fence in a few certain farms that can afford it, certain houses that can afford it. But what about the houses that can't afford it? Cannot afford the fences? What happens to them? And even the houses that can afford it, is fencing the deer out really going to stop the Lyme's disease? It may stop the deer from eating the shrubbery, the landscaping. That clearly it might do, my big problem is rabbits eating my garden. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: This is only an amendment to the existing code because currently people could put up 6 foot high stockade that completely blocks everything, alright? So this is an amendment to allow people to go, if they want to, to go .... Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing October 5, 2010 MR. SCHWARTZ: Six and a half feet high to go to 8 feet. 15 COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: To go to 8 feet, that is all. So it has got nothing to do with whether people can afford it or not, if you are going to go, it gives you a different option. MR. SCHWARTZ: Well, what it does essentially is keep the deer out of a small part of Southold Town. No matter how many, you know, fences are going to get put up, there is still going to be a lot more area that is not fenced in. Same with the hunting program, the current hunting program. The estimate that I heard was 10,000 deer in Southold Town. Now, with all the interest and these libraries having this video of 'Under our Skin' about the ticks reflect the interest in our communities. People who came here today but with all due respect, I would like to see these people get involved in the comprehensive plan, do some comprehensive planning for deer management, tick management and a couple of other issues. There has been a lot of research that they are doing over in Connecticut, there are contraceptives that can be applied through darts I think, twice a year. They are working on one that they can just apply once year, so contraceptive programs may be more practical in the future. But the studies have shown that when you keep the deer out of a small area by putting up a fence, that does not stop the tick. In fact, there are studies that show that in some cases the ticks increase in number inside that fenced in area and also the ticks there are hosting on rodents and other animals that unlike deer, one thing about those ticks when they host on the deer, the deer don't, apparently don't get a lot of these diseases, so the deer don't transmit the diseases from the ticks. Ticks get them somewhere else. I don't know, this is the research I could do and I don't want to take too long but there are some issues there. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Can I just clarify one thing? MR. SCHWARTZ: In terms of the hunting, the studies that I read about described 50% or 80% reductions in population as being effective to control the deer population. If we are talking about, in Southold, under 500 deer last year killed out of 10,000, that is less than 5% .... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That is why we are .... MR. SCHWARTZ: Of the population. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: And again, that is a heavily regulated activity. What we are doing is every year we are getting more compliance or ..... COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Opportunities. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Largesse or opportunities from the DEC. But let me just go back to the other issue, when you talk about, we understand that there is a tick disease, a tick problem and rodents etc are part of that problem. All critters make good hosts. But you can eradicate mice and rodents by calling an exterminator. You can't do a damn thing when you have 14 deer in your yard, under current law. So that is why the fencing Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 16 October 5, 2010 was proposed. Because you can take steps, if you dispose of a raccoon, you put it in yellow bag. You don't have to drive to the DEC and have it weighed and tagged, you know, there are vehicles for those homeowners to do what they can for pest control on site for all currently, right now for all but for deer. So that is why the deer fencing is being proposed, to give homeowners some sense of control over part of the property. Now, one gentleman is disappointed that we didn't address the front yard. We are trying to balance out the issues here and the needs of the community. MR. SCHWARTZ: Is a fence and a wall considered the same under this law? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Under the code? I believe it would be. IfI am not mistaken. But to go to the height you want, you just need to select from that. MR. SCHWARTZ: I just know what happens to a neighborhood when you start walling in the properties versus when the properties are open. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Well, see people can do that now, with stockade. They can do that with the stockade fence. MR. SCHWARTZ: People can but are they? Anyway? COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yes, in some areas they are. MR. SCHWARTZ: And do we want to encourage that? