Full Transcript
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Hey, Heather, you want to read this? Sure. So just to read into the record, we did receive correspondence. One letter from Kim Judd regarding 10A. 7 Old Country Road, a request to reopen appeal number 2025-042, and also a letter from Amy Loeb from PBMC Northville Health about 10A. 7 Old Country Road, Riverhead, another request to reopen appeal number 2025-042. All right. Can I circulate it to the board? Yes. Okay. Okay. Are we ready for public hearings? Go ahead. Okay. The first appeal number 2025-036. Muhammad Faisal, 2041 Osborne Avenue, Riverhead. The applicant requested their second adjournment, and they requested April 23rd of 2026. Okay. Can I have a motion? So moved. Second? Second. All right. Mr. Barnes. Can you hear me, Leroy? Aye. Okay. Yes, I can hear you. Senator? Aye. The West King? Aye. Aye. And I vote aye. So that adjournment has been moved to April 23rd. So, we're going to move to April 23rd, 2026. Go ahead. And next, appeal number 2025-028505, Lincoln Street Opportunity Zone Fund, LLC. I believe the zoning board is looking to give this a lengthy adjournment. Ann Marie, is that correct? That's correct. So, the zoning board is going to seek to adjourn this matter until the parties, being the applicant, owner of the property, and adjacent owner, who appealed to the board. Okay. Who appeared at the original zoning board meeting on this appeal and thereafter expressed a desire and intention to resolve amongst themselves several issues that may resolve or eliminate all or part of the relief requested by the zoning board until June 11th to enable the parties to provide, demonstrate, and or detail the resolution of all or part of the relief requested by the zoning board. Okay. So, I'm going to move to April 23rd, 2026. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye.
Sale. Aye. Aye. So, Weske? Aye. Gazillo? Aye. And I vote aye. So, that's been adjourned. Thank you. June 11, 2026. Okay. And before we open Appeal Number 2025-043, does the applicant or the representative have the proof of mailings and affidavit of posting?
Thank you. The application is for Zoning Board Appeals 1-1-222B, where the Zoning Board Appeals may approve a special exception from one nonconforming use to another nonconforming use to wit. Applicant seeks to change from a nonconforming single-family residential use to a solid waste management facility, construction and demolition, debris processing, concrete and asphalt crushing and screening facility.
You're an attorney, right, sir? Yes, sir. All right, please state your name and address. Yes, Stephen LoSquadro, 649 Route 25A, Rocky Point, New York, on behalf of the applicant. And, Mr. Chairman, members of the Board, first of all, good evening. Happy New Year. Good evening. There are documents that I've set forth for all of you, one of which the chairman you have is tapped and indicates a series of documents that will be relevant and will, at various stages of the presentation. Go right ahead. Yes, sir. So this is an application for a special exception. It's a form of an interpretation. It's brought pursuant to Section 301.222B of the Town Code, providing that a nonconforming use on a lot may be changed to another nonconforming use when approved by special exception. Now, the lot in question had and has a nonconforming use on it, and that is a residential use. That use, the single-family residential home, exists on the site and is reflected in documents that are attached to the application itself and are also contained in the documents provided to you. Now, for all of the board members, the particular documents that refer to the residential use are the last documents. And Mr. Chairman, those will be the documents that you have that are tabbed as Exhibit J. Now, the nonconforming use to which the applicant seeks a change is a concrete yard, a concrete crushing facility. And that has been the subject of a site plan that the applicant has had before the Town for almost a year. Thank you. Almost ten years. You'll see from the first documents that are before you that that site plan application was made in January of 2017.
It was approved. The particular use that we're seeking here was actually approved by this board in 2018. Just for clarification of the record, this is the zoning board determination. in 2018 was a request for an interpretation. The interpretation by the zoning board was that it was not listed as a prohibited use under the then-Industrial A. The zoning board did not declare it a permitted use. They stated it was not listed as a prohibited use. And, Mr. Peretti, of course, that's 100% correct. And as you know, that after that, because that was in February of 2018, the ZBA application was made. In April of 2018, the decision to which you're referring was issued. And then, of course, in August of 2018, and you'll see the correspondence attached from Ms. Thomas as attorney to the ZBA, the ZBA requested clarification, which the applicant provided. And that clarification, coupled with the interpretation to which you refer, allowed the site plan to move forward because it was a use that was not prohibited. The only clarification, legally, that the zoning board could request was on an interpretation. Correct. And that's what they delivered. That's true. Yes. And I'm just pointing out that there was a subsequent clarification sought, which was provided. And then, of course, the application continued from that time forward. Now, the concrete yard use, which is sought here, that would have been a conforming use prior to the town board's zone change. Because, as you may be aware, this was industrial A property. And then the town board, on its own motion, about eight or so years into the application, as the applicant was on the cusp of approval, changed the zone and eliminated the use for which the applicant had applied back in 2017, and for which the applicant continued to apply after the ZBA application was approved. Okay. Thank you. So, the ZBA interpretation. So, the use then would be nonconforming, hence the application made under Section 301.222B, which allows one nonconforming use to then be transferred to another nonconforming use. It's a mechanism that exists in the town code, particularly in a situation like this, where a great inequity could occur. And then, of course, the application would be not only a nonconforming use, but also a nonconforming use, because you had an applicant here who has been in the process for almost ten years, and then about eight or so years, almost nine years into the process, the zone was changed, stripping away a use for which the applicant was about to receive approval, as a final site plan had been submitted, and had been essentially completed, and the applicant was just awaiting a final hearing. So, you know, you can't just say, you know, you're going to have to wait until you get a final hearing for approval of its use. I will point out the following before I delve into some of the documents that I provided to you to put this in some context and so you can have some more color on this and understand how this got to this point. First and foremost, under 301.222B, which allows one nonconforming use, if it exists, to have another nonconforming use established on the site. The nonconforming use, as I said, would be the concrete crushing facility, which would have, again, I repeat, have been conforming if the town board had not just had taken action on its own motion just before the applicant was about to receive final approval. But that use, we have to recognize, conforms entirely to the nature and character of what exists in the area. It conforms entirely to the nature and character of the uses that surround and are near the site. This is immediately adjacent to concrete crushing facilities. It directly neighbors. The Suffolk concrete facility. And other uses, which are not just similar, but in many instances more intense or impactful than the use that the applicant seeks here. Which, again, is the use for which the applicant applied, making a site plan application in 2017 and then continuing with the application as permitted by the planning board. After appearing before the Board of Appeals.
