Residents attended the continuation of the Island Properties hearing at town hall, that began on the morning of June 10 and was reopened the evening of June 24. Local residents commented on the Island Properties plan for a change of use for their 286 South Street site. It had been approved for a 112-unit assisted living facility and was being changed to a 33-unit townhouse location. The new plan is 60 percent less dense than the previous use, but residents had other questions they wanted answered. (The hearing began with a discussion of a proposed generic environmental impact study for the Island Properties. It is included at the end of this article.) John DeBellis, who had spoken at the previous hearing, was the first person called to speak. IP attorney Jeffrey Forchelli reminded Oyster Bay Town Supervisor John Venditto, chairing the hearing, they had agreed at the June 10 meeting that there would be only new speakers. Mr. Venditto cautioned Mr. DeBellis to talk about new material and not to bring up any issue he had already discussed. Mr. DeBellis said he found irregularities among the 70 signatures on the petition Mr. Forchelli submitted with the proposal naming people in favor of the plans. Mr. DeBellis said three names weren't local, but were from Westbury, Smithtown and Nesconsett. He said a friend who he considers a reliable source told him residents of Kellog Street were told the plan was going to be downsized from the 33 units. He said 31 signatures were members of the Chamber of Commerce, which was " understandable." But, he asked, "where will they park?" Carol DuBois asked if there were plans for stormwater run off on the site. Mr. Forchelli said that all subdivisions have to go before the Nassau County Planning Commission and they require that all water generated on the site must be gotten rid of on the site. They require drywells and catch basins (on a less than 5 acre site) to recharge into the ground (where there is a paved lot). Joan Mahon, executive director of the Main Street Association said her group had voted unanimously in favor of the proposal saying it fit their parameters of environmental, design, economic and demographic concerns for a walkable community. She said Vision Long Island encouraged compact downtown designs to save room elsewhere. She said her board wanted the project to begin without delay, without waiting for a generic impact statement to be created and went down a list of previous objections negating them, in favor of the IP plans. She said, "The townhouses will get people out walking: to have healthy lifestyles. Everyone is going to walk downtown and shop," she said, adding "This property will not be left undeveloped." Ms. Mahon then introduced the members of her board: Jack Bernstein, Rich Cieciuch, Joanne Gallo, Jerritt Gluck, Marie Knight (who was not necessarily representing the Oyster Bay Civic Association, she said), David Lamb, Chris Mills, Ed Mohlenhoff, George O'Neill, Angela Koenig (who did not vote because she is the publisher of a newspaper), Ellen Roche, Katie Schwab, Bill Sheeline, VP; John Specce, organization chair (who was not representing the chamber of commerce); Nick Voulgaris, Eric Best, honorary member Peter Tilles and herself. Centre Island Mayor John Williams, board president of Friends of the Bay was the next speaker and he said the information provided by Mr. Maher had "taken the wind out of his sails." Mr. Howard Mayer, of Cashin Associates, an attorney who specializes in environmental impact statements, said the plan didn't fit the guidelines that require a generic impact statement. Still, Mr. Williams said he was disappointed there would be no cumulative affect of the plan and others of Island Properties to be measured. Mr. Venditto said while the information from Mr. Mayer showed the town's loss of power he added, "We will explore it." Barbara Lippman said as a resident of Oyster Bay for 40 years she totally supports the IP plan. "As a homeowner my present house is too large for myself and my husband. It is perfect for a young family. We hesitated selling because we want to remain here and there were no apartments for us. I was here when Norwich Gates came in and I thought it was a bad idea because of the traffic involvement. It was built and it never detracted from Oyster Bay. I agree with the IP plan and would like to live there." William Burke of East Norwich, said he supported the townhouses, as a low impact addition to the hamlet. He was also against the environmental impact statement saying, "This project is less intrusive than the other one proposed." He said the plan is a redevelopment of land, it is not virgin land and that a GEIS will delay progress, slow down things and waste money." Mr. Burke added, that as a retired school principal, "I feel the school system is very fragile and we have to see that we don't exceed the numbers of people it can hold." Frances Leone, a resident of Oyster Bay for 30 years, and a homeowner along South Street talked about the need for stormwater control saying the last storm created a mess on her property as water flowed down the road. She said with all the planned development looming in the future, "I won't be able to get to my house," because of the traffic. Rudi Wolf, an Oyster Bay resident said he moved here 20 years ago. "Everything is great. This historic 1653 hamlet of Oyster Bay, on the water, is quaint and quiet. I can see it getting congested. The population is exploding on Long Island. Why do we have to expand Oyster Bay? I like the quaint, quiet village I moved into. I have an 1893 house. My neighbor across the street has an 1855 house. I picture this like Cape May, where people keep the original houses with one family living in them - with trees and quiet. That's how I hoped Oyster Bay would remain. I didn't like it when Carvel and McDonald's came. I like Nobman's that's been here all these years and (was owned by Richard Nobman) and his father Walter before that. It's nice here, like that." Mr. Wolf said the townhouses will take away the one family concept in the area. He described the trip north along Route 106 as exciting. "At Rothmann's you start to slow down as you get into one lane. You pass the bike store. Some houses along that way could be fixed up better. Then you hit Berry Hill Road, and doctor's offices in houses. I would prefer five single family houses in a Colonial style (for 286 South Street). It would be great for me." He preferred the assisted living facility to the townhouses, saying they added less to the traffic numbers. "The 33 units will have two cars apiece and one (parking) outside. That's congestion in and out of town." He said, "You can modernize but you don't have to change. I want single family homes to remain intact. " He said, "It is already hard to get onto South Street from Tooker Avenue. Soon the town will have to add stop lights down the street." Carol Lizzo, a 20 year resident said her husband's grandfather worked for Theodore Roosevelt. She agreed with Bonnie Eisler, saying that it was a shame they couldn't do an environmental impact study. "I think this is a game Island Properties is playing. One application at a time is unethical. It will affect the school system and the services." She remembered the village when Elizabeth Culimore (women's clothing store) and the Casual Gent (a men's clothing store), and said, "They didn't need apartment dwellers to sustain that kind of business. We don't need apartment buildings with 300 or 200 units. What are they going to do when they get started on the waterfront area. It should be looked at as a whole and not individual parcels." Don Jenke took another tack. "I'm going to have to go to 70 meetings, one for each application of IP? I'm not against Mr. Wang, but he has billions of dollars. I don't think any other town has had 70 parcels bought up by one person. Seventy parcels of land and he's going to go to you one application at a time? He's going to wear you down. We're not going to live long enough." Charlie Kulis said as areas get more developed the real estate taxes go up and that affects the selling price of a house and that there is an impact on the school system. He said that there is uniqueness here and developing it similar to other areas - takes away from it and will have a negative impact. As for traffic, he said, there is one basic route in and out of town and that more development will only affect the hamlet adversely, unless Cove Road becomes a major highway. The supervisor asked Mr. Forchelli if he had anything to add to the testimony and he said, "Everything that needs to be said has been said." Martha Offerman read the resolution announcing the hearing and added that there were two parking spaces per unit required, for a total of 66 spaces but that there were actually 76 spaces. "There are letters for and opposed," she said. At the back of the hearing room several residents of Sampson Street were talking. One said, "A majority of Sampson Street homeowners are in favor of the most recent plan. They met with us and addressed all our concerns." When asked about the closeness of the houses on the back of the plan, they answered, "They plan to leave as many existing trees as they can to make a buffer zone. They will leave all trees with a diameter of 6 inches or more."

