Full Transcript

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Heather, is anybody on Zoom? We have one on Zoom. I don't know if they want to speak, if you want to address them. Okay. If there's any people on Zoom that would like to participate in a public hearing, please raise your hand so Heather can identify you.

All right, gentlemen, you have anything? Nope, no. We'll reclose it. Public hearing. I'll second. Boogman, second. Mr. Zernicki? Yes. Mr. DeNiro? Aye. Mr. Baer? Yes. An aye vote aye, and we wish you the best of luck. Thank you very much. Have a good afternoon. You too. All right, moving on to discussion items. Number one, McGinnis Residence, Chapter 219, which is 888 Soundshore Road, with Heather. Thank you.

I'll make this brief because this is just on for discussion, no action today. This is a Chapter 219 application. The owners of 888 Soundshore Road in Jamesport are looking to demolish an existing 52-square-foot rear deck and construct a new deck, approximately 438 square feet, with a privacy wall on the east side and stairs to grade. The entire property is within coastal erosion. The property is under a protection hazard jurisdiction, and I think the Seahaw line actually bisects the property. So, yeah, so it's right there. So the existing deck is the smaller piece right here. So all of the proposed improvements are seaward of the Seahaw line, and pursuant to Chapter 219, that's considered new development, which is not allowed under that chapter. So they do need relief from the Zoning Board of Appeals under their authority as coastal. So they're looking to demolish an existing deck. So they're looking to demolish an existing deck. So they're looking to demolish an existing deck. So they're looking to demolish an existing deck. Being that it's a deck, it's, you know, an accessory structure for single-family dwelling. So it's a Type 2 action pursuant to SECRA. It's located in the RA40 Zoning District. In terms of setbacks, they actually don't need any area variances because they are maintaining the existing setbacks that are on the property. I will note that, you know, looking at aerials, this portion of the property here was pretty heavily vegetated. That's on page 3 of my staff report, the year 2. So in March of 2024, you can see that there's some vegetation there. And then in the following figure, figure 3 on page 4, it looks like some clearing was done. I will note that the driveway that's over here is outside of jurisdiction. So the clearing that they did there wouldn't require any sort of 219 permit. But the new deck and then the clearing. The clearing here would all need approval. So at this point, I did refer it to the consulting engineer. I haven't heard anything back yet. They'll need to either get a permit or a letter of jurisdiction from the New York State DEC. So at this point, if the board has any questions or concerns from a planning standpoint, we can have them move forward, get them a denial letter. And the ZBA will decide whether or not to grant the relief sought. Connie, I think you were telling me. Fences and disrepair. Is that something that's going to be replaced when I do this? Which fence? The one on the east side, the chain link fence. It's a short, like, four-foot chain link fence. I mean, we could certainly ask them about it. You know, if it's on their property and it's their fence, we can see if they want to repair it. Do you think that they wanted some type of privacy? So on the east side of the property, let me just pull out the elevations. They're looking to do a privacy wall on the deck itself. On the deck itself. Yeah. I mean, it's small. But if you look, it's A2 of the elevations on the east side of the deck. I think it's a six-foot privacy wall that they're looking to do. I guess just to sort of maintain, like, a closed area privacy on the deck itself. And the ZBA would have to approve because they're going out further. Yeah. So Chapter 219, the whole purpose is that if you're on a shoreline, particularly proximate to a bluff or within SEHA jurisdiction, you're trying to either retreat from the bluff point of inflection or, you know, if you're doing erosion protection structures, stairs to the beach, those are all things that would be permitted. But any new development, including accessory structures, a new house, a pool, they're not specifically permitted under the subsidy. Unlike me, I think it's above section. In Chapter 219, I think it's subsection B. So they need relief from the zoning board. I mean, I will note that the existing stairs for the deck do go out a little bit further than the 52-square-foot deck itself. I can't speak to what the zoning board would grant or ask the applicants. That's really, you know, they have to review that under their purview as the Coastal Erosion Hazard Board of Review. But perhaps, like, cutting the deck back and trying to... keep it as close as possible to whatever existing disturbances there would be good it would behoove the applicant to maybe examine that but a six-foot wall between the deck and the water no on top of the deck oh okay yeah it's kind of hard to see but if you look at the elevation the you know the the deck is a square on the east side I think it's it's the on a to the side elevation drawing labeled to they show a privacy wall just on the one side of the deck so that actually wouldn't result in additional ground servants for the wall but the new piers for the deck would thank you yeah that when I walk the property it really you know an extra three four feet what it looks like from the existing stairs isn't that much of a problem but that's up to the CBA and then the hay bales you're gonna require or request some extra plantings so I mean the silica fencing and hail hay bales are required as part of construction in order to prevent runoff down the bluff face but my recommendation from a planning standpoint would to read that be re vegetate that area at least to the condition that it was in in the aerial from 2024 I mean it's pretty clear that there was some vegetation removed between those two aerials I can recommend plantings that are you know that will do well in a !

