Full Transcript

Thank you. [transcription gap] Would anybody like to speak?

Charles Cuddy, I represent the applicant. Mr. McCarthy is here with me and also Tom Wolpert. This is a site that has public water. As Heather just indicated, the zoning board in September granted our variants. For these lots, the lots really are already recognized by the town. They each have a number. One is on Soundshore Road. The other is on Bayberry Lane. The Soundshore one is the one that's vacant at this point. Mr. McCarthy wants to build for one of his sons on that lot. I think it's appropriate. We've gone through this before, but I think it's an appropriate division, and I would ask the board to approve it. Thank you. [transcription gap]

Do we have anybody on Zoom? No hands up. No hands up. No other speakers? All right. Can we get somebody to close the public hearing? I'll move we close the public hearing. Second. Moved and second. May we have a vote? Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. Nenero? Aye. Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote aye. The motion carries. On to public hearing number two. Riverhead Mazda with Matt Chardon. Good evening, Matt.

Good evening. All right. For the record, Matt Charr is Senior Planner for the Town of Riverhead. I will read the public hearing notice into the record and then turn things over to the applicant. Please take notice that a public hearing will be held before the Planning Board of the Town of Riverhead at Riverhead Town Hall for West 2nd Street, Riverhead, New York, Thursday, the 7th day of November 2024 at 6 o'clock p.m. To consider the site plan application entitled Riverhead Mazda, which proposes to construct a 21,914-square-foot gross floor area car dealership with service area, including off-street parking, landscaping, on-site drainage, and other related site improvements. Within an approximately 10.59-acre property currently improved with 2%. Two buildings dedicated to automobile sales and with vehicle storage in the rear of the property within the Business Center, B.C. Zoning Use District situate at 1423 Old Country Road, Riverhead. More particularly, identified as Suffolk County Tax Map Numbers 600-108-2-3.3 and 17.1. The applicant's representative to go through the site plan with you guys, which is up on the screen. Thank you, Matt. Yep.

Good evening. Dan Peferero with Key Civil Engineering, 664 Blue Point Road, Holtzville. The subject parcel is currently home to the existing Ford and GMC dealerships. Our proposal involves constructing a new approximately 22,000-square-foot Mazda dealership, which is situated primarily behind the GMC building. In addition to the new dealership, we're planning a reconfiguration of the existing parking lot to improve traffic flow and define the parking areas better than the existing conditions for each of the three buildings. As part of the redesign, we're incorporating several landscape islands in front of the Mazda building and between the two existing buildings that more clearly define the way that traffic is supposed to flow in those areas and also to provide some opportunity to landscape and beautify the site. The new development will have less impervious coverage than the existing site layout, which will result in less stormwater runoff. The area in front of the GMC and Ford dealerships will largely remain unchanged with a few key improvements. These include the installation of landscaping along Old Country Road, the formalization of the existing layout in front of the Ford dealership through the use of striping, and the creation of a hardscape area beside the GMC building. These modifications will help create a more organized and clearly defined circulation path for vehicular traffic. The proposed layout complies with town requirements for yard setbacks, landscaping, parking, screening, and other applicable standards with no variances. 205 parking stalls are required where 205 parking stalls are provided. A maximum of 75% of the site can be in imperviousness. We're proposing 53%. A new 10-foot landscape buffer is proposed adjacent and west of the proposed Mazda building. And new ADA-compliant parking stalls are being provided for all three buildings. Additionally, the existing trash enclosure is going to be removed and relocated to a new, more appropriate location behind the Ford building. And for safety and visibility, new dark-sky-compliant LED lighting. The new LED lighting will be proposed in the area of the Mazda building at 16-foot mounting height. In summary, the development will improve both functionality and appearance of the site, reduce impervious surfaces, and comply with all zoning and landscaping regulations. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them. Okay, thank you, Dan. Anybody from the audience would like to comment? Dan, just a couple. The back area, are you going to keep as the stone parking, not to be blacktopped? Correct. There is a portion behind the Mazda building that we're proposing to asphalt, but for the most part, that rear area will remain existing. One other question. When you get car deliveries, is there any way you can make sure that the trucks go out the rear entrance so they can catch the light on Pulaski? Tom, it's a public hearing. You have to come up, state your name, and then speak into the mic, please. Tom Williams from Riverhead Mazda. We have truck drivers change all the time, so we do educate them every time they come. They pull in off of 58. We leave plenty of access to them to get through the property, and we instruct them that they can exit out the back, make a right, and come out to the light up on 58. So, you know, do we get some that go the wrong way or try them back out, and we stop them when we see them? They park in 58. We tell them you can't park there, but, you know, they just—it's not like the old days where Ford and GM and Mazda contracted with a major car carrier to bring the cars out. Now they're just all, who shows up? Why? You never have to instruct them. I mean, it shouldn't even be on a road. But, yes, we do instruct them to go out the back. It would just be so much easier going out the back. Yes, and the way it's designed and laid out, it doesn't give them really room to turn around, so they're going to have to go to the back to a staging area, and it's going to line them right up to exit onto Pulaski Street. Okay. Okay, thank you. Very good. Good. Any other questions? Do we have any Zoomers? No one with their hand raised. Okay, board members? Good. Good. Not at this time. Somebody wants to close it. I'll move we close the public hearing for Riverhead Mazda, so moved. Second. Moved and second. May we have a vote, please? Mr. Zelnicki? Yes. Mr. Hogan? Yes. Mr. Nenaro? Aye. Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote aye. The motion carries. Moving on to item number three for public hearing, Carson Woods Major Subdivision with Greg Berman. Greg Berman.

