1989-09-11
........
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
'-' 13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.........
- -- --l
m 1 4 89 1
, ,",'
PLANNING BOARD : TOWN OF WAPPINGER
COUNTY OF DUTCHESS : STATE OF NEW YORK
-------------------------------------x
PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE PURPOSE OF
RECEIVING COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM RECEIVED
AS TO COMPLETENESS ON JULY 24, 1989
PREPARED PURSUANT TO THE NEW YORK STATE
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY REVIEW ACT ON THE
APPLICATION OF ALPINE COMPANIES SEEKING
SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT A SHOPPING
CENTER ON 60 PLUS OR MINUS ACRES LOCATBD
ON THE EAST SIDE OF ROUTE 9 APPROXIMATELY
1,000 FEET SOUTH OF MYERS CORNERS ROAD AND
BEING PARCEL '6157-02-707773 IN THE TOWN OF
WAPPINGBR.
--------------------------------------x
September 11, 1989
Town Hall
Town of Wappinger
APPEARANCES:
TOWN PLANNING BOARD
CHAIRMAN EDWARD HAWKSLEY
WILLIAM PARSONS
CHRIS SIMONETTY
JOHN PERILLO
DONALD KELLER
NOT PRESENT:
FRANK PATTERSON
JAMES MILLS
ALSO PRESENT:
HERBERT LEVENSON, Zoning Administrator
and Clerk to the Planning Board
JAY PAGGI, P.E.
Engineer to the Town
RAY ARNOLD, A.I.C.P.
Town Planner
Robin E. DiMichele
Senior Court Reporter
State of New York
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
'-"
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 2
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLBY: The meeting will come
back to order, please. We will continue with the
public hearing. There are a couple ot
administrative items I would like to take care ot.
Some ot you have probably been to meetings here
betore and you know what I'm going to say, but they
need to be said.
Since this is a public meeting hall there is
no smoking allowed. It you must smoke you have to
do so outside the building. In the event of an
emergency you may exit through the doors at the
rear, down any ot the major hallways directly
outside the building, or through this exit directly
to my right.
At this point, having said that, I move to
open the public hearing. Do I have a second?
MR. KELLBR: I'll second.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLBY: All in favor.
MR. SIMONETTY: Aye.
MR. PARSONS: Aye.
MR. KELLBR: Aye.
MR. PERILLO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Opposed?
(No Response)
.........
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
w....:.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
'-'
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 3
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Would the secretary
please note for the record that Mr. Mills and Mr.
Patterson are absent. Jay, could you please get
Herb. While welre waiting for the Zoning
Administrator to come in to the room I would like
to address the principals involved in the hearing
tonight. To my immediate left is Mr. Perillo,
member of the Planning Board, myself, Ed Hawksley.
To my immediate right is Mr. Parsons, to his right
is Mr. Keller and to his right is Mr. Simonetty.
If I may point out the other Town officials
present, the Clerk of the Board, Mr. Levenson, the
Consulting Planner to the Board, Mr. Ray Arnold,
and the Engineer to the Town, Mr. Jay Paggi. The
principals of the Alpine Corporation, or the Alpine
applicants are I think spread out in the front row
here.
Would the Clerk to the Board please verify
this pUblic hearing was properly advertised.
MR. LEVENSON: It was, Mr. Chairman, in the
Southern Dutchess News as prescribed by the SEQRA
regulations.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you very much.
Ladies and gentlemen, the purpose of this
'-'
.......
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 4
pUblic hearing is so -- Well, first of all, there's
one legal requirement, and that is in order to
satisfy the SKQRA requirements we have to have this
pUblic hearing. It is primarily intended to
receive input from you, the public, on the content
and adequacy of the draft environmental impact
statement, and that's what we'll be concentrating
on this evening. At some date in the future there
will be a public hearing on the site plan itself,
so I would ask you direct your comments this
evening to the draft environmental impact
statement. Would the --
Having said that, would the Clerk to the
Planning Board please verify that the draft
environmental impact statement was properly
distributed to the concerned agencies.
HR. LEVENSON: It was properly submitted to
all the concerned agencies.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you.
To give you a brief background on the
application, the application was received by this
Planning Board in September of 1988. The Planning
Board made a determination that it was a type 1
action and that the Planning Board was the lead
"-'
~
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
agency on Harch 13, 1989. The public hearing on
the scoping document which established the content
of this draft environmental impact statement was
held on April 24, 1989, and this draft document was
received by the Planning Board -- Could you fill me
in on that date? Is that the date on here?
HR. LEVENSON: Yes.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: On July 28, 1989. At
this point I would ask that Hr. Hesinger of LA
Group give a brief discussion, brief presentation
on the application.
HR. HBSINGER: Thank you, Hr. Hawksley.
Before I start I think Tyde Richards of the Alpine
Company wanted to say just a couple of words.
HR. RICHARDS: Hy name is Tyde Richards and
I'm here with my partner Hans Weiser. Also with me
is Bill Simcoe from C.T. Hale, Stu Mesinger from LA
Group and Phil Grealy from John Collins.
The LA Group prepared the D.E.I.S. for us
with help of course from C.T. Hale who was involved
with the sewer and water work, and John Collins who
was involved with the highway work. I just wanted
to mention a few things. We've had a lot of
questions regarding what the center will look like.