me me me me me me

What was the elevation on the original 52 foot? Sorry about that. The original elevation of that. That I'm actually not 100% sure about. The building plans were hand-drawn when I pulled the building files, so I could try to estimate it, or I could ask them to measure it as far as an existing condition is concerned. But they did submit photos. Yeah, so in photo number two, you can see the existing deck is already raised up just because of the way the house was constructed right there. So I don't believe that the proposed deck is going to be any higher than what's existing, but it will be larger in terms of square footage. It's going to be higher because that's where they're going to exit. Yeah, that's where their existing door is. It's going to be higher. I can see what they did here, yeah. They're going to bring it up to level. Okay, okay. That was my question. Thank you. All good? Yep. So we'll see how they do with zoning board, and then maybe they'll be back. Awesome. Thank you. And the DEC. Yeah, they'll need a letter of no jurisdiction or a permit. Okay, item number two, Duffy MX motocross track with Greg.

All right. Good afternoon, everybody. So this is just a discussion of the draft scope. That was submitted for an application that's being reviewed concurrently by both the town board and the planning board. It is an application seeking to establish an outdoor motocross dirt bike track at a site at 2822 River Road in Calverton within the Calverton Industrial Zoning Use District. The town board has jurisdiction over the special permit which is required to establish the use on the property. The planning board is an involved agency, as the planning board has jurisdiction over the site plan. So the town board. The town board assumed lead agency. They issued a positive declaration on the application in October of 2025. The applicant submitted a draft scope to the planning department on January 15th. That started a trigger, a trigger, a 60 day review period at the end of which the town board as lead agency has to adopt a final scope. That final scope sets forth the parameters of what's going to be studied and looked at through the draft environmental impact statement. We did have a public scoping session. That. That was a 50 town boards meeting last night. We did receive comments from the New York State DEC. We received comments from the Pine Barrens Commission as well as the health department. And there were a number of residents and members of the public who got up and spoke. The copy of the draft scope that I distributed to the board had my staff edits. They were highlighted so that they were easily visible. One of the major changes and it's a new. Newfound information. So the DEC did come to a determination that a mine land reclamation permit would be required. So it is not in your copy, but I did add one of the required approvals from the town of Riverhead zoning board of appeals of the use variance for mining. Beyond that, we did. I did add a section that requires the consistency with adopted land use plans. The project does propose a sand mine, which is a prohibited use, which is within the Calvert and industrial district. District. Pursuant to chapter town code chapter three Oh one attachment for B. Um, and then beyond that, the existing amendments within the within the draft scope that I distributed to you haven't changed. Um, what I will do if there's any substantive comments or anything that the board would like to see added to the draft scope, I'm going to have to go through all of the notes and all of the comments we've received thus far, assemble them into a final scope that would be adopted by the town board. Uh, yeah. Next month. So I'm not. We're not. The purpose of this is not not to get into the merits of the site plan, but rather to see if the planning board has an involved agency has any comments on the draft scope. Does the does the DEC at the owner's expense? Naturally, did they provide the monitor for the input for the soil? I believe that I believe there is oversight for the DEC in terms of monitoring. Um, I mean, you know, the the fact that they need a mining permit is a significant significant discovery in this application, and it sort of has changed the trajectory of the application a little bit. So that is a significant issue that needs to be addressed and fully fleshed out through the environmental review. But anything, you know, the the questions at the town board last night, questions came up about if there's bonding. I did find out subsequently that there is bonding that's done through the DEC. Um, not necessarily. selling through the town, but it is a significant hurdle that mining is a prohibited use in this zoning district. The town receives so much per yard, correct? So there is an exportation fee that's supposed to be used for— Several dollars a yard, I think. Several dollars a yard, but that's supposed to address wear and tear on public roads sort of as a mitigation of exportation. So there is a fee. But again, it's sort of—the fee is sort of irrelevant at this point in the review. It's sort of—I don't even see how we get there. I don't even see how we get there. So I do have to send a copy. I'm going to send a referral to the ZBA because they were not initially considered an involved agency. But again, are there any—does the board have any comments on the scope? I know Member Zelnicki was at the meeting last night, so he is aware of the comments that were addressed last night. I noticed that they're saying that I've got to have health department approval, or rather, they're just going to have Port of Sands. So that is a question, and that did come up at the public scoping session last night, the question whether or not they'll need any type of health department approval. There is an existing single-family residence on the property. They've stated that the use of that will remain a single-family residence. But I think— I think what we could do is put language in there, is demonstrate affirmatively whether or not any type of approvals from the health department are required. Without the approval of a mining permit, there's no way we can move ahead. Well, so it's not to say the project can't move forward. One of the alternative—well, so one of the alternative—the draft scope that was submitted to the town just provided a no-action alternative. Which is sort of a baseline in every EIS that we review. One of the alternative—you know, the alternative that I added was an alternative without excavation and exportation of material and demonstrating compliance with the Pine Barren CGA. So, in other words, if they re-graded the property and bermed up and provided some, you know, sound mitigation to adequately address the other potential environmental impacts, that's not to say that the project couldn't move forward in some respect. But I'd like to see, you know, a thorough analysis of a— I agree. I agree. I agree. I agree. I agree. Of the impacts of the project without that mining component. Also, worthy of note, last night one of the town board members indicated one of the alternatives they would like to see the construction of an indoor track and what types of implications that would have. You know, that may serve to mitigate any sort of noise, dust, etc. from neighboring residents and properties. So— Also one of the questions I have is that I always thought this was supposed to be some type of— Unlike me, I don't think it's like a running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running running Would they need a special permit for those special, you know, the high volume amount of people?

