HomeMy WebLinkAbout1000-35.-1-24 (3) October 2, 1997 • The Suffolk Times
Judge
Ousts
Jem
Lawsuit
GREENPORT—A federal judge has
dismissed New York developer Manny
Kontokosta's $18 million lawsuit
against Tom Wickham and other mem-
bers of the former United Southold
Town Board for voting to reverse the
downzoning of a 62-acre Soundfront
parcel he owns here.
U.S.District Court Judge Denis Hur-
ley turned aside each of Mi. Kon-
. _ tokosta's claims,including the assertion
that the town's action violated his equal -
protection rights and the-federal Fair
Housing Act. . 1
"I'm very pleased," said Riverhead
attorney Tony Tbhill,who defended Mr.
Wickham and the other officials. "This
is everything we asked for."
Howard Pachman, Mr. Kontokosta's
attorney, was out of town and unveil-
able for comment. _
Mr. Kontokosta, who owns the prop-
erty known as Jem Commons immedi-
ately to the west of Brecknock Hall,
filed for a rezoning in 1989 to allow.
construction on half-acre and one-acre
lots.The land had been covered by the
R-80 two-acre zone. The Southold.
Town Board did notact on his request
until December 1993, after.the United
Southold Party swept all contested townP
elections that November and just before
the lame duck GOP board left office.
Shortly after taking office,Mr.Wick-
ham's administration started the review
of placing Mr. Kontokosta's property,
and several others with high-density'
zoning, under the two-acre limit. In
July, they voted to rezone only the Jem
Commons acreage. In the interim, Mr.
Kontokosta purchased the Traveler-
Watchman newspaper in Southold.
In his 28-page decision,Judge Hurley
ruled that Mr. Kontokosta did not havei -
a vested"property interest"in the lower
zoning and in fact never filed an objec-
tion to the United Southold board's
change. The judge also found that Mr.
Kontokosta did not prove the claim that
the Town Board members harbored
malice against him.
In his suit, Mr. Kontokosta argued
that the US board's action violated the
federal Fair Housing Act in that the re-
jection of his plans to set aside some _
units as"affordable".perpetuates segre-
gation. Judge Hurley found, however,
that "there is nothing in the present
record to support [the]claim that if this
low-income housing were built, it
would discourage the alleged segrega-
tion."
' e,1�� .� , ,tri send Ji l:i.,i+.il� •js
brdMy 6,.'iTh Suffolk times'+ 5
qk
Boar set es- , e&0 os
x
Deal saves builder - cress of the non dimneful things[ve _hook-ups The viinge opted fora th1a7"he asked'9t avoid$and client
had to do as.ahar
. ass,"saki Trustee moraodum -ss y;,v 'rmtea the liability we faced,which could
$600,000 on hook-ups .:Jamie Mine. -a-s soinglnendupomt -. .m 1983,1 when"Mae nm have been considerable."
for 108-unit`prOjeCt...•. Ins taxpayers Of the:.villaga.•looted aro develop the v-acr0$wmd a Mr. Kmtokoeu will be allowed to
to do vil.
By Tim Wacker .. i was turned down.Howeverwhen he lag$she honk�water and goweach unit be ns ss stems for
The settlement grew cut of a recon - y
__ mendadon by an independent federal <:99ME
.he wu granlad per- $2,570 and$2,585,respectively.If hevoted tide wok o intik a ninee B ardd mediator appoinWl n 1994 to Settle the M1 fi the dynein had,the build$our the whole development he
Year dispute, an attorney mid endng the tba ester pmject:^ '-would lave b tin viUsuit brought by developer MennY vmage said Tuesday.Michael Miranda PaY age 5556,740.
