Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPB-09/11/2017 OFFICE LOCATION: *0 S®!/ MAILING ADDRESS: Town Hall Annex jy® P.O.Box 1179 54375 State Route 25 ,`® �® Southold, NY 11971 (cor.Main Rd. &Youngs Ave.) Southold NY Telephone: 631765-1938 www.s6utholdtow=y.gov 01. rRECEIVED PLANNING BOARD OFFICE + l d TOWN OF SOUTHOLD OCT ��►' 2 4 "11 e3' l PUBLIC MEETINGC�, M,a - MINUTES &Autheold"town Clerk September 11, 2017 6:00 p.m. Present were: Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairman James H. Rich III, Vice-Chairman Martin Sidor, Member Pierce Rafferty, Member Heather Lanza, Planning Director Mark Terry, Assistant Planning Director Brian Cummings, Planner Erica Bufkins, Planner Trainee Jessica Michaelis, Clerk Typist SETTING OF THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING Chairman Wilcenski: The first order of business is for the Board to set Monday, October 16, 2017 at 6:00 p.m. at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, as the time and place for the next,regular Planning Board Meeting. James H Rich III: So moved. Martin Sidor: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Jim, seconded by Martin. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Southold Town Planning Board Page 12 September 11, 2017 Motion carries. SUBDIVISIONS Conditional Preliminary Plat Determinations: Chairman Wilcenski: Baxter, William J., Jr.'- This proposal is a Standard Subdivision of a 2.38 acre parcel into 4 lots where Lot 1 = 0.62 acres, Lot 2 = 0.63 acres, Lot 3 = 0.62 acres and Lot 4 = 0.52 acres, in the Hamlet Business Zoning District. The property is located at 260 Griffing Street, on the northeast side of Griffing Street, approximately 402' west of the Main Road, in Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-102-5-9.4 Pierce Rafferty: Mr. Chairman, I offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposed Standard Subdivision is to subdivide a 2.38 acre parcel into 4 lots where Lot 1 equals 0.62 acres, Lot 2 equals 0.63 acres, Lot 3 equals 0.62 acres and Lot 4 equals 0.52 acres. The parcel is located in the Hamlet Business Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on November 22, 2011, the Southold Town Planning Board granted Sketch Plan Approval upon the map prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, Land Surveyor, entitled "Yield Map prepared for William J. Baxter, Jr. situated at Cutchogue", dated September 15, 1998, last revised May 17, 2011; and WHEREAS, on May 29, 2012, the applicant submitted a Preliminary Plat application; and WHEREAS, on November 26, 2012 the Southold Town Planning Board found the Preliminary Plat application complete; and WHEREAS, on December 12, 2012, the Planning Board referred the application to other agencies for comments and to request Lead Agency for a coordinated review of the Unlisted Action pursuant to 6 NYCRR Part 617, Section 617.7 of the State Environmental Quality Review; and WHEREAS, on December 18, 2012, at the request of the applicant's agent, the Southold Town Planning Board granted an Extension of Sketch Plat Approval for six (6) months from December 18, 2012 to June 18, 2013; and WHEREAS, on December 18, 2012, the Southold Town Planning Board waived the requirement to submit Road and Drainage plans until submission of the Final Plat map and application; WHEREAS, on July 1, 2013, the Southold Town Planning Board granted an Extension of Sketch Plat Approval for six (6) months from June 18, 2013 to December 18, 2013; and Southold Town Planning Board Page 13 September 11, 2017 WHEREAS, on December 17, 2013, the Southold Town Planning Board granted an Extension of Sketch Plat Approval for six (6) months from December 17, 2013 to June 17, 2014; and WHEREAS, on March 10, 2014, the Preliminary Plat Public Hearing was held and closed; and WHEREAS, on July 8, 2014, the Southold Town Planning Board granted an Extension of Sketch Plat Approval for six (6) months from June 7, 2014 to December 7, 2014, and periodically granted another three extensions through June 26, 2016; and WHEREAS, on July 12, 2016, Southold Town Planning Board granted an Extension of Sketch Plat Approval for six (6) months from June 26, 2016 to December 26, 2016, and again on January 9, 2017,from December 20, 2016 to June 20, 2017; and WHEREAS, on June 26, 2017, a review of comments from other agencies was completed; and WHEREAS, on July 27, 2017, the applicant submitted revised maps with Suffolk County Department of Health Services approval dated July 10, 2017; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 2017, the Southold Town Planning Board, as Lead Agency, pursuant to SEQRA, made a determination of non-significance for the proposed action and granted a Negative Declaration; and WHEREAS, on August 14, 2017, the Southold Town Planning Board granted an Extension of Sketch Plat Approval for six (6) months from June 20, 2017 to December 20, 2017 upon the map prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, Land Surveyor, entitled "Yield Map prepared for William J. Baxter, Jr. situated at Cutchogue", dated September 15, 1998 and last revised May 17, 2011; and WHEREAS, as a result of this subdivision, there is the potential for new residents creating an increased demand for recreational facilities in the Town. These factors present a proper case for requiring a park suitably located for recreational purposes; and WHEREAS, due to the size of the proposed lots, and potential future commercial uses requiring space for parking and buildings, the parcel is unsuitable for the inclusion of a public park, playground or other recreation use; and WHEREAS, Southold Town Code §240-53 G establishes a fee to be paid in lieu of providing a park within the subdivision, and the required fee is $7,000.00 per new lot created; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board, as described above, hereby finds that the proposed subdivision plat presents a proper case for requiring a park suitably Southold Town Planning Board Page 14 September 11, 2017 located for recreational purposes, but that a suitable park cannot be properly located on such subdivision plat, and that the Planning Board will require a Park and Playground fee in lieu thereof. James H. Rich III: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Pierce, seconded by Jim. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Motion carries. Pierce Rafferty: And be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board hereby grants Conditional Preliminary Plat Approval upon the map prepared by Nathan Taft Corwin, III, Land Surveyor, entitled "Final Plat Subdivision for William J. Baxter, Jr. situated at Cutchogue," dated September 17, 1998 and last revised November 22, 2015 with the following conditions: 1. Revise the sidewalk plans on the Final Road & Drainage Plan to remove the section of sidewalk, drainage, and street pavement expansion that the Heritage (aka Harvest Pointe) will be completing. Submit revised plans to construct the sections of sidewalk and curb along Schoolhouse Road and down Griffing Street to the end of the property lines that are satisfactory to the Planning Board. The sidewalk along Griffing Street must connect to the ends of the existing sidewalk(s). 2. A performance bond will be required to be provided prior to Final Plat approval. Provide a draft performance bond estimate pursuant to §240-32 Performance bond. The details of the items that must be included in the Performance Bond remain to be determined by the Planning Board in consultation with the Office of the Town Engineer and the applicant. 3. Fulfill the street tree requirement pursuant to §240-49 Clearing to the satisfaction of the Planning Board. 4. Provide draft covenants and restrictions and cross access easements. A draft template of each to be provided by the Planning Department. Southold Town Planning Board Page 15 September 11, 2017 5. Public water will be required for this subdivision. Submit a letter of water availability from SCWA. 6. Reapply to the SCDHS for this subdivision to indicate public water will be used. Request to remove the prohibition on residential use in the covenants imposed by SCDHS as a result of their 1992 variance for this subdivision, which was based on the project using well water (Liber 11742 Page 743). 7. A Park & Playground fee of$21,000, pursuant to §240-53 G of the Southold Town Code, will be required to be submitted prior to Final Plat approval. 8. An Administration Fee in the amount of$8,000 or 6% of the performance bond estimate, whichever is greater, pursuant to Southold Town Code §240-37 Administration fee will be required to be submitted prior to Final Plat Approval. James H. Rich III: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Pierce, seconded by Jim. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Motion carries. Chairman Wilcenski: I am recusing myself from the next project, I will turn the microphone over to Vice-Chairman James H. Rich III. Final Plat Determinations: Vice-Chairman Rich: The Estates at Royalton - This proposal is for a Standard Subdivision of a 36.9 acre parcel into 12 lots where Lots 1-11 equal 0.7 acres each, and Lot 12 equals 12 acres, located in the A-C Zoning District. This subdivision includes 15.2 acres of open space and 1.7 acres for a proposed road. The property is located at 55 Cox Neck Road, approximately 490 feet north of Sound Avenue, Mattituck. SCTM#1000-113-7-19.23 Martin Sidor: WHEREAS, this proposal is for a Standard Subdivision of a 36.9 acre parcel into 12 lots where Lots 1-11 equal 0.7 acres, and Lot 12 equals 12 acres, located in the A-C Zoning District. This subdivision includes 15.2 acres of open space and 1.7 acres for a proposed road; and Southold Town Planning Board Page 16 September 11, 2017 WHEREAS, on June 6, 2016, the Planning Board granted Conditional Preliminary Plat Approval upon the map entitled "Estates at Royalton Preliminary Plat", dated November 13, 2015, prepared by Howard Young, Land Surveyor, with conditions: and WHEREAS, on June 23, 2016 the applicant submitted a Final Plat Application and $500.00 fee, and WHEREAS, on July 5, 2016 the Southold Planning Board received a letter from the Office of the Engineer approving the road and drainage specifications and requiring a New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Phase II SPDES Permit, and WHEREAS on July 18, 2016, the Final Plat Application was found to be complete, and WHEREAS, on August 8, 2016 a Public Hearing on the Final Plat was held and closed, and WHEREAS, on October 18, 2016 the Southold Town Board accepted the bond estimate in the correct amount of$314,870.00 for the proposed subdivision; and WHEREAS, on October 3, 2016 the Planning Board accepted the Bond Estimate for The Estates at Royalton in the incorrect amount of$314,970.00 and on April 11, 2017 the Southold Town Planning Board accepted the Bond Estimate for The Estates at Royalton dated September 8, 2016 in the corrected amount of$314,870.00. WHEREAS, on April 11, 2017 that the Southold Town Planning Board granted Conditional Final Plat Approval upon the map entitled "Final Plat for the Subdivision Map of Estates at Royalton", dated June 22, 2016 and last revised October 31, 2016, prepared by Young & Young, Land Surveyors, subject to 15 conditions and WHEREAS, that the Southold Town Planning Board waived the requirement to build two (2) moderate-income family dwelling units (MIFDU) in lieu of a $424,750.00 payment to the Southold Housing Fund; and WHEREAS, on April 19, 2017 a check in the amount of$424,750.00 was submitted and transmitted to the Southold Housing Fund, and WHEREAS, on July 18, 2017 an Irrevocable Standby Letter of Credit Number 68131518 issued by the Bank of America Merrill Lynch in the amount of$314,870.00 was submitted. WHEREAS, the Planning Board found that a suitable park cannot be properly located within the subdivision and a park and playground fee in the amount of$77,000.00 in lieu thereof, pursuant to Town Code 240-53 G Reservation of parkland on subdivision plats containing residential units is required, and Southold Town Planning Board Page 17 September 11, 2017 WHEREAS, on August 17, 2017 a check in the amount of$77,000.00 for the park and playground fee was submitted, and WHEREAS, an Administration Fee in the amount to $18,892.20 pursuant to Town Code §240-37 Administration Fee is required, and WHEREAS, a check in the amount of$18,892.00 for the Administrative Fee was delivered on August 17, 2017, and WEHREAS, on September 8, 2017 an affidavit confirming that the utility pole would be moved from the road apron was submitted, and WHEREAS, on September 9, 2017 the applicant has provided photographic proof that all materials including recycled concrete aggregate (RCA), vehicles and structures have been removed from the Open Space Easement Area, and WHEREAS, all remaining conditions have been satisfied, be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Planning Board grant Final Approval with one condition on the Suffolk County Department of Health Services approved map entitled "Subdivision Map Estates at Royalton Final Plat" dated June 22, 2016 and last revised February 21, 2017, prepared by Young & Young, Land Surveyors, subject to meeting the following one condition. 1. Submit the Open Space Conservation Easement and Covenant and Restrictions dated September 7, 2017 filed with the Office of the Suffolk County Clerk to this office. Pierce Rafferty: Second. Vice-Chairman Rich: Motion made by Martin, seconded by Pierce. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Motion carries. Vice-Chairman Rich: I will turn the microphone back over to the Chairman. Southold Town Planning Board Page 18 September 11, 2017 SITE PLANS Determinations: Chairman Wilcenski: One Woman Vineyard Aq Storage Barn —This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of a 1-story 4,410 sq. ft. building for agricultural storage, and no basement located within a 0.22 acre building envelope attached to ±18.8 acres of farmland (SCTM#1000-51.-3-4.14) with Development Rights held by Suffolk County in the AC Zoning District. The property is located at 19110 Soundview Ave., ±800' s/w/o Clark Rd. & Soundview Ave., in Southold. SCTM#1000-51-3-4.14 James H. Rich III: WHEREAS, This Site Plan is for the proposed construction of a 1-story 4,410 sq. ft. building for agricultural storage, and no basement located within a 0.22 acre building envelope attached to ±18.8 acres of farmland (SCTM#1000-51.