HomeMy WebLinkAboutFarm and Farmland Protection Strategy ELIZABETI-[ A. NEVILLE
TOWN' CLERK
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (631) 765-6145
Telephone (631) 765-1800
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS
ADOPTED AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD
HELD ON JANUARY 18. 2000:
RESOLVED that the .Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby adopts the
Southold Town Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy as a Town Policy.
Southold Town Clerk
January 18. 2000
Southold Town Farm and
Farmland Protection Strategy
Final
January 2000
Town of Southold
Town Board
Supervisor Jean W. Cochran
Justice Louisa P. Evans
Councilman William D. Moore
Councilman Brian G. Murphy
Councilman Craig A. Richter
Councilman John M. Romanelli
ii
Town of Southold
Land Preservation Committee
Richard C. Ryan, Chairman
Raymond Huntington
Reed A. Jarvis, Jr.
Joseph Krukowski
Frederick A. Lee
Noreen McKenna
James H. Pim
iii
Southold Town Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy
Prepared By
Peconic Land Trust
John v.H. Halsey, President
Timothy J. Caufield, Vice President
Marian P. Sumner, Director of Conservation Programs
Tiffany Liebling, Project Assistant
Kerri Searles, Project Intem
(516) 283-3195
and
Town of Southold
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
Melissa Spiro, Senior Planner
John Sepenoski, Information Systems
(516) 765-1938
and
Steering Committee
Brian Murphy
Richard Ryan
Valerie Scopaz
Marian Sumner
Advisory Committee
Joseph Gergela
Reed Jarvis, Jr.
Fred Lee
Robert Van Bourgondien
under the direction of Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
This report was prepared for the New York State Department of State with
funds provided under Title 11 of the Environmental Protection Fund Act.
SOUTHOLD TOWN FARM AND FARMLAND PROTECTION STRATEGY
Table of Contents
L
IlL
Executive Summary
Introduction
A. Character of Town
B. Development Pressure
C. Need for Protection Strategy
Inventory and Analysis
A. Acreage Analysis
1 Acreage in production
2. Acreage already protected
3. Acreage threatened
B. Composition of Agricultural Industry
1. Traditional Industry
2. Current Trends
3. Potential Future Trends
IV.
Planning Framework
A. Overview of recent and current Public strategies
B. Overview of Private and Public-Private Partnership Strategies
V. Recommendations
VI. Conclusion
APPENDICES
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C
Appendix D
Bibliography
Inventory and Methodology
Conservation Options Brochure
Southold Township 2000
Farmland Protection Strategy Map
Page
1
4
5
8
10
11
17
17
21
22
23
25
27
36
40
Southold Town Farm and
Farmland Protection Strategy
January 2000
Final
Part 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Introduction:
Increasing development pressures within the Town of Southold are presently
impacting the economic viability of its agricultural industry, as well as its rural character
and quality of life. In order to protect the agricultural industry and our quality of life
from the negative aspects of development, a proactive approach to preservation must be
taken now. The Town is at crossroads~it must choose whether to devote the time and
resources necessary to implement a comprehensive protection strategy or risk losing its
agricultural industry, as well as the rural character of the Town.
The f'mdings of this report are a direct result of focused discussions with farmers,
members of the Southold Town Agricultural Advisory and Land Preservation Advisory
committees, and organizations committed to farm and farmland preservation, such as the
Long Island Farm Bureau, the Peconic Land Trust and the North Fork Environmental
Council. This report sets forth a practical strategy for improving our present preservation
efforts. It also suggests a timeframe and administrative procedure for implementing the
strategy.
Purpose:
The threatened agricultural land base and the agricultural industry of Southold
Town are natural, economic and scenic resources that are unique, irreplaceable and
critical. As a step towards developing a comprehensive protection strategy, the following
goals and objectives were established:
Goal 1: To preserve land that is suitable for farming.
The objective is to make farmland preservation a viable and attractive option for
landowners (as opposed to residential development).
Goal 2: To ensure that farming remains an important part of the local economy.
The objective is to help farms and farm-related businesses remain economically viable in
the highly competitive agri-business market, and in the face of escalating residential
development.
Conclusions:
The agricultural landscape is one of the most visible features of the Town's
landscape and economy. Approximately 28% of the Town's land is in active agricultural
production. However, there are many vacant properties that once were farmed, and could
be put back into production. Conservatively, more than 16% of the Town's economy is
estimated to be based on agriculture and related businesses.
Over the last twenty years, public and private efforts to conserve agricultural land
for the future have been successful in preserving over 2,400 acres of land. However, this
acreage represents less than one-fourth of the current farmland. During that same twenty-
year period, it is estimated that the Town lost as much acreage to development as was
permanently protected)
The analysis tmdertaken in this report suggests that some changes are needed if
the Town wants to meet its goals of maintaining a vibrant farm industry and preserving
farmland.
Recommendations:
The following strategies or actions are recommended to meet the above-
referenced goals:
· Identify farmland in need of protection,
2
· Reach out to owners of vulnerable parcels,
· Compile and maintain a listing of lands known to be for sale,
· Provide literature and resources on preservation options,
· Expedite the Conservation Opportunities Planning Process,
· Leverage public and private funds to the greatest extent possible,
· Encourage farm support services and farm-related businesses to thrive,
· Investigate creating a Town Agricultural Agreement Program,
· Encourage the use of Integrated Pest Management and other environmentally
friendly farming techniques,
· Streamline the regulatory process,
· Develop a stewardship program, and
· Assign responsibility for implementation of the above-referenced strategies and
actions by January 2000.
Epilogue:
In 1997, Southold Town's Supervisor, Jean W. Cochran, launched a growth
management initiative, Southold Township 2000, a copy of which is included as
Appendix C. The focus of Southold Township 2000 is to develop a series of strategic
action plans to guide Town actions in the near future. The Southold Township 2000
program is supported by a $60,000 matching grant from the New York State Depa~hnent
of State with funds provided under Title l I of the Environmental Protection Fund. This
Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy is a required and integral component of Southold
Township 2000.
Addendum to Executive Summary
January 2000
In September of 1999, the SouthoM Town P6rm a,d Farmland Protec#on
Strategy was delivered to the Town Board as a Draft for discussion purposes. The Final
report differs from the Draft in the following respects: a revised title page and an updated
list of Town Board members as of January 2000. This Addendum is intended to reflect
public input and discussion that took place after September 1999, specifically in
connection with the Roundtable Discussion.
On November 17, 1999, Somhold Town hosted a public forum or roundtable
discussion to explain and discuss this Strategy. The forum included an overview of
Goals and Objectives and a comparison of this Strategy to past and present land
preservation strategies within Southold Town. Preliminary public feedback prior to the
forum indicated that specific sections of the draft text needed clarification. Therefore, the
presentations by the Peconic Land Trust and myself were designed to provide more
information. For this reason, a copy of the presentation notes is attached.
There were a couple of critical comments directed at this Strategy. One was that
it did not propose a target number of acres to be preserved; nor did it set a target date for
those acquisitions. Another was that it did not discuss or propose certain regulatory
mechanisms such as transfer of development fights or eminent domain acquisitions. A
third was that the Town should not commit additional staff or resources to this effort.
In response, I suggest the following points. First, agricultural land preservation
within Southold Town (as determined by popular vote, as well as by legislative policy) is
predicated on vohmtary offers of the sale of development rights by landowners. While
there is a clear element of self-interest involved, the voluntary approach, at heart,
presumes an underlying collective will by individuals within the community to make
decisions in support of maintaining the character and economy of Southold Town. Given
the level of interest by property owners in preserving their land, it appears that this
collective will is alive and kicking. Second, there presently is resistance amongst the
citizenry to transferring density from agricultural land to elsewhere within the Town due
to deep concerns about loss of rural character, the potential for damage to the fragile
coastal environment and a general distrust of government. Third, in developing the
Strategy, the underlying assumption was that the Town wishes to protect most of the
unprotected acreage currently in agricultural production or support roles (about 8,000
acres). It follows then that Town leadership in forging constructive partnerships with
individual landowners to facilitate voluntary preservation and stewardship of that land is
of paramount importance. Finally, committing Town resources to this Strategy would
have the highly beneficial effect of establishing, as Town policy, a cost-effective process
and procedure that will continue to evolve in response to the changing needs of local
government and landowners.
Part 1I
Introduction
A. Character of Town
The Town of Southold (the "Town") is the eastern-most township on the North
Fork of Long Island, New York, and is bordered to the west by the Town of Riverhead, to
the south by the Peconic Bay and to the north by the Long Island Sound. The Town is long
and narrow: its landmass is approximately 54 square miles in size, but stretched out over 21
linear miles. Originally, the Town developed as a series of small, discrete traditional
hamlets, including Laurel, Mattituck, Cutchogue, New Suffolk, Peconic, Southold, East
Marion and Orient, separated by expanses of agricultural land.
The Town has a unique heritage and a rich history dating back to the colonial
period. To this day, many historic structures and sites remain, providing an important
sense of place that links the Town with Native Americans, and the earliest English
settlers of the land. In addition to the numerous historical sites and landmarks, many early
farmhouses remain on working farms. These houses and the farms on which they exist are
strong conveyors of the Town's rural heritage.
The visual diversity of open farm fields, vineyards, open waters, sheltered creeks,
wetlands and woodlands, along with quaint historic hamlets make the Town unique. This
scenic appeal has am-acted and will continue to attract residents, businesses, and visitors.
Agriculture, in particular, with its bucolic fields, farmstands, wineries and tasting rooms, as
well as "u-pick" produce, is a major component of the local tourism industry.
4
B. Development Pressure
Residents and visitors to the Town enjoy and benefit from a wealth of natural
resources including farmland, sound and bay beaches, marine waters for boating, fishing
and swimming, historic sites, and scenic vistas. Thousands of years after Native
Americans first populated Long Island, and several centuries after European settlers
arrived, the Town's fertile agricultural lands remain central to the character and economy
of the area. The sense of Southold as a rural, agricultural community is at the core of its
appeal for tourists and second homeowners. However, the high quality of life combined
with the Town's proximity to the metropolitan New York area, has resulted in continued
pressure to develop the remaining farmland. The loss of farmland not only threatens the
economic viability of agriculture; it diminishes the rural appeal of the Town thereby
threatening the Town's second home and tourism industries. Protecting a significant
percentage of the remaining acreage is critical to maintaining a healthy local economy,
and the efforts of individual landowners are key to protecting this valuable resource.
Agricultural land is the most visible feature of the Town's landscape, occupying
approximately 10,232 acres of the Town's approximately 34,000 acres. In 1997, the Town
contained 22% of Suffolk County's remaining agricultural acreage, which was second only
to the Town of Riverhead's agricultural acreage. With over $250 million worth of market
value annually, Suffolk County is New York State's leading producer of agricultural
products.2 To sustain the farming community, the Town and County have made substantial
investments in protecting the agricultural industry from development pressures since the
1970's. To date, the Town has protected 988 acres of farmland at a cost of approximately
$7.5 million and the County has protected 1,330 acres of farmland, also at a cost of
approximately $7.5 million. However, after over a decade of development rights
acquisition efforts, approximately 77% of the remaining farmland is unprotected.
The following is more detailed discussion of key impacts affecting farm and
farmland:
· Farming Industry Shifts
The agriculture industry has undergone major changes within the past two decades.
For generations, Southold's farmers focused on potato crops, as they are well suited to the
region's sandy, yet fertile soils. Other vegetable crops and fruits were grown, but on a
smaller scale. During the 1970's, the nature of crop production changed due to a number
of factors including the ban on TEMIK, an effective pesticide against the Colorado potato
beetle. TEMIK was banned due to its propensity to contaminate the groundwater, which is
the Town's sole source of drinking water. Without TEMIK, potato yields and profits
plummeted. Many potato farmers were faced with either raising different crops, which
required learning new tilling methods and purchasing new equipment, or opting out of the
business and selling the land.
· Escalating Real Estate Market/Estate Issues
While the potato industry was in decline, real estate values were appreciating and
developers were buying farmland to subdivide. Since developers were able to sell
improved land at roughly four times their cost, they bid raw land prices up. For various
economic reasons, farmers began to sell. Senior farmers with no family to continue the
tradition contemplated selling their land for retirement income and, in other instances,
heirs who inherited farms were unable to pay the estate taxes and were forced to sell. As
a result, viable land that had been farmed for generations was sold for development.
Given the high land prices, many farmers who needed additional acreage were forced to
either rent land or enhance productivity in order to remain profitable.
Development pressures have moved eastward in Suffolk County over the years due
to the availability and affordability of land and the desire of urban and suburban residents
to live in a more rural, scenic and safe community. The establishment in 1992 of the Pine
Barrens Preserve in Brookhaven, Riverhead and Southampton towns resulted in
development pressure leapfrogging to the east. Today, a strong economy and stock market
are driving the development. Further, some of the newcomers desire large remote lots or
6
"mini farms." This trend poses a threat to commercial farming because farmers am forced
to compete with residential buyers for large lots. Again, there is a significant disparity in
purchasing ability between farmers and non-fam~ buyers who are willing to pay higher
prices for vacant land.
Tourism Industry Impact
As the tourism/recreation industry has become a significant part of the Town's
economy, it has increased development pressures through a demand for more second
homes and related services. However, to sustain the tourism industry, care must be taken
to protect a significant part of the environmental base on which it heavily relies:
agriculture.
· Regional Development Impact
The Town is also being impacted by the intensification of development within the
adjacent Town of Riverhead. The Tanger Mall shopping outlet and Splish Splash Theme
Park have brought hundreds of thousands of visitors annually to the North Fork. In the
near future, the Town will also be impacted by the re-development of the former
Gmmman/tJS Navy property in Calverton. The site has the potential of generating
thousands of direct and indirect jobs. The Town's already threatened agricultural lands are
likely to be impacted by development pressure to create more residential subdivisions for
employee housing.
Per the Town's DraR 1999 Local Waterfi.ont Revitalization Plan, "if the Town were
to continue growing at an average of 14.5 percent [per decade] as it has since the 1950s; if
two-acre zoning were to remain in effect; and if no additional land were protected fi.om
development; the Town could expect to reach saturation population in less than 40 years".
Given the heightened development pressures, without proactive conservation efforts,
saturation could be reached even sooner.
C. Need for Protection Strategy
Development pressures are infringing upon the viability of the agricultural industry,
as well as the overall quality of life within the Town.
Since the mid- 1950's, the percentage of land in farm use has been declining to the
point where the total acreage in non-agricultural uses is now far greater than the total in
agricultural use. Approximately 28% of Southold's total land area is in agricultural land
use compared with 30% in residential land use. (The remaining land area is used as
follows: 2% in commercial/industrial use; 18% is vacant land; 11% in recreational
use/open space use; 6% in transportation use (roads, etc.); 4% in institutional use (e.g.
schools); and less than 1% in utilities and waste handling use)?
Privately owned and managed farmland generates far more in local tax revenues
than it costs in local services. It requires few public services unlike residential uses which
require schools, public safety (police and fire protection), infrastructure, etc. According to a
national study by the American Farmland Trust, the median cost to provide public services
per $1.00 of revenue raised is only $0.31 for farm uses while it is $1. l l for residential uses.
4 Therefore, saving farmland saves taxpayer dollars.
Summary of Cost of Community
Services Studies
Farm Residential
8
Not only is residential development draining on the Town's tax base, it has also
created a variety of problems for the farming community including:
developers bidding land prices beyond what farmers can afford;
increased complaints about farm-related activity i.e. chemical spraying;
smells, noise, dust, slow-moving equipment on roadways, etc;
crop loss from trespass and stormwater nm-off from developments;
physical barriers to equipment moving from field to field;
competition for water supply; and,
the loss of necessary farm-related businesses.
While the Town has attempted to address some of these issues with its Farmland
Bill of Rights and the State has tried with its Agricultural District program, problems still
exist.
Federal and state tax policies also complicate the effort to preserve farmland.
Believing that their only choices are to sell their land now or let their heirs deal with it
and the tax consequences in the future, many landowners are unwittingly sacrificing their
land, as well as their equity in it. Many landowners can benefit substantially fi-om a better
understanding of the range of options available to them with respect to the future use,
ownership, and management of their land.
As stated earlier, the agricultural land-base is shrinking. For Southold to retain its
rural heritage, a proactive, long-term strategy for farm and farmland protection must be
adopted and implemented now.
Part 111
AGRICULTURAL LAND INVENTORY AND ANALYSIS
In order to develop an informed, proactive farm and farmland protection strategy, a
comprehensive inventory (the "Inventory") was taken of the remaining agricultural lands
within the Town. The Inventory provides baseline data for the Town's use in its future
planning and farmland protection efforts.
A. Acreage Analysis
In the spring of 1998, the Town of Southold's Planning DeparIanent prepared a
preliminary estimate of agricultural land based on aerial photographs and field
inspections. The 1998 inventory identified approximately 6,253 acres of active farmland
and an additional 8 l I acres of fallow land totaling 7,064 acres. At the Town's request,
the Peconic Land Trust undertook a more comprehensive analysis of the agricultural land
inventory in May of 1999. (The methodology and inventory results are detailed in
Appendix A).
The revised Inventory identified 488 parcels considered to be in agricultural use,
totaling 10,232 acres. Of this total acreage, 7,466 acres are actively farmed, 1,490 acres
are considered fallow or resting, and 1,276 acres are associated support land.
In an effort to better understand the characteristics of the land included in the
agricultural land inventory and to define appropriate strategies for protection, the parcels
were grouped and analyzed into the following categories: Acreage in Production,
Acreage Protected, and Acreage Threatened.
10
1. Acreage in Production
Acreage by Crop
Approximately 7,466 acres of active farmland, 1,490 acres of fallow land and
1,276 acres of support land were identified. The inventory classifies the active farmland
into eleven categories--960 acres grain; 1,632 acres vegetable (including pumpkins and
sweet corn); 188 acres fruit/orchard/berries; 665 acres sod; 675 acres nursery; 161 acres
greenhouse; 856 acres potato; 353 acres field corn; 1,733 acres vineyard; 156 acres
horse farm/pasture; and, 88 acres Christmas trees. The following chart depicts the
farmland acreage:
A~e Farmla~ Crop
1
Vegetable and Vineyard uses represent the highest percentage of crops grown in
the Town at 18% each; fallow land represents 17%, grain 11%, potato crops 10% and the
remaining uses represent less than 10% each.
II
Crop Distribution
Crop distribution was analyzed in order to identify current agricultural trends and
determine the degree of crop diversity within the industry.
Grain is cultivated in all of the hamlets
except East Marion. Yet, only three of
the hamlets, Laurel, Mattituck, and
Cutchogue, contribute 70% of the grain
grown in the Town of Southold.
Vegetables, found in every hamlet,
are more evenly distributed. However.
Orient, has the most with 27% of the
total vegetable acreage.
Fruit, orchard, and berries are
found in five of the seven
hamlets. Cutchogue contributes
84% of the total fruit, orchard, and
berry acreage.
2%
12
In the Sod category, Cutchogue
contains 69% of the total acreage with
Southold and Peconic equally
contributing the remaining acreage.
Laurel and Cutchogue are the
main producers of Nursery
stock with 28% and 37%,
respectively.
$%
Greenhouses, identified in all
the hamlets except Orient, are
located mainly in Laurel (21%),
Mattituck (21%), and Cutchogue (36%).
Half of the total Potato acreage is
grown in Cutchogue. Mattituck,
with 37%, is the only other major potato
producing hamlet.
Field corn, grown in four of the seven
hamlets, is located mainly in
Mattituck (55%) and Cutchogue (35%).