Kontokosm over water and sews book- - itti the maataium n Man village currently charges$4,732
ups o his proposed 108-unit residential a the New York City kw firm lhnurm.; p� the proJecOstalled`But Mr. ami$6,694,respectively,far water and
development east of the San Simeon U S Heller acid a 1991 court ruling by Ywsn".sa Wen Died khe soh chances-,..'.,Sewer hook-ups:'and Mr. Konfokma
nenan homemRoute 48. US District Coon lodge John Kanralta ,alts Ura bedcbao fees.He also aiguedn �'. would have had o pay$I am.008 m
6 eel the i nue for the emsidmediator's recon• his suit Wet he was wrongly denied the develop ore whole Pasco
It was about tits beet deal Oreernpert- nneridsioru and the eventual widen e t book-ups n 1983.- Mr.Miranda said tom rens were or-
Loeld have hoped for,according n the Problems.with the village's SOWN =. y;.-� ;demal In Judge Kameda's rating and
Iawye hired by the village. But for. system and the demands being placed- The Pros aad Coag could not be challenged by the village.
some m the beard,which voted 4-0 for on it are central to ondeeuoding the ":.That second charge kept the suit sive -"The village had no choice n that re-
the Witlevent with one abstenton,.it settlementMiranda
Mr.Miraand local our-. aft Judge Ramona's 1991 ruling,sub- spat"Mr.Maeda said."This was jun
was a bitter pin to swallow. cials sold this weeJt The causing loco jepng gar vilbp tDcine then Sl mil•i�a questlm of making surea long-
The settlement provides Mr.Koamo try found dozer$of devehtpm Walking.^:'fidk in damages if Mr.ICootokassn pro..,'standing soft was settled and that the
kosta with mom than 5600,000 in for.hook-ups n the building.boom of veiled. That Babmty Outweighed the " com lturomlity of the backbone fees
reduced fees,called backbone fees,that the mid-19809, forcing the state .: obligations the:villoge imorred in thee; was uplreW."
the village charges a developer to book DWanmmrl of Envvmmmotel Contact- .settlement,Tmalee John Cosko mid Mr.Molls dim pom."Il was a choice
up to the Greenport water and SOwN vadon to insist tial the vitlop upgrade thio weak., ��?.• < ' -
system.It also obligates the votes,to the plant or place a moratorium On new "Do I thole it's justified to give him ,. �,� See slot,page 26
yto to ties mu.
ni s pal sewer Nsyynammto aaommodam
the new develepasent .
However• some officials said, the DEVELOP
system upgrade was inevitable because - DAYS
FULkI
the village had to accommodate
hookups promised other developers.
Officials ala said granting the dis- ErAPODUNI THUMPSONSDAY HOUSEWARES
counted backbone fees was consistent DAILY SPECIALS SATURDAYS
with an carilcr coon ruling and the rat- MON.: Double Coupons 1, 5 1a ea ` MON. 10%OFF our
dement helped avoid possibly costly TUES A D.:tou le Coupons
all For t3abh .t;� 0.0f t118$o Bedding Dept.
judgment the.village could face if it Senior Citizens at the Em Or�4 0 NOUSB tog.itOr
chose m risk the mouw..;. „ ; - A �.S. �8.., A, TUES.S,WED.f0%OFF to all
'- ”' THIffill 10%OFF to all ' ' " 'a M,_ rBCBiYe 8 n;,t.l_ f7 •e" """' ' Senior Citizens
-'"Sdfi,it bothers carne camber$that pdople under 62 "- THUBS.: 10%OFF to ally'
couMr.nted
edImkeen was able lawsuit
cis- Fm.; 25%o8 $1 GIFT CERTIFICATE - people under 62 .
coronad feee. "SbOr"g Ws 1°°s°°il was Greeting Cards : to.be used for fuluie IfUrchaseS, , ., Fal.: 10%off LEVI'S
SAT.: Thompson'a " Purchast exclude tall items and other Seiecte� '> "11I Thompson's
Cutehogue FDes Bucks Day merchandise.See stores lot add8lonal IleWla. • + Bucks Day
Quick Response
Saves.3 Pets
In House Blaze Good Bence Good Sense ,Good Same
CUTCHOGUE—A Bayberry Road Ca lwcad-nu R84W W W spray Naagk Moral Rims 1• •
home m Neuer Point Wes hmvBy dmr- rumor•10 Vkn 44M Cmppe to A1M,. .Compare M LM Ma l
aged n a fire Sunday morning,and the 4M$1.89 -tar.$1.99 Arai.='1.09�:+ " 'Vol Candles Potpourri
women aside hogued Fire
responset good Sense Good Sense Good Sent$ SALE VI , SALE'3
form the g the building
Fere d her t ret AMI-momml Ibu roken Ndurngegmble i'oa4en ",.,'':..
