Credit: Pine Plains Planning Board
On Wednesday, June 12, the Pine Plains Planning Board convened a public hearing to discuss the proposed slaughterhouse at 424 Prospect Hill Road. The hearing drew considerable attention from community members, who raised concerns about its impact on nearby properties.
Matthew Cichetti, owner of Prospect Hill Farm, is the applicant for the project, in collaboration with neighboring Sugar Hill Farm. The slaughterhouse would fill a critical need among local livestock farmers who often travel long distances to bring their animals to slaughter.
Pine Plains resident and former Town Board member Sarah Jones said the public hearing was premature, “I don’t think that the board has really dug into the specifics of what this slaughterhouse is and how it will operate and function and a whole myriad of issues around the slaughterhouse,” she said. “I am totally in favor of building a slaughterhouse in that general area, I want to be very clear about that. I think that a slaughterhouse is very important in terms of supporting our farms, and that it’s necessary and that it can be done properly.”
Suzanne Terrizzi who lives at 3593 Route 199, directly across from Sugar Hill Farm, voiced concerns about the potential impact on her property. “We’re concerned that our easterly view, which is now pastures and woods, would be disrupted,” she said. “We prefer not to see a building back there. The visibility of the building and the lighting are our main concerns.”
John Bonneville, who lives 300 feet from the projected site, questioned the location. “There’s plenty of spots. Why is it next to my house?” he asked. His wife, Peg Bonneville, echoed these sentiments and raised traffic concerns. “All of that acreage, why does it have to be right behind my house?” she said.
Cichetti responded to concerns, ensuring that all lighting would be dark-sky compliant and that the building would be fully insulated and soundproofed. He explained that the waste would be managed on-site, with all operations contained within the facility. “There’s no impact, there’s no significant odors,” he said. “It’s all contained. It’s over 500 feet off of the road, it’s completely concealed with trees around it. We’re adding trees around the neighbor to keep it hidden. When you’re driving down 199 or sitting on your porch, you’re not going to see this building.”
Credit: Pine Plains Planning Board
He added that the lighting is all concentrated in the back of the building, and that the entrance on Route 199 already handles a lot of traffic. He estimated the facility would create about six jobs, with most of the labor coming from the local community, although a few specialized positions might require external hires.
“The biggest benefit to the community is that it will be open to all of the farms,” Cichetti said. “We all know there is a major need for this. We will be opening our doors, and depending on that to keep the facility going. It’s not just going to be the whole farm, it’s going to be the whole community. We’re probably going to be looking at processing five to 10 animals at the facility per day. In order to meet that demand and meet the business model, that means we will need local farms. It’s a huge benefit to local farms.” He estimated that only 20% to 30% of the animals processed would be from Prospect Hill and Sugar Hill farms.
Planning Board chairman Michael Stabile asked about the rationale behind the chosen location. “It’s a spot that has a concrete slab, it’s hidden and the access is easy. We won’t have to cut any more trees,” Cichetti said. The board also discussed how the exact acreage of land disturbance — estimated to be around two acres — remains unclear and the necessity of coordinating with the state Department of Agriculture and Market for licensing and operational details. If the land to be disturbed is greater than 2.5 acres, a more intense level of examination would be required under the state’s Environmental Quality Review Act.
Town attorney Warren Replansky recommended further coordination with the state to enhance public understanding and ensure compliance with all regulations. “There must be a process to submit to Ag and Markets with much more detail about the operation of the facility’” Replansky said. “We need to coordinate our review with them and determine the exact acreage disturbed.”
With many issues still unresolved, including sound levels, traffic and water usage, the board voted to keep the public hearing open. “Obviously, we have some things we need to figure out and nail down,” Stabile said. “We have a lot of work to do.”