Vineyard is fairly evenly distributed
among its main producing hamlets;
Mattituck comprises 23%, Cutchogue
30%, Peconic 30%, and Southold 16%.
14
Horse and animal farms/pastures
are found mainly in Mattituck (46%)
and Cutchogue (24%).
Christmas tree farms are found in
only three hamlets, Mattituck (19%),
Cutchogue (37%), and Southold (44%).
Approximately 87% of the Fallow land
is located within Mattituck, Cutchogue,
Peconic, and Southold.
15
Hamlet Composition
Hamlet composition was analyzed in order to determine the remaining farmland
acreage per hamlet and the degree of crop diversity within each hamlet, as well as to
identify any prominent industry preferences.
Orient consists of 742 acres of farmland and fallow land. Vegetables are the
dominant crop totaling approximately 436 acres. Fallow land is also prevalent, making
up 185 acres. East Marion also has a high proportion of vegetables with 82 of the total
96 farm acres devoted to that crop. All categories are represented in Southold's 1,434
agricultural acres, but the acreage is comprised mainly of four crops: vineyard (271
acres), vegetable (252 acres), grain (123), and nursery (124). It should also be noted that
fallow land makes up 360 of these acres. Peconle's 1,242 agricultural acreage is
comprised primarily of vineyard (519 acres). The other predominate crops are:
vegetable (278), grain (110) and sod (106); fallow land comprises 190 acres. Cutchogne
has the most farmland of all the hamlets (2,939 acres) and each agricultural category is
represented. However, vineyard, sod, potato, and fallow make up most of this acreage
with 527, 461,432, and 351 acres, respectively. In Mattituck, all categories except sod
16
were identified within its 2,077 acres of farmland. Of note are: 409 fallow acres; 392
vineyard acres; 315 potato acres; 288 vegetable acres; 233 grain acres and 183 field corn
acres. Laurel's 485 acres of farmland is comprised mostly of grain (200 acres) and
nursery ( 190 acres).
2. Acreage Already Protected
There are two types of farmland protection: public and private. The public sector
has permanently protected farmland through the County and Town Purchase of
Development Rights programs ("PDR"). As a function of the Town's clustered
subdivision open space requirements, additional acreage has been protected. The private
sector has also protected farmland through limited development projects and conservation
easements held by private conservation organizations.
The inventory shows that approximately 2,318 acres out of a total 10,232 acres of
farmland are permanently protected by PDR. Approximately 113 additional acres are
protected by subdivision open space requirements and private conservation efforts. This
means that 24% of the total agricultural land in the Town is currently protected by these
conservation efforts, leaving 76% unprotected and, therefore, vulnerable to conversion
from agricultural production.
3. Acreage Threatened
There are several criteria that can be used to identify land threatened by
development. We have identified the following:
- Land not Protected by Public or Private Conservation Programs
- Land with Pending Subdivision Applications
- Land not Enrolled in State Agricultural Programs
- Land Owned by Non-Residents
- Land Owned by Seniors
- Fallow Land
17
Laud not Protected by Public or Private Conservation Programs
Land is vulnerable to development if is not permanently protected by public PDR or
private conservation efforts. Of the 10,232 acres of total farmland, 2,431 acres are
protected. This means that a total of 7,801 acres or about 76% of the land is not protected
through PDR's, easements or subdivision open space and are considered vulnerable to
conversion at this time. While the Town has a subdivision cluster provision which would
theoretically protect 50% of the current farmland acreage, there are no certainties that the
subdivided lands would remain in active farm use (especially given the difficulties in
maintaining viable farm operations in proximity to residential clusters).
Land with Pending Subdivision Applications
Development is an immediate threat to land with pending subdivision applications.
Currently, nine parcels totaling 329 acres are in this category (see Inventory for details).
Laud not Enrolled in the Agricultural Programs
Other levels of threat include parcels that are not enrolled in agricultural programs;
non-participation in such programs could indicate that farmland may soon be converted
to non-farm use. On the other hand, participation in such programs may indicate an
intent to continue agricultural production, at least for the short-term.
Landowners may enroll their property in New York State's Agricultural District
Program (the "District") and/or apply for an Agricultural Assessment. By enrolling their
land in the District, landowners are eligible for agricultural assessments and to 'receive
certain statutory protections against possible complaints made by residents about
necessary agricultural processes i.e. plowing, irrigation, spraying, etc. The total acreage
enrolled in the current District, which is an 8-year program expiring in 2003, is
approximately 5,255 acres. Of the acreage enrolled, 4,586 acres are in active agricultural
use; the remaining acreage is considered support land. (This number more than doubles
the total acreage enrolled in the previous 8-year District of approximately 2,800 acres.)
18
Landowners not enrolled in a District are eligible for agricultural assessment
through the State's Individual Commitment Program. Presently, the Town has a total of
840 acres in individual commitments. As with the District enrollment, individual
commitments run for eight years, but each year, the eight-year commitment is renewed.
Properties currently enrolled in the Individual Commitment Program can be converted to
the existing District when it is renewed in 2003.
In order to obtain tax reductions, landowners must apply for an Agricultural
Assessment annually and can realize property tax reductions of approximately 80% on
average. To qualify, the land must be at least ten acres in size and must be actively
farmed for at least two years with gross sales of $10,000 annually. If the acreage is part
of a larger farm operation that meets these standards, it may qualify even though it is less
than ten acres. Alternatively, fewer than ten acres of actively farmed land are eligible if
gross annual sales exceed $50,000 for at least two years. Application for an agricultural
assessment is submitted to the Town Assessor prior to the taxable status date of March
1st.
Landowners receiving tax benefits under this program are penalized for
converting from fanning to other land uses. The penalty for converting land is equal to
five times the taxes saved in the last year plus 6% interest per year, compounded annually
for each year the agricultural assessment was granted (not exceeding 5 years).
Of the 10,232 agricultural acres, 4,089 acres or 40% are not within the District
nor are they enrolled in any kind of tax program. Those who own this acreage either
have made a conscious decision not to participate in such programs or they are unaware
of the programs and their benefits. In either case, these farmland acres are under a
greater threat of conversion than those enrolled in agricultural assessment programs.
Note: After eight years in the Agricultural District Program, the landowner is free to
convert the farmland without penalty. So, while the farmland enrolled in an agricultural
assessment program may be indicative of a short-term commitment to agriculture, the
19
threat of conversion still exists, in addition, if the difference in tax assessments between
participating and non-participating acreage is not substantial, the penalty may not be
significant enough to deter conversion. Also, as the penalty is not imposed until the land
is physically altered, land could be subdivided (but not built upon) without triggering the
conversion penalty.
Land Owned by Non-Residents
Another potential threat to conversion of agricultural land is non-resident
ownership. Non-residents tend to have fewer ties to the land. Non-resident owners of
active farmland are receiving relatively Iow rental income compared to the potential
income they could receive from sale or development of the land. Hence, non-resident
owners may be more easily enticed to convert or sell their land. At present, non-resident
ownership is estimated to encompass about 30% of the total acreage.5
Land Owned by Seniors
Land owned by seniors is also considered at risk. Many senior farmers may have
no younger family members interested in farming or they may not have properly
protected the land for future generations through proper estate planning. It is not
uncommon for heirs of farmland to face staggering inheritance taxes that necessitate the
sale of all or a large part of the farm in order to realize the cash necessary to pay such
taxes.
Fallow Land
Fallow land is at risk for impending development. The fact that land is not in active
production means that it is either being rested for a limited time or being held available
for development or sale. The Inventory identifies a high percentage--approximately
15%-- of the Town's total farmland acreage as fallow.
B. Composition of Agricultural Industry
20
1. Traditional Industry
For generations, Southold's farmers focused on potato crops, as they are well
suited to the region's sandy, yet fertile soils. Other vegetable crops and fruits were grown,
but on a smaller scale. During the 1970s, the nature of crop production changed due to a
number of factors. These include: an increased awareness of the potential for groundwater
contamination, the rising costs of farming (laboi', as well as purchasing and using
fertilizers/pesticides) and the growing competition for agricultural land.
In the late 1970s, Suffolk County's Department of Health Services began
documenting the leaching of chemicals bom fertilizers and pesticides applied to cropland.
The finding of TEMIK, an aldicarb-based pesticide in private wells near farm fields led to
an intensive well-monitoring program throughout the East End. The public health concerns
over contamination converged on the agricultural industry, forcing the reduced usage of
fertilizers and pesticides and the banning of easily leached compounds.
As a result, Integrated Pest Management ([PM) programs began to be promoted
wherever possible in order to reduce the need to apply fertilizers or pesticides. However,
the ban on aldicarb negatively affected the potato industry due to the immunity of the
Colorado Potato Beetle to other available pesticides. Without aldicarb, farmers saw yields
per acre drop to the point of unprofitability. Many farmers were faced with either planting
different crops, which required learning new tilling methods and acquiring new equipment,
or simply opting out of the fanning business. Concurrently, an oil embargo pushed up the
prices of petroleum-based fertilizers and pesticides and the fuel costs of applying them.6
Today, increased development pressures present an additional obstacle to farmers,
particularly those who need substantial acreage to be profitable. Long-time local farmers
are not only losing land to developers able to pay higher prices per acre, they are also
losing land to industry newcomers such as vineyard owners whose substantial resources
allow them to pay higher prices. The high land prices also exclude entry of new,
tmestablished farmers into the market.
21
2. Current Trends
The agricultural industry has undergone a number of changes within the last two
decades on a national level. Where once the United States was full of smaller family
farms, the shift has been to consolidation of farms into corporate enterprises. However,
the farms existing at the local level differ greatly fi.om this national trend. The inventory
shows that farmland parcels in the Town average, roughly, 17 acres in size. Due to the
shortage of affordable land for expansion, to remain profitable, many farmers have
moved towards specialized niche markets.
Much of the existing farmland that was devoted to potatoes has either been
converted into development or is producing alternative crops. In recent years, the most
noticeable trend is the growing number of vineyards. The conditions on the North Fork
of Long Island are very favorable to the growing of grapes due to the well-drained soil
and the climate. The concept of owning a vineyard has become increasingly popular with
affluent entrepreneurs from outside of the region. Fourteen wineries are located in the
Town and several others are in the making. The Inventory identifies approximately 18%
of active farmland as vineyard.
Another important trend is the increase of nurseries and greenhouses. Nurseries
represent approximately 8% percent and greenhouses represent 2% of the total active
farmland acreage. While these numbers are relatively small, they are rising.
Greenhouses and nurseries afford greater yield and higher profits per acre than most other
crops grown in Town. The greenhouse trend is causing much cona-oversy within the
Town. Many residents insist that the growing number of greenhouses is destroying the
open vistas that add to the beauty and attractiveness of the Town. However, given the
prohibitive cost of acquiring more land, greenhouses are becoming one of the most
profitable ways for local farmers to make a living on existing holdings. Eventually, a
compromise will need to be reached to maintain the scenic character of the Town while
allowing for the farmers' economic survival.
22
Sod farming has become more prominent within the Town and now represents
nearly 7% of the active farmland. The demand for sod, however, fluctuates with the
economy and the building industry.
Other crops such as vegetables remain stable and sell on a retail and local (farm
stand) level. Vegetable crops represent about 18% of the total active farmland. Berries
and tree fruits also are a stable crop that has not fluctuated much over the years. In total,
berries and tree fruits represent only about 2% of the total crop grown in Town.
It should be noted that fallow land represents approximately 15% of the 10,232
total farmland acreage.
The current trends show that farmers have diversified their crops to remain
economically viable. Traditional crops with local retail outlets remain stable, while high-
yielding and specialized niche market crops are on the rise.
3. Potential Future Trends
As development pressures increase and the value of land escalates, we can expect
farmers to continue to diversify and strengthen their market niches in order to remain
profitable. As noted earlier, one area that is experiencing an upsurge in growth is nurseries
and greenhouse production. The trend seems to be moving toward ornamentals, which
are extremely profitable in this strong economy. However, the traditional annual flower
market seems to remain strong even in a fiat economy. As noted in the previous section,
the number of greenhouses being installed has increased noticeably, generating complaints
fi.om residential neighbors who had assumed that land fi.om which development rights had
been purchased could not be used for any type of agricultural structure. New York State's
Agriculture and Markets Law classifies greenhouses as a farm structure, hence exempt
fi.om New York State building and fu'e codes. Unless specifically noted in the contract, the
23
sale of development rights does not preclude a farmer from installing greenhouses integral
to the farm-related business operation.
This situation is presently the subject of concentrated effort by the Town's Code
Committee, the Town Attorney, the Town's Agricultural Advisory Committee, the
Planning Board and Planning staff to reach a compromise on proposed regulations for the
siting and screening of greenhouses. This dialogue is illustrative of the difficulties the
Town faces in maintaining a balance between the needs of its agricultural industry in a
changing economy and the expectations of its residents, and second homeowners. At the
heart of this dilemma lies the fact that the very demand for open space vistas and traditional
farms by residents is foming farmers to maximize production on the remaining land by
shifting from traditional crops to greenhouse production which can take place year-round.
Another trend that is likely to continue as the economy thrives is vineyard
development. Vineyards represent a long-term investment in plant stock, as opposed to
the annual planting and harvesting of other crops. There are several years (and
significant financial investment) between planting and harvest. Many vineyards have
built wineries from which to manufacture and distribute their wines. These wineries have
become a significant tourist attraction in their own fight.
The strong tourism/recreation industry also fuels the profitability of local farm
stands, and hence, the growing of "truck crop" vegetables and berries will likely
continue.
Due to environmental concerns and the growing need for further ground water
protection, another likely increase will be in the production of organic produce and
Community Supported Agriculture, as well as the overall increase of Integrated Pest
Management (IPM) systems in all aspects of fanning to reduce the use of pesticides.7
24
Part IV
PLANNING FRAMEWORK
There is a significant history of farm and farmland protection within Southold
Town. As will be explained below, there are several methods whereby land is currently
being preserved. However, as also will be shown, these methods alone are not sufficient
to achieve the degree of protection that the Town wishes to attain.
A. Overview of recent and current Public strategies
Suffolk County and the Town have demonstrated a strong commitment to
preserving farm and farmland through a combination of purchase of development rights
programs, local zoning measures and matching funding.
Purchase of Development Rights
The County's purchase of development rights program has been in existence since
1974 and is responsible for the preservation of approximately 1,330 acres of farmland
within the Town at a cost of approximately $7.5 million. Most recently, in November
1998, voters authorized a County bond issuance of $62 million for conservation efforts.
Of this, $20 million is earmarked for farmland preservation within Suffolk County.
Since 1983, with the passage of its first local bond act to acquire the development
rights to farmland, the Town has spent approximately $7.5 million to purchase the rights
to more than 988 acres of prime agricultural land within the Town. Bond issues were
approved in 1983, 1987, 1994, 1996, 1997 and 1999.
Additional land protection measures were enacted when the Peconic Bay Region
Community Preservation Act (the "Act") was signed into law on June 22, 1998. This
legislation created a mechanism whereby the Town was able to establish a preservation
25
fund financed solely by revenues from a real estate transfer tax. The Act required the
development of the Community Preservation Project Plan ("CPPP'). The CPPP
identifies the properties the Town wishes to protect. It also describes many alternative
mechanisms the Town can use in cooperation with landowners to accomplish its goals. It
should be noted that properties listed are not prioritized and that landowners whose
properties are listed must voluntarily request acquisition by the Town under this program.
Town Zoning
Agricultural-Conservation
In the 1980's, the Town adopted a new zoning classification to identify and help
protect prime soils--Agricultural-Conservation (A-C). A-C is an important part of the
code in that it contains some restrictions against wholesale conversion of contiguous
areas of prime farmland to residential use. However, these restrictions have limited
impact as will be discussed in the next paragraph.
Cluster Development
The Clustering requirement encourages flexibility and innovation in residential
development design, which would not necessarily be achieved by adhering to traditional
zoning and subdivision regulations. Clustering is required on lots of 10 or more acres in
the A-C, R-40, R-80, R-120, R-200 and R-400 Districts. The Town's codes require that
at least 50% of the land be preserved from development. Depending on the shape of the
lot and the subdivision layout, clustering can result in large contiguous areas of open
space or farmland.
Properly used, clustering can result in preservation of farmland. However, given
the average acreage of most farms in Town (17 acres) and the fact that many farm lots are
shaped like elongated rectangles, it is very difficult to design a clustered subdivision that
also preserves a block of agricultural land that remains economically viable to farm.
26
Further, instead of limiting development, cluster zoning merely compacts it into restricted
areas.
Farmland Bill of Rights
The Farmland Bill of Rights was introduced into the Zoning Code in May of 1997
in order to protect farmers who were operating within applicable laws, from undue
interference fi.om residents (e.g. complaints about farm-related activity including
chemical spraying, smells, noise, dust, etc.) As discussed earlier, while the bill provides
for advance notice to buyers of property adjacent to farmed land, and some legal
protection, farmers are still inundated with complaints.
Matching Funding
Since 1997, the Town's Land Preservation Advisory Committee has successfully
leveraged Town funds (acquired from the bond referendums) to obtain matching federal
and state funds dedicated for farmland preservation.
B. Overview of Private and Public-Private Partnership Strategies
In recent years, there has been a significant change in the Town's approach to
land preservation. Instead of relying on zoning and subdivision cluster techniques to
preserve farm acreage, the Town has been open to establishing cooperative partnerships
with land conservation organizations and property owners.
Specifically, the Town Board, the Land Preservation Committee and the Planning
Board have worked closely with landowners on farmland preservation. The Peconic
Land Trust has helped to facilitate these efforts. This partnership bas been very effective
in a number of projects whereby a purchase of development rights was combined with
limited (reduced-density) development and private conservation easements. This
27
approach has effectively leveraged the Town's limited financial resources so that more
land is preserved or protected at less cost to the Town.
The Town also has supported the Conservation Opportunities Planning process
(COP) whereby the Trust works with landowners on behalf of the Town. The goals of
COP are: 1) to make landowners aware of public and private conservation tools and
techniques that may be useful by providing them with a range of options that meets dual
goals: economic and environmental; 2) to provide landowners with basic information
about their land (soils, topography, natural features, etc.) so that they can make informed
decisions; and, 3) to define areas that may be suitable for public or private conservation.
Conservation tools can be blended together to create the greatest benefit for the
landowner. One example of a successful blending of public acquisition programs with
private conservation techniques resulted in the protection of prime agricultural acreage in
Mattituck. In this instance, the owner of 77 acres worked with Peconic Land Trust and a
local surveyor to design a limited development plan that provided the means for his
family to realize the equity they required from their property, while preserving the land's
most significant attributes. More specifically, the Town purchased the development
rights to 34 acres of farmland adjacent to a 30-acre parcel of vineyard already protected
by a purchase of a development rights program. As a result, the integrity of a significant
agricultural unit remained .intact, and scenic, agricultural views of the area were not
affected. The plan provided the following:
1. The sale of development rights on the agricultural land to the municipality,
2. The donation of a conservation easement to the Peconic Land Trust, with
potential charitable gif~ benefits, due to the reduction of development potential
on the balance of the property from 20 units to 6 units,
3. The sale of restricted farmland to an adjacent landowner,
4. The creation of 6 residential sites of five acres each, and
5. The donation of 13 acres of land to the Peconic Land Trust for park purposes.
28
In the final analysis, this conservation effort was a "win-win" on all levels. The
landowner felt that the plan was financially and environmentally superior to full yield
development plans in that it met the family's investment goals while also protecting the
rural landscape of the area. The Town was able to protect important farmland and to
significantly reduce density on the property.