~
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 6
Here's a few ideas of what we have in mind for the
center to look like, and after the meeting everyone
can take a look at this artist rendering we've
prepared and over here we have some photographs of
the center we just opened two weeks ago which is
our first center, and you see a lot of similarities
in this center compared to our artist rendering
here. You know, we're very conscientious, the two
of us are very conscientious about our work and
what we do and we felt everyone might want to see
for a moment what our ideas are, of what the
project looks like. Without any further comment,
Stu Mesinger.
MR. MESINGER: Thanks, Tyde. I'm Stuart
Mesinger. I'm the Director of Community Planning
for the LA Group in Saratoga Springs, and we're the
principal office of D.E.I.S. along with John
Collins who did the traffic consulting and C.T.
Male who is responsible for water and sewer
engineering.
Most of your faces I recognize from the
scoping meeting when I was here in April, and at
that time we had a lot of input from you folks as
to the kinds of issues you wanted to see addressed
'Il1.o::..
'-"
""
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 7
in the D.E.I.S., and we tried to address them, and
I think the primary thing that we did that you'll
notice, is we refigured the entire layout of the
project. If you recall, that as the plans were
originally submitted and originally figured, this
center was located perpendicular to Route 9 and
extended along the southern property boundary, in
fact, in more of a line type shape, and was much
closer to all of these properties along the rear
line, and we've heard a number of comments at that
April meeting from the residents who abut this
property that they were concerned about things like
visual impact, noise, the general closeness of the
facility to their properties, and so we tried to
take that into account, and essentially what we did
was to swing the whole thing so that it's now
located in a -V- shape and is more parallel to
Route 9.
The other major change we made was to down
size the project by about 40,000 square feet, so
it's a significantly smaller project. We took --
We listened to you in a number of other ways,
that if you read the D.E.I.S., I hope you had the
opportunity to do that. We did some pumping tests
~
"-"
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 8
and we monitored neighbors wells with the wells we
put in on the property, and basically we didn't
find any effect on those wells.
We had done some storm water planning and we
think that we can duplicate the function of this
area as regards downstream drainage.
The one thing that you may notice that this
plan does is it gets in to this wetland area and
the wetland area as was requested at the scoping
meeting has been flagged in the field by D.E.C.
We've had meetings with D.E.C. about it and we
recognize this plan requires a permit from D.E.C.
and Alpine intends to seek that permit.
Without getting in to all the technical
details of the project I'm very interested in your
comments, as I think we were at the scoping
meeting. We've tried to address them and I'm
interested in what you have to say about the draft
impact statement.
The reason we have this hearing is it's a
draft statement. It's out there for public review,
and what happens is that your comments are going to
be incorporated in the final impact statement that
will hopefully address those comments, and again,
........
.......
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
if you haven't read the document please take the
time to do so, because it really helps us to know
what you think and to try and make this a better
site plan.
The comment period closes on September 21st.
After that time we'll prepare the final impact
statement incorporating whatever changes to the
project. It will be filed with the Town. The Town
will hopefully accept it, make findings on the
project and then we'll go in to the site plan
review stage which will be a very detailed review
of where plantings will be, where the retaining
walls go and a lot of detailed site plan specific
things, and they'll also be another public hearing
on the site plan.
I'm going to sit down and be quiet and listen
to you folks now.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLBY: Thank you very much. At
this time I would like to ask the experts that
generally report to this Board to give their
comments at this time.
Mr. Arnold, do you have any comments to make
at this time?
MR. ARNOLD: The basic purpose of the SBQRA
'.
'Ir....:.
'-'
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 10
regulation is to incorporate the considerations of
environmental factors into the existing plan review
and decision making process of the State regional
local government agencies at the earliest times.
It is not the intention of SBQRA that environmental
factors be the sole consideration in decision
making, but that protection enhancement of the
environment, human and community resources should
be given appropriate weight and social and economic
considerations in determining public policy, in
this case approval of plans and that those factors
be considered together in reaching decisions.
One purpose of this D.B.I.S. is to determine
how many of such perceived impacts are significant
and determine whether mitigating measures are
possible to eliminate or reduce the significant
impact.
The second purpose is to allow a suitable
balance of social, economic and environmental
factors to be incorporated in to the planning and
decision making process of this Planning Board in
considering the application.
The following comments are submitted on an
interim basis. A full report will be submitted
---
"-'
'-"
'l..t;.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 11
under separate cover prior to the close of the
comment period.
I'd like to mention that the new plan
intrudes in to the wetlands area in the center of
the site. The Board must determine whether this is
an allowable option in the development of this
parcel.
The new plan eliminates the construction in
the north -- the southeast corner of the site and
replaces it with the detention pond for fire
protection purposes. That's something I think we
have to address.
Detailed soil mapping is missing, more
current information other than 1939 soil survey is
available. Soil information may effect the
buildings and parking area location.
We should be aware there is a 16 foot
difference in floor elevations between the two
anchor stores. How will this difference be
handled? It's a question for them, and the
building will have an unbroken front of 1320 feet
in an L shaped configuration. It's not the easiest
type of development to have for fire fighting
purposes, for fire access purposes.
~
"
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.........
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 12
The physical analysis submitted, I need a
little bit more information inCluding what program
was used and the supporting assumptions.
The narrative describing the area does not
describe the existing shopping centers outside the
boundaries of the Town. This is somewhat
misleading. There are adjacent areas which have
Shopping centers and shopping retail in the
immediate vicinity, but they're not mentioned in
this report because they stopped at the Town
boundary.
D.E.I.S. references 202,600 square feet of
gross leasable area all the way through and on with
the plan. I'd like to know is this the total
building size or are there additional sizes other
than the gross leasable area? Is it all on one
floor?
