Public speaks out at Planning Board meeting

NORTH EAST — In keeping with its recent decision to allow public comments at each of its meetings, the Planning Board meeting on Wednesday, Feb. 22, began with a statement from Amenia resident Tonia Shoumatoff on the proposed supermarket for the Boulevard District on Route 44. The market is to be built on a 10-plus acre site owned by Quinmill Properties, just behind Thompson Plaza. The market is the brainchild of Southern Realty and Development LLC, which brought the idea to the North East Planning Board in November 2010.Watershed concerns Shoumatoff was there wearing two hats: one as the Tenmile River Watershed Coordinator for the Housatonic Valley Association (HVA) and one as a reporter for the Millbrook Independent.She spoke first about “promoting development compatible with the watershed,” saying the “Tenmile River watershed is among the most pristine, biologically diverse and scenic watersheds in Dutchess County.” She submitted a letter to the board, also sent to William Janeway, regional director of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). She read the letter aloud before a full audience.“HVA has been following closely the proposal by Southern Realty and Development LLC, to construct a 36,000-square-foot Hannaford Supermarket adjacent to NYS DEC MT-12 wetland, which is described as important habitat for several endangered and rare species identified ... [by] various experts,” Shoumatoff read. “HVA is concerned that this application may not benefit from the hard look of a comprehensive environmental review provided for under New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act [SEQRA]. We ask that the NYS DEC provide the North East Planning Board with specific guidance about the protection measures and buffer width needed to protect the wetland.”Freshtown vs. Hannaford? The next public speaker was Amenia resident Betty Rooney; she spoke in favor of Freshtown, a supermarket chain with locations in Amenia and Dover Plains owned by Noah and Dan Katz. The Katzes own other Freshtown stores and are looking to take over the Grand Union in Millerton and convert it to a Freshtown. They have made presentations before the Planning Board and the public, and they have even submitted paperwork to the board. However, that paperwork is incomplete, which means there is not a proper application for the Freshtown project before the Planning Board at this time. Click here for details.That detail has not prevented residents around the region from voicing their opinions about Freshtown versus Hannaford, which most people believe is the supermarket behind the SRD application. Thus far SRD principle John Joseph has remained mum on who his tenant will be. Others involved in the project, however, have freely referred to the project as Hannaford without any comment or correction from Joseph.“I know you have before you the issue of the supermarket coming in, and I know Freshtown is one of the companies that would like to come in as well,” Rooney said. “I would like to share why I think Freshtown is good for the community: they’re for small towns, they give back. ... They donate [to community events]. They are owned by a family. This is an American company. Hannaford is not an American company, it’s a nice store but it has a subsidiary in Maine. I think it would be great to give back to a company that is very community oriented, which I know Freshtown is.”Greenough’s grievances Rooney’s comments were followed by Millerton resident and village Planning Board member Peter Greenough’s. (After the meeting Greenough made it clear to The Millerton News that he was not speaking for the village Planning Board.) He rose and walked toward the board table.“I don’t really care which supermarket comes to Millerton,” he began. “Millerton obviously needs a new supermarket. What I care about is the process.... I am concerned this is being considered only by the town Planning Board because there are implications for the entire area. The Hannaford application is nearly on the state line and is very close to important wetlands.... In this case with the town Planning Board, I see it as a decision where they’re not seeking, and excuse me if I offend anyone, not reaching out to other members of the community. We’re all members of the town.”Tax exemption? Greenough then made a statement that silenced the crowd.“People have not been told Hannaford will not pay taxes to the town for 10 years,” he said. “New York State law [gives] certain tax exemptions.”North East Assessor Katherine Johnson later said Greenough’s comment was inaccurate. The town does not have a 100 percent exemption; that type of exemption is county based, not town based, according to Johnson.“What we have is to promote small business,” she said. “We don’t have [10-year 100 percent exemptions]. Those are big industrial things, and we don’t have those.”The day following the Planning Board meeting Johnson released a statement to clear any lingering confusion. It read:“The Business Investment Exemption is an exemption for ‘commercial and industrial facilities that are constructed, altered, installed or improved... at a cost exceeding $10,000.’ This is a partial exemption from town, county and school taxes, but not from special assessments or special district taxes. The exemption may be granted only after and within one year of completion of the construction or improvement.“The term of the exemption is 10 years. For the first three years, 50 percent of the increase in assessment due to the construction or improvement is exempt from taxation. For the remaining seven years, the percentage exempt decreases from 40 percent down to 5 percent in the final year.”Planning Board Chairman Dale Culver addressed some of Greenough’s statements the following day as well.“I would expect that a village official would do a little homework on that before he made a statement that would say we have no concept and don’t understand what we’re doing,” Culver said. “I don’t know what the point is.”Greenough responded to the Culver’s comments days later.“It’s not incumbent on a citizen to become an expert on a process that’s before the town, not the village, and I was speaking personally,” he said. “Many of the issues I raised are accurate. For example, there is no record in the village of a letter ever being received as required by law for an agency[the town] seeking lead agency status in the SEQRA process.”Being inclusive As far as not including others in the process, Culver said the Planning Board meetings have always been open to the public. He did say, however, that he will take special care to reach out to the village.