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: I would strongly recommend you did that because I just sat with your neighbors the other day that were complaining about the guinea hens going on to their property. They have a valid concern, so maybe some fencing .... MR. SCHWARTZ: Who were you talking to? SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: Several community members that came to see me on a Saturday because they are concerned about it. So maybe fences do make good neighbors and maybe it is okay to have these things if you keep them on site. MR. SCHWARTZ: I only know of one neighbor who has objected. COUNCILMAN TALBOT: You are getting offtopic here. COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: Yes, we are way off topic. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: We are way offtopic... MR. SCHWARTZ: Not totally because guinea hens eat ticks. Amendments to Chapter 280, Deer Fencing 17 October 5, 2010 COUNCILMAN KRUPSKI: We still have a public hearing, let's stick with the fencing here. MR. SCHWARTZ: I will close by just mentioning that, you know, I don't think the fencing is going to do anything to help the traffic problems. I don't think we can fence all the roads in in Southold Town. Currently, we are just starting, October to December is the mating season for deer, so that is ..... SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: That would explain the sale of chocolate in all the stores. MR. SCHWARTZ: Very funny when you get in a car accident. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It mirrors state hunting regulation. We don't get to select the date, the state does. That is why all of the... MR. SCHWARTZ: Nobody is saying you should select the dates. I am saying people should drive carefully over the next few months. Maybe we should have speed limits that adjust for the season. Thank you. COUNCILMAN TALBOT: Anybody who hasn't had the ability to view that deer meeting, it is going to be on tv. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: It is going to be on 22. COUNCILMAN TALBOT: There is real good information on there regarding the stuff on air and one other thing, feeding the deer is illegal and if you call the DEC, that officer will happily come down to Orient and write a violation to the people that are feeding it. If it is happening anywhere in town, it is a violation of state code. SUPERVISOR RUSSELL: And we are stepping that all up as part of the integrated approach here. There is no single solution, it is going to be a selection of several different solutions. Would anybody else like to comment on deer fencing in residential areas? (No response) This hearing was closed at 9:12 PM Southold Town Clerk Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 5, 2010 RESOLUTION 2010-818 TABLED Item # 5.45 DOC ID: 6270 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-818 WAS TABLED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON OCTOBER 5, 2010: WHEREAS there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of SOuthold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 7th day of September, 2010, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences" and WHEREAS the Town Board of the Town of Southold held a public hearing on tl~e aforesaid Local Law at which time all interested persons were given an opportunity to be heard, now therefor be it RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby ENACTS the proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences" which reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. of 2010 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning", in connection with Deer Fences. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend §280-105, "height of fences, walls and berms" to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. II. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: § 280-105. Height offences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: A. When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. B. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. C. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide Generated October 8, 2010 Page 60 Southold Town Board - Letter Board Meeting of October 5, 2010 agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and rear yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed eight feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (i) Fencing Fabric: high-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with graduated opening', (ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet 3. Deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard of any property. IlL SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: TABLED [UNANIMOUS] Next: 10/19/2010 4:30 PM MOVER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman SECONDER: Louisa P. Evans, .lustice AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski .lr., Evans, Russell Generated October 8, 2010 Page 61 Page 1 of 1 Neville, Elizabeth From: Cooper, Linda Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 9:27 AM To: Beltz, Phillip; Berliner, Sandra; Neville, Elizabeth; Woodhull, Ruthanne; Al Krupski (alkrupskitown@yahoo.com); Chris Talbot (christptal@yahoo.com); Louisa Evans (Ipevans@fishersisland.net); Russell, Scott; V Orlando (vincent.orlando@town.southold.ny.us); W. Ruland (rulandfarm@yahoo.com); Andaloro, Jennifer; Finnegan, Martin; Hulse, Lori; Krauza, Lynne