Thank you. Thank you for the record. Greg Bergman, Senior Planner with the Riverhead Planning Department. And I did receive the affidavit of posting and mailings as required by the subdivision hearing. This is a public hearing on a eight-lot major subdivision called Carson Woods Major Subdivision. It is a 19.95-acre parcel, which is located in the middle of the river. It is located in the middle of the river. It is located at both the terminus of Zimacki Lane and Fox Lane. It is located within the Agricultural Protection Zone, or the APZ Zoning Use District. As the board will recall, just a brief history on the application. By Resolution 23-095, dated November 2, 2023, the board approved an as-of-right nine-lot yield map. At that same meeting, by Resolution 23-096, the board approved an eight-lot sketch plan, which was compliant with the Long Island. Workforce Housing Act. By Resolution 24-044, dated June 14, 2024, the board classified the application as an unlisted action pursuant to SECRA and initiated a coordinated review with involved agencies. By Resolution 24-074, dated October 3, 2024, the board assumed lead agency and issued a negative declaration. And by Resolution 24-075, dated October 3, we scheduled this public hearing. The head of head of head of head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head about 64.1% of the parcel being preserved. We received reports from the Riverhead Water District identifying what will require to serve the project with potable water. We received comments from the New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation. They issued a no effect finding stating that no archaeological or historic resources would be impacted by the proposed development. It was considered a matter for local determination by the Suffolk County Planning Commission and otherwise fully complies with all the regulations of the APZ zoning district and the cluster regulations of the Town Code. Does the latest rendition include the 50-foot buffer on the eastern portion? Yes it does. If you'll see on the map that it's located on the top portion of that picture, that is the eastern portion of the property. Bless you. And that is a 50-foot buffer which will preserve that existing tree line as you're coming west on Main Road. You will still see that buffer of trees. That's the subdivision application in a nutshell. We do have the attorney for the applicant Martin Finnegan here if he wants to add anything. If the board has any questions I'm here otherwise we can open it up for the public comment. There was a question I think about fencing on the properties. So fencing this is something that we've sort of dealt with a couple of times through cluster subdivision. Obviously when we get to any any types of approvals they would have to file covenants on that open space. It would be my recommendation that no structures, fencing, etc. be placed in that open space. And we did something similar with the villas at Roanoke. We required fencing to be installed within you know on the individual residential lots to sort of prevent that gradual encroachment where someone just goes and clears a couple of trees and eventually there's no buffer left. So that would be a recommendation that I would absolutely you know continue through with this. Just think it's good planning practice. Beyond that if there's any questions the board may have or if we'd like to open it up to the public. Anybody from the audience like to speak? Good evening. Martin Finnegan 13250 Main Road, Mattatuck for the applicant Crossroads Atlantic. Greg stole a lot of my thunder there so I'm not going to belabor the point. I just wanted to first mention that I'm joined this evening by the project engineers from BBV and they're available to answer any questions the board may have. You know this is a very straightforward eight lot subdivision. As you pointed out it will be buffered from the eastern end to preserve that scenic vista coming down the main road and protect the existing agricultural operation there. The vast majority of the property as Greg pointed out will remain as open space per code and it is really tightly designed just as a sort of a seamless extension of Fox Lane. As noted, there was a negative declaration, which is a finding by the board that they're not expected to result, the project's not going to result in any negative environmental impacts. We did receive comments from the town engineer just today. We've, as Greg noted, have prior comments from the water district, and I think we're waiting for a few more comments from the fire marshal and fire district, however the applicant is prepared to address those comments and make any required changes to satisfy the town engineer moving forward, obviously subject to any additional comments we might get this evening. Thank you. Sure.

Hello, my name is Scott Gammon. I own the orchard to the west of the development, and this is my first time seeing the map. You said about the buffer to the east. There's no buffer to the west between my property. I spray late at night, early in the morning, and I'm concerned that it's going to really affect the neighbors. It might be some hostility or it might make my job more difficult. And I was curious. I was told a while back that there had any existing farm operation that has to be some kind of buffer between, I don't know if that's true or not, a buffer, a natural buffer left between the development and the existing agriculture. I'm not quite sure, but I've. So there's no code requirement for a buffer between the agricultural operation and the residential operation. It's something that the board has done in other subdivisions. Because it's located within proximity to an active agricultural operation, there will need to be specific notations on the map regarding right to farm practices, and those will also have to be recorded in deed restrictions on the property, basically giving any property owner, who purchased one of these purchases, one of the lots of their within proximity to Greg. I'm sorry, it's public here. We do need you up there. I'm sorry. Yeah, I kind of forgot what I said from the beginning there. But so no, there is no code requirement for a vegetative buffer between an agricultural operation and a residential use. There are requirements in the town code. I believe it's chapter two or one section four, if I'm not mistaken. It requires specific notations to be put on a subdivision map, giving notice that any. Property owner is within a certain distance of an active agricultural operation, and there can be noise, odors, dust, et cetera. And there will also be as a requirement of the town code, they have to file deed restrictions on those properties, basically giving any prop any potential purchaser again, putting them on notice that they are within proximity to an active agricultural operation. That being said, I think if the board wants to consider some type of buffer, it would probably be good practice. Um, you know, if they want to put a 25 buff, 25 foot buffer on that Western property, um, that might be reasonable. I think they still have pretty nice size building envelopes on the property. Um, but I mean, that's something we can discuss as we get towards approvals. Greg, I kinda, I kinda agree with that. Uh, being a local farm, there are sometimes problems with spray, spray materials and everything else. Uh, a 25 foot buffer would not be bad. Um, it's, that's, excuse me, there's other neighbors involved too, that if you could just isolate it a little bit, everybody might be able to like, you know, change is difficult for everybody and I understand progress is progress. You can't stop it, but if it could mitigate the effect on other people's property, I think it would be a good thing. Even if they squished it and made them wider, I don't know. I don't know. I'm not a developer. And the thing is it's a wooded area anyway, so it's just all it does require is not taking down 20 leave the existing vegetation somewhere just for a little space. Make everybody happy. Them and me. And I don't know what you think about that. Just, yeah, I like it. It's only public hearing now and we're taking input input from people and I think you got a good idea. They appreciate it. Thank you so much. Sure.

