Sarah Taddeo

@sjtaddeo

Webster residents at a planning board public hearing Tuesday were almost completely against a proposal that would eventually bring 74 acres of tomato greenhouses to a rural part of town.

The hearing, which was rescheduled to Tuesday after residents packed a previous planning board meeting to fire capacity earlier this month, went on for several hours, as residents voiced their concern surrounding the project.

Owners of Intergrow Greenhouses Inc., a tomato growing firm that has other greenhouse sites in Gaines, Orleans County, near Albion, and Fillmore, Allegany County, is proposing to build a 25-acre greenhouse, with the possibility of two additional greenhouses in the future, plus 155 parking spaces and a management building on the 114-acre site at the corner of State and Salt roads. The company grows tomatoes hydroponically, and estimates that the proposed facility could create around 100 jobs, said Intergrow president Dirk Biemans in May.

Here are five major takeaways from the meeting:

1. Does the proposal fall under the conservation easement?

A matter of major significance was whether the proposal fits the parameters of a conservation easement that includes the parcel of land. The agreement, crafted in 2005 between the town and the landowners, the Schreiber family, gives the town development rights to the parcel and stipulates that the land cannot be developed for residential use, only agricultural.

But many neighbors say the tomato greenhouse project does not count as an agricultural use.

"There's no way on God's sweet earth that this satisfies and can be built according to the easement," said resident Don Haag of Webster.

At the time of the easement, hydroponics was not included in the state definition of "agriculture," said Chuck Lang, a Penfield resident who used to live in Webster.

"If the town allows the current New York state definition of agriculture to apply to this case, then what good are any government documents that are written if the definitions are altered to facilitate whatever the government wants?" he said.

Peter Vars of BME Associates represented Intergrow at the meeting, and stated that the proposal was in line with the easement, the town zoning code, which is Large Lot Single Family residential for that area, and the state Agricultural and Market stipulations in that it is, in essence, an agricultural proposal.

2. The project would disrupt views, bring traffic

The proposal will look very different than standard farm fields, said Jason and Monica Jugovic, who lives on Salt Road and whose property would be surrounded on three sides by the greenhouse facility.

"When we purchased our home, we sold our (previous) house and ran there because we loved this place," said Monica Jugovic. "Our dream is turning into a nightmare."

The couple thought standard farming would continue on the property when they moved in about two years ago, and are now worried that they will have to live with greenhouses in the backyard instead of rolling farmland.

While Vars said the Monroe County Department of Transportation looked over the estimated traffic impact of the full project and did not find it to be destructive to the neighborhood, several neighbors expressed concern about potentially noisy delivery trucks, and an increased traffic load, especially in the winter.

3. Worries about property values

Several neighbors worried about the effect the project could have on property values in the area, if the project is approved.

"This will crush my property value," said Bill Burden, who lives on State Road. "That's a major part of my retirement income and it's going to be flushed down the toilet."

On the flip side, Matt Chatfield of the Webster Economic Development Alliance touted the economic benefits of the project.

"How do we balance investment, open space and quality of life?" he said. "With the uncertain future of Xerox, our biggest taxpayer, I believes this investment in our community supports the stability and diversity of the future tax base."

4. Environmental questions

While some neighbors applauded Intergrow at the meeting for its sustainable practices, such as collecting and recycling runoff water on its properties, others worried about how the project could impact the environmental footprint of the area.

Several ponds are included in the proposal to hold water used within the facility, and they'll be close to the Jugovic's residence. Whatever fertilizers and other chemicals that might be used on the property could end up in those ponds, which could create an environmental hazard or nuisance in the area, said Monica Jugovic.

5. There are better locations out there

A large portion of those who spoke at the meeting asked why Intergrow couldn't find a plot of land more suitable to the project in an area that wouldn't impact so many neighbors. Some mentioned Wayne County as a better alternative for a project of this size.

"I get it that there's a new definition of what a farm is," said Taylor Chamberlain of Webster. "This is a really good model for a farm, but not here."

The town planning board will consider the comments as part of the ongoing development approval process of the project. The matter was tabled until an upcoming meeting in September.

STADDEO@Gannett.com

MORE: Webster greenhouse proposal has neighbors seeing red

Tomato grower proposes 25-acre Webster greenhouse