The partnership strategy expands the preservation options of landowners and the
Town alike. A variety of land preservation options are available to owners by using one
or more conservation tools. These are listed and described briefly below:
· Conservation Easements,
· Purchase of Development Rights,
· Transfer of Development Rights,
· Tax-Exempt Installment Sale,
29
· Bargain Sale,
· Like-Kind Exchange,
· Limited Development Plans,
· Family Limited Partnership,
· Charitable Remainder Trust, and
· Land Donation.
Conservation Easement
A Conservation Easement is a voluntary agreement between a landowner and a
charitable conservation organization or the Town to restrict the use of land in perpetuity.
This flexible tool protects land while leaving it in private ownership and can make a
critical difference in a family's ability to pass land from one generation to the next. It can
be very useful when used in combination with other tools. As such, easements convey a
portion of a property owner's "bundle of fights" to a qualified recipient. For example, an
easement may restrict land or a portion thereof from subdivision, construction, or other
alterations to the property in a specified manner. Such restrictions may protect significant
natural, agricultural, and/or historical features of the property.
Advantages to the landowner:
l. The landowner retains ownership of the land and may continue to live on
it, sell it, or pass it on to heirs.
2. The easement is flexible and can be written to meet the particular needs of
landowner while protecting the property's resources.
The donation of a conservation easement is a tax-deductible charitable giR,
provided that the easement is perpetual and is donated "exclusively for
conservation purposes" to a qualified organization or Town. The value
of the girl is equal to the difference between the fair market value of the land
before and after the imposition of the easement restrictions as determined
by a qualified appraiser. The before value is based on the potential
development yield and the after value is based on a conservation easement
plan that illustrates the open area and the development area.
An easement can significantly lower estate taxes--sometimes making the
difference between the ability of the heirs to keep land in the family and their
need to sell it. In addition, easements may provide the landowner with
property tax benefits since the assessed value of the land may be decreased.
Conservation easements do not permit public access. The public has no more
fight to trespass on land covered by an easement than on any other private
property, unless the owner is willing to permit such access.
30
Note: Post-Mortem Election
In instances where comprehensive estate planning has not occurred, recent
changes in the IRS code, Section 203 lC, allow the executor or beneficiaries of an
estate to donate a conservation easement within nine months after the landowner's
death, thereby reducing the potential estate tax liability.
Purchase of Development Rights
A development right is one of a property owner's "bundle of rights"; the one that
allows the construction of a residence on the property. Both the Town and Suffolk
County have Purchase of Development Rights (PDR) programs designed to protect
farmland. Through these programs, landowners voluntarily agree to sell all or a portion
of their development fights to the government. The landowner retains ownership of the
remainder of rights, which enable him/her to farm, to sell, and to pass the land on to
heirs.
Advantages to the landowner:
1. The landowner retains ownership of the land, and may continue to live on it,
farm it, sell it, or pass it on to heirs.
2. The landowner is paid for the development rights.
The sale of development rights can significantly lower estate taxes on the land
itself. However, the proceeds from the sale will be included in the
landowner's gross estate, unless spent. Also, the lhndowner may be subject to
capital gains tax.
4. The real estate tax assessment of the property is generally reduced.
Selling Development Rights
Since PDR programs are voluntary, participation in such programs is initiated by
a letter from the landowner to the Town or County expressing interest in selling
development rights. Assuming that there are funds available to purchase the
development rights and that the land fulfills the criteria of the program, the
municipality will order an appraisal of the development rights. Once the appraisal
is completed, an offer is made to the landowner. If there is agreement on the
purchase price, then a closing will be scheduled and the transaction will be
completed.
31
Tax-Exempt Installment Sale
Landowners who sell development rights or land are often confronted with a
capital gains tax that claims up to one-third of the sales price, depending on the owner's
basis. In September, 1996, Governor Pataki signed into New York State Legislation a
law that provides landowners with some relief from capital gains tax through a tax-
exempt installment sale.
A tax-exempt installment sale is a long-term contract (up to 30 years) to
sell development rights or land to a municipality. During the contract period, tax-
exempt interest on the unpaid sales price is~paid on a semiannual basis, with a
portion of the sales pr/ce paid each year until the end of the term. As such, both
the receipt of the sales price and payment of any capital gains tax are deferred. It
is important to note that, should the landowner want to realize all of the sales
price prior to the end of the term, the installment-purchase contract itself can be
sold by the landowner or his/her heirs to municipal bond investors.
Advantages to the Landowner:
1. The landowner can spread the proceeds of the sale of development rights
or land over a number of years.
2. The landowner can receive tax-exempt interest at a more favorable rate by
deferring the receipt of the sales price over time.
3. The payment of the capital gains tax can be deferred over as much as 30 years.
4. If inheritance tax is paid during the term of the installment sale, the heirs will
benefit from an increased basis.
5. The owner or the heirs may also sell the contract for cash.
Bargain Sale
A bargain sale is a conveyance of development rights or land to a charitable
conservation organization or municipality at less than its fair market value. For the
conservation organization and the municipality, a bargain sale results in a savings of
limited acquisition funds.
Advantages to the Landowner:
The difference between the land's fair market value as determined by a
qualified appraisal and its bargain sale price is a charitable donation for the
landowner.
32
2. A bargain sale combines the income-producing benefit of a sale with the tax-
reducing benefit of a donation.
Like-Kind Exchange (IRC 1031}
A like-kind exchange is a tax-free transaction in which a landowner's property is
exchanged for other qualified, like-kind property. Such an exchange can be fulfilled
through a sale of land or development rights as long as the exchange property is
identified within 45 days after the sale of the initial property; the proceeds of the sale are
reinvested in qualified business or investment property and the actual closing takes place
within 180 days after the sale of the initial property.
Advantages to the landowner:
l. Landowners can defer capital gains tax on the sale of appreciated property
including development rights.
2. Landowners can use the gross proceeds of a sale to acquire additional land.
Limited Development
Limited development is the subdivision of land on a reduced-density basis in a
manner that is both economically rewarding to the landowner and ecologically sensitive
to the land. It integrates the unique elements of an individual property (e.g. agricultural
soils, natural features) with the landowner's goals (e.g. estate planning, financial
objectives) and the real estate market of the local area to create an alternative to
traditional development.
Advantages to the landowner:
l. The recognition of the landowner's right and need to make gainful use of the
land.
2. The ability to blend property sales with charitable gifts to offset potential
capital gains tax.
3. Regulatory agencies often expedite approvals on limited development plans
given the reduction in density.
4. Road improvements and other infrastructure costs are greatly reduced with
limited development.
33
Family Limited Partnership
A family limited partnership is a form of ownership that can be used to facilitate
the transfer of land and other assets from one generation to another. Depending upoo
restrictions within the partnership agreement, the value of the land by the family limited
partnership can be discounted by as much as 25%-35% for estate tax purposes.
Advantages to the landowner:
1. The landowner, as general partner, retains control over the land.
2. If structured properly, assets beld by the family limited partnership can be
discounted in value thereby enabling more of the assets to be conveyed to the
next generation, especially through the use of the unified credit and annual
exclusions ($10,000/recipienffyear).
Charitable Remainder Trust
A Charitable Remainder Trust is a mechanism through which a landowner can
achieve a stream of income during his/her lifetime or other specified time period by
donating an asset (cash, securities, land, etc.) for the benefit of a charitable organization.
The Charitable Remainder Trust manages the investment of the asset with the income
being distributed to the landowner donor. Upon the death of the landowner, the principal
is transferred to the charitable organization.
Advantages to the landowner:
1. If the asset donated to the charitable remainder l~'ust is highly appreciated,
the proceeds of its sale will not be subject to capital gain tax and the income
distributed to the landowner will be based upon its full value.
2. The landowner realizes a charitable deduction for the donation of the asset to
the charitable remainder trust based on actuarial tables.
3. The assets donated are removed from the donor's estate thereby reducing tax
liability.
Land Donation
Under special circumstances, a landowner may want to consider an outright
donation of land. Land donated to a conservation organization or Town may represent an
excellent legacy for future generations. Communities across the coantty are enjoying
nature preserves, recreation areas, and other open space today because of the foresight
and generosity of landowners who have made gifts of appropriate portions of their
holdings.
34
Advantages to the landowner:
I. The transaction is relatively simple and can be accomplished through a
conveyance by deed.
2. The donation may provide a substantial income tax deduction to the
landowner based on the fair market value of the land as determined by a
qualified appraisal.
3. The capital gains tax and real estate commission are avoided.
4. The value of the land is removed bom the landowner's estate thereby
reducing future estate taxes.
5. If the land donated is of significant conservation value, it will be
permanently protected.
Note: Some landowners prefer to continue to own and control their land during their
lifetimes, transferring the land by will at the time of death. While the donor receives no
income tax benefit from the gift and continues to be liable for property taxes, removing
the value of the property bom the estate could significantly reduce estate taxes.
Although there has been a growing and highly successful use of the public/private
conservation strategies described above, they are not as well known as they should be.
Each of these strategies relies on the voluntary initiative and cooperation of the private
property owner. However, there is only limited community outreach and no coordinated
and ongoing education effort on the Town's part.
35
Part V
RECOMMENDATIONS
The analysis found that while the Town has made progress in farmland
preservation, more than 76% of its agricultural acreage still is not protected fi.om
conversion to residential development. In order for the Town to meet its goals of
preserving farmland and maintaining a viable agricultural industry, it cannot rely on the
standard methods it has employed over the last two decades.
In general, the Town should first assume responsibility to make greater use of
partnership efforts in order to leverage its limited financial resources more effectively.
Second, it should exert greater leadership and take a more proactive role in coordinating
the public/private partnership efforts. Third, it should maintain an ongoing dialogue with
property owners about the financially viable and attractive options for fanning and
farmland preservation. The following recommendations define a strategy to accomplish
these goals:
Identify critical farmland in need of protection
Identify contiguous tracts of farmland that should be conserved in order to
maintain the viability ofthe industry and project adjoining, open vistas.
The Town should send literature (e.g. the attached Conservation Options
brochure) and/or meet with landowners in these corridors to explain programs and
determine interest.
Reach out to owners of vulnerable parcels
The Town should adopt a systematic, outreach program directed at owners of
vulnerable farmland parcels--unprotected properties. Owners of land within the
critical corridor areas should be a priority. Recommended steps include:
36
Contacting subdivision applicants to discuss conservation options and
limited development as potential components of pending development
plans.
Contacting owners of parcels not enrolled in the Agricultural District or
Agricultural Assessment Program to encourage participation.
Contacting non-resident landowners to identify potential sellers or donors
of development rights.
Contacting Senior owners and encourage participation in a Town-
sponsored estate planning seminar.
Contacting owners of fallow land to identify potential sellers or donors of
development rights.
Compile and maintain a listing of known lands for sale
Such a list should be created fi.om the outreach described above and added to as
additional lands are identified. The list should be reviewed by the Town for
potential PDR participation and could be shared with farmers wishing to expand
or with farmers trying to enter the market.
Provide easily accessible literature and resources on preservation options
The Town should provide landowners with easy access to the attached
Conservation Options brochure and any other relevant literature i.e. NYS
Agricultural Districts information, as well as access to a knowledgeable person to
answer questions and/or meet with landowners. The Town should also sponsor a
series of free workshops to explain the benefits of conservation options to
landowners. Workshop speakers could include estate planners, farmers who have
participated in the PDR program, representatives of conservation organizations,
etc. To do a more effective job of marketing these various public and private
conservation tools and techniques, an Options pamphlet was created and is
attached (Appendix B).
37
Expedite the Conservation Opportunities Planning (COP) Process
The COP Process is a valuable tool for the Town to help encourage landowners to
participate in conservation planning--it provides landowners with a better
understanding of their land and their options while assisting the Town to identify
those portions of one's property that should be protected. It is also a valuable tool
for potentially leveraging funds through the public-private partnerships. If limited
development becomes a component of a conservation plan, the Town should
consider an expedited subdivision approval process, especially if the overall
density of the property is reduced by 75% or more through the sale or donation of
development fights. Expediting both the PDR acquisition process and the
approval process for limited development plans would provide greater incentives
to landowners to voluntarily protect significant portions of their land and would
enhance the credibility of the land protection options.
Optimum use of the COP requires use of computer generated mapping
capabilities, which the Town possesses. In order to make maximum use of this
resource, however, the Town should continue to enhance the capabilities of its
Geographical Information System through the addition of staff, continued
training, updated software and expanded database development.
Leverage funds to the greatest extent possible
The Town should continue to be proactive in seeking Federal, State and County
grant funds to leverage Town funds, as well as in actively supporting legislation
to enhance Federal, State and County funding programs. In addition, the Town
should continue to forge public-private partnerships to leverage funds. As
mentioned above, partnerships, which can lead to leveraging funds, can be
identified through the COP process, as well as through regular contact with local
conservation organizations, etc.
38
Encourage farm support services and farm-related businesses to thrive
Retaining farming and its related businesses is good economic development
policy. Local land use and other policies should be examined to ensure that they
are not hindering these businesses; the Town should also investigate potential
incentives to encourage such businesses.
In addition, the Town should continue to support reasonable retail farming
initiatives and should consider conducting a proactive marketing campaign to
foster agri-tourism. By helping to make farming more profitable, farmers will
want to continue farming and to expand farm operations within the Town.
Investigate creating a Town Agricultural Agreement Program
While the State has an Agricultural District Program, approximately 40% of the
farmland acreage is not enrolled in that program. By creating a Town
Agricultural Agreement Program with a shorter term, additional parcels may
become enrolled. Other Towns have implemented their own districts with various
enrollment terms and tax benefits (e.g. enrollment on an annual basis and tax
reduction of 50%). For landowners who do not want to participate in the eight-
year State program, a Town program that reduces property taxes on farmland may
provide a way to encourage landowners to hold land in farming, albeit for a
shorter term.
Encourage the use of IPM and environmentally friendly techniques.
By encouraging the use of more environmentally compatible farming techniques,
complaints about farm nuisances and drinking water contamination will be
curbed. The Town should consider incentives for green farming and support
Federal and State legislation for such incentives.
Streamline the regulatory process.
By reducing burdensome regulatory procedures, farmers should be able to
accomplish their objectives more easily. The Town should initiate discussions
39
with local farm representatives to find out what procedures are perceived as
cumbersome and examine local policy to simplify the process.
Develop a Stewardship Program.
Work with the farm industry to determine effective ways to ensure the wise,
ongoing use of preserved farmland in accordance with the aims for which public
and private resources were committed.
Assign responsibility for implementation of the-above referenced strategies
and actions by January 2000.
The analysis of information gathered in this report clearly indicates that any
reasonable preservation goal set by the Town Board will require careful
professional oversight. With approximately 7,800 acres of farmland at risk, even
a modestly successful program over the course of thc next five to ten years will
require a coordinated capital investment in the tens of millions of dollars.
Implementation of an effective preservation plan which minimizes the cost to the
Town and maximizes preservation efforts will clearly require a commitment of
staff and sufficient budgeted resources. A dedicated Land Preservation Program
Coordinator could knit together the greatest level of achievement of all of the
recommendations included in this report and ensure proper administration with
Town government.
Conclusion
The Town's agricultural resources are unique and irreplaceable. They
form the basis of the Town's aesthetic and economic character. The underlying
premise of this report and these recommendations is that the Town will have to
maximize all available public and private resources in order to accomplish its dual
goals of preserving farmland and maintaining a viable agricultural industry. It
also is clear that implementation of the recommendations will require a
commitment of administrative resources along with a more proactive policy of
40
preservation and stewardship. And, finally, there is recognition that it is not
enough to create partnerships with private landowners and other entities to effect
preservation of prime farmland--the Town must take responsibility to exert
ongoing care or stewardship to ensure that the land remains in productive
farming, lest our individual and collective aims of conservation be thwarted.
ENDNOTES
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner, Town of Southold.
Dra~ Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Document. Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner, Town of
Southold, 1998/l 999.
Suffolk County's Ground Watershed Protection and Water Supply Management Strategy (draft, April
1999). *Data includes Fishers Island and Plum Island
From studies conducted by the American Farmland Trust.
Information from the Town Assessor and Planning Department.
Draf~ Local Waterfront Revitalization Program Document.
This section was completed by interviews with Cornel[ Cooperative Extension.
41
Appendix A
$outhold Farm and Farn
rotection Strategy Inventory
Total Acreage of Farmland Parcels
Total Acreage of Active Farmland
Total Fallow Acreage
Total Support Land Acreage
10232
7466
1490
1276
Total Protected Acres
Percent of Farmland Protected
Public Protected Acres
Subdiv. Open Space & Private Protected Acres
2431
24%
2318
113
Kev
I grain 960 acres
2 vegetable 1632 acres
3 frui~orchard/berries 188 acres
4 sod 665 acres
5 nursery 675 acres
6 = greenhouse (including container stock) 161 acres
7 = fallow* 1490 acres
8 = potato 856 acres
9 = field corn 353 acres
I0 = vineyard 1733 acres
11 = horse farm/animal farm/pasture 156 acres
12 = x-mas trees 88 acres
* Fallow includes overgrown agricultural parcels and some
parcels with cover crop.
Agricultural Pro,ram
Enrolled in Agricultural District [ (~ 8 year renewal
Agriculture Exemption within Agricultural Dislrict
Agrieuhure Exemption - Individual Commltmenl
Pletqe note: Pamels wilhout a number in the total acreage nolumn have their total acreage listed in one ofthe other categories because their use falls in more than one category (multiple crops).
The total acreage for that tax map number will be reflected in one of the other categories.
13
14
15
~UUU ~: 2 17.~ 100~lSO0~,O00201?O06 ~rain 25.1
I~ 63 18.1 1~3~3018~1 ~ 4,3 ~,T
I~ 6~ 24 1~3~30240~ ~~ 3.~ R.5
I~ ~ 3 1~0~6~0~2003~
I~ ~ 48 1~2~8~
I~ ~ 2 511~2051~ O~ 0.25
I~ ~ 2 M
1~ ~ 2 58 100~2058~ ~in 0.5 0.5
I~ ~ 2 59 1~205~ ~in 0.25 0.25
I~ ~ 2 60 1~2~ ~in 0.25 0.25
I~ ~ 2 61 10~2061~ ~in 0.25 0.25
t~ ~ ~ 6x.~ ~~oo~
I~ ~ 2 63
I~ ~ 2 6! 1~2~ ~in
I~ 65 I
~ 75 3
~ 75 4 22.S ~75~022~ ~g~in
I~ 75 6 I I 1~75~1
I~ ~ 2, 9.1 1~83~2~1 I~e
1~ 83 3 1~83~3~2 ~in [ .... 19~ ' 13.6
I~ 84 2 2.1 1~84~2~2001
I~ 85 3i 10.4 1~85~301~ ~in -
I~ 85 3i 12.2 1~8S~3012~2 ~in __
[~ ~ ~ t.~ ~2~i. I ~x.~l tx.el
,~~ 41 ~.ll ~~ ~i. I ~ ~.q
I
L__
J
1
1
L__
1
1
I
Suffolk PDR
Su ffoJk PDR
Suffolk PDR
X, submilted 6/8/q9
16
17
18
19
21
23
24
23
26
27~
28
29
30
3]
40
41
Southold Farm and Farm' O;otection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivision Ag.
District Uses Acres Cate Protection A dieatlon
1000 100: 2 4 1000100000000200400~ ~:rain 34 ...... ~, ..... ~,v.~, ............ Ft' .........