-3-4.14) with Development Rights held by Suffolk County in the AC Zoning District, Southold; and WHEREAS, on April 11, 2017, William Kelly, authorized agent, submitted a Site Plan Application for review; and WHEREAS, on April 24, 2017, the Planning Board accepted the application as complete for review and required additional information to be submitted immediately; and WHEREAS, on May 1, 2017, William Kelly, authorized agent, submitted information as required by the Planning Board; and WHEREAS, on May 8, 2017, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, determined that the proposed action is a Type II Action pursuant to §617.5(c)(3) "agricultural farm management practices, including construction, maintenance and repair of farm buildings and structures, and land use changes consistent with generally accepted principles of farming" and, therefore, not subject to review because the action is for the construction of a building for agricultural equipment storage on an existing farm; and WHEREAS, on May 17, 2017, the Planning Board, pursuant to Southold Town Code §280-131 C., distributed the application to the required agencies for their comments; and WHEREAS, the proposed action is exempt from review by the Suffolk County Planning Commission (SCPC); and WHEREAS, on May 19, 2017, the Architectural Review Committee reviewed the proposed project and approved it as submitted; and Southold Town Planning Board Page J9 September 11, 2017 WHEREAS, on May 24, 2017, the Southold Town Fire Inspector reviewed and determined that there was adequate fire protection and emergency access for the site; and WHEREAS, on May 31, 2017, the Southold Town Engineer reviewed the proposed application and determined that the action meets the minimum requirements of Chapter 236 for Storm Water Management; and WHEREAS, on June 5, 2017, a Public Hearing was held and closed; and WHEREAS, on June 15, 2017, the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Coordinator reviewed the proposed project and determined it to be consistent with Southold Town LWRP policies with recommendations to the Planning Board; and WHEREAS, on June 22, 2017, the Southold Fire District provided comments that were addressed to the satisfaction of the Planning Board and determined there was adequate fire protection for the site; and WHEREAS, at a Work Session on June 26, 2017, the Planning Board reviewed comments from referrals and staff analysis and required revisions to the site plan; and WHEREAS, on July 6, 2017, William Kelly, authorized agent, submitted revised site plans; and WHEREAS, on September 1, 2017, the Southold Town Chief Building Inspector reviewed and certified the proposed Agricultural Storage building as a permitted use in the A-C Zoning District; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2017, the Southold Town Planning Board determined that all applicable requirements of the Site Plan Regulations, Article XXIV, §280 — Site Plan Approval of the Town of Southold, have been met; therefore, be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this proposed action is consistent with the policies of the Town of Southold Local Waterfront Revitalization Program. Martin Sidor: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Jim, seconded by Martin. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Southold Town Planning Board Page 110 September 11, 2017 Motion carries. James H. Rich III: And be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board approves the Site Plan entitled "One Woman Vineyard", prepared by Jeffrey T. Butler P.E., dated February 27, 2017 and last revised June 5, 2017, with the following two (2) conditions and authorizes the Chairman to endorse the Site Plan and the following two (2) plans: 1. Page — 1 Overall Site Plan 2. Page — 2 Site Plan Details & Lighting Plan Conditions: 1. This Agricultural Storage Building and site plan are designed and approved for owner use only and shall not be open to the public; 2. The subject building envelope and use thereof was created as part of the 2005 subdivision for Frank Purita and pursuant to the Covenant & Restriction filed August 25, 2005 (Liber D00012405; Page 659) which remains in effect. Martin Sidor: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Jim, seconded by Martin. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Motion carries. SITE PLANS - STATE ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT SEQRA Type Classifications/ Set Hearing: Chairman Wilcenski: 870 Love Lane Professional Office and Apartment—This proposed Site Plan is for the conversion of an existing two-story single family dwelling to a 1,430 sq. ft. Professional office on the first floor and 830 sq. ft. apartment on the second floor with nine parking stalls on 0.7 acres in the Residential Office (RO) zoning district, Mattituck. The property is located at 870 Love Lane, in Mattituck. SCTM#1000- 140-2-17 Southold Town Planning Board Page 111 September 11, 2017 Pierce Rafferty: Mr. Chairman, I offer the following: WHEREAS, this proposed Site Plan is for the conversion of an existing two-story single family dwelling to a 1,296 sq. ft. professional office on the first floor and 830 sq. ft. apartment on the second floor with nine parking stalls on 0.7 acres in the Residential Office (RO) Zoning District, Mattituck; and WHEREAS, the Southold Town Planning Board, pursuant to State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) 6 NYCRR, Part 617, has determined that the proposed action is an Unlisted Action as it does not meet any of the thresholds of a Type I Action, nor does it meet any of the criteria on the Type II list of actions; be it therefore RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board has determined that this proposed action is an Unlisted Action under SEQRA as described above. James H. Rich III: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Pierce, seconded by Jim. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Motion carries. Pierce Rafferty: And be it further RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board sets Monday, October 16, 2017 at 6:01 p.m. for a Public Hearing regarding the Site Plan entitled "Proposed Office & Apartment at the Racanelli Building" prepared by Donald G. Feiler, R.A., dated August 30, 2017. James H. Rich III: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Pierce, seconded by Jim. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Southold Town Planning Board Page 112 September 11, 2017 Motion carries. OTHER Amended Photometric Plan: Chairman Wilcenski: New Suffolk Waterfront Fund, Inc. -This proposed Site Plan is for the re-location, renovation and addition of 47 sq. ft. to the historic Galley Ho restaurant building, totaling 1,725 sq. ft., to include a 66 seat restaurant and 16 slip marina on 2.3 acres in the M-II Zoning District. The property is located at 650 First Street, on the corner of Main Street and First Street, New Suffolk. SCTM#1000-117-8- 18 James H. Rich III: WHEREAS, on November 17, 2014, the Southold Town Planning Board granted Approval of the Site Plan application entitled "New Suffolk Waterfront Fund", prepared by Stacy Marshall Paetzel, dated April 7, 2014 and last revised September 25, 2014; and WHEREAS, on April 26, 2016, the Planning Board sent a memorandum supporting the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy to the Building Department after the completion of all site work; and WHEREAS, on May 9, 2017, the Planning Board received a request from Stacy M. Paetzel, authorized agent, to amend the approved photometric plan; and WHEREAS, on May 31, 2017 staff reviewed the proposed amended photometric plan and provided comments pursuant to §172, requiring revisions; and WHEREAS, on July 7, 2017, Patricia McIntyre, owner, submitted revised photometric plans for review; and WHEREAS, at their Work Session on August 29, 2017, the Southold Town Planning Board determined that the amended photometric plan is consistent with §172 Exterior Lighting requirements and all applicable requirements of the Site Plan Regulations, Article XXIV, §280 — 130 of the Town of Southold, have been met; therefore be it RESOLVED, that the Southold Town Planning Board grants Amended Approval to the Photometric Plan entitled "Phase 2 Lighting Plan", prepared by Stacy Marshall Paetzel, dated May 2, 2014 and last revised June 26, 2017. The Chairman is hereby authorized to endorse the Photometric Plan. Martin Sidor: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Jim, seconded by Marty. Any discussion? All in favor? Southold Town Planning Board Page 113 September 11, 2017 Ayes. Opposed? None. Motion carries. Public Hearings Continued by Court Reporter Jessica DiLallo PUBLIC HEARINGS Chairman Wilcenski: 6:01 p.m. - RCC Sacred Heart—This proposal is for a Standard Subdivision of 35.5 acres into two lots for the purpose of separating an existing cemetery from an agricultural area, where Lot 1 = 24.65 acres of agricultural land, and Lot 2 = 10.86 acres and contains the cemetery of the Roman Catholic Church of the Sacred Heart. In addition, two lot lines of the adjacent parcel belonging to the Roman Catholic Church of Our Lady of Ostrabama, SCTM#1000-96-5-12.2 (Lot 3), will be relocated to allow Lot 1 direct access to Depot Lane; the size of Lot 3 will remain at 7.17 acres. The property is located in the AC Zoning District at 3450 Depot Lane, Cutchogue. SCTM#1000-96-5-12.2 & 12.3 Chairman Wilcenski: 6:02 p.m. - Front Street Professional Office - This proposed site plan application is to demolish an existing two story dwelling and construct a 5,804 gross sq. ft. one story professional office building, full basement and 16 parking stalls on 0.8 acres in the Residential Office (RO) Zoning District. The property is located at 75795 Route 25, Greenport. SCTM#1000-45-7-5.3 Chairman Wilcenski: 6:03 p.m. - Tenedios Agricultural Barn - This Agricultural Site Plan is for a proposed one story 8,664 sq. ft. building to house livestock (goats, sheep & chickens) and store feed, supplies and farm equipment on a 34.5 acre farm, of which 29.5 acres have development rights held by Southold Town and 5 acres have development rights intact in the R-200 Zoning District. The property is located at 28410 Route 25, Orient. SCTM#1000-19-1-1.4 & 1.3 Southold Town Planning Board Page 114 September 11, 2017 APPROVAL OF PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Chairman Wilcenski: We need a motion to approve the Planning Board minutes from: • August 14, 2017 James H. Rich III: So moved. Pierce Rafferty: Second. Chairman Wilcenski: Motion made by Jim, seconded by Pierce. Any discussion? All in favor? Ayes. Opposed? None. Motion carries. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned. Respectfully submitted, Jessica Michaelis �=` ,��^ Transcribing Secretary Donald J. Wilcenski, Chairman 1 1 TOWN OF SOUTHOLD PLANNING BOARD COUNTY OF SUFFOLK: STATE OF NEW YORK 2 ------------------------------------------- X TOWN OF SOUTHOLD 3 PLANNING BOARD MEETING 4 ------------------------------------------- X 5 6 Southold, New York 7 September 11, 2017 6:00 P.M. 8 9 10 11 12 Board Members Present: 13 14 DONALD J. WILCENSKI, Chairman 15 JAMES H. RICH, III, Board Member 16 PIERCE RAFFERTY, Board Member 17 MARTIN H. SIDOR, Board Member 18 WILLIAM CREMERS, Board Member (Excused) 19 20 21 HEATHER LANZA, Planning Director 22 MARK TERRY, Assistant Planning Director 23 BRIAN CUMMINGS, Planner 24 ERICA BUFKINS, Planner Trainee 25 JESSICA MICHAELIS, Clerk Typist September 11, 2017 Meeting 2 1 2 3 INDEX 4 5 HEARING PAGE 6 7 Rcc Sacred Heart 3-8 8 9 Front Street Professional Office 9-11 10 11 Tenedios Agricultural Barn 11-100 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 September 11, 2017 Meeting 3 1 RCC SACRED HEART 2 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: We have three 3 public hearing's this evening. The 4 first public hearing is for RCC 5 Sacred Heart. This proposal is for a 6 Standard Subdivision of 35.5 acres 7 into two lots for the purpose of 8 separating an existing cemetery from 9 an agricultural area, where Lot 1 10 equals 24.65 acres of agricultural 11 land, and Lot 2 equals 10.86 acres 12 and contains the cemetery of the 13 Roman Catholic Church of the Sacred 14 Heart. In addition, two lot lines of 15 the adjacent parcel belonging to the 16 Roman Catholic Church of Our Lady of 17 Ostrabama, SCTM# 1000-96-5-12.2 which 18 is Lot 3, will be relocated to allow 19 Lot 1 direct access to Depot Lane; 20 the size of Lot 3 will remain at 21 7.17 acres. The property is located 22 in the AC Zoning District at 3450 23 Depot Lane, Cutchogue. 24 SCTM# 1000-96-5-12.2 & 12.3. 25 At this time anyone from the September 11, 2017 Meeting 4 1 audience that would like to address the 2 Board on the Roman Catholic Church in 3 Cutchogue, please step to one of the 4 podiums and state your name, write your 5 name for the record, and address the 6 Board. 7 MS. SCELFO: Good evening, 8 Mr. Chairman. My name is Rachel 9 Scelfo. I am an attorney from the 10 Law Firm of Certilman, Balin, Adler & 11 Hyman, 100 Motor Parkway, Hauppauge, 12 New York, for the applicant, RCC of 13 the Sacred Heart. 14 For the record, Mr. Chairman, I 15 have the original affidavits of 16 posting and mailing, which I would 17 like to submit along with the green 18 cards. I also have an Exhibit for 19 the Board's review, if I may step 20 up? 21 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Sure. Thank 22 you. 23 MS. SCELFO: As it was stated, 24 this subdivision involves the two 25 lots at issue. Lot's 12.2 and Lot's September 11, 2017 Meeting 5 1 12.3. 12.3 is owned by the Roman 2 Catholic Church of the Sacred Heart. 3 It is located at 3450 Depot Lane in 4 Cutchogue. The property is zoned AC 5 District. The property is currently 6 used in the front for the existing 7 cemetery use. In the rear for 8 ongoing existing agricultural use. 9 The proposal is to subdivide Lot 12.3 10 into two lots. Lot 1 would be 11 maintained for the agricultural use. 12 That is indicated in green on the 13 map. It will be 24 .64 acres. The 14 existing agricultural use will be 15 maintained. The development rights 16 are being sold to the Town. We're 17 currently in contract with the Town 18 to sell the development right's and 19 have been since June 7th of this 20 year. The property will ultimately 21 be used subject of a conservation 22 easement. Lot 2 in the front of the 23 parcel on Depot Lane will maintain 24 the existing cemetery use. No change 25 proposed. That parcel will be September 11, 2017 Meeting 6 1 oversized at 10.8626 acres. In 2 addition to that split between the 3 cemetery use and the agricultural use 4 for purposes of the transfer of 5 development rights, there is also a 6 lot line adjustment that is occurring 7 between Lot's 12.2 and 12.3. 12.2 is 8 owned by Our Lady of Ostrabama. That 9 is the church parcel and that is 10 indicated in pink on the map. There 11 will be a land swap lot line 12 modification between the two lots. 13 The purpose of that is to create an 14 access for the new agricultural lot 15 off of Depot Lane. So that will 16 provide the access to Lot 1, the 17 agricultural use in the rear. So 18 that 50 feet, that lot line transfer 19 is occurring to provide access to 20 that newly created parcel in the 21 rear. The use of Lot 3, the Our 22 Lady of Ostrabama, will remain the 23 same. It will also remain the same 24 size that it currently is now, 25 which is 7.1682 acres. The church September 11, 2017 Meeting 7 1 will remain on the property. No 2 changes are proposed physically to 3 any of these parcels. No buildings 4 are proposed at this time. All the 5 uses are being maintained. Other 6 than this land swap to accomplish the 7 access to the rear lot and the 8 subdivision. So that we may transfer 9 development rights to the Town for 10 the agricultural use in the rear. We 11 attended the Planning Board work 12 session on August 14th. There were 13 some minor comments, which we already 14 addressed. We haven't made a formal 15 resubmission of plans because we 16 wanted to see what your comments were 17 and what other comments may come up 18 out of this hearing. But we are 19 prepared to move forward with the 20 application. That is all I have on 21 direct presentation. 