Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutThe Enclaves - 2019_6_11 DEIS Completeness Review NELSON, POPE & VOORHIS, LLC ENVIRONMENTAL  PLANNING  CONSULTING www.nelsonpopevoorhis.com CORPORATE OFFICE HUDSON VALLEY OFFICE 572 WALT WHITMAN ROAD, MELVILLE, NY 11747-2188 156 Route 59, Suite C6, SUFFERN, NY 10901 PHONE: (631) 427-5665  FAX: (631) 427-5620 PHONE: (845) 368-1472  FAX: (845) 368-1572 MEMORANDUM To: Leslie Weisman, Chairperson and Members of the Town of Southold Zoning Board of Appeals cc: Charles R. Cuddy (Project Counsel) From: Carrie O’Farrell, AICP, Senior Partner Date: 6/11/19 Re: The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments At the request of the Town Zoning Board of Appeals (“ZBA”), Nelson, Pope & Voorhis, LLC (“NP&V”) has reviewed the Long Environmental Assessment Form (“LEAF”) Parts 1, 2 and 3, SEQRA Determination of Significance (i.e., Positive Declaration) dated November 16, 2017, Final Scope dated April 19, 2018, and Draft Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the Applicant, dated April 2019, including all studies, reports, figures, photos, plans, and other associated materials contained within the DEIS for “The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant” Special Exception Use Permit (“SE Permit”). The purpose of this memo is to assist the ZBA, as Lead Agency, in determining whether the DEIS is “complete” based on the scope and content requirements of the agreed upon Final Scope and 6 NYCRR Part 617, Subsection 617.9 (b) (“Environmental impact statement content”) of the State Environmental Quality Review Act (“SEQRA”) so that the public review process for the DEIS and SE Permit can begin. Based on our review, we have identified scope omissions and recommended corrections, clarifications noted herein. Therefore, we recommend that the DEIS be deemed “incomplete” and the applicant be advised to address the following items outlined below. Once the DEIS is revised, resubmitted and determined to be “adequate” by the ZBA in terms of its scope and content, the ZBA as Lead Agency will: 1) formally “accept” the document by resolution; 2) distribute or make the DEIS available to other involved agencies; 3) file a DEIS Notice of Completion and schedule a public hearing in the NYSDEC’s Environmental Notice Bulletin (“ENB”) and a newspaper of area-wide distribution; and 4) make the document available to the general public on the Town’s official website and at the Town Clerk’s office (and/or any other suitable location) to begin formal review. During this comment period, the Board may have substantive comments, which along with substantive comments from our office, would be issued to the applicant during the public comment period and addressed in the Final EIS. DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 2 of 11 1.0 Description of Action The application under review includes the following proposed actions and/or improvements:  Expansion and renovation of an existing two-story home, including connecting an existing adjacent shed to the main building with a 519± SF addition and converting the entire structure into a 74-seat “sit-down” restaurant with a gross floor area of 3,806± SF, plus 524± SF of cellar space.  Removal of a second shed that is currently located on-site and retention and reuse of an existing one-story detached residential garage for storage for the restaurant operation.  Construction of a two-story L-shaped hotel building with flat roof containing forty (40) 500 SF - 540+/- SF hotel rooms to the north of the proposed restaurant, and four detached 594+/- SF cottages on the north side of the hotel building.  Installation of an outdoor in-ground swimming pool, pool patio, and pool cabanas on the west side of the proposed hotel building, a small decorative fish pond and lawn/outdoor event area on the south side of the building, drainage catch basins and subsurface leaching pools to address stormwater runoff, an advanced on-site sewage treatment facility at the northeast corner of the property for on-site sanitary waste treatment and disposal, installation of other essential utilities (public water connections, electricity, telephone, cable, etc.) and miscellaneous minor recreational amenities and accessory features. The proposed STP would be a Biologically Engineered Single Sludge Treatment (“BESST”) system. An STP control building would be installed to house aeration blowers, odor control equipment, and the operator’s laboratory space. Treated effluent would discharge into a subsurface effluent disposal system consisting of several leaching pools.  Construction of two parking lots with a combined total of 160 parking spaces, including 40 spaces for the restaurant use and 120 spaces for the hotel use. The restaurant parking area would contain 27 paved surface parking spaces including two Americans with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) stalls, 11 grass pave spaces and two grass overflow spaces. The hotel parking area would contain 96 paved spaces, including four ADA stalls, and 24 grassed overflow spaces. All standard (non-ADA) spaces would be 9 feet wide by 20 feet long and interior double loaded parking areas will have 24-foot wide center aisles and ADA spaces that would be designed in accordance with ADA requirements. Access to the site would be via a one-way access driveway off Main Road at the east end of the property and a one-way site egress on to Main Road at the west end of the property. The restaurant and hotel buildings will be connected by an interior street containing a vegetated median strip.  