34.4 1
lO00 10( 2 6 100010000000020060~ ha~ 7 I
1000 10( 4 3 1000100000000400300(] ~heat 17.5 22.1l I
1000 10( 4 4 100010000000040040OS ~e 28 I I,
1000 los 4 5.4 i0001000000004005004 rnin 10 I Town PDR
1000 101 I 2.3 10001010000001002003 ~:rnin 4 I
1000 101 I 7.2 10001010000001007002 :[train 10.9 I Town PDR
.~000 101 2 22 10001010000002022000 'l~rain 7.1 7,1
1000 101 2 24.t 10001010000002024000 [train 16.1 16.11 I Suffolk PDR
,, 1000 102 2 22 i 000102000000202,300{] [ v/e 14.7
1000 102 41 5.3 10001020000004005003i~e 14.6 144 I Town PDR
1000 102 41 6.1 10001020000004006001lithe 22.5 22.-~ I Town PDR I,
10~0
102
6
20.1
10001020000006020001
l~.i. i.5 35.8, i
,o. ,o~ :o! 100010700000100060~ t'/e 22.6 22.( I I,
I000 10'~ II lC 1000107000001101000~ ]~ain 7 13.-~ I
, I000 108 I 10001080000001002000 i~tain 4.7 4/; i
1000 108 3 100010800~003007000 ~rain 22 I I,
1000 108 3 I000108000000300700~ ha~' 5 I h
1000 10S I 10.1 10001090000001010001 I~-ain 22.9 53 1
1000 109 I II I0001090000001011000 ~rain 27 I I
1000 109 I 2] 10001090000001023000 8raln 5.8 5.81 I
1000 115 2 3.1 1000115000000~0030011~e 7.5 49.78 I Town PDR
..1000 115 41 8.5 I0001150000004008005 t,/e 4.2 33.21 I I.
1000 115 8 10001150000008001000 .~ain 12.5 24i
.1000 115 8 3.] 10001150000008003003 l~'ain 12 29 1
1000 115 IoI 1000115000001000100O ~ntin 12.3 15.21 I
1000 125 31 I'~ 1000125000000301300~ i~aln 4.3 4.3! 1 X, Laurel Links
i000 125 4 21 100012~000000402100~ I~nin 57.4 57.4 I X, Laurel Links I.
.1000 i25 41 24.1 10001250000004024001 ~ain 63 6] I X, Laurel Links I.
1000 126 7 1000126000000700i000 i~ain 75.5 100.4' 1 X, Laurel Links
51
61
71
Total 959.6
Percentage of active
farmland ! 2.85 %
II 1000 17 6 6 10000170000006006000[ve[etable
3 l I~ I 18 41 1.31 10000180000004001003 vegetable
.14.21 25.2J
12.4 28.7
11.5 16.8
2
2
2 PLT Easement
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total
District Uses Acres ~,,cagc ~_ ategory l'rot :tion
!a 4 1oooo18oo00o04o076o0 vegetable y of_ 22. q
10OO 18 5~ 23 IO00018OO00005023O00 vegetable 81
1O00 18 ( 14.5 10oo018ooOO006014o05 vegetable 4.5 -- 4.51 ---~
lo00 18 14.6 IO00018OOOO006014O06 vegetable 2 21 2
1000 J$ 14.8 1OOOO180000006014oo8 vegetable 4,3 4.31 2
IOO0 18 14.9 IO00~18O0OOO06014009 w~,e~b!e 31.15 62.31 2 I Tow~ PDR
]OOO 18 17.3 1000018000000601700,1 vegetable 4 26.71 2 --
H~0 Ig 6 19.3 Ioo00i~000u006019003 ve~table 15.2 15.21 2 I ----
IOOO 19 1.2 10000190(300001001002 vegetable 25 34.61 2 --
10O0 19 7.4 10000190CR~R~I007004 vegetable 68.3 116.9 2 I Su£f'o PDR
I~00 19 7.5 100OOI~tooT00$ reliable 8 8 2 I -----
10O0 19 8.4 IOO00ifn~0v001oogoo4 vegetable 31.4 35.4 2 I
IOO0 19 11.3 IOO00190000001011003 vegetable 9.2 9.9 2 I --
17 1000 19 14.7 IOOOOi~-n~V001014007 vegetable 26.6 30.3 2 I --
18 1000 19 2 10.1 10000190000002010001 vegetable 31.9 31.9 2 I Sut~o' PDP.
Ig 1000 20 1.3 100~200O0OOOIOOl003 vegetable 19.7 19.7 2 I
20 IOO0 20 2.2 1000020001~001oo2002i vegetable 20 20 2 [ Tow~
21 IOOO 20 3.2 IO0OO20000O001oo3002 vegetable 28.7 28.7 2 I Tow~
22 IO00 20 3 3 i00~v2UOOCRa)03o030OOl ve~:etabldftuit 25.5 25.5 2 -- I ' --
23 10O0 20 3 4.1 10~020~000003OO4001 vegetable 0.5 15.6 2 ] p
IOO0 20 3 6.2 100002000900030060021 vegetable 4.7 21 2 I --
IOOO 27 2 10~ux)u6'00001002C,~0 vegetable 10 10 2 I - --
10O0 27 3 $ 100002~0O00OO300~0001 vegetable 14.6 14.6 2
IOOO 30 2 130 100003f,'000000213oo0( vegetable 19.5 19.9 2 ] Subcliv. Open Space
28 10OO 31 I 100OO310O0000100100( renderable 23.3 33 2 I --
1~0 31, 6 28.1 10~031OOOO(~6028O01 ve{:etabJe ]5 17.2 2 I --'
30 IOOO 38 1.3 10000380000001001002 vegetable 24.3 33.6 2 I --
31 I000 52, 4 1.3 10000520000004001002 referable 3 4.9 2
IOO0 52 4 4 IOO00520000004004OO{ vegetable 6 12.'/ 2 ~-~
33 10OO 5;21 5 59.10 IOO0052000g00505901¢ ~e~etable 29 34.8
IOOO $4~ 7 21.1 10000~40OO000702100! ~e~etable 26.9 34 2
35; IOOO $.~ I 8.4' IO0005;$OO0OO01OO~004 ~e~etable 18.3 18.3 2
1000 5.~ 2 8.$ IO0005:$C,'0~200800~. ~e~etablc 5 2
37 IOOO 5;~ 5 IT 1O000~5;000000:501700( ~,~etable 31.4 31.4 2
38 I000 5;~ 4 2.1 10000590000004002001 ~,e~elable t4.7 17.9 2 ----T
IooO 62 I 1.5 IooO063ooOooolOOlOO.~ ~,eeh,hle~ : -- 8.6 8.6 2
I000 6.~ 3 25; 10000630000003025000! ve~iable 6.2 ...... 8.3 .... 2 ..... ~- ....
41 I000 ~ 3 15; 10000660000003015;000! vegetable 27.2 ...... 27.2 .... ~--- -- ~ '
IOOO 69! 6 IooO069000000100(~OOve[~etable -- 36 40.1 ......... ~' ...... ~ -
43 I000 701 8 I IOOO070OOOOO08001OOO! vegetable 6 61
---' 6 2 .......
44 looO 73 3 I.I IOOOO730OOOO03OOIOOl vegetable s5.5 .... ~ ___~.- .... ~ --- '
PDR
PDR
Pending Subdivislo.
..\ pplicati~ n
Ag.
I 42.1 10000740000001042001 ~etab~e 2
~ '~',~ 3 1000075000000300300~ ~etable __ 2
11300 75 7 I..~ 1000075000~, 7001005 ~'e~etnble ,0 2 Town PDR
I000 75 7 1000075000000700200~ ge~etable 2 20.e 2
1000 75 7! 6.1 10000750000007006001 ~-~elnble 2 I~ 2
1000 84 1' 7.1 10000840000001007001 referable 1.9 IS 2
10O0 84 I 12.1 10000840000001012001 ~e~able 6.2 6.2 2
1000 84 2 4.1 10000840000002004001 s,e~etable 86 8~ 2
10O0 84 4, I000084000000400100~ s,e~etable 3 6.3! 2
1000 84 5' 1.2 10000840000005001002 ~e~etable 0.9 I 2
1000 84 5 I.~ 1000084000000500100 ~e~etable 13.15 2 Suf~olkPDR
1000 85 2 le 1000085000000201600~ ~e[:elable 24.1 31.4 2
10O0 8e 3 1000086000000300100~ ~effetnble 33 75.6 2
J000 94 2 1000094000000200700~ ~umpkin$ 4.9 10 2
'1000 95 I l( 1000095000000101000~ ~:etable 20.~ 2
1000 9~ 2 31 1000096000000200300( ge~:etable I 2.2 2
10GO 9~ 2 71 1000096000000200700( vegetable 24.0 34.9 2
1000 96 2 1( 1000096000000201000( s, eiletable 7.5 26.5 2
1000 9~ 2 I I 1000096000000201100( s,e~etable 9.3 9.3 2
10~0 97 I 1000097000000100100C ve[~etable 19.4 2
1000 9'~ I 16.4 1000097000000101600~ ~el~ble 14.8 14.8 2 Town PDR
lO00 9~ I 18 1000097000000101800( vegetable 5.5 5.5 2
1000 9~ 2 3 10000970000002003000! vegetable 2.2 2.6 2
1000 9~ 2 23 10000970000002023000 ve[ietable 2 2
1000 9; 4 17.1 10000970000004017001 vegetable 1.9 1.9 2
1000 9~ 4 17.2 10000970000004017002 vegetable 2.1 2.1 2
10O0 97i 4 17.3 10000970000004017003 ve~-"htble 2 2 2
1000 97 5 2.1 10000970000005002001 vegetable lO 10.1 2
1000 97 8 31.2 10000970000008031002 re,table 17.5 21.7 2 Town PDR
1000 101 2.3 10001010000001002003 ve[ietnble 12.c) 20.9 2
1000 101 2 6 10001010000001002006 ~elable/t'ruit I1.1~ 16.70 2
1000 101 2 16 10001010000002016000 ve~:etable 2
1000 102 9 10001020000001009000 veffetable 25.4 27 2
1000 102 2 12.2 10001020000002012002 ve[~etable 3.2 3.2 2
I000 102 23 10001020000002023000 ve[:elnble 2.~ 2
10O0 102 6.2 10001020000004006002 vegetable 7.8[ 7.8 2
1000 106 2.3 100010~i0000009002003 vegetable 23.5' 25.9 2
1000 106 4.9 1000[060000009004009 vegetable 10 14.3 2 Subdiv. Open Space
1000 108 10001080000002003000 ve[lelnble 3 3.~ 2
1000 108 10001080000002006000 vegetable I g 2
1000 109 10.2 10001090000007010002 corn(sweet) 1.5 2
45
$7
6O
61
67
71
77
78
81
86
91
Dbtrkt
I04
105
1000
Southoid Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Uses Acres
Total
Percentage of active
farmland
Total
0.5
1631.83
21.86%
Cate
2
2
2
2
2
64 2
2
2
22.~
39.3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Protection
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk pDR
Suffolk PDR
Town pDR
Pending Subdivision
Ag.
/-- I.
Southold Farm and Farnc O'rotection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivision Ag.
Dbtrlet Uses Acres Acres Cate, Protection alication
II 1000 102 6 20.1 10001020000006020001 orchard 16.8 3
12 1000 102 6 23.2 10001020000006023002 o~haM 6.4 6.4 3 Suffolk PDR I.
13 1000 103 II 1.2 10001030000011001002 on:hard lO 18.7 3 Suffolk PDR I,
i4 1000 i03 I I 22 10001030000011022000 orchard 5.3 6 3
I$ 1000 103 I I 23 10001030000011023000 orchard 8.3 8.3 3 Suffolk PDR I,
16 1000 109 5 23.3 10001090000005023003 orchard 29.4 29.4 3
17 10O0 109 7 10.2 10001090000007010002 orchard 5.8 15.3 3 1,
18 ..ti000 109 7 10.2 I0001090000007010002 small fruit 5.8 3 I.
19 10gO II0: I.I 10001100000001001001 orchard 5.6 5.6 3
1000 110; 1.3 10001100000001001003 o~hard 17 18.2 3 Suffolk PDR
21 1000 II0, 8 1.1 10001100000008001001 orchard 6 6 3 SuffolkPDR
22 1000 II0~ 8 1.3 10001100000008001003 omhard 0.3 0.3 3
23 1000 II0: 8 2 10001100000008002000 orchard 15.4 15.4 3 Suffolk PDR
1000 II0 8 32.4 10001100000008032004 orchard 5.8 31.9 3 Suffolk PDR
1000 115 8 3.3 10001150000008003003 bet'ties 3 3 I.
26 1000 120 3 11.8 10001200000003011008 betdea g 10.3 3
Total 188.30
Percentage ot' active
farmland 2.52%
1000 59 3 27 10000590000003027000 sod 20.2 21.1 4
1000 69 5 18.2 10000690000005018002 sod 59 62.1 4 Suffolk PDR
10(X) 74 4 4.1 10000740000004004001 sod 2.6 2.6 4
1000 74 4 4.2 10000740000004004002 sod 2 2 4
1000 74 4 4.3 10000740000004004003 sod 1.9 1.9 4
1000 74 4 4.4 10000740000004004004 sod 1.9 1.9 4
1000 74 4 4.5 10000740000004004005 sod 13 1.9 4
I000 74 4 4.6 10000740000004004006 sod 1.9 1.9 4
1000 74 4 4.7 10000740000004004007 Iod 2 2 4
I 1000 74 4 4.8 10000740000004004008 ~xl 2.(~ 2.6 4
It 1000 75 7 2 10000750000007002000 sod 18.e 4 ~.
12 1000 82 10000820000001001000 sod 9.9 9.9 4 j
13 1000 83 32.3 10000830000001032003 sod 29.7 29.7 4 ~,
14 1000 84 2 I.I 10000840000002001001 sod 9 4 h
15 I000 84 2 3.3 1.000{)840000002003003 sod 48.5 57 4 I,
16 I000 85 7 10000850000002007000 tod 23.7 33.? 4 I.
I'/ 1000 85 18.2 100008500000020i8002 sod 25.2 25.2 4 SufFolk PDR I
I,O00 86 10.~) 10000860000001010009 sod 32.1 32. l 4 i, )l
]000 95 4 10000950000001004000 sod 47.4 47,4 4
1000 95 10000950000001005000 sod 33.2 33,2 4 ]
22 1000 9~ · ~/ 8.i 10000950000001008001 sod ] 44.71 44.7 4
23 l~ 9,5 ~'] ~ 10000950000001009000 sod { 23.71 23.71 4
2al ~ 95 '~] ~ Io6o~sooo~fOlOOOO,,~l ]- sT - ~ 4'
2~ ~-s-q i.i 1000~s(~oooo20~ib~ ~I--- aq' 5~.2) ~ '
2']I |000~[- ~ --: -- 4 i0~0v:~000000200400o ,od I 7.al ~.61 4 I
2~ !~ I 95 a.I 1000095000000300800m ~d I ~ -- 54.61 '¥" ]
2g 1000 ~ 95 10000950000004001000 ~ I 12.3l 12.31 4 I
3( {000 95 9 10000950000004009000 sod { 6.3{ ..... 6.3 4
31 1000 95 I0 1000095~010000 sod I 20.41 2~.~4 - -~--
32 1000 95' 11 J 0000950000004011 000 sod { 13.1 13.11 4
3] I000 95 4 12 10(300950000004012000 SOd 6.2 6.21 4
34 1000 95 4 13 160609500000~4013000 sod 6.5 6.~1 4
35 3000 97 I(} I0000~0000010001000 sod 4 4
36 1000 97 I(~ 2 10000970000010002000 sod 4[ 41 4
Total 664.80
Percentage of active
farmland 8.90%
t
1
{
1000 55 2 8.5 10000550000002008005 nuraer//omhard I '1 I 1.21 5 ·
lO00 69 4 11 10000690000004011000nurs~ I 5'31 .___ ~
1000 69 a 9.5 '~s n.~ I ~1 I 5
1000 74 5 S I000074000000SOOS000 n~/~reenhouses [ 5.31 ~ 5
1000 75 6 10000750000001006000nutsery I 7[ 10..~, 5
1000 75 17.1 10000750000001017001 nut~-~/ 2.5[ 4.2/ 5
] J000 75 17.2 10000750000001017002 numer~ ) 17J 19.6[ - -~- ) Town PDR
II 1000 75 2 2 100007500000020020O0 nursery [ 181 {
12 I000 75 2 8 10000750000002008000 nuucr'/ { 16.61 ~ 5 I
13 1000 75 2 9 10000750000002009000 nursery I ~ 18.71
t4 IO00 75 4 z9 m~75~02~000 nu,~/ [ o.21 ~
15 1000 75' 6 7.3 10000750060006007003 nursery { ~ 'i'~ 9~- 5 { Srlffo/k PDR
16 1000 83 2 13.8 10000830000002013008 nuesety ___ ] ~ [ ~ [ ~ufrolk PDR
$outhold Farm and Farm' rotection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivision Ag.