22 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you very 23 much. 24 Does anybody else -- would anybody 25 else like to address the Board on RCC September 11, 2017 Meeting 8 1 Sacred Heart Cemetery? 2 (No Response. ) 3 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Anyone? 4 Seeing none. 5 MEMBER RICH: Mr. Chairman, I make 6 a motion that we close this hearing. 7 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Motion made by 8 Jim. 9 MEMBER SIDOR: Second. 10 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Seconded by 11 Martin. 12 Any discussion? 13 (No Response. ) 14 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: All in favor? 15 MEMBER RICH: Aye. 16 MEMBER SIDOR: Aye. 17 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Aye. 18 Opposed? 19 (No Response. ) 20 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Motion 21 carries. 22 MS. SCELFO: Thank you. 23 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you 24 very much. 25 ************************************* September 11, 2017 Meeting 9 1 FRONT STREET PROFESSIONAL OFFICE 2 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: The second public 3 hearing that we have tonight is for 4 Front Street Professional Office. This 5 proposed site plan application is to 6 demolish an existing two story dwelling 7 and construct a 5, 804 gross square foot 8 one story professional office building, 9 full basement and 16 parking stalls on 10 0.8 acres in the Residential Office (RO) 11 Zoning District. The property is located 12 at 75795 Route 25 in Greenport. 13 SCTM# 1000-45-7-5.3 14 At this time, I would ask anyone who 15 would like to address the Board, please 16 address your comments to the Board, 17 sign and write your name for the record. 18 Yes, sir? 19 MR. SOUTHARD, JR. : My name is 20 Charles W. Southard, Jr. Registered 21 architect. I am the project 22 architect. Address 435 Bay Home 23 Road, Southold, New York. Myself and 24 the two owners are here to address 25 any questions that might be asked. September 11, 2017 Meeting 10 1 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 2 Would anybody else in the audience 3 like to address the Board on Front 4 Street Professional Office? 5 Anyone? 6 (No Response. ) 7 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Does staff or 8 any Board member have any questions 9 for Charles? 10 (No Response. ) 11 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Seeing none. 12 Hearing none. 13 MEMBER RICH: I make a motion we 14 close this hearing. 15 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Motion made 16 by Jim. 17 MEMBER SIDOR: Second. 18 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Seconded by 19 Martin. 20 Any discussion? 21 (No Response. ) 22 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: All in favor? 23 MEMBER RICH: Aye. 24 MEMBER SIDOR: Aye. 25 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Aye. September 11, 2017 Meeting 11 1 Opposed? 2 (No Response. ) 3 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Motion 4 carries. 5 MR. SOUTHARD, JR. : Thank you. 6 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you 7 very much. 8 And that's it for tonight. 9 ************************************* 10 TENEDIOS AGRICULTURAL BARN 11 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Our third 12 public hearing is for Tenedios 13 Agricultural Barn. This Agricultural 14 Site Plan is for a proposed one story 15 8, 664 square foot building to house 16 livestock (goats, sheep and chickens) 17 and store feed, supplies and farm 18 equipment on a 34 .5 acre farm, of 19 which 29.5 acres have development 20 rights held by Southold Town and 21 5 acres have development rights 22 intact in the R-200 Zoning District. 23 The property is located at 28410 24 Route 25, Orient. SCTM# 25 1000-19-1-1.4 & 1.3. September 11, 2017 Meeting 12 1 I have a couple of comments to 2 make before we open the floor. We've had 3 several e-mail's, letter's in the range 4 of 20 to 30 e-mail's and letters of 5 opposition and concerns for this 6 application. I would also like to 7 mention that there was posting error. 8 The first two days, there was a posting 9 that was for the Methodist Church that 10 never got taken off, but it was 11 rectified and it was posted for the 12 correct amount of time. We've got a 13 referral letter from the Trustee's. And 14 they have notified us and that they do 15 have some concerns and would like to be 16 involved. We have a letter from the 17 New York State Department of 18 Environmental Conservation, DEC. And 19 they have stated that they would -- they 20 are going to be involved. And there will 21 be permits needed for this project to go 22 forward and we would be working with them 23 at their request. What else do we have 24 here? I've got a couple of things that 25 I am hoping to try and answer a couple of September 11, 2017 Meeting 13 1 the questions -- well, not answer, but 2 try and keep the questions -- although 3 everybody has an opportunity to speak 4 tonight. To try and keep the 5 repetitiveness or redundancy of people 6 asking or questioning the same things. 7 If you want to speak, you're more than 8 welcome. We will be here all night if we 9 have to. Some of the observations that 10 staff has already come up with that we're 11 concerned about the impacts that are from 12 the livestock, both directly and 13 indirectly, with fencing, groundwater, 14 freshwater. We're concerned about the 15 animal waste and potential negative 16 effects on groundwater and wetlands and 17 the bay. How will the animal's waste be 18 handled? These are all questions that we 19 have already developed and obviously will 20 take more of your input today. We're 21 going to be asking for mitigation 22 measures on how to handle the wetlands 23 and the groundwater. How the location 24 and the orientation of the proposed 25 building was determined? And we also had September 11, 2017 Meeting 14 1 information given to us that there was -- 2 whether special events will be held 3 there. There was apparently an 4 advertisement for a bonfire and a 5 cookout. We will have code enforcement 6 handle that. And I believe it says that 7 we are aware that this building is in a 8 flood zone. Could possibly be in a flood 9 zone. This is all information that we 10 are still gathering. Again, this is very 11 preliminary. And the last question that 12 I will throw out that, that we will be 13 addressing is will the second floor be 14 used -= or is there a second floor being 15 proposed due to the building is currently 16 28 1/2 feet tall? So with that said, I 17 would like to open the floor up. I would 18 also like to make the comment right now, 19 that due to all the information that we 20 will need and we know that we won't get 21 it tonight, we will and obviously we have 22 many people who want to speak, so we will 23 be adjourning this meeting at the end of 24 tonight after everyone speaks. And 25 adjournment means that once we gather September 11, 2017 Meeting 15 1 enough information that we feel we can 2 bring it back to the public -- we 3 advertise all public meetings. So this 4 won't be -- the meeting won't be held 5 over. It will be adjourned until a 6 future date. 7 With that, I would like to start with 8 both sides of the room. If anybody would 9 like to, please state your name, address 10 the Board. And again, this is all being 11 recorded. So all the information you are 12 giving us, will be recorded and looked 13 into. State your name, write your name 14 for the record. And if we could start on 15 this side, and also on this side, we have 16 two podiums. Whoever wants to speak, can 17 step up to the podium so we can keep this 18 moving. Thank you. 19 MR. FOSTER: Thank you. My name 20 is Thomas Foster. I live at 21165 21 Main Road in Orient. Immediately 22 across from Latham's Farm Stand. We 23 look south towards the Bay over 30 24 acres of crop. There is dirt and mud 25 in the early spring. Dust and September 11, 2017 Meeting 16 1 fertilizer in the late spring. 2 Constant traffic in the summer and 3 noise all year round. Yet the scenic 4 view shed and the open space provide 5 unrivaled vistas. We know this from 6 personal experience that reasonable 7 agricultural use and scenic beauty 8 can be mutually reinforcing. We are 9 pro farm. Mr. David Latham farming 10 land is farming on land that has 11 development rights intact. Neither 12 he, nor the land owners, the Tuttle 13 Family have agreements which limit or 14 curtail the use of this land. That 15 is not the case with the property in 16 question tonight. My focus will be 17 on the development rights contract 18 between the Town of Southold and 19 Maureen Cullinane approved by the 20 Town Board on April 9, 2002 and 21 recorded in the deed dated 22 May 22, 2002. This deed specifically 23 curtail's and limits the use of this 24 property. The deed provide, "use of 25 this property shall be conducted in a September 11, 2017 Meeting 17 1 manner that does not detract from or 2 adversely effect the open space and 3 scenic value that is protected by 4 this development right's purchase and 5 easement. This covenant shall run 6 with the land in perpetuity. " These 7 sentences seem perfectly clear. 8 Quick review of the context of this 9 agreement will show unequivocally 10 that these words mean exactly what 11 they say. Our community recognizes 12 the beauty of this land and its 13 vulnerability over 40 years ago. On 14 May 22, 1974, the Town and the then 15 land owner, the Young's Family 16 entered into a scenic and 17 conservation easement, which promised 18 the Southold citizens the enjoyment 19 of the vistas provided by the farm. 20 When the family sold the property on 21 April 21, 2001 for $490, 000.00, this 22 easement lapsed. Everyone wanted to 23 know, what was Ms. Cullinane going to 24 do. At first, she proposed a modest 25 development consisting of four lots September 11, 2017 Meeting 18 1 and significant preserved acreage. 2 According to the records of the Town 3 Board meeting held on April 9, 2002, 4 Southold Town rejected her initial 5 proposal. As Melissa Spiro ,6 representing the land preservation 7 committee testified "the committee 8 decided that they would like to see 9 more preservation and less 10 development on this parcel. " That 11 is, they wanted to make sure as much 12 agricultural land as possible was 13 preserved in addition to the scenic 14 value of the parcel. Ms. Spiro went 15 on to state that "the development 16 right's proposal we have before you 17 tonight, does meet the goal of both 18 increase agricultural and scenic 19 development rights easement. The 20 Town agreed to pay Ms. Cullinane 21 $425, 000.00. That is Southold Town 22 and Ms. Cullinane agreed that the 23 sale of these rights would reduce the 24 value of her property by 86%. She 25 bought it for $490, 000. She's September 11, 2017 Meeting 19 1 selling the rights for $425,000. At 2 this meeting, Dick Ryan, Chairman of 3 the Land Preservation Committee 4 added, "this is probably the most 5 challenging and most intense 6 negotiation we have experienced thus 7 far. With repeated visits to the 8 property by members of the committee 9 and a lot of conversations with the 10 Planning Board, Planning staff, 11 attorney's, brainstorming on our own 12 committee. It is a fantastic 13 success. " Ms. Cullinane concurred. 14 Commenting that those representing 15 the Town were "extraordinary 16 hardworking, patient and tenacious. 17 And I am proud and pleased to live in 18 a community that has volunteers doing 19 this kind of work. " If this had been 20 a simple sale of development rights 21 for agricultural purposes, there 22 would have been no need for so many 23 site visits or challenging, intensive 24 negotiations. Obviously the key 25 element in the determination of the September 11, 2017 Meeting 20 1 restricted language of the agreement 2 and the amount of the purchase price 3 was the open space component. 4 Ms. Cullinane gave up $425, 000.00 in 5 development rights. Almost all 6 market value of the property just 7 over a year after she had purchased 8 it for $490, 000.00. In return, she 9 deeded to her neighbors, perpetual 10 enjoyment of this parcel scenic 11 beauty. She agreed that, "use of 12 this property shall be conducted in a 13 manner that does not detract from or 14 adversely affect its open space and 15 scenic value. " As it happens, 16 Mr. Danny Latham, our farmer 17 neighbor, also farms on this 18 property. And I have never heard any 19 objections to his husbandry. His use 20 has not detracted from or adversely 21 affected the farms from open space or 22 scenic value. The proposal before 23 you tonight requests permission to 24 radically alter this use in 25 contravention of the clear language September 11, 2017 Meeting 21 1 of the deed. Unlike most contracts, 2 development rights contracts have a 3 third party. All of us in this room 4 are partners to this contract. 5 Ms. Cullinane did not only pocket 6 $425,000 in tax money. She also 7 received a perpetual guarantee that 8 her annual property taxes would be 9 reduced to reflect the sacrifice of 10 her ability to use or abuse the land 11 however she wanted. By 2003 her 12 property taxes on this parcel were 13 500 lower. Now, as we all know that 14 the taxes on this farm are cut in 15 half, the Town budget isn't reduced. 