with saving the belidng and hes duce p $3.5 Comoa to Mmmudl
pas ,f"pkm52.39 aoapk•53.59 „ar 53 99 cents earl-s ape 1-Inter Insulated carafe
The Cue went SO fact that it mus r _S bath beads e
beers been Eve or ten minutes before A 4o-Pepe super value a. Ioemma " 'SALE$4 SALEI`6
wen caning out
of the windows,"said Magnetic Photo Wood Picture ^Wood Frame
Katherine NeweD-Mayne,the 80-year. Album Frame - 5"rr" 8'a1r
„
out owner of the bone. $3,99 ,,.„ •53.gg glue=g vlaee tablecloths Coffee mugs
If they hadn't gotten it,my house SALE%0 a5 SIM.
would have burned down.” she mid. Peak Snap FI:-a-Flat Snap Windshield
"Da cue was very quick and they were Anti-Freezep Do or
wouderful. Someone went in and got gal.$5.99 $2.99 $ 15% photo frames -�115%off wine and,
my dog and my rat..l was very happy - S1.29,-s�'
d¢Ndm opar spachab champagne glasses
with their penlieved a."
the Cue,believed m 6e electrical in 10-Pack":�; � Clothespins
origin,was confined to an upstairs bed- Dish oz.990Detergent Sponges ,. 50-Pack • ' ' smrmaara
room and bathroom.Fire Chief Arthur. - azo:.995 $1 $1. -
Brewer said in a press relearn.The nest r+ _ Off of the house suffered water and smoke 1 i
IMS cur• PorlMom _
damage,he mid. whet•Pe[•rou,ems Me IT Mountain. .Elbow Moment
$ a
Tluee water hoses,outing 3,400 fee e"";PoM a eau Herb Tag � or Spaghetti� ' PURCHASE OF 5 or mere
in length,were snaked through the shin- 40".oak 995 16[".bags,990s (EXCLUDES aALE ITEMS)
deep snow and 10 degree temperatures216$.995'- ri Murat be presented prior to metal
m control the Damm. • • • $ 1 • �•
The Suffolk County Police Arson
Squad is investigating the natter,but ! Don't toupet to check out our
Ms.Newell-Mayne said she believed Winter" 50 /a OFF
n:Bargalfl Room
the rue named from a short n hes bed- list prices .we
room wiring.No one was Inured and Clearance Sale SELECTED MERCHANDISE all items 510 or less
Ms. Newell-Mayne'$ parrot aim es-
caped unharmed.Chief Brawn said.
W:IN S0061-k trines-fibtia"ice'
M:gnnmkoaa,was the only member Serif... Souholdomente
owned by
of die pwbiic present at the meamg.
Continued from Pape 5 - But p inch s of boot-ops to other de- "1 thought it was going to be a Closed
between tatting that mine and going to velopers make evimbb.be arid. that investment in Millsesss c Ild �.��y,i
town,"I& Wits said."Btu tlut was didn't make a bell of a lot of sense.to
Mr.Miranda.He's our attmney on it, - "!hare's no question that it places an mo".
and we had to go with his tecommenda- obligation on the village;"be said."Ba "If ym'te going to have it in open
dao." s - it's not beyond the commitments we session..why am just have it in open
ViAogt Dots Gat Something - had �L contracts m several sessim?"Ms.Heaney asked"When I
Mr.Costello said the village got one walked in time.I couldn't Understand
important coocaysm,which made the Trusteedbar Barbara Heaney, who was whyinampaperwasthae.
elected but March.said she nceded
deal easier for him to accept. Mr., mare iofametiwn m the mattaand thus "Lthaugbt it closed session:then
Komokosm had to agree to Natively abstained when the roenare passed,4-0. it was announced as open session,"said
low uge of both the water and sewer At.the vote,she said Mr.]fontokona Trustee�Hubbard' _
systems,which will restrict what be can 8m a gale mo much hum the ' Both Mr. Kapell and Mr.Cwstdto
build,the mtnen said "I'm not habe Handed Ippy with the set ik %" Said the meeting.was intended b be _
b 10,800 gamma and Daily winter um is goingboutfknw b wen from the Slid,and die mayor bris.
she said."In a settlement,everybody tied at di:suggestion that be had sought.