If the project moves forward in some capacity, I mean, if we're approving, if they've considered those impacts, I mean, I don't necessarily think that each event, if they have a, if they receive, you know, the necessary approvals and the permits and they have a CO for a racetrack and we've considered potential impacts from those race events, you know, similar, I know the Riverhead Raceway has a certain, like, number of races that they're permitted to do per year. So I think something like that can be addressed. And I can figure out how to, you know, I can figure out how to formalize that into the final scope and address that aspect. The number of events at Riverhead Raceway is a verbal agreement. There's no written hard-fetched dates that they have to maintain. I know there is a time period, and I believe our town code does have a, it's in raceways. I think they do limit the number. I think they do it voluntarily. Voluntarily, they're pre-existing non-conforming. What would happen? That's another story. Greg, that house is located on the, well, I guess it would be the south side. Where it's located, do they have to go through that whole length road from River Road all the way? Yeah, so that's what they do now. I mean, that house exists. So there's a driveway. That goes up to that house. There were prior approvals for this site. They were going to do a vineyard with a tasting room on this site. I don't know if that ever established. They did have a vineyard there, but the soils supposedly weren't great for grapes, so that was the end of that. But, yeah, so there is a driveway, and, I mean, it was a residence for a number of years. It's occupied. I don't know if it's currently occupied right now, but, I mean, it does have a CO for a single-family residence. Good, guys? Good? Other than when you look at the plan for the excavation. What a great change. Yeah, I mean, 120,000 yards is not an insignificant amount of material.

They're going to be paid for material going out and the material that they bring in. Also, it's... Does the DEC take anything out of that? I mean, the importation is what I asked the question. But does the DEC add or take anything out of what the income would be from the soil? That I can't say. Okay, it's not important. It's not important. Just asking the question. No, I think they ask for payment for when they have an inspector on the site. Well, they pay the monitor. Yeah. Yeah, they pay that, I know. Anything else? No. Okay. Thank you, Greg. Good job. Let's move to public comments and resolutions. Not seeing any hands. Gentlemen, resolutions. Resolution number 20-26-014 for Birchwood at Wading River. Second. Moved and seconded. Mr. Zanicki? Yes. Mr. DeNiro? Yes. Mr. Baer? Yes. And I vote aye. The motion carries. Public comments on all matters. Okay. Okay. We tried. We have no minutes. Greg, any secret actions we need to know about? Okay. Good. Other business staff? Life's good? Okay. Our next meeting will be March 6th at 6 o'clock right here in the town boardroom. 5th. I apologize. 5th. March 5th at 6 o'clock right here in town hall. Any other business members? Well, can we close it out? Motion to close. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Okay. Have a nice weekend, everybody.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.