Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Mohring Enterprises
JI.rDITH T. TERRY /own Hall, 53095 Main Road TOW'I~ CIJgRK P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11(071 REGISTRAR OF VITAl. STATISTICS Fax (516) 765- 1823 MAIlJllAGE OFFICER Telephone (5161 765-1801 RECORDS MANAGEMENrF OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORIVL'~-TION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD AT A REGULAR MEETING OF TI'IL TOWN BOARD OF THE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD HELD ON JULY 26, 19911, A RESOLUTION WAS OFFERED AND SECONDED TO CHANGE THE ZONE, ON THE TOWN BOARD"S OWN MOTION, FROM HAMLET DENSITY (I'ID) DISTRICT TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-80 DISTRICT ON THE PROPERTY OF MOItRING ENTERPRISES. UPON A ROLL CALL VOTE, THIS RESOLUTION FAILED TO PASS. ADD NEW DECLARATION 09:59 FILE NUMBER: N1473800-00901 Town of SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK County LEAD AGENCY: 473800 Town of SOUTHOLD, SUFFOLK County OFFICE or BOARD: Town Board CLASS: T Unlisted TITLE: COZ-SCTM# 100-45-2-10.5 Type 1 DESCRIPTION: Zone chg of 20.07 ac from Hamlet Density to Res. 80 loc. E/S Chapel Lane. DATE RECEIVED: Negative Declaration 07/19/94 STATUS: N Normal Void Conditioned Rescinded ICurrent Record 11 IMPORTANT >> File Number: N1-473800-00901 00 Use the above number in all correspondence about this action! To the Lead Agency: The above information confirms that filings on the described Negative Declaration were officially received by, and entered in the SEQR Repository on the date(s) shown in the box headed DATE RECEIVED above. The date and time in the second line show when this document was printed. Please check the information above carefully. For corrections or questions contact Charles Lockrow, (518)457-2224, or write to: SEQR Repository NYSDEC Division of Regulatory Affairs 50 Wolf Road, Room 514 Albany, NY 12233 RFcF~VFD Town of SOUTHOLD S,,..,~-i: ~ -. Town Board : .... 53095 Main Road-P.O. Box 1179 Southold, NY 11971 'Hi)' Clum~ ot Z~e SEQR Greenport. Comments: The Town Board is reviewing thi~ project simultaneously with the following applications: C!han~o~: of Zo~ on Towu Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-40-3-1 s/s CR 48, more fha. 10~ c/o C~apd ~ ~--.. Gre~nport Propor~d COZ on Town Board's Own Motion s/s CR 48. 400 fe~ w/o Moore's lane, Gre~nport Proposed COZ on Town 13card's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-35-1-25 n/s CR 48, 1,1.39 fe~t c/o Sound Road, Gre~nport Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion SCT~# 1000-45-2-1 s/s CR 4a, 805 feet ¢/o Chapel l~n% Gre~nport Proposed COZ on Town Board's O~n Motion n/s CR 48, ~ feet ¢/o Sound Road, Greenport l~pn~ons Suplmrting Thin D~P=I"minnltlo~: This det~rminnfion is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determlnntJon of sig~l~C~llC~ COlltnlned in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11, the Long Enwironmental Assessment Form Parts I and 1I, and the following spedfic reasons: (1) Tlu~ ra~bjea ehan~'~ of zonin~ doe~ n~t ,~T,~.',-,~ any of th,-. ~/t-' ria for det~rmlnin~ r.i?i~:ance of an a,qion that would warrant ~ preparat/on of a Drnft I~_l~l. /%nverseJy. tl~ ~tion will minim:=~ environmental impa~ thereby pro~lin~ suppm't for issuanc~ of a N~ive l~:~tratlo~ =t, eaea t~ re~tu= t~ impact of ~ d~e~m~ ~ r~a to t~.~ impact area~ .~ c~m~area to current (3) Ti~ propo~A zonin~ h conahtent with had use am:l ZOnlnE of surrounding lam:~ und will ~erefore ~ cause a signi~acant impacL As a result, th,- prop,w~ ehan~oo, of z~nin~ will have a beJ~ficlal impact upon (4) C. ondde-ralion ha~ beun given to the revi,~w of th,~ propor~.d zon-- e. hang~ ~mdact~d by a consultant to t~. ?own no~d, whid~ co~.a.~ t~ fo~ with r~ard ~ t~ r~ in conra~ of,m~.u~ resources: "Tlms~ fivdin~m: SUggeSt that my developing, at on this ~ ~ have onvii'o~mental impac~. Our initial impre~inn iS t~at I'ezrmin~ [O 'R'80" re. skl~ntial will provi~ a r,i~nifirnnt ~ me~sur¢ of protection for tl~ environment than tl~ 'HD" ~ning now provid~ Pag~ 2 ~3 'HD' Ch,m~, or Z~me SEQR Determi~Oon (5) C~leral~n i~ be~n given to a p~--i-~ document prepared by th~ South~d P~--i-_o Stuff cnlifle~ "Re~e~ o~'Ham/~ Dozs/ty ~/~ .Vo~tho/d Town - ~port to the (6) ~ ~j~ ~ ~nrain~ ~ r~ ~ ~ m~ ~ ~d ~ o~ m m~ For ~ ~o~ion: To~ of Son.old ~&~: To~ ~ 53~5 ~ Ro~ P.O. Box 1179 8ou~ol~ N~w Yort 1~971 Phon~ No.: (516) ~pi~ of t~ Nofi~ ~t ~: ~mmi~ion~r-~p~ ~cnt of En~onm~n~ ~a~o~ 50 Wo~ Ro~ ~b~y, Stony Br~ Stony Br~ ~ S~o~ ~ p!annin~ ~mmi~ion ~uffolk County Debarment of Health 5erwices ~Y5 ~islative Commission on Water Resour~ ~uthol~ Town Plannin~ ~uthom Town noar~ of ~thold Town BuilOin~ Depar~ent Village of Gr~n~rt ~thol~ Town Clerk's Bulletin BoarO Page3 of 3 JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN' CLERK P.O. Box 1179 Southo/d. New York 11971 REGISTRAROFV1TALSTA'HSTICS Fax 516 765-1823 MARRIAGE OFFICER Telephone (5161 765- 180 I RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORJViATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON JULY 12. 1994: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of $outhold has consistently noticed the SEQR status of this project as a Type I action, and due to a clerical error the notice of determination adopted May 31, 1994 erroneously stated that the SEQR status of this project was Unlisted when it should have stated Type I; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Town Board resolution of May 31, 1994 is hereby rescinded and this notice is reissued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The Town Board of the Town of Southold has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environemnt and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared. Property of: Mohring Enterprises Title of Action: ("h~nge Of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion $C'rM# 100045-2-10.5 e/s Chapel Lane, Greenport SEQR Status: Type I Action Project De~ription: Theproject which is the subject of this Determination, involves a the change of zone of 20.07 acres from 'Hamlet Density' to 'Reddence-80". The project site contnln~ freshwater wetlands assoc/ated with Moore's Woods (NYSDEC Freshwater Water Wetlands #SO-l). .The proposed project is one of six (6) change of zones being considered by the Town Boardat thi~ time in the same geographic area. SCTM Numbe~. 1000-45o2-10. 5 Loeation: The site consists of 20.07 acres and is located on the east side of Chapel Lane in the nnincorpora~d portion of Greenport. Reasons Supporting Tiffs Determination: This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of significanco contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and Il, and the following specific reasons: (1) Thg slJbje.~ chaxlge Of zonln~ ,Ic~¢ ROt e..xc.e.,e~ any Of ~ criteria for determining ~ifie. allc~ o£ an action ~h~t would warrant tl~ preparation of a Draft ElS. Conv~r~ly, tl~ action will mlnimi~ potential enviromcntal impac~ thereby progldlng ~upport for is~,,~m~ Of a Nexgafi~ Decla~ation. (2) TIg proposed proje.~t will rexluce th~ pot¢.r;~l developmeat dvn6~ oa the subject site. As a resu/~ density derived impacts including: wa~ use; s~nlt.~y waste volume; disturbance of laad; tralfic generation; and solid waste generation will also I~ red-,'¢a Ac~rdingly~ the ~ubjea:t change of zoning is expected to re, duce the impact of si~ development with regard to the. se impact areas, as c~mpared to clllTent Zonln~o (3) TI~ proposal zoning is con.sistcnt with land use and zonin~ O~ SlllTOIIDding land~ and wil/thcreforc not gause a gi~nifirant impact. As a result, tl~ prolmsed rhange. Of zoning will haVe a I:~neficial impact upon land u.~ in the area of the si~¢. (4) Consideration has been givea to tl~ r~vi~w of the. proposed zone change coaducted by a consnhant to the Town Board, which concludes the following with regard to fig site ia consideration of unklu~ site resources: 'The,~e fina;n~ suggest tha~ any development oa this site will have environmental impact~. Our initial impression is thai re. zoning to 'Rq~' resiaenfia/will provide a gi~o~i~e~nt in~'~ measure Of prote,~i._-oa for th~ envirmiment ~ ~ "I~D' zonin~ now provide~ CoasidexalJoa has been give, a to a plmming dmmmant prepared by the Soufhold planning Sta~ emi/led, This report concludes the following with regard to the site ia c~nsideraitoa of unlque site resources: (6) The subject si~ contai~ unique re. sources. While not specilically identilqed as fi-e.~hwater wedands on the NYSDF, C Tentative Fre. shwa~er Wethnd Map~ ~he entire site cont~in* a high d~ns/ty of freshwater ~ vegetation s~s. The propo~ r~ng¢ Of 7~onin~ will mlnlmi~ impac~ UpOtl we. tlalldg resources by reducing the potential land us~ dvn~i~. In addition, the lower potem;~l land us~ density will provid~ m~re flexible land us~ options to ma~;m;~,,~ s~bac~ and ensm'¢ pre. s~rvafion of uniqu~ habitat Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk July 13. 199~1 CRAMER, VOORHIS & ASSOCIATES, INC. Environmental & Planning Consultants 54 N. Country Road Suite 2 MILLER PLACE, NEW YORK 11764 July 6, 1994 (516) =131-1455 TO Town of Southold Judith Terry , Town Clerk P.O. Box ]179 HD Change of Zone; ' Southoid, NY ii9'71 SEQR Determination ,~',._ ...... ~"~ Southold Town Clerk WE ARE SENDING YOU ~ Attached [] Under separate cover via the following items: [] Shop drswings [] Prints [] Plans [] Samples [] Specifications [] Copy of letter [] Change order [] Notice 1 7/12/94 SEQR Negative Declaration for parcels 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8. (corrected copy) THESE ARE TRANSMI'I-rED as checked below: [] For approval [] Approved es submitted [] Resubmit copies for approval ][](For your use [] Approved as noted [] Submit copies for distribution ][][As requested [] Returned for corrections [] Return___corrected prints [] For review and comment [] [] FOR BiOS DUE 19__ [] PRINTS RETURNED AFTER LOAN TO US REMARKS Any questions, please call. COPY TO SIGNED: Thomas W. Cramer, ASLA SEQR NEGATIVE DECLIRATION Notice of DeJ, etmination of Non-Si~o~ificam:e Deletminatiou of Sig~ific. au~ Lead Agency: Town Board of the Town of Southold Addre~: Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 D~te: July 12, 1994 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617, of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared. Title of A~tion: Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion Parcel #5, SCTM# 1000-45-2-103 e/s Chapel Iane, Greenport SEQR Status: Type l Action Project Description: The project which is the subject of this Determination, involves a the change of zone of 20.07 acres from "Hamlet Densit]ff to "Residence-80~. The project site contains freshwater wetlands associated w~th Moore's Woods (NYSDEC Freshwater Water Wetlands #SO-l). The proposed project is one of six (6) change of zones being conaidered by the Town Boardat thi.; time in the same geographic area. SCTM Number:. 100045-2-103 Location: The site consists of 20.07 acres and is located on the east side of Chapel 1 zne in the nnincorporated portion of SEQR Determlmliloa Greenport. ~ts: ~e To~ Bo~d ~ re~e~ this proje~ s~eo~ly ~ ~e fo~o~g app~o~: ~ange of ~ne ~ To~ B~d's ~ M~on P~I ~L S~ 1~I s/s CR ~ more th~. 1~ c/o C~I ~ Gr~ ~o~ ~Z on T~ ~d's ~ M~on P~ ~ S~ 1~1 s/s CR ~ ~ f~ w/o M~re's l~ne, Gr~n~ Pro~ COZ on To~ ~d's ~ M~on P~I ~4, S~ 1~3~1-~ n/s CR ~ ~9 f~i e/o ~d R~ Gruner Pro~ ~Z on To~ B~d's ~ M~on P~I ~7, S~M~ 1~2-1 s/s CR ~ ~5 f~ e/o C~I l~ae~ Gr~R Pro~ ~Z on To~ ~d's ~ M~on P~I ~& S~ 1~3~1-~ n/s CR ~ ~ f~ e/o Sold R~ Gr~n~ R~ns Sup~ ~s ~ina/io~: ~ de~inn6on ~ ~ued ~ ~ ~ideragon of ~e ~te~ for de~fion of Sj~/fi~n~ ~n~ ~ 6 ~ P~ 617.11, ~e ~ EH~onmeu~ ~ment Fo~ P~ I ~d ~ ~d ~e fo~o~ spe~c re~o~: (1) (2) ~ proud ~oj~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~me~ a~.ad~ ~ ~ ~j~ ~. ~ ~ r~ ~ ~ of ~ ~opm~ ~ re~d to ~ ~ ~ ~ ~m~ to (3) (4) Om Page2 o~3 · HD' Change of Zone; Parcel #$ SEQR Delermlm*tion (5) Consideration ha~ been given to a plann;ng document prepared by t~c Southold planning S~ entitled, "l~,vie~ of Han~ Den~ Zoning in $outhold To~n - ~ ~ ~ To~ ~ ~ F~ 1~. ~ re~ ~.ae~ ~ f~o~ ~ re~d to ~ ~e ~ ~on of mq~ ~e r~: (6) ~ s~j~ ~c ~.t~;.~ ,miq~ r~. ~ nm s~y i~.tifi.~ ~ ~er wc~ on ~ ~SD~ Tentat~ Fr~ W~d ~ ~ c~c ~ ~tain~ a high ~ of ~w~cr ~lan~ ~on s~. ~ pro~ rhan~e Of ~nin~ ~ minimize ~ u~n w~ r~ ~ r~u~n~ ~ ~cntlal ~ ~ ~. ~ ad~o~ ~ Io~r ~entlal ~d ~ ~ ~ pr~ m~e ~ ~ ~ o~o~ to ~mir~ ~a~ ~d e~e pr~on of ~q~ For F~h~ l~o~-~ion: ~n~ Pe~on: Ju~ Te~, To~ Clerk To~ of Sou~old Ad&~: To~ H~ 53095 M~ Ro~ P.O. Box 1179 Sou~ol~ New York 11971 Phone No.: (516) 765-18~ ~pi~ of t~s Noti~ ~nt ~: ~mm/~ioner-~p~ent of En~o~en~ ~e~a~o~ 50 Wo~ Ro~ ~b~y, ~ Re~onal ~-New York 5~te ~e Dep~ent of En~onmen~ ~e~afio~ S~ ~ Stony Br~ 5~ny Br~ ~ S~o~ ~ PI~ ~mmi~io~ l~ge3 ef3 PUBLIC HEARING SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD JUNE 28,199~ 9:50 P.M. IN THE MATTER OF A CHANGE OF ZONE ON THE TOWN BOARD'S OWN MOTION FROM HAMLET DENSITY (HD) DISTRICT TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL R-80 DISTRICT ON THE PROPERTY OF MOHRING ENTERPRISES. Present: Supervisor Thomas H. Wickham Councilman Joseph J. Lizewski Councilwoman Alice J. Hussie Councilman Joseph L. Townsend, Jr. Councilwoman Ruth D. Oliva Justice Louisa P. Evans Town Clerk Judith T. Terry Town Attorney Laury L. Dowd SUPERVISOR WICKHAM: We'll proceed to the fourth public hearing on the property of San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc., otherwise known as Mohring. COUNCILWOMAN OLIVA: "Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law, and requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York at 8:15 P.M., Tuesday, June 28, 199~, on the Change of Zone on the Town Board's Own Motion from Hamlet Density (HD) District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of Mohring Enterprises, located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route u,8 and north of Route 25, Greenport, New York, containing 28.822 acres, Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000-0/~5-2-10.5. Any person desiring to be heard on the proposed amendment should appear at the time and place above so specified. The legal description of the aforesaid property is as follows: Beginning, at the point of intersection of the easterly line of Chapel lane with the southerly line of Middle Road (C.R.48), and running thence along ~liddle Road three courses: (1] N-S2°58'50"E.-27.0 feet; thence (2) Northeasterly on a curve to the left having a radius of 749.20 feet, a distance along said curve of 338.09 feet; thence [3) N.36°33'20"E.-4~0.0 feet to land of Siolas and Tsounis; thence along said land S.53°26'40"E.- 460.05 feet to land of Village of Greenport; thence along said land two Pg.2 - Change of zone- Mohring Enterprises- courses: (1) S.18°37'00"W.-448.87 feet; thence (2) S.41°26'30"E.-696.77 feet to Lutheran Church property; thence along said land three courses: (1) S. 51°03'00"W.-659.82 feet; thence (2) N.88°22'q0"W.-550.0 feet; thence [3) S.67°41'30"W.-100.0 feet to the easterly line of Chapel Lane; thence along Chapel Lane two courses: (1) N.2°54'50"W.-272.19 feet; thence (2) N.q°19'20"W.-806.79 feet to the point of beginning. Dated: May 31, 1994. Judith T. Terry, Southold Town Clerk. I do have a notice of publication in the Suffolk Times, The Traveler-Watchman, and also, an affidavit stating it has been posted on the Town Clerk's Bulletin Board. There are two pieces of correspondence, one from own own Planning Board. At its June 2~th meeting, the Planning Board adopted the following report. The Planning Board endorses the townspeople's vision for their Town, which calls for individuaUy distinct or discrete hamlets separated from each other by open or farmed countryside, and which calls for the equitable distribution of affordable housing density throughout the Town. The Planning Board also recognizes that achieving this vision will require the careful consideration of the land use within and adjacent to its hamlet centers; that the Town's Zoning Map should reflect the intent of the community's vision; and that the Town must weigh the community"s interest in its collective future against the private interest of individual property owners in the use of their land. The Planning Board recognizes that the proposed rezoning of these properties will not deny these property owners the right or capacity to develop their land; that the proposed zone of R-80 is the base zoning of the Town and is by no means the most restrictive zoning categorization in Southold. The Planning Board endorses the report, Review of Hamlet, Density Zoning in Southold Town, Report to the Town Board, and its recommendation that the zones of these six properties be changed from Hamlet Density to a lower density such as R-80. Sincerely, Richard G. Ward, Chairman. We, also, have one from Stephen Jones, Director of Planning, County of Suffolk. Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 1Lt-lU, to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for local determination. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapprovai. Very truly yours, Stephen M. Jones, Director of Planning. There is notice. I"11 read it. Ladies and Sirs. The undersigned, pursuant to 265 of the Town Law does hereby protect against proposed change of zone on the easterly side of Chapel Lane, Greenport, Town of Southold, New York. Attached hereto as Exhibit "A' is a true copy of Notice of Hearing for the proposed change of zone. The undersigned is the owner of more than twenty (20%) percent of the land included in such proposed change. The undersigned hereby protest such change. Wherefore, the undersigned states that pursuant to Section 265 the Town proposed amendment change not affective unless adopted by a favorable vote of at least three fourths of the members of the Town Board. Mohring Enterprises, signed by Richard T. Mohring, Jr. Pg.3 - Change of zone- Mohring Enterprises. ALLEN SMITH: My name is Allen Smith for those of you who do not know me. I represent Mohring Enterprises. The principal of that cooperation is Richard T. Mohring, Jr., who is present with me this evening. I have several things that I would add to the record in this particular hearing. I would ask that as those hearings, that have gone before us, relate to the underlying planning, zoning issues, that those comments be considered by the Board in it's consideration of this particular change. There's several features of this particular proposed change that are different than the others, and they are all in the records of the Town of Southold, and I would ask that they be incorporated for reference. The first is that there is a map showing thirty-six units on this particular property. The second is that there are eight units, that are there, that have Certificates of Occupancy issued by this town, and they are currently served, and the property is served for that matter with water, and with sewer by contract with the Town of Greenport. So, to the degree that we are talking in the other instances about the attraction as to whether or not the property can, or will be served by sewer or water, that is not true with reference to San Simeon. It occurred during the prior owner. The property was taken back by the North Fork Bank, and Mr. Mohrin9 has come along with every intention of pursuit, pursuing the permits that have been issued, and building the job out. That's the lawyer stuff. I would like to say two quick things. As a former Town Supervisor, a Village Attorney for the Village of Creenport, a Village Attorney for the ~illage of Westhampton Beach, and probably up and down the North and South Fork, I am fond of saying that man does not live by quiche alone. You can't have this town become Huntington, a place where you only have five acre zoning, or two acre zoning, or any zoning, housing zoning, commercial zoning, to the exclusion of all others. It won't work. This is what I've been trained to do. I have done this for twenty-five years of my life. If you do not afford to people an opportunity for entry level place to live, this doesn't work. Twenty-five years ago, when Janice and I returned to Riverhead, we didn't live on the bay. We lived in the Roanoke Garden apartments opposite the hospital. That's what we could afford. She was a beginning teacher and my father wouldn't pay me any money to work for him. We couldn't have lived on the bay. We couldn't have lived on two acres. We couldn't have bought a farm, but we did want to come back to the community, and I suggest to you that if you rule all the higher density zoning, you are going to do your community a disservice, if you will, for the Allen Smiths, and Janice Smiths, who wish to return here and live. Now, the other thing that I find somewhat surprising in that kind of planner, public official type concept is that apparently you review this as consistent with some sort of TDR operation. As you may recall, I~m one of the few attorneys, unlike a carpetbagger as you would call, Mr. Bracken, who have done this type of thing. I've actually made it happen for the Young projects, and for some of the other projects, were in fact 200, 250 acres of farmland have in fact been used, and the density moved, at no cost to the taxpayer, on to higher density areas. What you're doing is inconsistent with that. You already have a relatively high zoning characteristic for your other areas in the community. If the developer has to go out and buy that acreage at twenty, thirty, forty thousand dollars an acre less than that, I don~t care what it is, that value, the dollar he pays, gets added into the cost of the unit on the receiving parcel. You are by definition creating something that won't work, because your land cost per unit will not only be the receiving parcel cost, but it will be a piece of their life. Think about it, you won't have Pg,~ - Change of zone- Mohring Enterprises. affordable housing. If what you're somehow trying do is somehow through a TDR mechanism create housing, what you propose is counterproductive. Somebody has not thought this through. Thank you very much for llstening to me. Good evening. SUPERVISOR WlCKHAM: Anyone else like to address the Board on the question of the Mohring property? (No reponse.) I declare this hearing closed. Judith T. Terry $outhold Town Clerk To; ?outhold To~vn Re: Remarks Concerning Proposed Rezoning I{F Parcels at ~. Creenport 'ate: .TL~ne 2R, 1994- Inasmuch as the public hearings this evening involve the proposed rezoning of six parcels, my remarks, although applicable to this parcel, must also be broader in scope. Since the board, in re~ulating zoning, must consider the future of the town and the welfare of all its residents, logical, rational zoning decisions cannot be made without consideration of the concentrated and cumulative effects of the present HI. zoning on the welfare and future character of the greater Greenport area. The tov.m board is well aware of it, but for the record amd for those in the ~udience who may not be aware, York State must, by la~, have a comprehensive plan. This reeuJrement and the precepts for its for~nulation are incorporated in the New York State Enabling Act for To%~ Zoning and recited in Sections 261, 262, 26] and 265 of Town Law. Section 261 empowers the town board to regulate and restrict zoning for the general welfare of the community. Section 262 permits the town board to divide the town into districts best suited to carry out the purposes of the act. ~ection 263 states regulations must be in accordance with a comprehensive plan:which promotes the general welfare. Such regulations shall be made considering the characteristics of . the district and its pe~uliRrasuitability for particular uses. Section 265 permits the town board to amend and repeal zoning by ordinance. Case law provides smple precedents that zoning decisions are not to be made on a piecemeal, or lot-by-lot, basis, t~rther, zoning is to be based on appropriate land usage, not on ownership or occupancy. Based on the above considerations, it is obviously the duty of the board to arrive at zoning decisions on an objective basis, absent any emotional or political considerations. mhe present Hr.` zoning of most of these parcels represents a carryin~ over of similar uses permitted by the previous zoning. A particularly e~regJous exception was the rezoning of the Jems Commons parcel by the previous administration in Lecember of 199] ss a derisive parting shot at the inco~ing board. iIith the exception of the Jems Commons parcel, the others were ~ezoned, upon the o~T~ers' applications, fro..one-family residential use to more intensive uses, notably multi-family. These rezonings took place over the period 1958 - 1983. It is obvious that there %~ ~. '-~ a comprehensive plan for the area, but thst these rezonings took place on a piecemeal,lo-by-lot bas~s and for the benefit of individual owners. The present }~ zonings, as a continuation of theses precedents, is the very antitheses of planned zoning. The present zoning pattern in the West Greenport area is the result of a form of internecine warfare conducted against the greater Greenport area by previous town administrations. The town pursued a pattern of locating every type of intensive use, unwanted elsewhere, on the perimeter of the Village of Greenport. The bias of the town against the village is further illustrated by the fact that in the case of the hamlets, }{D zoning is restricted to radii of from one-quarter to one-half mile from the hamlet centers, in the case of Greenport it is permitted within~ne-half mile of the village's borders. The ],The result is to permit construction one and one-half miles from the village center and far beyond reasonable walking distance. All of this clearly violates the hamlet concept on which the ~aster Plan is based, Ostensibly. but speciously, the previous boards justified their zomin~ decisions based upon the purported availability of potable water end sanitary sewer capacity.Obviously, no consid- er@tJon was given to the fact that the development of these parcels would overwhelm the village's capacity to provide such services, let alone to also serve the strip zoned commercial and industrial zoning lining both sides of Main Road in the area. S~ch intensive development would also place additional demands on the East-West Fire District and the Police Department and renu~re additional capital expenditure for infrastructure. Greenport's school taxes are already the highest in the town: for example, they are over twice those in the abutting East ~arion-Orient School District. The prospect of increased school taxes would prove disastrous to the already overburdened Greenport district. Analysis of available data results in some shocking conclusions as to the malignant effects of the current HD zoning on the future of the greater Greenport area and gives the lie to any pretense of the equitable distribution of hamlet zoning. The total HD zoning in Southold is approximately 356 acres. Southold has ten hamlets and one incorporated village. West Greenport fits neither description, yet a.n incredible 81% of ~.all of Southold's HD zoning is located there. MSouthold has approzimately 315 acres of vacant HD zoning of which 269 acres, or 85%, is in the unincorporated area at Greenport. (3) Basing yield projections upon the Zoning Code and prior approvals by the Planning Board, development of the vacant HD parcels in the Greenport area,alone,would produce approximately ??0 dwelling units. Calculated on a conservative average occupancy of three persons per unit, the increase in the area's population would be 2310 persons. The impact of such an aggregate increase in population can best be visualized by comparison with 1990 population statistics. The estimated population of West Oreenport was 1614 and that of the incorporated village 2070, The increase in West Greenport's population would be 143%, or approximately two and one-half times. The projected increase in population would also be the equivalent of mere than doubling the then population of lhe Incorporated l~]l]aFe of C~reenport. Despite the [;aster t;lan's purported adoption of hamlet zoning, and despite the aforementioned fact that the To~,m of Southold encompasses 10 hamlets and an incorporate~ village, this inequitable distribution of hamlet zoning results in some ~0~, or approximately one-third, of the town's future population being concentrated in the Greenport area. Has this board given any consideration to the effect this localized densification of population in an area already having a surfeit of affordable sale and rental properties would have on real estate values in the area,? It is generally accepted that residences occupied on a year-round basis demand more in the way of services than the real estate tax revenues they generate will support. This gives rise to a discussion of school taxes. The school taxes in the Greenport School District have reached critical proportions and have already had a depressing effect on real estate values in the area. The development of these HD parcels in the Greenport area would result in a population increase of approximately 63%. The present Creenport school enrollment is 570. B propo,$rtionate increase in students would result in an enrollment of 930 students, or an increse of 360 students. However, it must be factored in that the present population of the school district is of a relatively mature age. If, as might reasonably be expected, the or tenants of these ~ parcels were of a younger age bracket, the school enrollment could well double in size. I question whether the previous boards, responsible for this unwarrented population density, ever considered the probable effects on the school district. It is my understanding that a. previous poll of the board indicated four members favorin~ the rezonin~ of ~hese parcels, one member adamantly and obdurately opposed, and one member indicatin~ at least a partial ambivalence toward the proposed rezonincs by endorsing the rezonin~ of 63 acres of the total. I submit this would have a minor, even miniscule impact of the Hi9 zonings on the Greenport area. The overai1 effects would be: Of the then total 293 acres of HD zoning in the town 229 acres, or 76C, would be concentrated at Greenport. 