Subject: Deer Fence Legislation Bob Fisher called to suggest the Deer Fence Ordinance specify that the fence be placed on the owner's property. He said he is certain that there are currently deer fences encroaching on town property. Linda J. Cooper Deputy Town Clerk Town of Southold 631-765-1800 Life may not be the party we hoped for, but as long as we are here, we might as well dance! If you really want lo be happy, nobody can stop you. 10/6/2010 SUMMARY OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 280 REGARDING DEER FENCING THE PROPOSED LOCAL LAW THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING SETS FORTH AMENDMENTS TO TOWN CODE SECTION 280-105 "HEIGHT OF FENCES, WALLS AND BERMS," THE PURPOSE OF WHICH IS TO PERMIT DEER FENCING IN RESIDENTIAL AND NON- RESIDENTIAL ZONES UPON OBTAINING A BUILDING PERMIT AND COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING RESTRICTIONS: 1. WHEN LOCATED IN OR ALONG SIDE AND REAR YARDS, THE HEIGHT OF THE DEER EXCLUSION FENCE SHALL NOT EXCEED 8 FEET. 2. SPECIFICATIONS - THE TYPE OF FENCING USED MUST BE HIGH-TENSILE, WOVEN WIRE FENCE FABRIC WITH GRADUATED OPENING AND THE SPACING BETWEEN FENCE POSTS MUST BE 20 FEET. 3. DEER FENCING IS~F~PROHIBITED IN OR ALONG THE FRONT YARD OF ANY PROPERTY. 9930 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 23rd day of September, 2010, Sworn to before me this day of Principal Clerk 201o. NOtARy pUBt~C-SIAIE Oi: NEW ~OR~ tlo. 01 _vOb105050 ~uOl~e~ ~n S~f~°~k COUnW 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 MEMORANDUM 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: Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Members of the Town Board From: Martin H. Sidor, Chairman Southold Town Planning Board Date: October 4, 2010 Re: A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences" Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the proposed Local Law referenced above. The Planning Board has reviewed the proposed legislation and supports it with the following changes recommended: Consider adding a condition which prevents locating fencing in public right-of-ways, on public lands or across legally recognized easements and/or other recognized areas granting access to public areas. Property boundaries bisect and include wildlife habitat that contain freshwater soumes. The impacts on wildlife dependent upon corridors for survival (reptiles, amphibians, small mammals) will not be assessed if only a building permit is required. Consider adding the ability for a Town official to be consulted if the deer fencing is proposed to be placed in or around wildlife corridors or significant habitat. 3. Consider prohibiting deer fencing over or around natural protective features (e.g. beaches, down the face of bluffs, over dune systems). Scott A. Russell, Supervisor Members of the Town Board October 5, 2010 Page Two 4. Consider adding the ability for a Town official to inspect the property before and after fence installation. OFFICE LOCATION: Town Hall Annex 54375 State Route 25 (cor. Main Rd. & Youngs Ave.) Southold, NY 11971 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 · Telephone: 631 765-1938 Fax: 631 765-3136 LOCAL WATERFRONT REVITALIZATION PROGRAM TOWN OF SOUTHOLD MEMORANDUM To: Supervisor Scott Russell Town of Southold Town Board From: Mark Terry, Principal Planner LWRP Coordinator Date: Re: October 4, 2010 Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coastal Consistency Review of Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences," The proposed local law 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 to this department as well as the records available to me, it is my recommendation that the proposed action is CONSISTENT with the LWRP Policy Standards and therefore is CONSISTENT with the LWRP. It is recommended to further the below listed policy that the following is considered for medium to large sized properties containing wildlife habitat and/or a freshwater source. 6,4 Protect vulnerable fish, wildlife, and plant species, and rare ecological communities. Section 280-105 Height offences, walls and berms C, 2. (i) requires "graduated openings" however, a minimum mesh size is not specified. Although many wildlife species could "pass through" varying mesh sizes; fence design should allow the passage of the largest non-target mammal ( e.g. red fox (Vulpes vulpes)). The largest reptile that may require passage is the snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentine). Further, potential impacts to non-target wildlife could be minimized by requiring that the bottom of the fence be set six inches above grade to allow medium to large non-target wildlife to pass under the fence. This design would require a maximum fence height of 8 feet 6 inches. Pursuant to Chapter 268, the Town Board shall consider this recommendation in preparing its written determination regarding the consistency of the proposed action. Cc: Martin Finnegan, Town Attorney Jennifer Andaloro, Assistant Town Attorney 617.20 Appendix C State Environmental Quality Review SHORT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM For UNLISTED ACTIONS Only PART I - PROJECT INFORMATION (To be completed by AI)plicant or Project Sponsor) 1. APPLICANT/SPONSOR 12. PROJECT NAME Town of Southold / Local Law Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, Dcer Fences. 