Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Buffer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board leaves buffer‑reduction request for Perez Radic Industrial Park open pending environment review
Summary
A proposed reduction of a required 100‑foot buffer to 50 feet at the Perez Radic Industrial Park was discussed but not decided; staff recommended waiting for the Department of Environment and Waterways’ comments and the board left the hearing open.
The Smithtown Planning Board on Dec. 3 heard a request to reduce a required 100‑foot vegetated buffer to 50 feet for property at 20 Austin Boulevard within the Perez Radic Industrial Park and voted to leave the hearing open until the Department of Environment and Waterways completes its review.
Planning staff said subdivision no. 344 (Perez Radic Industrial Park), a 44‑acre industrial park approved in 1966, originally required a 100‑foot perimeter buffer along the west side adjacent to residential zoning. The applicant seeks the waiver to accommodate a rear building addition and expanded parking; staff said the proposed building addition would not encroach but the expanded rear parking would encroach 50 feet into the buffer.
Staff noted an existing LIPA right‑of‑way immediately west of the site provides an additional 50 feet of separation to residences, effectively producing a 150‑foot separation when combined with a 50‑foot reduced buffer. Staff also warned that reducing the vegetated buffer would increase the industrial site’s visibility from neighboring residences, especially in winter, and that the Department of Environment and Waterways is reviewing potential impacts. Staff recommended the board reserve decision until that agency’s comments arrive.
Vincent Trearco, representing the applicant, said the LIPA easement behind the buffer is generally unused and that the building extension itself would not cross the property line; "it's just the parking that... would encroach," he said. Trearco offered that the applicant would accept additional plantings or screening recommended by site plan review and had no objection to Department of Environment and Waterways review.
Board members discussed scheduling and agreed not to set a new hearing date; instead they left the hearing open until the department’s report is received, at which point the applicant will be notified and a date set if needed. The board’s action keeps the matter active but postpones a final decision.
