PATTERSON TOWN BOARD MEETING

PATTERSON TOWN HALL

1142 ROUTE 311

PATTERSON, NY 12563

DECEMBER 3, 2003

MINUTES

PRESENT: MICHAEL GRIFFIN, SUPERVISOR

JOHN CALBO, COUNCILMAN

GERALD HERBST, COUNCILMAN

CRAIG BUMGARNER, TOWN COUNCEL

MARTIN POSNER, COUNCILMAN

CINDY PUGLISI, DEPUTY TOWN CLERK

EXCUSED: ERNEST KASSAY, COUNCILMAN

Supervisor Griffin called the Patterson Town Board meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. with 18 in attendance.

Salute to the Flag and Roll Call.

Tom DiSantis, Patterson Fire Department, stated that he would like to explain to the Town Board that last summer they ran two events at the picnic grounds at the firehouse.
For those who are familiar with him he has been running different events for the county. He ran the Irish Festival for a number of years and the Octoberfest. Next summer we are looking to do a whole series of summer family events. We will be doing the Irish Festival again and the Octoberfest along with other family types of festivals and music events. Mr. DiSantis wanted to let the Town Board know and felt it was important to let the Town Board know and to get your support and approval. Mr. DiSantis stated he spoke with Mr. Griffin and said there may be an opportunity to do some sort of 4^th of July event in the Town and bring other traffic and revenues into the Town.

Mr. Griffin stated that he has only one concern, every time the Patterson Fire Department runs an event it rains. Does that mean it will rain every weekend you have an event next summer?

Mr. Griffin stated that he did have the opportunity to meet with the fire department and he thought it was very worth while what they are trying to do. They want to have weekend events similar to the Irish Festival and Octoberfest. They are well into the planning stages. Mr. Griffin thinks there is an opportunity for revenue to come into the town. There is an opportunity for support of the fire department. A lot of the logistics have been worked out to date. Mr. Griffin stated he would like to see them move forward with this and when they can present us with some ideas and what type of programs they will be having he will be anxious to hear what they are. Mr. Griffin asked if anyone had any other comments for the Board.

Mr. Griffin stated without objection he asks the Clerk to file the reports as read.

Putnam Lake Fire Department – None

Patterson Fire Department – None

Code Compliance Officer – September, October, November

Code Enforcement Officer – September, October, November

Dog Control Officer – November

E.C.I. Officer - None

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 2

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Calbo made a motion to accept the minutes as follows:

Public Hearing – Preliminary Budget – November 5, 2003

Town Board Meeting – November 5, 2003

Bid Opening – Patterson Recreation Center – Well Pump – November 6, 2003

Bid Opening – Winter Sidewalk Maintenance – November 19, 2003

Seconded by Mr. Herbst. All In Favor: aye. Carried.

Mr. Herbst made a motion to approve the Supervisor’s Report for the months of October. Seconded by Mr. Posner. All in Favor, aye. Carried.

Mr. Herbst made a motion to approve the following bills chargeable to 2003:

General Fund $205,697.12, Highway Fund-Employee Benefits $30,981.75, Highway Debt Service $26,332.13, Putnam Lake Fire District $41.49, Patterson Fire District $542.96, Patterson Light District $840.14, Patterson Refuse District #2 $9,022.25, Patterson Park District $15,520.54, Dorset Hollow Water District $2,032.00, Fox Run Water District $20,971.56, Capital Fund $14,393.62, Grand Total $326,375.56.

Seconded by Mr. Calbo. Roll Call: Mr. Calbo, yes; Mr. Herbst, yes; Mr. Posner, yes; Mr. Griffin, yes.

Mr. Williams stated that what is being proposed is a shift in the zoning law on a parcel that is near Interstate 84 and Route 311. The parcel runs from Interstate 84 to Route 311 back down toward Fair Street and comes up against Fair Street on the backside. Initially the parcel was zoned industrial. With the current zoning that was adopted in June the Town shifted the portion of the property into a residential zoning district. A request was made to shift a portion of that back to industrial and that is what is being considered here tonight. The green line (on the map) was where the shift took place. Everything on this side was shifted to residential and everything on the other side was zoned to industrial. Based upon the request we moved this line over to a line perpendicular with the Patterson/Kent boarder about 350 feet off of the border. There were a lot of people who were against that shift. We took another look at it and as a compromise we came up with a new proposed line that is under consideration, which would again split what was proposed for being changed into industrial. An additional 6 acres would be shifted back into the "I" zoning district. Another 6 acres would be left as residential to give a greater buffer to the Kent/Patterson line.

Mr. Paul Camarda, developer on the property, stated he had an interest in the property for about 4 years. Hopefully he will get to develop the property. He stated he has long term plans to develop this property as a retail center. He believes they made some progress and they are getting close but are not there yet. He recognizes the concerns of the residents. As far as the property is concerned he will be available to the residents at anytime. He wants the residents to know that he is proud of his work and does not want them to think he will be running away after the project is complete. He has a track record of building successful developments. The property was zoned 77 acres industrial. I can see the logic here. It makes sense to make this a residential zone. Mr. Camarda wanted to bring the Board’s attention to some of the changes they made to the master plan. He is not objecting to that. He stated the Board changed the coverage area on this site; this site of 77 acres could have been developed for about 800,000 square feet. Under the new