16 Osyterpond School District, Fire 17 Department, beach, library don't get 18 less money. Rather all the rest of 19 us go up. I mean, how did we agree 20 to this? As long as we get what 21 we're paying for. Since 2002, we're 22 collectively paying thousands of 23 extra dollars a year to ensure that 24 "use of this property shall be 25 conducted in a manner that does not September 11, 2017 Meeting 22 1 detract from or adversely effect it's 2 open space and scenic value. " We 3 would like this Board and this Town 4 to reaffirm tonight. Thank you. 5 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 6 Yes? 7 MS. O'MALLEY: Yes. My name is 8 Allison O'Malley. My address is 9 18450 County Road 48 in Cutchogue. I 10 am here tonight as not only a North 11 Fork native but also as a business 12 owner. I own and operate Eagle's 13 Neck Paddling Company out of Orient 14 Beach State Park, which as we all 15 know is in Hallock's Bay. I own a 16 paddle board and kayaking business in 17 this location. My concerns are, 18 being as my address is as it is, on 19 County Road 48, I know very, very 20 first hand about entertainment and 21 the distraction that it takes from 22 our living because I live right next 23 door to Vineyard 48 . The traffic -- 24 my concerns are for the neighbors who 25 live around it. As I have seen on September 11, 2017 Meeting 23 1 their website, that they plan on 2 educational services. Having a 3 yearly food and wine festival, among 4 other things. The traffic getting 5 onto Orient, as we all know, is hard 6 on most days anyway. It's a one lane 7 road. And that brings me to the 8 affects on my business. It's very 9 hard to get to Orient as it is. 10 Going to the park could be very 11 difficult with ferry traffic. And 12 the fact that this is on the 13 headquarters of a Narrow River. I 14 have lived here my life and I have 15 not had amnesia about what happened 16 to our bays and how they fought to 17 come back. And Hallock's Bay being 18 the prime one. Scalloping has been 19 sparse in that area as it is since 20 the brown tide. And I just implore 21 everybody not to have that same 22 amnesia that is in a flood zone. The 23 property abuts right up to it. And 24 my concern is, how much of the 25 agriculture there is -- how much is September 11, 2017 Meeting 24 1 being farmed for vegetable's and 2 fruit and how much of the 35 acres is 3 being done for wildlife for herding 4 pigs and cattle and such? I mean, 5 there is minimums for 20 pigs for an 6 acre. Four goats for a quarter acre. 7 One acre per horse. So these are the 8 things that we need to look at. I am 9 wondering why there hasn't been a 10 study done? An environmental impact 11 study done because anything leeches 12 into the water there, you're going to 13 effect Hallock's Bay. I mean, we 14 gotten it back once. We can't think 15 that we would be so lucky to get it 16 back again. Thank you. 17 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 18 MR. HANLON: My name is Bob 19 Hanlon. I live at 28775 Main Road in 20 Orient. My wife and I own the 21 property immediately across from Main 22 Road from the Tenedios Farm. I am 23 here tonight not as an individual but 24 as the President of the Orient 25 Association. Because this project September 11, 2017 Meeting 25 1 may have significant impacts on our 2 groundwater, our bays, scenic view 3 shed, all the people of Orient, all 4 the people of Southold are affected 5 neighbors. At this time, the Orient 6 Association is not taking a position 7 for or against this property. We 8 rarely weigh in on individual 9 projects unless they have broad 10 impact on the community as a whole. 11 We are committed to ensuring that the 12 community has a full and accurate 13 information about the views that 14 effect Orient. We urge our elected 15 and appointment officials to make 16 decisions based on a full record, 17 especially when those decisions have 18 a broad and lasting impact on our 19 hamlet and our Town. The proposal 20 under consideration lacks that full 21 and accurate information. The site 22 plan submitted seems to authorize a 23 fairly large structure on land that 24 has development rights transferred to 25 Southold. That transferring imposed September 11, 2017 Meeting 26 1 significant restrictions and 2 covenants on the land. The proposed 3 structure will house a substantial 4 amount livestock, including meat and 5 dairy goats, pigs, sheep and 6 chickens. This is a type of level of 7 use that is new to this property. 8 This land is especially sensitive 9 because it contains wetlands. It's 10 part of New York State's designated 11 significant coast and fishing 12 habitat. Long Beach Bay also known 13 as Hallock's Bay. And the State owns 14 titled wetlands along that river. It 15 was also adjacent to New York State 16 critical environmental area 17 Hallock's Bay. These are fragile 18 ecosystems that are crucial to the 19 health and marine system and the 20 shellfishing industry community. 21 There is grave concern in the 22 community that the proposed use could 23 damage those wetlands and waters 24 because of the waste generated by a 25 livestock generation. There is also September 11, 2017 Meeting 27 1 concern for the water needed to 2 support the proposed use may effect 3 the aquifer and increase salt water 4 intrusion. There is concern of the 5 size and location of the proposed 6 structure may seriously impair the 7 scenic view, which is required to be 8 protected under the restrictions and 9 the deed. The Planning Board has 10 determined that this project should 11 be considered a SEQRA Type II Action, 12 which waives the need for further 13 study on a range of issues affecting 14 the environment and community 15 character. This decision may have 16 been prompted from the information 17 submitted by the applicant. Some of 18 which is materially inaccurate or 19 incomplete. For example, on the site 20 plan application form, and I will 21 give you copies of the specifics. 22 The form asks, is there an existing 23 sale of development rights on the 24 property. The answer given is, no. 25 But the development rights have been September 11, 2017 Meeting 28 1 sold. It asks, are there accessory 2 uses? The answer was, "Not 3 applicable. " But in the Suffolk 4 Times, the owner's representative's 5 said that he will host tours, 6 dinners, cooking classes, culinary 7 education programs and local food and 8 wine festival on the property. And 9 on their website lists a cook-out and 10 bonfire on the property opened to the 11 public, scheduled for October. On 12 the application for building permit, 13 Question 15 notes, Trustee approval 14 may be required. There is no record 15 in the file showing these have been 16 obtained. I know here that they will 17 be obtained and that is obviously a 18 good thing. Question 17 states, 19 "Topographical data required. " The 20 data used appears to be from 1929. 21 Not current. This land is in a flood 22 plain. Inaccurate data. Question 18 23 asks "Are there any covenants and 24 restrictions with respect to the 25 property? If yes, provide a copy. " September 11, 2017 Meeting 29 1 The answer was left blank and no 2 documents about this are attached. 3 There are restrictions to the 4 development right's deed. On the 5 LWRP consistently assessment form, 6 the applicant has checked "Not 7 Applicable" to every question. Even 8 though many of the factors. They 9 must be addressed clearly and are 10 applicable. For example, Policy 1 11 asks, "whether the project fosters a 12 pattern of development that enhances 13 community character, preserves open 14 space, makes efficient use of 15 infrastructure, makes beneficial use 16 of a coastal location, and minimizes 17 adverse effects of development. " 18 Answer, "Not Applicable. " But deed 19 restrictions on this property due 20 require preservation of open space. 21 So that question has to be addressed. 22 Policy 3, "does it enhance visual 23 quality and protect scenic 24 resources?" Answer, "not 25 applicable. " But deed restrictions September 11, 2017 Meeting 30 1 require protection of scenic 2 resources. So the question must be 3 answered. Policy 5, "Protect and 4 improve water quality and supply. " 5 The answer, "not applicable. " But 6 livestock near Hallock's Bay may 7 impact water quality and supply. So 8 the question must be answered. 9 Policy 6, "Protect and restore the 10 quality and function of the 11 ecosystems including Significant 12 Coastal Fish and Wildlife Habitats 13 and wetlands" answer, "not 14 applicable, " but the designated 15 habitant of Long Beach Bay (Hallock's 16 Bay) and the state and title 17 marshlands cover parts of the 18 property itself, as well as, abut 19 wide areas of the property. It must 20 be answered. Policy 8, "Minimize 21 environmental degradation from solid 22 waste and hazardous substances and 23 wastes. " Answer, "not applicable. " 24 But no provision has been indicated 25 to deal with animal and human waste September 11, 2017 Meeting 31 1 on the property. It needs to be 2 addressed. Policy 11, "Promote 3 sustainable use of living marine 4 resources. " Answer, "not 5 applicable. " But potential 6 wastewater and flooding concerns can 7 effect living marine resources 8 especially in areas affected under 9 two state designations. The question 10 needs to be answered. On the 11 Environmental Assessment Form, 12 Question 7, asks "is the site of the 13 proposed action located in or does it 14 adjoin a State listed critical 15 environmental area?" The answer 16 given is, "no. " But it does adjoin a 17 listed area, Hallock's Bay. 18 Question 10, "will the proposed 19 action connect to existing public or 20 private water supply?" Answer, "yes. 21 Existing private water is on site. " 22 There is no indication that this is 23 adequate for the additional uses 24 proposed. Question 11, "will the 25 proposed action connect to existing September 11, 2017 Meeting 32 1 wastewater utilities, if no, describe 2 the method for providing wastewater 3 treatment?" The answer, "no. " Not 4 require at present. However, both 5 animal and human generated wastewater 6 must be handled. It requires an 7 answer. Question 18, "does the 8 proposed action include construction 9 or other activities that result in 10 the impairment of water or other 11 liquids, " answer, "no. " Again, there 12 is no indication as to what will be 13 done with wastewater or flood water 14 when it occurs. This needs to be 15 addressed. Other documents 16 associated with this land made clear 17 that there are additional issues that 18 need to be addressed before the 19 suitability of this -- a project is 20 decided. Nearly two decades ago, the 21 Town of Southold placed this land and 22 its community preservation plan and 23 targeted it for the purchase of 24 development rights. In 2002, at a 25 hearing before the Town Board, when a September 11, 2017 Meeting 33 1 proposed purchase of those rights, 2 land preservation director, Melissa 3 Spiro pointed out that the land 4 needed to be preserved for three 5 reasons. Agricultural preservation, 6 land of exceptional scenic value and 7 wetlands protection. That is a site 8 to where that is in the record. The 9 Town proceeded with the purchase. 10 The usage proposed in the following 11 application only relate to crops and 12 livestock. In fact, the applicant 13 claims accessory uses aren't 14 applicable. However, the 15 representative of the owner had made 16 public statements to the contrary in 17 an-article on August-4, 2017 Suffolk 18 Times. They stated that they will be 19 hosting tours, cooking classes, 20 culinary education programs and a 21 local food and wine festival on the 22 property. On the website, they are 23 advertising a fall harvest cookout 24 and bonfire to be held on the Fresh & 25 Co Farm on October 7, 2017. It is September 11, 2017 Meeting 34 1 our understanding that no such 2 activities are permitted on land 3 where the development rights have 4 been transferred to the Town. The 5 land not included in the preserved 6 area was reserved for residential 7 use. And the deed's for using the 8 right-of-way to get to that land for 9 any, but residential purposes. This 10 project raises questions about 11 significant impacts on our bays, 12 wetlands, ground water and scenic 13 views. Members of the community have 14 already raised many questions, 15 including, Will the animal waste pose 16 a hazard to Hallock's Bay? Will the 17 waste pose a risk to our well water? 18 Is this land in a flood zone? What 19 happens to the waste if it floods? 20 How much of this project affects the 21 wetlands on the property? How will 22 it affect nearby wetlands? Why isn't 23 an independent review being done by 24 experts to assess the impact? What 25 will be stored in the barn and what September 11, 2017 Meeting 35 1 safeguards will be planned in case of 2 a flood? If water is being drawn to 3 feed animals, will it lead to salt 4 water intrusion? Will the proposed 5 barn be an eyesore and detract from 6 scenic views protected in the deed? 7 Why isn't a view shed analysis being 8 required as it has been for other 9 projects? Will thus barn be used to 10 store equipment for elsewhere? How 11 can they hold events and other 12 non-farming activities on preserved 13 land? Because the project has been 14 designated a SEQRA Type II action, no 15 additional information is being 16 required that could address these 17 questions. The Board indicates now 18 that they may be seeking more 19 information. We applaud that. It 20 may be that the negative impacts are 21 not likely or maybe their are steps 22 that could be taken to control the 23 risks or it may be that the risks are 24 so great that the proposal must be 25 changed. We simply do not know. The September 11, 2017 Meeting 36 1 community and this Board are entitled 2 to a complete and professional 3 analysis of the issues that have been 4 raised. To that end, we ask the 5 Board to reconsider its designation. 6 Make this a Type I action and require 7 that independent experts on these 8 topics be selected by, be retained 9 and report to this Board to address 10 these concerns about wastewater, salt 11 water intrusion, flood control, 12 scenic preservation. Only then will 13 it be possible for you to make a 14 sound decision that protects our 15 community and carries out the 16 mandates of law and Town policy. 17 Thank you. 18 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 19 Yes, ma'am? 20 MS. THOMAS: My name is Sherry 21 Thomas and I have submitted my letter 22 on the web. I live at 1055 Browns 23 Hill Road in Orient. I want to talk 24 -- I am really delighted that you 25 have already talked about animal September 11, 2017 Meeting 37 1 waste, but I want to address you as a 2 former livestock farmer who knows 3 _ these issues and these animals quite 4 well. Raised sheep, goats, chickens, 5 pigs, steer and horses on 100 acres 6 of land. I am well aware of what is 7 required to take care of these 8 animals and what the waste issues 9 are. The proposed pre-fab barn is 10 well designed for housing horses or 11 perhaps milking cows. It is not well 12 suited for goats, sheep, chickens or 13 pigs. Beyond that, there is some 14 even more glaring omissions in these 15 applications. Assuming that this is 16 a livestock barn. No refrigeration 17 units have been scoped for this 18 process. No housing for agricultural 19 workers to take care of all those 20 animals. Especially the milking 21 goats who have to be milked twice a 22 day. No animal waste disposal 23 program. One pig for example 24 produces 1 ton of manurer a year. 25 Put 30 pigs as has been stated on September 11, 2017 Meeting 38 1 that property for adding 30 tons of 2 high nitrogen loaded manure into 3 Narrow River and Hallock's Bay. 4 Hallock's Bay is already a fragile 5 designation. Likewise, chickens have 6 the highest nitrogen rate of any 7 domesticated farm animal. And the 8 number of chickens being talked about 9 is going to be a significant damage 10 to the water quality. What seems 11 clear to someone who has been a 12 farmer, is that this is a 13 disingenuous application. This is 14 not a livestock barn for the purposes 15 described in this application. This 16 is agro-tourism facility that is not 17 allowed on the preserved 25 acres or 18 on the single family zoning of the 19 remaining five acres. And I ask you 20 to take this under very, very serious 21 review. Thank you. 22 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 23 MR. DELUCA: Good evening, Mr. 24 Chairman. My name is Bob DeLuca and 25 I serve as president for Group For September 11, 2017 Meeting 39 1 The East End, and I am also a 2 resident of the east end. I am here 3 today to share, I think the concerns 4 of many. I will be brief. Let me 5 just stipulate that the concerns that 6 Mr. Foster and Mr. Hanlon, clearly 7 reflect our concerns as well. Let me 8 also thank you for opening this 9 hearing and giving an indication that 10 many of the concerns that we have 11 about this project, what it means, 12 what it means in many different 13 dimensions in planning, the Board's 14 commitment into looking at that, I 15 think a lot of people came here to 16 hear. And it's not clear from just 17 looking at the records. So I want to 18 thank you very much for that. Two 19 things really that occurred to me. I 20 have the benefit or depending on how 21 you want to look at it, the torture 22 on a regular basis. And one of the 23 things that I wanted to just bring up 24 is just my experience, having spent 25 20 years on working in the South Fork September 11, 2017 Meeting 40 1 as well as the North Fork and this 2 idea of sort of law of unintended 3 consequences. And I can tell you 4 about everything that we thought we 5 were doing when we first dealt zone 6 changes and agriculture protection. 