I've provided you with a series of documents. They establish how the applicant here has always acted in good faith, has always complied with every section of the town code application process, submitted a site plan application, and then continued with the application. Submitted a site plan application, and then continued with the application. In January of 2017, together with a $25,000 fee. Was told to make a ZBA application. Submitted that in February of 2018. All of these documents are before you sequentially, chronologically. In March of 2018, the planning board issued a staff report permitting the application to move forward. In April of 2018, a decision was issued by this board. In April of 2018, a decision was issued by this board. Which said, this is not a prohibited use. Which said, this is not a prohibited use. In August then of 2018. There's a copy of that provided to you as well. There were additional site plan submissions requested. Planning staff. On behalf of the Planning Board. requested by staff, planning staff on behalf of the planning board, those were provided. In February of 2020 you'll see that there was a secret scoping notice issued. So the secret process here was was very involved. The applicant spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on particular engineering, particularly from a secret perspective, to comply with the standards and analyses and testing and other processes required under the environmental impact statement process. All of that was done. Then of course unfortunately for the applicant and many others for that matter, we have to be very mindful there's a difficult time, but the COVID pandemic hit and the application like many others was slowed down for a while. No fault of the applicant, no fault of the town, it was just difficult for business to be conducted in an expedited process at that time. You'll see however in January of 2023 there are documents before you that reflect that a final submission was made to the planning board and it's marked final. And you'll see the letter from the engineers Nelson and Pope and I believe it's from one of the partners, Mr. Dixon, that reflects the fact that there were only three revisions that needed to be made at that time and they were extremely minor. Very ministerial in nature, adding a marking or a code to certain pages on the plan. Really scrivener's details at best. And then of course we know that what happened is there was a comprehensive plan that was in the works and the Town Board, the city authorities, the city change the zone from industrial aid to light industrial, which still allowed many industrial uses, but not the use for which the applicant had applied and on which the applicant had expended hundreds of thousands of dollars over essentially a 10-year period. So what was brought to the applicant's attention was that Section 301.222 is a mechanism by which a potentially inequitable situation can be remedied in a very narrow fashion. And that is what the request is here. The applicant does not seek anything more than what it applied for in 2017. It doesn't seek anything more. Then what it sought an interpretation on in 2018, and it certainly doesn't seek anything more than the clarification it provided at the Board's request later on in 2018. Under the circumstances, the application is narrowly tariffed. It's fair and reasonable. It would prevent a great inequity for someone who has been in a process for 10 years and had a change that was not requested. And it would also provide for various uses. There's also various uses for various uses. There's also uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. There's uses for various uses. to a great extent, are much more impactful and intense than what the applicant proposes. And those uses were not established pursuant to a site plan that reflects current code standards. This would be. But certainly it is in harmony with what is found in that area, which is an area of industrial use. Clearly the town had created zoning for that area in that way. So uses would be concentrated in certain areas, such as on Manor Road or on Cromer Avenue, for example. Uses are concentrated for those very purposes. So for all of those reasons, I respectfully submit on behalf of the applicant that the request is reasonable. It's very narrowly tailored. It prevents a great inequity that certainly everyone wants to avoid, given the actions taken when someone was on the cusp of approval. Which has a lot of implications. There's other implications and consequences that we're not going to discuss now, but certainly fair and reasonable and in harmony with what's found in the area. So for all of those reasons, again, members of the Board and Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your time and your consideration. It seems like there are a fair amount of folks here. And to the extent that they are here for this and not for other matters that were adjourned, I'll be happy to listen to what they say. And if you deem it appropriate, then I can answer that. I can answer questions that respond to what they say. I'll be very happy to do that. To begin with, just for our benefit to the benefit of the audience, could you explain the operation? Suppose it was granted. How would the operation work? May I still call you Judge? Call me anything you want. I've been called worse. Well, I appreciate that, Judge. Judge, I – the use will not be different than uses that are found in the area. So – I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. particularly from curbing it's brought to the site the origin is always noted the DEC requires that it would not be from sites outside of Long Island primarily in Suffolk County the concrete is brought in and it's crushed so it can be reused one particular aspect judge of this application which would provide greater safeguards and control as opposed to other facilities doing very similar things in the area is that this would be established pursuant to current town code requirements so you have mr. Bergman and others from planning staff who ultimately when the site is built it's not going to be from the site itself and so the DEC requires that the site plan is approved attach a bunch of conditions which then get memorialized in covenants and restrictions that the applicant then has to file so that they run with the land in the site that would be part of what would happen here as well could you describe the crushing process how it's done what happened but it's done with etc and I presume it's done outdoors it's done outdoors there's a machine that crushes the concrete and as I understand it this is where maybe it goes a little bit beyond any expertise but I think it's a good question I think it's a good question that's a good question so the idea that the company has a lot of expertise that I have but what I've seen because I did have the opportunity to observe it there's water that utilized both with the machine but also in the surrounding site because that prevents dust from forming how big is this mission might be about the length of this table maybe a little bit more certainly taller how tall I don't know if it's the same one that would be used, but I've seen them. They're about eight feet tall, like the size of a container. And the length of that table, let's say 15, 20 feet? Then maybe, Judge, it might go 25 or 30 feet. All right, 25 or 30 feet. A lot of noise involved? Certain amount of noise, for sure. All right. How much material is going to be brought into this facility on a weekly or daily basis, like as far as tonnage, truckloads?
Two answers to that. One is, what I do know is that whatever is brought in and the amounts that are brought in are actually controlled by the DEC. So the applicant can't go beyond what the DEC permits in its regulations. Number two, I know that Mr. Seaman, who is the town's environmental expert, requested as part of the EIS that the applicant provide limits to what it would bring in so that those limitations and the manner in which it would be done would be made known to the planning board. And so the applicant did agree to provide those limitations as requested by the town's environmental expert. Do we know what those limitations are? No. Would you know if that's per truck, per load, or per day? I remember specifically that it was by day. They wanted to know that it would only be within certain hours on work days and not on weekends. But it's indeterminate how many times a day? Yes. It's indeterminate how many trucks per day? That I do not know. But what I do know is this, Judge, is that that's certainly within the purview and certainly is what the planning board is going to impose. The reason we're here now is that when the zone change happened, the planning board said, we're very sorry. You're nine years in. You're about to get your final hearing, and we can't move forward. You have to clarify this matter. You have to go to the Board of Appeals. But, Judge, and also Mr. Porsche, to your point, those are limitations and conditions that the planning board will impose. And the planning board has made very clear that it's going to do so. And the applicant has said, and by the way, these are at public meetings. The applicant has said that there's no issue with that. The applicant has no particular usage or tonnage or amount. The applicant has said that there's no particular usage or tonnage or amount to which it aspires. Whatever the planning board deems best is what the applicant will do. Is this facility limited to just crushing concrete and asphalt? Yes. Nothing else is going to be recycled, crushed, stamped? No. No, the planning board made that clear. But to be fair also to the applicant, the applicant didn't seek that either. But the planning board did clarify that point. And this is just material coming from jobs. They are working. They are working on Long Island. Correct. You indicated that the similar use is a similar use right next door, so to speak. That's to the west, isn't that correct? We've all been there, by the way. Yeah. The way I look at it is because when you go out of the driveway, Suffolk concrete is sort of essentially diagonally across the street. You can just walk right there. Right. Right. But on the other end, if that's, we'll say, to the west, to the east, it's all residential homes. Isn't that correct? Right. Yeah. No, there's only one residential home that's nearby. I think the audience agreed with you. Yes. Okay. Can the audience please be quiet until they come to the podium to speak? Thank you. As I understand it, and by the way, just like you, I've been there, but what was established at prior meetings, particularly before the planning board, is that the property that's going to be used for the planning board is going to be used for the planning board. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. drive down a residential block and all of a sudden you see the other firm that's still there.
Well, I guess, Judge, it depends on the path you take, because what I would know is that you would go in off of Middle Road, then you sort of make that turn and you go around to Manor. See, I went straight down Middle Road, and it was on my right. But on Middle Road, you're on that for just a very short distance. It's not far off of Middle Country Road. It's not far off of 25. Just for the record, is Suffolk Concrete crushing concrete? My understanding is, what I've seen is that there are a number of folks there who are crushing concrete. I mean, these uses are not really, how shall I say, well-hidden. I thought they just made concrete, but maybe they are crushing concrete. I don't know. But you had mentioned the surrounding properties in the neighborhood, the adjacent properties are more intense and more impactful than the proposed use here. You want to expand on that a little bit? Sure. Well, you have Suffolk Concrete, which is making concrete, as you pointed out. It's a very intense activity. You also have a property that's, I guess if I'm on, picturing it or orienting myself, if I'm on Manor Road and I'm coming out of the driveway and then I go to the right, which is heading in the direction towards Suffolk Concrete, that there is a trucking and materials operation there that places a bunch of things. So there's dust, there's noise, there's truck activity, there's materials being moved. All of those things are happening. And it's happening not on a site. That would be regulated and in conformance with town code as this one is. Because I said this would be the only site in the surrounding area that would be subject to codes as they exist now. All of the others are these pre-existing non-conforming uses that essentially nobody can do anything about it, even if they wanted to. Does your client own other facilities that do this? The client did own one facility in Westbury for many years. Does not anymore, but operated a facility in Westbury for almost 30 years. Where does he currently bring his concrete and asphalt? What's that? Where does he currently bring in his material? As I understand it, he brings it to Island Park, which is some distance.
I have a couple of questions. Yes, sir. You know, you were talking and you were talking about applications and things like that. And you said you were told to make an application to the ZBA. Who told you that? What's that? You said that you were told to make an application to the ZBA. Who told you to make the application to the ZBA? The planning department or who? I. Well, did you make it on your own? Well, let me say this. Obviously, I did the application on my own on behalf of the applicant. So it's the applicant's application. Nobody in the town is made. I'm not saying that. Nobody in the town is making the application. But to your point, Chairman. The planning department had no input on that? Did they deny it or approve it or what? Well, they really can't. But they're aware of this section 301.222 . Because really, in a situation like this, that would be the only way that someone who finds themselves in this circumstance is going to move forward. Because again, I have to note, because I think it's very significant. We're not talking about someone who just comes forward at the 11th hour or is seeking something that maybe somebody was unaware of. This was made after ten years in the process because after nine years the zone was changed which is a fairly extraordinary circumstance. Well. You indicated that the prior use, the existing use, it's still in the process. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. exist in your opening statements is that occupied now that home i know there are people who are there at times judge is it is it occupied every moment of every day no it's not but it's the last time it was occupied that i don't know but and by who but it was it's occupied by uh employees of the of the applicant really as really as more of just as really more judge i have to be very frank of course really more on a caretaker basis because you don't want you don't want a home that's in an area like that to be subject to somebody who might squat in it or come in and damage it so that's why do they rent what's that do they rent no is there any any rental agreement anything any bill anything to show it's in use anybody here to demonstrate that they live here they live there i mean judge i can provide that as a follow-up of course all right but there's nobody here tonight there's no bills and even your j your exhibit j the most recent thing that stated was 1981. judge the reason i the reason i attached those twofold number one actually the application requires it so that was part of the application second of all just to show that it was in non-conforming use that that existed for many years i i mean they demonstrate that but they don't demonstrate there's anybody living there now is the how does the house act as as also like an office for the business that's true too or it would or there's another aspect of it which is that the home the home could be removed i mean that's if that's something that ultimately when we when this when this is i'll say this if and when the applicant could proceed you'd be in a situation where pursuant to 301 222 b you would move from one non-conforming use to another at which point the home would not have to be there so if planning staff or the planning department in conjunction with planning staff deemed that it was a bet it was better for the site to not have the home on it it would easily be removed we're trying to also establish is there an office in this house right now
there are there are office materials there do people operate the office on an everyday basis no but remember there's a reason for that too because one of the things that the town has said is that we do not want a lot of activity in and out of this site and all this matter is settled is there like a phone line to the business that goes to that house they would use cell phones
what is the site currently used for now yeah it doesn't look like it's fallow yeah i mean there's nothing that it can be used for now because the town attorney has indicated it should not be used until these matters are resolved so it's not being used as a residence it's not being used as anything at this point in time well as i as i told judge gazello uh the residential aspect of it is still there and people do do stay there because again the property ultimately the asset or the investment needs to be safeguarded and also you do not want people who would squat or do something else in there so just for clarification are you stating that the town attorney told you that the property couldn't be used as a single family residence or are you referring to the proposed uh facility concrete facility
well mr denti that's that's interesting i think that might be a bit of a hybrid and you know maybe you and i could clarify that with mr howard but as you know this it was made it was made fairly clear it did not want to see much activity coming in and out of this place because they thought that was going to be more respectful to the neighbors so the applicant was very eager to accommodate what was requested.