82~ of the total remaining HID acreage in Southold would still be in the Greenport area. The projected number of dwelling units would be reduced to 662. The projected population increse would be reduced to 1986 , or a decrease of 14%. However. ~his would still represent an increase of one and one-quarter times the 1990 population of West Greenport and would be the equiva, lent of almost twice the village's 1990 popula.tion. In closing. I would urge the two members of the board to reconsider their expressed opposistion to the rezonings in light of the (5) foregoing snslysis. Either of you can prevent the devastating impsct ~f the continuation of the present zoning will have on the future of Greenport ares, and the welfare of its residents. The decision - and the responsibility - rest with you. (5) TOWN BOARD TOWq~ OF SOUTHOLD R~CBVED JUt 5outhold To,,:~ IN THE MATTER OF THE CHANGE OF ZONE OF PROTEST PURSUANT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY ON THE EAST SIDE TOSECTION265TOWN CHAPEL LANE, GREENPORT LAW LADIES AND SIRS: The undersigned pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law does hereby protect against the proposed change of zone on the easterly side of Chapel Lane, Greenport, Town of Southold, New York. 1. Attached hereto marked Exhibit "X" is a true copy the Notice of hearing for the proposed change of zone. 2. The undersigned is the owner fo more than twenty percent of the land included in such proposed change. 3. The undersigned hereby protests such change. WHEREFORE, the undersigned states that pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law that the proposed amendment (change) not be effective unless adopted by a favorable vote of at least three fourths of the members of the Town Board. Mohr'~nt~erpri~es, ~nc., LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSAl TO AMEND ZONING CODE AND MAP Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law, and requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of. Southold, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, at 8:15 P.M., Tuesday, June 7.8, 199~1, on the Change of Zone on the Town Board's Own Motion from Hamlet Density (HO) District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of Mohring Enterprises, located on the east side of C~hapel lane, south of Route q8 and north of' Route 25, Greenport, New York, containing 28.827. acres, Suffolk C~ounty Tax Map No. 1000-0q5-2-10.5. Any person desiring to be heard on the proposed amendment should appear at the time and place above so specified. The legal description of the aforesaid property is as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the easterly line of Chapel lane with the southerly line of Middle Road [C~.R.~B), and running thence along Middle Road three courses: (1) N. 5 Z°58'50"E.-7.7.0 feet; thence Northeasterly on a curve to the left having a ~-adius of 7~9.7.0 feet, a distance along said curve of 338.09 feet; thence (3) N.36°33'20"E.-q~0.0 feet to land of Siolas and Tsounis; thence along said land S.~3*26'q0"E.- ~160.05 feet to land of Village of Creenport; thence along said land two courses: [1) S.lB*37'§0"W.-qqS.B7 feet; thence [7.) S.~,IQ26'30"E.-696.77 feet to Lutheran Church property; thence along said land three courses: (1) $. 51~03'00"W.-659.82 feet; thence (2] N.88°22'~I0"W.-S50.0 feet; thence (3] S.$7°~1~30"W.-100.0 feet to the easterly llne of'Chapel Lane; thence along Chapel Lane two courses: [I) N./°$~,'50"W.-7.72.19 feet; thence (2) N.~IB'20"W.-806.79 feet to the point of beginning. Dated: May :31, 199~. JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK "- COUNTY OF SUFFOLK i~ -: ;-~7~: May 10, 199~ Honorable Thomas Wickham, Snpervisor Town of Southold Town Hall 53095 blain Road RECFIVED Southold, N. Y. 11971 RE: Hamlet Density Rezonings Dear Supervisor Wickham: Soulhold To~n C~er~ In an effort to assist you in the public discourse regarding rezoning of parcels zoned hamlet density to the two acre residential classification, we have prepared yield maps of five of the parcels_ I found in my experience as a town planner, that a graphic repre- sentation of development potential is always helpful prior to reaching a conclusion as to whether a rezoning on the town's own motion is reason- able or not. A rezoning need only meet the test of providing a reason- able return on property development and I think our site studies show that. We have not dealt with natural features on these sites to any great extent. Part of a town's prerogative, if you wish, is to permit yield to be taken on environmentally sensitive areas as an incentive to cluster and preserve these features. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation flags wetland areas in their jurisdiction, which is another resource to determine the scope and extent of environ- mentally sensitive areas, Obviously, clustering is also a means by which net monetary return can be increased by reducing infrastructure, road and site development costs. Again, this is strictly a local prerogative as to how and when to use the clustering techniques. I hope this information will be helpful to you. We have spoken with your planning staff on these and other matters and will continue to stay in contact with them. Honorable Thomas Wickham -2- May 10, 1994 Thank you for the opportunity to render this pianning assistance. Yours truly, ~.~Jomes Director SMJ:pd Encls. 2 sets/parcels ], 3, 4, 5, 8 cc: Robert Gaffney, SC Executive George Gatta, Dpty Cty E×ec/Econ Dev & Planning Donald Eversoll, Chairman SC Planning Co~ission RECEIVED JUN 2 7 TO: Thomas Wickham, Supervisor FROM: Valerie Scopaz, Senior Planner RE: Theoretical subdivision Yield Maps For Parcels 4, 5 and 8 of the Hamlet Density Report DATE: May 9, 1994 On Friday afternoon, I met with the Director of the Suffolk County Planning Department, Stephen Jones, about another matter. He left theoretical subdivision yield maps for three of the six properties that are proposed to be rezoned from Hamlet Density to the R-80 or two acre density. The yield maps should be viewed as the outside number of lots that could be obtained without subtracting for sto~mwater, runoff or wetlands or other environmental conditions that might be noted during an environmental quality review which could lower the theoretical yield.. PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS Richard G. Ward, Chairman Town Hall, 53095 Main Road George Rilchie Latham, Jr. P.O. Box 1179 Bennett Orlowski, Jr. Southold, New York 11971 Mark S. McDonald Fax (516) 765-3136 Kenneth L. Edwards Telephone (516) 765-1938 June 27, 1994 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD RECEIVED Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town Hall JUI~ southold, NY 11971 Dear Mrs. Terry: $outholdTswnCler~ Re: Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion: SCTM # 1000-40-4-1 - J. Geier SC~ ~ 1000-35-1-25 - LBV Properties SCTM 9 1000-45-2-10.3 - Richard Mohring (a.k.a. San Simeon Retirement Community Inc.) SCTM ~ 1000-45-2-1 - Siolas & Tsunis SCTM # 1000-35-1-24 - Jem Realty SCTM ~ 1000-40-3-1 - KACE Realty At its June 24th meeting, the Planning Board adopted the following report: The Planning Board endorses the townspeople's vision for their Town, which calls for individually distinct or discrete hamlets separated from each other by open or farmed countryside, and which calls for the equitable distribution of affordable housing density throughout the Town. The Planning Board also recognizes that achieving this vision will require the careful consideration of the land use within and adjacent to its hamlet centers; that the Town's Zoning Map should reflect the intent of the con~nunity's vision; and that the Town must weigh the community's interest in its collective future against the private interest of individual property owners in the use of their land. The Planning Board recognizes that the proposed rezoning these properties will not deny these property owners the right or capacity to develop their land; that the proposed zone of R-80 is the base zoning of the Town and is by no means the most restrictive zoning categorization in Southold. The Planning Board endorses the report: "Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in Southold Town: Report to the Town Board", and its recommendation that the zones of these six properties be changed from Hamlet Density to a lower density such as R-80. Si cerely, Richard G.~ard Chairman LEGAL NOTICE NOIICE OF 14"~,RING DN PROP iL 1'O AMEND ZONING CODE .AND MAP COUNTY OF SUFFOLK Pursuant to Section 265 of STATE OF NEW YORK ss: quiremen[~ of the Code of the Fown of $outhold, Suffolk County. New York, a public Patricia Wood, being duly sworn, hearing ~%il[ be held by the Town Boald of the Town of says that she is the Edltor, of the Southold, at the Southold TRAVELER-WATCHMAN, a public Toxin Hall, Main Road, newspaper printed at SouEhold, in Soulhold, NeY, "lbrk, at 8:15 Suffolk County; and that the notice P.M., hlesda~,, June 28.1994. of which the annexed is a printed onthet'hangeofZoneoflthe copy, has been published in said [o~%n Board's Own Motion Traveler-Watchman once each week FrOm Hamlet Density (HD) for / District to Low Density . ............................. weeks Reqidential R-80 District on the properD of Mohring successif~_ely, commencing on the Enterprise~,, loomed on the .... ./..< .~?... cast side of Chapel Lane, ~outh of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, New 'tbrk, containing 28,822 acres, day of . ...... '-~' '~. ~ - ....... , Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1 9..5/.',/ . . '/ ' 1000-045-2-,0.5. ~-,C.~. :C.'\' Any person desiring to be ~ t,, ~(, heard on the proposed amend- . , . .- . .~-~.. , -~-.~-~-~--.....~. ~-~-....- . . ment shou]d appear ar the time and place above so specified. The legal description of the aforesaid property is as follows: Beginning at the point SW9 ~rTll to before me on this of intersection of the easterly . . . ~/~c. ~. '. , d~.y of line of Chapel Lane with the southerly I ne of Midd e Road -I (C.R. 48h and running thence ............... ,-d'C..%~-. ..... , 1 9 along Middle Road three ' ' ' >/ courses: {1) N. 52° 58' 50" E. ' ...... 27.0 feet; thence (2) Nor- theasterly on a curve to the left having a radius of 749.20 feet, a distance along said curve of ~ff.~..~~~' :' -' 338.09 feet; thence (3) N. 36° . ......... ;--~t''c'- . · · 33' 20" E. 440.0 feet to land Not~ry P%l~l~c of Siolas and Tsounis; thence alottg said land S. 53 ° 26' 40" BARBARA k $CHNEIDLR E. 460.05 feet to land of NOTARY PUBlIC, State0fN~ Village of Greenport; thence No. 4806846 along said land two courses: Qualilied in SullMk C~::j / 11) S. 18° 37' 00" W 448.87 Commission £~pir~--1- feet; thence 12) S 41° 26' 30" E. 696.77 feet to Lutheran Charch property; thence along said land three courses: (1) S 51~ 03' 00" 'Ar. 659.82 feet; thence (2) N. 88° 22' 40" 'Ar. 550.0 feet; thence (31 S 67~, 41' 30" W 100.0 feet to the easter- Iv line of Chapel Lane', thence along Chapel Lane two courses: (I) N. 2°54' 50" W. 272.19 feet; thence (2) N, 4= 19' 20" W. 806.79 feet to the point of beginning. Daled: May 31, 1994 JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK t X-6/' 16,"94(13) LEGAL NO'Fi¢I~ NOTICE OF HEARING STATE OF NEW ¥C_ County, New York, a public hearing 48), and running thence along Middle ~[d County, being duly sworn, say~ that he/Ehe To~n of Southold, al the Soulhold N.52"SS'50"E.-27.0 feet: thence (2) in PrincIpal Clerk of THE SUIcIcOLK TIM~-~, · ¥or~. ¢on,aini.g =~ ~:~- a,:re,. Sur[olk Church property; ,hcnc. aloe, s.id the ~,J~ dayOf ''~U~- No. 50048M, ~UOITH T. TEl~¥ Sworn ,to before me STATE OF NEW YORK) SS; COUNTY OF SUFFOLK) JUDITH T. TERRY, Town Clerk of the Town of Southold, New York, being duly sworn, says that on the 9th day of June 1994, she affixed a notice of which the annexed printed notice is a true copy, in a proper and substantial manner, in a most public place in the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, to wit: Town Clerk's Bulletin Board, Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York 11971. Legal Notice, Notice of Hearing on Proposal to Amend Zoning Code and Map, 8:15 P.M., Tuesday, June 28, 1994, Southold Town Hall, on the change of zone on the Town Board's own motion from HD to R-80 on the property of Mohring Enterprises. . Judith T. Terry ~'~ Southold Town Clerk Sworn to before me this 9th day of June , 1994. LINDA J. COOPER Notary Public, State of NAW Yo~'k No. 4822563, Suffolk Term Expl,'es Der. e,'r)ber 31.19'"/' T LEGAL NOTICE NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSAL TO AMEND ZONING CODE AND MAP Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law, and requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, at 8:15 P.M., Tuesday, June 28, 1994, on the Change of Zone on the Town Board's Own Motion from Hamlet Density (HD) District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of Mohring Enterprises, located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, New York, containing 28.822 acres, Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000-045-2-10.$. Any person desiring to be heard on the proposed amendment should appear at the time and place above so specified. The legal description of the aforesaid property is as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the easterly line of Chapel Lane with the southerly line of Middle Road (C.R.48), and running thence along Middle Road three courses: (1) N.52°58'50"E.-27.0 feet; thence (2) Northeasterly on a curve to the left having a radius of 749.20 feet, a distance along said curve of 338.09 feet; thence (3) N.36°33'20"E.-440.0 feet to land of Siolas and Tsounis; thence along said land S.53°26'40"E.- 460.05 feet to land of Village of Greenport; thence along said land two courses: (I) S.18°37'00"W.-448.87 feet; thence (2) S.41°26'30"E.-696.77 feet to Lutheran Church property; thence along said land three courses: (1) S.51°03'00"W.-689.82 feet; thence (2) N. 88°22'40"W.-550.0 feet; thence (3) S.67°41'30"W.-100.0 feet to the easterly line of Chapel Lane; thence along Chapel Lane two courses: (1) N.2°54'50"W.-272.19 feet; thence (2) N.4°19'20"W.-806.79 feet to the point of beginning. Dated: May 31, 1994. JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ON JUNE 16, 199~i, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO JUDITH TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, P.O. BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times The Traveler-Watchman Town Board Members Town Attorney Town Clerk's Bulletin Board Mohring Enterprises NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSAL TO AMEND ZONING CODE AND I~AP Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law, and requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, at 1~:15 P.M., Tuesday, June 211, 1994, on the Change of Zone on the Town Board's Own Motion from Hamlet Density (HD) District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of Mohring Enterprises, located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, New York, containing 28.822 acres, Suffolk County Ta× Map No. 1000-045-2-10,5. Any person desiring to be heard on the proposed amendment should appear at the time and place above so specified. The legal description of the aforesaid property is as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the easterly line of Chapel Lane with the southerly line of Middle Road (C.Ro48), and running thence along Middle Road three courses: (1) N. 52°58'50"E.-27.0 feet; thence (2) Northeasterly on a curve to the left having a radius of 749.20 feet, a distance along said curve of 338.09 feet; thence (3) N.36°33'20"E.-440.0 feet to land of Siolas and Tsounis; thence along said land $.53~26'40"E.- 460.05 feet to land of Village of Greenport; thence along said land two courses: (1) S.18~37'00"W.-448.87 feet; thence (2) S.41°26'30"E.-696.77 feet to Lutheran Church property; thence along said land tl~ree courses: (1) $.51~03'00"W.-659.82 feet; thence (2) N.88°22'40"W.-550.0 feet; thence (3) S.67°41'30"W.-100.0 feet to the easterly line of Chapel Lane; thence along Chapel Lane two courses: (1) N.2°54'50"W.-272.19 feeL; thence (2) N.4°19'20"W.-806.79 feet to the point of beginning. Dated: May 31, 1994. JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ON JUNE 16, 199~I, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO JUDITH TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, P.O. BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times The Traveler-Watchman Town Board Members Town Attorney Town Clerk's Bulletin Board Mohring Enterprises NOTICE OF HEARING ON PROPOSAL TO AMEND ZONING CODE AND MAP Pursuant to Section 265 of the Town Law, and requirements of the Code of the Town of Southold, Suffolk County, New York, a public hearing will be held by the Town Board of the Town of Southold, at the Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, at 8:15 P.M., Tuesday, June 28. 1994, on the Change of Zone on the Town Board's Own Motion from Hamlet Density (HD) District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of Mohring Enterprises, located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, New York, containing 28.822 acres, Suffolk County Tax Map No. 1000-045-2-10.5. Any person desiring to be heard on the proposed amendment should appear at the time and place above so specified. The legal description of the aforesaid property is as follows: Beginning at the point of intersection of the easterly line of Chapel Lane with the southerly line of Middle Road (C.R.48), and running thence along Middle Road three courses: (1) N. 52°50'50"E.-27.0 feet; thence (2) Northeasterly on a curve to the left having a radius of 749.20 feet, a distance along said curve of 338.09 feet; thence (3) N.36°33'20"E.-440.0 feet to land of Siolas and Tsounis; thence along said land S.53°26'40"E.- 460.05 feet to land of Village of Greenport; thence along said land two courses: (1) S.18°37'00"W.-448.87 feet; thence (2) S.41'26'30"E.-696.77 feet to Lutheran Church property; thence along said land three courses: (1) S. 51°03'00"W.-659.82 feet; thence (2) N.88°22'40"W.-550.0 feet; thence (3) S.67~41'30"W.-100.0 feet to the easterly line of Chapel Lane; thence along Chapel Lane two courses: (1) N.2*54'50"W.-272.19 feet; thence (2) N.4°19'20"W.-806.79 feet to the point of beginning. Dated: May 31, 1994. JUDITH T. TERRY SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK PLEASE PUBLISH ON JUNE 16, 199~I, AND FORWARD ONE (1) AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION TO JUDITH TERRY, SOUTHOLD TOWN CLERK, TOWN HALL, P.O. BOX 1179, SOUTHOLD, NEW YORK 11971. Copies to the following: The Suffolk Times The Traveler-Watchman Town Board Members Town Attorney Town Clerk's Bulletin Board Mohring Enterprises JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall. 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERI{~ P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 1~971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax (516} 765- 1823 MARrflAGE OFFICER Telephone (516~ 765-1801 RECOR/)S MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEQR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Nodc~ of Dele. r~i-afion of Non-Significance Dgterml,atlon of Sign~canc.~ Lead Agency: Town Board of the Town of Southold Addrem- Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Date: May 31, 1994 This notice is hz?ed pursuant to.Part 617, of the implementi~ regulations pert. lnlng to Article 8 (State Environmental Qnahty Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The lead agency baa determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared. Title of Arllom Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-45-2-10.5 e/s Chapel ! ~ne, Greenport SEQR Status: Unlisted Action Project Desetipflon: Theproject wh/ch is the subject of this Determination, involves a the change of zone of 20.07 acres from "Hamlet Density" to "Residence-80". The project site contains freshwater wetlands associated wath Moore's 'HD* Chan~ oI'ZoI~ SEQR Woc~Is (~SD~ Freshwa~r Water We~ ~). ~e proposed projc~ ~ one of s~ (6) ~e of ~ ~idcrcd by ~c To~ Bo~dat ~me geo~ap~c ~ S~ Num~ 1~5-2-10.5 ~tiou: ~c ~te co~B of 20.07 a~es ~d ~ l~ted on ~e ~t side of Chapel I ant ~ ~e unin~orated ~on of Gree~o~. ~mm~t~ ~e To~ Bo~d ~ re~e~g thi~ proje~ s~eo~ly ~ ~e fo~o~ app~ofiom: Cha~ge ~ ~ne on To~ B~d's ~ M~ s/s CR ~ more *hah 1~ e/o C~I ~, Pro~ COZ ou To~ B~'s ~ M~on S~ 1~1 s/s CR ~ ~ f~ w/o M~re's l~n% Gr~n~ ~o~ COZ ou To~ B~d's ~ Motion S~ ~1-~ n/s CR ~. L~9 f~ e/o Sold R~ Gr~ ~o~ COZ on To~ Bond's ~ Motion S~ 1~1 Pro~ COZ on To~ Bogd's O~ Motion S~M~ 1~1-~ n/s CR ~. ~ [~ e]o Sold R~ Gr~n~ ~ de~inafion ~ ~ued ~ ~ ~midera~on of ~e ~te~a for de~insfion of si~ific~n~ ~at~ined ~ 6 ~C~ P~ 617.11, ~e ~ En~o~en~ ~mem Fo~ P~ I ~d ~ ~d ~e fo~o~ spe~c re.om: cn~o~cn~al ~ ~r~by pro~ sup~d for ~,,~nr~ Of a N~a~ivc D~m (2) ~ pro~ ~oi~ ~ r~ ~ ~c~ ~vclopmc~ ~ on ~ s~j~ Fage 2 og3 SEQR I)etermln~om (3) (4) C~n :id~.rntinn r~ O~ ;niti~l ~i~ h that r~nin~ tO 'R~ r~ntial ~ pro~ a ~ ~ m~e ~ pr~ f~ ~ ~n~om~ *hah ~ '~' ~n;nE nOW pro~ ~n.ig~r~ti~ ~ ~ ~VCn to a plann;nz d~ prcp~ by ~ ~old plann;ng S~ *.ntitl~ (6) pro~ moro For ~ ~n~ P~on: Ju~ T~, To~ Clcrk To~ of Sou~old ~: To~ H~ 530DS Main Ro~ P.O. Box 117~ Southol~ Now York Pbono No.: (S 16) 765-18~ Ro~onnl ~tony Broo~ Stony Br~ Suffolk County Department of Health Services NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island Sou~hold Town Planning ~oard Southold Town Board of Appeals Sou~hold Town Building Department Village of Greenport Southold Town Clerk"s Bulletin Board Mohring Enterprises, 3~7 G]~n Cove Avenue, S~n Cliff, N.Y.I157~ ~3eg3 JLrDITH T. TERRY Town Hail, 53095 Main Road TO¥irl~ CI~R.K P.O. Box I/79 Southold. New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax 1516) 765- 1823 MARYOAGE OFFICER Telephone 1516) 765-1801 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FI~EEDOM OF INFOPdMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD SEQR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Noti,~ of DeX~..rminmion of Non-Signific~nc~ Determination of Si~ifir~ Lead Agency: Town Board of the Town of Southold Addre.~: Town Hall, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Date: May 31, 1994 This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617, of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Qnality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared. Title of Actiom Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-45-2-103 e/s Chapel I ~ane, Greenport SEQR Status: Unlisted Action Project Description-- Theproject which is thc subject of this Determination, involves a the change of zone of 20.07 acres from "Hamlet Densit,ff to "Residence-80". The proiect site contains freshwater wetlands associated vath Moore's Pa~ 1 o1'3 "HD" Clmage of Zone SEQR Woods (NYSDEC Freshwater Water Wetlands #SO-l). The proposed project is one of six (6) change of zones being considered by the Town Boardat this time in the r~ame geographic area. SCTM Num be~. 1000-45-2-10_~ Location: The site consists of 20.07 acres and is located on the east side of Chapel I ~ne in the ~mincorporated portion of Greenport. Comments: The Town Board is reviewing this project simultaneously with the following applications: Change o[ Zone on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-40-3-1 s/s CR 48, more ~hnn 1000' e/O Chapel lane, Grnenport Propn~A COZ on Town Board's Ovm Motioa SCTM# 1000-40-4-1 s/s CR 48, 400 feet w/o Moore's Iane, Greenport ProposedCOZ on Town Board's Own Motion , SCTM# 1000-3:5-1-25 n/s CR 48, 1,139 [er4 e/o Sound Road, Greenport Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-4.5-2-1 s/s CR 48, 8~5 feet e/o Chapel Lane, Greenport Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM~ 1000-35-1-24 n/s CR 48, 564 feet e/o Sound Road, Greenport Reasoll~a Slll~l:lor[in~ This Determination: This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of si~ifi,'nnce contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form Paris I and II, and the following specific reasons: (1) The subject ehnnge Of zoning does no~ e.y. eeed any of the criteria for determining ei~ificance of an action *h~t would warrant the preparation of a Dragt FAS. Conversely, the action will mi~l~i?e, pore.till environmental impacts thereby providing support for is.suanc~ of a Negative Declaratiom (2) The proposed proje~ will re. duce the potential developmem density on the subject sil¢. Az a result, denr. lty de. rived impac~ i~clorlln~ waler us~; ~nnirary waste volume; disturbance o[ land~ traffic Ben~ntlon; and solid wasle generation will also be reduce4:L Accord~ly, the subject ehnn~e O£ zonln~o ie e..xpr~ed to reduce the impact of s~e developmem[ with regard to these impact areas, as compared [o Page 2 o~3 *HIP Chanooe of Zone SEQR Determination (3) Thc prol2of~ed ann;n~ is c~ngiqtcnt with land u.~ ami zoning of surrolmaing lands, and will therefore not caas~ a siguiflr~n~ in~pac:L As a rasult, the proposal change of zonin~o w~ have a bellBficia] impact Ilpoll had u~ in tha area of thc ~e. (4) Consideration has been given to the review of thc proposed zone ,'ha-? conducte, d by a cons'dtan~ m the Town Board, which concludes the followin~ ~ rega;d to the site in consideration of uniqu~ sltc re. zourcr~: 'Thasc fin.:lln~q sugge~ thai any development on this site will have environment, a] impacts. Oar ~ impre,c~ion ~s that re.7~nin~ to 'R-~Y' Fe.,S~[e. nti21 wi~ provide a ~i~o~;f~r~.f inc~casexi measure of protect, ion for thc environment than thc 'LID" Z~Ling now provide~ Cousideration has been given to a plann;n~o docmnenr pre:pared by the Sour. hold pl~n.;.~ Staff ent;rled, 'Review of Hurnle. t De.n. xiO, ~fling in $outhold Town - Report to the Town Boant' dated February 1994. This report conclude, s the following with rcgurd to the glrc in conq;dcraiton of unique site resources: d~L~y/S reconvnend~d" (6) Thc subiec:t sitg COz~ra;n~ unique re-sources. While not specifically identified as ~'eshwatcr wetlnnd~ on thc NYSDEC Tentative Freshwater Wetlan,J Maps thc entire site contains a h;~h density of fi'e. shwater wot]antis vegetation sl:Je~c,~ Thc proposed cha~gc of z~n;n~ will minimize impact upon wetlandf~ resources by redu.-;n~ thc pote. r;al land nse de, z~. l,u addition, the lower potcntiaJ land use density will provide more fle, xiblc land nse options to ma~mi?~ setbacks and ensure prascrvatiofl of unique habitat For Further IxLformation: Contact Person: Judith Terry, Town Clerk Tow~ of Sourhold Address: Town Ha~I, 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Sou~old, New York 11971 Phone No.: (516) 765-1800 Copies of' this Notice Sent to: Commigsioner-Department of Environmental Conservacion, 50 Wo~f Road, All)any, NY Regional O~f:ice-New York State the Department of Environmental Conservation, SUNY @ Stony Brook, Stouy Brook, NY SuffoLk County Plmming Commission Suffolk County Department of Health Services NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island $outhold Town Planning Board Southold Town Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Village of Greenport $outhold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc., Main Road, Greenport, N.Y. 11944 l~ge3 of 3 JUDITH T. TEB. RY Town Hall. 53095 Main Road P.O. Box ll79 TOVt/-I~I CLERK Southold, New York 11971 I~EGISTR/k~ OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax 1516) 765-1823 I~Lad:~qJ~GE OFFICER Telephone (516} 765 1801 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICE[{ OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON MAY 31. 