7 All these things. A project like 8 this is a bell weather in a lot of 9 ways for where things are going. In 10 some ways, I believe we're well 11 protected by some of the stipulations 12 in the covenants, but the reality is, 13 if an applicant comes to you and just 14 breezes through an environmental 15 assessment form and says none of this 16 applies and hopes that they get away 17 with it, and then basically sends out 18 an advertising piece and says, hey, 19 you can come out and do all kinds of 20 stuff that really isn't agriculture. 21 In all that, there is a head of the 22 process where you haven't really even 23 had the time to review the concerns 24 raised by the public. That is not 25 good. It's not setting a stage for September 11, 2017 Meeting 41 1 people who come after that applicant 2 who might do the same thing. So I 3 would just pray that when you do what 4 you're doing here, you take a close 5 look at the entire picture of how 6 easy it is to slip. You know, it's 7 agriculture. It's a barn. All of 8 these people are so concerned. Cows, 9 horses, chickens, whatever. Those of 10 us who drive by that property or ride 11 by it or run by it or see it every 12 day, know that there is a lot more 13 going on there. I think that 14 deserves the hard look to give it 15 what it demands. My last point 16 really is, SEQRA provides you as a 17 Board an opportunity to review your 18 decision. Your Type II preliminary 19 designation. And the law provides 20 very clearly when new information is 21 provided, you have the opportunity to 22 change that provisions. In the code, 23 easy to do and basically I think in a 24 case like this when you have minimal 25 information to start with, the September 11, 2017 Meeting 42 1 opportunity provided by extending 2 this hearing and letting us put in 3 written additional information can 4 give you the opportunity to go back 5 and do what I think needs to be done 6 here, which is a proper 7 classification of this project. A 8 full SEQRA view of this project. And 9 the benefit of a full SEQRA review, 10 is all parties and all of the 11 information in one place, at one 12 time. With alternatives standing 13 next to the project and you don't 14 have to invent the process as you go 15 along. That said, if the Board can't 16 find its way there, we certainly 17 would support your investigating each 18 and every one of those opportunities 19 along the way because that's the only 20 way you can determine if this project 21 is in deed an agricultural use of an 22 agricultural preserve that would be 23 consistent with the goals of the plan 24 and all the other things that we 25 think about with the agriculture or September 11, 2017 Meeting 43 1 if that is being a ruse to slip in a 2 project that is more bigger and over 3 time will become a headache for the 4 people of Orient as well as the 5 people surrounding it. So with that, 6 I just ask that you carefully 7 consider that and -- I know it's not 8 easy, but I thank you for the time 9 and effort and for leaving the record 10 open. Thank you. 11 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 12 MS. SOTO: Mr. Chairman and 13 Trustees. Thank you for the time. I 14 am here -- 15 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Sorry, your 16 name? 17 MS. SOTO: My name is Patti Soto. 18 I am a resident of Orient. And I am 19 here to read a statement from a 20 concerned citizen and a regular 21 visitor to Orient, Dr. Natalie 22 Gionelli-Exum. She is assistant 23 scientist at the Department of 24 Environmental Health and Engineering, 25 John Hopkins, Bloomberg School of September 11, 2017 Meeting 44 1 Public Health. The statement is in 2 regard to the animal waste management 3 for livestock operations at the 4 proposed Steve Tenedios Fresh & 5 Company Barn about which we're 6 speaking. I will now read Natalie's 7 statement. "It is well known that 8 the manure production from livestock 9 operation can have consequences for 10 occupational health effects, public 11 heath effects, neighbors and adverse 12 environmental effects. While manure 13 is a valuable resource when properly 14 used for agricultural purposes, there 15 is concern for this proposed animal 16 production, that the amount of animal 17 manure produced may be too much for 18 the available land and wetland area. 19 Therefore a comprehensive approach 20 should be taken to ensure that the 21 manure and wastewater from this 22 operation will be properly managed to 23 not contaminate the surrounding 24 waters. And proper management of 25 these animal wastes may cause September 11, 2017 Meeting 45 1 bacterial infections, antibiotic 2 resistance infections, increase human 3 exposure to inorganic arsenic and 4 dioxin like compounds that may 5 contribute to increase cancer risk 6 and non-cancer risks. The 7 environmental protection agency and 8 United State Department of 9 Agriculture rely on a comprehensive 10 suite, a voluntary programs, 11 regulatory programs, to ensure that 12 animal operations establish 13 appropriate site specific nutrient 14 management plans and will protect the 15 environment and public health. This 16 plan should include provisions for 17 handling chemicals, dead animals, 18 soil testing, safe manure spreading 19 and diverting wastewater away from 20 the farm. The plan should also 21 account for animal manure analysis 22 for its nutrient content and soil be 23 tested for phosphorus levels. 24 Therefore, it is my recommendation 25 that this plan be specified before a September 11, 2017 Meeting 46 1 permit be given to the proposed Fresh 2 & Company Barn. Thank you for your 3 time. " And Dr. Exum thanks you for 4 your time. 5 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. Yes. 6 Go ahead. 7 MS. CARTAGENA: Hello. My name is 8 Maria Cartagena. And I have a home 9 in Orient located adjacent to this 10 farm, the Tenedios Farm at 27754 Main 11 Road. I bought this property four 12 years ago, but before buying 13 property, I had been coming here for 14 the area for eight years. We chose 15 to buy this property precisely 16 because it was surrounded by 17 farmland. We wanted the tranquility 18 and lovely view quarters our location 19 provides. Having lived across two 20 farms for the past four years, I have 21 gotten o know that farming can be a 22 bit messy. I easily put up with the 23 dust and the water pumps and the 24 workers on Latham's Farm, which is in 25 front of my property. I know Danny September 11, 2017 Meeting 47 1 Latham personally. Buy his fruits 2 and his vegetables as long as his 3 stand is open. Ellen Hook, my 4 neighbor, even make Strawberry 5 Rhubarb Jam together. And we make 6 sure to drop off a jar of our 7 homemade jam for Danny at his stand 8 every spring. When we bought the 9 home that we live in now, Maureen 10 Cullinane owned it. And she came 11 over with a dozen of her eggs from 12 her chicken farm and we became 13 friends. We even hired her company 14 to work on the landscaping of our 15 large yard, which abuts directly to 16 the farm. We were very sad to hear 17 about her passing. We were delighted 18 however to know that someone knew 19 about the farm last year and was 20 going to keep the farm going. I had 21 even gone to Fresh & Co store in New 22 York and proudly ordered a salad, 23 knowing that it literally came from 24 my backyard. I am not an expert on 25 development, but I am a journalist September 11, 2017 Meeting 48 1 and I have written several books on 2 business. Having read the 3 application and reviewed the proposed 4 barn plans, I have many questions 5 that don't seem to be addressed 6 properly by Mr. Tenedios application. 7 I will not repeat them because Bob 8 pretty much outlined them. However, 9 I am understand that during the i 10 meeting on August 14th, the Planning 11 Board decided a State Environmental 12 Quality Review Act submission would 13 not be required. I don't think that 14 is wise and I ask that one be 15 required before moving forward with 16 the vote on this application. Given 17 the information that we have right 18 now, I vigorously oppose the 19 production of this livestock farm and 20 am most certainly against the 21 property being used to host 22 festivals. Thank you. 23 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 24 MS. HANDS: My name is Venetia 25 Hands. I live in Browns Hill, September 11, 2017 Meeting 49 1 Orient. Mr. Chairman, members of the 2 Board, thank you very much for being 3 here. And thank you very much for 4 what you have already told us about 5 questions that have come in and 6 information that you are going to be 7 asking this applicant to provide and 8 for adjoining this hearing. And for 9 there to be another opportunity. 10 This is very good news. I will try 11 and not repeat things. But I want to 12 say that I am extremely disappointed 13 in Mr. Tenedios. It is my hope that 14 at the end of this hearing, perhaps 15 at even this point of the hearing, he 16 will withdraw his application. At 17 least until he can resubmit it with 18 bullet proof plans to ensure all the 19 concerns that are being raised here 20 are being taken care of. When I saw 21 the Fresh & Co Signs, I like Fresh & 22 Co. I have bought many meals there. 23 So I went to their website. It talks 24 about sourcing from local partners 25 they know and trust. And it says, September 11, 2017 Meeting 50 1 "when it comes to people and food, 2 it's what inside that counts. That 3 is why we serve pure foods that are 4 free from synthetic fertilizers, 5 antibiotics pesticides and other 6 additives. We also believe in the 7 importance of supporting local 8 families. Family farms that are 9 comitted to sustainable practices. " 10 That is the source of my 11 disappointment in Mr. Tenedios. 12 Because then we got this application 13 for this huge barn, and this un-yet 14 specified numbers of chickens, goat, 15 sheep and pigs that aren't on the 16 farm. It is adequate for all the 17 reasons that you have heard already 18 and will probably hear again. How 19 can Mr. Tenedios profess those values 20 and beliefs, yet to seem have no 21 awareness or sensitively of the this 22 piece of land. 23 Mr. Chairman, Members of the 24 Board, I am glad you are going to 25 proceed as cautiously as I think you September 11, 2017 Meeting 51 1 are saying. We owe it to all those 2 who have worked hard to protect this 3 land, to protect so much in Southold. 4 And we owe it to the legacy of 5 Maureen. Thank you. 6 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you 7 MS. MCNEALY: Hello. My name is 8 Ellen McNealy, and I live at 70 9 Vincent Street in Orient. And I am a 10 member of the board of The Orient 11 Association and the Oyster Farm 12 Community Association. I wanted to 13 give maps, put maps up to show for 14 context. Because I am not sure that 15 everyone is really familiar with the 16 material that has been discussed. So 17 some of these maps, you have seen. 18 Some you may not have seen. I have 19 copies for you. I don't plan to 20 discuss them, except what they are. 21 Simply for information purposes for 22 the people that are here. May I 23 present them to you? 24 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Yes. Thank you. 25 MS. MCNEALY: That map refers to September 11, 2017 Meeting 52 1 potential development in Orient. 2 Shows the particular property that is 3 being discussed. As being adjacent 4 to the end of Narrow River on Narrow 5 River Road. Right there. The next 6 piece is that one. Which was created 7 by the Department of State, GIS 8 Department and shows significant 9 coastal fish and wildlife habitat. 10 With many of the lakes going up into 11 that property. As the little fingers 12 going up into the map. The next one 13 is Nitrogen. This is produced by the 14 Nature Conservancy and estimates that 15 there is 77% of Nitrogen entering 16 Narrow River from that particular 17 area, moving into the Hallock's Bay. 18 The next map prepared by Peconic 19 Green Growth shows the depth of 20 groundwater at that point, which the 21 yellow areas shows 0-3 feet. And the 22 red area, 0-1 foot. The area in the 23 black shows how close it is to the 24 ground water. The next one is also 25 Peconic Green Growth and it's called September 11, 2017 Meeting 53 1 Influence Zones. Sorry. That is the 2 wrong one. Oh, well. Shows that the 3 entirety of that property is in he AE 4 Zone as you can see. The 50 year 5 flood zone. We have -- Hurricane 6 Sandy, which came up my driveway on 7 Vincent Street, which is 400 feet in 8 from the Bay, shows that this is 9 deeply in the flood zone in that 10 area. The next one is the Influence 11 Zone that I was talking about 12 earlier. It shows how quickly 13 whatever happens on that property 14 influences in that certain area. So 15 that is 1-2 years for the most part. 16 So everything at that point 17 percolates into the ground water and 18 makes it way into the bay rapidly. 