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 3

TOWN BOARD MEETING

zoning that the Board adopted, that he is not objecting to, that number is about 485,000. He stated that the Board cut that number back by about 45% already in June. He stated that the Board changed the set backs on this property for 50 feet per building to 65 feet from an impervious surface. Most buildings are here and always have a blacktop area in the back for the trucks to get in and cars, that’s usually 30 – 40 feet. He stated the Board doubled the set backs of this property in June, but he is not objecting to that. Mr. Camarda stated that they do object to this line (on map) coming this far down into the property, it doesn’t make sense from a planning perspective. It cuts off the back of the property. He would like to ask the Board in fair planning that this line (on map) should at least parallel this line that would leave 500 feet instead of 300 feet. Lastly, we were not

initially looking to develop this residentially, but the adjoining neighborhood is built on ¼ to 1/8 acre lots. Mr. Camarda stated that the Board zoned these 4 acres. In essence

what you did was you took 20 acres of the property and zoned it 16 to 32 times. It’s more restrictive to the adjoining neighborhood and he is not objecting to it. He understands that the Board tried to create the best possible buffer for the residents. Mr. Camarda does have an objection about the line cutting across the property.

Mr. Griffin stated that two weeks ago we had a public hearing that a number of residents had concerns. One had to do with the potential for access into the residential neighborhoods. Mr. Griffin asked Mr. Camarda at this point in time do you envision any access other than a gated emergency entrance that would follow where the existing road to the cell tower is now?

Mr. Camarda stated absolutely not. It would not make planning sense, it wouldn’t make economic sense and it certainly wouldn’t endear me to the neighbors behind me. Any access to here would be a chained emergency only. It would be 15 feet wide, just enough for a fire truck or ambulance to fit. Never to be dedicated as a town road. Chained at both ends so the people down here could not come up into it and the people down here could not come through. All our access would come from Route 311 about 600 or 700 feet from the Interstate.

Mr. Griffin stated that one of the other concerns had to do with the buffer against the houses in the back, 350 feet, and now 400 feet average. The concerns were north of there; those houses were basically backed up to the property. The neighbors had a tremendous concern on the impact. The lighting was a concern because a lot of the trucking and resupplying of these buildings goes on late at night. Trucks idling, diesel fumes, etc. That’s always a concern as far as safety, health concerns. The third issue that was brought up had to do with the potential for well interference. Those of you who have restaurants or concerns about wells drying up etc. Mr. Griffin stated he thinks they are all legimate concerns and a general concenious concern that this was not appropriate to be backed up to a residential neighborhood.

Mr. Ed Mullin stated that the traffic on Fair Street was a concern.

Mr. Camarda stated that he has done a lot of residential development. He is a homeowner and understands every one of those concerns. He stated he lives in Richfield, CT. It should not make a difference where I live. He stated he goes to other towns in Dutchess and they ask me the same thing. He couldn’t possibly live in every town he does business in. As far as your concerns, first the water situation. Anytime we are going to take "X" amount of water from the earth we are going to have to do studies. We are not going to be using high water uses, because when you do high water uses you then have to up your sewer capacity. Getting sewer plants approval is very difficult. Our water uses are going to be low water uses and that is a self-serving thing. We don’t want high water uses because it creates another problem for us in how to dispose of the water. Anything we do as far as well water will be tested. We will do draw down tests. We will also test your well to make sure we are not affecting your water.

Mr. Griffin stated the biggest concern is the idling trucks and the fumes they give off.

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 4

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Camarda stated that they looked at this plan a few different ways. Our first reaction was to put the retail stores in this area. Which to be perfectly honest would not work well with the scenario the Supervisor just spoke about. With that, we looked at the site and said which way do we want to handle it. By putting the stores close to this area and the parking lot is over here. This is Concord Road that has about 9 area residents that the Supervisor spoke about that doesn’t have this 300-400 foot buffer. About six months to a year ago we said we couldn’t move ahead until we start playing with it in different ways. There are all sorts of announcements today about insurance because they where loading stores during the day and people were getting hurt at Home Depot and every store you go

to. A lot of the stores have said we do not want to load these stores while we have customers inside the stores, which tells us they are not loading them during the day they are loading them at night. So with that in mind it is becoming a bigger issue for these stores. We looked at bringing the stores out further. The stores will be here, lighting will be this way (pointing to map) but it creates another problem for us. He stated he does not want the Interstate to have the backs of these stores. We are working with some landscaping ideas. If we back the stores on the flip side it creates more landscaping challenges for us. We think we can do a better job by landscaping. He can’t make a tractor-trailer less noisy. He could never tell a truck driver not to idle his truck for 3 hours. But he stated that he can put the stores out here and we would spend enough money on landscaping to make it look good from the road and there won’t be any complaints about the trucks behind these homes. They will also be 100 feet away. He stated he doesn’t think we are going to go that way. He thinks they will bring the stores in this way and do an extensive landscaping package. This site has much higher growth with full-grown trees at the border on the property.

An audience member stated that this is fine during the spring and summer but what about this time of year when there are no leaves on the trees.

Mr. Camarda stated we are going to landscape with Norway spruces, blue spruces, and serpent spruces from all the Interstates. But there is already a big green buffer.

Mr. Ron Fechti stated my house borders this property on Echo Road. What about the run off, everything runs off there into a stream and into Lake Carmel, which is part of the reservoir system and along Towners Road and out into the reservoir.

An audience member stated that he has been back there numerous times walking his dog, his kids played back there. He lived there 24 years,……

Mr. Griffin stated that was a project that was proposed by National Development Realty. They are no longer involved with this project. This project is coming in now with a completely new design. The old design didn’t work for the Town or anybody else.