My name is Larry Kaiser. I live on 32 Zimacki Lane, Jamesport. Um, my eyes aren't what they used to be. Is there any way we could zoom in on the map because it's the first time I've ever seen a tree? Um, I'm not sure if you can see it. [transcription gap] ever seen this plot layout or may I come to the table like my question it directly relates to any buffer on the south side of the development and where the stormwater relocation basements you can talk into the mic there you can talk into that mic recharge area okay so this is Fox Lane coming on slain and this is where's Matthews right here correct all right what's the approximate okay I see it right here twenty eight thousand square foot lot size thirty thousand my biggest concern you have to speak at the microphone sir sorry just trying to expedite time my biggest concern is that there be something in play for perpetuity like was brought up mentioned before that the homeowners who purchased the properties two three five years later decide they want a little bit more open space I've been a contractor in this town for 30 some odd years I've seen it happened I've worked with the DEC because people have encroached on DEC lands so I think it's very important that the town adhere to this practice of putting in the deed these covenants and restrictions agreed thank you thank you and Larry I think also where you see the the catch basin I believe Greg you do they are treed also right there are screening requirements for you know in inside defense Larry that's gonna be yeah so in the town of Riverhead road and drainage standards there are planting requirements and screening requirements for town recharge basins and other things that are going to be in the town and that's what we're going to talk about in a little bit thank you I'm good thank you okay thank you thanks anybody else would like to speak you have to ask at the microphone it's a public hearing take your time good evening I'm here I'm just uh I've been here four years I'm from Queens so you still have to give your name and address yeah I'm on 61 Fox Lane I'm on the !

air and you know they want to do what they want to do I don't think that's fair what do you think well they do have property rights I understand but you take the mic you take the mic mic how would I say you're taking you're taking my needs on no I mean I can I can address your like what I mean first of all you would never we would never nobody had notices and what's what was going on oh this this thing's been in the process for a while but I think it's been in the process for a while but I think it's been in the process for a while for years I mean but don't the homeowners supposed to get something this is a public hearing you're here did you get notice of this here this for today but the other ones we never got notice you said there was other meetings there was also other meetings there that were taking place that passed this than that yeah but we weren't know you know we had no notices of that you're you're here didn't you head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head I come from the city to come to the country. You know what I mean? I know exactly what you mean. I just had a subdivision approved in my backyard where all the wild dinos are. So I get it. But these people own property. They pay taxes. They put proposals that do meet the code. We just try to make them better. Make them function better. Make the site plans better. But people do have property rights. But the street is going to have enough room for the traffic to go in and out? You mentioned a couple of things. I did receive some correspondence this morning and last week from neighboring residences on Fox Lane. So I went and pulled the subdivision file for the Manor Lane Estates situated at Jamesport which is the subdivision that was approved for the Fox Lane subdivision. That application was filed. It was approved by the Planning Board I believe in 1989 and then filed with the Suffolk County Clerk in November. November of 1990. That map at that time, both the final plat and the road and drainage plans call that a temporary cul-de-sac. And the road and drainage plan includes a note that the temporary cul-de-sac is to be removed when parcel to the east is subdivided and street is put through. So through the planning process, there was always contemplated, I mean going back now 34 years, there was a future subdivision. The Planning Board at the time realized that there was subdivision. There was a future subdivision. There was a future subdivision. There was a future subdivision. There was a future subdivision. There was a subdivision potential. Fox Lane is designed as a town roadway. It meets fully meets the requirements for road standards for a subdivision. And when we review subdivisions, we create logical extensions for future subdivisions. So that's exactly what happened in this case. I am understanding that people had the benefit of living on a dead end street. Again, we're talking about eight single family residences. We're not creating a main thoroughfare. It does not have any other connection to any major, you know, roadway where the people are going to be using this to kind of cut through traffic. The proposed development would basically be commensurate. I believe there's 10 houses on Fox Lane. There's only eight on here. So there would be less traffic generated from those new eight houses than there would be from the existing residences. But again, there was when we talk about planning and future planning, there was a logical extension. So Fox Lane was determined even 34 years ago that this would be the extension and would serve the future subdivision. I would like to know how big is this how big is this street, the actual street that we have now. I believe it's 28 feet. 28. I heard by law, it's supposed to be 55. The right of way is 55 feet. No, it's not supposed to be 55. So you two cars, two cars would be, would be clear, would be... could be available it'd be enough all right and like I said I don't know the laws so that's you know we did here tonight we're gonna talk about buffers and stuff so I guess it but you know you already make it the whole point is you know I bought this house I paid money for this house you know I came here to have a better life for my kids and my grandchildren now you know when I tell people it's a dead-end street beautiful now you know we're not gonna have that no more the kids got to stay in the property which is it is a town road though sir and you know understand what you're saying but the the people that own the property do have the right to subdivide I know and trust me they're gonna do a nice job these homes they're gonna be large home so no idea that's that's not that's not our purview yeah thank you anyway thank you anybody else