199q: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold has proposed a change of zone on their own motion from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc., located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, N.Y., containing 20.07 acres, SCTM #1000-045-2-10.3; and WHEREAS, the proposal has been referred to the Southold Town Planning Board and the Suffolk County Department of Planning for their recommendations and reports, all in accordance with the Southold Town Code and the Suffolk County Charter; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Town Board hereby sets 8:15 P.M., Tuesday, June 28, 1994, Southold Town Hall, Main Road, Southold, New York, as time and place for a public hearing on the aforesaid change of zone; and be it further RESOLVED that the Town Clerk be and she hereby is authorized and directed to cause notice of said hearing to be published in the official newspapers pursuant to the requirements of law. June 1, 199~1 JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOVI/'N CLER. K P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax (516) 765- 1823 MARRIAGE OFFICER Telephone (5161 765-180 I RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFOI~MATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON MAY 31, 19911: RESOLVED that this notice is issued pursuant to Part 617 of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The Town Board of the Town of Southold has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact Statement need not be prepared. Property of: San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc. Title of Actiom Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-45-2-10_3 e/s Chapel l,ane, Greenport SEQR Status: Unllqed Action Project Description: Theproject which is the subject of this Determination, involves a the change of zone of 20.07 acres ~rorn 'Hamlet Density* to "Residence-80". The project site contains freshwater wetlands associated with Moore's Woods (NYSDEC Freshwater Water Wetlands #SO-1). Thc proposed project is one of six (6) change of zones being considered by thc Town Boardat this time in the same geographic area. SCTM Numben. 1000-45-2-10.3 Location: The site consists of 20.07 acres and is located on the east side of Chapel Lane in the unincorporated portion of Greenport. Reasons Supportino_ This Determination: This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of significance contained in 6 NYCRR Pan 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and IL and the following specific reasons: (1) The subject ehano'e of zoning do~ not ex.cecal any of thc criteria for dctcrmlnlng ~i~nili~ce of ~ a~on that would warrant the preparation olr a Draft EI-q. Conversely, the. action will ~ potential CnVironmental im@acJ~ thereby prodding support for issuance of a Negative Declaration- (2) Tho proposed projed will reAuce tho potently! developmem~ density on tho subjca site. A~ a result, denshy derived impacts iadudiag: water usc; ~nitzr¥ waste volume; distm'banc~ of ]~md; ~at~c generation; and solid waste gencratlon will ~l~ be rcdu~4 Accordln~ly, the subjca change of z~nin~ is e, xpe~ed to reduce tho impact o£ site development with regard to thes~ impact uroa.% ~ compared to (3) Tho pro~s~'~r.~A zDning i& COnSis~e~l; wi.th h nd us~ al~d zDnin~ of sun'ouz~din ~ h nds~ and will thoreforo not cau~ a ~i?i~nt impaa: As a result, the propos~ change of zoniz~ will have a beneficial impact upon (4) Consk~'aJ~ion has been given ~o the review of the pro.n~c~.d zon~ ~ conducted by a consnlt~nt to the Togm Boazd, which coud,.-lt.x tim foLlowiz~ with regard to ~ si~ in conslderaliou Of ualque site r~s~urces: "Fh~se ~ndi,,? sugges~ that any dev¢lopmenZ on thLs silo will have enviromnenl~l impac~ Our ~ impression is that r~Z~Dnin~a [O 'R-80~ reslde~ti~l will provide a signi~can~ incre~sod measure of protes~ion for the cnvironmcn~ th=n ~ "HD" zouln~ now provide~ (5) Con~id~ralion bas been given to a phnnln~a document prepared by the Southold phnnin~a Staff entitled, 'Review of tiarn~ Density Zoning in $outhold Town - Repo~ to th~ Town Board~ dated Fcbruary 1994. This report condudes thc following with regard to tl~ site in consideraiton of unique sitc resource,s: (6) Tho subject site ~nt~in~ u~iqu~ resources. Whik not angelically identified ~ freshwater wetlands on tho NYSDF..C Tcntalivo Freshwater Wethnd ]vlap~ tho cm. iro silo cont~in~ a h~gh de~--~y of ~'eshwater wetland, s vcg¢lation spedc~. Thc proposed change of zonln~ wili minlmiT,- hnpac~ upon wethnds resources by redudng Lbo pote~ti:~! land u~ density. In addition, thc lower potentiaJ land u,~ densit'y will provide moro flexible land use options !o ma~imiTe, scthacks and ensure preservation of unique habila~ Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk June 1, 199q J'LrDITIt T. TER.RY Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CI-~-RI{ P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax (516) 765- 1823 ~GE OFFICER Telephone (516) 765 1801 RECORDS NL~IAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFOI/MAT[ON OFP'[CEFt OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON MAY 31. 1994: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts the proposal of Cramer, Voorhis $ Associates, Inc., in the amount of $80.00 per declaration, for the preparation of SEQRA Declarations for the proposed Hamlet Density Zoning on the Town Board's own motion on the following parcels: Kace Realty Co., John Geier & Ano., LBV Properties, San Simeon Retirement Community Inc., John G. Siolas & Catherine Tsounis, and Jem Realty Co. /~/ Judith- T. Terry Southold Town Clerk June 1. 199~I CRAMER, VOORHIS &.ASSOCIATES ENVIRONMENTAI~.~ PI,,~iI'~/N~ !NG CONSULTANTS May 20, 1994 Ms. Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town of Southold 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 RE: Proposed ltd Rezonings on Town Board's Ow~ Motion SCTM # 100-40-3-1, 40-4-1, 35-1-2.5, 45-2-10..3, 4~-2-1 and 35-1-24 Dear Judy: Attached please find copies of the draft SEQRA determinations for each of the above referenced parcels. They have been formatted so they e~n be xeroxed directly onto the Town's stationary without retyping, should you fred them acceptable. If there are any questions with regard to them, please feel free to give me a call. Enclosed you will find a bill for services with regard to the preparation of the Long EAF's on the above referenced parcels. This is consistent with the resolution adopted at the March 8th Town Board meeting which authorized us to undertake the work. Also enclosed is a proposal for services in completing the atttached SEQRA determinations and the bill for same. As we discussed thi~ morning, ol~r proposal of March 8th and the Town Boaxd resolution of that same date only authorized the preparations of the Long ,~F,a~s. The attached proposal is serf-explanatory. ..-- Thank you for your attention to thi~ matter. Again, if we can.,b~ of any~fiJ_,'ther assistance, please feel free to give us a e~ll. /~j-' Very _trul~.~ ~ours, ////~~W. Cramer. ASLA enclosures 54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 2, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455 SEQR NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice of D~e. rmina6on of Non-Si_o~i~cance Determination og Significance Lead Agency: Town Board of the Town of Southold Addre. rz: Town Hall 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Date: May 31, 1994 This notice is issued pursuant to Par~ 617, of the implementing regulations pertaining to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environmental Conservation Law. The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impac~ Statement need not be prepared. Title of Aetiom Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-45-2-10.3 e/s Chapel Iane, Greenport SEQR Status: Unlisted Action Project Description: The project which is the subject of this Determination, involves a the change of zone of 20.07 acres from 'Hamlet Density" to "Residence-80". The project site contains freshwater wetlands associated vath Moore's Pag~ 1 or3 'HD' C~e of Zone SEQR Detzrmiuattoa Woods (NYSDEC Freshwater Water Wetlands ~SO-l). The proposed project is one of six (6) change of zones being considered by thc Town Boardat thi.~ time in the same geographic area. $CTM Number:. 1000-45-2-10_3 Location: The site consists of 20.0'/acres and is located on the east side of Chapel Iane in the unincorporated portion of Greenport. Comments: The Town Board is reviewing this project simultaneously with the following applications: Change oI Zone on Town Board's Own Motion s/s CR 4~, more th~n 1000' ¢/o Clmpe! Lax~ Gre~nport Propos~ COZ on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM.~ 10(O-40-4-1 s/s CR 4~, 400 [~.i w/o Moore's I ~,,~., Gre~npo~t Propos~COZ on Town B~ard's Own Motion · SCTIvI# 1000-3~-1-2~ n/s CR 48, 1,139 [e.e.i ¢/o Sound Road, Gr~isnport P~opos~ COZ on Town Board's Own Motion SCTIvI~ 1000-4~-~-1 s/s CR 48, 8~ feast ¢/o Chapel I ~n~. Gr~-npon Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion SCTM# 1000-3~-1-24 n/s CR 48, ~o4 fee.4 ¢/o Sound Road, Gr~npor~ Re. sons $~ppoliin~ This De~rmination~ This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determinntion of sil~ificance contained in 6 NYCRR Pan 617.11, the Lon§ Environmental Assessment Form Parts I and IL and the followln~ specific reasons: (1) Th~ sub)ex~ ~ of zo-i-~ do~ no~ ~ a~y of th~ cfii~ria for de4~i~ing ,i~i6ca~c~ of a~ aciion thai would warrant ~ preparation o! a Drab F. iS. Conversely, ld~ acIion will mi,~imi~, pot~nt~l ~nvironm~n~nl impacts thereby prov~lin~ support for issua~c~ of a N~h~ Declaration. (2) Th~ prop~.d pro]e.~ will reduc~ th~ potential d~v~lopmcn~ d~nsit7 oa ~s subject sk~, A~ a r~uli, deasit7 d~ved impa~ h~cludin~ wa~r u.~; ~,,i~nry waii¢ volume; dismrbanc~ of land; I~affic F~..ragon; and solid wasi¢ ~¢n~ratlon will also b~ re. dui;ed. Ac~ordh~ly, Ih~ subjex~ cha~ of ZOnln~ i~ e. aq)6cte, d to rexluc~ ~h~ ~npac~ of sil~ d~v¢lopm¢~ wilh regard to th~ impaci area& a~ compared io Pag~ 2 o~3 ~HD' Chan_oe of Zone SEQR Delzrminatiou (3) TI~ proposed zoning ii congi~cnt with land u~ and zoning of surroanain~ lands, and will therefore not cansc & ~i~r~nt hnpact. As a rcsu~, I~ prol~1 vhan~¢ of zonln~ will have a bcnelicial hnpact upon land use in the aran of thc sRc. (4) C.~a.~le~i~a has ~ given to the review of the proposed zone change conducted by a consultant to tiu~ Town Board, which conclud~ II~ followizq~ i regard to tI~ a in consideration of unique Rite re. sour~ "The.se findin~o~ Sugga..~t a any development on this Rite v, ill haw environmenlal impacts. OI11' inillnl impre.~siOll iii thalt rez.qnln~a to 'R-fff' i*esi~ntlal i provide a ~i~niFh-nnt incre...a,~*~'.,~l me...,'islxre of protecXkm for flu: cuvironmant than ~hr. 'I-{~)' zonin~., nw provide, s. (5) Considoration ha~ been given to n pL~,,,,i,,_o document prepped by tl~ $outhold pllnnln~ Staff ~ntltlexl, '.,q.~vie~v ,of .Hamlet.,De. ns~ .Zonia,g ~ $~ Tov,,n * .Repoz~ ~o O~e Top,,n Boozd' dated February 1994. This r~p~;~i conchxdea the follo~ i regard to tI~ sit-' in considersiton of uniqu~ site re.souza (6) Th~ subjcg::t sig c.~nl:lln. U~U~ resouzc&S. Wing nco SpCC~c~y [den[~ ~ [FeAhWar~F w~tl~nd~ on thc lqYSDEC Tentative Frcshwatcr Wcfland Maps th~ cufive site coutnln, a h~gh den.~ty of freshwater wetlands vcgctation spccic~ Thc propor~d vhan?, of z~n~ng dill ~ impact upon wetlands reseurccs by rcdur;ng the potent~l land ~ danf~y. In add'on, thc lower potcnfi~1 land u~ d~zh~y dill provide morc flem'blc ]and usc options ~o ma~miT,', setbacks and cnsurc preservation of unlqne habitat For Further Information: Contact Person: Judith Terry, Town Clerk Town of Southold Address: Town Hall, $3095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Phone No.: ($16) 765-1800 Copies of this Notice Sent to: Comm~gsioncr-Dcpartment of Environmental Conservation, 50 Wolf Road, Albany, NY 12231 Regional Office-New York State thc Department of Environmental Conservation, SUNY @ Stony Brook, Stony Brook. NY SLlffOlk County P],~lning Comrn~ion I~ge 3 o~3 ~\\\\ ..,,~ CRAMEFI, V .tO, RHIS &~,A~,SOCIATES E NV I RO U M E N TAL"-.AJ~ID:. P,,~q..~ G CONSULTANTS May 2O, 1994 Ms. Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk Town of Southuld 53095 Main Road P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 Preparation of Declax~ons for Proposed Hamlet Densit~ Zonino~ on the Town Board's Own Motion SCTM # 100-40~1, 40-4-1, 3~-1.2~, 45-2-10.3, 45-2-1, 3.5-1.24 Deax Judy: As per your request the following will serve as a proposal for services with regard to the above. It is our tmderstanding that the Town Board wishes to consider the rezonln~ of the above six (6) paxce]s Q-om H~mlet Density to Residence 80. We have previons]y prepared the long EAF's for each parcel which the Town has cfl'culatcd in accordance with the rules and regulations of SEORA. Prior to maJdzzg a ~ dctcrmi-ation declarations of s~D~ifica~ce must be made. In our proposal of March 8th and the subsequent Town Board resolution of that same date, CVA proposed to prepare the Long EAF's. This proposal did not, however, include preparation of the above referenced declarations on each parcel. CVA proposes to prepare thc necessaxy SEORA declarations for the Town Board's review at a cost of $80 per declaration for a total of $480. I hope that the Board ~ Rnd the above proposal acceptable, l~ere are a~y questions, please feel free to contact me. / / It should be noted that we have taken the Liberty of complct~g,tbe, decla~a-tions, anticipating thc Town Board's approval. Very ,/ ~'t['homas ~W. Cramer, 54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD. SUITE 2. MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455 JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TOWN CLERK P.O. Box 1179 MARRIAGE OFFICER ~,,~'~-.~,~ ~'-.~.~-~'~' ~'~ Fax (516) 765-1823 Telephone (516) 765-180 I OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK ' TOWN OF SOUTHOLD Pursuant to Sections 1323 and 1332 of the Suffolk County Charter the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby refers the following proposed zoning action to the Suffolk County Department of Planning: New Zoning Ordinance Amendment of Zoning Cod~ X Amendment of Zoning Map (Change of Zone) Location of affected land: East side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, N.Y. Suffolk County Tax Map No.: 1000-0tl5-2-10.3 Within'500 feet of: X The boundary of any village or town The boundary of any existing or proposed county, state or federal park. X The right-of-way of any existing or proposed county or state parkway, thruway, expressway, road or highway. The existing or proposed right-of-way of any stream or drainage channel owned by the County or for which the County has established channel lines. The existing or proposed boundary of any other county, state or federally owned land. X The Long Island Sound, any bay in Suffolk County or estuary of any of the foregoing bodies of water. Or within one mile of: Nuclear power plant. Airport COMMENTS: Change of zone on the Town Board's own motion from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District to Low Density Residential R-BO District on the property of San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc. Date: May 20, 199q Southold Town Clerk ,ILrDITH T. TERRY :~ ~'~ -_~.-~ ,"~ Town Hall, 53095 Main Road ' ~ P.O. Box 1[79 TOW'I~I CI~gR.I{ ~~ Southold. New York 11971 Rb~'GI~TRAi~ OF VITAL ~TATISTICS ~'"~ · Fax (516) 765- 1823 Ivl~ql~a, GE OFFICER . Telephone (516) 765-1801 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD May 20, 1994 Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Hall Southold, New York 11971 Gentlemen: Transmitted herewith map of of a proposed change of zone on the Town Board's own motion from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of San Simeon Retire- ment Community, Inc., located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, N.Y. Please prepare an official report with respect to the proposed change of zone, and transmit same to me. Thank you. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry $outhold Town Clerk Attachment 3'LFDITH T. TEI~.RY Town Hall, 530q5 Main Road TOWel CI,~R.K P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York ~ 19'~ I REGISTRAR OF ~rlTAL STA~I1STIC$ Fax (516) 765 1823 MARRIAGE OFFICEI'{ Telephone 1516~ 765-1801 REcoRDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORIVL",TION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON MAY 16, 199q: WHEREAS, the Town Board of the Town of Southold has proposed a change of zone on their own motion from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District to Low Density Residential R-80 District on the property of San Simeon Ret- irement Community, Inc., located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, N.Y., containing 20.07 acres, SCTM #1000-045-2-10.3; now, therefore, be it RESOLVED that the Town Clerk be and she hereby is directed to transmit this petition to the Southold Town Planning Board and the Suffolk County Department of Planning, all in accordance with the Southold Town Code and the Suffolk County Charter. Southold Town Clerk May 17, 199ti COUNTY OF' SUFFOLK Judith T. ?e.w/, Town C~ed[ Town of $ouUmld Town Rail - 530~ ~a Ro~ P.O. Box J 179 Soud~old, ~w ~o~ J[97Z MAY ~ .,~ RE: ~ohn OeJg~ & A~lbe~, S~: 1~0-40-~01 ~ ~e~ Co., 5~: 1~0-4~03-01 Sou/hold Town De~ ~, Te~: ~ Suffo~ Coun~ ~a~[ of Hc~h Sc~Jca~ (SCD~IS) has ~ceivcd your lelte~ d~ Ap~ i I, 1994, con~mMg ~ ~ove-mfemnccd C~n$c of Zm~ applicadom, ~ h~ no objccti~ ~o ~e Town's desi~a~on = lead atcncy. ~lis co~po~en~ b ~tendcd p~y to ~im the pmc~r~ mq~mm~u of SEQRA ~Aai~.g m dm ~tabli~hme~[ of lc~ agency. ~ S~H3 ~y supports ~1 effom to m~mJxc pmtccflon of n~m~ ~ourc~ w~uh tony be impacted upon by construction ~d dcvetopmcnt a~dvitic~, it is the posiliun o[ thc tkp~ue~ Ih~t t~ S~ my/ow provides ~ ~at~l op~autdty for comp~mive co~ider4~i~ o[~ msou~s, ~ ~al ~1 p~c~icable pi~ing me~o~ shoed ~ mnployed to ~lp cns~ ~ ~mt~flon. Oipa~cul~ contra m ~p~nt=~ b ~ ~gquAm pwte~on o/worlds, s~u~ wa~, natural commmfitJe~, conliguou~ ~t~ hah/tins, a~ mm, ~g~d ~ld elld~cfgd s~cJ~. Jn a~Uon, e~o~ [o pro.gl ~nsiti~e physic~ ws~ ~cb g~ndw~c~, dun~, blu~, ~omUms, nn~r~ ~enge c~gl[, groundwater mcU~ge ~, ~d st~p sl~s ~ fuUy suppu~ ~ en~ui~ by O~e S~HS. Additlon~ ~o~afion m~y bc ~mvid~ palm Io ~ close of t~ eslabUd~ed co~l ped~. Should you have a~y qucstio~ or ~q~e ~don~ ~o~atlon, ple~e feel ~e to c~ta~t ~ 0~ of Eco[o~ at 85~Z078. Sh~mly. ~ I. Rcusc~o ~v~ent~ ~]~er Of 6ce of Ecolo~ M~/ta Fra~ D~o$. SC ~OUNTY OF SUFFOLK ROBERT J. GAFFNEY SUFFOLK COUNTY eXECUTIVe DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING STEPHEN M. JONES. A.I.C.P. April 19, 1994 Town Clerk Town of Southold Applicant: Town of Southold (San Simeon Retirement Community Inc.) Zoning Action: Change of zone from HB to R-80 Location: SCTM #1000-45-2-p/o 10.3 S.C.P.D. File No.: SD-94-9 Pursuant to the requirements of Sections A 14-14 to 23 of the Suffolk County Administrative Code, the above referenced application which has been submitted to the Suffolk County Planning Commission is considered to be a matter for local determination. A decision of local determination should not be construed as either an approval or disapproval. Very truly yours, Stephen M. Jones Director of Planning S/s Gerald G. Newman Chief Planner GGN:mb RODERICK VAN TUY/ (L.S.) COUNV^NTUYL RODE:RICK VAN TUYL, P.C. Licensed Land Surveyor~ 218 FRONT STREET GREENPORT, NEW YORK 11944 (516) 477~0170 April 25, 1994 Description: Property of San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc. Chapel Lane, Greenport. Beginning at the point of intersection of the easterly line of Chapel Lane with the southerly line of Middle Road (C.R. 48), and running thence along Middle Road 3 courses: 1) N.52°58'50"E.-27.0 feet; thence 2) Northeasterly on a curve to the left having a radius of 749.20 feet, a distance along said curve of 338.09 feet; thence 3) N.36°33'20"E.-440.0 feet to land of Siolas and Tsounis; thence along said land S.53°26'40"E.-460.05 feet to land of Village of Greenport; thence along said land two courses: 1) S.18°37'00"W.-448.87 feet; thence 2) S.41°26'30"E.-696.77 feet to Lutheran Church property; thence along said land three courses: 1) S.51°03'00"W.-659.82 feet; thence 2) N.88°22'40"W.-550.0 feet; thence 3) $.67°41'30"W.-100.0 feet to the easterly line of Chapel Lane; thence along Chapel Lane two courses: 1) N.2°54'50"W.-272.19 feet; thence 2) N.4°19'20"W.-806.79 feet to the point of beginning. Containing 28.822 acres. Roderick Van Tuyl To: Southold Town Clerk ,; ~:a21~'~,~.. ~ .~- ~. P.O. Box 1179 THOMAS H. WIC~,.HA.M ~. ~ .. = --' ~ -, ~uthold. NewYork 11971 SUPER~SOR ~ ~ ~-=.-~ ~ ,.~ - ~ ..~ ~ ~,,.. Telephone (5]6) 7~5 - 1800 OFFICE OF T~ S~ER~SOR TO~ OF SO--OLD April 12, 199~ Stephen Jones, Director Suffolk County Planning Department 12th Floor Veterans Memorial Fiighway Hauppauge, NY 11788 Dear Steve: In January the Town of Southold asked its planning staff to conduct a review of eight vacant properties that were zoned Hamlet Density (HD) in order to determine whether they should so remain. The FID zone permits four dwelling units per acre and represents our most intensive residential zone. A report was issued in February, a copy of which is enclosed for your information. Earlier this month, the Town Board began a coordinated environmental review on six of these properties in anticipation of conducting a public hearing on rezoning them from HD to R-a0, which is our two acre residential zone. With this letter, I am requesting the assistance of your planning staff in the preparation of information related to the HO rezonings; specifically an analysis of the potential yield and return for each of the subject properties under the R-80 zoning district. In addition, it would be helpful if your staff could provide a comparative analysis with the potential yield and return under the FID zone. I have enclosed a map and the environmental report for each property. The Town has not received the surveys yet, which is wh)~ the enclosed maps are copies of site plans and other maps in our files. If y6u would prefer to work with the surveys, perhaps copies could be sent when they are completed in a few weeks. Should your/~taff need any additional information, please do not hesitate to let me knorr./ Thanking you in advance for your assistance, please know that I am most ~p/preciatlve of your offer. Thomas Wickham Supervisor '~W :mis Enclosures JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall. 53095 Main Road TOI~t/N CLERK P.O. Box 1179 Southold. New York 11971 REGISq'RAR OF VITAL STA~I1STICS Fax 15161 765 1823 MARRka, GE OFFICER Telephone 1516) 765-1801 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD April 11, 1994 Lead Agency Coordination Request The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law and 6NYCRR Part 617 the following: 1. your jurisdiction in the action described below; 2. your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and 3. issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated. Enclosed you will find the Southold Town Board's findings and a completed Long Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response. Project Name: San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc., Main Road, Greenport, N.Y. 11944, SCTM #1000-045-2-10.3, property located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, N.Y., containing 20.07 acres. . , Requested Action: Change of Zone on the Town Board's own motion from Hamlet Density (HD} Residential District to Low Density Residential R-BO District. SEQRA Classification: Type I Contact Person: Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk, Town of Southold The lead agency will determine the need for a environmental impact statement (ELS) on this project. If you have an interest in being lead agency, please contact this office immediately. If no response is received from you within 30 days of the date of this letter, it will be assumed that your agency has no interest in being lead agency. Page 2 Agency Position: [ ] This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status for this action. [X] This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action. [ ] Other. (See comments below) Comments: Please feel free to contact this office for further information. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Enclosures Copies of this request and all attachments to the following: Commissioner Langdon Marsh, NYS-DEC, Albany Robert Greene, NYS-DEC, Stony Brook NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island Suffolk County Department of Planning Suffolk County Department of Health Services Southold Town Planning Board Southold Town Board of Appeals Southold Town Building Department Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board (without attachments) San Simeon Retirement Community, Inc., Main Road, Greenport, N.Y. 11944 JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall. 53095 Main Road TOIl/BI CLER.K P.O. [lox 1179 Southold. New York 11971 Ri~.GISTRP, R OF V1TP. L STATISTICS Fax (516) 765- [ 823 MARRIAGE OFFICER Telephone (5161 765- I§01 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY 'i'HE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON APRIL 5, 1994: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby commences the lead agency coordination process in regard to the State Environmental Quality Review Act on the Type I action of proposed rezoning of the following described property on the Town Board's own motion from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential District to Low Density Residential R-80 District: Tax Map #1000-045-2-10.3, owned by San Simeon Retirement Community Inc., containing 20.07 acres, and located on the east side of Chapel Lane, south of Route 48 and north of Route 25, Greenport, New York. Southold Town Clerk April 6, 1994 Town Hall. 53095 Main Road JUDITH T. TERRY P.O. Box 1179 TOWN CLEI~..I[ Southold. New York 1197[ Fax /.516~ 765-1823 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Telephone 1516 } 765-1801 MANPdAG E OFFICER RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON APRIL 5, 1994: OWNER PARCEL # 1000-45-2-10.3 PROPERTY LOCATION SAN SIMEON RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, INC. East Side Chapel Lane Main Road South of Route u, 8 & North Greenport, New York 119~,~ of Route 25, Greenport, NY WHEREAS, the Master Plan of the Town of Southold and the recommendations of the Town's advisory Stewardship Task Force have increasingly emphasized the promotion of growth in and around the hamlet centers, to strengthen their business prospects while keeping open space and farmland undeveloped; and WHEREAS, the Town Board has examined and extensively discussed a report entitled "Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold" dated February 199u, which assessed the appropriateness of the zoning of all undeveloped HD zoned properties in the Town of Southold; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold concludes that HD zoning of this property is not appropriate for the following reasons: 1. Only a small portion of the property has been developed pursuant to HD zoning in the decade since a site plan for the southwestern portion of this property was approved. The units built pursuant to the HD zoning are uninhabited and the site appears to have severe drainage problems; 2. The HD zoning of this site is not consistent with the Town's comprehensive plan because it encourages high density residential growth at a significant distance from the nearest hamlet center of Greenport and encourages suburban sprawl; 3. The HD zoning is not consistent with the large expanse of park which borders this property to the east; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold finds that rezoning th'is property from HD to R-80 is appropriate for the following reasons: 1. R-80 is the base zoning of the Town because it retains the open rural environment so highly valued by year-round residents and those people who support the Town's economy; 2. R-80 zoning is most consistent with the zoning on immediately adjacent properties; 3. R-80 zoning will best suit the property because it allows sufficient land in a parcel to handle the drainage problems which are associated with the heavy clay geology found on the site; The heavy clay soil on the site has extremely poor drainage qualities which creates an acute potential for flooding and wetlands in homesites developed pursuant to HD zoning, which can be minimized by R-80 zoning. Judith T. Terry ~/ Southold Town Clerk April 6. 199q JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall. 53095 Main Road TOWN CI~RK P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 REGISTHAR OF VITAL ~ATISTICS Fax (516) 765-1823 MARIMAGE OFFICER Telephone (5161 765-1801 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FILEEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON APRIL 5, 199t1: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby authorizes Roderick Van Tuyl, P.C., Land Surveyors, to prepare an accurate description of the following properties by metes and bounds, and three copies of a map of each parcel showing the zoning classification of the surrounding area within 500 feet of the parcel: 1 . 1000-040-3-1 Kace Realty Co., 43 West 54 Street, New York, N.Y. 10019 2. 1000-040-4-1 John Geier & Ano., c/o Marion Geier, Atlantic Mobile Park, Box 30, Newport, N.C. 28570 3. 