3. PROJECT LOCATION: Murd~.~_!-_~J Southold Cou~ly Suffolk 4. PRECISE LOCATION (Street address and road intmsections, prominent landmarks, etc~, or IXOVlde map) Town-wide $. PROPOSED ACTION IS: [] New [] Espacalon [] Modificatlonlaltsr,tion 6. DESCRIBE PROJECT BRIEFLY: The consideration of "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences. 7. AMOUNT~3~F LAND AFFECTED: Initially '"' acres Ultimately NA acroa 8. WILL PROPOSED ACTION COMPLY WITH EXISTING ZONING OR OTHER EXISTING LAND USE RESTRICTIONS? [] Yes [] No If No, descdpe bdefly 9. WHAT IS PRESENT LAND USE IN VICINITY OF PROJECT? De~[~:Residenfial [] Industrial [] Commercial [] Agrlculturo [] park/Forest/Open Space [] Other Thc proposed local law applies to all land uses, town-widc. 10. DOES ACTION INVOLVE A PERMIT APPROVAL, OR FUNDING, NOW OR ULTIMATELY FROM ANY OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY (FEDERAL, STATE OR LOCAL)? [] Yes [] No If Yea, list agency(s) name and permit/ppprovals: Filing with the New York State Department of State if successfully adopted. 11. DOES ANY ASPECT OF THE ACTION HAVE A CURRENTLY VALID PERMIT OR APPROVAL? [] Yes [] No If Yes, list agency(a) flame and permit/approvals: NA 12. AS A RESULT OF PROPOSED ACTION WILL EXISTING PERMIT/APPROVAL REQUIRE MODIFICATION? []Yes []No I CERTIFY THAT THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE IS TRUE TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE Applicant/sponsor name: Town of Southold Town Board Data: 10/4/10 Signature: IIf the action is in the Coastal Area, and you are a state ag.ency, complete the Coastal Assessment Form before proceeding with this assessment I OVER 1 )ART II - IMPACT A~$r:~-~T,;:,~;T (To be coml~t~,~- by Lead Agency) A. DOES ACTION EXCEED ANY TYPE I THRESHOLD iN 6 NYCRR, PAR~ 617.47 If yes, coordinate the review process and use the FULL FAF. ['~ Yes [~]No S. WtLL ACTION RECEIVE COORDINATED REVlEVV AS PROVIDED FOR UNLISTED ACTIONS IN 6 NYCRR, PART 617.6? If No, a negafJve declaration may be superseded by another involved agency. E~]Yes r~No c. COULD ACTION RESULT IN ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS ASSOCIATED WITH THE FOLLOWING: (Answers may be handwritten, if legible) Cl. Existing air quality, surfaco or groundwater quality or quantity, noise levels, existing traffic paffem, solid waste production o~ disposal, potential fo~ emsico, drainage or flooding problems? Explain briefly: None C2. Aesthetic, agdcutiural, archaeological, historic, or other natural or cultural resources; or community or neighbod~ond character? Explain bifefly: None C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: Thc proposed action(depending on placement) may result in adve~ee impacts to non-target wildlife mobility by limiting the ability of the non-target wildlife to access certain habitats on medium to large properties. See attached supplement. CA. A community's existing plans or goals as oltlclally adopted, or a change in use or intensity of use of land or other natural resources? Explain briefly: None C5. Growth, subsequent development, or related activities likely to be induced by the proposed ac~on? Explain briefly: None C6. Long term, short term, cumulative, or other effects not identified in C1 -C57 Explain briefly: None C7. Other impacts (incinding changes in use of either quantity or type of energy)? Explain briefly: None D. VVILL THE PROJECT HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARACTERISTICS THAT CAUSED THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A CRITICAL ENVIRONMENTAL AREA (CEA)? [] Yes [] No If Yes, explain bdefly: E. IS THERE, OR IS THERE LIKELY TO BE, CONTROVERSY RELATED TO pOTENTIAL ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS? [] Yes [] No If Yes, explain prletiy: PART III - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (To be completed by Agency) INSTRUCTIONS: For each adverse effect identified above, determine whether it is substantial, large, important or otherwise significenL Each effect should be assessed in connection with its (a) setting (i.e. urban or rural); (b) probability of occurring; (c) duration; (d) irreversibitity;, (e) geographic scope; and (f) magnitude. If necessary, add attachments or reference supporting materials. Ensure that explanations contain sufficient detail to show that all relevant adverse impacts have been identif~d and adequately addressed. If question D of Part II was checked yes, the detarmination of significance must eveluata the potential impact of the proposed action on the environmental characteristice of the CEA. ] ~heckthisb~~ify~uhaveidentiltedon~~rraorepctontia~tylarg~~rsignl~cantadverseimpaofswh~chMAY~ccur` ThenpreceeddimcifytotheFULI FAF and/or prepare a positive declaration. [] Check this box if you have determined, based on the information and eoalysis above and any supporting documenteffen, that the propesed anti°n WtL[ NOT result in any significant adverse environmental impacts AND provide, on attashrnents as necessary, the reesor~ supporting this determination Town of Southold Town Board 10/4/10 Name of Lead Agency Date Supervisor Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Titie of Responsible Officer Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer (If different from responsible officer) SEQRA Short Form Supplement Action: "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences." Part II. Impact Assessment Supplement - C3. Vegetation or fauna, fish, shellfish or wildlife species, significant habitats, or threatened or endangered species? Explain briefly: There is a potential adverse impact to non-target wildlife species (medium to large mammals and reptiles) post installation of deer fencing on properties which contain numerous habitat types and freshwater sources. The permitting process to erect a fence is ministerial and therefore, an assessment of potential impacts to non-target wildlife species will not be performed during the process. Section 280-105 Height of fences, walls and berms C, 2. (i) requires "graduated openings" however, a minimum mesh size is not specified. Although many wildlife species could "pass through" varying mesh sizes; fence design should allow the passage of the largest non-target mammal ( e.g. red fox (Vulpes vulpes)). The largest reptile that may require passage is the snapping turtle ( Chelydra serpentine). The duration and irreversibility of the proposed action will vary. Potential impacts to non-target wildlife could occur for the life of a fence or be reversed through the removal of a fence. Correspondingly, the potential impacts to non-target wildlife could further be minimized by requiring that the bottom of the fence be set six inches above grade to allow medium to large non-target wildlife to pass under the fence. This design would require a maximum fence height of 8 feet 6 inches. RECEIVED From: Leslie Weisman [mailto:weisman@northfork.com] Sent: Friday, September 10, 2010 6:05 PI~I To: Finnegan, Martin Cc: Toth, Vicki; Andaloro, Jennifer Subject: Deer Fencing SE? 2 0 Southold Town Hi Martin, As per your request, hem are my comments on the proposed draft legislation for a local law on deer fencing. The proposed language and limitations to rear and side yards is simple and straightforward. The only thing I suggest for your consideration is stipulating a maximum diameter or width in the case of flat metal posts, on the posts used for deer fencing on residential properties. While I don't think it is necessary to describe the type of post, materials etc, I am concerned that the use of very large posts, similar to those used on Ag. properties, could really be out of scale with residential character and lot sizes. Thanks, Leslie RECEIVED SEP 2 0 2010 From: John Bredemeyer [mailto:jbme4u@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, September 17, 2010 4:57 PM $oetholc~ Town To: Standish, Lauren Cc: jbme4u@gmail.com; David Bergen; Bob Ghosio; Cantrell, Elizabeth; Jill Doherty - Forward Subject: Pproposed Deer Fence Ordinance Hi Lauren would you please forward this to the Town Board, Legal Department & Mark Terry: Dear Town Board Members and Town Officials concemed about deer: While I fully agree with the intent of the proposed deer fence ordnance/amendments, there are elements of it that may create unforeseen undesirable and long lasting consequences to native fauna that I believe should be looked into by wildlife professionals for advice prior to any final adoption. Consequently, please feel free to enter this communication on the record for consideration: 1. Habitat fragmentation with steering to highways and streets may increase undesirable pedestrian/bicycle/vehicle interactions: The height requirements will train deer to front yards and streets-real quick; deer with brains nearly as large as ours, but not quite so cerebral, are easily programmed for food (meaning they will continue to try and access yards). Collisions and suffering will likely increase unless the front yard heights are as "deer-proof" as those proposed for rear yards. 2. Habitat fragmentation will force other beneficial wildlife and game animals onto streets increasing mortality and suffering: There are a number of desirable native species that are currently resident here and are trying to re-establish themselves such as the wild turkey and the river otter. I came upon a dead river otter in the vicinity of the Soundview Restaurant on CR 48 two winters ago, a hit by car. These large mammals, travelling in very small family groups, wander great distances between watercourses and deer fencing may present a substantial obstacle for them to get to sufficient food in winter (usually freshwater fish) and safety. Wild turkeys now seen with some regularity in the town travel in flocks of up to 40 birds, mostly without flying, will find fencing very problematic. I suspect rabbits,raccoons and skunks will also be impacted. 1 suggest wildlife professionals be consulted to help develop an "escapement/pass-through" standard much like the escapement panels on lobster pots, so beneficial and enjoyed wildlife are not unnecessarily impacted by the rampant habitat fragmentation fencing will create. 