hi my name is Courtney Furland I live at 74 Fox Lane so I'm currently the last house in the cul-de-sac and from what it looks like right now I'll have two new neighbors I'm a little nervous I'm looking into my backyard so I ask that you please consider having a natural buffer to the west side of the property as well to maintain my peaceful quiet yard as I currently have it so I'm a little nervous

take your turn I just love my home so much and I want as little disruption as possible so from the way that it seems right now there's a little concern that so from the way that it seems right now there's a little concern that for the existing residents that have but the proposed development and that currently live on Fox Lane. It's a little disappointing, and as the plan stands right now, I'll soon have two new new neighbors whose homes will look directly into my backyard and a fire hydrant placed directly under my beautiful and mature maple tree. And so I just ask that you please consider all of our quality of life of the people who live on Fox Lane when moving forward with this plan, and I apologize for crying through that entire thing. Thank you very much. Thank you. But that's what we were just talking about, a 25-foot buffer continuously go. I think that would be really nice for us. You would consider that? So I feel like I don't want to put on the bad guy hat, but on the Manor Lane estate subdivision, there are indicated 25-foot natural buffer areas. There's on the northern side of Manor Lane as well as the eastern side. Again, I'm not, you know, who did it, but it appears as though those buffers are no longer existent. So, I mean, there were required buffers on the existing map. Okay. Again, we typically don't buffer residential to residential. We typically buffer commercial to residential. But, I mean, that's just, again, considerations that those lots within the Fox Lane subdivision were supposed to have 25-foot natural buffers all around the outside. I didn't have clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear Fox Lane as well. I just had a few questions. It looks like the fire hydrant at the apex or the back of the cul-de-sac is going to be moved to 74 Fox Lane. As my wife stated before, there's an oak tree there. A little concerned about the tree. It's a beautiful tree. It's actually like one of the most gorgeous things you look at. I might be partial, but I doubt it. When you drive down and see that, I'm concerned about where it's going to be located. That's going to tear up the root system. That's just one of my concerns. I'm not here to stop progress. I understand people pay taxes and they own land and there's going to be homes. I do understand that. Just to echo what my wife said, I really do hope that there's a lot of care and genuine concern for the existing quality of life for people out here. We are blessed to live out here. Every one of us that lives out here is. It's nice to preserve what we can, especially that type of life that we have. A lot of people don't have this. We don't want to see that disappear. We understand there could be homes. Try to do it in a nice way. That would be really nice. Are there any other impacts to 74 Fox Lane other than the fire hydrant? I would actually like to have a discussion with Mr. Furland because the notes on the Fox Lane subcontractor are very important. I would actually like to have a discussion with Mr. Furland. The sub division map indicates that cul-de-sac at the end of Fox Lane is supposed to be removed when there's push through. So I'd like to have a conversation with Mr. Furland, probably involve the applicant. The elimination of that cul-de-sac would obviously, they would essentially gain a little more grass. If there's a beautiful tree there, I would have no objection to keeping that cul-de-sac. But that's something I'd like to, I can provide my contact information and we can discussion also contact the water department and find out where we can put it that it's appropriate that's not offensive thank you Greg I appreciate that thank you I guess that was one of my points is you know I've seen cul-de-sacs become developed before and sometimes they look pretty goofy after they're done right you have this weird radius of a curb cut that's just reminiscent of what was there so I don't know if there's a plan for that I don't know how my other neighbors feel about that but you know it might it might look a little goofy at the end and like I said this is a pretty cool place that we get to live in so it'd be nice if we could preserve some you know some of it um let's see

yeah any reason why it was decided to be Fox Lane it was the only access to the property was that just curious I have to ask a question get one bite at the apple so in addition to the planned logical extension from the Manor Lane states Zola Zimacki Lane is only 50 feet wide that does not serve as adequate access for a major subdivision there was also early discussions with the Planning Board regarding that topic where Zimacki Lane comes out onto the main road the speed limits 50 miles an hour as you if you come off a Fox Lane as the residents are aware you come off a Fox Lane to Manor traffic's a little bit calmer the speed reduces I believe there's a 35 mile per hour speed limit in the along main road in the vicinity of Manor Lane so the Planning Board you know it was considered at that time that while eight single-family residences is by no means considered a significant trip generator in terms of traffic the Planning Board felt that it was appropriate that any additional traffic would be best suited going on to Manor rather than additional traffic coming on Zimacki on to main road and I think this is my last question. This is my last one. So as someone who's had a commute to the South Fork quite a bit through their career any side road that can be utilized for time savings will be utilized so I am just a little curious is there any possibility of Zimacki in the future I haven't had time to really examine too many things this question came to my late is there any way for Zimacki to be connected to Fox in the future I I don't want that because I don't want to be able to get a job in a Zimacki in the future. so I just have a clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear which is the future of this place. So the way the map is designed and the way the plat is laid out, as you can see, there is a recharge basin proposed on the south side as well as open space, so there would be no future connection to Zimacki. So, again, there's not going to be a cut-through. People are not going to try to zip through. Not that there's a light on Manor, but no one's going to try to cut through this to try to avoid traffic. So, in short, to Mr. Furlan's question, there will be no connection to Zimacki for this subdivision.

All right, that was it. Thank you all so much. I appreciate everybody's time. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Thank you. Excuse me, I just have one last question if I may. Sure. You've got to state your name again. Yes.