1000-035-1-25 LBV Properties, Suite 210, 898 Veterans Memorial Highway, Hauppauge, N.Y. 11787 4. 1000-045-2-10.3 San Simeon Retirement Community Inc., Main Road, Greenport, N.Y. 11944 5. 1000-045-2-I John G. Siolas & Catherine Tsounis, 190 Central Drive, Mattituck, N.Y. 11952 6. 1000-035-1-24 Jem Realty Co., c/o Kontokosta, 43 West 54 Street, New York, N.Y. 10019 Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk April 6, 199q Pk..GEL # 5 - 1000-q5-2-10.3 OWNER PROPERTY LOCATION SAN SIMEON RETIREMENT COMMUNITY, lNG_ East Side Chapel Lane Main Road South of Route q8 E, North Greenport, New York 119qL~ of Route 25, Greenport, NY WHEREAS, the Master Plan of the Town of Southold and the recommendations of the Town's advisory Stewardship Task Force have increasingly emphasized the promotion of growth in and around the hamlet centers, to strengthen their business prospects while keeping open space and farmland undeveloped; and WHEREAS, the Town Board has examined and extensively discussed a report entitled "Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold" dated February 199q which assessed the appropriateness of the zoning of all undeveloped HD zoned properties in the Town of Southold; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold concludes that HD zoning of this property is not appropriate for the following reasons: 1. Only a small portion of the property has been developed pursuant to HD zoning in the decade since a site plan for the southwestern portion of this property was approved. The units built pursuant to the HD zoning are uninhabited and the site appears to have severe drainage problems; 2. The HD zoning of this site is not consistent with the Town's comprehensive plan because it encourages high density residential growth at a significant distance from the nearest hamlet center of Greenport and encourages suburban sprawl; 3. The HD zoning is not consistent with the large expanse of park which borders this property to the east; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold finds that rezoning th'is property from HD to R-80 is appropriate for the following reasons: 1. R-80 is the base zoning of the Town because it retains the open rural environment so highly valued by year-round residents and those people who support the Town's economy; 2. R-80 zoning is most consistent with the zoning on immediately adjacent properties; 3. R-80 zoning will best suit the property because it allows sufficient land in a parcel to handle the drainage problems which are associated with the heavy clay geology found on the site; Lt. The heavy clay soil on the site has extremely poor drainage qualities which creates an acute potential for flooding and wetlands in homesites developed pursuant to HD zoning, which can be minimized by R-80 zoning. March 18, 1994 Ms. Valerie Scopaz Senior Planner Town of Southold Main Road Southold, N~w York 11971 Re: Proposed Chan~ of Zone on Tow~ Board's Own Motion e/s Ckapel lane, Gr~npor~ I(MM)-4S-2-10.3/Pared #S A.q requited 1~ the Town Board, ~ Parts I and II have ~n prepared for the 20.07 acre site located on the east side of Chapel lane between .CR 48 and SR 25 in Greenport. As part of our preparation of the EAF Part I we earned out a field inspection of the site on March 14, 1994. In our analysis of the site we also otili~d a diversi~ of resources (test ho.le .da_ta, r .ex~?t aerial pho. tography, site plans, natural reso~ce maps, ~u survey, etc.). Significant informatmn, with regard to ~h,~ parcel, found dunng our review are presented below. This site currently contain~ 4 s~'uctures containln~o 8 dwe .1~ ,nits, ~ built w~.thi~. the recent past. The structures appear to have never been occupied. Accessing the site ~s a paved ro.ad. ,Areas adjacent to the roadway and the slxuctures have been cleared and landscaping/turf installed, lt.sh, ould be .n.o~d,that rnAr,j of the. l~..dscap~ .plak. ts appear .to be stressed because of the e~asUng condi~om m the ar.e.a~ At me rune or me site inspection, there was a significant amount of surface water immediately surroundin~o the existing structures. In addition surf~_,-e_ water was observed over much of the rest of the site it low areas, including the cleared areas around the road and under the larger y. egetatiun that has not been disturbed. Freshwater Wetland vegetation was growing immediately adjacent to the buildings and in almost all of the areas where standing water was found. The various wetlands mn~ that where consulted in this review do not identif3~ freshwater wetlands on the site~mcluding the NYSDEC Tentative Freshwater Maps. It is our understanding that the NYSDEC has not completed the review of their maps m the area. The area to the east of the access road and sm~ctures is currently vacant. Initial investigation would suggest that most of the site contains freshwater wetland vegetation, it is also ass-reed that the NYSDEC would identify a major portion of the site as freshwater wetlands. However, there are also typical upland plant species mixed in with the wetlands plants. The observed plants included the following: Phra~..~ rushes and se~..ges, red maple, red cedars, clethra (spp.), high bush blueberry, multifiora rose, pussy willow, bayberry. The site was not emily accessible, however es a result of prelimin:uy field work it is sus ected that the wetland ye etation continues to the eastern boundaries of the site If su~ is the case it would then connect with a state designated freshwater wetland (DEC Freshwater wetland #SO-l). As the NYSDEC wetlands .m.m.m.m.m.m.m.m.m~. were developed using principally aerial photographies the area could have mi~-~.d identification. This is because of the upland vegetation (red cedars) that would be easily identified from the air, may have 1~1 54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 2, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455 'HI)" COZ TaWR'O Own Molioa tO a misinterpretation_ It should also be noted that the parcel to the south of this Ice[, that contal~ similar condlt/ons, has had wetlands identified and flagged on it. Who ~,~ed these wetlands is unknown at thi~ time. According to the Soil 5urvey of Suffolk County, New York,. compiled by the US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service in coo~rat/on w~th Comell Agricultural Eaq~rimenial Station, the soil in this area is enUrely Cand/ce loam {Ca). This part/o,lar soil is identified in the Survey as having extremely poor drainage qualifies. This soil drain%oe cond/fion has, no doubt resulted in the formation of the wetlands on the site. F.urt~_ermore, accordin~o to the survey, the limltaiJOns for homesites, sewage disposal fields, p~pel/ne locations are severe. There is an acute potential for flooding. A series of soil bo '.1'~ were done by McDonald Geoseieace which verifies the composition of the soil and/ndicates the ex/stence of clay to a depth of 18+ feet. These cond/fious would pose a detriment to development, pamcularly high density, on this site because of drainage problems, potent/al for flooding and wetlands. It is suggested that a further inspection, a more detailed inventory and analysis, in the form of an EAF Part lrl be prepared for th/s site prior to final decision- Initial find/ngs suggest that any development on this site will have environmental impacts, the significance cannot be determ/ned at thi~ t/me. Our in/t/al/mpression is that rezonin~o to ~R-80" resident/al will prov/de a dgnifi..c~nt increased measure of protect/on for the environment than the 'HD" zoning now prowdes. However, given the ob~dous sensifiv/ty of the site and the development constraints, there m:?ybe other measures that should also be taken into consideration during the Board's dec/s/on making process. Furthermore, we have rev/ewed the doounent prepared by the staff, "Rev/ew of Hamlet Density Zlmb~ in Southoid Town - .Repot[. to the Town Board" dated February 1994. We concur w/th the recommendations made in that doo~ment, that "the Properly should be zoned to a den~ more compatible with its enviwnmoUal constraint~ , I hope the above and the attached EAF Part I and 1I are helpful. informat/on w/th ~reparat/on any more regard to the above or if you wish us of the EAF Part IH please contac~ us. VeF Enclosed: FAF Part I & H CRAMER. V Q~R H~ ,.~/'//,~,S O C I A T E S E N V I R O N M E N T.~..~,~,.////~, G CONSULTANTS 1 ,L4 6-::, (2/87~- ?c 617.21 SEQR Api:~ ndlx A Stale Environmental Quality Review FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM Purpo~: The full I:^F is designed to help applicanl~ and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a proiect or action may be significant. The question'of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer· Frequent- ly. there are aspects of a project that are subiective or unmeasureable. It is also understo~ that those who determine significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental analysis. In addition· many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting the question of significance. The full E^F is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information [o fit a proiect or action. Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts: Part 1: Provides obiective data and information about a given proiect and ~t~ site. By identifying basic proiect data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3. Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur Irom a project or action, it provides guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially- large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced. Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3is used to evaluate whether or not the impact is actually important. DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE--Type I and Unlisted Actions Idenliiy the Portions of EAF completed for this project: ~' Part ] --_ Par-L 2 [~Part 3 Upon review ol the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 ~l appropnate), and any other supporting information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the lead agency that: ^ The proiect will not result in any large and important impact(s) and. therefore, is one which will not have a s~gnificant ~mpact on the environment, therelore a negative declaralion will be prepared. B. ^Jthough the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required. therefore a CONDITIONED negalive declaration will be prepared.' C. The project may result m one or more large and important impact3 that may have a significant impact on the enwronment, thereiore a positive declaration will be prepared. · A Condlhoned Negatwe Dec[arahon ~s only vahd for Unhsted Acbons C~ange of Zone for SCTM~1000-45-2-10. 3 Name ol Action Town of Southold Town Board Name of Lead Agency Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer S,gnature ot Responsible Off,cer m Lead A£enc¥ $~gnatu~e oi Preparer{If ddlerent [rom responsible officer) PART 1--PROJECT INFORMATION Prepared by Project Sponsor NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determinin8 whether the action i~oposed may ha'.,' · sisnifican! effec~ on the environment. Please complete the entire Iorm. Paru A through E. Answers to these questions will be conside,e,' as part of the application for approval and may be subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additiona. 'information you believe will be needed to complete Part~ 2 and 3. It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involv~ new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and speci~ each instance. NAME OF ACTION e/s Chai~,el Lane, n,,'o SR 25, S./o CR48, Greenport Town of Southold Town Board ~16 ) 765-1891 I IZIp CODE CITY/PO Southold [~T~T E 11971 Sam Simeon Retirement Community, Inc. I ( ) Greenport NY) 11944 Change of zone to R-80 residential from BD on a 20.07 acre parcel Site presently contains four uninhabited buildings and is predominantly covered with wetland vegetation. Chanqe of zone is based on Town Board motion. Please Complete Each Question-ln,iicale N.A. ii not applicable A. Site Description Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas. 1. Present land use: ~Urban I~lndustrial f-ICommercial [~Residential (suburban) [~Rural (non-farm) ~Forest DAgriculture ~Other Uninhabited structures & vacant land_ 20.07 2. Total acreage o[ projec[ area' acres. APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION ,Meadow or Brushland (Nor,-agricultura[) Although not 19. 13 acres 19. 13 acres orestc~s , . · acres acres there is a b~gh density of wetland . Agricultural [Includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) vegetation acres acres Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24. 25 of E~L~esent' acres acres Water Surface Area acres acres Unvegetated (Rock. earth or fill) acres acres Roads. buildings and other paved surfaces .94 acres .94 acres Other [Indicate tTpel acres acres 3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? a. Soil drainage: mWell drained % of sJte ~Moderately well drained % of site [~Poorly drained 100 % of site b. If any agricultural land is revolved, now many acres o! soil are classified within soil group 1 :hrough 4 ol the N' Land Classil~cat~on System~__NA acres (See I NYCRR 370} 5. Approximate percentage of proposeo .. oject site with slopes: ~O-10'Y. 1, % Oi0-15~, I-I15% or greate~ 6. Is project subsl, antially contiguous to. or contain a buildina, site. or district, listed on the State or th~ National Registers of Historic Places~' ~Yes ~No 7. Is pro,cc[ substantially conti~uous lo a site listed on the Re~ister of National Natural Landmarks~ ~Yes ~No 8. . What is t~ depth of the water lable? 8-~6'(infeet) P~c~e~ ~e~ on s~e. a~ 0+ 9. Is site located over a primal, principal, or sole source aquifed ~Yes ~No 10. Do hunting, fishin~ or shell fishin~ op~unities presently exist in t~ pro,eot area~ ~Yes ~No' 11. D~s project s~te contain any species of plant or animal life that is iden~fi~ as threaten~ or endangerS? Accordin~ to Idendfy each species 12. Are there any umque or unusual land forms on the project site~ (i.e.. cliffs, dunes, other ~eolo~ical formations) ~Yes ~No Describe 13 Is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area? [-)Yes ~lNo Il' yes. explain 14. ' Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community? II, Yes ~No NA 15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary 16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area: a. Name SO-1 & 50-2 bl Size (In acres)180- & 109+ 17. Is the site served by existing public utibtles? ~Yes [--)No a) If Yes. does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? ~Yes S~No for HD zoning b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? ~Yes ~No Greenport districts are currently over burdened. 18. is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law. A~icle 25-AA. Section 303 and 304? OYes 19. Is the site located in or substantially contmguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Artmcle 8 of the ECL. and 6 NYCRR 6177 .~Yes (~No 20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? '~Yes -~No nnknown B. Project Description Project is a proposed rezoning. I Physical dimensions and scale of proiect (till in dimensions as appropriate) a. To(al contiguous acreage owned or conuolled by project sponsor 2 o. 0 7 acres b. Project acreage to be developed: NA acres initially; NA acres ultimateJy. NA C. Project acreage to remain undeve!oped acres. d. Length of project, in miles: NA (If appropriate) N A e. If the proiect is an expansion, indicate percent ol expansion proposed %: i'. Numb.er o! oil-street parking spaces existing ~tA , proposed NA g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour (upon completion of proiect}? h. If residential: Number and type of housing unil.~: One FamiJy Two Family Multiple Family Condominium Initially Ultimately NA __ 2. Ho~ much natural material (i.e., rock. earth, etc.) will be removed from the site? 0 tons/cubic yards 3. Will disturbed areas be reclaimed? I'-IYes ONo I~NIA a. l! yes, Ior what intend . purpose is the site being ret)aimed) b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation! OYe~ I-1No c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamationl F'lYes OHo 4. How mat~y acres o( vegetate, on (trees. shrubs, ground covers~ wil. I be remove~ Irom site? 0 acres_ 5. Will any mature Iorest (over 100 ye,~rs old) or other Iocail¥-importanLvegetation be removed by this project? OYes ~iDNo 6. If single phase proiect: Anticipated period of construction ~A months. (including demolition). 7. If multi-phased: a. Total number of phases anticipated ~'~ (number). b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition). c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year. d. ts phase 9 [unctio~aUy dependent on subsequent phases? OYes I-1No 8. Will blasting occur during construction? []Yes ONo ~, 9. Number of jobs generated: during construction t,~A ; after project is complete 'tO. Humber of iobs eliminated by this project 11. Will proiect require relocation o~ any projects or facilities? C3Yes ~No if yes. explain - 't2. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? [~Yes ~No a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage. industrial, etc) and amount b. Name ol water body into which effluent will be discharged 13. Is subsudace liquid waste disposal involved? OYes ~No Type 14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? [-1yes ~qNo Explain 15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? EYes l~No 16. Will the project generate solid waste? I-lYes ~]No a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons b If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? OYes ~No c. If yes, give name ; location d. Will any wastes nol go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? E]Yes ~No e. If Yes, explain 17 Will the project involve the disposal ot solid waste? ~Yes ,~No a. if yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month. b. If yes. what is the anticipated site life? years. 18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? [:]Yes ]~No 19. Will proiect routinely produce odors {more than one hour per day)? [~)'fes 20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? [:]Yes ~No 2't. Will project result in an increase in energy use? f-lYes ~No If yes . indicate type(s) 22. If water supply is lrom we s. indicate pumping capacity N~' gallons/minute. 23 Total anticipated water usage per day gallons/day. 35..Aplz~o~at~ Required: Submittal Typ* CAange of gone City. Town. VitlaBe Board ]~Yes [:]No City. Town. Villale Planning Board E3Yes [-iNo City, Town Zoning Board ~lYes [No City. County Hea~th Department ~Yes Other Local Agencies [~Yes I-INo O~.her ReglonaJ Asencies ~]Yes State Agencies ~)Yes [-i/Ho Federal Agencies C]Yes ~lNo C. Zoning and Planning Inlormatlon 1. Ooes proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? []Yes ~]No if Yes. indicate decision required: ~i~zoning amendment [~zoning variance F'lspecial use permit ~subdivision (-1site plan (~new/revision of master plan L~resource management plan ~lother 2 What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? HD 3. What is the maximum potential deveJopment of the site it' developed as permitted by the present zoning? can not be determLned with out further investiqation of wetlands boundary, R-80 4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? 5 What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning? 6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use 7 What are the predominant land use{s) and zoning classifications w~thin a '/, m,[e radius of proposed action;' Nursing home/HD, Parklands/PD, Vacant property/R-SO 8 is the proposed action compatible with adioining/surrounding land uses within a 7, mile;' J~¥es ENo N A 9. if the proposed action is the subdivision of land. how many lots are proposed? a What is the minimum lot size proposed;' 10 Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water district3;' I-lyes ~No '~1 Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police. fire protection)? ~Yes ~i~No a. if yes, is existing capacity su[t~clent to handle projected demand? _~Yes ~No 12 Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic sigmficantJy above present levels;' (:3Yes ~No a. If yes. is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? I-lYes C~No D. Informational Details Attach any additional inlormation as may be needed to clarity your proiecL I! there are or may I:~ any adverse impacts associated with your proposal. :)lease discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or avoid them. E. Verification I certify that the information provided above is true to the best o[ my knowledge. S po n s o r~/~'~ Pad 2- ~IOJECTIMPACTSANDTHEIP-IAGNITUDE lerlX)f~b~llt~ of L~ Gef~ra! Ifl~ormll~ (Reid Cl~fully) · Iff c~pletini t~ form t~ revi~er s~ld ~ iuid~ by 1~ ~est~: Ha~ my res~nses a~ ~terminati~ ~n ~ea~blel The rev~er Is ~ ex~ct~ to ~ an ex~n envi~menMI · Identifyinl that an impact will ~ ~(entially larie (column 2) ~s ~t ~an t~t it is al~ necessarily Any larle impact must ~ evaluat~ in PART 3 to determine ~ignificznce. Idenlifyini an gm.ct iff column 2 simply asks that it ~ I~k~ at furor. · T~ E~mple~ provided are to assist t~ reviewer by showing ~s of impac~ a~ w~rever ~ssible t~ ~res~ld of m~nitude ~at w~ld UiMer a tes~n~ in column 2. T~ examples am ~rally a~licable ~oui~t ~ SMte and for most situations. BuL for any s~cific project or site ot~t ~m~ a~ ~r ~res~lds may ~ appr~te f~ a Potential La~ie Impact t~. ~us ~uidni ~aluat~ in Pa~ 3. · T~ ImpacU of each ~oj~ on each site. in each I~ali~. will va~. T~mf~, ~ examples am illustrat~e and ~ ~n offer~ as guidance. T~ ~ ~t c~stitute an exhaus~ list d im~ a~ ~lds to an~ each q~. · The numar of examples ~r questi~ d~s not indicate the ambiance ol each q~ti~. · In identifying impact, consider long te~, sho~ term and cumlative Imlrudlom (Read carefully) a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Y~ if t~e will ~ a~ impa~ b. Maybe answers should ~ consider~ as Y~ answers. c. If answering Y~ [o a question then c~ck the appropria[e ~x (column I ~ 2) to i~icate ~ ~tential size o[ the impacL If impact thres~ld ~uals or execs any example pro~, c~k column 2. I~ impact will ~cur but thres~ld is I~er than example, c~ck column 1. d. If mv~er has d~bt a~t size of ~ impact ~en conside~ ~ gm.ct as ~t~lly large and p~ to PART 3. e. If a ~tentially large gm.ct c~ck~ in column 2 can ~ miti~t~ ~ c~ni~s) ~ ~ ~o~ to a small ~ ~rate . must ~ ~plain~ in Pa~ 3. 1 2 ~1 to ~tentlal ~ la.ct Be ~te ~e MIt~gat~ By ~NO OYES E~amp~ ~at w~ld apply to ~[umn 2 · ~y c~stmction ~ slo~s of 15% or greater. [15 f~[ rise ~ 1~ ~ ~ ~Yes ~No f~t o~ length), or where [~ general slo~s in the project area ~c~ · Construction on la~ where the depth to the water table is I~s than ~ ~ ~Y~ ~No 3 f~L · Construction of pav~ parking area for 1,~ or more vehicle. ~ ~ ~Y~ · Construction on la~ w~re ~r~E is ex~ or ienerally ~hin ~ ~ ~Yes ~No 3 f~t of existing ~r~nd su~ace. e. Construction [hat will continue for more than I year or invol~ more ~ ~ ~Yes ~No than one phase or sM~e. · Excavation lot mining pur~ses that would remove more than 1,~ ~ ~ ~Yes ~No tons of natural material [i.e., rock or soil) ~r year. · Construction or expansion o~ a lanita~ landfill ~ ~ ~Yes ~No · Construction in a designal~ flyway. ~ ~ ~Yes ~No 2. Will there be an effect t,. _.,y umque or unusual land forms found on the sitel' [i.e.. cliffs, dunes, geological formations, etc.)[~NO EYES · Specific land forms: [] [] [~Yes I--)No 1 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be IMPACT ON WATER Moderate Large Mitigated By 3 Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protectedt Impact Impact Project Ctllnge (Under Articles 15, 24.25 of tJ~e Environmental Con~er~ation Law, ECL) [~'NO I-lYE 5 Example~ that would apply to column 2 · Developable area of site contains'a protected water body. [] [] [:}Yes []No · Dredgin8 more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a [] [] r-]Yes I-]No protected stream. · Exten.~ion of utility disttibutioa facilitie~ I.hro4dgh a I:motected water __kc, cl_y. [] [] I'-~Ye~ []-]No · Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetlan<L [-] [] [-]Yes f-INo · Other impacU: [] [] I--lYes []No 4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existing or new of water? I'-~ N O f~YES Example~ that would apply to column :2 · A 10% increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water [] [] i-lYes []No or more than a 10 acre increasa or decrease. · Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of sun<ace area. []-I [] r-lYes I--)NO · Other impact: Site contains significant wetlands [] ~ [~Yes []No that are not_designated by the State at this time. Change of z6ne will seduce po~eQtial future impacts 5. Will Proposed Action affect sunace or grounawater quality or quantityi' '~NO C1YES Eumeles that would apply t~ colum~ 2 "' · Propo~-~d Action will re,quire a discharge permit. [] [] FIYes []No · Prolx~ed Action requires u~ of a source of water that dc~s not [] '~ E]Yes []No have approval to serve prop,o~'~d-~roj~:t) action. · Pro~ Action requires water suppty from wells with greater than 45 [] I--) [-]Yes []No gallons per minute pumping ~*apacity. · Construction or operatio~3 causing any contaminatio4~ of a water [] [] I--lyes [-INo supply system. · Prol:x:~ed Action will adversely aflect groundwater. [] [] i-]yes []No · Liquid effluent will be conveyer.; off the site to facilities whlch presently [] [] [-],Yes i'-tNo do not exist or have inadequate capacity. · Proposed Action would use water Ln exce~s of i~),00:) gallons per [] [] [-]Yes []No day. · Proposed Action will Jikel" ~_~,_~. s,ltat,on or other discharge into an [] [] ~Yes existing body of water ~,., th;_ ~_,:tunt that there will be an obvious visual contrast to natural conditions. · Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical [] [] [~Yes []No products greater than 1,100 gallons. · Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water [] [] [~Yes []No and/or sewer services · Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may [] [] ?-)Yes i--INo re,quire new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage facilities. · Other impacts: [] [] [-]Yes []Nc Will proposed action alter draina~ flow or patterns, or surface ',,..a [ e r runofff [}NO I~YES [xz r,pJt'l !~at v. odJd appJv to column 2 2 3 Small to Potential Can Impact Be Moderate Large Mitigated By Impact Impact Project Change · Pro~ Action may cause substantial erosion. ['-] (-I I-lYes · Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. [-] [] I"]Yes []No · Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. [] [] [-]Yes ['-lNG · . Other impact3: [] [] [~Yes [-]No IMPACT ON AJR 7. Will propOse'd action aifect air quali~' J~NO I-lYES E~ample~ that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will induce 1.000 or more vehicle trips in any given [] [] E}Yes []No · Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than I ton of [] [] I--lYes []No refuse per hour. · Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a [] [] E]Yes [--]No heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed [] [] ['-]Yes []No to industrial use. · Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial [] [] ['-IYe~ []No development within existing industrial areas. · Other impact~: [] [] i-lyes ['-]No IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS 8. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened o~ endanlered specie, si' ~NO r-lYES E~amples that Would apply to column 2 ' .... " · Reduct.k:m of one or more species listed on the New York o*' Federal [] [] l'-ly~s '[~No list. using the site, over or near site or found on t~e site. · Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitaL i--1 [] F-lYes i-lNG · Application of pesticide or herbicide more than t~ice a year. other [] [] I--lYes i--lNG than for agricultural purl>o~es. · Other impact3: C_hanqe of zone ~,~_q_]. ~-ec~uce pot:ential [] [] [-1Ye~ ~lNo ±:nl~ a c E s _ 9 Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-r~reater~d or non-endangered species? r-lNG ~YFS Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or [] [] [-]Yes []No migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. · Proposed Action requires the removal of more [ha'n 10 acrea [] [] E]Yes I--lNG of mature I'orest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important vegetation. IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCES 10. will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? ~NO DYES E,ample-~ that would apply to column 2 · Th~ proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural [] [] [~Ye-~ land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard, c~ch~rd, e[c ) Small to Potential C. In Implct &l Mo<~rltl Large Mltlgatm<l ~1~ Impact Impact ProJ~t ~ C~struction activity would excavate or compact the ~il prolile of ~ ~ ~Yes ~ a~icultural land. T~ pro~sed action would irreversibly conve~ mo~e ~han 10 acres ~ ~ ~Ye~ ~No of agricultural land or, if I~a[~ in an Agricultural DistricL ~re ~n 2.5 acres of airicultural la~. T~ ~ a~ w~ld di~upt ~ p~t ins~llat~ of airi~ral ~ ~ ~Yes ~No land manaiement systems (e.i., subsu~ace drain lines, ~tlet ditch. strip cropping; ~ create a n~ for such ~ur~ (e.i. ~u~ a [a~ field to drain ~rly due to increa~ ~noH) Ot~r impact: ~ ~ ~Yes ~No IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES 11. WiU proposed action affect aesthetic resourcesf ~1,,IO I-lYES (If necessary, use the Visual E^F Addendum in Section Appendix E,ample. I that would apply to column 2 · Proposed land uses. or project components obviously different from [] I~ ['-1Yes [-~No o~ in sharp conUast to current surroundin~ land use patterns, whet~r' man-made or natural. ., · Prol:x3'~ land uses, or project c~mpone~ts v~ible to u~ of [-] [~ I~Yes [-]No aestJ~tic resources which will eliminate or signH'icantly reduce d~ir · enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that r~ource Project comPonents that will result in the elimination or significant [] [-I i-~Yes ['-lNG s. cre~nin$ of scenic views known to be important to the area· · ~ impacL~: [] [] ['-]Yes I--]No IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 12 Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure o! histonc, pre- historic or paleontological importancei' ~NO E]YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or subsLantially [] [] I-lYes I-'lNG contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register of historic places. · Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed ~c<ated wib~in the [] [] []Yes []No project site. · Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive lot [] [] []Yes [-']No archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory. · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 13. Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or future open spaces or recreational opportunitiesl' Examples that would apply to column 2 ~NO OYES )The permanent foreclosure of a luture recreational opportunity.-- [] [] [~Yes '"~' A major reduction ot an c.{:mn space important to L~e con'u'nunity. [] [] []Yes []No · Other impacts: [] [] []Yes []No 1 2 3 IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION Small to Potential Can Impact Be 14. Will there be an effect to existinl transportation systems~ Mo~larltl Large Mitigated By ~NO DYES Impact Impact Project C~ange Eaamplet that would apply to column 2 · Alteration of present patterns o[ movement of people and/or goods. J'-J J~ J-lYes []No · Prol)osed Action will result in major traffic problems. J-J . [] J-lYes r']No · Other impacts; [] ['-J J--lYes J"JNo IMPACT ON ENERGY ' 15 Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel or energy supply~ PiaNO ~YES Examples that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of [] [] []Yes [~No any form of energy in the municipality. · Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy [] [] []Yes [-]No transmission or supply system to serve more than 50 single or two family residences or to serve a major commercial or indusb'ial u~e. · Other impact: Change of zone will reduce added [] [] l-lYes []No stress on already over stressed Greenport uti2it, ies NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS 16. Will there be objectionable odor~, noise, or vibration as a result of the Proposed Act. km~ ~NO · ["'lYES' '~ ' Example~ that would apply to column 2 · Blasting within 1..5CO fe~t of a hospiLal, school or other sensitive [] [] []Yes I-lNo facility. · Odor~ will occur routinely (more than c~e hour per day). [] [~] [~]Yes IT1No · Proposed AcLion will produce operating .oisa exceeding fl~--'l'oc~l-.. .[] [] []Yes []No ambient nois~ levels for noise outskle of structures. · Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a [] [] []Ye~ I~No noise screen. · Otl~r impacts: [] [] []yes I'-INo IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH 17 Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety? ~NO OYES Ezample'~ that would apply to column 2 · Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous [] [] [-]Yes []N substances (i.e. oil. pesticides, chemicals, radiation, etc.) in th~ event of accident or upset conditions, or there may be a chronic Iow level discharge or emission. · Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous wastes" in any [] [] []Yes []N form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive, irritating. infectious, etc.] · Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural [] [] []Yes gas or other flammable liquids. · Proposed action may result in the excavation or other disturbance [] [] []Yes within 2,000 fe~t of a site u~d for the disposal ol solid or hazardous · Ot~er impacts: _ [] [] J~YL'I 1 2 3 IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER Small to Potential Clrt Impact Be OF COMMUNITY OR NEJGHBORHOOD Moderate Large Mitigated By 18. Will proposed ·etlon affect the char·tier of the existing communityf Impacl Impact Project Change ~NO CIYES Exampleg that would apply to column 2 · The permanent population of the'city, town or village in which the [] I-) f-lYes [-INo project is located is likely to grow by more than $%. · The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services [-J [-] l-lYes I-)No will increase by more th,an 596 per year as · result of this project. · Proposed acticm will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. I[-] [] []-]Yes []No · Proposed action will cause · change in the density of land use. [] [] []Yes []No · Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existini facilities, structures [~ [] I-lYes []No or areas of historic importance to the community. · Development will create a demand for additional community services [] [] []Yes []No (e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.) · Proposed Action will set an important precedent Ior future projects. ['-] [] {-']Yes (~No · Proposed Action will create or eliminaLe employment. · [] [] []Yes []No · Other impacts: l'~ [] I'-~Yes I'-INo 19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to potential adverse environmental impacl.st' [:]NO C)YI:S If Any Action In Part 2 Is Identified aee Potential Large Impact or ['"'. If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3 Part 3--EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS Responsibility of Lead Agency Part 3 mu~t be prepared il one or more impact(s) is considered lo be potentially Larle, even il the impact(s) may be mitigated. Instructions Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Par~ 2: 1. Briefly describe the imp·eL 2. Describe (il applicable) how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project change(s). 3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude (hat Lhis impact is important. To answer the question of importance, consider: · The probability of the impact occurring · The duration o( the impact · Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value · Whether the impact can or will be conlrolled · The regional consKluence of the impact · Its potential divergence from local needs and goals · Whether known objections to the proiect relate to this impact. (Continue on atLachmenb) JUDITH T. TERRY ~~~.~, Town Hall, 53095 Main Road TO~-N CL~R.~ ~ P.O Box 1179 Southold, New York l~971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL ~I'ATI~TICS Fax (516) 765- 1823 MARRIAGE OFFICER Telephone (5161 765- I gO I RECORDS MANAOEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFOKMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 10, 1994 Thomas W. Cramer, ASLA Cramer, Voorhis & Associates 54 North Country Road, Suite 2 Miller Place, New York 11764 Dear Tom: This is to confirm that the Southold Town Board, at their regular meeting held on March 8, 1994, adopted a resolution accepting your proposal to prepare Long Environmental Assessment Forms for six proposed rezonings to be undertaken on the Town Board's own motion. A certified copy of the resolution is enclosed. Very truly yours, Judith T. Terry Southold Town Clerk Enclosure ~ _ cc: V. Scopaz, Senior Planner dlJDITH T. TERRY ~~~..~---~ Tov, n Hall. 53095 Main Road TOW'N' CI,ER.K ~ P.O. Box 1179 Southold, New York 11971 REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax 1516) 765- 1823 MARRIAGE OFFICER Telephone (516) 765-1801 RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK TOWN OF SOUTHOLD THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON MARCH 8. 1994: RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of $outhold hereby accepts the proposal of Cramer, Voorhis & Associates, dated March 8, 1994, at a total sum not to exceed $1,200.00, for the preparation of Long Environmental Assessment Forms for six (6) proposed rezonings to be undertaken on the Town Board's own motion. Judith T. Terry(/ Southold Town Clerk March 9. 199q &soc.^T E N V I R 0 N M E N T' ~,~?_.~;~ G C?NSULTANTS March 8, 1994 Ms. Valerie Scopaz Planner Town of Southold Main Road Southold, NewYork 11971 RE: Proposal for Services Preparation of Long Environmental Assessment Forms (EAF) for Proposed ltamlet Density Zoning in the Town of $outhold Dear Valerie: Pursuant to your request, th.e following will serve as a proposal for services with re-'ard to the above referenced. It ~s our understanding that the Town Board .wishes to eons[der theposslble rezoning for six und. eve. loped parcels from Hamlet Density (HD) to Residence-80(R-80). This proposed action !s a result of the study prepared by you and the staff, entitled "Review of Hamlet Density Zomng in the Town of $outhold", dated February 1994. The following are the six parcels that will be considered in the public hearings: $CTM# Hamlet Location Acreage 100-40-3-1 Greenport, umncorp. 17.1 100-40-4-1 Oreenport, un,ncorp. 10.55 100-35-1-25 Greenport, umncorp, 132.08 100-45-2-10.3 Greenport, umncorp. 20.07 100-45-2-1 Greenport, umn¢orp, 1.2 100-35-1-24 Greenport, umncorp. 62.3 CVA proposes to completethe.Long EAF necessary for coordination with other involved agencies under the State bnv,ronme, ntal QualityReview (SEQR) Act. We will also cared out field inspections on each of.the subject parcels to ass!st in the preparation on the documents. It is also. ou.r understanding that youhave certain mforma,tion that will be made available to us to assxst m the preparation of the Long.EAF's. In consideration of the above we estimate that the preparatton of each Long EAF will cost between $150,00 to $200.00, x~qth a total sum of not to exceed $1,200.00, I hope you and the Board find the above proposal acceptable. If ther.e are any questions wtth the above please feel free to c.ontact me. If the Board authorizes this proposal, please let me know and we will begin work immediately as I u. nderstand that the public hearing will be set for March 22. Thank you for your consideration of CVA and I hope to hear fromyou shortly. ,,/]-- _- .., Verytr~:y. uts, ~___~~ N. Cramer, ASLA 54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 2, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455 Richard G. Ward, Chairman '~ Town HalF, 53095 Main Road George Rilchie Lalharn, Jr. ' ' ' ~.'~. ~'' ' P.O. Box 1179 ~ - "" '~'a~.~' ~.-,. ,._, Southold, NewYork 11971 Bennett Odowski, Jr. ~ .) ;- Fax (516) 765-3136 Mark S. McDonald '~_~ Kenneth L. Edwards -~'~.~-~- Telephone (516) 765-1938 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE TOWN OF SOUTHOLD March 9, 1994 Thomas W. Cramer Cramer, Voorhis Associates 54 North Country Road, Suite 2 Miller Place, NY 11764 Re: Preparation of Long Environmental Assessment Forms for Proposed Hamlet Density Rezoning in the Town of Southold Dear Tom: The Town Board voted to retain your services as set forth in your March 8th Proposal for Services. Let my secretary, Martha, know when you will be here for the field inspection so that all the technical information can be assembled and ready when you arrive. You will find the enclosed copy of the Hamlet Density Report useful in providing some of the background information and the planning context of the review. When the LEAFs ar~ completed, please send them to Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk, since all rezoning petitions and billing for same are handled by her office on behalf of the Town Board. The LEAFs are needed for Tuesday, March 22nd, when the Town Board will begin the lead agency coordination process. Since the Town Board's work session starts Tuesday morning, the~LEAFs should be in Mrs. Terry's office no later than Monday. Th~ public hearing probably will not be set until the environmental review is completed. I look forward to hearing from you shortly. Sincerely, Senior Planner cc: Judith T. TL£ry, Town Clerk March 6, 1994 Supervisor Thomas H. Wickham Town of Southold Town Hall Main Road Southold, N. Y. 11971 Dear Mr. Wickham: Re: Resort Residential as Alternative to Hamlet Density ZOning at West Greenoort For what my opinion may be worth, changing the zoning of the Geier parcel, or any of the HD parcels on the perimeter of the Village of Greenport, to an RR district would be a calamitous mistake. If the Town Board's intention is really to reduce the intensity of use in the area , with its concomitant increase in the demand for utilities and services, the result of such a change could very well have the opposite effect. Among the glaring weaknesses of the Southold Code is the number and diversity of Special Exception uses and the discretionary powers delegated to the Board of Appeals. The.curr~t ZB~ represents ~be last v~tige o~, tb~ old .... change of zone, would.permit the ZBA to continue exerting the power to thwart or subvert the intent of the Town Boar~. Both HD and RR zoning districts permit residential use as a matter of right. The density for one family use in both districts is similar. The HD districts also permit two - family dwellings on plots twice the area of those required for one famiiy use. Analysis of the Special Exceptions provided for in the respective districtsreveals their degree of diversity While these exceptions in HD districts provide for multiple dwelings, town houses, row or attached houses, the density for each such unit is the same as for one family use- Both districts permit, as exceptions, bed and breakfast facilities, wineries and accessory apartments. The other Special Exceptions for RR districts however, are largely for commercial uses. Although two family uses could be allowed a~l-t~ at an equivalent density to that of HD districts, historically, these RR districts have been developed for the more intensive commercial uses such as motels and tourist camps. RR exceptions also include free - standing restaurants, marinas, yacht clubs, conference centers, clubs, golf courses, etc. The required plot size, per unit, for motels, hotels and conference centers is 4000 sq. ft. If, for example, the Geier property is actually ten and one half acres, the yield would be appro×lmately 114 motel units. Tourist camp use would provide a similar yieId. Considering the nature of the uses of comparably zoned property in the area, and the demonstrated propensities of the ZBA, it is hardly iikely that rezoning any of these HD parcels would effectuate the Town Board's objectives. Further, this type of zoning, and its likely commercial use, would undoubtedly incur the disapproval of the GreenDort viliage government. In closing, based upon my inquiries, I would suggest you investigate the actual circumstances surrounding the purportted approximately $150,000 advance to the Geir family as well asa~ the nature of the previous use. You may also be interested to know that Counciiman Lizewski was overheard extolling the benefits of RR zoning to the Geiers. Sincerely, P. S. Although the thrust of t~IsMIe~is an attempt to point out the inadviseability of changing the zoning of any of the HD parcels to RR use, it is in no way intended to serve as an endorsement of their present HD zoning. The Master Plan's concentration of these HD parcels on the perimeter of the Village of Greenport represents a flagrant violation of the Master Plan's purported adherence to the hamlet concept of zoning. It is based on the spurious contention ~ontontion that adequate potable water and sewage disposal capacity are available. The foreseeable burden on area residents emanating from ~reased demand for services , as well as the inevitable increase in traffic, would prove both inequitous and unconscionable. EXECUTIVE SU~4ARY Review of Hamlet Density Zoning In Southold Town Report to the Town Board February 1994 This study was authorized by the TOwn Board in January of 1994. Its purpose was to assess whether undeveloped properties in Town that are zoned Hamlet Density (HD) are appropriately zoned. This study was undertaken as part of the Town Board's ongoing commitment to implement the Town's Comprehensive or Master Plan. Part of this process includes evaluating whether the current pattern or location of HD-zoned properties is furthering the Goals and Policy Objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. All vacant HD-zoned properties in the Town are reviewed in the report. They are listed below in the same manner that they are identified and reviewed in the report: SCTM# Hamlet Location Acreaqe 040-3-1 Greenport, unin. 17.1 #2 040-4-1 Greenport, unin. 10.55 %3 046-1-2.1 Greenport, unin. 3.5 #4 035-1-25 Greenport, unin. 132.08 #5 045-2-10.3 Greenport, unin. 20.07 #6 102-1-33.3 Cutchogue 46.16 #7 045-2-1 Greenport, unin. 1.2 #8 035-1-24 Greenport, unin. 62.3 The report provides a planning policy framework within which to evaluate the available data about each parcel. The recommendations in this report indicate whether the current HD zone needs to be changed or left untouched; based on whether the zoning is in conformance with public planning policy, but without recommending specific zone changes. REVIEW OF HAMLET DENSITY ZONING IN SOUTHOLD TOWN Report to the Town Board February 1994 REVIEW OF HAMLET DENSITY ZONING IN SOUTHOLD TOWN Report to the Town Board February 1994 INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this review is to study the current status of each vacant property that presently is zoned for Hamlet Density. The study includes an assessment whether that designation is in keeping with the intent of the Comprehensive or Master Plan for the Hamlet Density (HD) zoning district. Initially, this report will describe the reasons for the review. It then provides a detailed analysis of the pertinent policies of the Cor~prehensive or Master Plan affecting the Hamlet Density zoning and the history of the zoning that preceded it. Ne×t, the report includes an analysis of the properties in a uniform manner. Each property is described as to its current physical location, including zoning. Each property is reviewed in terms of any current approvals and development. Each is analyzed as to its conformity with the Comprehensive or Master Plan and other public policies. Lastly, a recormnendation is made as to the appropriateness of the zoning. NEED FOR THE REVIEW: The need for this review, evidenced itself in different ways. First, with one exception, the parcels to be reviewed have been zoned HD for long periods of time ranging from 5 to 36 years. Second, these properties are either undeveloped or under-developed. Third, seven of the eight parcels are located adjacent to or within close proximity to,the Incorporated Village of Greenport. The fact that these properties re~ined undeveloped over such long periods of time raised several questions: which ranged from why the properties were rezoned in the first place to why the properties remained undeveloped. The clustering of these properties adjacent to and around the Village of Greenport also raised questions as to the consistency of the Town's actions in context with its own Comprehensive or Master Plan. With one exception, the HD zoning designation was assigned to each parcel in response to a petition by the property's owner. The rezonings occurred periodically, starting in 1958. The potential availability of public water and, in some cases, sewer, services from the Village of Greenport evidently was a factor considered by previous Town Boards in granting these parcels the HD zone. AIl but one of the undeveloped HD parcels either are adjacent or within close proximity to Greenport Village. The resulting pattern has had a significant negative impact on the Village of Greenport. The Mayor of the Village had a general discussion with the Town 8oard on January 4, 1994, in which he indicated that the cumulative impact of the added density would not only strain the present infrastructure capability of the Village's public water and sewer systems, it would increase Greenport's already disproportionate share of the Town's affordable housing units; a situation that was documented in Suffolk County's Equitable Housinq Study of 1991. The Town has not undertaken a specific study of the appropriateness of HD rezonings since the Master Plan Update was conducted during the early 1980s. This review - will look at the appropriateness of the HD zoning designation for those parcels that are zoned HD and that are undeveloped. This is in keeping with the Town Board's commitment to implement the Town's Comprehensive or Master Plan. Charged in 1992 with suggesting ways to implement 'this vision, the Town's Stewardship Task Force recommended to the Town Board, in Septealbsr of 1993, that it "Revise the Zoning Code and Map to better comply with goals of the Master Plan". In conjunction with this reco~endation, the Task Force also suggested to the Town Board that it "Review Zoning Map and revise to. eliminate zoned districts which are incompatible with their present use and physical 2 context." This review is in response to those recommendations. AUTHORIZATION FOR REVIEW: The Town Board Resolution of January 4, 1994 states the reasons for this review, the Board's intent in authorizing it, and directs staff to carry out the study. METHODOLOGY USED IN ANALYSIS: CRITERIA FOR REVIEW: The me~odology used here reflects the purpose of this review which is to examine the eight vacant parcels currently zoned Hamlet Density and to determine whether they are eppropriately zoned in relationship to the goals and objectives of the Town's 1984 Update of its Comprehensive or Master Plan, the 1991 Report of the US/UK Countryside Stewardship Exchange and the ongoing work of the Town's Stewardship Task Force. Each of the eight properties were reviewed systematically using the following format: Site Data Notable Physical Features and Limitations Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning Status of Development: Approvals and Infrastructure Public Policy Recommendation The Site Data section will identify the parcel by its Tax Map Number, its location and its acreage. Information about the zoning and ownership history of this parcel will be presented here also. The section on Notable Phvsical Features and Limitations will review the relevant, available environmental data and its significance or potential impact on the parcel's development potential. The Surrounding Land Uses and Zoning section will describe the land uses and zoning of the surrounding properties, and will discuss 5he significance of those uses and designatioas for the subject parcel. The following section, Status of Development: Approvals and Infrastructure, will review the current status of any applications and approvals for the subject parcel. 3 The ~ublic Policy section will examine the appropriateness of the Hamlet Density designation relative to the vision set forth by the Town's Cormprehensive or Master Plan Update in 19B4, the 1991 US/UK Countryside Stewardship Exchange Report and the Stewardship Task Force's draft recommendations of 1993. The last section, Recommendation, will list a recommendation for either leaving the Hamlet Density designation or changing it. Public Policy in the Context of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Code: Because the Public Policy sections of each case study presume an undersnanding of the Town's Comprehensive or Master Plan and of the Town's ongoing efforts to implement its vision, as well as an historical knowledge of elements of the Zoning Code itself, the following section has been included here. Its purpose is to provide a detailed analysis of the public policies that were considered in this evaluation of the pattern of Hamlet Density zoning in Southold Town. The Comprehensive Plan Southold Town has been engagcd in an ongoing effort to implement the Goals and Policies of the 1984 Comprehensive or Master Plan Update as evidenced by the work of the Stewardship Task Force (STF). Appointed by the Town Board, the STF has been charged since its inception in 1992, with the "study and exploration of amelioratory reco~nendations of the Southold Town Zoning Map and Ordinances, in order to foster and implement the ideals and goals of the existing Master Plan, incorporating the reco,~nendations of the US/UK Stewardship Ea(change." The recommendations of the US/UK Stewardship Exchange reflect the collective thinking of a team of eight professional planners who met with government officials and a wide rangc of community representatives about planning issues during July of 1991. They found six areas of agreement with the Comprehensive or Master Plan. These included: 1) "Concentration of new residential and commercial development in and around existing hamlets and villages,..." along with the 2) "Preservation of. the historic character of the villages and hamlets, carefully controlling design 4 of new development to maintain compatibility." and 3) "!4alntenance and improvement of the envirornment through prevision of an appropriate infrastructure to protect water quality and to manage n~tural resources properly, and to guide development to appropriate locations." (A Report by the 1991US/UK Countryside Stewardship ExchanGe Team To The People of the Town of Southold, North Fork. Long Island. Noven%ber 1991. p.8.) The aforementioned issues had been derived from the Goals and Policies of Southold Town's 1984 Master Plan Update. That document set forth a number of Goals and subsequent Policies which have a bearing on this study, and which are stated in Appendix A of this study. In September of 1993, the Stewardship Task Force published an interim report in which it made a series of draft recon~nendations to implement the Goals and Policies set forth by the 1984 Master Plan Update. The preface to its recommendations on the Character of Hamlets and Rural Setting states: The hamlets are the historic focus for residential and business activity in Southold Town. We consider this to be a desirable pattern of development, which should be encouraged by allowing appropriate new residentia~ and commercial development in the existing centers. In order to facilitate this growth, careful planning should undertaken by the Town, so that a rural, pedestrian oriensed village quality, consistent with our history and traditional pattern of development, is fostered. The long history of Southold has given rise to a tremendous richness and diversity of buildings and working landscapes. Vigorous steps should be taken to assure the preservation of these structures and landscapes, without infringing on the rights of their individual owners. All residents benefit from the preservation of our historic and scenic heritage, not only for our "quality of life", but for the economic potential it offers the Town. Purpose of the Hamlet Density Zoning District: this policy of concentrating residential development throughout the Town's hamlets is reiterated in the Town's 5 Zoning Code, which states that the purpose of the HD Zoning Dissrict is: "to permit a mix of housing types and level of residential density appropriate to the areas in and around the major hamlet centers, particularly Mattituck, Cutchogue, Southold, Orient and the Village of Greenport." The Zoning Code specifies that the HD district may be designated by the Town Board upon its own motion, as well as by petition of the property owner on parcels located within one-half mile of a Hamlet Business district of the hamlets of Mattituck, Cutchogue and Southold; and within one-quarter mile of the Hamlet Business district of Orient and within one-half mile of the boundary of Greenport village. In the Master Plan Suam~ary of 1985, three criteria were set forth for the establishment of a Hamlet Density district: location relative to the hamlet business area, the availability of utilities and the provision of moderate cosn housing. The report suggested Greenport be considered as a hamlet. It also suggested that the maximum HD development be permitted "only where necessary utilities are in place or can be assured and where there is the provision of moderate cost housing." (p.9). Finally, it states the "The Hamlet Density category is also designed to support the establishment of innovative techniques for getting the optJ~mim use out of existing housing." (~nphasis supplied.) Uses Allowed in the Hamlet Density Zoning District: The Zoning Code allows within the HD district only two uses by right: 1. one-family detached dwellings, and 2. two-family dwellings. A Special Exception from the Zoning Board of Appeals is required for other uses such as: 1. multiple dwellings, townhouses, row or attached houses; 2. accessory apartments in single-family residences, (as regulated elsewhere in the Zoning Code); 3. bed and breakfast establishments, (as regulated elsewhere in the Zoning Code); 4. wineries, (as regulated elsewhere in the Zoning Code). 