Have there been any violations or anything issued at this site? There were violations that were issued about nine years ago. That was DEC violations? Was that? DEC violations? Yeah, and those were cleared up almost instantaneously because the DEC's position was you brought in some material and you didn't have all your permits in place yet from the town, so we need you to stop. That's number one. Number two, the DEC said show us where the material came from, which they were very quickly able to do. The most important thing that goes on in the administration of what the DEC calls 360 permits, which relates to any type of material that comes into a site, is the origin of the material. But as I said, the applicant knows exactly where the materials are coming from because it's where they're working and they're not exporting in from out of state or in place. When did your clients purchase the property?
It was prior to 2017, the application. That's for sure. I don't have a deed, so I don't know the exact date, but they owned it when they made the application. They owned it when they made the application in 2017. And did your client obtain any permits or approvals for the use prior to the DEC violation from the town? They had applied, but the approvals were not finalized, at which point then they stopped. Was there a stop work order issued, Dan? I'm sorry, Mr. Barnes, no, there was not. That's okay. I take that back. There was at first, and then everything stopped. But there wasn't a stop work order. The stop work order was not from the DEC. The stop work order was from, as I recall, the town. The code enforcement. Correct. And the stop work order directed you to make application for a permit. Actually, the stop work order was after the application. See, what happened was they jumped the gun. So they were clearing without... Without a site plan. Yes. They had made their application, they jumped the gun, and they had to stop. Okay. Had they made their application to the DEC at that time? Correct. Had they made an application to the town at that time? Yes. We talked a lot about the site when we mentioned the site plan. I think it's just important for the record. Did the planning board, did they ever actually approve the preliminary site plan? No, they... I don't think so. No, they never did. As I said, it's unfortunate, but a matter like this, it's a very lengthy process. You have to go through a preliminary site plan. In a case like this, rightfully so, there's going to be a positive declaration. There has to be, because that's the only way that you're going to invoke in EIS a scoping process. Because if you don't do that, you're not going to have the level of... There's not going to be the level of scrutiny that you want. The applicant understood that, and that's where this very lengthy and collaborative process between town planning staff, Mr. Seaman, the town's environmental expert, and Nelson Pope and Voorhees, the environmental experts retained by the applicant, led to the EIS process moving forward. That took years. Now, you can see in the document that I gave you, and I think, unfortunately, so I'll apologize, of course, that the only one that's tabbed is the one that Mr. Whitmire has, but it is, these are documents H and I, and these are towards the end, and one shows that there was a scoping hearing, which only was set in February of 2020. That's three years after the application. And then you can see three years after that, which is in January of 2023, that... The planning board accepted the final submission. And then if you look at Mr. Dixon's letter, which follows the final resubmission, and you'll see the difference that it's marked final on the application paperwork, Mr. Dixon only indicates that there are three revisions left, and as I pointed out, they're really ministerial in scope. So these are folks who are about to be approved, and then the zone gets changed on them without their request or input, but we have to just accept and acknowledge that that happened. Did the planning board deny the preliminary site plan application? No. It was just... The way that works, Ms. Pradenti, is that it just works through iterations until such time as planning staff reports to the planning board that it meets... With their approval. And of course, ultimately, though, that is a decision of the planning board, but staff has great input in the process. Right. But your answer is it was never denied.
There was paperwork that came back that said the application process is denied at this point, which is sort of a formality in going forward, so that the applicant is made to resubmit, and the applicant resubmitted here multiple times. So for instance, the applicant submitted in January of 2017. There was a staff report in 2018. There was an additional submission at the request of Mr. Murphree in March of 2019. There was secret scoping in 2020, and then a final submission in 2021. And then there was a final submission in 2023. So the matter could not have been denied because it was always allowed to move forward with the revisions requested by way of comment letters. So you're stating there was no denial of preliminary site plan when you submitted in 2023. That was for final site. That was for final site plan, correct? Correct. And the town code actually allowed for, even if there was a denial on preliminary, to file and move for final, correct? That I don't know. Okay. I couldn't speak to that process. Okay. What I do know is this, is that at every juncture, through the various iterations, the applicant made the modifications and responded to the comments appropriately. At every turn. So that the application could move forward. So what was the last action by the Planning Board prior to the 2023 submission? The last action of the Planning Board was as I recall to request an appearance at a work session to indicate that they wanted to bind. Are there any comments? Are there any comments? Are there any comments? Are there any comments? Are there any comments? Are there any comments? Are there any comments? revisions. And when was that? I don't know the date, but it was prior to. Approximate year. I would say since that was in January of 2023 and those documents are before the board, it had to be towards the end of 2022. And that was based on your submission for final site plan? Correct. I have no experience with this, but I can't imagine how crushing concrete is not a very noisy process. Do you agree? I would judge. And this is outdoors? Yes. Although I would say this, Judge, that one of the things that planning staff had suggested, which certainly is a matter to which the applicant would be amenable, is that planning staff asked, could it be considered that this be done in an indoor facility? But it's not part of the plan right now. But if plan if but again, we're here to talk about a use the particulars of the use everything that will go on that site, the structures, the conditions, the restrictions that's for the planning board to impose. And so I would say this judge that that's certainly something that the applicant would consider as the applicant has always considered every situation. I would say that it's a matter of what you would consider a good suggestion made by planning staff. I would say that it's a matter of what you would consider a good suggestion made by planning staff. With all respect, that's what we used to call an if bet. With all respect, that's what we used to call an if bet. Do they exist to do concrete crushing facilities exist indoors? Yeah, you could put up a building that would surround it. Yeah, they do. Yeah, they do. Yeah, they do. And remember also, Mr. Porsche, it's always good to have a good plan. It's always within the purview of the planning board before a final hearing is set to indicate what conditions they want, including changes to the site plan because that's happened on multiple instances here. So the special exception criteria set forth in the code, chapter 105, 8, and 9, the C2A1 through A13. Can you go through those points for the zoning board and demonstrate that you can meet that criteria? I could. The – when you go to 221 – I'm sorry. 301, 222B, it refers you to 105 as sort of what authorizes you to then utilize 301, 222B. So I focused on the 301, 222B criteria. Well, it specifically states, Town Code Chapter 105, 8, the – Under C.A., which I referred, the Board of Appeals shall grant special exception and special permits only upon the making of the following determinations. And then it gives a list. The use will not prevent the orderly or reasonable use of adjacent properties or properties in the surrounding area. Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for Sale uses only for and intent of chapter 301.
So, we don't know that. What I did do, Mr. Dendy, I thought that what I did do, now, I don't have that enumerated before me. If I have a copy, I'd run through it with you. Of course, what I intended to do in more of a narrative fashion was address those items as part of what I set forth earlier, talking about the nature and character of the surrounding area and other uses.