So give cop a hate,but I be
8.640 gallateMr
daily-That will mean . the village overcompensated t'get rid t rid to restrict public a press seem -.
- -1 do everything in the open.-he said..
r o m units can abuildaha. ty tingle-bed- -of the lame...Bar think God it's ova." "It's Com y
mom mita LL the sin.which may be __. : . ,.,- � completely inconaisten[with m -
hard to sell in she ppmt economic di. Open or Closed f admumamdan to do otherwise.Nobody
mase.Mr.Coetrlb said. - Mr.Mills and other tnsstens also- conducts a more.open administration
"As a compamta,the village is only questioned how the meeting aonomse- dun Ido." ,
- -supplying 8.640 gallons of sewer ca- mint was made and how it was subse-_. ...: .-
- ptdly.-which is nor mbevabb."W. qtly conducted _ _ •
. Cwatego acid. On,Friday..afternoon, The Suffolk
Currently.the neva system handles Tactics was informed by viWge Clark _
60D.IM pDoes a day.The DEC baa a-- Lam Cama dna the meeting would be
dared thattapauty upgraded to SOOA00._closed to the public and pea in aft ro.
gallons if die moratmim isto.be lilted..; dixva legal mamas However,Maya
That mans the Sewer system will ICapeg Said at was never his intention to
need a costly upgrade of clow to bold an executive session,and a staff
$500,000,Maya David Bapell said.. --member of the TSaveler-Watchman,the
_ _ �_._ __
I
J
1� �tiT� - .. • .••
IF:t ..�7 §'+yae ��. —_—_—�z_o•—_ _. cob fes + ...�,
ilFPj ��,, 9f,b
[�{ 1 � ISI • \ � ��\\
`�- ,,. V
1 •]I
I'f���o tii§�
V I I I � e \
�'t9a�l �
i i i i i =•;.�. �
:.�,. i
e '� 2 � _ ,
_gyp:: � � I �� �'
• : � v Yi�
I
I
-' 6 i
p i
�a.y ��i
l
Y
i //�� Y i 1
%I �- �� £ V may' 1�
� { .Q j
Jo a � f. Sb- { � f
o n � . L^i \ _ � � 0 5 iA
o< Z a '�t ':faa .'.S: ...t,D'. + iOai afi' ''�
_ mt! o^i
��X
i N a t A ''i.y O - Y 3,
i A
•i - < T 4�.r O � D<Iyy,Oa.fP y i `6. -j S.OS•�
n O �".S° `—�O ^ 036 4 a.� J~ .w nq•t S�CpY n 5 '� <' - � I
�� � s + `` y'1„ I
E t, �Q � i �� ni s a s a
i to c ., a +.c°i v� :
s
-S 3' 3..0 �. �-- � t—
o OIs 1 .\ ��g g
I
� tWii is '.�,�'. �� �.
I
L
0
C* x
LAURY L.DOWD Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
Town Attorney 'y Off' P. O. Bac 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Fax (516)765-1823
Telephone(516)765-1800
OFFICE OF THE TOWN ATTORNEY
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
MEMO
TO: TOWN BOARD
FROM: TOWN ATTORNEY�'J
RE: REALTY V. TOWN
KCE REALTY V. TOWN
DATE: September 8, 1994
The court has ruled on the two lawsuits filed re the environmental review of
the proposed HD rezonings. They have ruled in favor of the Town, dismissing
the cases. This action was taken because the lawsuits were filed before the
Town Board acted on the rezonings, and the court felt that the cases were
premature.
However, the court dismissed the cases without prejudice. I believe we can
anticipate the suit by Jem will be refiled against the Town sometwne soon.