Mr. Camarda stated that they had meetings with some of the citizens in Kent who have concerns about Lake Carmel. There is a stream that leaves Concord and drives right through this property. It’s a storm water drainage from Concord Road/Echo Road and this other road. It comes down here and cuts across this property and then goes directly into the stream that carries it to Lake Carmel. If you were to check the quality of the water that is coming out of that stream right now, it’s probably not up to snuff. The only reason why it isn’t is because there aren’t any retention ponds here to let this water go into and filter out the sediments. One thing we are going to do is to take this town drainage, that’s not our drainage and put it into some ponds so it gets some filtering before it gets to the stream, which takes it to Lake Carmel. It’s an existing problem we think we can correct.

Mr. Griffin stated one other point on this subject; any approvals for this project will have to go through NYCDEP. They will have to do an extensive storm water pollution prevention plan and study which will basically guarantee to NYC satisfaction that the water running off of that site is equal to or far better then what is coming off the site now. If you go down to Home Depot now there are ponds all over the place, those are used for

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 5

TOWN BOARD MEETING

storm water detention for settling ponds, polishing, cleaning the water. This project will be subject to secret review, state environmental quality review act. If will be subject to NYCDEP approval for storm water pollution prevention plan and it will also have to go through all of the Town codes and wet lands that the Town currently has in place.

Mr. Ray Maneiro stated he has been a resident of Lake Carmel for 40 years and is an ecologist. He stated he is worried about the Eco Systems in Lake Carmel. He stated that an Eco System is being upset. You are coming from another area and are telling us how

to develop our area when we of Lake Carmel are against the development and against the Home Depot and all others coming into this area. We live in a national environment and live in a very beautiful Eco System that has to be maintained and you are coming in here and upsetting that with your plans that you think are good for the community. Mr. Ray Maneiro does not want him here and several others from the community do not want him here.

Mr. Steve Hill stated to Mr. Carmarda after you put in this development who is going to buy my house with a mall stuck behind it? Am I stuck with this for the rest of my life? What I’ve been working all my life and the equity I have been putting in my home you are going to take away from me by putting up this mall. My home is going to be worth nothing after this development is put in. He’s also dead set against this whole thing being

put in.

Mr. Paul Camarda asked where exactly does Mr. Steve Hill live?

Mr. Hill stated right on the back of this property on Concord and Echo. Right on the corner. Nobody will buy my home.

Mr. Maneiro asked Mr. Camarda to please answer his question regarding the Eco System. He stated that he would be upsetting the entire Eco System of that area. You are bringing in high levels of traffic into this area. We have plenty of restaurants in this area and plenty of shopping centers all along Route 22 and he would like to know who said we would want another development in this area?

Mr. Camarda stated that the only development that I have done in Carmel is a residential development on larger lots that most people live on. A lot of my developments are on 2 or 3 acres. We did not do small lots. We do larger lots. Most of my development has been residential. He stated he had nothing to do with Home Depot. I will not take responsibility for destroying an Eco System in Carmel. If I was going to destroy your Eco System here, I won’t last 6 months in the approval process. This is a very difficult approval process, no one will destroy anything. Mr. Camarda stated that Mr. Hill’s house would be worth more money. Can you have 100 acres sitting behind you anymore, no you can’t. I understand that. You had this buffer because the Cushman family decided not to develop it for years. They gave 800 acres at a very nominal price to the state on the other side of the parkway for open space. They want to develop a few of their properties and they have picked this one to be developed. I didn’t make that decision. If I am going to develop this property and go forward with this, I will sit down with you and do the best possible job I can to try to make this situation better for you or anyone of the 800 neighbors. Now if I had 400 of them I couldn’t do it.

Mr. Hill stated the numbers your coming up with is nowhere near 8 families it’s hundreds. That’s a community back there. You are only talking about what is bordering it. How about the other 100 or 200 homes that is down the street that will be directly affected by it. There are homes surrounding the whole property. You’re not affecting 8 people you’re affecting hundreds of families. This is a community.

Mr. Camarda stated he is not exactly putting something in the middle of the residential area. We have an Interstate right here. That is a big thing.

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 6

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Fechti stated that you are taking away our buffer zone. You keep bring up the fact that the majority of homes being ¼ acre, ½ acre parcels, that’s true. These homes were originally summer homes grand fathered in. People bought these homes years ago because we enjoyed the serenity of the area and having that big buffer zone between the highway and us. Now you are trying to take that away from us and we are not going to have that serenity. You complained about 2 or 4-acre parcels for these bigger homes. If you wanted to put 25 homes back there on 2-acre parcels or whatever it is, I have no objection with that. If you fill up the whole thing with homes those people are going to

go to bed at night when I go to bed. Their lights will go out when my lights go out. Develop it with homes if it has to be developed.

Mr. Hill stated on the opposite side of Fair Street, which is the backside of this property, my brother-in-law and probably five or six of my close friends live in Patterson. Those zonings are zoned for seven acres, my friend Steve is zoned for five acres. So, you are talking about the upper side of the property and on the backside of the property the zoning is different.

Mr. Camarda stated that he is not here to make it personal. It’s not him. If I didn’t do this there would be another developer. The Cushman’s would go out and get another developer and do the same thing. They want to sell the property and develop this piece. So if it were not Paul Camarda they would go to someone else.