Town parking requirements based upon total
building area and require a different calculation
for restaurants so we have to review the parking
spaces provided.
The Town adopted a revised master plan on
August 8, 1988. The D.B.I.S. -- This proposal does
not conform to that proposed land use and reference
.'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
---
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
'-'
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 13
is made in the O.E.I.S. as to compliance with the
Town plan which is not true at this time.
Three other technical comments. Submitted
landscaping plan does not conform to description
and parameters listed in the D.E.I.S. as pertains
to the intervention of species in the event of
disease striking plants. We have to talk about
that a little bit.
There is no mention of balancing Hudson fills
on the site which may reduce the need for blasting
or transporting topsoil and fill off the site, and
there's no mention of the disposal of grub material
and tree stumps whether burning or other
alternatives.
That's about all we have that I have at this
point.
We will be reviewing the traffic aspects in a
little bit more detail in the written report.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you very much. Mr.
Paggi?
MR. PAGGI: I have reviewed the O.E.I.S.
paying particular attention to three major topics,
being sanitary sewerage collection and disposal,
water source and supply, storm drains, storm water
'-"
......
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 14
management. We will have specific comments
relating to each of these three items and we will
be forwarding them to the Board by the 21st of
September which is the close of the comment period.
Just to highlight a few of the points we will be
mentioning in that letter.
With respect to sanitary sewerage disposal,
the developer states that he has struck an
agreement with the Village of Wappinger Falls for
one method of disposal of the sanitary sewerage and
we would like an overall location map showing the
specific location of that tie-in with some type of
correspondence from the Village acknowledging this
agreement.
The second alternative stated by the
developer is the tie-in to the Town's proposed
trunk line that will cross this property. We
understand that the developer cannot make a
commitment to that trunk line because it is not a
reality at this point in time, however, we would
recommend that some statement be made by the
developer that if and when this trunk line becomes
a reality the developer will abandon the tie-in to
the Village and hook in to the Town's sewer system.
~
'-"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.'-'
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 15
With respect to the water source and supply,
the developers engineer has provided us with the
three pump tests on wells one, two and three, and
with the monitoring results of the adjacent wells
he did. Also, he has provided us with the water
quality results from the table, two out of the
three wells. I don't think we have the water
quality from the third well. However, we would
like some statements from the developer and his
engineer that the final approval of the water
system will be subject to the Dutchess County
Health Department approval, review and approval,
and that the fire prevention or fire protection
system that has been laid out by the developer will
meet at least the tentative approval of the Fire
Advisory Board.
As you know, they have quite a lengthy letter
in, and I think there should be some acknowledgment
back and forth that the mechanism is there for
working out those differences.
With respect to storm water management, the
developer has stated generically that there will be
no net increase in flow from the site and that what
will be increased will be retained on site and
-
'-"
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 16
disbursed as the peak of the storm decreases. Itd
like more specific mention to the fact that there
are two distinct drainage areas draining to this
site, that meet on this site, and that the
interconnection or the interplay between these two
drainage areas must be further looked at when the
two peaks and the two drainage areas meet and how
they coincide with the peak from the run-off from
the site.
The second and more critical point is that
the proposal calls for a great area of existing
wetland to be filled in, and the major beneficial
from my point of view, the major beneficial aspect
of this wetland is in storm water retention and how
they intend to mitigate that impact. They have
shown a pond to be constructed in the southeast
corner of the site which intercepts the stream
coming from the south, from the Sucich Place
general vicinity. That will provide retention
volume for that stream, however, I do believe that
the impact of the filling in in the northerly and
westerly quadrant of the property or sector of the
property, that impact must be studied a little
further from the stream coming from the north.
'-'
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.....
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
.......
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 17
One other area that I'd like to mention that
I did touch upon in my site plan review letter is
the site grading. Ray I'm sure will address this
more specifically in his review, however, one
specific area of concern is the southwest corner of
the site where they show a considerable cut. The
impacts there would be limited, would include, but
not be limited to temporary impacts such as
construction type impacts, dust, noise, blasting
potential, things along those lines, permanent type
impact such as the construction of that retaining
wall which is a significant retaining wall. I
think that should be looked at with respect to
safety and immediate impact upon the two
neighboring properties.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you very much, Mr.
Paggi. Are there any Board members who would like
to comment at this time? Mr. Parsons?
MR. PARSONS: I have several things I want to
address, but the first one is going to be water.
The 27,000 gallons of water that is the approximate
anticipated use. I have a concern with the fact
that you're talking about wells not just so much
for the actual water use itself, and that's a
""".
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 18
considerable amount of water for an area like that
with all the homes around it, but the fire
protection situation on top of it. You in your
study here state that you have the hydrants, you're
going to use a pond as a back-up or actually not a
back-up, it's going to be a water supply for fire
fighting. I know that the Hughsonville Fire
Company has concerns about it and feels they would
possibly need another piece of equipment because of
this type of situation. My question is, why don't
you spend some of this money or all this money and
add a little to it and tie-in to the Town's water
system? Now, I know there was a shortage of town
water, but that's been corrected, or will be
shortly when the Atlas is purchased. That's
another excellent water source and it's going to
give the Town probably double or more as far as
water supply, and I just can't see a situation or a
site like this being developed to this degree and
turn around and live off of wells, especially for
fire protection.