Larry Kaiser, 32 Zimacki Lane. Just curious as the size or square footage of the house, houses that are proposed to be built in this. I know it's not listed on the plot. So, when the planning board deals with a subdivision application, they review a preliminary plat. There is no, right now, there are no lots that exist. There are no building permit applications. Right now, as it currently exists in the APZ, I believe there is a minimum 1,500 square foot size for single-family residences. That may or may not be amended by the town, board as a recommendation of the comp plan. But right now, there is no, there are no proposed house plans. There's no building permit applications. These lots do not exist. So, the planning board is not considering, the planning board doesn't review single-family residential building permit applications.

Question for the planning board now. Is there a maximum size on the books? Yeah, they're constrained by side yards, front yards. Okay. They're constrained by zoning. Well, the reason. The reason I asked this is the gentleman brought up the fact before. South Fork, okay, used to be a farming community. And they would build a eight-bedroom house on a half-acre lot. Let's be honest. We see it in South Janesport all the time. Okay. So, not my concern. My question is, is this going to be a three-bedroom, two-bath ranch, or is it going to be a six-bedroom, four-bath, in-ground gunite pool? We don't know. I understand. That's why I was asking about the maximum building footprint. Yeah. Is that something you guys deal with or the building department? No, that'll be building department. Okay. The building. So, development of single-family residential lots, there are dimensional regulations in all of our residential zoning districts. I believe the maximum lot coverage in the APZ is 15%. So, that would include all driveways, pools, decks, housing. Basically, any lot coverage could not exceed 15%. There are building envelopes. So, they would need, as you said, they would need to meet side, rear, front yard setbacks. To that point, if someone's going to build a six-bedroom house that they can fit within that building envelope, that fully complies with zoning. Thank you. Thank you. No questions. Thank you.

Hello. My name's Christina Yosa. I live at 73 Fox Lane. Could I just take a look at the… Sure. Certainly. Sure.

It's right here.

So, this is Fox Lane right now. Currently. This is a northern orientation. Okay. So, this is where the recharge basin is. So, presumably, this would be my house here. 73 Fox Lane, Christopher Prentice. Yes. So, yeah. So, there are screening requirements for within the recharge basin. And I believe there's an existing, like I said, from this map, there is a 25-foot buffer that was required on your property. There is currently a 25-foot buffer there. Yeah. So, the buffer on your property will remain, and then there will be additional screening within the recharge basin. Do you have copies of these? I can send you a copy. You should have. So, as far as that water recharge… It's on the website if you want to look online. It's on the website? Yes. Does that area get fenced in, or is it going to remain open? It will be fenced in? Okay. And is that cleared at any point? Because now my house will be next to standing water, presumably, with bugs and mosquitoes in our backyard, West Nile going around. Is that anything that… Most of those don't hold water. They don't hold water? They're in sand. They drain. Okay. Okay. So, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so, so Good evening. Joseph Marks, professional engineer with Barapanachi and VanWheel, doing business in Hoppog. This is in clean sand. The recharge basin is not going to hold water. Everything will perk into the ground. Thank you. It's just very concerning to me because I did not buy this property with the intention of a recharge basin being right next to us. We currently have some buffer there, woods. We have a neighbor that is basically right diagonal of that on Zemecki. My concern is of why our street has to be opened up when Zemecki has a straight run to the property. They spoke of speed limit. There's speeds up by Manor Lane that are just as fast. You can't make a left out onto. The road without taking off the nose of your car. So as far as speed limit, it would be feasible for people to make a left or a right on from Zemecki Lane. I wish you would take that into consideration. We do live on a quiet road. We would like to keep it a quiet road. My son, as others spoke about, don't have to worry about cars. We don't. It's. And it's nice. He rides his bike on the street and I can send him down and I don't have to worry about him getting hit by a car with somebody who's going to be doing 35 miles an hour down our little residential street that is only measured at 28 feet. They speak that Zemecki is 50 feet. Obviously there it's a little bit wider. So please just take those into consideration. It's quite a disruption to us. Our noise barrier from main road will now be disturbed. The noise barrier from the sod fields that is there. That is quite disruptive. Will be disturbed. If you could please take that into consideration. That would be wonderful. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Hi, my name is Carol Higgins, 62 Fox Lane. And I stand with my neighbors. Obviously, we're concerned about the quality of life that we've enjoyed living on Fox Lane and understand the value of our property and the safety aspect of our property is going to go down because of this pass through with Fox Lane. So we just hope you'll keep that into consideration and respect our quality of life and the wildlife. All of that's going to get destroyed. I have deer, rabbits, foxes. I have all of that in my backyard and they're going to have nowhere to go now. Ma'am, 12 acres will be saved. Twelve acres of the wooded property will not be touched. I'm sure they'll be grateful. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else? Anybody on Zoom? I'm sorry. There's nobody with their hand raised but someone just came in so let me admit that they do have a hand raised. I just have one more question. I'm sorry. Give me your hand again. I'm sorry. Why did only one of us receive notice of this meeting? Only one of our neighbors got notice. So I'm curious as to why the law firm. I didn't get a head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head 200 feet what is the address 62 it's possible you might not be within 200 feet so we provide we provide a mailing list for property owners for the provide a 200 foot radius mailing list that's what the applicants responsible for providing is for 200 feet I mean if that's the case you may not be within 200 feet I'm with you give your name again please Christina Yosa 73 Fox Lane I'm within the 200 feet and we did not receive notification of this meeting