6 The Zoning Code provides guidelines or parameters within which the Zoning Board of Appeals may grant the Special Exceptions only for accessory apartments and for bed and breakfast establishments. No guidance is provided to the Zoning Board for the institution of multiple dwe%lings, townhouses or row-houses, and wineries. The Zoning Code: Historical Background: Throughout this report, it is important to remember that while the "A" Residential-Agricultural zoning district always permitted residential and agricultural land uses, the required minimum acreage for a lot in this zone changed through the years. The following list shows how the minimum acreage changed (by the year the amendment was made to the Zoning Code). Year Minimum Acreaqe in "A" or "R" zones 1957 12,500 square feet 1971 40,000 square feet 1983 80,000 square feet 1989 80,000 square feet in A-C and R-80 zones (40,000 square feet for areas zoned R-40 only. Other residential zones provide for three, five and ten acre minimum acreages.) As will be seen, the in-depth analysis of each property will show that each parcel originally had been zoned for residential use. Some of the parcels have had more than one zoning designation in their history, mostly because the Town changed its zoning code and map several times since the first Code and Map were adopted in 1957. A brief synopsis of the changes that have been made to specific zoning districts is provided in Appendix B. The Impact of Public Water and Sewer Services on Density in HD: The minimum required lot area within the HD district is 20,000 square feet per one-family detached dwelling. Suffolk County's Health Regulations require the provision of public water where lots are smaller than 40,000 square feet in area. However, where both Con~nunity (Public) water and Sewer services are available, and a Special Exception is granted, the density may be increased to one unit for every 10,000 square feet. Thus, the development potential of a parcel zoned HD is inextricably tied to the availability of public water: and for the higher densities, the availability of sewer. In other words, for the HD "~ned property to be developed in accordance with the intent o~ the Code, it £equires access to public water and, sometimes, sewers. Nu~nber and Location of Properties Zoned Hamlet Density: There are thirteen properties in mainland Southold Town that are zoned Hamlet Density (HD), only five of which are developed. Three are located in Greenport: one is the Driftwood Cove Apartment Complex, another is the Seven-Eleven store, and the third is a large historic house adjacent to Brecknock Hall. The fourth is the Founders Village Condor~inium complex ia Southold. The fifth is a large house in Orient on the north side of SR 25, about 87 feet west of Young's Avenue. On Fishers Island, there are fifteen developed properties that are zoned HD. All these parcels, save one, are located within the boundaries of the abandoned Army base; and appear to have been developed either as base offices or officer's quarters. Of the eight vacant HD-zoned parcels, seven are located around Greenport Village, which for a long time was the only source of both public water and sewer services within the Town. There appears now to be some limitation on the Village of Greenport's ability to be the focus of all HD zoning given the current demand on its already strained water and sewer facilities. Cutchogue has the only other vacant HD-zoned property. The remaining hamlets in Southold Town have no vacant HD-zoned properties. 8 ANALYSIS OF HAMLET DENSIT~f PROPERTIES: PARCEL BY PARCEL Only those properties zoned Hamlet Density that were vacant as of January 1994, were selected for review. The individu- al parcels are listed below in the order they were rezoned starting with the first, in 1958. This is also the order in which they will be reviewed. Throughout the remainder of this report, the parcels will be referred to by the identi- fying Parcel and Tax Map numbers (SCTM#) noted here. SCTM~ Hamlet Location Acreage ~1 040-3-1 Greenport, unin. 17.1 #2 040-4-1 Greenport, unin. 10.55 #3 046-1-2.1 Greenport, unin. 3.5 #4 035-1-25 Greenport, unin. 132.08 ~5 045-2-10.3 Greenport, unin. 20.07 ~6 102-1-33.3 Cutchogue 46.16 ~7 045-2-1 Greenport, unin. 1.2 #8 035-1-24 Greenport, unin. 62.3 The format used in the analysis of each parcel is: PARCEL # and TAD( MAP NUMBER SITE DATA: Location: Acreage: Zoning History:* Ownership History:** NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS: SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING: STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE: PUBLIC POLICY: RECOMMENDATION: One or more maps showing the sub3ect parcel may accompany the written text: they will be found at the end of the analysis of that parcel. * Zoning History was culled from the Town Clerk's Change of Zone files. ** Ownership History was traced from Property Cards in the office of the Town Tax Assessor. PARCEL ~1 - SCTM ~ 40-3-1 BITE DATA: Location: South Side County Route 48, more ~han 1000' east of Chapel Lane, Greenport Acreage: 17.1 acres Zoning History : Year Rezoned: 6.13.58. The original petition was to change the zone from "A" Residental and Agricultural to "B" Business. Between January and May of 1958, the applicant changed his request to "M" Multiple Residence, which was subsequently granted. The file does not indicate why the property owner asked for the change of zone, nor why the Town Board granted the request. Ownership History / Year Acquired / Miscellany *Kate Realty Co 3-10-82 Transfer sub- ject to $184,000 mort- gage Kontakosta 3-10-82 Sanzone (Smith Est) ? Brereton ?-?-79 1/4 interest (which was sold to Sanzone in 1982 for $35,000.) H. Smith & Ano ?-?-54 Sledjecki ?-?-49 or earlier** Kontokosta is a principal in KACE Realty Property cards only note ownership as of 1949 when the records were started. NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS: There is little environmental information in the site plan file. A review of the aerial photograph reveals this to be a heavily wooded parcel which appears to drain in a southerly direction. The topography drops off to the south from 35 feet above sea-level near County Route 48, to about 10 feet at its southernmost point. The property may have freshwater wooded wet- lands on or within close proximity. SURROUNDING LA~D USES AND ZONING: The property is currently bounded on the north Dy CR 48; 'the west and south borders by land owned and zoned by the Village of Greenport as PD or Parkland, and the east border by land zoned R-80. North of CR ~8, lies an R-80 district, which contains residential waterfront homes. ~ Within 500 feet of the perimeter of this parcel (but not contiguous) there are properties zoned RR and HD. The RR properties to the northwest, diagonally across CR 48, contain m~tel and resort condominium uses, along with one residential use and an unfinished mo- tel. San Simeon Nursing Home, which is zoned HD, is about 800 feet to the west. The remainder of the HD property to the west is mostly undeveloped, and is one of the parcels under review (Parcel #7). The KOA Kampground lies due east at a distance of about 500 feet. STATUS OF DEVeLoPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE: On July 11, 1983, the Planning Board granted site plan approval to construct 108 dwelling units in 27 build- ings. The property owner has yet to obtain governmen- tal approvals for water, sewer and curb cuts. No building permits are known to have been issued. PUBLIC POLICY: Although. the subject parcel is adjacent to land owned by the Incorporated Village of Greenport, it lies 4,500 feet or more ( one mile ec~als 5,280 feet) from the developed portions of the Village, and is even further from the business center. It is surrounded by vacant woodland, which is zoned PD or Perk District. The Village changed the zone of the surrounding woodland from R-1 (Residential) to PD in 1987, in response to directives from the State of New York's Department of Environmental Conservation. The PD district is defined as follows: "An area reserved for recreational and firematic use by the citizens of the Village of Greenport as regulated by the Park Local Law, and in which Village utilities and other public uses may be maintained and expanded." The only uses permitted within this district are: 1) Nature trails 2) Sports playing fields 2 3) Firematic events 4) Utility facilities including necessary appurtances but not limited to: a) water towers b) sewage treatment plants c) electrical plants · 5) Municipally operated camp sites 6) Municipally operated trailer park 7) Watershed maintenance Much of the PD zoned land is environmentally sensitive, freshwater wooded wetland. Given the restrictive nature of the Parkland District, it seems inconsistent for the Town to concentrate its highest density residential use on the subject parcel. Further, this parcel is not within walking distance of the Village hamlet, and the necessary utilities do not seem to be assured at this time. For these reasons, intense development of the site does not seem to meet with the Goals and Policy Objectives of the Comprehen- sive or Master Plan. RECOMMENDATION: The site could be developed in a manner not requiring multiple density uses. Rezoning to a lower density is recommended. 3 PARCEL ~2 - SCTM ~ 40-4-1 SITE DATA: Location: South side of County Route 48, approxi- mately 400 feet west of Moore's Lane, Greenport Acreage: 10.55 acres Zoning History: Year Rezoned: 11.7.68 The petitioner applied for the zone change be- cause, in his own words, "The premises currently enjoy a non-conforming use status, as a rooming and boarding house; deponent wishes to enlarge that use." Ownership History / Year Acquired / Miscellany Geier Estate or Heirs 1993 Marcucci ? Contract Vendee J. Geier & Ano 1966 $37,000 Langone 19,19 or earlier NOTABLE PR~fSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS: In the absence of a definitive confirmation by the Town Trustees and the State Department of Environmen- tal Conservation, it is estimated that between one- quarter to one-third of the southern or lower portion of this parcel contain freshwater wetlands. These wetlands probably are part of the system of wetlands in the village parkland to the south. There is no soil boring on file for this property. The wetlands are likely to pose severe constraints on the potential yield of this property due to the mini- mum siting distances that structures and septic sys- tems must maintain from wetlands: as required by vari- ous Town, County and State regulations. Wet soils also pose problems for siting septic systems unless sewer service can be obtained. The environmental impacts of sewering on this wetland ecosystem are not known at this time. SURROUNDING L~ND USES AND DENSITY: The property is bounded on the north by County Route 48. Its east, south and west borders are bounded by the Village's parklands. North and northeast of CR 48 lies undeveloped land zoned R-40, and a partially completed subdivision development, also zoned R-40. Just beyond the Village parkland, fifty fee~ to the west of this parcel, the land is zoned STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTUP~E There is a large house and two or three other build ings or barns on the property. The structures are visibly in need of repair. There are no site plan approvals for any proposed construction. And, there is no site plan application on file. PUBLIC POLIC£: The limited environmental information available on this site suggests that this property is not suitable for the Hamlet Density intensity of use. The environ- mental sensitivity of this parcel is highlighted by the Park District zoning of the surrounding property by the Village of Greenport. The constraints are such that the availability of public water (and probably sewer) are absolute prerequisites for development at the HD density to occur. The presence of extensive wetlands is likely to compromise the potential yield. Further, it is inconsistent to place the highest resi- dential density in the midst of Park District zoning. The Town's Master Plan and the subsequent recommendations for its implementation argue for chan- neling new development towards the existing hamlets. This policy requires that new development be directed first to vacant land within the hamlets, then to va- cant land in close proximity thereto. It also re- quires where rehabilitation or renovation of the exist- lng building stock can both preserve the character of the hamlet and provide alternative housing choices, that this be pursued first, before creating new resi- dential centers isolated from the hamlet. This site fails to meet the criteria for proximity and accessibility'to a hamlet. It is not within walk- ing distance of the Village center. Further, the necessary utilities do not seem to be assured at this time. For these reasons, this parcel's zoning does not seem to meet with the Goals and Policy Objectives of the Master Plan. 5 RECOMMENDATION: This parcel could be developed in a manner not requiring multiple density uses. Rezoning to a lower density is recommended. 6 -~ ..... 'R-80 LIO R-40 ~qa-/- ~'l , / ... .... -:,',~ \ .... /: ... U._J ,~ .. "' 'J:._i"'"":"" - ...... - ........ . dl, ,/'~ ...., - ,.- I ,~¢~'~ , :.. · ~ ..... ~ - \\ . ~ ,,.. .-- ."'- ;- '.. ' .'.i'-'. ~ · " ". '. -' ,~, ' ~ ' '.'. · , X,:.... ·~.. ,.'.. '~ 4. ~ ...." i,"i.,, ,,, "~ //. -.: / '~. . __ ' .: ~ ,.~ '.' ." ," ~' .- 4'~' : ~ ' ' , '' "~ ',.' · ' '~' ~ 4 ' , ,.:,~..x.'~e~ ~- .~... ..,....... , .','.\ -.', ~ "' "'?~'. ~,-~ ~''1' '~ .' .:" ~.'"'~ .' ' - ".' ~ .' ' , .. . .u:c ~.~.~'.'~,,._.~ . ... ...... ,. · ~, . , ,k _,, , . · .... ~ . .'. .. ,. , .' ... ::-, .... . . --~\ ~ ,. : . .'..'-. . . I, -', .'" .' ' · '-,'.:, .. iL: ...... '-/ ' ' ": .... ,~,".;,:, ~ ....-,,.-, o...~....,...-.~ ....... b, · .1'/...~. · , . ':~'~,. =..h; ..'iI~ ,- · , · ' : . .... · .,. .,. · ,. - // .. · .. . -~ .,:. _._....-;,~, .,. .,... ~\,, .~\· · ' . ' .... ,. : \ .': :.~,',.?". , . i .. ' ~ .', . ... .....,,N, ., .\,.... _ '~ / \. L',.',,. .. ! .. .~\ . ..~, ~' -. '-~'n ": ' '\.. · · ''.' .:, . :.~,:. / ~ ,~ J . ~ -~ ~ \~ .., .'~.\ .~.. ....-. .... ~ ,...,, . ,. . -.,\ . ~ . ~,'. x,.x,'~\ : , , ._. .. . ~.~ ..., . ~----~.'~ ~.-.,. / ..-~ \ .. C',q.. ' ' ' '. ;' -/"',,- . ' ':~:" ~ e~/ ' ~ ~ ' .:' " 'x \' .... · ., . I. /' .. . ,,..,:,~%,~.,., /. ~ · ' .. \ x,. , · . /,..1....,,..,....:, ,~..~. ...'..:.. -- :. ~.. ....'...\.. ':-':', . r' '. " , '.'. :."/TI~=N. · '...".'-. . . -. ~, - ,..., ..,?:.. ,,, -: ..~ : · .'?_! n~ , PARCEL #3 - SCTM # 046-1-2.1 SITE DATA: Location: South side of State Route 25, about 577 feet east of 9th Street, Greenport Acreage: 3.5 acres Zoning History: Year ~ezoned: 10.27.70 The original petition to rezone this property from "A" Residential and Agricultural to "M-i" General Multiple Residence was changed to "B-2" Business at the recommendation of the Planning Board. At this time, there also was a pending petition on the adjacent property to the east, now the site of Driftwood Cove Apartments, for a change to the "B-2" Business zoning district, too. (The "B-2" district allowed for a more intensive multiple residence use than did the "M-l" zone.) The two properties were rezoned "B-2" in 1970, within two months of each other. In 1989, both parcels were rezoned Hamlet Density by the Town. Ownership History / Year Acquired / Miscellany Aliano 1974 $73,500 Casola 1972 $55,000 A- Cassidy 1949 or earlier NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS: There is little environmental information available for this parcel. It is covered with old-field vegeta- tion. The property does not appear to have any environ-- mental constraints. This is not a large site. Develop- ment of this site to its Hamlet Density potential will require the extension of both public water and sewer. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING: The property is bounded on the north by State Route 25 and a 7-11 retail store, which is also zoned To the east is the Driftwood Cove Apartment complex. To the south, the tracks and right-of-way of the Long Island Railroad. To the west is a lumber yard. The north side of SR 25 is zoned B Business and is devel- oped. STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE: The property was larger at the time it was rezoned. Slightly more than half an acre of it was developed into the 7-11 store in 1985. There are no other site plan approvals on this parcel. Nor are there any active applications for an HD use. PUBLIC POLICY: This site meets the criteria for the location of the Hamlet Density zone. It is within walking distance of the Village business center, schools, churches and other services. It lies adjacent to affordable hous- ing, and could be developed in a similiar manner. However, the small size of this parcel, which the current owner exacerbated by splitting off an addition- al .55 acres In 1977, is an obstacle. Development of this property will require the provision of both pub- lic water and sewer, the availability of which is not assured at this time. RECOMMENDATION: Since it meets all applicable criteria, except the availability of public water and sewer, this parcel could be left as zoned. However, the fact that Greenport Village and unincorporated west Greenport bear a disproportionate share of the affordable hous- ing within the Town must be factored in and dealt with. If the proportionate share of affordable housing is felt to be of primary importance, this parcel could be rezoned to LIO, in keeping with the LIO zoning to the west which borders this property. HDI AHD HD -= .... J 'R-8o L10 &- PARCEL ~4 - SCTM ~ 035-1-25 SITE DATA: Location: North side of State Route 25, approximate- ly 1,139 feet northeast of Sound Road, Greenport Acreage: 132.08 acres Zoning History~ Year Rezoned: 1971: 27.55 acres 1983: 74.53 acres The Change of Zone Petition files do not show why the rezoning was requested. The 1971 rezoning also created 12.43 acres of Business Zoning around an historic residence, known as Brecknock Hall. In 1983, the amount of land in the "M" Light zone was increased by 74.53 acres for a total of 132 acres. A filed Covenant and Restriction holds the total nu~nber of dwelling units to 350, and sets aside a reserved scenic area of 37.92 acres. This parcel was rezoned HD in 1989, when the Town eliminated the "M" Light Multiple Residence zon- ing classification from its Zoning Code and Map. Ownership History / Year Acquired / Miscellany Wolowitz, A. 1993 LBV Properties 1992 $4,000,000 (foreclosure; Greenport Dev. Co. 1984 $3,850,000 Brecknock Assoc. 1980 $ 354,000 no consideration G. Schad 1969 $ 800,000 Pollert & Wife 1949 or earlier NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS: The property is about 1,500 feet from the Village boundary. It contains about 2,700 feet of prime water- front on Long Island Sound complete with bluffs and beaches. This property is listed by the State as being part of the Eastern Bluffs Complex which stretch- es from Orient Point west to Miller Place. The some- what rolling terrain contains mature old field vegeta- tion, woods, ponds and associated wetlands. In 1988 a 9 large excavation was started where one of the ponds/stormwater drainage facilities was to be locat- ed. The sand has been removed from the premises, but the pond was never completed. The excavated area remains ~.oen to the weather without benefit of erosion controls. 7 The likely increase in traffic from the development of a parcel of this size are likely to require modifica- tions to State Route 25 and possibly the intersection of SR 25 and Sound Drive. SURROUNDING L~ USES ~JgO ZONING: To the north lies Long Island Sound. To the east lies the Island End golf course, which is zoned R-80. To the south are State Route 25 and two historic residenc- es, one of which is Brecknock Hall. Brecknock Hall is located within the LB district. The other historic residence is located within the HD district. To the west lies vacant land that was just rezoned from R-80 to HD and R-40. South of SR 25 opposite this parcel there is a mix of zoning: a vacant R-80-zoned parcel, a vacant Residential Office-zoned parcel and an estab- lished residential con~nunity zoned R-40. STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE: In 1987, a site plan for 350 condominium units was approved by the Planning Board. Since then, three building permits have been issued: one to construct the pumphouse for the public supply well; one to build a foundation for the recreation center, and one to build a foundation for one of the residential build- ings. Certificates of Occupancy were issued for the p~mphouse and the residential foundation in 1991. The permit for the recreation center was voided in Decem- ber of 1990 without the foundation being bu%lt. To our knowledge, there has been no building activity since that time. There is a unresolved dispute over the cost of the water and sewer contracts. Curb cut approval and other permits from the NYS Department of Transporta- tion are not on file, and may not have been obtained. Landscaping and excavation bonds are still on file with the Town. PUBLIC POLICY: The zoning and the site plan on this parcel contra- dicts the Goals and Policy Objectives of the Compr~hen- 10 Jive Plan in several ways. First, although the west- ern edge of the property is within 1500 feet of the Village boundary, it is separated by a heavily-trav- elled State Road and it is not located within easy walking distance to the hamlet's business cgnter, nearly a mile to the south. Second, the placement of high density residential zoning on prime and sensitive waterfront property contradicts our policies of encouraging the preserva- tion of environmentally sensitive areas, and of promot- ing development patterns that are responsive to or protective of sensitive coastal features and scenic vistas, as well being commensurate with available water supplies. Third, the size of this HD-zoned parcel relative to the Village hamlet threatens to draw from the ham- let rather than work to preserve and strengthen the hamlet cenLer. Although the nearby Limited Business zones are, strictly speaking, not within the purview of this review, its sheer size (more than 16 acres in total) require that its combined impact with the HD parcel on the Village be considered. The net effect of 133.+ acres of HD-zoned land and 16+ acres of LB-zoned land adjacent to one another on the north side of SR 25 creates enormous potential for the development of a satellite hamlet with its own busi- ness district just 1200 feet north of the Village boundary, and less than a mile from its business cen- ters. While the Comprehensive Plan calls for the creation of a new hamlet, creating one adjacent to an existing one that is in need of economic revitaliza- tion and has strained water and sewer facilities is not consistent with the other goals of preserving and strengthening existing hamlets. The Town would not profit from such a situation, and neither would the Village. The economic stability of Greenport Village is important to the Town because of Greenport's position as a transportation hub, as a major deep-water port, as a tourist designation, and as provider of public water to significant portions of the Town. The two governmental entities cannot afford to work at cross purposes with the other. Finally, the draft Long Island Coastal Zone Management plan recommends that this entire site be preserved in conjunction with its recommendation that undeveloped, relatIvely undisturbed forested properties within the Eastern Bluffs Complex by acquired to protect wildlife habitat. The Eastern Bluffs Complex encompasses the soundfront from Orient west to Miller Place. 11 RECOmmeNDATION: Rezone the property to a lower density residential use that better protects coastal resources, and that pro- vides for a level of residential development that is more compatible with the existing infrastructure and economic development of the hamlet of the Village. 12 R--80 PARCEL 05 - SCTM ~ 45-2-10.3 SITE DATA: Location: East side of Chapel Lane, south of County RouEe 48 and north of State Route 25, Greenport Ac£eage: Originally 26.57 acres: Now 20.07 acres. Zoninq History: ~ear Rezoned: 2.25.75. This property was rezoned by the Town at the request of St. Peter's Lutheran Church for the express purpose of constructing "multiple resi- dences for a senior citizen retirement community." Ownership History / Year Acquired / Miscellany Richard Mohring 1993 NFB & Trust 1993 ? foreclosure St. Pe£er's Church 1974 $175,000 Chapel Lane Assocs. 1971 $ 34,500 mrtge. DeShrage 1968 King-Greenport Assocs. 1965 Judysteve Corp. 1965 King 1949 or earlier NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES ~ LIMITATIONS: A full scale environmental review was never conducted on this parcel so the information available is limit- ed. The site is presently wooded, with some old field around the disturbed portion of the site where the. only four buildings of the proposed elderly housing complex were constructed. There are serious drainage problems that will add to the cost of development on this site -~_ due to the depth of the clay substrata. The depth of the clay also means that this site cannot be developed without public water and sewer. SURROUNDING LAND USES AlqD ZONING: The property is currently bounded on its north the San Simeon Nursing Home. To the east lies another parcel being studied in this review, (Parcel ~ 7), and the Village Parklands; to the south, a garage building, St. Peter's Lutheran Church and the former Skyway Drive-Is Movie Theatre. Chapel Lane borders the entire western edge of the. property. 13 The woodland to the east of this property is in the Village's Park District. Parcel ~1 (in this study) lies approximately 1000 feet to the east of this prop- erty. The property's south border is zoned Limited Business. A church, a garage and a former drive-in theatre lie within this LB district. With the exception of strip of LB zoning north of SR 25, all the land west of Chapel Lane clear to Albertson Lane is zoned R-80. A LILCO Substation lies within the LB district to the west of Chapel Lane, as does the Drossos Motel complex about a thousand feet or more from the intersection of Chapel Lane and SR 25. Much of the remainder of. the land west of Chapel Lane is vacant, probably due to the fact that towards Albertson Lane, much of the area is covered with fresh- water wetland. STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE: In 1984, a site plan for the southwestern portion of this parcel was approved. Four buildings containing eight dwelling units were constructed· Public water and sewer service was connected and Certificates of Occupancy were issued in 1986. However, the units were never occupied. In 1990, the Planning Board gave approval to a condo minium unit designation map showing 36 dwelling units on 7.74 acres· This map included the eight dwelling units that were constructed in 1986. There is a site plan application pending for this condominium plan. No plans have been filed for the remainder of the property which includes 12.6 acres of HD zoning and about 10 acres of LB zoning (the drive-in and the garage·) PUBLIC POLICY: The limited environmental information available sug- gests that this property is not a suitable site for the Hamlet Density intensity of use. The constraints on the site are such that the availability of public water and sewer are absolute prerequisites for develop- ment. Furthermore, due to the depth of the clay sub- strata, the potential yield on this site is likely to be compromised because of the amount of land that will need to be set aside to handle stormwater drainage. The stormwater drainage is a matter of concern because 14 this property drains to the wetlands and the Bay to the south. The Town's Master Plan and the subsequent recommenda- tions for its implementation argue for channeling development towards the existing hamlets. This policy requires that new development be directed first to vacant land within the hamlets, then to vacant land in close proximity thereto. It also requires where reha- bilitation or renovation of the existing building stock can beth preserve the character of the hamlet and provide alternative housing choices, that this be pursued firs5 before creating new residential centers isolated from the hamlets. The site fails to meet the criteria for proximity and accessibility to a hamlet, especially for afford- able rental housing. It is not within walking dis- tance of the Village hamlet, and the necesary utili- ties do not seem to be assured at this time. For these reasons, the site does not seem to meet with the Goals and Policy Objectives of the Master Plan. RECOMMENDATION: The property should be zonmd to a density level more compatible with its environmental constraints, and more consistent with the Comprehensive or Master Plan recommendations for a parcel remote from a hamlet center. 