I'm just reading forth the requirements and what the zoning board has to consider and providing you an opportunity to address them. I mean, you know, it's not an, you know, earlier you stated you're here to address them. You're here for an interpretation. You're not here for an interpretation. Your application is directly for a special exception. And the code requires the zoning board to follow this criteria. I agree. I think, if I can remember exactly what I said, if I misspoke, I'll apologize, but I think what I did say is that it's a special exception that... And in this instance, it acts in the nature of an interpretation. But I do not disagree that it's a special exception. That's what the application clearly states. And 301.222 is a special exception process. So I concur. If I could. Yeah. I just want to know a little bit more about the site. So I think if I tally it up, I think it's a special exception. I think it's a special exception. If I tally it up correctly, it's about 26,000 cubic yards of material that's going to be sitting there. If I look at the four different areas where there's lay down material either processed or stuff that's waiting to be processed, that's about 260 10-yard dump trucks somewhere in that neighborhood. So I'm just trying to get a feel for that. How close is the nearest residences? Yes. The only residences... Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Yes. used in other words that's a residence that I was informed by planning staff at a prior hearing before the planning work that that residence is a non-conforming use that's the one that's the only residence that is essentially close and is there any special provisions there in the construction of the facility they're meant to dampen any vibrations things along those lines I'll tell you the reason why I'm asking this when we had the former gallows site taken over on Hubbard Avenue and they began crushing vehicles I mean there were by Gershow for quite some distance around homes were experiencing vibrations from that crushing I'm thinking about even a machine that size which give me the amount you're going to be processing through there I'm surprised it's only that size that's an awful lot of material going through there what the likely impact I haven't seen the environmental impact statement so I don't know if this was addressed inside there what the likely impact is both with dust because at some point I don't see how you kind of keep the dust down if you're if you're wetting it down that just seems like you turn into a slurry but what the impact is on neighboring facilities neighboring houses obviously Suffolk cement probably is not going to care too much about that but a residential facility would be completely different well as I said addressing part of this earlier the techniques and and actually the equipment that's put into place that reduces dust it's fairly it's fairly effective I mean most facilities at this point in time you go to other jurisdictions they those facilities have them because that's not going to be able to get to a facility that's not going to be able to get to a facility that's not going to be able to get to a facility that's not going to be able to get to a facility because they're imposed by the other jurisdictions other municipalities pursuant to their respective codes and it's much more of a mist so to your point you think that it might create this sort of this mud pile but it doesn't do that what it does is it dampens the dust so I've always observed that to be to be effective but I guess that's always to a matter of degree right I I can't speak to that in the expert capacity let me be sure that's the the dust when they're crushing a concrete correct but when the truck comes in and dumps don't you anticipate to be dust with that so well but what they what they do is a lot of facilities when the trucks come in and out they have these elevated sprinklers that hit the dust that if the trucks would miss as they come in and out again the town is made very clear that ultimately the provisions in safeguards that the town will want or will come out of the site plan approval because as part and parcel of that there has to be the adoption of the EIS and so there's been great work that's been done on that over a course over the course of many years and the only thing I would just harken back to again is that in this particular instance you know the town exercises of control in that regard because this has to be done particularly in the case of the EIS and the EIS is a very important issue in the case of the EIS and the EIS is a very important issue in the case of the EIS and the EIS is a very important how many houses are we talking like you know we're talking from what i can see and i don't know if this is a perfect satellite image but so you get across the street as well but like how many houses are surrounded in this piece of property and in total residential houses you mean fanning out yeah i know there's only one adjacent border to a residential home but like next to that it seems to be three four five homes and then across the street it seems to be from what i can tell a couple homes at least is that fair yeah i thought maybe total as you fan out i always thought that there were six or seven but i don't have you you would see that much better i don't have that in front of me you know i just wanted to address uh 301-222b the non-conforming building and uses section one of the sections that we're supposed to be abiding by which is tough in this scenario is um b let me make sure i cite the right section um c c leave it c4 are you referring to 301-222 yeah the section this was specifically under 301-222b it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it of goods or products from raw materials in which the goods produced are generally of high value and in relation to bulk and which do not generate, and I think this is important, which do not generate offensive noise, vibration, glare, dust, smoke, gas, or other nuances. So I think that's directly on point with what we're talking about here and the nature of this facility. You want to comment a little bit about these things that seem to be concerning and right on point? Well, remember that, and this is where the nuance comes in, the application seeks a non-conforming use. So to your point, this will not conform to light industrial because nine years into their process, as they were awaiting their final hearing, the application was not able to provide it. Whereas it uses various uses. You want to use it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. You want it for various uses. beginning if we if we circle back it is there's a reason why a provision like this would exist in the code because not everything can be perfect and sometimes the town board will take action and that action may be very forward-thinking or may may attempt to enact a change globally but somebody may be affected in a very inequitable manner and that's what that's what took place here so is it your position that based upon the argument of pre-existing non-conforming use that the provisions regarding special exception set forth in 105 don't apply I'm not saying that they don't apply I'm saying that they have although you know it would not be for me to provide that interpretation and Hall or in part I'd have to leave that to you advising the board but I would say this that when you look at what those specifications are if you will including what mr. Porsche just mentioned clearly they have been they've have been addressed by the circumstances of the !
it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it is a pre-existing non-conforming to another that then is not conforming i know but you're referring to it now presently as a pre-existing use and i'm just confirming it's not a permitted or approved pre-existing non-conforming use the goal is to gain that status through this special exception correct and and just to be more clear and and i'll and i'll i'll put a finer point on it and maybe that's because i'm i'm changing tenses when i shouldn't but i'm using that and i'm there are times that i'm i'm using that and i'm speaking that way because i'm talking about what the use would be if it were allowed to move forward because right now there is the non-conforming use and what 301 222b says is that then you can have another non-conforming use this would be a non-conforming use because under light industrial it would not be conforming whereas under industrial a it would be and just to confirm you stated earlier uh that it is your intention to submit proof of continuous use of the single family residents as a single family residence correct that's what has to be established yes certainly to the extent that that you would want that and i and i know i of course i can supplement the record particularly with the chairman's approval i'll be happy to do that you offered that i'm confirming me to do it yes and i think we need it i agree we need that information because you're hanging your hat on the residential part of the component and we need to decide whether or not that's been in existence as a pre-existing non-conforming use as a residence and it's i don't know if it's being used as a residence anymore or hasn't been so we would need to establish that in the record
so you'll be able to provide that right dan yes sir okay good thank you and i'll be with the chairman's permission i'll i'll supplement the record and uh and i'll address the correspondence to miss prudente uh can i ask a few sure comments so i'm going through your uh environmental statement and under d2 project operations does the proposed action include any excavation mining or dredging during construction operations or both parentheses not including general site preparation grading or installation of utilities or foundations and you checked yes can you describe what those actions excavation mining dredging right well it's it's all encompassing but um when you look further and delve further into the application and the supplemental responses that were provided as part of the eis it relates to the crushing of the concrete there is going to be no mining that's that wouldn't even be permitted quite frankly but it's not going to be any mining at all um ! there'll be concrete crushing well i'm just referring to the specific question yes that was completed but it's sort of is there going to be any excavation any excavation you mean execute you mean excavation in the sense of digging up the land no any mining no any dredging no but you answered yes to that question but it's going to be the concrete crushing
well miss prudente i mean the applicant clearly wanted to err on the side of caution because excavation is encompassed by excavating machines so if you have concrete right that is brought into a site so i'll give you an example a truck comes in truck passes under the sprinklers and you get to the area where it's unloaded right and then the concrete unloaded has to go into the crushing machine how do you accomplish that you use an excavator it's like a backhoe so the applicant had to be precise and err on the side of caution in answering appropriately next under d2 under section 4 will there be on-site dewatering or processing of excavation excavated materials answer no correct right so when they talk about on-site dewatering i think that's what uh zba member zaweski uh was referring to so in other words during the crushing process it's not watered down to dilute dust it's not what i understand i understand dewatering is something different i understand that as an extraction process okay i can clarify it's it is it's an extraction process process when the ground groundwater table is high thank you next in section d2 c will the proposed action use or create a new demand for water response yes will the proposed action obtain water from an existing public supply yes did the applicant receive a water availability letter not yet because the applicant was the applicant was finalizing the process before of course it got shut down of determining whether a water line would run there or an existing well could be used that was part of that was an integral part of the eis process that the applicants and engineers nelson pope and vorhees have been in the process of working on with mr seaman did the applicant ever request or receive a map and plan for the extension of water public water to the site did the applicant receive a request a plan did the applicant request or receive receive a map and plan related to the request for public water to the site that's something that i could best have mr vorhees chick vorhees of nelson and pope answer because mr vorhees was dealing with the riverhead water authority and i think that's something that i would like to have mr vorhees and nelson pope answer because mr vorhees was dealing with the riverhead water authority and also with mr seaman and he was addressing the particulars of that topic next under section d will the proposed action generate liquid waste yes totally anticipated 220 gallons per day can you describe uh what liquid waste would be generated for Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale it uses uses atай emissions, including fuel? Answer, yes. Material transport vehicles, portable screening and crushing equipment powered by diesel-fired, internable combustion engines. True? Yes. Will the air emission sources require a New York State air registration air facility permit? Answer, yes. Will the proposed action result in the release of air pollutants from open air operations or processes such as quarry and landfill operations? Answer, yes. Yes, there certainly will be emissions. There are going to be machines and trucks there. Okay. Will the proposed action produce noise that will exceed existing ambient noise levels during construction, operation or both? Answer, yes. Will the proposed action remove existing natural barriers that could act as a light barrier or screen? Yes. Will the proposed action increase the number of !