My other concern dealt with the pipe that was
going to run to handle the sewerage, and at the
time we were talking about a four inch pipe which
'-"
'-'"
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 19
may handle just that, and then Jay alluded to the
fact that possibly something should be worked out
to tie-in to the Town's proposed new sewer
district, and that definitely needs to have
something done because it would be senseless to dig
up all that property for all that distance and
disrupt all the homes and roads and everything else
along the way and put a four inch pipe in, because
a four inch pipe may handle that particular place,
but it isn't going to handle anything else.
Jay alluded to the wall, the retaining wall
on the southern boundary, and I want to do more
than allude because looking at the topo map I could
see where that wall could be 20 or 30 feet high,
and I want an answer from the people, in fact I'll
ask you right now how high is that wall going to
be?
MR. MESINGER: I would have to look at the
plans to tell you.
MR. PARSONS:
MR. MESINGER:
that property.
MR. PARSONS: I think the fact of being built
so it's going to stay for the next twenty or thirty
I know it's a monstrous wall.
There's a significant cut on
.......
----,
'-"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 20
years, I have a concern about the safety aspect as
to how you're going to keep children off the top
from falling off of there and killing themselves,
and that sort of wall is not what I'd say is
advantageous to the community. I'd say it's a
large safety factor.
Skipping over in to the traffic study. I
have got a couple of things on that. One is the
concern when the actual study was taken, the actual
dates. Do you have those?
MR. GRBALY: Phil GrealYi John Collins
Engineers. Actual traffic surveys were done in
January, Pebruary and the beginning of May. I can
get you the exact dates.
MR. PARSONS: My question to that is, I want
the exact dates and you can verify that because it
should be looked upon as to the school situation at
the time. In January and February there were
holidays in the school and you automatically lose
between 1500 and 2,000 trips in that general area,
and it would make -- It changes the study.
MR. GRBALY: We'll get you the exact dates.
We'll check with the School Board about that.
MR. PARSONS: You want to make sure to do a
........
~
-
'-'
---
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
2S
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 21
true study that we're dealing with the time when
school is in full force with all the schools that
connect to that road. On page 28 in dealing with
the traffic study it talks about the things that
are going to be needed to be done, even if this
isn't built, but I have to turn around and say if
it is built it's going to speed up these things and
one of them is that at the intersection of Old
Hopewell Road and Route 9 additional turn lanes
will be required. On Route 9 and Old Hopewell Road
approaches will have to be upgraded. This traffic
signal will also have to be upgraded and
coordinated with the driveway signal and other
signals on Route 9. My question there is whose
going to pay for it? Now, I have major concern
with these things indeed needing to be done, but I
certainly don't feel that the County or the Town,
the people should be paying for upgrading an
intersection because of the increased traffic
brought about by a project as large as this.
That gets back to the sewer again which I
discussed. That was my concerns.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you, Mr. Parsons.
Anyone else?
......
~
!
1
'-'
1
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
22
2
MR. KBLLBR: I would like to address the
3
items that Jay brought up as far as the filling in
4
the wetlands. I'd really be interested in what the
5
displacement is on those wetlands, how much -- how
6
many cubic feet you're really going to displace by
7
filling that in, and can you take care of it
elsewhere on the site? I think that really should
........
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
be looked in to, if you know, you're making a major
impact and you're going to provide a holding pond
for one of the tributaries. It would seem to me
that you would have to do the same thing somewhere
else on the property through the water that you're
displacing by filling in the wetlands. I think
there ought to be a real good study made on that.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLBY: Is that it Mr. Keller?
MR. KELLER: That's all I have to say.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you. Anyone else?
MR. SIMONETTY: No. My comments were the
same as these two gentlemen already covered.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: I have a few comments,
and before I get in to those I'd like to offer some
23
documents in to the record.
24
25
First is a letter from Mr. Paggi dated August
8, 1989.
'-"
,~!.,.:
'-'
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 23
This next is a letter from Dutchess County
from the Health Department dated May 18, 1989.
The next is a letter from Mr. John Collins
addressed to the Planning Board dated August 1,
1989.
The next is a letter from the Hughsonville
Fire District dated August 14, 1989.
The next is a letter from the Dutchess County
Soil and Water Conversation District dated August
9, 1989, they have some rather lengthy comments
here.
The next is a letter from, I guess it's the
New York State DOT from Peter Nedwell dated August
9, 1989.
I think that's it for the documents.
I have some comments that I would like to
make.
On page 43 of your draft E.I.S. it talks
about the mitigating measures and specifically
about storm water detention. I have a concern
about standing water on the site. Storm water
detention basins I think are good if they're
designed so that they absorb the run-off, but then
drain out. Now I understand you're proposing the
--
'-'
Il.o<-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 24
pond on this site to serve fire fighting purposes.
That means standing water, and I have a concern
about that, a safety concern basically.
On page 44 on land use and impacts.
Mitigating measures that are proposed do not
address the removal of topsoil from the site.
Many, many times we see that when a site is
developed soil gets tracked onto adjoining roadways
and they become very difficult, sometimes almost
dangerous, and I think we need to address how you
plan to address that factor and whether in fact you
are going to be taking topsoil off the site. We
don't like to see that happen.
On page 47 you talk about slopes and
topography. You don't discuss here at all the
severe cut and fill which is being proposed on the
site. I think that is a severe oversight, if I may
use that word, that is a significant part of your
plan and I think it needs to be addressed. Those
are the things I have comments on.
Are there any other comments from the Board
members at this time before I open the floor?