Ms. Edie Keasbey stated we are here to discuss a zoning change. This Town worked real hard and spent a lot of time coming up with a new zoning. Her understanding with this is that the property has poor soils and is steep and that is one of the reasons why it was zoned residential. It doesn’t sound like great property in any way, shape or form. I would like to ask Mr. O’Connor about this property.

Mr. O’Connor stated that he is here as a citizen like the rest of you. When he was Chairman of the Zoning Board we went all through this with the first project. In general he thinks a lot of time and effort went into making the zoning changes we did just a few short months ago. I would be very uncomfortable based on a request that we would change something that was only in effect, I think it was very well thought out, not decades ago but literally months ago. I’m glad to see that there is some revision to the request but I would not be comfortable with it. If you go down to Home Depot there are no houses around there.

Mr. Griffin stated lets get back to focus. Edie you are absolutely right we are here to discuss a zoning change not do a public opinion poll. Mr. Griffin stated the bottom line here is do you have questions relative to this.

Ms. Keasbey stated when NRDC, National Retailer’s Development Corporation came here they came with some pretty fancy plans and they are a very professional national organization that develops malls all over the United States. The Watershed Inspector General, Jim Tierney came down and talked to them and said; "this is the first time you have done one in the New York City Watershed". You are going to have to jump through a lot of hoops in order to get your permits. In order to get them you are going to downsize considerably. NRDC being an intelligent group said it was not worth it and they walked away. I don’t know if Mr. Camarda is that much smarter and he thinks he can do this and ram this down our throats. I don’t think Mr. Camarda knows what he is getting into.

Mr. Bob Groezinger stated what does this have to do with zoning.

Mr. Griffin stated that we are drifting off course and asked Edie if she has questions.

Ms. Keasbey stated does Mr. Camarda think he can handle this or is this a pipe dream of his.

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 7

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Griffin stated he is trying to find out. You know as well as I and most of the people in this room know, the planning process in the NYC Watershed and approval process is a very long process and yes he will have to jump through hoops, but I don’t think he would be here tonight if he didn’t think he could make this project work.

Ms. Keasbey stated she does not want to see this town pay taxpayer’s money defending it’s self against lawsuits.

Mr. Griffin stated that is not a question.

Ms. Keasby asked, "Do you want to spend taxpayers money defending it self against law suits.

Mr. Griffin stated that we would get sued one way or the other.

Ms. Keasby asked, "Do you know what is happening in Southeast?"

Mr. Griffin stated he knows what is happening all over the watershed. Frankly, I tend to agree with you and I don’t know why someone would want to beat his or her head against the wall.

Ms. Keasby stated please don’t change the zoning just for the request of one person because someone else will come in and say, "I don’t like this 4 acre zoning".

Mr. Griffin stated o.k.

Ms. Keasby stated she has one last question for Mr. Camarda. I understand that you use Bill Shilling, who she has great respect for, as your lawyer. We have Tim Curtis and Craig and there might be a conflict of interest since they are all in the same firm.

Mr. Camarda stated that he does not use Bill Shilling as his attorney. He did something for him about three years ago on one particular item. I have been in Putnam County developing property for 16 years and other than that one 30 day situation we had the other 15 years and 11 months I’ve used John Porco’s firm in Putnam County and other firms in Westchester. As far as your feeling that this is going to be a very difficult thing, he believes it will be. Trying to satisfy the DEP and DEC’s standards for water are very difficult. He would not be doing this if he didn’t think he could do it. He had the benefit of three years to think about this. He thinks he is a thoughtful person and gave it a lot of time. He understands the position on the property. Mr. Camarda stated he looked at the zoning changes that were made to the property and what went into the set back change, the coverage area, they were tough changes to be made. He understood where you were coming from. This change defies logic to come down into the zone. He is only asking for fairness and not looking to get into a legal suit with the Town. All he is looking for is a minor change and all the other much tighter restrictions can hold. He has no interest in going to court against them. But he does want fairness.

Mr. Dumont, stated first to the Town "Why wouldn’t this go to the ZBA first, maybe as a variance"?

Mr. Griffin stated that it is a zoning change request, which the zoning is in the purview of the Town Board. Any special uses or variances would be in the purview of the Zoning Board. The Town Board makes up the Town zoning and those regulations and it would be our responsibility to re-zone this property.

Mr. Dumont asked Mr. Camarda if you don’t get this zoning change does that kill the project? Can you not go forward without this zoning change?

Mr. Camarda stated he believes they will go forward either way on the project. We do not feel we can deliver the product we want to deliver by having this piece cut off. We

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 8

TOWN BOARD MEETING

think in order for this to be a successful project you need "X" amount of square feet to make it work, because most of the time when you go to a shopping center you don’t go there for a few small stores you want what is known as an anchor or two. To lay this

project out right we would like to have this back corner in here to do that. In light of this situation of the zoning changes and the restrictions that have been put on this property from set backs I believe that this will fail under scrutiny. He doesn’t want to go in that direction and he doesn’t want to look at the entire zoning. Every property owner has rights and I respect your rights. You have to realize that the Town has to be fair, fair to you and fair to this property owner. If they are not fair sometimes the result is someone else comes in and arbitrates what is fair. He thinks what is fair in this case may be a far worse situation then just coming up with a compromise line of bringing back five or six of the 27 acres or 22 acres you have re-zoned. He thinks it is 22.75 so it would be 23 acres. He is only asking for about 5 acres to come back to square off the property. He doesn’t think that is a very big request. We are not objecting to everything else that was done, just the zoning.