19 So I think that is about it. I 20 hope that is informative. Thank you. 21 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 22 MS. SABATINO: My name is Linda 23 Sabatino. My husband and I live at 24 27756 Main Road, Orient, New York, 25 which is adjacent to this proposed September 11, 2017 Meeting 54 1 site. We are attending the Southold 2 Town Planning Board meeting tonight 3 to state our opposition to the 4 proposed barn on preserved land 5 adjacent property. We have lived in 6 the adjoining property for over 30 7 years. We have supported local 8 farming efforts during that whole 9 entire time. We are opposing the 10 size of the proposed barn for the 11 following reasons. The proposed barn, 12 is on development rights sold land. 13 Paid for by taxpayers money. This 14 proposal will put a large building on 15 prime agriculture soil. The proposed 16 barn is in addition to the buildings, 17 in which the applicant states will 18 remain on the property. The addition 19 of the barn will increase the 20 building coverage 1,752 square feet 21 to a total of 10, 896 feet. Six times 22 the current amount. Such a large 23 barn disrupts the scenic view shed. 24 One of the reasons the development 25 rights for this property were September 11, 2017 Meeting 55 1 purchased to protect this unique 2 scenic view. The survey shows that 3 there are wetlands on the property 4 and bordering three sides. Such a 5 dramatic increase in livestock 6 farming has the potential to 7 negatively impact Narrow River and 8 adjacent bodies of water. The 9 applicant has stated in news reports 10 that he intends to structure for 11 selling products and holding various 12 events that are not permitted on 13 development rights sold land. For 14 these reasons, we ask the Southold 15 Town Planning Board to not grant this 16 building application until it hs been 17 more thoroughly reviewed and 18 evaluation and it's reviewed by the 19 Land Preservation Committee. Thank 20 you. 21 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 22 MS. SABATINO: I also have a 23 letter from our neighbor who wasn't 24 able to come here today. 25 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: You can just September 11, 2017 Meeting 56 1 submit that to us and we will enter 2 that into the record. 3 MS. SABATINO: She already sent 4 it, but she would like it read. This 5 letter is from Colleen McDonald and 6 Ellen Hook and they live at 27775 7 Main Road, Orient, New York. And 8 again, this is adjacent to the 9 proposed site. We are writing to 10 express our opposition to the 11 proposed 9, 000 square foot barn on 12 Maureen Cullinane former property to 13 house chicken, sheep, goats, supplies 14 and farm equipment. Fresh & Company, 15 the company that owns the property 16 has also stated in a press release 17 dated August 1, 2017 that the 18 building and property will also host 19 events significant in scale, 20 including tourism. Cooking classes, 21 culinary education programs and local 22 food and wine festivals on the 23 location. The Town of Southold paid 24 Maureen $425, 000.00 of taxpayer funds 25 and listed it on the Town's Community September 11, 2017 Meeting 57 1 Preservation project land, as 2 property that should be preserved for 3 its agricultural value. In addition 4 to a scenic from wetlands. When we 5 received the official notice from the 6 Town Planning Board of the 7 application and pieced together the 8 two page map to get a clearer 9 understanding of this size and 10 location of this huge structure, we 11 realized that this was no local 12 ordinary community farm. This is 13 clearly a large scale commercial 14 operation. Apparently the applicant 15 was granted a SEQRA Type II status. 16 This exempts the owner from more 17 detailed environmental review. Did 18 the Town Board know the use and 19 intentions by the owner? You have 20 heard this before. Again, when the 21 application asked whether the 22 property bordered an environmental 23 area, they responded -- the response 24 from the application was, "no. " When 25 asked whether the proposed action September 11, 2017 Meeting 58 1 will result in a substantial increase 2 in traffic, the application said, 3 "no. " Hallock's Bay is a beautiful 4 asset to Southold Town. All of us 5 have enjoyed swimming, shellfishing 6 and hiking there. What the public 7 enjoys could be endangered if this 8 application is approved because the 9 critically sensitive levels of 10 Nitrogen are already measured in 11 Hallock's Bay. Any more Nitrogen 12 that is currently produced could doom 13 the waters to algae and cause the 14 death of ecosystem there. The river 15 feeds right into Hallock's Bay. The 16 wetlands which go directly into 17 Narrow River are actually on the 18 property. The water table is 19 actually so close to this property, 20 and yet the applicant wrote not 21 applicable on the application. USDA 22 Natural Resource Service, RCA states 23 that the animal liter from a typical 24 house of 22, 000 birds contain as much 25 phosphorus and sewage as much as September 11, 2017 Meeting 59 1 community of 6, 000 people. Would the 2 Town allow a huge residential complex 3 housing of 7, 000 people to exist on 4 wetlands on Hallock's Bay? And how 5 much water will a commercial farm of 6 animals require? What happens to the 7 aquifer that supports our homes? Or 8 would the amount of water draw an 9 increase in scale? (Inaudible) . The 10 applicant does not appear to be 11 acting in good faith when the 12 marketing materials say one thing and 13 the application says another. The 14 applicant owns a chain of restaurants 15 in New York City and this is where 16 the marketing will take place as well 17 as locally. Is the Town going to 18 allow a large scale commercial 19 operation in a location that they 20 have spent so money to preserve? 21 "The horse is already out of the 22 barn, " so to speak. At the very 23 least, the SEQRA should be elevated 24 to a Type I, so there could be a more 25 thorough environmental review and September 11, 2017 Meeting 60 1 more thorough disclosure of the 2 potential uses. Therefore we would 3 recommend that the application not 4 be approved. And again, this is 5 from Colleen McDonald and Ellen Hook. 6 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 7 MS. BOSTIC: Mr. Chairman, Members 8 of the Board. Can you hear me? 9 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Yes. 10 MS. BOSTIC: Great. Our home is 11 at 5305 -- my name is Anbriele Floyd 12 Bostic. Our home is at 5305 Narrow 13 River Road. So we will be close 14 neighbors of this proposed livestock 15 operation. I have two young 16 children, who like I do, drink our 17 well water. And like I do, in the 18 summer, swim in Hallock's Bay. 19 Almost every day. So you can imagine 20 how concerned I was when I heard 21 about this proposal. I am relieved 22 to hear and see how much thought 23 you're putting into this proposal. 24 That you have already had concerns 25 and have already listed your September 11, 2017 Meeting 61 1 questions. I am also relieved that 2 so many among us are better public 3 speakers than I am, have already 4 addressed a lot of my concerns. I 5 would like to mention to you that I 6 did start a petition on Friday 7 afternoon out of sort of desperation 8 to do something about this. And I 9 would like to read that to you for 10 the record. I move to deny 11 permission to Tenedios and Fresh & 12 Co, to build a livestock farm on 13 preserved land at 28140 Main Road, 14 Orient. Based on concern for 15 environmental impact for the titled 16 and freshwater wetlands, fish and 17 wildlife habitats, as well as 18 aquifer. Proximity to and inclusion 19 of flood zones, freshwater wetlands 20 and saltwater wetlands makes this 21 property inappropriate for raising 22 livestock. The proposed 9, 000 23 livestock barn for Steve Tenedios and 24 Fresh & Co, should be denied among 25 other reasons because it would September 11, 2017 Meeting 62 1 directly contradict the deeded sale 2 of development rights to the Town of 3 Southold. In that it would detract 4 from or adversely effect the open 5 space and scenic value that is 6 protected by this development rights 7 purchase and easement. I will let 8 you know that when I sent this out 9 Friday afternoon, I was hoping for 50 10 friends to sign. And when I walked 11 in here tonight, we had 699 12 signatures. These are our neighbors. 13 And these are the tourists that come 14 here as well, but these are mostly 15 our neighbors. I would like to bring 16 you this. 17 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Sure. Thank 18 you. 19 MS. WACHSBERGER: Freddy 20 Wachsberger. I live on Orchard 21 Street in Orient. I am going to hand 22 this in. So I am going to skip 23 reading stuff. It's just an 24 application. However, as the 25 applicant has announced his intention September 11, 2017 Meeting 63 1 to hold events on the property, which 2 would be illegal under the terms of 3 the deed, the proposed building is 4 propose and designed for events. The 5 Planning Board should determine that 6 this application be revised or 7 withdrawn. Too often in my 8 experience, applications have been 9 permitted to be pursued for months, 10 even years. That should have been 11 identified at the beginning. The 12 Board should not ignore the published 13 intentions the applicant to hold 14 public events on the property. And 15 should make very clear that such uses 16 are prohibited by the terms of 17 Southold Town's purchase of 18 development rights and that they will 19 not be tolerated. With Orient's 20 single road that are already impacted 21 by ferry traffic, such events would 22 be unattendable. If the applicant 23 will not agree to accept this 24 restriction unconditionally, this 25 application should be withdrawn. September 11, 2017 Meeting 64 1 Orient has some of the richest 2 farmland on Long Island. Even 3 without the proposed events, this 4 applicant suggest a serious change 5 and kind of scale of farming 6 practices traditionally utilized 7 here. The change which potentially 8 threatens the stated purpose of 9 Southold Town's Resolution 208, 10 protection of the environment and 11 scenic vistas. This project should 12 not be permitted to go forward at all 13 unless these questions are answered 14 satisfactorily. 15 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 16 MS. BERRY: My name is Glennis 17 Berry. I am an architect and 18 planner. I live at 24190 Main Road 19 in Orient. And I am here 20 representing the Non-profit Peconic 21 Green Growth. I will try -- there 22 might be a little bit of repetition. 23 But I will skip some sections. The 24 SEQRA classification should be Type I 25 for this proposal due to the September 11, 2017 Meeting 65 1 environment sensitivity of the site 2 and the deed restrictions. While an 3 exception in SEQRA exists for farm 4 practices, the critical nature of the 5 local environment should trump this 6 exception. The proposed uses on this 7 site will have detrimental impacts on 8 local shellfish and fin fish 9 populations. As well as the 10 recreational uses and scenic appeal 11 of Hallock's Bay. This project 12 pitches two historic occupants 13 against each other. Farming versus 14 fishing. This project could kill 15 Hallock's Bay. This project should 16 also ne reviewed for consistency with 17 the Local Waterfront Revitalization 18 Program. Agriculture is not one of 19 the exemptions listed in Section 20 268-3. Surface water quality. Where 21 Narrow River feeds into Hallock's 22 Bay, also known as Long Beach Bay on 23 some of the maps. The waters are 24 uncertified for shellfishing 25 pathogens. Effort should be made to September 11, 2017 Meeting 66 1 improve water quality here. Not 2 further degrade it. Hallock's Bay is 3 also the site of Cornell 4 cooperative's efforts to recede 5 scallops after shellfish decimation 6 due to Brown tides in 1990's. 7 Nutrient loading. Excess Nitrogen 8 causes alga blooms that deplete the 9 oxygen in the water and create 10 toxins. They have caused fish kills 11 and shellfish die-off's. Excess 12 nutrients are also a contributing 13 factor to the local loss of eel 14 egrets, which provides habitat. 15 Along the coastline, a Nitrogen level 16 of 0.445 milligrams of liter is 17 considered the -- the maximum limit 18 for healthy waters. And I've got 19 some illustrations in the letter for 20 you. And it shows that in Hallock's 21 Bay, it's hovering at this. It's the 22 .31 to .45. The only places in the 23 Peconic Estuary that are worse, are 24 on the far western side. Edge of the 25 Peconic Estuary. Only by protecting September 11, 2017 Meeting 67 1 water quality can we ensure a healthy 2 ecosystem. Ellen already talked 3 about the source in this water. The 4 potential Nitrogen loading. This 5 area is allocated in R200 Zoning 6 Category due to the fragility of the 7 environmental conditions. It 8 includes the five acre residential 9 parcel. There are 30 acres of land 10 excluding the 4 .5 on site wetlands. 11 Again, there is a discrepancy between 12 your own website and this 13 application. On their own website it 14 says that there are 4 .5 acres of 15 wetlands. Not the 2 that are on this 16 application. So if this property had 17 been developed under the 200 18 residential zoning, at the maximum 19 six homes would have been allowed. 20 So I took a look at what expected 21 Nitrogen loading could be from the 22 original zoning and from what 23 Maureen had. So what could happen. 24 And my numbers are assumptions 25 because the application doesn't September 11, 2017 Meeting 68 1 include numbers and intensity. So it 2 could be much worse than what I am 3 saying in fact. So if you look at 4 just residential use, you could 5 expect 135 pounds of Nitrogen to come 6 from that development. I assumed 7 from Maureen's operations, 400 8 chickens, five goats, one horse and 9 25 acres of crop, and I came up with 10 956 pounds of Nitrogen per year. And 11 the potential, I assumed 300 12 chickens, 50 goats, 3 pigs, 50 sheep, 13 2 dairy cows and 20 acres of crop, 14 and I came up with 2.760 pounds of 15 Nitrogen per year. And there is no 16 limit to the intensity. So this 17 number could be low. The proposed 18 usage could create as much Nitrogen 19 loading as a population of 306, which 20 is half the population of Orient. If 21 the Nitrogen is not treated, managed 22 properly and/or removed from this 23 site, mitigation is needed. One 24 would need to treat 228 homes with 25 enhanced onsite wastewater systems at September 11, 2017 Meeting 69 1 a cost of 4 1/2 million dollars to 2 reach a Nitrogen load as measured 3 from the original. That is a lot of 4 mitigation that could happen. There 5 are other ways of mitigating 6 agricultural loads, which should be 7 required at the owners expense if 8 this project proceeds. And I have 9 attached Chesapeake Bay watershed. 10 They have done a lot of study on 11 agricultural impacts on the water 12 quality. And they have a long list 13 of action items to mitigate 14 agricultural uses. And I will give 15 you a copy of that. The quantity of 16 water should also be looked at, as 17 well as the quality. And there is 18 studies that are going on right now 19 for Long Island that show that the 20 interface between fresh and saltwater 21 is moving inland and will be further 22 effected by sea level rise. 23 Machinery and fueling. The project 24 indicates that a large section of the 25 barn will hold equipment. Does the September 11, 2017 Meeting 70 1 machinery include vehicles and 2 tractors and the storage of hazardous 3 materials on site should be located 4 and the containment detailed. 