Uses Acres Prote :tion flication
I000 84 I 7.i 10000940000001007002 nurser-/ I I, 5
1000 84 I 7..~ 10000840000001007003 nurs~/ 12 12 5 Suffolk PDR l,
1000 84 I 7/I 1000~,840000001007004 aul~e~t 18.7 18.7 5 Suffolk PDR I,
I000 84 I, 1000084000000100800~ luner'/ 17.9 23.9' 5 I,
I0~0 84 4 1000084000000400100~ lurser~ 5 6.2 5 t, 2
i000 ~ 41 6.1 10000840000004006001 mrse~t 43.8 a8.~ 5
1000 ~l 4 6.1 1000054~00600! lu~e~ 18.2 48.8 5
1000 8,1 4 7.1 10000840000004007001 mrte~ 4 7.~ 5
'1000 ~1 51 1.3 1000~,$4000000500100] :flo,.v~ 0.5 5 Suffolk ?DR
I1~0 88 2 Ii 10000880000002017.00~ ~urse~ 9.4 9.8: 5
1000 9~ 3 1000096000000300200~ ~ui~e~ 18.5 18.5 5 I,
1000 9~ 3 6.1 1000096000000300600t xurseo~ 3.2 3.2 5
1000 9] 5 1000097000000500600{] aur~e~ 21.8 30.1 5 I,
1000 IOl I 19.1 10001010000001019001 xu~ 13.1 14.5 5
1000 102 2 2.~ 10001~,2000000200200'2 aurse~ 0.5 C..5 5
I000 102 2 2.2 I0001020000002002003 xurse~ 15.6 5 I,
1000 102 2 24.1 10001020000002024001 aul~ 0.9 II 5
1000 102 2 24.~ 10001020000002024002 autse~t I I 5
1000 103 I 19.3 10001030000001019003 au~t~ 26.7 26.7 5 I,
i000 103 I I 1.2 10001030000011001002 aui'~f~' 7.7 5 Suffolk PDR
1000 10! 2 1000108000000200700~ ~il~c~t 12.6 12.6 5 I,
1000 10~ 3 6.3 1000108000000~006003 i'~nhot~e/nurse~ 5 17,58 5 Town PDR (partial)
IOOO iO~ 3 13.( 1000108000000301300~ nurser-/ 4.1 4.1 5
I000 113 7 2.51 1000113000000700200~ aune~ I 8.9 5
I000 I1~ 13 Ii 1000113000001300100~ ~nrse~t , 17 17 5
I000 12( 3 8.2 I000120000000300800~ nuts',/ 2.2 2.2 5
I000 121 3 6 1000121000000300600( nutsery/~rtenhouse 2.2 2.2 5
IO(X) 121 3 7.31 1000121000000300700'~ nu~ 2.4 2.4 5
I000 121 3 7.4 1000121000000300700~ nurse~t 10 11.3 5 I,
I000 12~ I 2.1 1000124000000100200 nurser,/ 20 28.5 5
1000 12~ 3 4.1 10001250000003004001 nnrse~ . 8.7 13.5 5
I000 12~ 3 7.2 I000125000000300700~ nurser,/ 6.5 6.5 5 I,
I000 I~ 3 8, 1000125000000300800( nursery 7 7 5 I,
I000 125i 3 10 1000125000000301000( nurser~,/ 2.4 4.9 5 I,
I000 12~ I 1000127~100100( rlllf~e~/ 47 49.6 5
1000 1271 2 2.1 10001170000002002001 farad, 1.5 5
1000 127] 3 I I 1000127000000301100( aune~t 38.6 38.6 5 I,
1000 127 3 12 1000127000000301200( nu~e~/ 36 38.2 5
10~ 129 I I0001290000001001000 nur,~e~ 42,5 56.8 5 I, 2
21
2.~
24
31
3;
3:
34
35
36
37
40
41
43
44
45
46
48
51
53
54
Toml 674.85
I000 31 I $J; 10000310000001005009 8reenhous-~ 4 7.g 6
I...__~.=_~ 5~2 4 10000520000(XM00200~ ~reenhouse 0.4 6
1000 5_..~ 2 21 10000560000002021000 .~,reenhouse I 6
1000 5~ 10. 100005~)000010001'-~ ._greenhouse 0.$, 6
1000 6~ 3 10000660000002003000 ~eenhouse i.2 6
I~0~0 6~9~21 3 10000690000002003000 .~house'~ 4: 5.1 6
· Ioeo 69 4~ II tooooagoooooo4oHooo Feenhouse ~ --~ -~---
I000 69 9.$ 10000~~5 ~,~,,:,uuSeS 9.1 10.1 6
1000 75 17.1 1000075t~1017001 i~;,~,,;,ous~. 0.8 6
1000 75 17.2 10000750000001017002 [:teenhouse 0.0; 6
1000 84 104, 10000840000001010001 ~-,~,,,~ua~; 7.9 6
1000 84 1.3 10000840000005001003 ~...~.,,house 0.75 14.4 6 Suffolk ?DR
I000 85 7 10000850000002007000 ~-c.~,b~,,~..e 1~ 6
1000 88 17 100008~0000002017000 &i~.i~,ouse 0.4
10(X) 96 7.1 10000900000~9--3-n('-7001 ~,e~nl,uoses 0.25 12.6 6
1000 100 5.2 10001000000002005002 ~reenhouse 5.3 5.3 6
1000 100 ~ 5.3 10001000000002005003 i~,i~,u~ I0 I0 6
I0~0 101 14.3 10001010000001014003 ~.,,[,,,~se 2.5 12.3 6
I000 I01 19.1 10001010000001019~01 [a~.;,u~se 1.7 6
21 I0~0 102 20.1 1000102~)2~1 ~,,; ..... 12.3 6
22 10~0 107 2.1 1000107000000100200l ~-~a,5ouse 4.5 15.3 6
I $ubdiv. Open
23 1000 107 10 10.1 10001070000010010001 I~eenhouse 8 l0 6
24 1000 109 8.8 10001~1008008 ~eenhouse 24 24.7 6 I Town PDR
10gO 109 7 7 1000J0~utaa~/oO70001 [b-eenhot~ I.$ 3.3 6
10O0 ll2 7 1000112(r,-~3~01007000: [~teenhous e 0.6 44.3 6
100 I15 4 8.5 10001150000004008005 [~reenhouse 3.5 6 ] __ __~_.
28 I000 120 3 5 10001200000003005000 ~teenhouse I.I I.I 6 j
1000 125 2 2.2 1000125000000200200~ ~-enhouse 25 36.5 6 I
, .1000 127 2 2.1 10001270000002002001 ~-enhouse 8 14.8 6 ]
Total 160.90
Percentage of active
Farmland 2.16%
I000 18 2 33 10000180000002033000 fallow 7.9 7.9 7
lOgO 18 2 34 10000180000002034000 Fallow 22.2 22.2 7
I000 18 5 18.4 10000180000005018004; Fallow 2.9 2.9 7
1000 18 5 18.5 10000i~6'000~0501800.~ Fallow 3.6 3.6 7
1000 II 5 18.6 10000igCr,~)~:~01800( Fallow 3.7 3.7 7
I000 I! 5 23 I000018000000502~( ~llow 5 7
1000 18 6 4.1 10000~001 fallow 8.5 11.5 7
I000 18 6 5 10000igC500( Fallow 10.5 10.5 7
1000 IS I 10.7 100001900~a~I010003 Fallow 14.7 19.7 7 Town PDR
I 71000 I~ I 18.3 10000190000001018002 Fallow 76.8 76.8 7 Suffolk PDR I,
II 1000 2( 3 1,2 10000200000003001002 Callow 25.3 25.3 ? Suffolk PDR l,
12 1000 23 I 9 1000027000000100900( Fallow 4,1 4.1 ?
13 1000 31 3 12 1000031000000301200( Callow 9.6 18,8 ?
1000 51 3 4.3 1000051000000300400 Callow 22.1 27.6 ? I,.
1000 5.~ I 8.3 10000550000001008003 Callow 16.8 22.6 ? Town PDR
1000 5~ I 9 1000055000000100900~ Callow 16.? 16,7 7
17 1000 $~ 2 7 1000055000000200700( Fallow 11.5 20 7
18 1000 5~ 3 6.1 10000550000003006001 fallow 16.5 36.5 7
19 1000 $~ 6 35 10000550000~(a503500( Callow 29 29 7 X
1000 5~ I II.I 10000560000001011001 fallbw 69.4 69.4 7
21 1000 5e 3 13.2 100005~3013002 Callow 2.2 2.2 7
22 1000 5e 3 13.3 10000560(O0~30i300 fallow 4.1 4.1 7
1000 5~J 3 26.1 10000590000003026001 Callow 17.6 17.6 7
1000 5~ 10 6.3 1000059000001000600 Callow 13.1 28.3 7 ~,;
2~ 1000 63 I 1.3 1000063000000100100 fallow 4.3 7
26 1000 63 I 25 1000063000000102500~ Fallow 16.5 23 7
27 I000 63 3 I.I 10000630000003001001 fallow ILl ILl 7 I,;
28 1000 68 4 18 I000068000000401800C ['allow 15.9 40 7 I,
1000 6S 3 9.3 10000690000003009003 ['allow II 15.~ 7
1000 6~ 3 10. Ii 100006fa~00003010001 Ca!low 27.2 27.; 7
31 1000 72 2 2.'1, 100f~2~2002001 ['allow 4.9 4.~ 7
1000 73 I I: 1000073~i00100C ['allow 5.8 5.8 7
I000 73 I 2.2 10000730000001002002 ['allow 13.1 13.1 7
34 1000 73 2 4 1000073000000200400~ ['allow 31.5 31..~ 7
35i 1000 74 I 36 100007400000010360~ ['allow 58.4 7
1000 74 I 40.1 10000740000001040001 ['allow 32.5 51.,~ 7
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Dlsilq~ Total Pending Subdivision
38
41
42
43
44
48
5;
61
Ag.
7O
71
,~ae* ^cres Acreage ~ Pi otecllon
37 1000 7~4 2 15 10000740000002015~- rallow..~.~ 7 7 7
I~ 7~ ~ 10~75~2~2~ fallow 19.8 37.~ 7
I~ 7~ ~ 3 1~75~3~ allo~ 7.1 ~ ~
I~ 7~ 6.~ 1~75~ rallo~ 10.3 23.1j 7
7,2
I~ 75 6 7.4, 1~75~ ~allo~ 5.1 5.1 7
I~ sa ~ ~o.~s~~~l allo~ Is.s ts.5 7 s,rrolk
~ l~ l i1.~ I~1~o11~ ~1~ 14.~ 17.4
I~ ~ ~ ~.~ I~1~~ tllow 2 7
I~ ~ 5 3.~ 1~~3~2 tallow 6.9 6.~ 7
I~ 8~ 2 14 I~R~.~O[~ ~llow 18.8 36.5 7
I~ 8( 4 6.8 I~~ ~allow 7.5 7.5 7 I S~bd~ 0~en~p~c~l--~
I~ 88 2 I~ 1~2015~ tallow 14.2 14.~ 7
I~ ~ 3~ t~3~ ~llow 18.6 7
I~ 95 I 3.1 1~l~3~l ~allow 26.1 45.~ 7 ~ ~
I~ 96 I I~l~l~ fallow 28.3 28.3 7 ~
I~ ~ I 1~1~2~ fallow 17 I~ 7 [
I~ 9~ 9 I~ 1~7~12~ [allow 32.7 34.~ 7
I~ 98 I' 1.3 1~&~l~l~3 fallow 14.9 14.9 7
I~ 98 I 2.1 1~8~1~2~1 fallow 10.6 10.6 7 ~"
1~ [~ 3, l 12 I~i~]0,~ falrow 23.l 23.1 7
I~ I01 5.2 1~101~1~2 fallow 76.5 06.5~ 7 I
I~ 101 I 8.1 I~10i~l~l fall~ 7 32.2J 7
I~ ~oz 22 4 1~lO~2~ fafl~ 5.~, 5.~[ 7 [
I~ I01 16 1~101~201~ ~llow 5.9 6.9 7
I~ 105 6.2 1~105~1~ fallow 53.41 53.4
I~ 107 2.1 1~107~1~1 ~llow 10.8~ I 7 ~div.
I~ 108 I.I 1~10~1~1~1 fallow 19.~ ~9.71 7 3 - -~
I~ 112 1~112~2~1~ fillow ~ __~ _.- U.5I
73 I~ II3 I.I I~1i~7~1~1 fallow ___~_~_.~_ 4.15t I
75 1~ 116 3.4 I~ll~l~ hll~w __ ~ si_ 35.81. 7
76 I~ 121 9.1 1~121~1 allow .... I __ S°I_ 63.61 ~ I
[~ 121 5~ 4.1 1~1210~5~001 fnllow ~ 714~ 71.4~ 7 ~
Southold Farm and Farn~ rotection Strategy Inventory.
781 I°0°l 1221 ~1 2'21
oo0 I ZZl si 41
80 10go 122 7 8.6
Uses
10001220000001002002 fallow
10001220000005004000 fallow
l O001220000007008006 fallow
Total
Acres Acreage Category Protection
21'32 54.227 7 7
54.2 7
Total 1489.65
Pending Subdivision Ag.
Application Pro§ram
IO00 19 7.4 I0000100000001007004 ~otato 7.8 8 Suffolk PDR i,
1000 54 24.] 10000~40000003024001 mtalo 53.9 53.S 8 I, 2
IO00 55 5.1 IO000550000001005001 mlato 10.1 10.1 8
IO00 55 9.4 10000550000002009004 mlat~ 17.5 19.2 8 Town PDR
I000 55 I¢ 10000550000002010000 mtato 19.6 25.-~ 8
I000 83 13.8 i00008.10000002013008 mtato 20! 37.2 8 Suflblk PDR I.
1000 83 le 10000830000002016000 mtato 17,5; 30.8 8 I, .'
1000 83 17 IO000830~(~12017000 rua~u 33.8 33.8 8
IO00 83 6.1 10000830000003006001 ~otato 16.~ 26.7 8 I,
IO00 84 II 10000840000001011000 ~otato 28.5 28.7 8 1,2
1000 84 13 IO000840000001.013000 ~olato 10.r~ 14.'~ 8
IO00 94 3 3.3 10000940000003003003 ~olato 2C 25.3 8 Town PDR
IO00 95 1.1 IO000950000001001001 ~olato 10.5 33.2 8
IO00 95 2 I0000950000001002000 ~otato 34.1 34.1 8
1000 95 3.1 IO000950000001003001 ,c, iatu 22 8
IO00 95 3 3.6 10000950000003003006 ~otato 36.l 36.1 8 Suffolk PDR
IO00 95 4 3.1 10000950000004003001 ,u~a~u 21.1 8
IO00 95 4 14.3 1000095~014003 ,u~aiu 25.4 28.5 8 Town PDR (partial)
IO00 96 2 5 I0000960000002U0500~ -,~":~, 19.2 22.8 8 Suffolk PDR
1000 IO0 2 10001000000002u01000 -6ta'~6 64.9 69.9 8
I000 I00 3 16 IO001000000003016007 =~-'-~, 14.1 18.3 8 Suffolk PDR 1,2
IO00 [O0 4 2 1000100000000400200(~ ,~am 17.7 24.1 8
1000 100 4 4 IO001000000004004000 ~,.'-tu 32.1 62.3 8 I,
1000 101 7.2 IO001010000001007002 Otato 10.9 21.8 8 Town PDR I.
I000 1Ol 2 5 1000101000000200500f -~i,, 10.4 10.4 8 },;
Io00 10] 4 I.I 10001070000004001001 olato 19.5 32.3 8 Suffolk PDR I,
1000 10~ 5 I.I 10001070000005001001 ~,~u 15.6 15.6 8
1000 1071 5 6.3 10001070000005006003 x,~am 20 20 8 Town PDR
IO00 105 10 3 IO001070000010003OOC oe'to 17.4 20.8 8
1000 105 l0 8 Io00107000001000800( otato 15.4 15.4 8
IO00 10~ 3 I Io00108000000300100f olalo 16 17.3 8 I, 2
II
12
13
14
16
I?
18
19
21
23
29
31
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total
Dlstrkt Uses Acres Acre~
li
il
I mm I io~ II I°°°'to9oooooolo1~oepotato I ~
1000 ] 10~ I 24.~11oomO~°°°°olo2~ ,o,.to -I- -~ 3A.i~l
1000 . Il3 .7] I.I 10001130000007001001 mtato I 0.25] 4.4]
1000 ...... 115 2~ lC 10001150000002010000 IOlato t 23.8 23,8
I_~.~.,~ Ill ~1 13'1 IO001110000007013001 ~olato I 15.31 16.8
I000 115 10001150000008001000 ~otato I 12.71
1000 115 ~i 3.3 10001150000008003003 ~olato 81
1000 116 10001160000001002000 mtato I 30] 54.4[
32¸
3~
Total 855.94
Percentage of active
farmland I 1.46%
Category Protection
8 I Town PDR
s I
a I
s 1
Pending Subdivislo.
A pplicafion
Ag.
1000 20 3. 7.1 10000200000003007001 eom 181 18.21 9
1000 55.~ 6.1 10000550000003006001 corn ....
1000 94 331 1.3 1000(}940000003001003 eom 122.~[ 12.51 9
10~0 94 10000940000003002000 eom 18.7 37.31 9
Iooo 9541 s,3 10000950(N)0~005003 field eom 41.8 41.8 9
1000 95 1000095000000~006000 field corn 5 8.3 9
1000 97 I2.4 100fa~o000001012004 fieldcom 12 19.8 9
1000 100 10001000000002003000 corn 40 58.4 9
1000 100 6 100010000C~002006000 eom(field) 21.5: 38.5
1000 101 21.3 1000101000000202100: eom(field) 25 -- 9
1000 107 lC 9 IO00i0~f,]0fi0010009000 eom (field) I 23.8, 27.7 9
1000 112 8.2 10001120000001008002 cornI 36.3 36.3 9
1000 115 3.1 1000115000000200300 eom 7.5, 49.78 --- 9
I000 115 6 10001150000002006000 corn(field) 211 23.3 9
1000 115 9.1 10001150000002009001 eom 20.5 20.5 9
1000 116 2 10001160000001002000 eorn 241 .... 9
' -Suffolk PDR
Suffolk P~R
Town PDR
Town PDR
Total 352.60
Percentage of active
farmland 4.72%
1
l
X, submitted 3/13/96
I I000 J 51 3 4.3 10000510000003004003vineyard
2 000 55 I 8.3 0000550000001008003 vineyard
Southold Farm and Farm' otection Strategy Inventory
Total
Pending Subdivision Ag.
District Uses Acres Protection )licntton Pro
1000 56i 5 1.3 1000056000000500100 vine/etd 15 22.3 10
1000 5~ 3 28.4 1000059000000302800~ vin~ard 54.4 54.4 10
1000 5~ 9 28.1 10000590000009028001 vine/ard 8.5 8.5 I0
1000 5~ 9 28.2 1000059000000902800~ vine,~ 14.5 14.5 10 Suffolk PDR
1000 5S 9 30.8 1000059000000903000~ vine~M 12.3 12.8 10 Suffolk PDR .1
1000 5~ 10 6.3 10000.59000001000600.~ vine/aM 12.9 10 I,
1000 6~ I 33 1000066000000103301X vine/aM 1.2 1.2 10
1000 6~ 5 4.1 10000690000005004001 vine/ard 6.7 10.8 10 I
1000 6S 5 19 1000069000000501900C vineyard 16.7 16 I0 Town PDR
1000 731 3.4 10000730000001003004 vine/etd 13 13 10 Town PDR I,
1000 74 38 1000074000000103800( vine/etd 30.7 45.7 10 I,
100O 74: 4 3.2 10000740000004003002 vine/eM 21.7 21.7 10
· 1000 7.~ I 15.4 100007.50000001015004 vine/aM 16.4 24.9 10 TownPDR
10~0 7.~ 20.2 100007.5000000102000~ vine/aM 41 46.4 10 Suffolk PDR I,
1000 7.~ 2 15.2 100007.5000000201500': vineyard 17.9 18.4 10 Town PDR I,
1000 7~ 5 I 100007.50000005001000 vine/etd 14.7 14.7 10
1000 7.~ 6 9.6 100007.50000006009006: vineyard 2 2 10
10O0 7-~ 6 9.7 10000750000006009007 vine)aM 28 28 10 Suffolk PDR
10O0 751 7 1.5 10000750000007001005 vineyard 12.5 22.5 10 Town PDR
1000 84! 4.4 10000840000001004004 vine/aM 1.7 3.7 10
1000 84' 4.5 10000840000001004005 vim,,~ard 17.2 17.2 10 Town PDR
1000 84 4 ]0.1 10000840000004010001,vine/ard 33.5 35 10 Suffolk PDR I, 2
I
~4 4 13 10000840~00004013000 vihe/ard 5.2 5.2 10 Town PDR 3
1000 85 9 10000850000001009000 vine~rard 12.8 12.8 10
1000 85 ]0 10000850000001010000 vine,/ard 17.'7 17.7 10 1,2
10O0 85 2 I.I 10000850000002001001 vine/aM 6.4 6.4 10
1000 85 2 1.3 10000850000002001003 vine/aM 6.5 6.5
1000 85 2 9.2 10000850000002009002 vine/aM 65 70 10
1000 8.5 2 10.3 10000850000002010003 vine~rd 42.3 42.3 10 Suffolk PDR
1000 85 2 11.3 100008.50000002011003 vine/aM 37.2 37.2 ~0 Suffolk PDR I, 2
100O 85 2 14 100008.50000002014000 vine/etd 17.7 10 I,
1000 8.5 2 15 1000085000000201.5000 vine/aM 37.6 37.6 IR I, 2
1000 85 2 17.2 10000850000002017002 vine/aM 25.1 25.1 10 Suffolk PDR I,
1000 85 3 8 10000850000003008000 vine/aM 18.6 18.6 l0 1, ?