Mr. Andrew DeStefano, asked if this does not go in your favor are you going to sue us like you are suing Carmel?

Mr. Camarda stated just like any resident who went to a town or business, we can’t just go and shoot people, you try to go to court and try to resolve your problem in a fair way.

Mr. DeStefano asked if we are going to get sued?

Mr. Camarda stated he hoped not because there is no advantage for him suing the Town unless you have to do it.

Mr. DeStefano stated that means you are going to sue the Town. So, that is a yes.

Mr. Camarda stated would he consider suing the Town if his request was denied, his answer is yes.

Mr. DeStefano stated you would sue the Town.

Mr. Camarda stated he would "consider it".

Ms. Jacqueline Williams asked what specifically is the reason you need this parcel? You don’t specifically say why you want this piece.

Mr. Camarda asked if she was speaking about a certain parcel.

Ms. Williams stated yes, are you going to have the entrance coming on Fair Street.

Mr. Camarda stated no absolutely not. The only access coming into this center will be from Route 311. We also said we will have a chain on both ends, emergency access to get in if the Planning Board required us to have the secondary access. There is no plan to come down Fair Street.

Mr. Tom Tippler, Fair Street resident, there is an extensive amount of traffic flow currently on Fair Street. He envisions an additional increase of traffic flow. He would like to know what would be planned. Also, are we talking of a strip mall, restaurants, clothing stores? Lastly, take this message back to the Cushman’s, whoever they may be, that the residents do not want this and we would seriously boycott whatever stores are going to be put in there, and again we heard from an ecologist, residents and he thinks the Cushman’s need to know that the residents do not need or want this development. We understand you have to make a living, and you’re trying to make an honest living but you’re not going to do it on our backs. He hopes the Board hears us as well.

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 9

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Camarda stated that they have done some retail surveys. One type of store would be a clothing store also a need for electronic or computer store here. There is probably a

need for a lot of different stores in Patterson. If they were at the Home Depot center you would probably go to them. The normal stores you normally want to shop in. It would be a mixture of clothes, restaurants etc. Mr. Camarda stated restaurants like Fridays, Outback Steakhouse, Boulder Creek or smaller in the mix of the stores. Maybe a pizza place or Starbucks people would have someplace to go.

Mr. Dumont asked, "How long did Mr. Camarda own the property"?

Mr. Camarda stated he has been in contract on the property for about three years.

Mr. Dumont stated during the zoning changes with the Town, did you submit anything for this? In other words when we were going through the zoning changes in the last year, did you ever submit a letter that this was something you would be interested in.

Mr. Camarda stated to be quite honest we followed the zoning line but we never noticed this zoning line until the very end. We didn’t want to get real involved in the zoning process.

Mr. Dumont stated that obviously you are a large landowner. He finds it amazing you would overlook this during the re-zoning process. You don’t recall any letter being submitted to the Town that you opposed this zoning.

Mr. Camarda stated that he didn’t know if he submitted a letter but he did submit a reservation to talk to the Board about the set backs. As far as this zone line he doesn’t know exactly when it appeared on the map. It must have been a late addition in the mix. We didn’t pick it up and bring it to the Town’s attention.

Mr. Dumont stated it just sounds like to him that this interrupts your current plan and you’re coming in late. Why wasn’t this concern of yours brought to the Town at that point. Obviously you didn’t submit anything to the Town in writing. What concerns me is that you are coming in at the last minute because you overlooked something. Now you want our blessing on it.

Mr. Camarda stated you could say he overlooked it but he also thinks you can say the Town may have overlooked it when they re-zoned the whole Town. Maybe they weren’t aware of some of the concerns that they should have been.

Mr. Dumont stated they are your concerns not the Town’s, it’s your property.

Ms. Andrea Tippler stated the questions you haven’t answered, regarding traffic flow and the diesel trucks in the middle of the night. My brother owns a trucking company and she knows they have to run those trucks while they are unloading. They can’t shut those trucks off. How would you deal with that in your back yard if you had to smell it, and hear it? She feels she doesn’t need another store.

Mr. Camarda stated that they do a long traffic analysis of where the traffic impacts will be and will look in each road. He tends to think there will be some increase in traffic.

Mr. Tipper asked, "Will there be a traffic light blinking in my house?" There goes my serenity.

Mr. Camarda stated that Fair Street is not a great way to come in here. For people in Putnam, yes. He thinks more of the traffic impact will be on Route 311 coming off Route 52. There will be some impact.

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 10

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Maneiro stated that there are Eco systems there that you are not taking into consideration. You’re upsetting the whole environment of this area.

Mr. Camarda stated as far as the diesel fuel, if we go with our latest concept of the site and the stores come in this area, as far as the trucks go there will be hundreds and hundreds of feet behind the building away from any residential area.

Ms. Tippler stated that in the middle of the night sound travels. She can hear trucks brake on Interstate 84.

Mr. Camarda stated he does not think the decimal levels generated here will be any greater than the interstate that sits right behind here.

Jacqueline Williams stated you are explaining that there is only one access out of this mall.

Mr. Camarda stated that there is one main access out of this mall.

Ms. Williams asked is that possible?

Mr. Camarda stated that an emergency access with chains at both ends.

Ms. Williams asked could the road be built on Fair Street?

Mr. Camarda stated no. There is no intention to build a road to Fair Street.