How much development can Oyster Bay accept and still maintain a high quality of life for residents? That was the impetus of the question asked by Louise Harrison, executive director of Friends of the Bay at the June 10 hearing for the Island Properties proposal for their 286 South Street property. She suggested that since Island Properties owns over 70 properties in the hamlet, that there was good reason, using the NYS DEC concept of "segmentation" that they do a generic impact study of the IP plans. It would see how those developed properties will affect existing services such as the sewer, garbage, water and firematic services as well as the health of the harbor.

Town of Oyster Bay Supervisor John Venditto opened the continuation of the Island Properties hearing on June 24, with the testimony of an expert witness. Howard Mayer of Cashin Associates, an attorney with 25 years of municipal law experience in environmental impact studies gave an explanation of why the town couldn't do a generic environmental impact statement on the plans.

He was introduced by Mr. Venditto who said Cashin Associates was asked to make a technical evaluation of doing a cumulative impact study of all the future developments of Island Properties in Oyster Bay. Mr. Mayer explained the State Environmental Quality Review in detail and ended by saying the IP project didn't fit into the concept of "segmentation" since there is only one project being discussed at this time. Len Genovia, Mr. Venditto's legal assistant, confirmed that there was only one pending application.

Councilwoman Bonnie Eisler questioned the answer, saying the applicant has been holding public meetings about their plan for an apartment complex and other buildings. "He (Abraham Poznanski) has been out in the community talking of what he has intentions to build. Where do you draw the line?"

Mr.Mayer said it was not a subjective decision, that the state law is pretty clear. "In my view, if you disregard my advice and insist this application not go through until a plan is done - as an attorney, I would start an Article 78 proceeding. You just don't have the power under state law to do it. You don't have the power to force disclosure; however, they could (voluntarily) disclose," he said. His suggestion was that the town ask IP for voluntary cooperation to share plans and to work on a comprehensive analysis. "It could be done on a voluntary basis although there is no legal basis to hold this application hostage," he said. "Here you have an applicant with a previously approved application now asking for less density in a development."