MR. SIMONBTTY: Mr. Chairman, I'd like to
talk about this letter August 9th from the Dutchess
.....
."'!'!W
.......
1
2
3
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
County Soil and Water Conversation District.
25
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY; Fine.
4
MR. SIMONETTY: I'm a little confused in
5
that they go through and talk about the different
6
types of soil that will be encountered in this
7
development, but they don't address some of the
8
measures or any of the measures that are going to
......
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
be needed to meet the object of their narrative in
their letter. I'm not sure what they're getting at
or what's going to be done regarding the types of
soils. They pretty much come to the conclusion
that in most of the soil types that are there they
recommend that this is undevelopable, period.
MR. KELLER: It's up to the engineer, isn't
it to come up with ways to mitigate that? That's
what basically they're saying.
20
MR. SIMONETTY: I would agree, but they talk
about these limited mitigations here in some of the
soils and they feel very strongly that most of the
21
soils encountered here, there are no mitigating
~
\
l
I
22
measures, and I don't know what the answer to that
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY; I think the applicant has
i
1
1
I
23
is or what an engineers response to that might be
24
25
when they say there are no options or alternatives.
'-"
1
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 26
I
r
I
I
i
'--
2
to address that and have our consultants determine
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
whether --
MR. ARNOLD: One of the questions I asked is
that they do pick up the soil data and plot the
soil data, better soil data from the soil rather
than from the old study. No one can address what
they have there.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Is that it, Mr.
Simonetty?
11
12
MR. SIMONETTY: Yes, thank you.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you. I will now
13
open the floor to the public. Before I do so,
~
14
15
16
however, I'd like to explain the procedure. Again
those of you who have attended public hearings
before probably know pretty much the procedure any
17
way, but let me rephrase it. I will ask each
18
speaker to come forward and use the miorophone in
19
the front so that everyone can hear. Please speak
20
21
22
clearly and slowly enough for the stenographer to
take notes. Please state your name and address and
please direct your comments to this Board. If it
23
requires an answer from one of the experts I will
24
25
so direct. I was anticipating a much larger turn
out so we had a sign in sheet which I would like to
'-"
....
....
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 27
go from in aSking people to come forward. I will
still do that but I will give everyone an
~
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
opportunity to make one or two comments if you
would like. I would, again, ask you restrict your
comments strictly to the draft environmental impact
statement. As I said earlier the public hearing
will be held in the future regarding the merits of
the site plan itself. So the first person on the
sign up sheet was Mr. Railing.
MR. RAILING: Thank you. I represent 186
Route 9. My name is Jack Railing. I'm a
representative of Gray, Railing and Heinsman,
Mid-Hudson Pollution Control and also of what I
would assume to be 184 Route 9 which is the parcel
immediately to the south of 186 Route 9.
17
Some of the comments have already been
18
19
20
21
22
addressed so I'm not going to get in to and be
repetitious on those. We have no objection to the
development of this Shopping center, incidentally,
as immediate neighbors to the southwest. We did
have the primary concern of the grading in the area
23
adjacent to our property, that which was referenced
24
25
by the Town Ingineer and also members of the Board
\
I
!
\
I
where there is a significant cut on the southwest
.....
-
!
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.......
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
,..,.
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
portion of this particular property, and if I may
use the board just to illustrate, in this area
28
here. (Indicating) This is where Triad Professional
Park is, and this is the parcel now owned by a
group called Bicker Realty which I am part of, so
we are concerned about that, we're concerned about
the safety aspects. We have a well that's
immediately adjacent to the property line within
about 20 or 25 feet. The protection of the
existing stone wall between the properties, and
some of the visual aspects that relate to a
development of this type. We also were concerned,
obviously, being near the area of the blasting
where any blasting may occur.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you.
THE COURT: Thank you, Jack. The next person
is Nick Clark.
MR. CLARK: Nick Clark, Sucich Place,
Wappinger Falls. I just have a couple items, many
of which were covered, but a few things that
perhaps weren't. There's going to be a concern
perhaps for the adjacent property owners due to
increase noise levels. While the D.E.I.S. shows an
increase of .5 decibels which I have to agree with
i
1
J
,.
.......
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 29
their conclusions that it wouldn't particularly be
noticeable above the existing noise level of Route
9, the removal of trees on the site will certainly
increase the noise levels for adjoining property
owners on Sucich Place. I wonder if this could be
addressed and if some sort of mitigating measures
could be suggested, fences, increased plantings
perhaps or limiting the removal of existing trees
an the site.
As to wells, again, I know some of the
aspects were addressed. I wonder if the figures
are accurately going to reflect the recharge and
the well capacities in a typical year. We had an
unusually wet spring and I'd like to know if that
was somehow factored in, or could be if it wasn't.
It's assumed also that there's going to be no
additional traffic on Route 9. I don't know that
that's necessarily a realistic supposition. By
1992 I'm sure we're going to have additional
traffic, maybe not as a direct result of Alpine,
but there will certainly be extra traffic, and I
think that special consideration should be given to
the entrance and exits from the plaza, if a cut
through on Route 9 isn't there then it's assumed
....
~
l
j
,-".
1
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
that everybody is going to make U turns at Myers
Corners and Old Hopewell Road. Given human nature
30
2
3
4
I think that's unlikely. It's going to have a
great impact on Losee Road and possibly Sucich
5
6
Place. Sucich Place wasn't shown at all on this of
7
the traffic studies. Although it's not a major
road in there I think perhaps should be included.