1000 85 3 II 10000850000003011000 vine/etd 48.4 50.2 l0
1000 86 3.3 10000860000001003003 vine/ard 2.9 2.9 10
1000 86 3.4 10000860000001003004 vine/ard 21.'/ 21.7 l0 Suffolk PDR
1000 86 9.3 10000860000001009003 vine/ard 37.3 37.3 10 Town PD~R (partial)
10O0 86 15 10000860000001015000 vineyard 25 28.4 10 ' I,
1000 94 3 4.2 10000940000003004002 vine/aM '26 26 10 Suffolk PDR
1000 95 3.1 10000950000001003001 vineyard 2 l0 I,
I
I1
12
13
14
l$
16
17
18
19
21
24
25
28
29
31
32
33
38
41
42
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivision
DI~'I~ Uses Acres Acreage Categot)' Protcctlon .,\_p. pHca lb,h
IO00 96 2 7 I000096000000200700~ dn~d I0 I0
IO00 96 2 I0 1000096000000201000( dne~rd 8 iO I
IO00 96 3 4.1 10000960000003004001 vineyard 30 38.7 10
1000 96 3 5 IO00096000000300500( ~ne/srd 10.9 10.9 lO
1000 96 3 6.3 10000960000003006002 vine~'ard 14.6 14.6 l0 Suffolk PDR I _._
Io00 96 3 6.4 IO00096000000300600~ vine~,ard 5.8 5.8 10 Suffolk PDR
1000 96 4 4.3 10000960000004004002 vine,/ard 14.9 15 l0
't0~0 97 fl.2 10000970Oo0001011001 vlne~ard 53 53 ~0 Suffolk PDR
1000 97 12.6 1000097000000101200( vine'/ard 4.9 4.9 10 I
1000 97 12.7 IO00097000000101200'] vineyard 14.8 14.8 10 Town PDR
IO00 97 4 12 100(10970000004012000 vine~/ard I 10 I
1go0 97 4 19 10~0970000~4010000 v/ne,/aM IL7 Il.7 10 I .
1000 98 27.1 IO000980000001027001 vlne/ard 32 78.3 l0
1000 IO0 4 5.4 IO00100000000400~O04 vine,/ard 24.6 36.3 10 Town PDR ] __
1000 100 4 8 IO001000000(~O08000 vineyard 29.4 33.1 l0
1000 lOI 4.1 10001010000001004O01 vine/ag 14.5 14.5 I0
Io00 101 5.2 10001010000001005002 vine~rd 2(~ 10
1000 101 14.4 10001010000001014004 vineyard 5.l 5.2 10
1000 101 ! 1000101000~02001000 vioe~'~rd $.2C 5.2(~ ~0
1000 101 18.t 1000101000000201800~ v~oe~ard 12.6 12.~ 10 I Suffolk ?DR
IO00 101 2: 21.3 10001010000002021003 vineyard 20 50.2 10 t Suffolk PDR
1,0~0 102 I 3.3 10001020000001O03O03 v/ne'/ard 6.9 6.~ l0 Suffolk PDR
IO00 102 l] 5.2 10001010000001005O02 vino,/ard 14.8 18. l 10 ] __ _
IO00 103 I' 19.11 Io00103000000101901! vineyard 19.5 24.2 l0
1000 108 3 1000108000000300700(1 dneyard 20.9 57.6 I0 1
1000 10S i 8.] IO00109000000100800'1 dne~'ard 36.4 36.4 10 ]
1000 10g I 13 Io0010990t~0101300~ ~ineItard 30 50.4 tO
IO00 112 I 16.2 IO00112000000101600..q dne~ard 98.5 98.5 I0
1000 II~ I I~ 1000112000000101000~ dne,/ard 44.3 44.3 l0
IO00 IH I 20 IO0011200000010200~ dne~/ard 62.9 62.9 10 [ ..
1000 Ill 2 2' IO0011200000020020~ dne,/ard (6 16 t0
IO00 112 I 2.1 IO001130000001002001 dneyard 21.7 23.7 10 I
1000 II.~ 7 19.26 10(1011300000070190~ vintTard 30 30 10 I TownPDR(oartlab 1--' .
1000 115 7 13.2 I O001150000007013002' Vine'/aid 15.9 16.4 lO I
1000 116 3.4 lo00116000000100,to04: vineyard 27.8 10 t Suffolk PDR. PLT J "
IO00 120 2 3.1 10001200000002003001 vine:lard 20.4 3O.5 I0 t I
IO00 120 I 1O0012O000O005O01O00 vineyard __ 27 __ =~o ,0 I Town PDR
IO00 121 1.3 10001210000001O01003 vineyard 4.8 5.6 10 ' I ~- ....
1000 121 1.6 IO001210000001001006 vine,/ard 5 (0 ----] Town PDR ~- ....
IO00 125 I 2.3~ IO001250000001002032 vineyard _. 14.1] 20.o l0 ~ Suffolk PD~P, ~_ __ _
48
52
53
54
5~
61
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
81
83
Ag.
$outhold Farm and Farm~ ~:otection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivision Ag,
Olslrtet . Uses Acres Acreage Cate~or~ Protection Application Pro,:ram
ssi iooo I JUl ~1 °'41 ~°°°125°°°°°°l°°6°ealvineynrd I 91 11'121 I0 I TownPDR I I ~1
Total 1733,00
Percentage of active
farmland 23.21%
1000 18 4.1 10000180000006004001 homefarm II
1000 52 10000520000004002000 horse farm 1.8 2.8 I I
1000 52 60.2 10000520000005060002 home farm I I 13.8 I I
I000 69 7.1 10000690000005007001 ~astarc 1~ I~]
1000 86 3.2 10000860000006003002 ~aslure 1.2 1.2 I I
1000 96 7.1 10000960000003007001 hone farm 12
1000 97 10000970000001001000 horse farm 24.4 I
1000 97 22 10000970000002023000 hone farm 14 17.~ I
1000 98 27.1 10000950000001027001 farm animals (sheep) I£
1000 10l 2.3 10001010000001002003 horse farm I I
1000 102 23 10001020000002023000 ~asture 45.7 I I I,
horse farm/farm
1000 106 9: 10001060000009003000 animals 19S 193 II
1000 108 3 6.3 1000108000000300~003 horse farm 12 II Town PDR (partial) I
1000 115 9 10001150000009004000 ho~se farm 171 45.3
1000 120 2 10001200000002004000 horse farm 4 I
1000 121 3 5.1 10001210000003005001 horse farm 7 9.8 I1
1000 122 I 2.~ 10001220000001002002 horse farm 8 11 I I 3
1000 125 3 IU 1000125000000301100{1 hone farm 10 11.2 II 1,2
Total 155.90
Percentagn of active
farmland 2.09%
1000 68 4 18 10000~8000000401800~ ~-maslrces 19.8 12 I,
1000 75 2 9 1000075000000200900{ ~-mesl~ees I 12
I000 71[ 10.23 10000780000001010022 ~c-mastrces 17.5 17.5 12 I, 2
lO00 102 2 6.2 10001020000002006002 x-mastrees 1.9 1.9 12
I000 102 2 6.3 10001020000002006003' x-mas trees 1.9 1.9 12
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivision
District Uses Acres Acreage Categor'/ Protection Application
1000. 102 2 6.4 10001020000002006004 x-mas trees I.~ 1,9
1000 102 2 6.5 10001020000002006005 x-mestrees I.~ I.C; 12
1000 102 2 6.~ 10001020000002006006 x-mas trees 2.3 2.3 12
1000 102 2 6.~ 10001020000002006008 x-masuees 2.~ 2.8 12 I
1000 102 2 I~ 1000102000G002016000 x-mas trees 2¢ 25.5
1000 108 3 5.~ 10001080000003005002 x-mastrees I.I I.l 12
1000 10g 3 5.4~ 10001080000003005044 :x-mas t~ees 0.4 9.4 12 I
tO00 I0~ 3 5.45i 10001080000003005045 ~x-m~s trees 5.41 6.~ 12
I000 I0~ 3 5.5 10001080000003005005 t-m~strees I 12
I
I!
12
Total 87.90
Pc~entage o£activc
farmland I. 18%
Ag.
Southold Farm and Farml )n Strategy Inventory 't
Total Pending Subdivgion
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres Protection fiication A
1000 17; 6 6 ~fmit 5.1 3
1000 18~ 2- 33 tallow 7.9 7.9! 7
100~ 18 2 34 ['allow 22.2 ~2.21 7 ' '
1000 18, 3 30.3 ~getable 12.4 28/) 2 ,. 3
1000 18 4 1.3 resemble 11.5 16.81 2 PL~ Easemen!
t000 lB 4 7 ve~¢ta'ble. 10 22.1 2 ......
1000 18 5 18.4 ['allow 2.9 2.9~ 7
1000 18 5 18.5 fallow 3.6 3.6 7
lO00 18 5 18.6 fa{Iow 3.7 3.7 7
1000 18 5 23 vegetabl~ 3 8 2
I000 18 5 23 fallow 5 7
1000 18 6 4. I fallow 8,5 11.5 7
I000 18 6 411 ho~s¢ farm 31 I 1
1000 18 6 5 fallow 10.5 10.5 7
1000 15 6 14~.~ vegetable 4.5 '4.'5 2 I, 2
1000 18 6 14,~ vese~able, , '"'"iI ... 2 2 " . .... - ,_ 1, 2
1000 18 6 14,gl vel[etable.. 4.3 4.3 2 1, 2
~000 i'~ 6 14.9! ve$etable 31.15 62.3 2 " TownPI~R ,.
t000 18 6 14.9 nursery 31.15 5 Town,PDR ,..
' '1000 18 ~ 17.3 vegetable 4 26.7 2
1000 18 ~ 19.3 vegetable 15.2 ...15.2 2 ..... 31
1000 19 1.2 vegetable 25 34.6 2 .....
1000 19 II 7.4 vegetable . 68.3 I 16.9 2 Suffolk PDR ........1, 2:
1000 15 1~ 7.4 ~otaW 7.8 8 Suffolk PDR 1,
1000 15 Il 7.5 vegetable 8 8 2 ....... ,... l,
1000 15 l ! 8.4 vegetable 31.4 35.4 2 1,
1000 15 1: 10.7 fallow 14.7 19.7 7 ToWn'l~DR''
1000 15 I 11.3 v.e~¢table 9.2 9.5 2
1000 1~ I 14.7 ~ve.~etable 26.6 30.3 2
1,2
1000 19 I 18.3 {'allow 76.8 76.1] 7 Suffolk?DR
1000 19 2 10. I ~e{getabie 31.9 31.5 . .2 SuffolkPDR
1000 20 ... I 1.3 vegetab!e .. 19.7 19.7 2 I,
1000 20 1 2.2 vegelable 20 20 2 Town PDR
i000 20 I 3.2 vcgclable 28.7 28.71 2 Town PDR
shat~/~phnniagL%uthold Farm }nltiative~Farrn tnventory.xls~y tax #
Page { of 17 Mod/Ged 9/2,~/99 a( { 44 PM
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
District Section Block
............ ~- '~.,.~.~u, y s ~ utccuml AppllCaiioII
1000 20 3 1.2 fallow 25.3 25.3 7 Suffolk PDR
I000 20 3 3 vegetable/fruit 25.5' 25.5 2
1000 20 3 4.1 vegetable 0.5 15.6 2 PLT --
1000 20 3 6.2 wreeiable 4.? 21 2
1000 20 3 7. I corn 18 18.2: 9
1000 25 4 Il.4 ~e 17.6 17.6 I X, submitted 6181o9
1000 27 2 vegetable I0 10! 2
1000 27 3 rye 13 t3,
I000 27 9 fallow 4.1 4.1 7
1000 27 3 5 vegetable 14.6 14.6[ 2
1000 30 2 130 vegetable 19.5 19.9, 2 Subdiv. Open Space
1000 31 I vegetable 23.3 33~ 2
1000 31 I 5.9 greenhouse 4 7.9[ 6
1000 31 3 12 hllow 9.6 18.8 7
I000 31 6 28.1 vegetable 15 ITT 2 --
1000 38 I 1.3 vegetable 24.3 33.61 2
I000 51 3 4.3 fallow 22.1 27.~ 7
1000 51 3 4.3 vineyard 5 I 0
1000 52 4 1.3 vegetable 3 4.91 2
1000 52 4 2 greenhouse 0.4 6
1000 52 4 2 horse farm 1.8 2.8 I I
1000 52 4 4 vegetable 6 12.7! 2 [ ---
1000 52 5 60.2 horse farm I 13.8 I I
I000 52 5 59.10 vegetable 29 34.8! 2 Town PDR
1000 54 3 24.1 otato 53.9 53 91 8 [ - -
1000 54 7 21.1 vegetable 26.9 341 2
I000 55 I 5.1 otato 10.1 I0.1 8 [ -'-
1000 55 I 8.3 fallow 16.8 22.~ 7 Town PDR I
1000 55 1 8.3 vineyard 5.8 10 Town PDR f ....
1000 55 1 8.4 vegetable 18.3 18.3' 2 Town PDR
1000 55 I 9 fallow __ 16.7 16.7! 7 ----T
1000 55 2 7 fallow 11.5 __ 20[ 7 T-~ ..........
looo 55 2 8.5 vegetable 5 2 -1~ .......
I000 55 2 8.5 nursery/orchard 4 I 12! 5 I ......
1000 55 2 9.4 ~otato 17.5 19.21 8 Town PDR '-[- ............
lO00 55 2 10 ~otato 19,6 ___ 25.5 _. 8 }
Total Pending Subdivsion
Lot Uses Acres Acr Ag. Program
·
'1
Southold Farm and Farm! ~'otection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivsion
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres Acrea ~, Protection Application Ag. Program
10~0 55 3 6.1 ~ fallow 16.5 3'6.5 7
1000 55 3 6,1 Icom 20 9
1000 "5'5 5 17 Ive~etab[~,, 31.4 31.4 2
1000 551 6 35 Fallow 29 29 7 X
1000 "~'~: I I 1.1 ['allow 69.4 69.4 7 -
1000 561 2 21 ~,~nho~$e . I 6
1000 56: 3 13.2 I'ailow ' 2.2 2.2 7 "'
10~0 56, 5 1.3 vineyard 15 22.3 10
1000 59 3 26.1 fallow 17.6 17.6 7
I000 59 3 27 ~od 20.2 21.1 4
1000 59 3 28.4 vineyard, 54.4 54.4 10
1000 59' 9 28.1 vineyard 8.5 8.5 10 3
I000 59 9 28.2 vineyard 14.5 14,5 10 Suffolk PDR 3
I000 ,.5..9 9 30.8 vineyard 12.3 12,8 10 Suffolk PDR 3
I000 59 lO nursery,,. 9.5 12 5
I000 59 I0 gr~nhome . 0.5 6
1000 59 10 6.3 fallow 13.1 283 7 " I, 21
I0~0 59 10 6.3 vineyard, 12.9 10 , I, 2
I000 63 1 1.3 orchard 10.1 3
1000 63 I 1.3 fallow 4.3 7
I000 63 I 1.5 vegetable. 8.6 8.6 2
1000 6J 25 fallow 16.5 23 7
I000 6~ 3 I.I fallow 11.1 11.1 7 1, 2
1000 63 3 18.1 r~e 4.3 5.7 I ..,
I000 63 3 24 rye 3.3 8.5 I I, 2
1000 63 3 25 vesetabl~. ,. 6.2 8.3 2
1000 66 1, 33 vineyard ,. 1.2 1.2 10
I000 66 2 3 rye 6.2 8.1 I I, 2
1000 66 2 31 berries _ 0.7i .... 3 .. 1,2
1000 66 2 3i ~t~¢nhou,.se 1.21 6 .... I, 2
1000 66 2 48: grain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 66 2 49 grain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 66 2 50 grain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 6{ 2[ 51 grain 0.25 0.25 1
sharta'\ptan nin g~So u thold Farm Inititalv¢',Ftm'n lnventory.x~s~by tax #
Page 3 of 17 Modified 0/24/99 at 1:44 P,M
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivsion
Dlslfl~ Section Block Lot Uses Acres Acreage Cate ,ory Protection Application
1000 66 2 52 :rain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 66 2 53 ~ain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 66 2 54 ~rain 0.25 0.25 1 [
1000 66 2 55 ,~rain 0.25 0.25 1 ]
I000 66 2 56 ~rain 0.25 0.25 I
1000 66 2 57 grain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 66 2 58 :rain 0.5 0.5 1
1000 66 2 59 ~rain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 66 2 6~ ,,rain 0.25 0.25 1
IO(X) 66 2 61 ,,rain 0.25 0.25 I I
I000 66 2 62.1 Irain 0.25 0.25 !
1000 66 2 631 I~rain 0.51 0.5 l
1000 66 2 64 grain 0.25 0.25 1
1000 66 2 65! grain 0.25' 0.25
1000 66 3 15 vcl~clable 27.2 27.2 2
1000 68 4 18 fallow 15.9 40 7
1000 68 4~ 18 x-mas trees 19.8 12
1000 69 1! 6 vegetable 36 40. I 2
1000 69 I 8 l~rain 22.3 22.3 1
1000 69 1 9 grain 39.7 39.7 I
1000 6~ 2 3 greenhouse 4 5.1 6
1000 69 3 9.3 fallow 11 15.9 7
I000 6~ 3 10.1 fallow 27.2 27.2 7
1000 69 4 11 ;nursery 5.3 9.3 5
1000 6~ 4 11 I~reenhouse 4 6
I000 69' 5 4.1 vineyard 6.7 10.8 10
1000 69 5 7.1 pasture 10 10 11
1000 69 5 18.2 sod 59 62.1 4
1000 69 5 19 vineyard 16.7 16 10 Town PDR
1000 69 6 9.5 nursery 1 5
1000 69 6 9.5 greenhouses 9.1 I 0. I 6
1000 70 8 vegetable 6 --- 61 2 .............
1000 72 2 2.1 fallow 4.§ 4.9 7 ..........
I000 73 1 fallow 5.8 5.8[ 7
1000 73 si 2.2 fallow 13.1 13.1 7
1000 73I1 3.4 vineyard 13 13 [0 I~__ Town PDR__
Ag. Program
,t 4 _ fallow ~.-- ,5 I.~ ~
I000 74 36 fruit/orchard lO - ~.'~ 3
I000 74 3~ fallow 58.4 7
1000 74 1 37.3 ~rain 41 49.2 I Suffolk PDR 1,
1000 74 38 vineyard 30.? 45.7 10 I,
1000 74 I 40.1 fallow 32.5 51.4 7
1000 74 I 42.1 vefSelable 79 79.5 2
I000 74 2 15 fallow ') 7 7
I000 74 4 3.2 vine~'ard 21.7 21.7 lO
I000 74 4 4.1 sod 2.6 2.6 4
I000 74 4 4.2 ~od 2 2 4
I000 74 4 4.3 sod 1.9 1.9 4
1000 74 4 4.4 ~-~od 1.9 l.~ 4
1000 74 4 4.5 sod 1.9 1.~ 4
1000 74, 4 4.6 sod 1.9 1.9' 4
1000 74' 4 4.7 isod 2 2 4
, ,1000 74 4 4.8 Isod 2.6 2.6 4
1000 74l 5 8 nursery/g~e~houses 5.3 ? 5
1000 751 I 6 nursery 7 10.4 5 3
1000 75 I 9 nursery I 1 5
1000 75 1' 15,4 vineyard 16.4 24.9 I0 Town PDR
1000 75 lI 17. l nursery 2.5 4.2 5
1000 7511 17.1 f~tecJ,house 0.8 6
1000 75 I' 17.2 -~ff 17 19.6 5 Town PDR 1,
1000 75 Il 17.2 greenhouse 0.5 6 Town PDR 1,
1000 75 Il 20.2 vineyard 41 46.4 10 Suffolk PDR 1, 2.