I mean I have a certified return receipt from the United States Postal Service postmarked October 30th to 73 Fox Lane

Christina Yosa 73 Fox Lane whose name signs that posting it's not that you received it it's that it was mailed to you on a certain date that's the requirement so they have to send it to you return receipt if it doesn't get to you it didn't get to us because I did not get notification I only knew of this meeting because we had someone come to do soil samples and my husband approached the woman and the woman said oh they're gonna develop here they're gonna open up here they're gonna open up here they're gonna open up here they're gonna open up your dead ends and you're gonna go they're gonna go to the left I then went to the town and got the meeting notes from the July meeting and mr. Bergman's the planner name and address and I actually forwarded that all to my neighbors because otherwise we wouldn't have known about this was a property posted Greg yes thank you thank you thank you Heather okay anybody else have anything to say gentlemen anything no I move the public hearing be closed second second moved in seconded may we have a vote please mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenero mr. bear yes and I vote yes the motion carries thank you all right let's move right into discussion items item number one pastorano residence number 219 with Heather

no this is this is my husband's best friends mom second mom say hi I will take care is there anyone here for 834 South drum roll no okay I guess I have your I have your email right here just make furling this is a chapter 219 application for a property located at 834 Soundshore Road in Janesport Suffolk County tax number 8-1-8 they're looking to demolish the existing bungalow that's there and build a new two-story single-family dwelling with a full basement further landward from the sea ha line and top of the bluff but they're also installing a two-story apartment there's a new apartment there 20 by 48 and a half foot in-ground pool. They will be installing a new sanitary system and water service that's all within the coastal erosion hazard area, hence why they had to make an application to the board. Proposed action is a type two action pursuant to SECRA as it's the construction of a single family dwelling and accessory structures. It's within the residents A40 zoning use district located on the north side of Soundshore Road. The surrounding area is primarily residential in nature. Just to go over a quick property history, this is outside of the chapter 219 jurisdiction, but there is a detached structure on the property that the applicant is proposing to partially demolish and make alterations to it to create an accessory apartment, which they can do by town code as long as they abide by the accessory apartment rules, properties owner occupied, and that will tie into the new sanitary system that they're proposing. I did note that on a site inspection, the southern end of the property, which fronts on soundshore road, it's labeled as a wooded lowland, but it's populated with phragmites, which is indicative of water, and I actually went through the property, the old property files, and on a prior survey, it's shown as a pond so I did reach out to the applicant, as noted in my staff report, the last page, I asked if they could get a certified, so I did reach out to the applicant, so I did reach out to the applicant, I did reach out to the applicant as noted in my staff report the last page I asked if they could get a Certified environmental consultant or professional to go out there and verify if it's a freshwater wetland or not And if it is they'll have to flag the wetlands and the buffers just because that construction happening on the southern end of the property Might kick them to see a C jurisdiction So with Heather would they have to like put hay bales around just make sure no construction material? Yes, and I mean as it stands the project area. I don't know if you saw they have it Noted on the survey with a dashed line They are proposing hay bales and I self pants silt fencing to prevent erosion during construction I will note that pursuant to chapter 219 dash 14 subsection B the construction that they're proposing isn't specifically allowed It's considered considered development under chapter 219 So because even though they're moving the house further Landward from the see-haw line They do have to go to the zoning Board of Appeals as that board is the designated coastal erosion hazard Board of Review So they'll have to look at the proposed construction both the house and the pool and also the existing hot tub That's there which was put there without permits. I'm assuming prior to these applicants buying the property I just wanted to bring it to the Planning Board for discussion first to go over secret and then they've already Made an application to the zoning board their appeal will be heard next week at the meeting on the 14th I saw in the staff report pictures of where is the drainage coming from and through that pipe and where is it? Going to and is it causing any erosion? So that's a question that I had asked the applicants design professional because I noticed the drainage inlet on the plant that they Had submitted so when I went out there I took pictures It's proximate to where the hot tub is and then I went down the stairs to the beach which are actually They're very stable and intact no work is proposed there No work is proposed to the existing bulkheading which looks fine at the tone of the block, but that drainage pipe I didn't you know walk on the block, but I'm assuming the picture that I have there that pipe connects to that drainage inland Yeah, it was down the drain. Yeah, I think we need a little more information on that Yeah, I saw I had asked them to provide some more information You know it would be preferable for it to be removed and for them to You know if they're installing new drainage associated with the construction that they're proposing the 219 application to maintain all that stormwater on site Obviously prevent any sort of runoff from going down. The bluff base preventing future erosion but again They will be going through the zoning board process and if the zoning board grants The relief from 219 then they'll come back to this board and I'm hoping at that time They'll have much more information to provide the board upgraded septic Never ever Do you have a question? on the various ZBA and Planning Board resolutions and it was resolution number three on your list and it basically says that we approved coastal erosion hasn't permit for bluff restoration yes so they must have done some like terracing I'm not sure if you recall the property directly to the west the Winkler property they did bluff restoration as you may recall they didn't require any zoning board relief but they did need a chapter 219 permit so bluff restoration bluff cuts done in accordance with you know the provisions of the chapter those are permitted activities so I went back through aerials and it looks like they did some bluff terracing and new plantings it was a long time ago so it's kind of hard to tell at this point I just wondering exactly what was done yeah I'd have to pull other files unfortunately something was done though yeah unfortunately some of the resolutions weren't as detailed as they are now but I can try to find the staff report and who had worked on it at that time unfortunately none of us were in the planning department in 2010 but Heather what's the minimum from the pool to the bluff that is required so it goes it's based off of the sea hall line typically we don't want to see any construction seaward of the sea hall line and it's in with so within jurisdiction it's a 50-foot setback so it's not that they're not allowed to do it it just requires them to get a 219 permit and in this case the pool itself isn't a permitted construction activity that's why they have to go in terms of property line setbacks they're more than they're far enough away from the northern property boundary they don't need any area variances for the proposed pool and the new house and they're well within their maximum pervious surface coverage with the improvement so again no area variance is just relief from the zoning board okay and all this side setbacks are fine yes so they're removing basically 11 feet by 24 and 8.5 feet from this one-story frame guest house which was which is what we see in figure two correct yes so they were moving that side one and then they're making this habitable so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so so has a CO already and they need to adhere to the accessory apartment code because as it's written you have to have a CEO in place for at least three years in order to even go for an accessory apartment permit so this so number six is that we get a box occupancy excuse me one story yes workshop and then four states with the condition that the structure have no habitable space yes so I can't speak as to how the current structure the condition of it now but when it was approved by the zoning board and the building department when they received that certificate of occupancy they were permitted to have a one-car detached garage with a bathroom and workshop and the carport was included in that obviously if they apply for an accessory apartment permit to convert that to fully habitable space they're permitted to do that by code I would think it would supersede that certificate of occupancy but again that's not you know it's not a in the jurisdiction of the 219 application I just did it as you know historical reference so did the board have any other questions unfortunately I don't have anyone here from the application but I'll certainly get more information from you for you especially regarding that drainage inlet and pipe yeah I'm find out how far the wet that wetlands if it is well yeah they're working on it now I spoke with several other properties pretty much the same discussion item number two TJ OC real estate holdings LLC