Mr. Fechti stated that he was opposed with numerous other people of that tower going up. We were assured that no further development would be done back there behind our homes. You are grading this tower access, the road was there for emergency purposes in case of fire and there would be a small building, 10 x 10. Now there is a fence and compound and three buildings the size of this room, all that we were assured of would not be there. There were a few antenna’s added on and the past summer there were harvesting rocks and it sounded like jet planes landing behind us. We are always getting assured that there will be no further development going to be done, we’re putting up with all this noise, trucks in and out of there continuously.

Mr. Griffin stated that he is not aware of any mining operations being conducted at this time.

Mr. Rich Williams, Town Planner stated that the Cushman’s or a representative of the Cushman’s contracted for somebody to come in. They sold the stonewalls off of the site.

That’s the activity that has been going on for some months.

Mr. Camarda stated that one day he noticed that trucks were taking rocks off the site. After he was there the operation stopped two days later. He stated he called the Cushman’s and told them that was no good.

Mr. Fechti asked when was that?

Mr. Camarda was speaking but unable to transcribe do to lack of microphone usage.

Mr. Fechti stated that when they left our neighborhood they went down Route 311 and they were harvesting stones down there.

Mr. Camarda stated that he did not know anything about that.

Mr. Hill stated that he had trucks for the last eight months coming through his neighborhood. They were accessing the stones from the end of Vernon. They had bulldozers, dump trucks in and out of the place. The only reason they are not there now

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 11

TOWN BOARD MEETING

is because they got all of the stones out. The majority of the walls are already moved. He knows because he was back there and he knows the guys.

Mr. Griffin stated what is your question.

Mr. Hill stated there is no question. We are affected by what this guy is going to do. Build a development back there and we are going to have trucks going through our neighborhood every day.

Mr. Griffin stated that he does not believe that for one second. The Planning Board will not approve that. From what has been said here and what has been proposed for this sight has never proposed an access through a residential neighborhood.

Mr. Hill stated that’s what they use.

Mr. Griffin stated he doesn’t doubt that they do that to move the stones. He stated he was not aware that they were moving the stones because if he were they would have had to go to the DEC for a mining permit. We would have seen to it. You have to let us know.

Someone spoke but due to lack of microphone usage unable to transcribe.

Mr. Griffin stated of course they were, they were getting the money for it. They’re not going to call him up and tell me that.

Mr. Herbst stated that he doesn’t think they live there anymore.

Mr. Griffin stated he’s not sure where they live. The first thing they would do is build an access from Route 311. That’s if the project were to get approved. How many more times can you say the same thing? There are no plans to access this either for construction or permanent access through your neighborhood.

Mr. Fechti asked regarding this emergency road you are talking about, would that be the existing road into the tower.

Mr. Camarda stated that they haven’t designed that road yet. It will be a gravel or 15 foot wide road. We would use a little of the existing if we could. It would be smarter if we could use part of the existing drive. We are not coming very far; the cell tower is probably out here.

Mr. Maniero asked will there be a light on Route 311.

Mr. Griffin stated that no decision would be made until the State of New York reviews the traffic study. The developer is not the one who makes that decision. The decision will be made by the State of New York. It will be required at the time of the traffic study as a rule. The developer could petition for a traffic light out there.

Mr. Maniero stated this is a very dangerous road as it is. Increased traffic on that road is going to bring more danger. There are accidents every single day. The reason why all of us moved up here in the first place was to get away from that development, and all those shopping centers and malls. This man comes in from Ridgefield and he wants to bring it here to us. We don’t want it Sir. They are everywhere all around us.

Ms. Jacqueline Williams wants to double check. She is up at the map. Mr. Camarda is explaining to her where the emergency road is.

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 12

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Peter Riebold asked Mr. Griffin and Mr. Williams when the new zoning regulations where created, what was the intention that the Town had by creating that green line zone.

Mr. Williams stated that he placed that green line in that place based on what information he had available to him concerning the typography and the geology of the sight. He didn’t have any additional information. Mr. Camarda and his consultants have since provided additional information, which may or may not depending on your point of view refute my logic in putting the line where it is.

Mr. Griffin stated that in actuality he doesn’t know if there is such a zone as an unbuildable zone that probably would have gotten that designation. That is not a legitimate zoning designation. It is very steep back there. There is no soil. It’s mostly rock out crop and it’s very very steep. The concern we had was that it would be considered unbuildable under normal conditions. When we were approached with this project, we asked for a grading plan to see, if in fact, it was feasible to get something back there that would be buildable. He believes that there is a 40-foot cut in fill proposed under that grading plan.

Mr. Camarda stated that it is not 40 feet. We were going to step it, so you step down to something. Depending on our final elevation was we could figure out what our final grade would be. If it was 20 feet we would do it in 10 feet step 10 feet step it.

Mr. Griffin asked Mr. Camarda if you take 20 out of the high side you’d take 20 out of the low side?

Mr. Camarda stated correct.

Mr. Griffin stated you could not build a house back there, other than if they were on stilts. You would never get a septic system either.

Mr. Riebold asked Mr. Griffin from what you said it sounds like an unbuildable piece of land. Mr. Camarda is saying that the unbuildable is now buildable.

Mr. Griffin stated that if you get an engineer and financial backing, he suspects anything is do-able.

Mr. Riebhold stated that from what the other people are saying we would like to congratulate Mr. Williams and the other people who worked on the zoning documents and the amount of effort they put into it. We understand that what they tried to do is put the community as the priority and tried to do what is best for this community’s future. He thinks that what these people are saying to the Board is we have the confidence in you but we don’t like the idea that every time a developer comes in here he can’t make enough money unless he violates your zoning. So, he’ll sue you if you don’t change your zoning. We don’t want to hear that. You put a lot of effort into this document, it’s a good document, let’s try to keep this.