1 5 PARCEL ~6 - SCTM ~ 102-1-33.2 SITE DATA: Location: Nort~hernmost end of Griffing Laner a~u[ 1,G76 feet north of State Route 25, Cutchoque Acr~e: ~6.16 acres In 19~2, th~ pro~ owme~ pe~ti~ for a change f~ 'a~ ~si~nt~l ~ Agricultural to ~" Light Multiple R~5i~ for ~ pu~ose of construc~ng a r~iden~al ~,unity for senior citizens adjacent to the ~mng business dis- irict of Cutcho~. Ownership History / Year Ac~ired / Miscellany Nocro Ltd. 1986 Seacroft Ltd. 1986 Leisure Green 1983 Leisure to Leisure 1982 Leisure 1973 $ 69,000 (31.5 acres) Mill Matt Agency Iac. 1971 $101,500 Mandaro & ~o 1949 or earlier /~C~ABLE PHYSICAL FE~'L'uP~F_S A~D LIMITJ%TIONS: The Dr~ft ~o~emtml L~a~ ~atement for this project ~m~ ~e~it~ ~[r~emtal info~ation. The f~] YIS for this 9r~j~ ~s ~t been completed. fal~ f~r ~M Y~a ~It~ im old field vegeta- - far a vineyard, and a wooded parcel [bat is t~e site of a mew clustered residential subdivisiom, all of which is zoned Agrlcultural-Comservatioe (A-C). To the east, the parcel is bordered by another vineyard and other land in active agricultural production, all of which is zoned R-80. To the south, the parcel is 16 bordered by Griffing Street, School House Road, a building, vacant land, and the grounds of Sacred Heart Church. All of this land except the church is zoned Hamlet Business (HB). The church property %s zoned R-40. The properties that abut the western Dorder of this parcel are zoned R-40 also. STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTIIRE: A site plan application for a 160 unit condominium complex for senior citizens was made in 1984, A Draft Environmental Impact Statement was submitted in 1988. The applicant was asked to s~bmit a Final EIS in 1989. There has been no further action on this appli- cation since that time. PUBLIC POLICY: The current zoning of this parcel is in keeping with the goals and objectives of the Town's Comprehensive or Master Plan. The property is within walking dis- tance of nhe traditional core of Cutchogue hamlet. The property contains good agricultural soils, but is not environmentally sensitive. Due to its location just north of the hamlet's traditional center, this parcel, when developed, is likei¥ to strengthen the hamlet. This project has generated much opposition within the co.~nunity. And while its large size will have an impact on traffic, and the functioning and character of the Cutchogue hamlet, it nevertheless meets the criteria for location within the hamlet center and the provision of alternative housing choices. - RECOMMENDATION: This property is zoned appropriately at this time. 17 R--80 ',,,-C / A-C pARCEL ~7 - SCTM # 45-2-1 SITE DATA: Location: South side of County Route 48, 805 feet east of Chapel Lane, Greenport (Also approximately 1400 feet west of Parcel #1.) Acreage: 1.2 acres Zoning History: Year Rezoned: 1-10-89 This parcel was rezoned by the Town when the 1989 Zoning Map was adopted. Prior to this time, this lot was zoned "A" Residential-Agricultural. search to date has not unearthed an ex~planatioa for this change: so we don't know if this rezon- ing was intentional or a drafting mistake. Ownership History / Year Acquired Miscellany John Siolas & wife 1985 $38,500 Delandas 1974 $15,000 Pauli 1964 two parcels $ 3,000 King 1949 or earlier NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS: There is little environmental information available on this property. The aerial photograph of this property shows it to be wooded. It slopes towards the south as does the San Simeon nursing home site 50 feet to its west. There is a 50 foot buffer between this parcel and San Simeon Nursing Home, which is an intensely developed site. The small size of this property probably is its big gest physical limitation. It is likely to be ecnonomically inefficient to develop according to the HD potential. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING; This property is bounded on the north by CR 48. To the east and south lie the Village Parklands. To the west lies San Simeon Nursing Home, which is zoned HD also. 18 This property was originally bounded by Parcel ~5. In 1993, the owner of Parcel #5 filed for a lot-line change. The northern part of Parcel ~5 was given to the nursing home to provide for its future expansion. As a result, the area of the nursing home s~te in- creased from 3.58 acres to about 10 acres. The lot area of the subject parcel decreased from 26.57 acres to about 20 acres. STATUS OF DEVELOPMENT: APPROVALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE: There is no record of any attempt to develop this parcel in the Planning Board's files. PUBLIC POLICY: This parcel shares with Parcels ~1 and 5, the same drawbacks and lack of compliance with the stated goals and intent of the HD district and the Master Plan as it pertains to preserving the hamlets. Using the criteria set forth by the Master Plan Update and subsequent recommendations, the HD zoning makes no sense unless this parcel were to be merged with the San Simeon Nursing Home. However, it is under separate ownership at this time. The existence of the nursing home presents a dilemma. Southold is a retirement community as well as a resort community. The average age of the population in Southold is 44 years, and the trend looks as if it will continue upward. There is in an insufficient supply of nursing facilities in Town, and this alone is an argument in favor for the build-out of the origi- nal proposal. RECOMMENDATION: The parcel's small size and close proximity to the intensely developed nursing home site will work to its disadvantage as a strictly residential lot, unless the 50 foot buffer between the parcel and the nursing home is preserved. If this buffer is maintained, the fact that the lot is 420 feet deep and is bordered on its east and south sides by parkland will work to its advantage as a residential lot for one residence. 19 . LB '-' ' *' ' LlO .,/./ /' ~o / .- ~ / ~ [ " ; / ~ . '. ] . . ~b¥~ ,.. ' ~ ' PARCEL ~ 8 - SCTM ~ 035-1-24 SITE DATA: Location: North side of State Route 25, 564 feet east of Sound Drive, Greenport Acreage: 62 acres Zoning History: Year Rezoned: 12.07.93 This property originally was zoned R-80 which is equivalent to two-acre residential density. ~he lower 42 acres of thia parcel were ?-azoned H~et Density: and the northerly 20 acres on Long ~s- land Sound were rezoned R-40 or one-acre residen- tial density. One of the stated reasons for this change of zone was to provide affordable ho'~ging. Ownership History / Year Acquired / ~scell _ Jem Realty Co. 1979 $400,000 J. Rath 1977 Time Structures Inc. 1963 $115,000 split from P. Sinuta NOTABLE PHYSICAL FEATURES AND LIMITATIONS: T~is property is adjacent to Parcel 04 which was analyzed earlier. Detailed environmental information is available ftc=. the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements. The site contains prime farm soils, but has not been used for agriculture for many years. It is covered with transitional old field vegetation and young woods. The parcel's 1,441 feet of soundfront contain bluffs that range in height from 30 to 50 feet. The bluff area is considered to be stable, but subject to erosion from human activity as well as northeasters. Behind the bluffs, the property slopes to the south, dropping to !'~ feet above sea level at SR 25. There is ~bout 570 feet of road front- age. SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING: This parcel is bordered on its north by Long Island Sound; and on the east by more than 133 acres of most- ly undeveloped land which was studied earlier as p~r- cel #4. Most of Parcel ~4 is zoned HD, but the south- ~20 western corner of it is zoned Limited Business (LB) and it contains the historic residence known as Brec~nock Hall. To the south lies Porky's Restau- rant and State Route 25. The area around Pqrk¥'s Restaurant is zoned LB also. To the west, this parcel is bordered by residential homes fronting on Sound Drive, all of which are zoned R-40. STATUS OF DEVELOPMZ/qT: APPROVALS AND IR-FRASTRUCTURE: No applications for subdivision or site plan have been made. PUBLIC POLICY: WRen this parcei is viewed in conjunction with Parcel #4, studied earlier, and the LB zones (Porky's Res- taurant and Brecknock Hall), it becomes evident that the net effect of this zoning pattern is to create a very high density residential and business center just outside the Village boundaries. This would appear to be contrary to the several of the goals of the Master Plan. First, the parcel is separated from the village by a heavily travelled State road, and is not located with- in easy walking distance to the business center of Greenport Village, which is nearly a mile to the south. Second, the size of the HD parcel (42 acres), when considered with the 133+ acres of the adjoining HD- zoned property to the east (Parcel # 4) and the 16 acres of LB zoning abutting it, will work against attempts to strengthen and preserve the character and economic integrity of the Greenport Village hamlet and business center. Greenport's role as a transportation hub, deepwater port, tourist designation and provid- er of public water is i~ortant to the Town as a whole; and this should be recognized by the Town in its public policies. Third, this parcel, together with Parcel #4 will have an impact on the volume of traffic at the Sound Drive, SR 25 and CR 48 intersection. The State has acknowl- edged this impact by requiring road and inter~ection modifications for development associated with Parcel ~4, and may well require additional modifications for this site. Fourth, the availability of public water or sewer to this site is not assured at this time. · 2 1 Finally, the appropriateness of the R-40 designation must be addressed. The R-O0 zoning designation that preceded this rezoni~g was the base zoning in Southold Town since 1983 whe~ zhe Town increased the minimum required lot area for its sole residential zone, "A", from one acre to two acre. In 1989, the Town reaf- firmed its 1983 decision by zoning the subject parcel R-80, which is equivalent to the two acre density. The recent rezoning to R-40 had the effect of placing twice the residential density on the most envirorunen- tally sensitive part of the preperty, which is con- trary to our policy of encouraging the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, and of promoting development patterns that are responsive to sensitive coastal features such as bluffs. The sensitivity of this site's waterfront and bluffs can be judged by noting the New York Department of State's reco.~nenda- tion that the adjoining parcel to the east (Parcel ~4) be preserved in its entirety because of its importance as wildlife habitat and as an example of the Eastern Bluffs ecological complex. Further, the trade-off of twenty acres of R-40 zoning on sensitive coastal properly for the provision of forty-two acres of afford~_e housing to the south has no basis or support in our public policies for land use planning. There no demonstrated need for new affordable single-family housing in a hamlet that already contains a disproportionate share of the Town's affordable units. In fact, the Town has not seen to .it that opportunities for new affordable hous- ing are spread throughout the Town so that each hamlet is able to provide such opportunities for its resi- dents. RECOMP[ENDATION: Rezone the property to a lower density residential use that will pron~3ct its sensitive coastal resources, and that will provide for a level of residential devel- opment that is more compatible with the infrastructure and economic development of the Village hamlet. 22 ~PPENDIX ~ Goals and Policies for 1984 Master Plan Update (Underlining emphasis added.) GOAl,: Overall Planning Provide a con~manity of residential hamlets which are: comprised of a variety of housing opportunities and commercial, service, and cultural activities; serving to establish a sense of place; set in a open or rural atmosphere; supported by a diversified economic base (including agriculture, marine co~nercial and seasonal recreation activities) that maximizes the Town's natural assets, including its coastal location; and are striving for a compatibility between the natural environment and development. POLICY: Overall Planning Implement planning policies which provide for a number of housing types, promote agricultural preservation, encourage the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, protect groundwater, encourage water-dependent and water-enhanced uses of coastal lands, and support co,~nercial and industrial activities in appropriate locations. GOALS: Housing / Residential Development Preserve the existin~ housing stock and provide the opportunity for the development of a variety of housing types to meet the needs of people at various stages of the life cycles, various income and age levels and household con~ositions. POLICY: Housing / Residential Development Encourage housing development, of varying types and densities, in and around existing hamlets. GOALS: Environment Preserve and enhance the Town's natural environment. POLICIES: Environment 23 Restrict development in wetlands, tidal marshes, bluffs, dunes and beaches. Promote a development pattern that is responsive to sensitive areas exhibiting prime agricultural so~ls, poor drainage, high water table, high erosion hazard, flood hazard, sensitive coastal features, great scenic quality and woodlands. Promote development patterns that are at a scale that is commensurate with the available water supply. GOALS: Cultural Environment Preserve and strenqthen the hamlets as cultural, residential and commercial centers of activity in the Town: as a means of creating viable uses for historic buildings and areas and encouraging a "sense of place." POLICY: Cultural Environment Plan for intensity and mix of development of hamlet centers that improve the viability, functioning and aesthetics of hamlet commercial centers without changing the scale of the centers. GOALS: Waterfront Maximize appropriate use of coastal areas in a manner that protects sensitive coastal areas, maximizes access to the water and achieves economic benefit. POLICIES: Waterfront Increase the number and quality of p%lblic beaches. Insure physical and/or visual access to scenic vistas and waterfront areas. GOALS: Transportation Insure adequate movement of people and goods within Southold, as well as into and out of Town, in a manner that maximizes safety and maintains the integrity of residential and agricultural areas. 24 GOALS: Community Facilities/Utilities Ensure the provision of an adequate range of co~nunity facilities, services and utilities to accommodate existing and future Town needs in a convenient and cost effective manner. These Goals and Policies were drafted as a means of addressing the relevant planning issues. (Copies of the April and May 1983 memoranda from the Town's planning consultants which detail these issues follows.) 25 Raymond, Parish, Pine & Weiner, Inc. 555 Wh~Ie Plains Roa~. Tarry[own, NY 10591 914/63~-9003 212/365 2666 morandum April 26, 1983 TO: Southold Planning Board FROM: RPPW, Inc. RE: PLANNING ISSUES The Town Master Plan has to address various issues, many of which are interrelated and many of which require consideration of alternative responses. Based upon the preliminary analysis of the various factors affecting planning in Southold, the following are the issues to be addressed in the Plan: A. Overall Pattern of Development 1. Protection of Town's reflected Rural/Exurban Character in a combination of hamlet centers, farmland, large expanses of undeveloped land accommodation of new development within this framework 2. Suitability of Land for Development development or retention of farmland · proximity to/adequacy of community services protection of environmental features Z-wetlands;- tidal marsh; dunes, beaches and bluffs; scenic vistas; wate~.~ay~ creeks and ponds; · physical constraints - high water table; steep slope; poor soil permeability; flood hazard areas; erosion hazard areas - siltation · drainage problems 3. AGriculture · economic viability; chan~ing structure; cost of changing crops · availability of farm labor · impact on water quality and on water quantity · preservation of land for farming or open space 4. Water Summlv - Quantity and Quality ( protection of subsurface water from pollution emanating from development and agriculture; implications for development policy sufficiency of potable water to service future development, especially in Orient, East Marion and along coastline · approach to supply of water individual wells; small central systems; few larger systems · implications of importing water; desalinization of salt water 5. Housing/Residential DeveloPment · distribution/density · lack of affordable housinq for low, moderate and middle income segments of population · absence of small units older and younger one and two person households · seasonal vs. year-round housing · conversion of seasonal to year-round 6. Population Mix · aging of population - decline of labor force; implications for volunteer services such as fire ~ and rescue service; chanqing service needs · year-round/seasonal - implications for services 7. Approved - Unbuilt Subdivisions · why unbuilt density; location; physical conditions · implications for water consumption; other services · ownership pattern - affect upon future planning/ zoning .. 8. Traffic and Transoortation · adequacy of existing major east-west ~oads to accommodate traffic; technical capacity - desired levels of traffic · safety at several key locations · private roads - emergency access implications for access to beaches · need for or appropriateness of improved north- south roads · need for and location of a Town airport · adequacy of service by buses and trains - year-- round/summer season/time of day · need to encourage expansion of ferry service to expand markets in New England ~ 27 · seasonality of economy need to expand and/or create year-round economy; increase jobs for young adults · stability of agriculture and fishing - need to (farmland, fish habitats) protect resources appropriateness of encouraging agriculture and fishing as elements of economy; mariculture · need for flexibility on part of farmers and farm workers - retraining · limited growth potential for commerce and industry including fishing and agriculture · expansion of seasonal/tourist economy 10. Historic and Cultural Resources · preservation as part of Town's quality; heritage · enhancement for economic purposes 11. Seasonal Development · how much, where and what type (seasonal residences/transient tourist) land consumption and potential damage to environment; importance to economy - jobs and tax base; limited demand on many services 12. Hamlet Centers scale and character/concentration of preserve housing and services · focus of Town's economy - commerce limit strip commercial development · historic preservation program Community Facilities 13. Schools · potential consolidation - potential increase in shared services · extent to which existing physical plant can accommodate additional enrollment · school plant as resource for recreation/cultural and educational activities coordination of use and programming 14. Sewer · implications of expandin~ Greenport system - limited capacity · use of individual inground systems or small central inground systems limitation on density; impact on subsurface water · new treatment systems cost; level of development necessary to support versus desired density of development 15. Water Supply · protection of quality of supply · continuation of individual wells versus central supply · treatment of individual and public/community systems wells; costs · import water or desalihization · establishment of Town supply and/or treatment district to serve all or part of Town · expansion of Greenport system 16. Public Safety · Fire - assurance that all areas of Town covered need to improve accessibility to some areas; future availability of manpower; substandard private roads · Police - adequacy of facilities for future development; seasonal expansion · Emergency-Rescue - sufficient for emergencies; only one amDulance service for general medical transportation; manpower 17. Recreation · need to assure access to water for recreation including boat launch and mooring sites, beaches, and scenic vistas · need additional recreation areas and open space areas in scme parts of the Town · swimming pool; youth center(s) · access to school facilities assures availability of basic facilities to all areas of the Town 18. Lamdfill · life of present facility limited expand or pursue alternative source of disposal · landfill on aquifer - threat to subsurface water · methane gas - use for energy or dissipate 29 19. Access to Water · beaches swimming, bathing, walking, viewing scenic vistas · boat launching on north shore/launching and mooring on south shore for commercial and recreational fishermen · attractiveness for private residential/commercial development often precludes maintenance of.access · use for resort facilities 20. Quality of Coastal Waters · critical to fishing industry and recreational fishing · swimming/water sports · marine habitat · encouragement of mariculture development 21, Coastal Land Use Conflicts · availability of land for marine commercial uses as a priority objective · need for additional boat slips - dredging · competition with water-enhanced uses such as restaurants, motels 22. Protection of Sensitive Coastal Environment · tidal marshes · dunes, beaches, bluffs · scenic vistas · water quality 23. Salt Water Intrusion -. · need to protect g=ound water - limit on coastal area development ~_ 24. Navigability of Waterways · siltation and dredging - disruption of shellfish beds/spawning grounds The Master Plan will address these issues. The next step will be to establish a set of goals to serve as a mechanism to measure. the response to the issues. The process for establishing a concensus on goals will be one of the initial steps in Phase II, the preparation of the Plan itself. Raymond, ~r~sh, Pine & WeJner, Inc. 555 Wh~e Plains Road. T~rrytown, NY I a.mcrandum Juna 20, 1983 TO: $outhhold Planning Board FROM: RPPW, Inc. RE: PLANNING GOALS A clear statement of the Town's long range goals is an important element of the planning process in that it forms the basis for various l~ng and short range objectives, policies, strategies, and programs. Such a statement will help to crystalize in the minds of residents, business people, and public and private decisionmakers the precise directions in which the Town should develop. Such a statement is useful in setting priorities as well. While the goals are general, if there is a consensus or general agreement on them and on their interpretation, they provide 'justification for more specific elements of the planning and development process. To achieve this consensus and a sense of priorities, a process for refining the initial statement needs to be carried out. This memorandum sets forth an initial statement of goals which can serve as a basis for discussion. This initial statement is drawn from several sources including meetings of the Master Plan Workshop, discussions with various representatives of Town agencies, private business, institutions, and environmental and real estate groups. This initial statement does not necessarily reflect the order of priority. It may very well be that as discussions proceed, priorities will become evident and adjustments will be made. The main purpose of this memo is to stimulate thinking and discussion on this important topic as a basis for the Town Plan. PR~P©SED GOALS ~D POLICIES ~ Overall Plannin~ Goal Provide a community of residential hamlets which are: - comprised of a varlet'; of housing opportunities and commer- cial, service, and cui~ural activities; serving to establish a sense of place; set in an open or rural atmosphere; supported by a diversified economic base (including agricul- ture, marine commercial and seasonal recreation activities) that maximizes the Town's natural assets, including its coastal location; and are striving for a compatibility between the natural environment and development. Policies Implement planning policies which provide for a number of housing types, promote agricultural preservation, encourage the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, protec~ groundwater, encourage water-dependent and water-enhanced uses of coastal lands, and support commercial and industrial acti?ities in appropriate locations. Housing~Residential Develo~rent ~ Goals Preserve the existing housing stock and provide the oppor- tunity for the development of a variety of housinq types to meet the needs of people at various stages of the life cycle, various income and age levels and household composi- tions. Policies Encourage housing development, of varying types and den- sities, in and around existing hamlets. _-_. Usinq available assistance programs as well as land use, regulatory techniques and procedures to provide such assis- tance as may be needed to provide affordable housing, especially to younger and .Dlder segments of the community and to allow retired or moderate income homeowners to maintain their properties. Maintain the integrity of residential neiqhborhood2 by preventing through traffic movement and by discouragi~%~ Uses tkat are incompatible with a residential environment. 32 Acrfcultural Preservation Preserve the Town's prime farmland and encourage its con- tinued use for agriculture. Policies Limit non-agricultural uses in designated prime agricultural areas through methods such as agricultural zoning and easements. Promote a Town agricultural incer- preservation program, porating purchase of development rights, transfer of devel- opment rights, public information training and financial assistance programs to enable farmers to diversify into more profitable crops. Environment Goals Preserve and enhance the Town's natural environment. Maintain and protect Southold's agricultural heritage and pastoral and quality. open Insure that there is adequate quantity of potable water to serve Southold's year-round and seasonal populations. Policies Restrict development in wetlands, tidal marshes, bluffs, . dunes and beaches. Promote a development pattern that is responsive to sensi- tive areas exhibiting prime agricultural soils, poor drain- age, high water table, high erosion hazard, floo~ hazard, sensitive coastal features, great scenic quality and wood- lands. Protect the Town's water supply from further contamination by encouraging the use of techniques that reduce pollution from fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides (agricultural and residential), requiring adequate wa~er supply and SePtic system conditions for new development, and emplo,:'ing minimal maintenance dr~dging of streams minimize salt (to intrusion). Promote development patterns that scale that is are at a commensurate with the available water supply. Maintain and improve surface water quality by reducin~ sources of pollution and utilizing modern runoff control techniques to reduce stream siltation. Maintain finfishing and shellfishin~ habitats by reducing sources of pollution and by limiting dredging of streams and disturbance of wetlands. Cultural Environment Goals Preserve the historic, cultural, architectural and archae- ological resources of the Town. Preserve ~nd strengthen the hamlets as cultural, residential and commercial centers of activity in the Town; as a mesns of creating viable uses for historic buildings and areas and encouraging a "sense of place." Policies Promote the inventorying of cultural resources and encourage the establishment of Town historic districts and preserva- tion of historic buildings and sites. Plan for intensity and mix of development of hamlet centers that improve the viability, functioning and aesthetics of hamlet commercial centers without changing the scale of the centers. Economic Develooment Goals '~ Strengthen and diversify the Town's economic base as a means of stabilizing and expanding the tax base and year-round and seasonal employment opportunities. Policies Encourage diversification of agricultural crops and the marketing of Southold as a prime location for climate- sensitive forms of agriculture. Strengthen the Town's important commercial fishing and agriculture industries. Promote vacation and seasonal uses with respect for the Town's year-round needs, environmental features and rural heritage. 34 Improve the Town rs existing commercial areas but do encourage large scale expansion of current development. Encourage t~.