thank you Heather you [transcription gap] you ! you you you you you [transcription gap] TJOC Greg. All right TJOC I will keep this brief. TJOC as the board will recall we issued a positive declaration on the proposed TJOC development. It involves a major subdivision and a site plan for a mixed-use commercial development. The board on October 17th issued a positive declaration requiring the full formal process of an environmental impact statement. The applicant submitted a draft scope for the EIS to us on October 31st. Under the secret guidelines there is no option for a lead agency to reject a draft scope so that submission of that draft scope started a timeline. The lead board as lead agency has 60 days to adopt a final scope. What that final scope does is set the parameters of everything that's going to be studied and looked at and analyzed within the environmental impact statement. Based on the board's comments at the last meeting the desire was to hold a public scoping hearing. So the resolution that I have before the board today is to schedule that public scoping hearing. It will be at the December 5th 2024 meeting which is an evening meeting at 6 p.m. The draft scope will be posted on the town's website. The draft scope will also be made available and distributed to involved agencies. If we have the hearing on December 5th that puts us in a position to adopt the final scope. The head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head head I don't like that word anticipated. I will provide a full report for the board for the public hearing. There are some what I call presumptive language in there that they're almost sort of coming to a conclusion before we've had a chance to really perform any analysis. So I will have a full review and a full report from staff on the draft scope, and we'll make it open to the public as well. Okay. I just want to make sure there's not a lot of gray areas. No, we're going to eliminate anything that sort of comes to a foregone conclusion. Okay. Chairman? Well, and Greg, just one question. Is there any way of getting another draft on the change of the – So one of the things that SECRA allows you to do is look at alternative developments. I know I've had conversations with Member Zelnicki. We had actually – when we had pre-submission meetings with this applicant prior to the formal submission, the board will recall the – what I'll call the long end of – you know, the building is oriented along Middle Country Road in an east-to-west orientation. Member Zelnicki had wanted to see an alternative design where it's essentially in a north-to-south orientation. The thought is that that would sort of – if you've got people living in those apartments on the second floor and they're 50 feet off of Middle Country Road, you know, noise, light, that sort of thing. So. That's something that we could probably look at through one of the alternative designs through the EIS process. Okay. The project completely adheres to the zoning in the area. Is that correct? Correct. Completely complies with the zoning, but through an EIS process, we can typically really fine-tune it and get a better project for everybody. Great. Anybody? Okay. Okay. Thank you. Are you taking questions? No. I'd like to see a site plan. You can – when it's time for comments, you may speak on anything that you like. But right now, we're in the middle of a meeting. Thank you. You're welcome. Moving on to number three, 230 West Main Street, minor subdivision. Once again, with Greg. Thank you. So this is a subdivision – a minor subdivision that the board is considering seeking to subdivide an existing 15,557-square-foot building. And create two lots. One lot having a size of 7,153 square feet. Lot two having a size of 7,404 square feet. It's zoned DC-3, downtown center three. The application required approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals. The proposed lot widths were both 45.11 feet where 50 feet is required. The applicant received that relief by determination dated September 12, 2024. There were some conditions. I would just like to correct the record. When I was before the board last time presenting this application, I had made some recommendations about shared access and cross-parking. We've been having some issues with our GIS system. So the property actually is located within the parking district. So at any time that these parcels come in for redevelopment, they are actually not required to provide on-site parking. So that really would affect that recommendation and sort of nullify the requirement for it. If they're not – If they're not required to provide parking. So where would they park? Public parking. That's the purpose of a public parking district. Where is there parking for those two lots? Turn parking. Just to the east. For the lot in the town. Town parking lot. That's all in the parking district. Yeah, that's the purpose of the public parking district. So just to clear it up, just have a resolution to schedule a public hearing on that subdivision application. Now that they've got their variances. All right, don't go anywhere, Greg. We're going to talk about number four, Holly Estates minus subdivision. Thank you. All right, so this is a subdivision that, believe it or not, has been kicking around before the planning board since 2009. Kimberly Judd is currently the attorney on it. The applicant has been through a number of attorneys. Sean Walter actually initially handled this before he was elected to office. So that's how far back this goes. When this subdivision application was sort of revised, by the planning board, we held a public hearing on it again. We issued an approval resolution in November 2019. We've had several extension resolutions since then. They've gone through, they've had a really tough time. Their surveyor kind of bailed on them. They've just had a lot of hard times trying to get this thing over the finish line. So I do have a final extension resolution on. They did satisfy all of those conditions of the original 2019. They filed the CNRs, the common driveway easements. They had an approved stormwater pollution prevention plan. And they finally got approval from the Suffolk County Department of Health Services on August 30th. So all of the conditions are met. I'm happy to say that the board can grant this final extension. I have the maps ready for you to sign. They can get this thing done. Great. Anybody? No, Greg. That's just . It's two building lots plus the house that's there. There's an existing house and there would be, there's two new building lots, correct? All right. Once again with Greg, item number five, CAV 896 LLC for administrative site plan. All right. So wrapping this one up, this is an application to convert approximately 3,200 square feet of existing commercial space at the existing oncology center next to Berkshire. We have a full head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head clear head parking stalls. The applicant did obtain that relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals and it was subject to the condition of an offer of mitigation by the applicant to be accepted by the planning board wherein a change in the oncology treatment uses for the medical office approved subject to site plan in 2019 and the proposed expansion of the oncology cancer treatment 3,169 square feet be limited to that type of medical use and that any change of medical use would require applicant to seek site plan approval and or relief as appropriate based on based on quote such other medical uses or such other different uses be it retail or anything else. So long and short of it is the parking study that the applicant provided for this application demonstrated that they were nowhere near even at their busiest times they were nowhere near filling that parking lot. They received the necessary variances so I do have an administrative approval on. One of the major conditions that we're going to be carrying through from the ZBA I have spoken with the applicant their company are okay with it we're going to require a declaration of CNRs and a form by council approved by council to the planning board which shall restrict the use of the building as though on those areas depicted on the March 28th 2024 floor plan consistent with ZBA appeal number 24-16 and consistent with the applicant's offer of mitigation regarding use of the building that any expansion of occupied space or a change in the use of the building to any use other than oncology treatment shall require a new site plan to be submitted to the planning board and shall address any outstanding site plan issues including but not limited to parking supply. Very good. Are they still going to have to bus their employees? No that was one that they through the review process they've never actually had to utilize that provision because they've never exceeded their existing park. You know the parking supply has never been an issue during the five years of treatment. So they've never had to employ that. That's why we extinguished that covenant but it will be replaced with a covenant controlling the use which the applicant gets some additional use of that building provides a necessary service for cancer patients. Will not overwhelm their parking supply but if they do change to another type of busier medical office such as a pediatrics office or a you know dermatology office. They would be required. To come back to the planning board for site plan review. One of the problems I have is that I have no problems with the oncology center at all because I've been there several times and always plenty of space but in the future Northwell is growing and it's getting bigger. I just don't want to kick the can down the road they should look into more parking better parking you know because you just can't keep going into other areas. That's what that CNR I believe effectively captures and will sort of you know. This site had a. It's got a long history of expansion and ZBA over the years. So I think this kind of puts a firm end to where an applicant can sort of realize a benefit from the property but where the board would still be comfortable that there are controls in place where it's not going to change to another use that would overwhelm the parking supply. So. Happy to get this one. Done as well. Very good. Got your room right now. Okay. Thanks. Greg. Right now. I'm going to go public comments. On. Resolutions.