5 Machinery for cheese production, 6 which was mentioned somewhere, or 7 other processing, allowable uses 8 should be detailed for land and on 9 top of that, protection against 10 flooding should be part of any plan. 11 Flooding has already been discussed. 12 But they propose a couple of leaching 13 pits to catch storm water on the 14 plan. The storm water drainage 15 system shown requires a minimum of 7 16 feet of depths as a 3 foot clearance 17 is required for the bottom of any 18 kind of leaching apparatus. The 19 structures as proposed are basically 20 injecting runoff directly into the 21 aquifer. we recommend that vegetated 22 (Inaudible) be used instead. Air 23 quality. And I am quoting from an 24 extension document. "Air quality 25 concerns arise from odors, articulate September 11, 2017 Meeting 71 1 matter and pathogens. Manure can 2 result in odor and may react with 3 other compounds in the atmosphere 4 produced in particulate matter, which 5 can effect the environment and public 6 health. There are a variety of other 7 compounds released from manure, such 8 as hydrogen, sulfide, green house 9 gases, methane and nitrous oxide and 10 some volatile organic compounds that 11 can also cause air quality concerns. 12 Particulate matter that arises from 13 dust and reaction from ammonia with 14 other compounds in the atmosphere are 15 also concern. " I will skip the uses. 16 Although while intensity of use has 17 not been regulated, it should be a 18 part of the environmental and quality 19 of life issues evaluated by the 20 Planning Board until the code 21 incorporates such language. Because 22 right now, once you list agriculture, 23 there is no limit. Need for changes 24 to zoning -- sorry. As was discussed 25 in outreach during the development of September 11, 2017 Meeting 72 1 the Town's Master Plan, there was a 2 further defined categorized 3 agriculture as it related to zoning. 4 This should be combined with the 5 nutrient loading plan. For instance, 6 as agriculture is supported, the 7 Nitrogen loading in the area should 8 compensate for the excess, because it 9 will excess. Such as lower densities 10 requiring best management practices 11 or the provision of enhanced 12 treatment of onsite wastewater. 13 Considering locations for 14 environmental sensitivity, such as 15 proximity to surface waters and 16 susceptibility to saltwater intrusion 17 from pumping, we suggest evaluating 18 more restrictive zoning should be 19 applied. Please consider the use of 20 more refined agricultural categories. 21 Such as livestock, nursery stock, 22 food stocks, vineyards and fields and 23 agro-tourism. The Town has done a 24 good job of protecting small 25 businesses from the big stores. It September 11, 2017 Meeting 73 1 needs to do the same with farming. 2 To suggest a moratorium be suggested 3 by the Board, as farms are now 4 changing ownership and we can expect 5 more proposals, such as this one. I 6 have some specific comments on the 7 plan. The scope of the use needs to 8 be further defined. I will skip 9 that. And the plans of the building, 10 I heard that one section is going to 11 be climate controlled and that is 12 where they're listing hay storage. 13 So no stairs. No human bathrooms. 14 Nothing is shown. They should 15 provide sections as well as second 16 floor plans. Also the site 17 evaluation combines the homestead 18 parcel with the protective parcels. 19 It should separate the two. As the 20 development and limitations will 21 vary. We respectfully request that 22 the Board consider the impacts of 23 this project on water quality and 24 quantity thoroughly, as well as uses, 25 traffic and scenic quality. September 11, 2017 Meeting 74 1 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Do you have 2 anything else? 3 MS. BERRY: No. 4 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 5 MS. NOVACK: Hi. Thank you, 6 Mr. Chairman and Members of the 7 Planning Board for hearing us out. 8 My name is Chris Novack. I am a long 9 term, full-time resident of Orient. 10 My property overlooks the farm in 11 question. One of the most critical 12 sites on the North Fork and the lynch 13 pins that becomes Narrow River and 14 flows into Hallock's Bay. Maureen 15 Cullinane worked her heart out and 16 became a real farmer. You became a 17 real pillar of the Orient Community. 18 Her farm, her corner of Narrow River 19 is sacred ground to hundreds of us 20 that live here. Mr. Tenedios, if 21 that is how you pronounce it, showing 22 his colors as a fake farmer. Hiding 23 behind a slick corporate brand Fresh 24 & Co. This farm seems -- looks like 25 nothing more than a P.R by an September 11, 2017 Meeting 75 1 aggressive cynical corporation that 2 shows no intention of respecting 3 community, it's government or its 4 laws. Gentleman of the Planning 5 Board, please tell Mr. Tenedios that 6 we are not fooled. We know what 7 field kitchens are. There restaurant 8 like celebrity event places. We know 9 what a barn can be used for and what 10 it can hide. We know that the cute 11 animals are easily just a ruse. This 12 is how you build a fake brand. But 13 brand trust is a fragile thing. If 14 you lie, if you violate and soil this 15 particular piece of land or soiling 16 our groundwater, wetlands and our 17 bays in Orient Community will hold no 18 problem publishing the truth about 19 Fresh & Co, not just locally but 20 nationally. This application is 21 outrageous and it openly mocks all of 22 us in this room. He mocks every one 23 of us who have worked so hard to 24 build this community and character. 25 He is mocking you the Planning Board, September 11, 2017 Meeting 76 1 the Land Preservation Committee, the 2 Zoning Board, the Trustees, the 3 Supervisor, the Town Board. All the 4 other communities. The DEC, the 5 Department of Health. All of the 6 wonderful ecological and development 7 organizations that are in this room 8 today and the citizens or Orient and 9 Town of Southold, he is mocking the 10 real farmers that have worked that 11 land since the 1700's. And is mocking 12 every one of us who is ever worked 13 down the road, gone to the beach, 14 boated on Hallock's Bay or used the 15 State park. Mr. Wilcenski, Members 16 of the Planning Board, this 17 application as submitted is not 18 appropriate in Orient. If it's not 19 withdrawn, please deny it. To all 20 those who have worked so hard to keep 21 this property in the first place. 22 And always to the legacy of Maureen 23 Cullinane. Thank you. 24 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 25 MR. HOLZAPFEL: My name is John September 11, 2017 Meeting 77 1 Holzapfel. I live at 48 Cardinal 2 Lane in Greenport. And you started 3 the meeting with a number of objects 4 and thoughts about the application in 5 front of us, and what you knew about 6 it. We have heard from everybody at 7 least six or seven times, the similar 8 message. And I think it's obvious to 9 everyone here and everybody on the 10 Board on what is happening. Very 11 specifically, the application has 12 falsehoods on it. There is no doubt 13 about it. You know it. We know it. 14 It has been pointed out to you again 15 and again by both Bob's. And they 16 have made it very clear in the 17 application. And what I am saying 18 now, we can save a lot of time of 19 hearing the same thing again and 20 again if you simply vote right now to 21 deny the application. You have the 22 right to do that. Let me finish. 23 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Please -- 24 everybody has an opportunity to finish 25 tonight. September 11, 2017 Meeting 78 1 MR. HOLZAPFEL: I am not -- my 2 point is, I think you have the right 3 and you can deny the application now 4 and it might be the best thing. Let 5 him go back. Let him go back and 6 answer all of our questions. He 7 knows the questions to put in front 8 of him. He knows now. His lawyer 9 knows now the questions that are out 10 there for the application. It's not 11 going to make any difference for 12 three more hours if we stay here and 13 say the same thing. So again, I am 14 just asking you to consider ending 15 there application right now. 16 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 17 MR. LESLIE: My name is Richard 18 Leslie. Just give me a second here. 19 I live in Orient my entire 78 years. 20 My family settled in Oysterpond 300 21 years ago. My family are Latham, 22 King's, Young's, Terry's and 23 Tuttle's. Daniel Latham is my first 24 cousin. Our families have been 25 excellent stewards of this prestige September 11, 2017 Meeting 79 1 community all of this time. My great 2 grandfather Charlie Young, dug all 3 the mosquito ditches in Broad Meadow 4 in the 20's and 30's. My uncle Ed 5 Latham put up the dikes around Broad 6 Meadow's Narrow River and Hallock's 7 Bay after the second devastating 8 hurricane in five years inundated our 9 Town with saltwater. He did this in 10 '46 and '47.• These ditches and dikes 11 protect us all till this day. And 12 they were done with out any Federal, 13 State, County or Town funding. It 14 put our family in debt for a decade. 15 My uncle Ed Latham, now deceased, a 16 lifelong farmer purchased Broad 17 Meadow from the Heath Family Estate 18 in the early 70's with the sole idea 19 of protecting it forever. The State 20 subsequently took it by eminent 21 domain with the idea of protecting it 22 in perpetuity. Broad Meadow covers 23 both sides of Narrow River Road. It 24 extends from the Latham Farm's road 25 to Robin Road and covers most of the September 11, 2017 Meeting 80 1 parcel that is discussion for the 2 development. It is the nursery that 3 provides for the beginning of life to 4 Narrow River and fends to Hallock's 5 Bay and beyond. We knew it's value 6 and important 300 years ago. We knew 7 it when I was a kid. And we know it 8 now. Without this Salt Meadow, our 9 way of life here will certainly end. 10 You will never again witness the 11 merry of sea life that has sustained 12 us. Soft shell clams. Pretty much 13 gone. Scallops, mostly gone. This 14 is the nursery for bluefish and bass 15 and the best damn clamming grounds in 16 all of Southold Town. And the 17 majestic osprey who migrate from 18 Costa Rica, Guatemala and Honduras 19 will be gone. They will have nothing 20 more to eat. The proposed 21 development and let's call it what it 22 is, development must be stopped in 23 its tracks. And stopped now. Please 24 don't go looking for ways to modify 25 it or downsize it, just say, no. And September 11, 2017 Meeting 81 1 you must mean it and be prepared to 2 defend that decision in Court. The 3 developer has already flaunted many 4 rules you're supposed to enforce. 5 Since this application has been 6 pending, the applicant has moved in 7 nine small buildings. Last week they 8 moved in tents. The last one has 9 windows. Now I know goats are very 10 intelligent, but I never knew they 11 liked to live in buildings with 12 windows. Of course we always knew 13 that goat keepers do need windows in 14 their living quarters. All these 15 buildings are very carefully under 16 100 square feet in order to not 17 violate Town Code. Brush has been 18 cleared within the last 20 days in 19 violation of your rules. Fences have 20 been erected and spy cameras have 21 been installed. All of this while 22 your signs are posted explicitly 23 barring such activity. What is this 24 building for? What is to be housed 25 in it? What is to be stored in it? September 11, 2017 Meeting 82 1 Many of us, as you have heard here 2 tonight, believe this building to be 3 used for agra-entertainment. Fresh & 4 Co has promoted until this day that 5 they plan to have a cookout and 6 bonfire on this October 7th. We have 7 been told by Town officials that this 8 will not be permitted, yet we have no 9 indication that the applicant has 10 displayed that they have canceled 11 this event. In fact, it's actively 12 being promoted on the world wide web. 13 Fresh & Co has made no bones about 14 their intent to hold cooking classes, 15 wine and cheese festivals and other 16 public events on this protected land. 17 This is a travesty. We in Orient 18 will not stand by and let this 19 destruction of our wetlands happen. 20 We will fight it within our legal 21 power. We don't want to fight the 22 Town as well. We want you to stand 23 up and simply say, no. Environmental 24 counsel is not in favor of this, nor 25 is the group for the east end. And September 11, 2017 Meeting 83 1 just as you have heard earlier, a 2 petition circulated to say, no. 3 Which in just these few days has 4 generated 699 -- and I am sure it's 5 now 700 signatures. This means that 6 roughly 85% of Orienter's are opposed 7 to this development. We have never 8 been more unified. Please listen to 9 your public and listen to your 10 constituents and just say, no. Thank 11 you very much. 12 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 13 Jay? 14 MR. BREDEMEYER: Good evening. My 15 name John Bredemeyer. I live at 425 16 Old Farm Road. I have the distinct 17 pleasure of being a Town Trustee for 18 18 years. I am past/present and the 19 current Vice President, Chairman, 20 Mike Domino asked that I speak to you 21 briefly. I am not really here in the 22 capacity as a Trustee. But I wanted 23 to just give you some background 24 information. And since everything 25 that has been said this evening, I September 11, 2017 Meeting 84 1 couldn't agreed more with. I just 2 wanted to give you a little bit 3 information on the shellfishing 4 status of Narrow River itself. I 5 chair the Town's Shellfish advisor 6 Committee, and as its Chair, I also 7 have the pleasure of working with a 8 bunch of retired professionals. We 9 have two engineers on that committee. 10 We have a retired engineer that also 11 monitors the meeting. We have two 12 agriculturists. We have myself in 13 public and environmental health. And 14 we have a retiree from the general 15 County office and we have a retired 16 Colon/Rectal Surgeon. Now I kid 17 these people, they can run a small 18 country, and it's true. They could. 19 We have been working hard. We have 20 been out sampling the waters. Right 21 now, pending the DEC, potentials 22 change in the status of Narrow River 23 because people are doing the right 24 thing. They're picking up after 25 their pets. They're monitoring their September 11, 2017 Meeting 85 1 land use practices, agriculture's 2 change in town. People have been 3 putting in more buffers. We have 4 been working hard. So we want you to 5 know that this sort of an application 6 teeters us and puts us on the bring 7 to be lost in the very small days 8 that we make acre by acre. The other 9 thing that I wanted to share with you 10 is an experience that I had working 11 with the Health Department where we 12 were involved with the Peconic 13 Estuary Program. When the toxic 14 pesticide had been outlawed, I was 15 approached by the water quality 16 people to -- they were concerned that 17 they heard that this particular 18 agriculture -- which was so damaging 19 to the drinking water supply might be 20 getting into our bays and estuary' s. 21 And they sought my advice as to where 22 they could possibly find it in 23 surface waters. To give you an idea 24 about the extreme proximity of the 25 link of this property and Hallock's September 11, 2017 Meeting 86 1 Bay, the stream on the property is 2 one of the only sites on Suffolk 3 County where we pulled pesticides. 