10~0 75 2 2 ll~l&~[~ 18 5
1000 75 2 2 fallow 19.8 37.8 7
[000 75 2 8 nursery 16.6 16.6 5 I,
1000 75 2 9 m~9' 13.7 18.7 5
1000 75 2 9 x-mas t~ees I 12
I000 75 2 15.2 vineyard 17.9 18.4 10 Town PDR 1,
1000 75 3 ~ grain 4.4 4.4 1
1000 75 3 3 vegetable 19.71 19.7 2
1000 75 4 22.~ grain 9.4 9.4 1
sharec~lanning~Southold Farm Iniliative\Fam~ Inventory.xls\by tax #
Page 5 of J? Modified 9/24/99 ;d I 44 PM
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres Acr Cate~
1000 75 4 29~ nu~e~ 0.2 1.8[ 5 I
1~ 75 5 13 vmey~d 14.~ 14.7 10
1~ 75 6 fallow 7. I 7.1 7
1~ 75 6 6.1 fallow 10.3 23.1 7
I~ 75 6 7.2 allow 5.2 5.21 7
I~ 75 6 7.3 nme~ ~ 18,~ 18.9 5 _~ Suffolk
I~ 75 6 7.4 fallow [ 5.1 5.1 _ 7 . I
I~ 75 6 9.7 viney~d I ~ 28k I0 1~ SuffOik pdt
1~ 75 6 I1 ~min ~ 27.3[ 27~} I
I~ 75 7 1.5 vegetable I 101 [ 2 [ Town PDR
l~ 75 ~ 1.5 vineyard I ~2.Sl 22.5[ ' ~o I Town
I~ 75 2 vegetable [ 21 20.61 2
I~ 75 71 6.11 vegetable I 2[ . 1~1 2
sod
1°°°1 ~31
l°°°l 831
I°°°l ~31
l°°°l 831
lOOO I __ 8~1
I000 ~L_
,ooo L s~l
iooo L
l°0°l
ioool 841
21 13.8
.21
~1 171
31 2J._
fallow
fallow
121 Ifa,ow
nurseD;
'°taL° .... k.
grain
~otato
l{ 4._41 Noeya~
11 4.51 Ivineyard
II 7.11 ,eget~ble
7.21 nursery
7.31
s}.- ,t', ,rting~outhold Farm Initiative\Farm Inventory.xlsXby tax #
29.71 29.7 4
21.2{ 26.4 I
18.51 18.5 7
14:2t 17.4 7
33.81 37.9 7
17.51 5
20t 37.5 8
17.51 30.5 8
33.81 33.8~ 8
131 13.6 I
[641 26.7 8
1.7[ 3.7 l0
t7.21 17.2 10
1.91 1.9' 2
'1 '1 ~
'21 121 s
~8.7] 18.71 5
17.91 23.91 5
61 7.9{ 6
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Town PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
?a~e 6 of I 7
Pending Subdivsion
.Application
Southold Farm and Farm'
~tection Strategy Inventory
Dis'triG Section
84
84
84
84
84
84
85
85
Block Lot
hllow
I'allow
1000 sod
*h~'\planning~,.qOuthold Farm Initiafiv¢\F~rm Inventory.xl~\by t~x #
10.9
7.4
19.9
48.5
86
43.8
18.2
33.5
13.15
0.75
12.8
17.7
6.4
42.3
37.2
18.8
17.'1
37.6
24.1
25.1
25.2
Total
28.7
14.9
7.4
19.9
6.3
48.8
48.8
Protection
6.5
12.8
17.71
5
35 10 Suffolk PDR
I0
2
2
5
6
7
10
lO
10
10
4
6
10
Town PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
42.3 I0 Suffolk PDR
37.2 10 Suffolk PDR
10
10
31.4! 2
25. I I0 Suffolk PDR
25.2 4 Suffolk PDR
Pending Subdivsion
Application
A
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
3
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
1,2
Page 7 of 17 Modificd 9~24~99 al 1.14 PM
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending SubdJvsion
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres Acrea~ Cate~3~,,~ rrotecuon .~ppncauon
1000 85 31 81 vineyard 18.6 18.6 10
I000 85 3 10.4 grain 19.4: 19.4 I Suffolk PDR
I000 85 3 I vineyard 48.4 50.2 10
1000 85 3 12.2 l~rain 21.21 21.2 I Suffolk PDR
1000 86 3.3 vineyard 2.91 2.9 10
1000 86 3.4 vineyard 21.7 21.7 10 Suffolk PDR
lO00 86 9.3 vineyard 37.3] 37.3 l0 Town PDR (parlial)
1000 86 10.9 sod 32.1 32.1 4
1000 86 15 vineyard 25 28.4 { 0 --
1000 86 3 vel~etable 33! 75.6 2
1000 86 4 6.8 fallow 7.5 7.5 7 Subdiv. Open Space
1000 86 5 14.4 ,q'ain 8.7 12.9
1000 86 6 3.2 ~asture 1.2' 1.2 11
1000 88 2 15 ~llow 14.21 14.2 7
1000 88 2 17 nursery 9.41 9.8 5
I000 88 2 17 greenhouse 6 I --
1000 94 2 '~ pumpkins ~'491. l0 2
I
t000 94 3 1.3 corn 12.5 12.5 9
1000 94 3 1.6 ~rain 17.5 17.5 I
1000 94 3 2 ~llow 18.6 7 --
10(X) 94 3 2 eom 18 7 37.3 9
10(X) 94 3 3.3 ~otato 20! 25.3 8 Town PDR
1000 94 3 4.2 vineyard 26, 26 ! 0 Suffolk PDR
1000 95 1.1 ~otato 10.5 33.2 8
1000 95 1 2 ~otato 34. I ] 34.1 8 [ --
1000 95 3.1 fallow 26.1 45.2 7
1000 95 3.1 ~otato 221 s -- I
I000 95 I 3.1 vineyard 2l io I.....
1000 95. I 4 sod 47,4 47.4 4
1000 95 I 5 sod 33 21 33,2 4 - ' '~-
1000 95 7.2 sod 30.8! 30 8 4 T
I000 95 8. I sod 44.7 44.7 4 ........ ~- .........
23.71 2_ 7 .................... 7 .............
I0~0 95 lC vegetable 20.3!-- 2 -~-
1000 95 lC sod S! 25.3 4 ~[ T
1000 95 11.2' sod 19.Z 197 4 ] ...........
" mngXSouthold Farm Initiativ¢~arm Inventory.xls\by lax # - ~"
,~.g. Pr(,gram
Southold Farm and Farm'
ction Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivsion
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres
........... r~,~ ,,,at~u~ ~y r rotecuon Application Ag. Program
1000 9-~ 2 I.! ~od 41 $1.2 4
1000 95! 2 4 iod 7.8 8.6 4
1000 95 3 3.6 Potalo 36.1 36.1 8 Suffolk PDR
1000 95 3 8.1 sod 46 54.6 4 l, ?l
1000 95 4 1 god 12.3 12.3 4
1000 9541 3.1 potato 21.1 8 I,
1,
1000 95 4 5.2 field corn 5 5 9
1000 95 4 5.3 field corn 41.8 41.8 9 Suffolk PDR
1000 95 4 6 field eom 5 8.3 9
1000 95 4 9 sod 6.3 6.3 4 1,
1000 95 4 10 god 20.4 20.4 4 1, 7
1000 95 4 II sod 13.1 13.1 4 I, ?
1000 95 4 12 god 6.2 6.2 4
1000 95 4 131 god 6.5 6,5 4
1000 95 4 14.3' ~otato 25.4 28.5 8 Town PDR (partial) 3
1000 96 11 fallow 28.3 28,3 7 X, reapplied 3/18/98
1000 96 2' fallow 1~ 17 7
, 1,2
1000 96 2 2 grain ' 1.5 3,1 1
1000 96 2 3 vegetable 2.2 2
1000 96 2 5 ~otato 19.2 22.8 8 Suffolk PDR
1000 96 2 ? vegetable 24.9 34,9 2
I000 96 2 ? vineyard lC 10 1,
1000 96 2 10 ~rain lC I 1, ?
1000 96 2 10 ve~:-ble 7.5 26.2 2 1,
I000 96 2 I0 vineyard 8 10 1,
1000 96 2 11 ~,=;able 9.3 9.3 2 l,
1000 96: 3 4.1 ~,ha~d ' 2 3 I, 2
1000 9{ 3 4.1 vineyard 30 38.7 10 '" I, 2!
1000 9~ 3 5 ~ineyard 10.9 10.9 10 1,
1000 9~ 3 6. I nursery 3.2 3.2 5 1,
1000 9~ 3 6.3 vineyard 14.6 14.6 10 Suffolk PDR 1,
1000 9~ 3 6.4 vineyard 5.8 5.8 10 Suffolk PDR
1000 9~ 3 7.1 Igreenhouses 0.25 12.6 6 I,
1000 9~ 3 7.1 horse farm 12 11 I, 7
shaveo'~planningkSoulhold Farm Initiative\Farm Inventory.xls\by tax #
Page 9 of 17 Mod~ fled 9/24/99 at [att PM
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres Acreas~ CateB,,,,y rrm~ ction
I000 ( 9~ :~] ~1 greenhouse I 10[ 17.61 6
I000I 9~ 4 4.3 vineyard [ 14.9V i51 10
= 97l= 1~ i' horscfarm I 45 24.41
~:' i lt.2 mev,~ I 53l 53i 10 I SuffOl
J~i ~L ~ 12.41held corn J i2J 19.8l
~ ~1 ~J ~2.~ivineyard I 4.9i 4.9J ~0 l
looo I- 97 ~1 12.7lvin~ard I 14.8l 14.8l ~0 J Towr
I~'"~ 9;/~ 1~ 16.41vegetable .... ~ 14.8F t4.g] 2 I Towr
i I~l ~?_. ~Jt~,,eg~tabl~ I s.sl s.sl 2
1000I 97 2J 31 vegetable J 2.2J 2.6J ~ J
tooo 97 21 23! ve~e~hle I eJ --J
1000 97 ~ 23,hor~e farm J 14J 17.6J --~-
I000 97 4 17.1 vegetable 1.9, 2
1000 97 4 17.2~ vegetable 2.1 2.} 2 J
1000 97 4 !7.3 vegetable 2 2
1000 97 4 19Jvineyard 1L7J 11.7J I0 J
1000 97 5 2,1 vegetable J l01 10.11- 2
lOOO 97 s 61 ,u~y I 2t.8 30.~1
1000 97 8 31.2 vegetable J t7.51 2k7J- 2 · Towr
1000 97 9 1~ orchard j 2 J 3
1000 97 9 12 fallow j 32.'~ 34.7J 7
~000 97 to ,od I 4J 4l 4
1000 97 I0 2 $o~ J 41 4~
iooo 98 t.3 f, now I 14.9i - ~ ~ ·
I000 98 1 2.~ a,o,v I ~0.~1 lO.~J
~000 98 27.1,,i.ey~ 321 78.3[' i-O I
lO00 9a 27.~~.rm ~,im~ d6'~') l~ ..... q
I000 100 2 potato 643 _ 69.9J
1000 100 2 23 grain J 49.449.4I
~ooo ~oo 2 co~n ....... 1 4ol .... 58.4i
lO00 lOg 2 4! grain I 3d ....34.4J '~ J
xooo toe 2 5.3g~ee.~o~, -T_ 1ol ..... ~oq ~, I
~PDR
~DR
PDR
Pending Subdivslon
Application
·
q
I
1000
Southold Farm and Farmf )cotection Strategy Inventory
Section Block Lot
wheat
Total
faltow
fallow
beffies
Fallow
~egetable/fmit
['allow
s (field)
tth~,eo~planningX$oulho~d Farm Inifialiv¢\Farm Inventory.xls\by tax #
Uses Acres Protection
21.5 38.5 9
23.1 23.1
14.1 18.3
17.7 24.1
17.5
22.1
32.1 62.3
lO
24.6 36.3
29.4 33.1
12.9
14.5 14.5
76.5 96.5
10.9
21,8
32.2
2.5 12,3
5,2
13.1 14,8
9.1
10.4 10.4
11.13 16.70
5.20 5.20
12.6
20
7
8 Suffolk PDR
8
1
1
8
! Town PDR
10 Town PDR
~0
1
2
11
10
7
10
1 Town PDR
8 Town PDR
7
6
10
5
6
3
3
7
8
2
10
2
6.9 7
4.6 10
12.6 10
50.2
9
10
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Pending Subdivsion
Application
X, submiiled 3/I 3/96
ram
I,
1,
I,
1,
1,
page [ I of [ 7 Modified 9/24/99 at 1.44 Phi
I
16.1 16.1 1
10
14.8 18.1 10
25.4 2
0.5 0.5 5
15.6 5
x-mas trees 1.9 12
x-mas trees 1.9 1.9 12
x-mas trees 1.9 12
1.9 12
k-mas {tees 2.3 i 2
k-mas trees 2.8 12
3.2 2
k-mas trees 20 25.5 12
14.7
25 2
45.7 I
small fruit
orchard
orchard
fallow
orchard
orchard
fallow
shared~ianniflg~oulhold Farm Initiative\~:arm tnvcn~oW.xls~,b'y
0.9
14.6 14.6 1
22.5 I
7.8 7.8 2
1.5 35.8
16.8
12.3
6.41
19.5 24,2
26.? 26.7
18.'7'
7.7 ._ ....
_22
___ 5.3J
8.3 .... 8~
53.41 ._ 5341
6
10
5
7
3
3
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Town PDR
Town PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
Suffolk PDR
SufFolk PDR
Southold Farm and Farml
tection Strategy Inventory
Total Pending Subdivsion
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres Protecti A )lication
i000 106 ~1 2.3 vel~etable 23.5 25.9 2 1, 2
1000 106 9 3 horse farm/farm animals 19.9 19.9 I 1
1000 106 9 4.9 vegetable 10 14.3 2 Subdiv. Open Space
1000 107 2.1 greenhouse 4.5 15.3 6 Subdiv. Open Space 1, 2
1000 107 2.1 hllow 10.8 7 Subdiv. Open Space I, 2
1000 107 4 1.1 ~otato 19.5 32.3 8 Suffolk PDR i, 2
1000 107 5 1.1 ~otato 15.d 15.6 8
1000 107 5 6.3 ~otato 2C 20 8 Town PDR t, 2
112100 107 10 3 potato 17.4 20.8 8 1, 2
1000 107 10 6 rye 22.6 22.6 I l, 2
1000 107 10 8 totato 15.4 15,4 8 1, 2
1000 107 10 9 zorn Ifield) 23.8 27.7 9 1, 2
1000 107 10 I0.1 ~eenhouse 8 lC 6 I, 2
1000 107 11 l0 :rain 7 13 5 1
1000 108 1 1.1 allow 19.7 19.7! 7 1.2
I000 108 I 2 ;rain 4.7 43 I 1, 2
1000 108 23 vel[letable 3 3.9: 2
1000 108 2 6 vegetable91 2
1000 108 2 6 tallow 8 7
1000 108 2 7 aursery 12.6 12.~ 5 1, 2
1000 108 3 I ?otato 16 17.3 8 1, 2
1000 108' 3 5.2 K-mas txecs I. I 1.1 12
I000 10~ 3 5.44 ~-mas ~xces 9.4 9.4 12 3
1000 108! 3 5.45 ~t-mas txees 5.4 6.7 12 ~,
lO00 1081 3 5.5 K-mas trees I 12
1000 108 3 6.3 Ig~n~house/nurset,/ 5 17.58 5 Town PDR (partial)
1000 I08 3 6.3 horse farm 12 11 Town PDR (partial) I I
1000 108 3 7 ~l~a/n 22 1 1,2
1000 108 3 7 ihay 5 I I, 2
1000 108 3 7 vineyard 20.9 57.6 10 l, 2
1000 108 3 13.6 nursery , 4.1 4.1 5 I, 2
I000 108 4 1.1 potato 22 28.8 8
1000 10~ I! 8.7 vineyard 36.4 36.4 10 I, 2
I000 109 II 8.8 greenhouse 24 24.7 6 Town PDR 3
1000 109 I 10.1 grain 22.9 53 1
I000 10~ 1' I 1 grain 27 I 1, 2
sharedXplanning~5outhold Farm Initiative\Farm Inventoty,xls\by tax #
Page 13 o1'17 Mod//~ed 9/24/09 al I 44 PM
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
Total
District Section Block Lot Uses Acres Acreag~ Category Protection
I000I I09~ 11 IlI fallow I 6'21 7-7'31
lO001 I0~ I 11 potato 1 31[ I 8
i -13 ocya;d - 30- - IO
1000 109 I 23 grain I 5.8 34.19
I000 t-'~ I 24.4]potato I 34.19 8 I Town PDR
1000 109 5 23.2 tallow I 20 27.5[ 7 T Suffolk PDR
~ --- 109 5 23.3 ~rchard I 29.4 29.4[ 3
II 1000 109 7 7 gr~nhouae I 1.5 3.31 6
I 109 7 10.2 :om(sweet)I 1.5 t 2 I
lOOO I 109 7[ I0.2 vegetable I 2.2l I
1000 109 7 10.2 orchard I 5.8 15.3] 3
1000 109 7 10.2 small fruit 5.8 [ 3
1000 II0 I.I orchard 5.61 5.6 3
1000 110 1.3 orchard 17: 18.23 ] Suffolk PDR
1000 110 8 1.1 )rchard 6 6 3 I Suffolk PDI~
1000 110 8 1.3 orchard 0.3 0.3 3
1000 110 1.4 vegetable 6.2 6.2 2 ] Suffolk PDI~
1000 110 8! 2 orchard 15.4 15.43 ] SuffolkPDl~
1000 11~ 8 32.4 vegetable 11 ] 2 I Suffolk PDI~
1000 I I(~ 8 32.4 corn (sweet) 1 [ 2 I Suffolk PDI~
1000 llC 8 32.4 orchard 5.8 31.9t 3 I Suffolk PDI:
1000 112 I 7 vegetable 43.7 I 2
1000 112 I 7 greenhouse 0.6 44.31 6 T
i000 112 1 8.2 :om 36.3 36.31 ' ~ ~ Town PDR
1000 112 I 9.1 Ivegetable 64 64] '~ [ TownPDR
1000 112 I 16.3 vineyard 98.5 98.5 10 '~'
1000 112 I 19 vineyard 44.3 44.3 10
1000 112 I 20 vineyard I 62.9 62.9 10 ·
1000 112 2 2 vineyard 161 16t 1~ · -
I000 113 2.1 vineyard 21,7 23.71 I0
1000 113 2 1.1' fallow 19,5 61.71 7
1000 113 ~ 1.1 fallow 4 15 I ?
1000 113 7 1.1 ~otato 0.25 -- 4.4~ ~' ' -J- -
1000 113 7 2.5 vegetable 7.9 [
s~ ,ins"~outhold Farm lnitiative~Farm [nvento~.xls~by tax # '
Pending Subdivsion
Application
1
[ X, submitted pricer lc~ 1990
.\g. Program
]
I,
~ 19.23"~ - fallow 3'/
7 19.2(5 vineyard 30 Town PDR (partial) 1,
1000 113 13 nursery 17 17 5
1000 I 15 2 3.1 ~e 7.5 49.78 I Town PDR
1000 115 2 3.1 :om 7.5 49.78 9 Town PDR
1000 115' 2 6 :om (field) 21 23.3 9
1000 115 2 9.1 :om 20.5 20.5 9 3
1000 1151 2 I0 !potato 23.8 23.8 8 I, ?