Retention of some existing trees and the planting of vegetation would be provided along the perimeter of the site for screening and buffering. A Special Exception Use Permit is required from the ZBA for the hotel use and Site Plan approval is required from the Town Planning Board for the entire project. Other reviews, permits, and/or approvals that are necessary prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for the project include: an Article 6 Permit from Suffolk County Department of Health Services (“SCDHS”); Highway Work Permit from the New York State Department of Transportation (“NYSDOT”); and State Pollution Discharge Elimination System (“SPDES”) permit and SPDES sewage discharge permit from the DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 3 of 11 New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (“NYSDEC”). Suffolk County Planning Commission (“SCPC”) has General Municipal Law Section 239-m planning review authority over the proposed action and public water and utility service connections are also required from the Suffolk County Water Authority (“SCWA”), and PSEG Long Island and National Grid, respectively. 2.0 Location The subject property is located on the north side of Main Road, +/-830 feet east of Boisseau Avenue and +/-90 feet west of the intersection of Main Road and Town Harbor Lane in the Town of Southold. The property address is 56655 Route 25 (“Main Road”) and the subject parcel is identified as Suffolk County Tax Map District 1000, Section 63, Block 3, Lot 15. The 6.75-acre property is zoned “Hamlet Business” and is located within a mixed commercial/ single-family residential neighborhood at the easterly edge of the Southold Hamlet Business District. The south side of the property is currently developed with a two-story single-family home, detached garage and two sheds but the area behind these buildings is undeveloped. The site contains a small lawn, some ornamental landscaping, some fringing/perimeter woodlands consisting mostly of southern successional hardwood forest species, and old field successional growth associated with a previous agricultural use. 3.0 SEQRA Classification It should be noted that the proposed action was formerly classified as an “Unlisted” action pursuant to pre-2019 SEQRA regulations; however, recent (2019) amendments to 6 NYCRR Part 617 now classify the project as a Type I action. The reason for this change in status is due to Subsection 617.4 (b)(9) which states that an action must be classified as a Type I action when it: “exceeds 25 percent of any threshold established in [617.4, ‘Type I actions’]” and is proposed “wholly or partially within, or substantially contiguous to, any historic building, facility, site or district or prehistoric district that…has been determined by the Commissioner of the Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation to be eligible for listing on the State Register of Historic Places.” The existing home on the subject property, known as the “Lester Albertson House,” is classified by the NYS Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (“OPRHP”) as eligible for listing on the State and National Registers of Historic Places. This criterion, in conjunction with 25 percent of Subsection 617.4 (b)(6)(i) (“a project or action that involves the physical alteration of 10 acres” i.e., 2.5 acres), makes the subject action a Type I action. DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 4 of 11 4.0 DEIS Completeness Review Comments SEQRA requires that a DEIS be determined to be adequate in terms of its scope and content pursuant to the DEIS’s Final Scope and SEQRA Subsection 617.9(b), “Environmental Impact Statement Content,” prior to acceptance and circulation for public review to ensure a complete and accurate record. The following is a summary of identified DEIS omissions or deficiencies, and preliminary comments. 4.1 Omitted Items and Preliminary Comments Cover Page The cover page has a line for the date of DEIS acceptance but does not have a line for the date comments on the DEIS must be received by as required by SEQRA 6 NYCRR Part 617, Subsection 617.9 (b)(3)(viii). Section 1.0 Description of Proposed Action (See Page 3 of Final Scope) The following items were not included in Section 1.0, “Description of Proposed Action,” as required by the Final Scope:  List of community service districts that the site is located within (school, fire, police, ambulance and ambulance districts; the water district has been addressed);  Site zoning and surrounding zoning pattern and general recognition of consistency or nonconsistency with zoning;  Brief description or characterization of surrounding land uses/land use pattern;  Reference to appropriate figures/maps depicting community service districts, existing land use, and existing zoning);  Description of preliminary operations including a detailed description of the various components/uses of the proposed hotel, including hours of operation/use for the restaurant, anticipated frequency of use for conference spaces and events, including any proposed outdoor music (weekday/weekend, duration and season);  Anticipated hours that construction work will be performed.  