Are there any uses for Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale members of the Building and Constructions Trade Council of Nassau and Suffolk counties. The majority of their workers reside in Suffolk County. Many members of the building trades, which is how we refer colloquially to the Building and Constructions Trade Council, live in the town of Riverhead in particular. So hardworking people, that's who they employ, and that's what this business does. They build roads. Mr. Clark, this is not a facility that's then going to be a for sale facility where people come there and load up and get crushed concrete? No, it's not.
Okay, thank you. So, Mr. Escuadro, I'm looking at the resolution of the Planning Board, Resolution 2022-2022, which is the ! Whereas the Planning Board, in compliance with SIGRA and issuance of a negative finding statement, must not approve the Breezy Hill Group 6 LLC asphalt and concrete crushing and screening facility site plan application. Okay. Now, therefore, be it resolved, the Planning Board hereby denies approval of the Breezy Hill 6 LLC asphalt and concrete crushing facility preliminary site plan application. I addressed that with you earlier. These are the procedures that the Planning Board follows, because if you look to the earlier part of that paragraph, it says, I'm not going to approve the Breezy Hill Group 6 LLC asphalt and concrete crushing facility preliminary site plan application. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. It's it's it's there's a negative declaration issued or there's a negative declaration issued But the planning staff will require what's called an expanded EA which stands for stands for an expanded environmental assessment Or there's a third path and that is to say that an environmental impact statement Must be issued and that's why this couldn't go forward in the manner in which you just indicated by virtue of that because the applicant had to come back at planning's direction and then seek an Environmental impact statement as part of the application that was done and That's how we get then to the Final submission which again is reflected in the letter Which is the second to last document that all of you have in your folders? That's in January of 2023, but for Mr.. Whitmire who has his tab That's item or exhibit I
I'm not trying to be difficult. I thought my question was straightforward if there was a denial and there was and out of the application because the application continued and It continued until a final Hey Submission which I just then and it was then going to be put on for a final hearing I'm just gonna read from the resolution. I didn't write this resolution I'm not counsel to the planning board. I'll just read it one more time resolved the planning board hereby denies approval of the Breezy Hill group six LLC and asphalt concrete crushing and screening facility preliminary site plan application And I think miss Brudenti. I guess we could you know we could be talking about distinctions that do not have a difference Because all I'm saying is this Clearly the planning board took that action and that was an action that was part of the path to get it to final approval and It clearly was not denied because the application moved forward in full force and effect So I understand what you're reading and there's nothing inaccurate about what you're reading but I just need to clarify this so that there isn't the suggestion that the application couldn't move forward because It moved forward in all in all respects That's all
And I'll do Any more information Can I call the environmental? expert So miss Lewis Quadro the zoning board would like to call and requested Jeff Seaman Appear at the meeting tonight for clarification regarding these secret issues I and let me just say I think that is that's a wonderful idea because Clearly there are many aspects of The application that relate to what was done in the EIS process I'm not necessarily sure that they're Particularly pertinent to the code interpretation, but I think it's important for the overall background of how we got to where we are And to the extent that mr. Seaman has things that he says that need to be answered or clarified by mr Voorhees from Nelson and Pope then I'll make a note of that so I could have mr. Voorhees supplement the record. Oh, I suspect a lot of those issues Will be appropriate before the Planning Board very good Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you
Seaman will have to Raise it right. Here. Do you Saleem. I swear to tell the truth. The whole truth. Nothing but the truth. So I helped you I do. MR. Please state your name and address. Jeffrey Seaman, Hampton Bays, New York. I am the environmental consultant to the town of Riverhead and tonight representing the Zoning Board of Appeals in order to, I think, clarify and try to remap where we are under the CEQA process. Before I begin, I think I have, if you'll allow me, a few clarifications to some of the questions that were asked of Mr. Lascuadro. And please, I think you have to forgive both of us since this application has restarted, I think, the last time I was involved was sometime in 2023. My major responsibility throughout the process has been to make sure that the process is in what I will call breezy hill part one, dealt with the CEQA process, the procedures, and the review of the environmental impact statement, which may serve to answer several of the questions that were asked this evening. But I think for the benefit of the judge, if I may also refer to you as the judge, I think that's a good question. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Lascuadro. Mr. Lascuadro, you still call me anything else this morning. Well, I think one of the questions that was asked was what was the volume of material that could be permitted under the New York State DEC Part 360 requirements which would regulate a C&D processing facility. The applicant is a C&D processing facility. The applicant had applied for a permit. There are two avenues. One is a permit. One is a registration. A registration would cover a smaller facility. A permit, which is what has been applied for, is for any facility that would accept and process 500 tons per day or greater. With respect to the throughput, the size of the machine, how much could be processed? In any single day? Yes, they do vary in size. Many of them are mobile. They can be transported from site to site. But the quantity with a daily throughput is specified in the EIS by a cut sheet for the particular machine that the applicant proposed to use. So that is a variable. So although you may be able to import 500 tons in a day, you may not be able to process that much depending on the size of the equipment. However, the EIS, and I want to be clear, I don't have the specific annual volume, but I think if you did 500 tons per day, six days a week, for an entire year, you would come up with a substantial number. But I believe during the environmental review process, you would be able to process 500 tons. You would also consider it as a Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale denied the applicant was instructed that they could prepare a final site plan and a supplemental environmental impact statement to support their final plan and give them a second bite of the apple providing that was done within a six month period of time from the denial date which I believe was April 21st 2022 the applicant met that deadline I think the submission was done in October and that started again the environmental review process now the conundrum that I see tonight is that once that process started planning board took the responsibility as it had done in the original EIS as being the lead agency however this application which was filed in December of 2025 and brings us here tonight was never a part of that environmental study and we're not going to be able to do that tonight the application was never intended at the time the applicant resubmitted in 2022 in October to be a part of the environmental review so much of what has been discussed tonight would not be included in the supplemental environmental impact statement because it was never part of the final scope it's only for Sale Sale it's only for Sale Sale it's only for Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale on the interpretation, which standing alone is a type two action, as many of your applications are. So you have very little involvement in the CEQA process. So what I'm trying to do tonight is to come up with a recommendation, which somehow has to find its way back to the planning board, that their actions, while appropriate, several years ago, under the requirements that they had given to the applicant for their submittal within that six-month period, and the items identified at that time that were to be subject to greater scrutiny under a supplemental environmental impact statement, excludes any of the dialogue or application processes that are before us today. So under CEQA, in section 617.8, there is an avenue for comments on a draft scope that can be added to the final scope, providing there are substantive reasons why those comments weren't previously submitted, and whether or not they would be significant to the application. And I think it's obvious that the Zoning Board of Appeals comments and the public's that you might hear tonight would be substantive with respect to the land use and zoning issues here. So what my recommendation would be, using that, as an avenue, is to formally request that the planning board, at the appropriate time, perhaps rescind its adoption of the final scope. And if this hearing remains open, since you can't make any decisions until the CEQA process has been completed, allow a new resolution, to establish the draft scope, give the public an opportunity, as well as this board, to submit additional comments to the original draft, and then issue a final scope. That would be my recommended option. The other option is the applicant would have to withdraw everything and resubmit from scratch. I think that would be unfair because I think, first of all, they would not meet the six-month deadline that had been given to them previously by the planning board, and that would seem to be an excessive recourse. How that application and request to rescind and reestablish the scoping process with the planning board could take place either through direct action of this board or request. It could be requested by the applicant. Again, not only because the involvement as an involved agency by CBA on this matter, but also because the zoning has changed. And under the original application, the use is now contemplated under the light industrial We're not part of that industrial land use and zoning issue that was previously studied. So much of that can be thrown out the window. And under 617 , you could just supplement what's already out there, but I don't think that's the correct avenue to go because you are now an involved agency, and I would imagine that the land use and zoning issue is a real core component of the EIS. And I think it would be appropriate after you review tonight's hearing that you may have even more questions or issues that you would like to have added into the EIS process. So, Jeff, if I could just summarize. I'm being really direct on this. Planning Board is lead agency, true? Correct. They declared themselves lead agency, correct? Yes, they did. By resolution, yes. Zoning Board is unable to make a determination until the secret process is complete, correct? As an involved agency after the, yes, correct. After the sub-agency. After the supplement. After the final EIS is, yes. Ready? Correct. It's your, those are two points you've made. You've also recommended that the Zoning Board take the position not to request Planning Board have applicant re-apply the zoning decision. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. Right. new the recent processes but instead have the planning board the request from cba the recommendation would be to rescind the adoption of the final scope include and list the zoning board as an involved agency to permit the zoning board to submit comments prior to the completion of planning boards final review correct and to and to continue the coordinated review process with the cba i'm confident in the planning board processes will go according to the required secret process my responsibility obviously on behalf of the zoning board is that the zoning board adhered to secret lead agency status no determination until completion and obviously follow your recommendation yes and and also to acknowledge that as an involved agency the zoning board of appeals at the time the final supplemental impact statement is submitted will render its own findings statement which is independent of the planning board or any other involved agencies finding statement thank you
thank you so uh thank you for the public uh uh mr squadro do you want to respond or can we like members of the public maybe if i could just sure address one or two of those points
all yours
so
! uh so clearly i i agree with much of what mr seaman has said we all know that he's very very good at what he does and i know um our experts particularly mr vorhees and his team from nelson pope and vorhees worked or worked with him on this over the course of years it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it matter. But, and the town board has indicated maybe at a work session that it's amenable to the use and citing this on a particular parcel as is presented or as suggested. But that might require certain area variances that the town board can't waive, would have to go to the board of appeals. And so in those instances, a town board will refer the matter to the board of appeals and then it comes back. But the town board is lead agency. But yet that hearing and the determination is able to go forward. And that doesn't prevent the matter from going forward. So in other words, the board of appeals can hear the application, but ultimately it's understood that it's going to have to go back to the town board. And it's not going to be a matter of, you know, a matter of, you know, a matter of, you know, in the scenario I'm giving to you. And then the town board has to act. So I do hear what's being suggested. What I'm noting though, is that you are an involved agency. Mr. Seaman is correct. And of course, we can all acknowledge that nobody could have anticipated this because nobody knew that after nine years of an application that the town board was going to change the code and eliminate the use. So therefore, this application was necessitated by that. What I could suggest, however, you know, and of course, you'll have to make the determination that you deem best, but that is your determination could still be made. But everything that's done here and all comments that you wish to convey, particularly on an environmental basis, would be conveyed to the planning board in any event. And the planning board, can choose to redo the scope and rework the EIS to take into account things that are said here, to the extent that those things were not accounted for and everything that they did over the course of years.