1000 115 4 8.5 !rye 4.2 33.2
I00 115 4 8.5 ~greenhouse 3.5 6 1, 7
1000 115 7 13.1 i?to 15.3 16.8 8
1000 115 7 13.2 vineyard 15.9 16.4
1000 115 8 I Igrain 12.5 24
1000 115 8 I potato 12.7 8
1000 115 8 3.3 Igrain 12 29 I I, ?
I000 115 8 3.3 vegetable 6 2 I, 7
1000 115, 8 3.3 jberries 3 3 I,
10~O 11'~ 8 3.3 ~potaro 8 8 1,
1000 115! 9 4 horse farm 17 45.3 II
1000 115 10 I grain 12.3 15.2
1000 116 I 2 potato 30 54.4 8
1000 I I~ I 2 eom 24 9
1000 1 I~ 1 3.4 ,fallow 8 35.8 7 Suffolk PDR
1000 116 I 3.4 Ivineyard 27.8 10 Suffolk PDR, PLT
1000 116 I I0 !vegetable 7 7.8 2 I, 2
1000 12C I 3 Ivegetable 13.3 13.3 2 I, 2
1000 120! 2 3.1 vineyard 20.4 39.5 10
1000 12{ 2 4 horse farm 4 4 11
1000 1201 3 2 vegetable 10.8 10.8 2 1,
1000 12( 3 5 [Feenhouse 1.1 I.I 6
1000 1201 3 6 vegetable 1.3 1.3 2
1000 120 3 8.2 nursery 2.2 2.2 5
1000 1201 3 11.11 vel~etable 22.2 22.2 2 1, 2
1000 120 3 11.12 vegetable 39.3 39.3 2 1, 2
1000 12{ 3 11.8 ~erriea 9 10.3 3
1000 120' 3 11.9 vegetable l0 10 2 I, 2
sharea'~planning~Sou [hold Farm Inifiativ&F~ml ~nvento~7.xls~by '~x #
Page 15 of I 7 Modified 9/24/9q ac 1:44 PM
Southold Farm and Farmland Protection Strategy Inventory
District Section Block
...... · ~,-. ,:ar~c ,,~a~egm y rroteetlon .Application
1000 120 3 II.l~ vegetable 13J; 13.9 2
1000 120 5 vineyard 2'~ 28.9 I 0 Town PDR
I000 121 12 vineyard 4.8 5Z
1000 121 I.{5 vineyard 5 5l 10 Town PDR
I000 121 3 5.1 horse farm 7 9.8~ 11
1000 121 3 {5 nursery/greenhouse 2.2 2.2 5
10O0 121 3 7.3 nursery 2.4 2A 5
1000 121 3 7.4 nursery 10 11.3 5
1000 121 4 9.1 fallow 50 63.{5 7
1000 121 5 4.1 fallow 71.4 71.4 7
1000 122 I 2.2 fallow 3 7
1000 122 I 2.2 horse farm 8 I I 1 ]
1000 122 5 4 fallow 21.2 27 7
1000 122 7 8.6 fallow 54.2 54.2 7 I
1000 124 I 2.1 nursery 20 28.5 5 [
1000 125 I 2.25 vegetable 23.1 23,1 2 Subdiv. Open Space
1000 125 I 2.32 vineyard 14.8 20.9 l0 Suffolk PDR
1000 125 I 6.2 vegetable 1.5 1.8 2
1000 125 I 6.4 vineyard 9 11.12 10 Town PDR I
1000 125 2 2.2 greenhouse 25 36.5 6 [
1000 125 3 4.1 nursery 8.7 13.5 5 I
1000 125 3 7.2 nurseD' 6.5 6.5 5 ]
1000 125, 3 8 rlursery' 7 7 5
I000 125~ 3 10 :om 1.5 2 ]
1000 125 3 10 !vegetable I 2
1000 125 3 10 [nursery 2.4 4.9 5
I000 125l 3 I 1 horse farm lO 11.2 I I
I000 125i 3 13 srain 4.3 4.3 1
1000 125 3 15 ivegetable 0.5 0.5 2 __.[
lO00 125 3 17 'vegetable 0.5 0.5 2 [ ~.~7~.~-~-_ _-'
1000 125 4 21 !grain 57.4 57.4 ...__~1 ...... _L_ .......
I000 125i 4 24.1 igrain 63 63 .... 1~_ ~ .........
I000 12{5 7 I Igrain 75.5 100.4--.~.-~- ~- ..........
1000 127 I I nursery 47 49.6 ____5~ .... ~_ ]
I00~ 127 2 2.1
.u ery 1.5 I 5 1_ ..... I
I000 127 2 2.1 greenhouse 8 _ 14.8} 6 }
Total Pending Subdivsion
Lot Uses Acres Acr~ Cate gram
s' ing~,outhold Farm InitiativeS:arm Inventory xis\by tax #
I000
nu~e~
shama'~planning~Southold Farm Initia{fve\Fam~ Inventory.xls\by ~x #
Page I? of I? Modified 9124109 ,~ ] 44 PM
Methodology_
In May of 1999, at the request of the Town, the Trust began a six week f?~mland
inventory. The Town's Planning Department prepared a rough estimate of the inventory.
of agricultural land in the Spring of 1998. The 1998 inventory, based on aerial
photographs and field inspections, identified approximately 6,253 acres of active
farmland and an additional 811 acres of fallow land.
To further these efforts, the Trust undertook a more comprehensive analysis o f the
agricultural land inventory by conducting extensive field inspections. The land was
observed to determine the type of planted crop, as well as the acreage ofacnve land,
support land and fallow land. Wherever possible, a farmer or owner was interviewed.
Through the Trust's analysis, 488 parcels were identified totaling 10,232 acres ofwh/ch
7,466 acres :vere identified as active farmland, 1,490 as fallow and 1,276 as support lasxd.
The identified parcels were cross-referenced with:
· information fi.om the Town Assessor's Office to identify parcel enrollment in
the NYS Agricultural District and participation in the Agricultural
Assessment;
· Updated records fi.om the Town and County's Planning Departments to
identify parcels protected through public and private conservation efforts; and,
* Information fi.om the Town's Planning Depa,tment to identify pending
subdivision applications.
The completed inventory was provided to the Town's Division of haformation
Systems to be digitized for new GIS maps.
Assumptions
While conducting the inventory certain assumptions were made for recording purposes:
The Fallow category includes land that was obviously farmed at one time or land that
could easily be fanned with minor clearing of the area. This includes over,own
land, some cover crop, and/or low ~owth trees/shrubbery (but not woodland).
Support land acreage was determined by the amount of land that accompanied an
active crop and served the purpose of support, such as roads, agricultural structures,
open space to make farming purposes easier i.e. to separate different crops, provide a
road buffer, etc.
In order to place into a category, land that was observed as being newly plowed
and/or planted was classified ms vegetable unless otherwise specified by an available
farmer or owner.
This inventory does not account for double cropping.
While identifying greenhouse acreage, physical glass or plastic structures, as well as
stock placed outside a greenhouse (having been grown in the structure) was included.
It is also important to note that on many of the greenhouse parcels, owners or workers
were available for interview and the inventory reflects their information.
The nursery acreage is inclusive of stock still in ground and stock removed fi'om the
ground and balled or containered for sale. It should be noted that greenhouse and
nursery coincide on several parcels.
Regarding corn, per the suggestion of Comell Cooperative Extension, we
differentiated between sweet corn and field corn. Sweet corn was included in the
vegetable category while field corn was placed in a category by itself. Field corn was
identified by its quantity and planting in distinct rows of the-.qame height, whereas,
sweet eom was generally in smaller quantities, not necessarily in rows segrnents of
differing heights and, very often, located in the same field with other crops.
There are four parcels that were identified aa participating in the NYS Agricultural
District or Assessment Program, but that were unobserved due to their inacc~.~ible
locations and for which crop type could not be identified from the aerial photographs.
These parcels are tax map numbers: 66-2-4 (.5 acres), 66-2-5 (.5 acres), 75-*-30 (1.8
acres), 83-2-13.6 (2.9 acres), 94-3-4.1 (10.1 acres), and 121.-1-1.6 (5 acres).
It should be noted that grains are often used as resting crops for potatoes and not ms a
crop in and of itself; field corn, at times falls into this category, as well. Hence, the
potato crop may be under estimated overtime due to crop rotation.
The fY:.' farn.~ parcels noted in ._~'ew Suffolk ~v-~re included within the hamlet of
Cutchogue for the punposes of the pie charts and graphs.
Appendix B
TOWN OF $OUTHOLD
Cormot¥1ng Equity and Farmland:
UmlUd ~ Laded
2. Flexibility - ca~ ~e desisnnd to p~c~ect all or a
portion ofyoor prope~y while meeting your pas~iculM
z~eds.
3. Tax-~educ~ble chadtable ~ (Ixo~nd that the
easement i~ peq~ eMI is ~mted 'er. Jm~,~y ~'
cease~agoo pu~' m · qu~ifled ~ or
~ h~ to munk~pal bond inve~ton.
1, S p~aci~ the pmoee~ ova' & Ii~mbe~ o f years.
A bm~iin f~te is · conveyance of developmem r~,ht s cc
Ilfld to ii cilag,table c~&tioe of Seaizat~on or
A family limiled ~ is a fo~m of
~r~on to aned~.
Advan~a&es to the tafldoWne~:
For additional information,
The Town of Southold
Land Pr~ervation Coordinator
(516) 76~-1800
or
Peconlc Land Trust
(516) 28~-3195
OF
comldete~ demd~ and nmb ~hts form.
Conservation Opdons Information
Nme:
Address:,
! ~mnce or the eecohicP~d TruU.
Appendix C
gan INVESTMENT FOR THE FUTUXE:
A PROPOSAL FOP. SOUTHOLD TO~: t997-1999
PROPOSAL:
To desi~mn, adopt and implement a set/es ofstrate~c act/ons which
. wotdd identify specific goals to be achieved, describe ~ec/fic actions
to be taken and recommend specific policies to guide the Town's
day-to-day decisions in the areas of natural resource management,
economic development and land use.
GOALS:
To position the Town to constracdvely manage anticipated gowth, while
simultaneously preserving its tmique character and en,dronment.
To adopt clear, unambiguous =m. fidelmes, policies and procedures to guide the
various Boards and Deparuuents responsfb[e for overseeing applications for
development.
To develop efficient, timely and cost-effective ways for the various Boards
and Departments to make decisions in accordance with established
guidelines, policies and procedures.
To protect for the future, the ToWn's unique, irreplaceable and critical
resources: natural, scen/c, economic, arckitectural, cultural and historic.
To more fully implement the vision articulated in the 1985 Master Plan
Update.
Appendix D
· ~
Bibliography
American Farmland Trust. Saving ,~merican Farmland I'Vhat VI/or'Icj. Northampton, MA:
AFT, 1997.
Bowers, Deborah and Daniels, Tom. Holding Our Ground. Washington, D.C.: Island
Press, 1997.
Comell Cooperative Extension. Personal Interviews with Dale Mayer and William
Sanok. June, July, August 1999.
Dan/els, Tom. 1571en City and Country Collide. ',,Vashington, D.C.: Island Press, 1999.
Ferradino & Associates, Inc., Hutton Associates, Inc., and Cotilla Associates, Inc.
The Draft Scenic Southold Corridor ~Sianagement Plan, 1998.
Kelley, Nancy Nagle (Editor). Blueprint for Our Future: Creating Jobs, Preserve the
Environment. The Report to Governor lvfario Cuomo by The East End Economic
& Environmental Task Force of Long fsland, New York. New York: Newmarket
Press, 1994.
New York State Department of Agriculture and Markets. Agricultural Districts. Circular
1150-Article 25AA, November, 19~2.
Peconic Land Trust aud Town of Southampton Farmland Committee and Depmunent
of Land Management. Town of Southampton Strategy for Farm and Farmland
Protection, 1998.
Russell, Scott. Town Assessor-Personal and telephone interviews. June, July, August
1999.
Scopaz, Valerie. Town of Southold Draft Local [F'aterfront Revitalization Plan,
1998/1999.
Suffolk County Planning Department. Ground Watershed Protection and F/ater Supply
Management Slrategy" Draft, April 1999
Suffolk County Planning Department. Agricultural and Farmland Protection Plan -
the Economy of Agriculture, April 1996.
Town of Southold. Community Preservation Project Plan, 1998.
Roundtable Discussion
on
Southold Town's Proposed
FARM AND FARMLAND PROTECTION STRATEGY
7:15 p.m.
November 17, 1999
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
· Brian Murphy, Councilman
OVERVIEW OF STRATEGY: GOALS & OBJECTIVES
Valerie Scopaz, Town Planner
INVENTORY & ANALYSIS OF AGRICULTURAL INDUSTRY IN
SOUTHOLD
· Marian Sumner, Director, Conservation Programs, Peconic Land
Trust
REVIEW OF PAST & PRESENT LAND PRESERVATION STRATEGIES
· Tim Caufield, Vice President, Peconic Land Trust
RECOMMENDATIONS
· Valerie Scopaz, Town of Southold
Tim Caufield, Peconic Land Trust
QUESTIONS & ANSWERS
ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION
Brian Murphy, Councilman
Southold Town Farm and
· rmland Protection Strategy
September, 1999
Purpose: To develop a
, renens ve protecuon strategy
1:.. To preserve land that is suitable for
farming.
· Goal 2: To ensure that farming remains an
important part of the local economy.
Acreage in Production
Acreage Protected
Acreage Threatened
Inventory
Total Pending Sub division Ag.
11
19
2t
31
37
Acreage in Production
· 488 parcels
, Totaling 10,232 acres
· 7,466 acres active farmland
,490 fallow
· 1,276 support land
Farmland Crop Acreages
Active Farmland Crop Acreages
20O
~ Vegetable 18%
,..~ Vineyard 18%
~, Fallow 17%
~, Gra,n
Potato
Remaining
11%
10%
categories less
than 10% each
Farm Acreage Use Per Locality
100
0
Orient
E. Marion
Southold
Peconic Cutchogue
Mattituck Laurel
· Grain
· Vegetable
· Fruits
· Sod
[] Nursery
[] Greenhs,
[] Fallow
[] Potato
· Field Corn
· Vineyard
[] Horses
[] X-mas Tr.
500
45O
400
250-
200".
150 ·
100.
50,
Orient
(742 farm and fallow acres)
90-
· 80 -
70-
'~ 60'..~
~0,~
O[
East Marion
(96 farm and fallow acres)
400
350
300
250
200
2 15o
100
50
Southold
(1,434 farm and fallow acres)
0
Peconic
(1,242 farm and fallow acres)
6OO
500 -
400-
300
200-
100
11 0
Cutchogue
(2,939 farm and fal]'6w acres)
600
500
400
300
200
100
Mattituck
(2,077 farm and fallow acres)
450
400 -
350 -
~300-
250-
200
150
100 -
50-
~ ~oo
5O
Laurel
(485 farm and fallow acres)
0
Acreage Currently Protected
23%
I"" Acreage Protected
· Unprotected
77%
2,318 of 10,232
acres protected
SOUTHOLD TOWN FARMLAND PROTECTION MAP
SOUTI:-IOLD TOWN FARMLAND PROTECTION MAP
SOUTHOLD TOWN FARMLAND
PROTECTION MAP
Acreage Threatened
",..L.and not protected by conservation
programs
Land with. pending subdivision
applica,tiOns
Land not enrolled in state
agricultural programs
Land owned by non-residents
Land owned by seniors
Fallow land
c and Not .Protected by
onservat on Programs
'""? .... ''801 vulnerable subdi ision
· . . · acres to v
Land with Pen.ding Subdivision
Applications
9 parcels totaling 329 acres have
pending subdivision applications
Land. Not nrolled in the
Agricultural Programs
· Enrolled
· Not Enrolled
5,255 acres
currently enrolled
4,089 acres are
not enrolled
." Land Owned by Non-Residents
~0%
At present, non-
resident ownership is
estimated at 30% of
the total acreage.
70%
[] Non-Residents
· Residents
Southold Town
nse rvatio n Agenda
. ...:: 'Past, Present & Future
Protected Town
Acreage Programs
County/Other
Programs
Private
Conservation
Total Dollar Value
Conservation
Agenda
Past 20 years 2,588
'i977 - 1999
$8,609,455 $7,488,939 $3,524,000
44% 38% 18%
$19,622,394
Past 4 years 911 $5,229,905 $932,924
1996 - 1999 56% 10%
$3,115,000
34%
$9,277,829
Pending Projects 368
1999
$2,000,000 $3,000,000 $1,500,000
31% 46% 23%
$6,500,000
Future Conservation
(In A Perfect World)
7500 $11,250,000 $16,875,000 $9,375,000
30% 45% 25%
$37,500,000
In a Perfect World .....
Full Fee
Acquisition
Full Fee
Acquisition
PDR
Acquisition
Southold Town
Share (30%)
7500 ac.
$20,O00/acre
3750 ac.
$20,O00/acre
3750 ac.
$10,000/acre
$150,000,000 $75,000,000$37,500,000$11,250,000
Southold Town
· .'..?'..'Conservation Agenda
.....· ',.:~".."' ' ...... 'Past Present & Future
Protected Town
Acreage Programs
County/Other
Programs
Private
Conservation
Total Dollar Value
Conservation
Agenda
Past 20 years 2,588 $8,609,455 $7,488,939 $3,524,000
1977 - 1999 44% 38% 18%
$19,622,394
Past 4 years
1996 - 1999
911 $5,229,905 $932,924 $3,115,000
56% 10% 34%
$9,277,829
Pending Projects
1999
368 $2,135,500 $2.816.000 $1,270.000
34% 45% 20%
$6,221,500
$outhold Town
C.onservation Ag da
Past, Present & Future
Protected Town
Acreage Programs
County/Other
Programs
Private
Conservation
Total Dollar Value
Conservation
Agenda
Past 20 years 2,588 $8,609,455 $7,488,939 $3,524,000
1977 - 1999 44% 38% 18%
$19,622,394
Past 4 years
1996 - 1999
911 $5,229,905 $932,924 $3,115,000
56% 10% 34%
$9,277,829
Southold Town
· . ;!, ':. .C .o nse rvati o n Agenda
· Past, Present & Future
protected Town County/Other
.Acreage Programs Programs
Private
Conservation
Total Dollar Value
Conservation
Agenda
Past 20 years 2,588 $8,609,455 $7,488,939 $3,524,000
1977- 1999 44% 38% 18%
$19,622,394
Southold Town
Conservation Agenda
Past, Present & Future
Fallow Land
m Acti~ farmland
I1' Fallow land
Land is at risk for
development
Approx 15% of total
farmland is fallow
85%
Land Owned by Seniors
Land considered at risk because
Next generation may not be
interested in continuing farming
Inheritance taxes may necessitate
farm sale
Eecommendations
'~ii.".identify critical farmland in need of rotection
out to owners of vulnerable parcels
and maintain a listing of known lands for sale
· easily accessible literature and resources on preservation
Conservation Opportunities Planning Process
=!"' LeVerage funds to the greatest extent possible
· EnCOurage farm support services and farm-related businesses to
thrive
· Investigate creating a Town Agricultural Agreement Program
· Encourage the use of IPM and environmentally-friendly techniques
[] Streamline the regulatory process
[] Development a Stewardship Program
[] Assign responsibility for implementation of the above-referenced
strategies and actions by January 2000