Subsection 1.2.4, Table 2, “Site Data for Existing and Post‐Development Conditions,” includes an entry of “3.563 ac (167,065 SF).” Please check the math on these numbers as there appears to be a significant discrepancy between the above conversion and the actual number using 43,560 SF/acre. This difference does not appear to be due to minor rounding error as 3.563 acres is 155,204 (a difference of nearly 12,000 SF) and 167,065 is more like 3.835 acres, a difference of more than one-quarter acre.  Subsection 1.2.9, Table 3 “Solid Waste Generation,” indicates that solid waste for the restaurant would be 296 lbs./day for the restaurant but it does not appear that this projection factored in the 2 lbs./day per meal multiplier which would make the total 592 lbs./day or 9.0 tons/month. Please check this figure and revise as necessary throughout the document. DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 5 of 11 Section 2.1 Soils and Topography (See Page 6 of Final Scope)  Estimated land area to be cleared/disturbed.  Maximum depths of cut and fill.  Estimated volume of soil to be removed from site, estimated number of truck loads this will be, and estimated length of time for removal of excess soil. (Total cut is provided but no estimate is provided of the volume to be removed, other than stating that the “majority” would be shipped off-site).  Section 2.1.2, page 15, first paragraph states in part “…disturbance of soils for building foundations, utility installation, grading, paving, and landscaping.” For greater completeness and accuracy, NP&V recommends that the “in-ground swimming pool” and “fish pond” be included in this list and it is recommended that “drainage” and “sanitary system” be added to supplement the statement regarding underground “utilities” which could be interpreted as only electrical, natural gas, telephone, cable, and drinking water services. Section 2.2 Water Resources (See Page 6-7 of Final Scope)  Projected total stormwater runoff volume after construction from the two-inch rainstorm in cubic feet (This projection should be compared to total capacity of proposed drainage system);  Information about the decorative fishpond. This would involve a brief discussion to characterize this feature such as the total surface area of the pond, its depth, materials to be used/how will it be lined, any necessary equipment (e.g., aerators, pumps, storage tanks), any required maintenance, how and where pond water will be discharged if maintenance is required, species of fish and type of vegetation to be included, etc.).  Please also note that Subsection 617.9(b)(5)(iii)(i) of SEQRA (“Environmental Impact Statement Content”) requires that “measures to avoid or reduce both an action’s impacts on climate change and associated impacts due to the effects of climate change such as sea level rise and flooding’ must be considered. NP&V did not see such a discussion in the DEIS.  The wording of the following sentence on page 19 of the DEIS, “Based upon the USGS map (see Figure 5 in Appendix A), the depth to groundwater varies across the site from twenty five (25) feet above mean sea level (amsl) on the south side of the property to thirty three (33) feet amsl on the northwest corner of the property[,]” is inaccurate and should be revised accordingly. The reason for this comment is that the groundwater table is not 25 or 33 feet above mean sea level as indicated on the water contour map in Figure 5 or the soil borings on Sheet C-201. That is, the actual elevation of the water table is roughly a few inches to 2 feet above mean sea level, although the depth to groundwater may be 25- 33 feet deep from the ground surface. For example, Boring 1 has a ground surface elevation of 26.0± feet and the depth to groundwater is 25’8” thereby indicating that the elevation of the water table at this location above mean sea level is around 4 inches (0.33-feet). DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 6 of 11  Projections of water demand and sewage generation should include anticipated demand/flow for a 250-person wedding reception based on total number of attendees, employees and any others, and demonstrate that the proposed BESST system can accommodate this flow.  Page 19, states that according to “Suffolk County’s recent groundwater models developed for the Long Island Nitrogen Action Plan (LINAP), the local groundwater flow direction is estimated to be south, towards Town Creek/Southold Harbor [and a]ccording to the LINAP models, the groundwater travel time to Town Creek/Southold Harbor is in the 2‐ 10 year contributing area depending upon the location within the property.” The referenced data or maps should be included in the DEIS to support the written conclusions in the text of the DEIS.  Top of page 22, regarding surface waters: It is recommended that Hippodrome Pond be mentioned as well, as some groundwater flow from beneath the site may be toward the south-southeast, and the topography and local surface drainage system may flow toward this area, and although the DEIS indicates that the entire flow from a two-inch (ten-year) 24-hour storm would be collected and recharged on-site, any storm that is larger would likely contribute runoff to the street drainage systems or off-site locations.  