As far as lighting of the site, I wonder how
8
9
10
that's going to effect adjoining property owners,
especially if there's not many trees on the site.
11
12
13
Can there be some sort of mitigation timers? I
---
know securities a concern on the site, but perhaps
14
something can be done to address that. Thank you.
15
16
17
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Mr. Clark, the comment
you made about wells, were you making that in the
form of a question that you want answered from the
18
applicant?
MR. CLARK: Yes, if that's possible. Sure.
19
20
21
22
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Can you address that at
this time?
MR. SIMCOE: My name is Bill Simcoe~ I'm with
23
24
25
C.T. Male Associates. Just to point out, we are
talking about a bedrock type well and that bedrock
aquifers really aren't subject to short term
'-'"
~..,
"-'
1
2
3
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
31
4
variations due to precipitation as wells would be,
and sand and gravel aquifers, so we would expect to
see less seasonal variations in a bedrock aquifer.
5
MR. CLARK: So in this particular case there
is no special back and forth?
6
7
MR. SIMCOE: Right. We wouldn't anticipate
8
with a bedrock aquifer we would see a short term
~
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
variation due to a wet spring.
MR. CLARK: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you. Next is
Robert Millner.
MR. MILLNER: As stated, my name is Robert
Millner; I live on Sucich Place. I heard a
reference made to a back-up water supply of some
type of pond that's going to be constructed on the
'"
\
I
j
17
site. Now, last year we went through a rather dry
18
19
year, and there was even water rationing in
different places. The thing I'm concerned about in
20
regard to fires, if this is going to be, if a pond
21
22
23
24
25
is going to be a back-up, what happens if we get a
year or a long stretch where it's dry and there is
no water to fill this pond? Is this pond going to
be only from drainage or is it going to be some
type of well pumped in to it to use for a ready
-..
-
'-"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.......
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
........
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 32
supply, or how is the pond going to be maintained
at a particular level to use for a back-up for
putting out fires? Has anything been thought of
about that?
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Did you have any other
comments?
MR. MILLNER: No, that's my
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Are you prepared to
answer that?
MR. SIMCOE: The exact nature of the fire
storage wasn't really laid out within the draft
environmental impact statement, but it would be
reviewed for the final impact statement taking in
to account tire insurance, and concerns that the
Fire Marshall might have. It's just envisioned
that it would be either a pond or some sort of
storage vessel. It could possibly be filled by the
well rather than be subject to precipitation for
replenishment. That wasn't addressed in the
D.E.I.S. It might be the sUbject of a final impact
statement.
MR. MILLNER: Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Next person is Barbara --
I'm sorry, Gordon Robbins.
.........
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 33
MR. ROBBINS: Hi. My name is Gordon Robbins;
I live on Losee Road owning the adjacent property.
I have about three or four questions and most of
them are addressed to the impact statement.
One is, maybe I couldn't find it, but the
amount of blasting and material that's going to be
moved and how the adjacent properties are going to
be protected against damages, and if the developer
is going to post a bond or what's going to happen
over there. That's one question.
Another one is, and this is just something
that came up, if there's a storage vessel I hope
it's not going to be a stand pipe.
In to the environmental impact statement
there's a zoner visibility map which is figure 4-7,
and in that map it appears that the map is zoner
visibility map for the summertime because a large
part of the area is showing blocked by vegetation,
and that vegetation, of course, would not be there
in the wintertime, and along that line, as an
adjacent property owner I would hope that the Town
Board would request the developer to plant some
type of evergreen vegetation or some type of a
barrier so we have a little bit of privacy in the
~
'-"
~
'-'
......
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 34
wintertime because the trees are bear here at least
six months of the year. That would also help a lot
with things like noise.
The traffic survey on, regarding Losee Road,
and I have been living on Losee Road for the last
fifteen years and I haven't been counting the cars
passed my house but I have noted the traffic on
Route 9 has increased, that the amount of avoidance
traffic on Losee Route has also increased where
people will travel from Hopewell Road to Myers
Corners and Myers Corners to Hopewell to keep off
of Route 9, and figure 4-4 and 4-3 which addresses
the arrival distribution and departure distribution
from the center show all the traffic, none of which
is any additional increase on Losee Road.
Unfortunately it doesn't address the avoidance
distribution, the folks that due to the additional
traffic on Route 9 would now be traveling on Losee
Road in order to keep off Route 9, and it's -- the
Town might want to address in more detail how you
would handle those intersections which are a very
short distance from Route 9, both at Hopewell and
at Myers Corners and the Losee Road, and also if
you had a north south new road in there which I
'-"
~
1
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
35
2
3
know people, even though it's not directly in this
statement is talked to, and people have discussed
4
how you would bring that additional road in to
5
Route 9 over there and handle the additional
6
traffic which would be a very, very short distance.
7
I could see some serious grid lock there in many
8
situations, and those are some of the concerns I
9
had with the environmental impact statement. Thank
10
you.
11
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you for your
12
comments. The next is Barbara Robbins.
~
13
14
MRS. ROBBINS: I'm in agreement with my
husband.
15
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Okay. Thank you. The
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
next is John and Ingrid Collins.
MR. COLLINS: John Collins; Losee Road. Just
an aside on the traffic, the study itself, at least
the parts that have to do with the side roads were
I
I
done on the Priday of Memorial Day weekend, they
weren't done in January, they weren't done in the
beginning of May by the dates on your chart.
MR. GREALY: Phil Grealy; John Collins
25
MR. COLLINS: No relation by the way.
I
j
i
Engineers.