4 So you rest assured that anything you 5 do on the land is going in the water. 6 I know you have the Board's comments. 7 The Trustee's will obviously work 8 with the Planning Board and 9 appreciate this opportunity to speak 10 with you. 11 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you, 12 Jim. 13 MR. FAGAN: Hi, my name is Louis 14 Fagan and I live on 1515 Plum Island 15 Lane in Orient. And I just have a 16 comment to make. Do you realize that 17 there is already livestock on the 18 south end of that farm and its 19 wetlands? That's my question. 20 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Yes, we're aware 21 of that. 22 MR. FAGAN: How did they get away 23 with it? That is my question. 24 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: We are going 25 through the site plan process now. September 11, 2017 Meeting 87 1 MR. FAGAN: Thank you. 2 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Anybody else? 3 MS. WHITSIT: My name is Diana 4 Whitsit. I live at 36505 Main Road. 5 I am owner of farmland that goes from 6 the sound to the bay. And we have 7 been farming that land for 300 years. 8 I fully agree with Bob from the group 9 on the east end, that this proposal 10 is not made for this barn and other 11 factors regarding the barn and around 12 the barn is disingenuous at best. 13 And should not be allowed as it 14 stands. I am here also to speak on 15 behalf of barns and pigs. We are 16 agricultural town. I think that the 17 animals there now are there as of 18 right. And I think that the number 19 of animals that would be allowed on 20 the parcel is governed by existing 21 laws. I mean, I would love nothing 22 better that on my way home to see a 23 couple of goats and a couple of 24 pigs. But if it comes to the Town 25 allowing agra-entertainment, that September 11, 2017 Meeting 88 1 would be awful. I don't think that 2 is a problem because it's not allowed 3 now. It's in the statute. You can't 4 have weddings. You can't have 5 burning couches. It's not allowed. 6 So I don't see that there is a 7 problem. And there is one other 8 issue that everybody has been 9 mentioning and I don't understand. 10 The worry of human waste. I mean, 11 they have a port-a-potty there. I 12 don't understand how that could 13 possibly be an issue. Having said 14 that, I would love to see a barn 15 anywhere on the Main Road, but I 16 would not like to see parties and 17 bonfires and whatever is -- I think 18 is intending to use to the place for. 19 So in that respect, I am against the 20 proposal. Thank you. 21 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 22 Anybody else like to speak? Go 23 ahead. 24 MS. O'MALLEY: I will be very 25 quick. Allison O'Malley, Cutchogue. September 11, 2017 Meeting 89 1 I would just like to say to all of 2 you of the Board, thank you again. 3 And if anyone out of you or anyone in 4 the audience that still might have 5 any question that this might be a 6 good idea and not to just deny it 7 now, I would offer to privately take 8 you on a kayak tour on Hallock's Bay 9 and Narrow River. And if you can 10 watch the Great White Haring, the 11 osprey and (Inaudible) drying their 12 wings in the morning and still have 13 any thought that this could 14 potentially be good idea, I will 15 gladly pack up my business of 28 16 years and put a For Sale sign on my 17 house and move out of this Town while 18 it's being sold to the devil. 19 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 20 MR. WEBB: Good evening, Mr. 21 Chairman. Members of the Board. My 22 name is Ted Webb, and I live at 420 23 Village Lane in Orient. And first of 24 all, I would like to say that I would 25 like to compliment the owner of this September 11, 2017 Meeting 90 1 property for doing more to bring our 2 community together than any one of us 3 have been able to do. I would also 4 like to share with you that my 5 colleague, Mr. Leslie over here. I 6 have spent a good time of my 78 7 years on this earth and in this 8 beautiful community called Orient. I 9 have a lot of emotional ties to it. 10 Along with my dad and grandfather 11 going back several generations. If 12 Hallock's Bay was a human being, it 13 would be in the intensive care unit 14 at Eastern Long Island Hospital right 15 now. And I say that because I have 16 witnessed changes of Hallock's Bay 17 over many years. Some of my favorite 18 memories were getting in a little row 19 boat with my grandfather at the 20 Dwarf. That thing was like a two 21 hour trip. We would have to take 22 lunch with us. And we would go 23 clamming and scalloping in season. I 24 can tell you first hand, there are no 25 more blue craw crabs. There are no September 11, 2017 Meeting 91 1 more soft shell clams. A lot of the 2 things as we knew as youngsters are 3 gone. I hope not forever. You have 4 listened to a lot of expertise 5 tonight. I don't have any of that. 6 I do have an emotional reaction to 7 all of this and we simply cannot 8 allow this project to go forward. 9 Than you very much. 10 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 11 GRANT: Grant (Inaudible) 32275 12 Main Road, Orient. What I would ask 13 is would you allow this in your 14 backyard? I don't feel like going 15 out in my backyard and smelling what 16 is going to be waste, depending on 17 which way the wind is blowing. It's 18 going to be a nuisance. Noise. You 19 can see what is going to happen with 20 this. That is all I have to say 21 about it. 22 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Excuse me, sir. 23 Can you please write your name for the 24 record. 25 MR. CAUFIELD: Hi. My name is September 11, 2017 Meeting 92 1 Eddie Caufield. I live on 24260 Main 2 Road in Orient. And I would like to 3 speak briefly about Hallock's Bay. I 4 have a background on (Inaudible) . 5 And I have been on Hallock's Bay for 6 about 45 years. I swim in. I go 7 across it. And I have watched, as 8 Ted Webb has said, the decline of the 9 bay. The bay right now is intensive 10 care. It's on it's knees. It has a 11 chance of coming back. There are 12 (Inaudible) which is the bay scallop. 13 Slowly coming back. Very slowly. 14 And it's not that the species itself 15 has a hard time, it's that the 16 ecosystem that this species lives in, 17 has a hard time. That is directly 18 caused by nitrates. From people, 19 from fertilizer, etcetera. If you 20 take an aerial view of Hallock's Bay, 21 it goes up the estuary and across the 22 dike from Latham's Farm, through 23 Broad Meadow and a finger directly 24 into this property. Now, you look at 25 the problems when we have in the September 11, 2017 Meeting 93 1 Chesapeake. Of course there is 2 overbuilding, etcetera. There is 3 chicken farms and things like that. 4 That runoff is nitrates. If 5 Hallock's Bay is on its knees and 6 trust me, it's on its knees, this 7 will kill it. That's it. Just 8 sign its death warrant now. So 9 that's it. 10 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 11 MS. MARLIN: Hi. I am Debra 12 Marlin from Browns Hill. And we are 13 really very well represented here. A 14 number of people who have already 15 spoken and a number od things that 16 have been said have been said again 17 and again. I do want to return to a 18 couple of things that have gotten 19 overlooked because there are so many 20 important parts of what this 21 application is all about. So I am 22 just going to read an except from 23 Barry Bergald's (phonetic) letter to 24 me -- to you. You have it in your 25 records already. Traffic is a vital September 11, 2017 Meeting 94 1 concern. As it's already very 2 difficult for local residents to turn 3 off the access roads of the north 4 side of Main Road. Notably Browns 5 Hill Road. And off Narrow River 6 Road, due to the ever increasing 7 traffic use of the Cross Island 8 Ferry. Not only are the entertaining 9 uses in violation of the restrictions 10 of the property, they create 11 potential traffic hazards. One if 12 only to look at the imagined possible 13 situation with the Lavender Farm in 14 East Marion to see what would be 15 instore. There are curbs on Main 16 Road on both sides that compromise 17 the visibility for traffic. Events 18 that involve music or sound of any 19 kind will violate the peace of this 20 neighborhood and recreation area. 21 This has already been experienced 22 when a local property was used for a 23 wedding event recently. I am sorry 24 that I am unable to attend the 25 meeting in person to vigorously urge September 11, 2017 Meeting 95 1 you to respect the letter of 2 restrictions on this property. And 3 to give priority to the voices and 4 views of your constituents and 5 taxpayers. Now I am going to read a 6 very short letter of mine. Fresh & 7 Company proposed use of land on 8 Narrow River Road is the very 9 definition of commercial use. The 10 development rights were sold to the 11 Town years ago for a hefty sum and 12 now remain in place for perpetuity. 13 Just because Mr. Tenedios has 14 overlooked the development 15 restrictions on his land, does not 16 mean that Southold Town should as 17 well. Furthermore, I urge you to 18 look at the lawsuits that I have 19 heard of seeing the (Inaudible) 20 printout in your folders. Then 21 consider if this company should be 22 entrusted with the health and 23 wellbeing of our delicate ecosystem, 24 our wetlands, our vistas, our 25 tranquility, our fresh air and our September 11, 2017 Meeting 96 1 values. Or are they bringing the 2 very thing that from the city. 3 Does this kind of development have a 4 place in our farming village? Our 5 hamlet? Thank you. 6 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Thank you. 7 Again, I just want to reiterate. I 8 am going to ask for a motion to adjourn 9 this meeting until it's going -- not for 10 a specific time. Whenever we get the 11 information that we need to come back. 12 And everybody will be noticed and will be 13 made sure that you're aware of the next 14 public hearing. So yes -- go ahead. 15 MALE SPEAKER: Quick question, 16 does that mean it's going to come 17 back as a Type II action or are you 18 changing -- 19 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Right now, I 20 can't answer any of those questions. 21 Right now, all I am saying is that we 22 heard you loud and clear. We got a lot 23 of information to gather. A lot of 24 information that we need to get. There 25 is no telling which direction this is September 11, 2017 Meeting 97 1 going to go, but I am just telling you 2 that we hear you. And that all of 3 your comments and concerns will be 4 addressed. 5 MALE SPEAKER: -- the bonfire and 6 the cookout? 7 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: We already have 8 the code enforcement aware of that. If 9 not, we will -- 10 MALE SPEAKER: -- burning couch 11 this weekend? 12 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: I will ask 13 counsel -- counsel says that they're 14 investigated both already. They are 15 well aware of those dates. 16 Sorry. You need to go to the 17 microphone to talk because it's being 18 recorded to make sure we get 19 everything -- 20 FEMALE SPEAKER: How will the 21 community be aware of what you decide 22 and what you decided you're going to 23 do? 24 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Like I said, 25 we're adjourning this. There will be September 11, 2017 Meeting 98 1 another public forum like this for you to 2 come back after we get a lot more 3 information. We just don't have a lot of 4 information. And we will be going back 5 to the owner and the applicant to get 6 more information. With that, taking all 7 of your concerns. We have to go through 8 a process. 9 MALE SPEAKER: Has any of the code 10 enforcement actually been out to the 11 site? They have moved the goat pens 12 back to the leeward side of the 13 wetlands already? I don't see nay 14 permits on the fence or anywhere over 15 there. 16 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Okay. I will 17 make sure that Town counsel speaks to 18 code enforcement tomorrow. 19 MR. DUFFY: We were out there to 20 make sure that the signs had been 21 taken down. I don't know if that 22 were before -- 23 MALE SPEAKER: I just rode by 24 there this weekend and they are all 25 back by the back corner and up September 11, 2017 Meeting 99 1 against the wetlands. And I don't 2 see any barriers. I don't even know 3 what they're doing with the feces as 4 it is. 5 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: We will make 6 sure. And I will also make sure that 7 Planning sends a memo -- we will send it 8 to Town Counsel and they will get code 9 enforcement out there. 10 Please state your name, please? 11 MS. BOSTIC: Anbriele Bostic is 12 there a plan? I noticed on their 13 site plan, the wetlands delineation 14 is from 2001. Is part of the plan 15 going to be to revisit that 16 delineation. 17 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: We are going to 18 look at everything. 19 MS. BOSTIC: And second question 20 since it didn't come up. Has anyone 21 -- will you be asking them if they 22 plan to apply for a slaughter permit? 23 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: That's a good 24 question. That will go into the record 25 and we will address that. September 11, 2017 Meeting 100 1 MS. BOSTIC: Thank you. 2 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Does anybody 3 have anything else? If not, thank you 4 all for your patience and again, you 5 will all be notified through the channels 6 when we re-adjourn the meeting. Thank 7 you very much. 8 MEMBER RICH: Make a motion to 9 adjourn this meeting. 10 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Motion made by 11 Jim. 12 MEMBER SIDOR: Second. 13 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Seconded by 14 Martin. 15 Any discussion? 16 (No Response. ) 17 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: All in favor? 18 MEMBER RICH: Aye. 19 MEMBER SIDOR: Aye. 20 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Aye. 21 Opposed? 22 (No Response. ) 23 CHAIRMAN WILCENSKI: Motion 24 carries. 25 (Meeting Concluded. ) September 11, 2017 Meeting 101 1 2 C E R T I F I C A T I O N 3 4 5 6 I, Jessica DiLallo, certify that the 7 foregoing transcript of audio recorded 8 Meeting/Public Hearings was prepared 9 using required electronic transcription 10 equipment and is a true and accurate 11 record of the meeting. 12 13 14 Signature: 15 Jessica DiLallo 16 RECEIVE® � kes 0-3:30 17 OCT 2 4 2017 18 Date: September 25, 2017 �• ���7.tJU�L2 So hold Town Cierk 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q�KUV��,• —_—� 25