~ development of public further~ and private mariculture activities in the waters adjacent to the Town. Encourage the development of land based support facilities for the Town's fishing industry. Provide opportunities to accommodate office and research development, light industry and industries related to other elements of the economy. Limit strip comr~ercial areas and encourage the concentration of cormmercial uses in existing shopping areas. Waterfront Goals Maximize appropriate use of coastal areas a manner in that protects sensitive coastal areas, maximizes access to the water and achieves economic benefit. Policies Promote and water-related uses in waterfront water-dependent areas which are not environmentally sensitive. Protect the quality of coastal waters. Increase the number and quality of public beaches. Insure physical and/or visual access to scenic vistas and -. waterfront areas~ .- Promote co~ercial and recreational fishing and boating opportunities where there are no conflicts existing residential development or sensitive natural features. Promote maintenance of existing naviqable wate~¢ays. Transportation Goals Insure adequate movement of people and goods '~%~ Southold, as well as into and out of Town, in a manner that maximizes safety and maintains the integrity of residential and agricultural areas. Policies ~ Encourage the use and/or developmen5 of public transporta- tion. Encourage roadway and intersection improvements that will improve the flow of traffic and promote safety. Community Facilities/Utilities Goals Ensure the provision of an adequate range of community facilities, services and utilities to accommodate existing and future Town needs in a convenient and cost effective manner. Policies Improve, maintain and expand where appropriate to accommo- date present and future development of the water supply, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and solid waste disposal systems in order to support the desired level of development and to maintain and protect a healthful living environment, a viable economic base and the natural environment. Provide an open space and recreation system adequate in size~ and location to serve the total (seasonal and year-round) population. Assure availability of and/or access to a full range of modern health services, including emergency services, for all citizens. ... Provide a full spectrum of accessible educational facilities 'and services to meet the needs of all segments of the community in the most efficient and effectiv~ manner. Promote the provision and availability of necessary social services, including appropriate neighborhood, senior citi- zen, and day care facilities. Provide a full range of public safety services (police, fire, ambulance, rescale, etc.) necessary to create an environment of personal security and protection of property. APPENDIX B Brief Synopsis of Changes Made to Specific Z~ning Districts in the Southold Town Code 1957 - 1989 In 1957, there were only three zoning districts: "A" Residential and Agricultural, "B" Business and "C" Industrial. The "A" district permitted one-family dwellings and a number of other community facility-type uses, but not ~ultiple dwellings. The "B" district, however, permitted two-family dwellings and multiple fm-nily dwellings, provided however that the lot area and other requirements of the "A" district were complied with. In 1958, the "M" Multiple Residence District was added to the Zoning Code. This district permitted all the uses allowed in the "A" district, plus multiple dwellings designed for and occupied by not more than four families. Hotels, motels, boarding and tourist houses and cottages were also permitted. The minimum lot area required in this district was 12,500 square feet. It is interesting to note that in 1958, the "B" district permitted multiple family dwellings as regulated by specific provisions of the "A" district. In fact, the "B" district allowed densities up to twenty families on one acre of land. By contrast, the "M" district only permitted a density of four families per 12,500 square feet or about fourteen units to the acre. In 1966, the Zoning Code was amended to provide two multiple residential districts: "M" and "M-l". The "M" Multiple Residence district allowed all the uses permitted in the "A" district plus dwellings designed for and occupied by not more than four families, boarding and tourist houses, motels and hotels, tourist cottages and camps, and non-commercial marinas. The "M-i" district was similar except that it did not allow hotels, motels, tourist cottages or camps, and non-commercial marinas. The minimum required lot area remained at 12,500 square feet per lot. The 1966 Code also had three business districts, of which only the "B-2" district is of interest to us here. Thai district allowed all the uses allowed in the "A", "M", and "M-l" districts along with multiple dwellings and bonafide commercial usesl The maximum allowable density was still twenty units to the acre. And, the allowable density in both multiple residence districts still limited to the equivalent of fourteen tO the acre. 37 In 1971 the entire Zoning Code was revamped. The "M" District was renamed the "M" L~ght Multiple Residence District: and, the "M-i" Multiple Residence district was renamed the "M-i" General Multiple Residence District. In the "M" Light district, all "A" uses were permitted by right, along with multiple dwellings for up to four families and boarding and tourist houses. The "M-l" General district permitted all the uses allowed in "M" Light. But other uses that previously were permitted as of right (such as non-co~nercial marinas, multiple dwellings, motels and hotels and tourist camps) now required a Special Exception. In 1971, the required min~mum lot areas increased, dramatically, to 40,000 square feet for "A" and "M" Light districts; and 80,000 square feet for "M-i" General districts. Also in 1971, the three business districts were consolidated back to two districts. One parcel under review in this study was changed from "B-2" to "B" Light Business. Ail uses that were permitted in the "M" and "M-l" districts were also permitted in the "B" Light district, exactly as provided for in the multiple residence districts. In keeping with other increases, the minimum lot area in the "B" Light district was increased to 20,000 square feet. In 1989, major changes were made to the Zoning Code, which is the one we use today. In this Code, both multiple residence districts were eliminated, and a new district, the Hamlet Density HD District, was created. The business districts were changed also. Today, the B General arid HB Hamlet Business districts closely parallel the business districts of the previous code, meaning that multiple dwellings are allowed by Special Exception within these zones. 38 Draft Notes from the Town Board Work Session on Hamlet Density review, 2/25/94 Boardmembers made a number of general conunents about the review, including these: There is a substantial amount of inappropriately zoned property in the Town and it is now timely to deal with it. Of particular concern is the tendency towards suburban sprawl -- the natural form that development is likely to take in the absence of well thought-out planning. The Master Plan and the Stewardship Task Force both emphasize hamlet-center development as appropr/ate to Towns like Southold. Promoting most growth in and around the hamlet centers strengthens the business prospects of our "downtown" centers while keeping open space and farmland undeveloped. Greenport is a special planning case because the Incorporated Village has its own planning and zoning framework, it has the largest developed business center in the Town, and because there is a preponderance of unbuilt HD parcels on the edge of the Incorporated Village. HD parcels, if developed to maximum density, require public water and public sewers_ The Greenport Water Company has been called on to supply public water to some of the HD parcels but the utility has not been able to extend its system as requested in many cases. Property owners have options other than Greenport water, however, and at some future point SCWA water is a distinct possibility in the area. At present, all Greenport water comes from wells within the Town but outside the Incorporated Village. The availability of public water and sewers may be a secondary concern but should not be a primary consideration in this review. It has been about ten years since RPPW began developing its master plan recommendations; it is therefore appropriate to consider now possible modifications to the Master Plan and refinements in its implementation. ~ The HD review is only one of many possible changes that may be warrahted in our zoning map. The Town Board will want to look into the appropriateness of other zones and policies, and will want to consider some positive incentives, particularly in the hamlet center areas, not simply additional restrictions. There are arguments for proceeding ahead only when the Board has a package of changes that addresses all or many of these needs, but it is probably not feasible to attempt to hold up all changes until we have agreement to enact them ali at one time. The proposed review raises questions of the property rights of the owners. It is not clear that all owners would be disadvantaged by an upzoning. In certain cases, in particular those in which owners have actually begun constructing pursuant to a building permit, they may have vested rights. 2 The "public good" is the ultimate criterion for Boardmembers to use in considering possible zone changes, i.e., posed as a question, is the proposed action (or inaction) likely to benefit the community as a whole? Boardmembers made these specific conunents regarding the eight parcels reviewed: Parcels 1, 5 and 7 are relatively close together, have received almost no development activity (except for part of parcel 7), are almost completely wooded, and are farthest from the Greenport line. The arguments for rezoning may be strongest for these three. Parcel 2 has been used in the past for a boarding house. It has some wetlands at one end of the property and ~s surrounded on three sides by the Incorporated Village's park zone. Questions of hardship on the owners were raised in the event of a rezoning. An RR designation may be warranted for this parcel. Parcel 3 is close enough to the Village center that it could remain HD. Alternatively, it could be rezoned to match neighboring parcels (LIO, General Business). Parcels 4 and 8 are by far the most important of those under review because, among others, of their size (almost 500 units planned), location relative to the Village center, potential for traffic generation near a strategic road crossing, and frontage on the Sound. Because they have much in common and are adjacent, most of the arguments for one apply to the other. There is strong rationale for rezoning both parcels but there is also concern about possible vested rights of the owners. The HD designation of parcel 6 in Cutchogue was generally acknowledged to be appropriate in view of its proximity to Cutchogue village. The Supervisor said he would like to put this matter on as a for-discussion item at the next Town Board meeting (Mar 8) and would reserve an hour for the discussion. T. Wickham 2 Mar 94 P~oposed Outline of the Review 1. Introduction and Background Purpose of HD Zone HD uses by right and by spec exception Current extent of HD parcels Newly-created HD parcels through zone change How HD zones were treated in Master Plan Special impact of public water, sewers on HD zones, and vv. 2. Need for the Review Concern about Greenport Disproportionate concentration of density Disproportionate concentration of affordable housing Burden of providing public water, sewers Few HD parcels actually built out Question of consistency of HD zones with: Master Plan goals and objectives US/UK Stewardship Report Stewardship Task Force recommendations (draft) Other . . , 3. Town Board Resolution of Jan. 4 Test of resolution Board's intent Asked staff to carry out the review 4. Criteria of the review Public Policy Physical limitations Surrounding land uses Status of Infrastructure :_ Current state of development - Other . 5. Panel-by-Parcel Review 6. Conclusions and Recommendations. DISCUSSION OF HD ZONE REVIEW Should HD zones be spread evenly through the Town or just focused around one or two hamlets? How should the goals of Raymond, Parrish, Pine and Wiener's memorandum on planrdng issues be applied to the present HD zones? What is the current state of development in the HD zones? Are there physical limitations on these properties, i.e. wetlands, bluffs, waterfront access, etc.? What are the land uses surrounding these HD zones? What is the status of the infrastructure {water and sewer) to serve these properties ? · Raymond, Parish, Pine & Weiner, Inc. 555 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, NY [ [ Memorandum June 20, 1983 I TO: $outhhold Planning Board FROM: RPPW, Inc. RE: PLANNING GOALS I' A clear statement of the Town's long range goals is an important element of the planning process in that it forms the basis for various 1Qng and short range objectives, policies, strategies, and programs. Such a statement will help to crystalize in the minds of residents, business people, and public and private decisionmakers the precise directions in which the Town should develop. Such a statement is useful in setting priorities as well. While the goals are general, if there is a consensus or general ~greement on them and on their interpretation, they provide 'justification for more specific elements of the planning and development process. To achieve this consensus and a sense of priorities, a process for the initial statement needs carried out. This refining to.be memorandum sets forth an initial statement of goals which can serve as a basis for discussion. This initial statement is drawn from several sources including meetings of the Master Plan Workshop, discussions with various representatives of Town agencies, private business, institutions, and environmental and real estate groups. This initial statement does not necessarily reflect the order of I priority. It may very well be that as discussions proceed, _ priorities will become evident and adjustments will be made. The main purpose of this memo is to stimulate thinking and discussion on this important topic as a basis for the Teton Plan. l I PROPOSED GOALS AND POLICIES ~ Overall Plannin~ Goal Provide a community of residential hamlets which are: comprised of a variety of housing opportunities and commer- cial, service, and cultural activities; serving to establish a sense of place; set in an open or rural atmosphere; supported by a diversified economic base (including.agricul- ture, marine commercial and seasonal recreation activities) that maximizes the Town's natural assets, including its coastal location; and are striving for a compatibility between the natural environment and development. Policies Implement planning policies which provide for a number of housing types, promote agricultural preservation, encourage the preservation of environmentally sensitive areas, protect groundwater, encourage water-dependent and water-enhanced uses of coastal lands, and support commercial and industrial activities in appropriate locations. Housing/Residential Development ~ Goals Preserve the existing housing stock and provide the oppor- tunity for the development of a variety of housing types to meet the needs of people at various stages of the life cycle, various income and age levels and household composi- tions. Policies Encourage housing development, of varying types and den- sities, in and around existing hamlet's. Using available assistance programs as well as land use, regulatory techniques and procedures to provide such assis- tance as may be needed to provide affordable housing, especially to younger and older segments of the community and to allow retired or moderate income homeowners to maintain their properties. Maintain the integrity of residential neighborhoods by preventing through traffic movement and by discouraging uses that are incompatible with a residential environment. 2 AGricultural Preservation Goals Preserve the Town's prime farmland and encourage its con- tinued use for agriculture. Policies Limit non-agricultural uses in designated prime agricultural areas through methods such as agricultural zoning and easements. Promote a Town agricultural preservation incor- program, porating purchase of development rights, transfer of devel- opment rights, public information training and financial assistance programs to enable farTners to diversify into more profitable crops. Environment Goals Preserve and enhance the Town's natural environment. Maintain and protect Southold's agricultural heritage and pastoral and quality. open Insure that there is adequate quantity of potable water to serve Southold's year-round and seasonal populations. Policies Restrict development in wetlands, tidal marshes, bluffs, ,~ dunes and beaches. Promote a development pattern that is responsive to sensi- tive areas exhibitinq prime agricultural soils, poor drain- age, high water table, high erosion hazard, flood hazard, sensitive coastal features, great scenic qualit~ and wood- lands. Protect the Town's water supply from further contamination by encouraging the use of techniques that reduce pollution from fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides (agricultural and residential), requiring adequate water supply and septic system conditions for new development, and employing minim, al maintenance dredging of streams minimize salt (to water intrusion). Promote development patterns that are at a scale that is commensurate with the available water supply. Maintain and improve surface water quality by reducinq ~ sources of pollution and utilizinq modern runoff control techniques to reduce stream siltation. Maintain finfishing and shellfishing habitats by reducing sources of pollution and by limiting dredqinq of streams and disturbance of wetlands. Cultural Environment Goals Preserve the historic, cultural, architectural and archae- ological resources of the Town. Preserve End strengthen the hamlets as cultural, residential and commercial centers of activity in the Town; as a means of creatin~ viable uses for historic buildinqs and areas and encouraging a "sense of place." Policies Promote the inventorying of cultural resources and encouraqe the establishment of Town historic districts and preserva- tion of historic buildinqs and sites. Plan for intensity and mix of development of hamlet centers~ that improve the viability, functioninq and aesthetics of ~ hamlet commercial centers without changing the scale of the centers. Economic DeveloPment Goals '~ Strengthen and diversify the Town's economic base as a means of stabilizing and expanding the tax base and year-round and seasonal employment opportunities. Policies ~ Encourage diversification of aqricultural crops and the marketing of Southold as a prime location for climate- sensitive forms of agriculture. Strengthen the Town's important commercial fishing and agriculture industries. Promote vacation and seasonal uses with respect for the Town's year-round needs, environmental features and rural ~ heritage. Improve the Town's existing commercial areas but do not encourage large scale expansion of current development. Encourage the development of further public and private mariculture activities in the waters adjacent to the Town. Encourage the development of land based support facilities for the Town's fishing industry. Provide opportunities to accommodate office and research development, light industry and industries related to other elements of the economy. Limit commercial and the concentration strip areas encourage of commercial uses in existing shopping areas. Waterfront Goals Maximize appropriate use of coastal areas in a manner that protects sensitive coastal areas, maximizes access to the water and achieves economic benefit. Policies Promote water-dependent and water-related uses in waterfront areas which are not environmentally sensitive. Protect the quality of coastal waters. Increase the number and quality of public beaches. Insure physical and/or visual access to scenic vistas and · . waterfront areas-~ .- Promote commercial and recreational fishinq and boating opportunities where there are no conflicts with existing residential development or sensitive natural features. Promote maintenance of existing navigable water, aye. Transoortation Goals Insure adequate movement of people and goods within $outhold, as well as into and out of To~n, in a manner that maximizes safety and maintains the integrity of residential and agricultural areas. 5 Policies ~ Encourage the use and/or development of public transporta- tion. Encourage roadway and intersection improvements that will improve the flow of traffic and promote safety. Community Facilities/Utilities Goals Ensure the provision of an adequate range of community facilities, services and utilities to accommodate existing and future Town needs in a convenient and cost effective manner. Policies Improve, maintain and expand where appropriate to accommo- date present and future development of the water supply, sanitary sewer, storm drainage and solid waste disposal systems in order to support the desired level of development and to maintain and protect a healthful living environment, a viable economic base and the natural environment. ~ Provide an open space and recreation system adequate in size~ and location to serve the total (seasonal and year-round) population. Assure availability of and/or access to a full range of modern health services, including emergency services, for all citizens. Provide a full spectrum of accessible educational facilities '~ and services to meet the needs of all segments of the community in the most efficient and effective manner. Promote the provision and availability of necessary social services, including appropriate neighborhood, senior citi- zen, and day care facilities. Provide a full range of public safety services (police, fire, ambulance, rescue, etc.) necessary to create an environment of personal security and protection of property. 6 . Raymond, Parish, Pine & Weiner. Inc. 555 White Plains Road, Tarrytown, NY 105 emorandum April 26, 1983 TO: $outhold Planning Board FROM: RPPW, Inc. RE: PLANNING ISSUES The Town Master Plan ha~ to address various issues, many of which are interrelated and many of which require consideration of alternative responses. Based upon the preliminary analysis of the various factors affecting planning in Southold, the followin~ are the issues to be addressed in the Plan: A. Overall Pattern of Development 1. Protection of Town's Rural/Exurban Character reflected in a combination of hamlet centers, farmland, large expanse~ of undeveloped land accommodation of new development within this framework 2. Suitability of Land for Development development or retention of farmland · proximity to/adequacy of community services · protection of environmental features - ~etlands;- tidal marsh; dunes, beaches and bluffs; scenic vistas; waterways creeks and ponds; · physical constraints high water table; steep slope; poor soil permeability; flood hazard areas; erosion hazard areas - siltation · drainage problems 3. AGriculture · economic viability; chan~ing structure; cost of changing crops · availability of farm labor · impact on water quality and on water quantity · preservation of land for farming or open spa_e 4. Water SuPPlY - Quantity and 0uality ~ · protection of subsurface water from pollution emanating from development and agriculture; implications for development policy · sufficiency of potable water to service future development, especially in Orient, East Marion and along coastline · approach.to supply of water - individual wells; small central systems; few larger systems · implications of importing water; desaliniz.ation of salt water 5. Housing/Residential Development · distribution/density · lack of affordable housinq for low, moderate and middle income segments of population · absence of small units - older and younger one and two person households · seasonal vs. year-round housing · conversion of seasonal to year-round 6. Pooulation Mix · · aging of population - decline of labor force; implications for volunteer services such as fire ~ and rescue service; changing service needs · year-round/seasonal - implications for services 7. Approved - Unbuilt Subdivisions · why unbuilt - density; location; physical conditions · implications for water consumption; other services · ownership pattern affect upon future planning/ zoning 8. Traffic and Transuorta'tion · adequacy of existing major east-west roads to accommodate traffic; technical capacity desired levels of traffic · safety at several key locations · private roads - emergency access - implications for access to beaches · need for or appropriateness of improved north- south roads · need for and location of a Town airport · adequacy of service by buses and trains - year-- round/summer season/time of day · need to encourage expansion of ferry service to expand markets in New England ~.i 2 · seasonality of economy need to expand and/ox create year-round economy; increase jobs for young adults · stability of agriculture and fishing need to protect resources habitats) (farmland, fish appropriateness of encouraging agriculture and fishing as elements of economy; mariculture · need for flexibility on part of farmers and farm workers - retraining · limited growth potential for commerce and industry including fishing and agriculture · expansion of seasonal/tourist economy 10. Historic and Cultural Resources · preservation as part of Town's quality; heritage · enhancement for economic purposes 11. Seasonal Development · how much, where and what type (seasonal tourist) - consumption residences/transient land and potential damage to environment; importance to economy - jobs and tax base; limited demand on many services 12. Hamlet Centers · preserve scale and character/concentration of housing and services · focus of Town's economy - commerce - limit strip commercial development · historic preservation program Community Facilities 13. Schools · potential consolidation - potential increase in shared services · extent to which existing physical plant can accommodate additional enrollment · school plant as resource for recreation/cultural and educational activities coordination of use and programming 14. Sewer · implications of expandin~ Greenport system - limited capacity · use of individual inqround systams or small [~ central inground systems - limitation on density; impact on subsurface water · new treatment systems - cost; level of development necessary to support versus desired density of development 15. Water SUDD1V · protection of quality of supply · continuation of individual wells versus central supply · treatment of individual and public/community systems wells; costs · import water or desalihization · establishment of Town supply and/or treatment district to serve all or part of Town · expansion of Greenport system 16. Public Safety · Fire - assurance that all areas of Town covered - need to improve accessibility to some areas; future availability of manpower; substandard private roads · Police - adequacy of facilities for future development; seasonal expansion ~ · Emergency-Rescue - sufficient for emergencies; only one ambulance service for general medical trRnsportation; manpower 17. Recreation · need to assure access to water for recreation including boat launch and mooring sites, beaches, and scenic vistas · need additional recreation areas and open space areas in scme parts of the Town · swimming pool; youth center(s) · access to school facilities assures availability of basic facilities to all areas of the Town 18. Landfill · life of present facility limited - expand or pursue alternative source of disposal · landfill on aquifer - threat to subsurface water · methane gas use for energy or dissipate 4 19. Access to Water · beaches - swimming, bathing, walking, viewing scenic vistas · boat launching on north shore/launching and mooring on south shore for commercial and recreational fishermen · attractiveness for private residential/commercial development often precludes maintenance of"access · use for resort facilities 20. Quality of Coastal Waters · critical to fishing industry and recreational fishing · swimming/water sports · marine habitat · encouragement of mariculture development 21. Coastal Land Use Conflicts · availability of land for marine commercial uses as a priority objective · need for additional boat slips - dredging · competition with water-enhanced uses such as restaurants, motels 22. Protection of Sensitive Coastal Environment · tidal marshes · . dunes, beaches, bluffs · scenic vistas · water ~uality 23. Salt Water Intrusion " · need to protect ground water - limit qn coastal area development 24. Navicabilitv of Waterways · siltation and dredging disruption of shellfish beds/spawning grounds The Master Plan will address these issues. The next step be to establish a set of Goals to serve as a mechanism to measure the response to the issues. The process for establishing a concensus on goals will be one of the initial steps in Phase II, the preparation of the Plan itself. 5 PARCEL #5 45-2-10.3 20.07 ACRES YIELD 9 LOTS [FOR R-80 REQUIREMENTS) SCALE 1"=200' Suffolk County Planning Dept. H. Leo Den~Jsoa Bldg. 12th. Fi.