......
-
"'"
1
2
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
36
3
MR. GREALY: What you're referring to in the
study are the dates that the computers print-outs
4
5
were done. Those aren't the dates that the data is
6
based on, and at Mr. Parsons request we'll get the
actual dates. Those were just the dates that
7
computers runs were printed out, the dates on top
8
of the sheet.
9
MR. COLLINS: It's very deceptive.
10
MR. GREALY: I understand, and Mr. Parsons
11
asked for the actual dates and we'll get those.
12
MR. COLLINS: Everything else I have has been
13
covered except getting back to the pond again.
---
14
15
16
17
18
It's variously been a fire, source for fire water.
At other times it's called a wetland exchange, so,
it's a swamp swap actually. In that sense it's
creating at least a swampy area to take, to offset
the one that's being covered, and then at other
19
20
times it's called a pond, and in at least one
reference there is a sentence that says something,
21
22
I'm paraphrasing because I don't remember exactly,
something like if it holds water, if it will hold
23
24
25
permanent waters which would maybe go along with
what you were saying before that you're not really
sure yet whether it actually will be permanent
".......
,f
1
i
f
i
.~
'-'
1
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
37
2
3
4
5
6
standing water or whether it will just be a little
bit more swampy than it is now, and the real
question in there, its only in one picture in all
of the depictions, it's not even mentioned, there's
no little blue thing with birds flying and waves or
7
anything in there, its only on one of the contour
8
9
10
11
maps which is the second map back there, but could
you maybe help us understand what it's going to be?
What will the finished product look like? I
understand that there will be a diversion of the
12
Sucich Place stream, 101-2. You're going to divert
13
that stream east. You're going to apparently dig a
"-"
14
deep hole, you're not going to use berming from
15
16
17
what I understand, and you're going -- and it will
be made to flood. You're going to be dependent. I
saw no reference to other sources of water. The
18
19
sole source of water is these streams which do dry
up. I don't understand. The question is can he
20
please describe what the finished product would
21
22
23
24
25
look like.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Mr. Collins, if I may
interrupt. I think that at the point where we
started discussing the site plan in particular,
that will have to be detailed quite extensively for
)
\
'-'
~
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
this Board.
MR. COLLINS: To Losee Road people that's
very much an environmental thing because it comes
right up to the border, it comes right up to the
border of several properties and it can cause the
removal of a lot of trees.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: I think what we're
addressing here is the adequacy of that concept,
whether or not that's acceptable or not.
MR. COLLINS: That's the primary thing, but
the having of it alters, and by the way, we're not
really totally against the idea.
Another part of the question is, how much
flexibility is there in the topography to allow it
to be narrower or longer, deeper, wider, something
like that. To us it is an environmental thing, so
that's why I thought it would be addressed here.
It's not on the site, per se.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Does someone wish to
answer that?
MR. MESINGER: Just to address a couple of
points, and I think your questions are good ones.
To go back, there is flexibility in the size of it.
It can be made to look pretty. The second one is I
38
---
,...
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 39
would anticipate the need to berm it to some degree
in order to get the necessary storage. The primary
function of the pond is for flood water storage,
because as somebody mentioned we're displacing some
of the flood water storage passed that wetlands and
we need to replace it, and we'll do that through
the pond. From my point of view the fire
protection role of the pond is secondary. I think
people have raised a number of good points tonight
about that that we need to relook at. That pond
shouldn't have any function at all for fire
protection. We need to do that with an underground
tank with volume to meet fire protection codes,
safety requirements, so, what you're left with then
is a pond that duplicates the wetlands, flood
storage functions and hopefully is aesthetically
pleasing, and then see, actually improves wetlands
benefits because what you have now is a fairly,
it's a class 2 wetlands which isn't real good
habitat and you have an open water value which has
a greater value.
HR. COLLINS: Again the question at that
point then gets to be the idea of permanent which
is the idea of tree removal and open space with
~
~
-
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 40
water sometimes, at least sometimes in it, or
berming, leaving the trees and letting, allowing
the flooding to happen when it has to happen and
then control it, and that's our area of concern,
not being against the idea of having it, is it
overkill or to what degree do you have to go to
satisfy the D.E.C., and or can the same goals be
accomplished, the same goals for avoidance of
downstream flooding and all the other stuff and
leaving as much of the topography as is. We hope
there will be some mechanism.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: I think you hit on the
key word, and that's D.E.C. Because it is a
wetland area they will have to get a permit and
they will have to do whatever they propose to do
there.
'-'-
MR. COLLINS: We're kind of looking for a way
to input in to that. We don't know how that can be
done.
MR. MESINGBR: It would be helpful for us to
know what you prefer so that when we sit down with
our discussions we are able to say, well, this is
what the neighbors prefer, and I'm not sure if you
want us to dig it or berm it or how you want it to
'-'
,-".
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 41
look, so get together and think about it and tell
us how you would like to look.
MR. COLLINS: That would be very good.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLBY: Thank you, Mr. Collins.
Is there anyone else who would like to comment who
has not signed in? All right.
MR. HIRKALA: My name is Mike Hirkala; I live
on North Fowlerhouse Road, Town of Wappinger.
There are two major concerns I have which I would
like to see become a part of the final
environmental impact statement. One is the
potential for mitigating any traffic or mitigating
the traffic problems with the north south road as
shown in the Town Master Plan, and I would like to
see how the developer will propose to utilize that
road for his traffic on site and off site, and also
I would like to see the developer mitigate a lot of
the concerns I have heard tonight environmentally
by proposing or at least speaking at length about
the possibility of developing the property with
it's natural terrain rather than the cut. I think
the visual environment has to be considered and
it's very important, and I think that would be one
way to mitigate any visual impact at all with what
'-"
-
.......