Mr. Griffin stated that he understands that, and he respects that. Part of the issue here is that for 35 or 40 years ago that property was zoned commercial completely. When we looked at it we said this should be buffered to the residential neighborhoods. It seemed reasonable. The rationale behind the diagonal line was simply because it was accessed as unbuildable. It’s unbuildable by general standards. We could have left it either way. He can see both sides of the coin. The property is on a 77 or 88 acre piece of property. We are discussing five acres plus or minus on the total parcel of property that had previously been completely zoned industrial. This project was reduced considerably. Basically we are discussing a five-acre piece of property.

Mr. Fechti stated that everyone speaking up is from Patterson. Forgetting any personal differences, friends or political anything, has any input been given for the Town of Kent

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 13

TOWN BOARD MEETING

and the residents that are also effected bordering this property.

Mr. Griffin asked has it been discussed in Kent?

Mr. Fechti asked do the Town’s of Patterson and Kent communicate with each other since they are bordering each other and affecting each other. Forget any political or Town differences, is their any communication going on between the two towns?

Mr. Griffin stated up until about three months ago the Town Supervisor’s met on a monthly basis. This project was discussed at length with Anne Marie Baisley and a number of the other residents. Prior to this current design there was a great deal of communication. There was a presentation made to the Town of Kent back when National Retail wanted to develop that site. Have we reached out to the Town of Kent as far as this proposal in regard to the five acre zoning change; Mr. Griffin stated he has not.

Mr. Williams stated they were noticed.

Mr. Griffin stated they were noticed because they were required to be noticed.

Mr. Fecthi asked, "does the Health Department know about this?"

Mr. Griffin stated this is a zoning change. A lot of the questions asked here tonight would be much more appropriately asked in the planning phase, if it gets to it. Traffic studies, water studies, hydrological studies, all of those types of studies will be in the purview of the Planning Board to request, require or demand. If the Planning Board came in and asked Mr. Camarda that they need an expert to come in and review or check hydrology studies, he would be obligated to pay for that. He would be obligated if we wanted to bring in experts in other fields. These are all things that are a function of the planning process. We are here to debate whether or not this particular five-acre piece of property should go back to the I-zoning that it had up until five or six months ago that it had since 1976. We are talking about a five-acre piece of property. Mr. Camarda came here as a courtesy to the Board and the residents to try and answer some of these questions so we could get a number of the issues out on the table.

Mr. Fechti stated a comfort zone is a good way to describe it since that is what he is going to destroy our comfort zone.

Mr. Griffin stated he has the same problem. This is a concern but there is a lot of understanding on this Board. We all have concerns and we have your best interest in mind as well as the entire Town’s. We looked at this property and looked at this zoning to what were reasonable potential commercial areas for the Town to help with the tax base and the sales tax base. We can all agree that when we drive to the Danbury Mall at Christmas and we can’t find a parking spot and think wouldn’t it be nice if this sales tax were in Putnam and not Connecticut.

Mr. Fechti asked, "is this going to be like Ames or you fill one mall and then the other one closes down that is a half a mile down the road?"

Mr. Griffin stated he does not have an answer for that.

Mr. Fechti stated that is exactly what happened down at Baldwin Place. One mall opened a half-mile from the other and then that one closed down.

Mr. Griffin stated he grew up in that general area and knows exactly what he is talking about.

Mr. Fechti asked, "how many small businesses in this area have been family owned forever and are going to be destroyed?

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 14

TOWN BOARD MEETING

An audience member stated there isn’t that many left.

Mr. Griffin stated he has no idea where he could buy a pair of pants in the Town of Patterson. He is not disputing the fact there is a lot of potential impact here. As a Town Board we are obligated to look at zoning throughout the Town. Commercial development pays more than it takes. Residential takes more than it pays. If you look at what your school taxes look like, another 40 or 50 homes and another 200 school kids will not help you out at all. It will only mean bigger schools, more teachers and will cost you more money.

Mr. Fechti stated you should not look at the outskirts of the Town as second-class citizens. We are citizens of Patterson just as much as the people on Main Street.

Mr. Griffin stated we absolutely do not look at it that way. That is not how we came to look at the potential commercial development. The potential commercial development came because it is at an interchange on a major interstate. We looked at Route 22 as a potential commercial corridor within limits and reason because we are not looking for any major retail. If Mr. Camarda came to me and said he could make a corporate headquarters work there, I would be his best friend forever. If we could have nine-to-fivers out there Monday thru Friday, if we could have a Pepsi Headquarters out there, Mr. Griffin stated he would take it in a heartbeat. Retail is very impactive and creates a lot of problems.

Mr. Fechti stated check with the Kent Police Department to see how many accidents there are on the corner of Fair Street and Route 311 in the past year.

Mr. Bob Groezinger stated that he thinks from a functional point of view as it relates to the zoning it was industrial for many years. A plan was submitted under the concept of it being industrial. The typography hasn’t changed, it is what it was when the plan was submitted. He does not think there is any harm from a zoning point of view, not a building point of view, in creating the modification that is currently proposed. That doesn’t mean he is necessarily in favor of the building, but strictly from a zoning point of view there is no harm in going back to what it was effectively when this project was originally proposed.

Mr. Griffin stated that’s a debatable point, but thank you.