Nobody. Gentlemen. Let's do. Yeah. I have a question. Sorry. Somebody here. Hello. Who's just jumping in. I assume. We keep the. Zoom. I don't know. Zoom is only for public hearing. Only supposed to be for public hearing. It records the meeting though. Oh okay. Because of that. I was told it was muted. Sorry. It's okay. Okay. Gentlemen. Resolutions. Okay. I'll move resolution number 84. Let's get it. Okay. Okay. Second. hearing of minor subdivision entitled the malice property on 80 on 2nd Street in South James Boyd second move to the second mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro hi mr. bear yes I vote aye the motion carries I move resolution 85 for 230 West Main Street for minus subdivision to schedule a public hearing so move second moving in seconded mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro mr. bear yes and I vote aye the motion carries I move resolution number 2024 086 Holly estates minor subdivision resolution granting an extension of the proof of approval for a minor subdivision so moved second move to second mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro mr. bear yes and I vote aye the motion carries resolution 087 TJ OC real estate holdings LLC federal resolution to schedule a public scoping hearing on a draft scope submitted pursuant to secret second moving in second mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro mr. bear yes and I vote aye the motion carries resolution 2024 088 CAV 896 LLC resolution granting administrative site plan approval for the site plan so moved second would in second mr. Zelnicki yes mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro mr. bear yes mr. Nenaro mr. Hogan yes mr. Nenaro mr. Nenaro mr. Nenaro mr. clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear clear I'll move the minutes of October 17, 2024. So moved. Second. Moved and seconded. All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Staff, any other business? You guys had a long day today. No. Thirsty. Huh? Thirsty. Yeah. Okay. No other business. No correspondence. Our next meeting date will be Thursday, November 21st at 3 p.m. Thank you all for coming. And have a great night.

Bye. [transcription gap]