But again, I just think that how long has the secret process gone on before the planning board? At least three years. Probably four. Because as we as we know, which I pointed out there was at one of the documents I provided it's. Item h. That Mr. Whitmire has. But of course, that's one of the ladder documents. That indicates that there there was a February. There was a February. 20th. 2020. Sale. scoping hearing but there's of course a lot of work that precedes a scoping hearing so we were going back to 2019 and they've declared themselves lead agency twice and they already commenced the second process right yes so I imagine what really I guess needs to be thought about is how is this done to not prejudice with you know the applicant acting in good faith and bringing this forward it seems to me that mr. seaman was saying that the Planning Board would have to agree to reopen and then the Planning Board would then I see now this then becomes this is the first time I've heard of a plan that would be approved by the Planning Board and this becomes interesting and this is where I say oh which comes first the cart or the horse because mr. seaman has suggested and again I don't disagree conceptually but I'm also thinking practically but mr. seaman has suggested that the Planning Board would reopen reestablish the scope move forward with the EIS process and then they were ultimately would be an adoption and that that adoption by the planning board would then allow you to make your determination here but no matter what the planning board must complete that process agreed so you keep talking about which comes first the chicken or the egg the reality in this application process planning board must complete their environmental review but they can only do that in conjunction with with a vote on a final application that's the process i mean that and that so that's why i'm saying that there's your financial site plan to them excuse me you submitted the request for final site plan approval to them then i think what we would need is the is the um assistance of the office of the town attorney and the recommendation and even consent of this board because so because the planning board would be of the position that they can't move forward until this issue is clarified here but if you can work that so that that can happen then i think maybe there's your solutions i really disagree the zoning board accepted your application without a denial and proceeded with the hearing tonight they'll keep the hearing open they've offered you an opportunity to provide additional submissions i have other recommendations uh regarding perhaps other material you would want to submit to the board and if you do i think the zoning board would grant you that and they'll keep the hearing open and i wasn't referring to that i think i think you know i think the the board has handled this here tonight very definitely all i'm just actually i was actually speaking to the planning board we'll need the planning board to agree to do what's being suggested okay that's what we would need right and whether they do or they don't the zoning board can maintain its position to be perfectly clear and aside from mr siemens comments i'm sure you could appreciate i did my legal research on the secret process the lead agency so i think we're good good okay so the public's going to speak and then if there are any questions i'll be happy to answer them and then we'll get to the hearing at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at 2 pm at complicated because of the time frames that have been involved between the finding statement and the directions given by the planning board and now the involvement of ZBA under this application. What I'm trying to protect in the secret record, I don't want to see a split in the process and create a concern for segmentation of the review. I do understand that in some cases with less important land use and zoning issues that might be an appropriate path to take, especially as was demonstrated in the interpretation process as a type two. But this is a much larger issue and what I would like the secret record to reflect is that all of the issues within the special exception requirements. The criteria are clearly discussed and outlined within the EIS and we can't do that unless we get that information as part of the final scope so that the applicant can't in the final EIS say, well that was never really part of the scope so we don't have to discuss it in great detail. So I'm trying to protect that entire record for the applicant and for both. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? Are there any comments for members? like to speak, if you want to just come up to the mic, we'll swear you in. And if somebody talks about a subject that you're going to talk about, come up and say hello and then just pass. Don't repeat it, please. Oh, God, we're going to be friends. I'm going to get to know you. Excuse me. Please raise your right hand. I do solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help your God. Thank you. Please state your name and address. Hi. Good evening. My name is Takvi Turchin. I'm the Greater Calverton Civic Association. Can you just raise your voice a little bit? Oh, very sorry. I was afraid of the microphone. Takvi Turchin, Greater Calverton Civic Association president. I'm here tonight representing most of the faces of the people that you see in this room. Yep. And those who are watching from home and watching not only on Channel 22, but there were a few Zoomers on there. And I'm going to ask you to raise your hand. Once again, we find ourselves in front of you and listening for over, I don't know, what are we at? An hour and 45 now. We were just in front of you two weeks ago. These are the same neighbors. We recognize the importance of the development along Middle Road. It is incumbent upon us to make sure that we're knowledgeable. And we recognize that. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. And it's also incumbent upon us to raise our voice. the civic it's very brief I'd like to read it to you into the record for the benefit of the record the auditory record so greater Calerton Civic Association reflects respectfully submits this written objection for inclusion in the official record concerning this appeal the Association represents residents of the Calerton community who are directly affected by land use decisions along Middle Road and surrounding industrial corridors the submission objects to the requested special exception to convert an existing non-conforming single-family residential use into a solid waste management management facility involving construction and demolition debris processing including concrete and asphalt crushing and screening the unlawful intensification of non-conforming use town code 301 222 B permits the town board of the zoning Board of Appeals to approve a change from one non-conforming use to another only where the proposed use is no more detrimental to the neighborhood then the existing use I take a pause here because what I heard tonight for better part of an hour was a representative from the applicant mischaracterizing this neighborhood it is in an environmental justice area and there are industrial uses but dating back to 1940 if you look at the aerials that were produced in their 900 plus page report there was a residential house right at the corner of Manor and middle and spend there ever since initially the representative was splitting hairs over a budding versus adjacent and I'm very happy to see the seriousness with which you asked them to define the neighborhood and I think that we all got a better feel for it after you ask those questions the the single-family residential use is inherently low impact the proposed social solid waste processing operation introduces heavy truck traffic outdoor stockpiling of construction debris continuous mechanical operations noise vibration dust diesel emissions and particulate matter this represents a clear escalation in intensity and external impacts the prior ZBA interpretations do not authorize this use prior ZBA determinations interpreting whether concrete crushing is prohibited were limited to textual interpretation and did not grant site specific approval or even evaluate neighborhood compatibility reliance on those interpretations is legally insufficient solid waste processing requires heightened security the proposed use constitutes solid waste management and carries documented risks to air quality groundwater public health and community character approval through a non-performing use substitution without demonstrated equivalency of impacts exposes the town to legal and environmental risk failure to implement a solid waste management program is a risk that is not a ! the applicant has not demonstrated through competent evidence that the proposed use will be no more detrimental than the existing residential use the record lacks comparative analysis of analyses of traffic noise emissions and operational intensity the cumulative impacts impact concerns are incremental approvals of high density uses along middle road collectively erode community character and environmental safeguards this application must be evaluated within that broader context our conclusion for the foregoing reasons the greater calverton civic association respectfully urges the zoning board of appeals to deny the requested special exception the proposed use constitutes an impermissible intensification of a non-conforming use and fails to meet the standards of town code 301 222 being respectfully submitted thanks very much for your time please keep your shields up we're looking forward to your answer thank you can ask a question how many people figure here about 60 70 in here yeah i think the seating is around 60 all other than the the attorney they're all your colleagues or body association so so residents raise your hands there you go anybody not a resident they're being none i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry i'm sorry thank you thank you very much