3. Why a steel fence requirement? For instance:Poly/Nylon based fence materials may be more desirable for front yards since they can be easily cut by Police and First-Responders in emergencies to get access to buildings and victims (compared to steel). Thanks for the opportunity to comment, Trustee, John Bredemeyer DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING COUNTY OF SUFFOLK STEVE LEVY SUFFOLK COUNTY EXECUTIVE September 14, 2010 THOMAS A. ISLES, A.I.C.P DIRECTOR OF PLANNING RECEIVED Town of Southold PO Box 1179 Southold, New York 11935 Att: Ms. Elizabeth A. Neville, Clerk Applicant: Zoning Action: Resolution No.: Public Hearing Date: S.C.P.D. File No.: Town of Southold Amendments Section 280-105 "Deer Fences" 2010-725 10/5/10 SD-10-LD Dear Ms. Neville: Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A14-14 thru A14-25 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for local determination as them is no apparent significant county-wide or inter-community impact(s). A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval. Very truly yours, Thomas A. Isles, AICP Chief Planner APF:ds LOCATION MAILING ADDRESS H. LEE DENNISON BLDG. -4TH FLOOR P.O. SOX 6100 (631) 853-5191 100 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY HAUPPAUGE, NY 11788-0099 TELECOPIER (631) 853~1044 ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork.net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 8, 2010 Re: Resolution Number 2010-725"A Local Law in Relation to Amendments to Chapter 280 Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences Andrew P. Freleng, Chief Planner Suffolk County Department of Planning Post Office Box 6100 Hauppauge, New York 11788-0099 Dear Mr. Freleng: The S outhold Town Board at their regular meeting held on September 7, 2010 adopted the resolution referenced above. A certified copy is enclosed. Please prepare an official report defining the Planning Department's recommendations with regard to this proposed local law and forward it to me at your earliest convenience. This proposed local law is also being sent to the Southold Town Planning Depmtment for their review. The date and time for this public hearing is 7:36P.M., Tuesday, October 5, 2010. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions. Thank you. Very truly yours, Neville Southold Town Clerk Enclosure cc: Town Board Town Attorney ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, RMC, CMC TOWN CLERK REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS MARRIAGE OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Fax (631) 765-6145 Telephone (631) 765-1800 southoldtown.northfork, net OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD September 8, 2010 Re: Resolution Number 2010-725"A Local Law in Relation to Amendments to Chapter 280 Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences Martin Sidor, Chairman Southotd Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall 53095 Main Road Post Office Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Dear Mr. Sidor: The Southold Town Board at their regular meeting held on September 7, 2010 adopted the resolution referenced above. A certified copy is enclosed. Please prepare an official report defining the Planning Depamnent's recommendations with regard to this proposed local law and forward it to me at your earliest convenience. This proposed local law is also being sent to Suffolk County Department of Planning for their review. The date and time for this public heating is 7:36P.M., Tuesday, October 5, 2010. Please do not hesitate to contact me, if you have any questions. Thank you. Very truly yours, Southold Town Clerk Enclosure cc: Town Board Town Attorney RESOLUTION 2010-726 ADOPTED DOC ID: 6193 THIS 1S TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-726 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2010: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby authorizes and directs the Town Clerk to transmit the proposed Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zonin~_~ in connection with Deer Fences" tO the Southold Town Planning Board and the Suffolk County Department of Planning for their recommendations and reports. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman SECONDER: William Ruland, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Page I of l Cooper, Linda From: Legals [legals@timesreview.com] Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 3:14 PM To: Cooper. Linda Subject: RE: 3 more legal notices Hi Linda, I have received the notices and we are good to go for the 9/23 issue. Thanks and you too have a great evening! Candice From: Cooper, Linda [mailto:Linda.Cooper@town.southold.ny.us] Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 2010 2:54 PM To: Suffolk Times Legals Subject: 3 more legal notices Hi, Attached hereto are 3 more Legal Notices of Publi.c Hearings for the Sept 23, 2010 edition of the Suffolk Times. Please confirm receipt. Thanks again and have a good day/evening. Linda J. Cooper Deputy Town Clerk Town of Southold 631-765-1800 Life may not be the party we hoped for, but as long as we are here, we might as well dance! If you really want to be happy, nobody can stop you 9/14/2010 LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 7th day of September, 2010, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences" and NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 5th day of October, 2010 at 7:36 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning~ in connection with Deer Fences" reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. 2010 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning"~ in connection with Deer Fences. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: I. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend §280-105, "height offences, walls and berms" to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. Il. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: § 280-105. Height offences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and rear yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed eight feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (i) Fencing Fabric: high-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with graduated opening; {ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet 3. Deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard of any property. III. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. Dated: September 7, 2010 BY ORDER OF THE TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Elizabeth Neville Town Clerk PLEASE PUBLISH ON September 23, 2010, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO ELIZABETH NEVILLE, TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, P.O. BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NY 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times TC's Bulletin Board Town Board Members Accounting Dept. Town Attorney Building Dept STATE OF NEW YORK) SS: COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) ELIZABETH A. NEVILLE, Town Clerk of the Town of Southold, New York being duly sworn, says that on the ,/z./ day of .~..~, 2010, she affixed a notice of which the annexed printed notice is a tree copy, ~n 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, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York. Re: Deer Fencing -- ~:)---Eli~zabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk Sworn before me this 023 day of .~z~- , 2010. Notary Pul~lic LINDA J COOPER NOTARY PUBLIC, State of New York NO. 01CO4822563, Suffolk County Term Expires Deoember 01,207.../._~ RESOLUTION 2010-725 ADOPTED DOC ID: 6189 THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION NO. 2010-725 WAS ADOPTED AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD ON SEPTEMBER 7, 2010: WHEREAS, there has been presented to the Town Board of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, on the 7thday of September, 2010, a Local Law entitled "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences. RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold will hold a public hearing on the aforesaid Local Law at the Southold Town Hall, 53095 Main Road, Southold, New York, on the 5th day of October, 2010 at 7:36 p.m. at which time all interested persons will be given an opportunity to be heard. The proposed Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280, Zoning, in connection with Deer Fences" reads as follows: LOCAL LAW NO. 2010 A Local Law entitled, "A Local Law in relation to Amendments to Chapter 280~ Zoning,', in connection with Deer Fences. BE IT ENACTED by the Town Board of the Town of Southold as follows: 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Local Law is to amend {}280-105, "height of fences, walls and berms" to allow for deer fencing in residential and non-residential zones to protect the health, safety and welfare of Town residents, business owners and their property from injury and damage due to the growth of the population of deer within the Town. II. Chapter 280 of the Code of the Town of Southold is hereby amended as follows: § 280-105. Height offences, walls and berms. Fences, walls or berms may be erected and maintained, subject to the following height limitations: When located in the front yard of residential zones, the same shall not exceed four feet in height when located in the front yard of nonresidential zones, the same shall not exceed six feet in height. When located in or along side and rear yards, the same shall not exceed 6 1/2 feet in height. Resolution 2010-725 Board Meeting of September 7, 2010 C. In residential and non-residential zones, except properties/parcels engaged in bona fide agricultural production, the installation of a deer exclusion fence may be permitted by obtaining a building permit issued by the Building Inspector, subject to the following criteria: 1. When located in or along side and rear yards, the height of the deer exclusion fence shall not exceed eight feet. 2. Specifications for construction of deer exclusion fences: (i) Fencing Fabric: high-tensile, woven wire fence fabric with graduated opening; (ii) Spacing Between Posts: 20 feet 3. Deer fencing is prohibited in or along the front yard of any property. III. SEVERABILITY If any clause, sentence, paragraph, section, or part of this Local Law shall be adjudged by any court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, the judgment shall not affect the validity of this law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so decided to be unconstitutional or invalid. IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This Local Law shall take effect immediately upon filing with the Secretary of State as provided by law. Elizabeth A. Neville Southold Town Clerk RESULT: ADOPTED [UNANIMOUS] MOVER: Louisa P. Evans, Justice SECONDER: Christopher Talbot, Councilman AYES: Ruland, Orlando, Talbot, Krupski Jr., Evans, Russell Updated: 9/7/2010 2:35 PM by Lynda Rudder Page 2