Mr. Maniero stated what this project does is bring stores to our area. He has lived up here for four years when there were no stores and he had to shop in White Plains and he was perfectly happy. He left that area because he came up here for the serenity, for the beauty, the natural wildlife and the natural environment that we live in. This is a water shed for New York City. It supplies eight million people with water. We are contaminating it. Every time we allow industry development to come in here we are putting it one step down. One more bite into our Eco Systems, one more chunk gone. You say school taxes, he will pay them gladly and I am retired. He is willing to pay whatever taxes it has to pay just so long as he has his serenity. That’s why he is there.

Mr. Griffin stated he understands.

Mr. Tippler asked the Board, "he heard the subdued threat that if the Board does not agree upon this plan there is a potential for you to be sued. Who is going to pay for that? Has anyone considered doing a cost analysis that in the long run may be cheaper for the Town to buy the property from the Cushman’s than to allow the development to go into litigation and spend his money for something he does not want?

Mr. Griffin stated it could be done but it has not been done.

Mr. Tippler asked would he consider it?

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 15

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Griffin stated they would consider anything.

Someone stated maybe you can make a park.

Mr. Griffin stated if we could we would buy an airport or a golf course.

Mr. Fechti stated ….. unable to transcribe due to lack of microphone usage.

Mr. Griffin stated he would be seeing Mr. Bondi tomorrow night and he will raise this issue with him. We asked him to consider the acquisition of the Burdick Farm area for similar reasons for protection of open space and the environment.

Mr. Tippler stated he supports Supervisor Griffin 110%.

Mr. Griffin stated the issue will be raised with the County Executive and the Legislatures and if anyone would like to send Mr. Semo, your County Legislature or County Executive a letter to that effect, feel free to do so. You might want to carbon copy Mike Principe or any of the other individuals at New York City DEP.

Mr. Fechti stated New York City isn’t buying property all over the watershed.

Mr. Griffin stated New York City has made the commitment that they will buy watershed property in West of the Hudson River. Kent is not West of the Hudson River. However, it is part of the Ashoken and West of the Hudson Reservoir system. Water comes down through the aqueducts and into Kent. They have also said at the same time they have no plans to acquire property in East of Hudson. The county has taken 30 million dollars that was given to them in watershed funds and they are now embarked on a program of land acquisition. Tilly Foster Farm, the Mahopac Golf Course, the Mahopac Airport and there is a piece in Patterson off of Fields Lane that backs up to the campus at Fields Lane. There are a number of properties that we have recommended that they consider as well as every other town in Putnam in the watershed.

Mr. Fechti stated New York City has bought property East of the Hudson in the last two years.

Mr. Griffin stated you might be right.

Mr. Fechti stated in the Town of Kent.

Mr. Griffin stated again the Town of Kent is in the West of Hudson watershed. The Town of Patterson is considered part of the East of Hudson watershed. Hopefully that will clear it up for you.

Mr. Hill asked, "does it make the Great Swamp the Hudson".

Mr. Fechti asked, "isn’t part of the property in Kent?"

Mr. Griffin stated that a very small parcel of it is in Kent, but it is not considered in the West of Hudson watershed area. The water that drains to the west side into Lake Carmel, he believes goes from there to the Middlebranch Reservoir system, which is part of East of Hudson. Whereas the other side goes into the Croton and into the diverting reservoir, which is also part of East of Hudson. Boyd’s Reservoir is part of West of Hudson because aqueducts feed it from the reservoirs on the other side of the river. The west branch reservoir. New York City is not currently looking to buy property at this time in the East of Hudson, which is where this property is located.

Mr. Fechti stated you would get a lot of backing if you could convince them.

PATTERSON TOWN BOARD DECEMBER 3, 2003 PAGE 16

TOWN BOARD MEETING

Mr. Griffin stated he would be more than happy to raise the issue with the County Executive and as many as the legislatures as he sees tomorrow night.

Mr. Fechti stated please let us know if you need any help.

Mr. Griffin stated he couldn’t see where letters would hurt any. Mike Semo, County Legislature, Artie Nordstrom is Legislature Town of Kent and that area.

Mr. Herbst stated he is also part of the Town of Patterson.

Mr. Griffin asked if anyone had any more questions. He thanked everyone for coming and will keep everyone up to speed as best he can.

Mr. Griffin introduced the following Resolution Local Law I-9, Providing for Public Notice and Hearing Entitled Fees

BE IT RESOLVED that an amendment of Patterson Tow Code Chapter 87, entitled "Fees", is hereby introduced by Michael Griffin, as Introductory Local Law I-9 of the year 2003 before the Tow Board of the Town of Patterson in the County of Putnam and State of New York, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that copies of the aforesaid proposed Amendment, which is attached hereto, be laid upon the desk of each member of the Board, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board will hold a public hearing on said proposed Amendment at the Town Hall, in the Town of Patterson, New York at 7:30 o’clock P.M. on December 17, 2003 and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk publish or cause to be published a public notice in the official newspaper of the Town of Patterson of said public hearing at least five (5) days prior thereto.

Seconded by Mr. Herbst. All In Favor: aye. Carried.

Mr. Griffin stated that if anyone would like to volunteer please let him know. It’s regarding Emergency Management, Neighborhood Watches, Medical Reserve Corps, Community Emergency Response Teams and Volunteers in Police Service. If nobody wants to be a liaison, Mr. Griffin stated he would volunteer.

Mr. Griffin introduced the Proposed Street Lighting for the Donald B. Smith Building