I know you saw me swear to tell truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God state your name and your address please my name is Jim Gore Lesky 1776 Middle Road Calverton my wife and I own the property adjacent to the post project lifelong residents for about 38 years I heard so many things today that I could comment on but I would like to say and I don't want to overstep my bounds I appreciate the turnout of the people in the area okay that have an interest in what might happen here you what I would like to say is that counselor for the applicant mentioned that I guess she has that it's sort of unfair that there was a zoning change while his application was still waiting to be determined on certainly the job of the town it's only for Whoever else might be involved to set zoning for the town okay which is in the best interests of the town it's residence when we bought our house there okay it had Wolfin agricultural property at one time and it was for residences as well as subjects members down the road there too and before we bought the property zoning was changed for Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale Sale And before we bought the property, the zoning was changed to some kind of industrial use, I guess to allow Suffolk Cement. But it wasn't until recently that I realized that my house was a non-conforming use as well as the seven or eight other houses that are in the neighborhood there. And there were additional other houses there when we moved in, but they're long gone at this point. So to say that, and because of all of the delays, which I feel were caused by the applicant and his non-compliance or activities that were non-compliant. Not permitted. That's the main cause of his delay in his application through the years here. And like he mentioned, COVID might have a part in that also. But from time to time, it is up to the town to review zoning in an area, especially in an area like Calvary, which over the last 20, 30 years has changed quite a bit. I mean, we've got some major developments. Okay. We've got some major developments in the area now. So much so that recently I was handing out some flyers, driving around and putting them in people's mailboxes. The developments that I thought were five, 10, 15 houses turned out to be 50, 60, 100 houses. So I didn't even realize how much of a change there was in my own neighborhood, honestly. But throughout this whole process, okay. The delays, I feel, were not so much the town's fault, but the applicant's fault. This thing from the beginning is like a bowl of jelly. You wiggle it, jiggle it, hold it under the light or in the heat for a minute or so, and it starts melting. When they originally came onto that property, they cleared it on a holiday weekend. Okay. When nobody came. And nobody could respond to it. When police were called, okay, and they spoke to the responding officer, people that were clearing, they put a lawyer on the phone. Now, I don't know if it was this gentleman here, but he told the police officer that they had all the permits in place and they were allowed to do what they were doing. And it got done that day or over that weekend. Because they were doing it. Because the town was closed. Nobody could respond, only the police officer. And he didn't really, couldn't do anything about it because the lawyer told him it was all legal. Well, that continued for the first three, four years. There was always something going on on a holiday weekend. At one point, they brought in thousands of yards of material and dumped it on the property to process in the future. They changed all the grades on the property. They changed the ! They dug a tremendous trench to hopefully put these crushers down into this trench in an effort to keep noise down eventually. So, everything that they did hurt themselves. Okay? And I think what really hurt them more than anything is the fact they had no regard for the people that live in the area. Okay? And it's only for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. I'm guessing it's for them. but I can only speak to common sense and at some point somebody's got to make a decision I don't begrudge the applicant being able to use the property for some purpose okay but there's got to be a transition from industrial heavy industrial okay which the cement block is heavy industrial in my eyes and residential it can't just be heavy industrial right up to the residents and one final thing I'll say thank you very much thank you sirs good question one other thing when I you know I was privy to some of the paperwork which I don't even know what particular paperwork was whether it's an engineering study the sequel whatever it's you know through pages and pages and pages of material you know I don't know what the paperwork was but I don't know what the paperwork was when I flip to the final page of one study and they mentioned that my home and my garage my property would serve as a buffer for the rest of the neighborhood from the noise the dust the vibration that was pretty much it for me I could never go along with anything these people were going to do and if you got questions for me I'll leave it at that I think you said you live in there 38 years is that correct year-round you know what a snowbirds are you and where is your house in relationship to the property is it across the street from you down the block east of the property adjacent property lines meet okay so you're right next door so to speak have you ever seen anybody live there for this first when they were changing the grades on the property okay there was a guy that was a guy that was a guy that was a guy that ran the machine that you know a big pain he stayed in the house for a time being how long goes that period I was like the first year and how long ago if he says nine years they own a property that was eight years ago okay and then so there was another couple that lived in there for a short time maybe six months how long goes that again and could you describe the neighbor's behavior it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's it's And then there is one on the corner. That fellow's been there for a long term. Now, going west where the other existing facility is, is that the only other, for lack of a better word, industrial facility in the neighborhood? You mean the cement plants? Yeah. Suffolk Cement? Well, Suffolk Cement is actually across the street, okay, to the west. All right, but my question is, is that the only industry or commercial structure there? Basically, there's two cement companies, okay? But they're together. West, no. Other than those two, we'll call it one. There's no others? No, there's nothing. I'm trying to think how to explain it to you. There's two separate transit mix companies, Suffolk Cement and then in Sears. Sears Ready Mix. And they're due west of you. And they're together. Correct. Other than that, it's all residential? Yes, in the little block. Okay. And there's a large vacant piece of property that runs all the way over to Applebee's on 58th. That's not a commercial property, obviously. I don't know what it is anymore. It used to be farmland, okay, when I came there. So what it is now, I don't know. Thank you. Anyway. Any more questions, sir? Anyone else? I got one more question for him. Okay. In the last year, have you seen anybody renting the house? No, we haven't. How about in the last two years? No. How about in the last three years? No. Okay. Please raise your right hand. You solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. I do. State your name and address, please. My name is Neemeth Calverton. Your last name is what? Neemeth. Okay. I've lived here for about 20 years, and I walk or ride a bike nearly every single day. I go all the way down to Suffolk Cement. Suffolk Cement is in a low. It drops way down. So to come up to these smaller houses on the end of middle, before the cement, you don't hear them because it's much lower. And also, they're... The wind's in the way it runs. You barely hear the sound. I've ridden my bike or walked down there for 20 years. Never have I heard grinding, crushing, or anything like that. Yes, there are trucks. And yes, it's a cement factory. They make bricks. They make all kinds of blocks. Across to the next block, I don't know how many acres that is away, on the small end of Toomey, behind those places, there's another cement company that makes cement. Okay. And they make rings for septic tanks and cesspools. Okay. But that's pretty far away. I've still never heard them crushing anything. Across the street or on... I don't know what direction it is. Southern part of middle, across from these homes, is the potential for that industrial factory or... Okay. Okay. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. Are there any helt. across the street from Timber Point at the Grumman site is that and it vibrates and leaves noise all the time now that's a long distance that's not like your backyard so for these poor people who have homes there 30 40 years to say to them you really don't matter anymore because I'm gonna build a factory that's gonna make me some money and I couldn't care less about you you live these at 20 years 20 years and where's your home in relationship down just east of deep hole in the Windcrest East community so far away from this and you walk by miles a day Walker they all know me every day up deep hole by the way but you won't play there virtually every day have you ever seen anybody living here no not for I noticed I used to notice the place because they have a little wooden bridge they built over a little I don't know if it's a man-made stream or pond and then there was that nice big house in the back I never noticed anything there but I wasn't looking specifically at that but you never noticed anybody look at any cause we can like that I have not. Okay, thank you. Anyone else? No one else? No one on streaming? Does anyone on Zoom want to speak on this matter? Raise your right hand. Yes, sir. Do solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So help me God. So help me God. Please state your name and address. Yes, it's Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Salman. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. Sale. I serve as counsel to the county board. Very well. This is the first time I've been before the ZBA. I did come to the other meetings because I just hate to see what's going on in the area. The previous fellow that owns the house right adjacent, as a broker, if he went to sell, he would have to do a disclosure that his property is being impacted by this proposed factory, basically. I think this project has whiskers on it. It's been around so long. The whole character of the area has changed. Route 58 has gotten so busy that people do the alternate. They come on Manor Road to avoid the heavy traffic on 58. Middle Road used to go straight through. For some reason, they ended up blocking it off so that Suffolk Cement, I guess it is, can bring their trucks through. They did put a stop sign so the trucks have to stop there. But these are big trucks, and can you trust them? The whole character of the area has changed to residential. And I believe these farms are going to be almost obsolete with the high-rise, I forgot what they call them, farms where they can grow indoors 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. And these farms have been in good condition. I think they're going to be good. I think they're going to be good. I think they're going to be good. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. I think it's going to change. to continue doing farming, that they're going to become residential. So that's why I said the whole character of the area, it just doesn't warrant putting this concrete demolition type thing in. Any questions? Thank you very much. Thank you.