'Ir..t-
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 42
is proposed. It's clearly a clear cut job which is
pretty much standard throughout the industry, and I
can't help but recall the words of a former
Planning Board Chairman in this Town who told a
planner after he had given his credentials if
you're a planner go ahead and plan. I would very
much like to see, again, utilization of the site in
it's natural terrain. Thank you.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you, Mike. Anyone
else wish to comment at this time? Yes, sir.
MR. WADDLE: My name is Arthur Waddle,
W-A-D-D-L-E. I'm the secretary of the Hughsonville
Fire District, and I'd like to bring up the section
4.02.05, Municipal Revenues and Finances. The Board
of Fire Commissioners have reviewed your proposal
and we do feel that it is going to be an impact on
the taxpayers of the Hughsonville Fire District to
buy, purchase additional equipment. I have heard
talk about this pond. We are definitely against a
natural stream fed pond, that I believe the stream
does dry up.
MR. PAGGI: It is known to be an intermittent
stream.
MR. WADDLE: So there would be no make up
w
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 43
water for this so-called pond. One thing we'd like
to have a fairly firm figure on, we use the 19
million dollar cost index that was in the impact
statement. How close is that?
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Who are you asking that
question of, sir?
MR. WADDLB: Whoever wrote the figure out of
19 million dollars.
MR. ARNOLD: I have no idea.
HR. WADDLE: It's in the impact statement. I
don't know. Somebody wrote it.
MR. HESINGER: We wrote the impact statement,
but I'm not sure what you're talking about.
HR. ARNOLD: Is this value of the property
after construction? Is that what you're talking
about?
HR. WADDLE: Yes. You have 19 million
dollars. Is that what you figure it will be
valued?
HR. HESINGER: Yes.
MR. WADDLE: Okay. That's it.
THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Waddle.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Anyone else at this time
wish to comment?
-
'-'
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 44
MR. MESINGER: May I just address one point?
The pond is not, or was not intended to be the
primary fire protection source and I want to make
that clear, and also want to make it clear that
based on the comments we've heard tonight I think
welve gotten some very clear direction on that.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Okay. Anyone else?
MR. VALDATI: Yes. Robert Valdati; Town of
Wappinger. I would just like to make sure that
therels particular attention paid to the potential
impact for the Pizzigalli proposed building on
Myers Corners since it will be in the immediate
environment of Losee Road, Route 9 and Myers
Corners and this area. I would like to see the
projected traffic study there interpolated with
what you are doing and what you feel will be
generated by the consumers using the facility.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Thank you, Robert.
Anyone else wish to be heard at this time? Mr.
Collins.
MR. COLLINS: Just a question to you
gentlemen. Do you have an opinion on the adequacy
of the transportation and traffic section of the
D.E.I.S.? Have you formed an opinion as to whether
........
......
'-"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
~
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 45
that needs to be redone or done -- or not redone?
Isn't part of this supposed to determine whether or
not there's a need for the Town to redo parts of
this study that it thinks might be inadequate, and
if so, when do you come to that judgment?
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Well, we come to that
conclusion after the close of the comment period.
That would be at a future meeting. If there are
any members of the Board who now would like to
comment on the adequacy of the traffic section
they're perfectly free to do so.
MR. KELLER: We really have to analyze the
written comments as of 9-21 when all the comments
are in, including these comments, then I think the
Planning Board can make a determination of whether
we feel it's adequate or not.
MR. PARSONS: You're a little early. That's
why I asked for the dates to make sure we get the
maximum. You're just a little early for those.
That's why we have public hearings. We haven't
made up our minds on anything.
MR. COLLINS: Okay.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Okay. Thank you, Mr.
Collins. Anyone else wish to comment or make a
-:
.......
~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies- 46
second comment at this time? I think we have
enough time. Anyone? If there are no further
comments, then I move to close the public hearing.
MR. KELLER: Second.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: All in favor?
MR. SIMONETTY: Aye.
MR. KELLER: Aye.
MR. PARSONS: Aye.
MR. PERILLO: Aye.
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Opposed?
(No Response)
CHAIRMAN HAWKSLEY: Ladies and gentlemen, the
time period for written comments about the draft
E.I.S. is September 21, 1989, so if you have any
written comments you'd like to make you have until
that date, and address them to the Clerk of the
Planning Board.
The next step in this process will be to
determine if a final D.E.I.S. is necessary, and
that will be done at a future Planning Board
meeting.
Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to thank
you for taking the time to come out this evening,
and I know it's not always easy in our busy
'-'
'-"
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
.~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
'-"
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
schedule to take time to come out to these
meetings, but I ~~ to assure you that we
appreciate it and I think the applicant has even
said they received some good comments this evening
which they will act on. Thank you very much.
(Whereupon the public hearing was concluded)
47
*
*
*
*
...... 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
~
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
-....
-Public Hearing/Alpine Companies-
48
C-E-R-T-I-F-I-C-A-T-I-O-N
CERTIFIED TO BE A TRUE AND ACCURATE
RECORD OF THE WITHIN PROCEEDINGS AS
TAKEN AND TRANSCRIBED BY ME.
K~~ €-.j)/'nui
Robin E. DiMichele
Senior Court Reporter