Page 33 states that the preliminary drainage plan for the project has been designed and “installed.” The word installed should be deleted or please add the words “will be” before the word “installed.” Section 2.3 Ecological Resources (See Page 7-8 of Final Scope)  Identification of those existing plant species that are classified as “exploitably vulnerable.”  The EIS indicates that existing trees will be retained within the 25’ rear yard and 10’ side yard setback that will provide screening for adjacent properties. Based on the proposed site grading and disturbance from equipment for installation of the proposed STP, it is not clear how such trees will be retained. The trees locations should be located on the plans with indication of the extent of tree crowns and the limit of disturbance accounting for necessary construction equipment access to determine if the retention of trees is feasible and can be considered as mitigation. Section 3.1 Land Use, Zoning and Plans (See Page 8 of Final Scope)  Discussion/description of proposed uses on both the first and second floor of the restaurant building (e.g., rather than just stating that it will be a restaurant please note office space, kitchen area, take-out area, pantry, staff locker room, food prep area, private room, types of indoor events if any envisioned, number of seats and bar stools on each floor, any storage space in basement, etc.)  Entertainment or activities that may occur at outdoor special events (particularly whether amplified music (DJs, bands, etc.), public speaking or officiating are expected, anticipated days of the week, hours of day/night, months of the year that such outdoor events would DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 7 of 11 likely be held (e.g., Fridays and Saturdays between 6:00 PM and 9:00 PM during the months of June, July and August)  Top of page 82 under the heading “Consistency with Relevant Planning Documents”: This section indicates that: “The following statements were identified as relevant to proposed project and an assessment of the proposed project’s conformance with each statement follows in italics.” The sentence is a little misleading as it suggests that the project’s consistency with each statement is in italics when it is the text from the plan, not the response, that is in italics. Section 3.2 Transportation (See Pages 8-10 of the Final Scope)  Indicate whether large vehicles (e.g., limousines and buses) will access and park on-site and how the action accommodates appropriate interior traffic circulation and parking of oversized vehicles.  Hotel Use: The architectural plans depict meeting rooms as well as gathering and dining areas in the hotel. Clarification should be provided regarding the operations of these accessory uses and they should be accounted for in the parking calculations, as stated in the Town Code. Documentation also states that this facility will be used for special events such as weddings and therefore the adequacy of parking for the 200-250 attendees for special events should be demonstrated (accounting for worker parking) based on parking provided.  As requested in the scope, a discussion should be provided to assess on-street parking on the north and south sides of NYS Route 25 in the parking analysis and the potential impact to the adjacent properties. If overflow parking is anticipated on NYS Route 25 during special events, the final scope requires evaluation of safety of pedestrians crossing NYS Route. Section 3.3 Aesthetic Resources and Community Character (See Pages 10-11 of the Final Scope)  Changes to the aesthetic character of the site and surrounding neighborhood must include the effects of proposed outdoor lighting and signage;  The assessment should also include a discussion of community character from the standpoint of the “surrounding neighborhood,” particularly, residential uses to the east (e.g., whether the hotel would be visible from these homes and the change in site density and conditions from a forest and successional old field environment to a new two-story 61,200 SF 44-room hotel and 160 parking spaces for both uses.  The Final Scope requires that the assessment of impacts on aesthetic resources and community character, include to-scale computer-generated imagery to illustrate existing conditions and changes to views from vantage points along Main Road and neighboring/adjacent land uses (assuming proposed landscaping at moderate maturity). Figures 18 and 19 submitted with the Draft EIS do not clearly label existing and proposed conditions. The Draft EIS text should provide an accompanying narrative to describe the methodology, software, and assumptions used in the preparation of the photo-simulations DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 8 of 11 to ensure that a verifiable accurate representation has been provided (i.e., how grades were established, assumptions for tree locations and tree maturity, etc.). The photo-simulations appear to show a number of mature trees that would be removed in accordance with the proposed grading plan. Additionally, photo-simulations should be provided to access the anticipated view from both the east and west bound approach along Main Road and from the neighboring properties (particularly the residential properties to the east).  