I just solemnly swear to tell the truth, to hold truth, and that's what the truth is. I do. Say your name and address. My name is Catherine Wheeler. My address is 46 Nicholas Way, Calverton. Where I live is about a half mile from where this proposed crusher is going to be, might be. And it's really north of Manor Road. So it's the first residential street north of Manor Road. Right now with the cement works on Manor and Middle and Toomey, tremendous amount of truck traffic all the time. There is ambient noise that comes from the cement factories. And I know it's them. I know it's them because it stops about 530 at night. I just also want to say that at the intersection of Manor and Middle, there is currently a sign that says heavy truck traffic. I would like to know what that sign will say if there's, what was it, 500 tons of concrete coming in. So that's what I have to say. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Thomas, we're going to tell the truth, the whole truth. So help you God. I do. State your name and address. My name is Michael Cuomo. I live in Foxwood Village on Middle Road. Can you be quiet, please? We can hear him. Can you just repeat your name and address, please? I'm sorry? Can you just repeat your name and address? Michael Cuomo. C-U-O-M-O. No relation. 1407 Middle Road. Just a quick question. I'm a little confused, and I want to make sure the distinction is clear in my head. So I hear everyone talking about concrete and concrete dust and the environmental impact of that. But I read that the application says concrete and asphalt. And I may be wrong. I guess the environmental consultant can clear this up. There's a big difference. Between those two substances and that asphalt may be much more toxic than concrete. Asphalt does contain petroleum products and so on. So I just want to be sure that you folks understand that distinction and that when you do communicate with the planning board, that among your requests is to make sure that that distinction is mentioned so that the environmental, the environmental people can be looking at both of those substances when they make their decision. That's basic. I just want to make sure that that's clear. Thank you. Do you want to speak, sir? Please. Okay. So I swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. So I hope you got it. I do. State your name and address. My name is Steve Kuhl. I live in Timber Park in Calerton. Across from the Grumman property. Your last name? Kuhl, believe it or not. K-U-H-L? K-U-H-L. Thank you. So my comments will be brief and maybe too simplistic, but I have to make the point. When my wife and I bought the house in Timber Park 39 years ago, Grumman was still in operation. And the F-14s and the A-6s would come back home after flying over the ocean. And they'd be moving pretty quick. And they'd be pretty loud. And I remember one time mowing the lawn. And this was the first day I ever saw an F-14 come home. He came back and he banked in to make his final approach on the airfield runway. And as I looked up, I could see the patches on the guy's arm. I mean, that's how close these jets were coming in. I mean, that's how close these jets were coming in. And, you know, I remember saying, God, it's loud. I don't know if I can stand it here. And then I thought to myself, wait a minute. They were here first. Grumman was here first. You know what, Steve? Get used to it. That's what you bought into. I think that the applicant should keep that in mind. That, okay, Suffolk Cement was there. And the people that bought our homes around the area, we knew that. We knew that the cement. The cement plant was there. It wasn't really noisy. But we knew what it did and we were buying into it. We were moving in anyway. What the applicant, I think, needs to keep in mind is that now it's extremely residential there. There are a lot of people living in the area. You want to move in with an industrial plant that's going to make a whole lot of noise and change the aspect of the area. I think that's something they need to keep in mind with their application. Part two, and I'll make this even briefer. I get to cross-country ski the other day with all that snow. I got to cross-country ski up and down Manor Road. And three bald eagles, three of them, were sitting on top of those power lines. Three of them. That's a real nice thing to have in your residence. Yeah. In a residential area. I don't know how much the bald eagles are going to want to hang out when the concrete's getting broken. But I thank you for your time. Thank you. You got one more? Two more? I won't do the whole thing. I promise. I swear her in for sure. You're so good. Thank you. Thank you. Salome swear to tell the truth. The whole truth. Nothing but the truth. So help you God. Please state your name and address. My name is Barbara Blass and I live in Jamesport. Thank you. I do have a lengthy statement and I will not read it all. But I did submit it to the board earlier today so you have that. But I did want to just pull out a couple of things that I think may be pertinent. The expressly prohibited use in the light industrial industrial district you know there's a difference between a expressly prohibited use and a non-conforming use and the use that's being sought is expressly prohibited and you'll see that in attachment 4b of the Riverhead Town Code there is no provision in Riverheads code that authorizes this board or any other board to substitute an expressly prohibited use for a non-conforming use just doesn't happen and there were a couple of comments that were made about it appeared as though the applicants representative was saying the town board on its own motion just went ahead and changed willy-nilly this you know our property that was that can't be more inaccurate this application is in direct conflict with a comprehensive plan and ironically if you read in the adopted EIS the applicants EIS it actually confirms and acknowledges the importance of respecting a comprehensive plan it says the need for a specific type and or location of development is established by the public by the public in concert with the applicable town entity and expressed in the form of recommendations in a planning document such as a town comprehensive plan our community this community is a town comprehensive plan and it is a town comprehensive plan it uses various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various uses for various these here well we recognize that we didn't want it anymore the town the community said it doesn't belong here anymore so I wanted to sort of emphasize that I also wanted to say that the planning boards adopted findings were very specific the negative finding statement and it included this following statement the action is inconsistent social economic and other essential considerations from among other reasonable alternatives the applicant has not verified nor demonstrated actions to avoid or minimize adverse environmental impacts to the maximum extent practicable they went on to specifically talk about lighting when where how much lighting will be provided measures to prevent fugitive lighting this is what they have to do in their supplemental and it hasn't been written yet although they were getting given directive back in 2023 adopted a final scope we have never seen the supplemental but here's some of the other things they were asked to make sure was included in that document and operations schedule when activities that when will activities that generate impacts such as noise just nuisance and or truck traffic will or will not occur you need to let us know noise the applicant is to provide a description of mitigation measures that could further reduce the potential for noise impacts to the neighborhood due to the proposed facilities operation and by the way the estimated throughput is 86,000 130 cubic yards of material circling back to your charge in chapter 105 dash 8 I'm not going to read those criteria I you are aware of them and I'm sure that the public is aware of them at this point but it's very very clear that it would be very difficult for this board to determine that this processing facility will not that generates air pollution noise dust vibrations and traffic will not impact the residential uses adjacent to and in the surrounding area and impact their valued what about the health and safety and comfort of the surrounding neighbors can they sit and open their windows or sit outside I doubt it and it's a good time to also mention that three-quarters of the site four point three seven acres of that site to be exact which was currently was forested it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it uses it So I know you cannot make a decision. The seeker has to be concluded in order for that to happen, and I know it's going back to the Planning Board for all of those issues and then some to be addressed. But I do respectfully request that the hearing remain open, which I understand that you're going to do, and I'm fully confident that after reviewing all the pertinent information and testimony, this Board will find that the requested special exception cannot meet the criteria set forth in Section 105-8. Thank you very much for your time. Let me see if I can tell the truth. The old truth, nothing but the truth. May I help you, God? I do. Thank you. Address and name, please. Chris Dorr, 112 North Woods Road, Calverton. Chris Dorr. D-O-R-R. D-O-R-R, yep. I live on North Woods Road, which is about a mile from where this is going to be. And while we're sitting here tonight, I got on my phone and I said, I'm going to talk to you. So I got on my phone and looked, what was the decibel level of a concrete crusher? And it's 120 decibels. It's the same as a jet taking off. All day long? All day long from eight to five. This will decimate the property values of anybody within at least a five mile radius of this facility because all day long there'll be a sound equitable to a jet taking off. Right. Right. it's just going to destroy our property values. Thank you. Thank you. All right.
You have to go. Can I say that that would be it? I really appreciate the turnout, really. It's good to see that so many people care for this town. I happen to love this town. I've been here since 1950, and I'm going to be here a while longer and whatever. But I am so glad that you all came tonight and that the people that spoke, we heard you. Thank you. And we'll do our job.
Is it closed yet? So if you could please exit quietly. Are we going to adjourn? Okay. We've got a minute. What do we got minutes to do? Let's adjourn. We've got to adjourn this. Appeal 2-0-2-5-0-4-3. Hearing shall be adjourned. They're not going to be able to hear you. The speaker's picking everyone up. You guys make up your mind. You want me to read it? I can project. I can project.
Heather, ask for submissions within 30 days. I got it. Project. Okay. All right. Members of the board, so for appeal number 2025-043, the hearing shall be adjourned to a future date for planning completion of SECRA and submission of the documents requested of the applicant this evening. So moved. Within 30 days. Second. Within 30 days. So moved. Mr. Barnes. Mr. Barnes. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. Second. No, don't run away yet. It's January 8th, 2026. I move to approve them. Second. All in favor? Aye. Our next committee is February 12th, 2026. Motion to adjourn? Yes. Moved. Second. Second. All in favor? Aye. Leave it on the tank.
Thank you.