“I’m going to send a letter to the village planning chair asking for any input they choose and if they’re upset, they’re more than welcome to come,” Culver said. “We’d love to hear from them.”Like Culver, Millerton Mayor John Scutieri said he has never heard from any village trustees or Planning Board members (besides Greenough) wanting to be included in the SRD application process.“I think what I was most disappointed in is an appointed official speaking at another municipality’s meeting as though he’s speaking on behalf of a village board. He was totally out of line,” Scutieri said. “He never spoke with me, the village attorney or the village clerks.”Greenough responded to that comment a few days later as well.“Well I was speaking as an individual,” he said. “It is convenient for the mayor to insinuate that I was speaking officially. I find it humorous. Rather than address the points that I raised, Dale and the mayor are trying to make it about me, when it’s really about the process.”Water worksIt was Scutieri, though not present, who was the target of more of Greenough’s criticism on Feb. 22. He said that despite what the mayor said at a previous public meeting held at the library’s Annex building, the village has not officially approved the extension of its water supply to the proposed supermarket site.“The extension has not been granted,” Greenough said. “[It] will cost residents of the village and town money and may impart a water and usage rate.”But Scutieri explained the water district that’s to be extended is the town’s; the only thing the village of Millerton would provide is the actual water to travel through the infrastructure. (Millerton provides the town all of its water; the town distributes the water through its own district.)“In return [for the arrangement with the proposed supermarket] the village is getting revenue for more water users and will have more billing,” the mayor explained. “That’s something that in my opinion is a win-win situation for the village.”The Village Board started discussing the issue in February of 2011 with its engineer, who, according to Scutieri, said the project “will not have a negative affect on the water supply throughout the community.” The village will not be able to provide enough pressure for the fire supply system, however, which is why the developer is planning to build, and pay for, an underground water tank exclusively for the fire sprinkler system. Although a formal motion had not been made by the Village Board to adopt the water arrangement at the time of the Feb. 22 meeting, the mayor said the board has unanimously agreed to the plan in concept. The Village Board put the issue to vote at its monthly meeting on Monday, Feb. 27, and with a vote of 3 to 1 agreed to “supply water to the Millerton supermarket project with all costs incurred to the developer.”New store has appeal Lastly, Scutieri said he wanted to emphasize that while people from other communities have traveled into Millerton to rally for Freshtown, local residents have been expressing their support for the SRD project.“Ninety-nine percent of the people I talk to are very excited about the new grocery store,” he said. “We have dealt with a grocery store that’s subpar and everybody is excited about the thought of a new store. I’m not in alliance with any store in particular. I’m just excited about helping the community get a nice new store, which we deserve.”At the Planning Board meeting Greenough continued with his list of concerns.“The process has to be correct,” he said. “This [application process] is being done fairly quickly.”“I take offense that it was said we’re hurrying,” Culver later said; he told Greenough outright the night of the meeting that he was “grasping” and that his board has done its due diligence. We’re in the better part of two years now. How is that a rushed job? He’s accusing us of misconduct. I don’t think any of his facts stand up.” The application has been in the public arena for more than a year.Greenough later addressed Culver’s comments.“I would say that the public only very recently became aware of the application,” he said. “Most people, everybody, wants a new supermarket, but given the impact that the applicant’s development will have upon the village and the town and the region in various ways ... the rest of the region should be brought into the process somehow.“Being inclusive in reaching out, as I suggested, to inform and involve the public is always a positive measure and should be standard operating practice,” Greenough continued. “I have not accused Culver or the town Planning Board of misconduct, but why the hurry?”Back at the Feb. 22 town Planning Board meeting, one of Greenough’s parting queries was about the Sterling Report, which was done to study the feasibility of the SRD project. He blamed the Planning Board for there being “no discussion” of the report. He did concede, however, that he has not been present at the majority of the board’s meetings, and therefore could not speak with first-hand knowledge of the matter.Enter the Katzes Noah Katz later told the board that he and his brother commissioned the Sterling Report, and “submitted it into the file.” Katz said it was done since they also considered the same Quinmill property for a Freshtown.“Our professionals told us a store of this magnitude could not be built on this site,” he said, “and gave us a very long list of reasons why.”The Katz brothers spoke toward the end of the meeting, rather than at the start of it. Their comments came following the completion of the Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) part two, which is part of the mandated State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA) process that SRD is currently in the midst of. Click here for more on the EAF.Planning Board member Evelyn Garzetta had a number of questions for the Katzes, which were on more than a few minds.“Our understanding is that you submitted an application but it’s not complete,” she said. “What’s holding it up?”“We’re watching this [SRD’s] project very closely,” Dan Katz said. “As far as the application, it’s for the site plan, but we need the OK from the landlord.”That landlord is local attorney, businessman and developer Robert Trotta. Thus far he has not signed off on Freshtown’s proposal to takeover the Grand Union; he owns the store and the plaza where Grand Union is located. Grand Union’s wholesaler, C&S Wholesale Grocers, has committed to working with the Katzes in converting the Grand Union to a Freshtown.“Right now we’re watching the project down the street,” Katz added.“If this [SRD] succeeds, are you pulling your application?” Garzetta asked.“That’s going to be an issue,” Katz replied, “because I don’t think two stores can exist.”