A discussion regarding landscaping including quality and adequacy of buffers, screening, retention of vegetation and proposed vegetation. Section 3.4 Noise and Odor (See Page 11 of the Final Scope)  The sound analysis considered the impacts of increased traffic and raised voice levels at special events but did not consider the impacts of amplified music at such an event from a DJ, band, or sound system). Amplified sound would clearly be louder than raised speaking voices, would have to be loud enough to be heard by everyone at an event, and would be additive to other sound generated on-site, and may be louder than traffic or non-amplified voices alone. This is of concern due to the finding in the noise analysis that voices alone during a special event would be “noticeable and significant” thereby prompting some noise mitigation. Soundwaves from amplified music would also be expected to include lower frequencies (bass) than other sources, which travels farther than higher frequency waves and may be more difficult to properly mitigate.  The DEIS must demonstrate that sound, including that generated from amplified music or speaking or officiating using a public address system at special events will not exceed the maximum permissible sound levels of 65 dBA or 50 dBA during the hours specified under § 180-6 and § 180-7 of the Southold Town Code. This would include assessing the sound levels from amplified sound during an outdoor special event (which could conceivably occur nearly every weekend throughout a summer), the reduction in sound levels from proposed mitigation (e.g., sound reducing capabilities of the temporary sound wall to be used during outdoor special events), distance from sound source to sound receptor and anticipated days of the week, hours of the day and night and months of the year or season that outdoor special event noise would be generated.  As far as construction related noise, the applicant should indicate the anticipated work schedule for construction activities including days of the week, hours of the day and whether work would be conducted on holidays. This must be consistent with the Town’s Noise ordinance which is codified in Chapter 180 of the Southold Town Code and a commitment to obey construction scheduling noise restrictions should be proffered. Section 3.5 Historic and Archaeological Resources (See Page 11-12 of the Final Scope)  Subsection 1.2.2 states that the OPRHP issued a “No Impact” determination in its letter of February 19, 2019 (provided in Appendix K of the DEIS). However, a review of the letter indicates that that determination was conditional upon a few modifications to the proposed plan, including but not limited to the removal of shutters. An examination of the architectural elevations for the proposed building addition and associated features includes DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 9 of 11 shutters. The OPRHP’s letter also discusses the removal of a proposed parapet on the west elevation which also appears to still be present. Based on NP&V’s reading of the OPRHP’s February 19, 2019 letter it is our understanding that the finding of “No Adverse Impact” on historical resources was conditioned on the removal of these features as this letter would seem to supersede the December 28, 2017 letter in this regard. Please explain or clarify how this is consistent with the OPRHP recommendation or consider revising the drawings in conformance with those conditions. Section 3.6 Human Health and Safety (See Page 12 of the Final Scope)  The Final Scope states that “[i]f necessary and based on [Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs)], groundwater sampling will be performed.” The DEIS makes no mention of groundwater sampling. If the ESA concludes that groundwater sampling is not necessary, then the DEIS should state this and specify why groundwater sampling is not necessary. If groundwater sampling is needed it should be conducted.  Given the age of the existing house, this section should address the potential presence lead based paint and asbestos and necessary measures to remove/and or handling requirements associated with proposed renovation work.  The ultimate disposition of the existing on-site septic system should be indicated. That is, will it be removed from the site, abandoned in place, or continue to be used for some purpose? Also indicate any plans for the existing on-site 275-gallon above ground storage tank (“AST”). Section 4.0 Other Required Sections (See Pages 12-13 of the Final Scope)  No issues related to scope of this section were identified Section 5.0 Alternatives and Their Impacts (See Page 15 of the Final Scope) No issues related to scope of this section were identified Plans, Figures, Exhibits  The large color simulations of the hotel provided in the appendices should be labeled to indicate which elevation is being displayed so that the perspective of the viewer is clearer.  