Mr.Venditto looked at the ruling philosophically saying, "It makes sense, whether I like it or not. What frightens me is that you indicated we are left with voluntary compliance." He talked of the issues the town faces when it tries to regulate development. The scales of justice balance the rights of private property, as represented in the final moment by the courts, versus the town's attempt to regulate. Mr. Mayer said, the town is limited in its regulatory powers.

There was still another question. Bonnie Eisler said, "We have a town plan. If a proposal is not in compliance with the Hamlet Plan we have adopted can we turn it down?"

Mr.Mayer said, "Yes."

Mr.Venditto said, "A vision plan can be a powerful tool or an empty chamber if you don't do the homework."

Councilman Chris Coschignano added that the plan for housing at the Pine Hollow Chevrolet dealership was changing right now. "It was 400, then 300 and now I've heard it is 240 units. Until an application is filed we don't know what we're dealing with."

Mr.Mayer added another piece of information. He said developers do their own traffic studies before plans come to town hall for review.

Ms.Eisler countered that by saying at a hearing the board was told a huge mall would have no traffic impact. "I don't know how a court decides a case," she said.

Mr.Venditto chimed in and said, "How can a major mall have no traffic impact." (The town has been in court in regard to the proposed mall on the Cerro Wire property in Plainview.)

Ms.Eisler said, "If there is a time when several plans come in at one time, then can we ask for a study?"

The consensus later among several people seemed to be that that was possible.

Del Barretto of Bayville commented on the discussion and complimented Mr. Venditto saying she was glad he was "one of the lawyers who will listen to other lawyers with half an ear." Dr. Barretto said of the need for a generic environmental impact study that "It is a finite world. We have finite facilities in this area. We have the Bay and Sound to save. No questions are being asked of how much this area can take. That's not the way a finite world works." The retired professor said, "Whether it's legal or not you have to get a guesstimate of how much the area can take without destroying the Sound. When you're talking of the septic system, when Ralph Naranjo (first Friends of the Bay executive director) argued for greater capacity for the sewer district it was only corrected somewhat. We have to find out how much the hamlet can support as we put in a little here and a little there. The IP plan is better but I'm not convinced we can't do an overview. Get a total view for the hamlet before you go around approving things here and there." As before, Mr. Venditto said, "We will take it under advisement."

Louise Harrison, executive director of Friends of the Bay said, "I'm pleased with so much attention for the need of a cumulative analysis of the IP plans. You may have concluded now is not the time for an EIS, but the key to consider is build out." She too complimented the board on Mr. Mayer's talk and said, "How often can there be a lecture on SEQR that everyone can understand. It is empowering all of us in the area and the government to bring up the possibilty of analysis." She suggested that there are few times when there is one owner with so many parcels to develop.

Ms.Harrison said, "Mr. Poznanski and I have been talking for quite some time on implementation strategies. As Dr. Baretto said, we need a cumulative analysis. Our resources are finite. I think if the rest of the state knew 90 percent of the oysters used in the state come from here, they would want Oyster Bay preserved." There was applause.

A town hall spokesperson last week said that Mr. Venditto said, "He will be talking to IP about working on a GEIS for the remainder of their holdings in the hamlet."

When asked in a telephone interview last week if he was interested in working with the town on a Generic Environmental Impact Study of his holdings, Mr. Poznanski held on to his view that there was no need for a GEIS for 286 South Street. "It is much ado about nothing. We have rules and laws that tell what we have to do," he said. "Change will happen no matter what we do. It can be negative change in the form of decay. If you don't take positive steps you get negative steps."

Mr.Poznanski said he purchased the site three years ago, with the Assisted Living Facility permit approved. "I've had three (public) meetings with the Oyster Bay Civic Association and met three or four times with residents. We would make more money if done as approved. We are being cautious and planning things. Each property we develop stands on its own. Generally, we are not asking for variances on our property, but are doing what is allowed by right. The only reason we are going for a hearing on this one is because of the change."

Speaking of the environment, he said they had already done an environmental cleanup on the Hallock site. "Presently, you have stormwater runoff coming from the 286 parking lot," that will be changed in the new plan.

He said, "The problem is everyone focuses on the waterfront and I'm not thinking about that."

Mr.Poznanski said his main concern is to revitalize Oyster Bay. As for restoration, he said the small house on East Main Street and White Street is still being looked at. He said, "John Collins owes us a plan that shows how we can economically make this thing work (preserve the 17th century building)."

Mr.Poznanski was very positive about the hearing. He said, "The dialogue helps me learn and understand." He is interested in hearing what people have to say and offer, as he shapes his plans. "We are not developers who are going to level the land. We are going to renovate properties," he said, "Like Obies and Not Just Art."