See comment above in Section 3.3. The photo-simulations provided as Figures 18 and 19 should be labeled to clearly indicate existing conditions vs. proposed conditions.  Sheet C-001 indicates that a 10-foot diameter leaching pool has a volume of 31.4 CF/foot when it should be 68.42 CF/foot. The calculations on the Drainage and Grading Plan also indicate that the multiplier should be 68.42 CF/foot. Even though the system is expected to have enough volume to accommodate the two-inch 24-hour design storm, this should be corrected. Please revise or clarify why there is a discrepancy. DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 10 of 11  Proposed Site Traffic Control and Parking Plan sheet C-100: The row of paved parking on the north side of the cottages indicates a total of “11” parking spaces but there are appears to be only 10 spaces.  Section 280-79 A.(5) of the Southold Town Code requires one off-street loading space or berth for each 2,500 square feet of hotel floor area. No loading spaces/berths are shown on the Site Traffic Control and Parking Plan (or other plans) and no calculations are provided. If it is intended that the hotel drop-off area will be used for this purpose, please indicate this, and specify whether the project meets the Town’s requirements.  The “Lower Level Plan” (i.e., basement floor plan) (Sheet A2.1) does not show what the east wing of the lower level of the hotel will be used for if at all. Please indicate the use of this part of the basement if any (e.g., storage, to remain vacant, etc.).  Language at the bottom of the “ADA Parking Calculations” box on the “Proposed Site Traffic Control and Parking Plan” (Sheet C-100) states that two ADA compliant parking stalls and one ADA van accessible parking stall are proposed (three total) but there only appears to be one ADA space and one ADA van accessible space on the restaurant site (two total). Please revise or indicate why the count as provided is correct. It is noted that the hotel portion of the site has four ADA spaces which is correct.  The “Proposed Site Drainage and Grading Plan” (Sheet C-200) shows a swimming pool drainage pool but there does not appear to be any calculations or discussion to indicate whether the leaching pool is sufficiently sized to handle the contents of the swimming pool or if the capacity of the proposed storm drainage system will accommodate discharge from the pool, in addition to stormwater runoff from a two-inch 24-hour rainstorm.  The “Proposed Site Drainage and Grading Plan” (Sheet C-200) – See Comment to Section 2.3 above. The EIS indicates that existing trees will be retained within the 25’ rear yard and 10’ side yard setback that will provide screening for adjacent properties. The trees locations to be retained should be located on the plans with indication of the extent of tree crowns and the limit of disturbance accounting for necessary construction equipment access to determine if the retention of trees is feasible. The Erosion Control Plan (Sheet C-300) should be updated to address any changes to the limit of disturbance.  The plans depict a feature behind each of the cottages that is labeled “H.T.” It is assumed that this is a holding tank of some kind but there is nothing on the plans or on the site plan legend that defines these features and there does not appear to be any piping connecting these features to the sanitary or drainage system. Please define the feature on the plans.  The Site Lighting and Details plan (Sheet C-500) notes state that 100-watt metal halide bulbs will be used but the cross-sectional diagram indicates that 100-watt high pressure sodium bulbs will be used. Please explain/clarify or revise accordingly. The lighting plan should include notations indicating whether the plan complies with the maximum lumen levels specified in § 172-5.B.(4)(a) and whether lighting will: 1) be controlled by timers or photosensors per § 172-5.A.(2), 2) and whether canopy lights are proposed at the drop- off area and that they will comply with § 172-5.A.(3).  Section 172-7 G. (1) “Lighting, Outdoor,” “Prohibitions,” of the Town of Southold Code states that high-intensity discharge, including metal halide, and high-pressure and low- DEIS Completeness Review & Preliminary Comments The Enclaves Hotel and Restaurant Page 11 of 11 pressure sodium lamps and fixture types shall not be permitted. Please verify that these are not proposed, and if they are please revised to comply with the Code.  The NYSDEC “Freshwater Wetlands Map” (Figure 6) shows NYSDEC wetlands depicted in color but the legend shows NYSDEC wetlands with no color. The wetlands areas and the legend should match. Miscellaneous Comments  Page 81, paragraphs 2 and 3 reference the wrong sections of Code. These sections should be cited as §§ 280-94 C. and 280-94 D., respectively. Moreover, as noted above, it should be demonstrated how the plan complies with these standards.  Page 2, of the “Soil Mechanics” report provided in Appendix E of the DEIS discusses frost penetration and states that “…all exterior foundations must have a minimum of ‘e’ feet of cover.” (emphasis added). This typographical error must be corrected so that this recommendation can be implemented in the future.  A full spell and grammatical check should be performed to improve the clarity and readability of the document.