Since the Kace property was not rezoned, that case will not be refiled. Let me
know if you'd like a copy of the decisions.
cc: Town Clerk
Planning Board
4 w s
SOUTHGLO TOtON
PLANNING BOAPA
��c��EFOIK�OG`
JUDITH T. TERRY y Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
TOWN CLERK c r=n P.O. Box 1179
N Southold, New York 11971
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax (516) 765-1823
MARRIAGE OFFICER �., Q� Telephone (516) 765-1801
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
SEQR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Detez=inati of Noa-SigniSca=
Determination of S* fwanoe
LeadAgency. Town Board
of the Town of Southold
Address: Town Ball,53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold,New York 11971
Date• July 12, 1994
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617,of the implementing re��aa�ons pertaining
to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review)of the p . onmentafConservation Law.
The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not
have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement need not be prepared.
Title of Action: Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion
SCI'M# 1000-35-1-24
n/s CR 48,564 feet e/o Sound Road,Greenport
SEQR Status: Type I Action
Project Description: The project which is the subject of this Determination,
involves a the change of zone of 623 acres from"Hamlet
Density"to"Residence-80". The roject site contains
freshwater wetlands and a mix of forested and old field
habitats. The site is also adjacent to Long bland Sound.
The proposed project is one of six(6) change of zones
being considered by the-Town Board at this time in the
same geographic area.
SCM Number, 1000-35-1-24
Location: The site consists of 623 acres and is located on the north
side CR 48,564 feet east of Sound Road,in the
•HD•Change of Zone
SEQR Detarmioation
unincorporated portion of Greenport.
Comments: The Town Board is reviewing this project simultaneously
with the following applications:
Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-40-3-1
s/s CR 48,more than 1000'c/o Chapel Lane,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motu
SCTM#1000-4441
s/s CR 48,400 feet w/o Moore's Lane,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1004351-25
n/s CR 48, 1,139 feet c/o Sound Road,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM#1004452-10.5
e/s Chapel Lane,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000.452-1
s/s CR 48,805 feet c/o Chapel Lane,Greenport
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of
significance contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11,the Long Environmental Assessment Form
Parts I and 11,and the following specific reasons:
(1) The subject change of zoning does not exceed any of the criteria for determining significance of an action
that would warrant die preparation of a Draft ELS. Conversely,die action will minimize potential
eavirommental impacts thereby providing support for issuance of a Negative Declaration.
(2) The proposed project will reduce the potential development demay on the subject site. As a result,
density derived impacts including water use;sanitay waste volume:disturbance of land;traffic
geaeradioo;and solid waste generation will also be reduoad. Accordingly,the subject charge of zoning is
expected to reduce the impact of site development with regard to these impact areas,as compared to
torrent zoning.
(3) The proper zoning is consistent with land use and zoning of surrounding lands,and will therefore not
cause a significant impact. As a result,the proposed change of zoning will have a beneSciai impact upon
land use in the area of the site.
(4) Consideration has been given to the review of the proposed zone change conducted by a consultant to
the Town Board,which concludes the following with regard to the site in consideration of unique site
resources:wnme findings suggest that any development on this site will have covironmental impact.
Our initial impression is that rezoning to'R-80'residential will provide a significant increased measure
Page 2 of 3
"HD"Change of zone
SEQR Determination
of protection for the environment than the"FID"zoning now provides.
(5) Consideration has been given to a planning document prepared by the Southold Planning Staff entitled,
"Review of Hamlet Density Zonbg in Southold Town-Repair to Ae Toon Bowe dated February 1994.
This report concludes the following with regard to the site in consideraiton of unique site resources:
"This pmcel could be developed in a insvuto not mg umW nwinplc dvu users. Reranirtg to a lower
density is mcornmeri&A-
(6) The subject site contains unique resources,and approrimately 67 percent of the site is considered
meadow/brushland and the remaining 33 percent of the site is forested. The site is also situated on Long
Island Sound. The proposed change of zoning will minimize impact upon the Long Island Sound and it's
associated bluffs,as well as the upland resources by reducing the potential land use density adjacent
these habitats. In addition,the louver potential land use density will provide more flexible land use
optious to marmivn setbacks and ensure preservation of unique wildlife habitat areas.
For Further Information:
Contact Person: Judith Terry,Town Clerk
Town of Southold
Address: Town Hall,53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
Phone No.: (516) 765-1800
Copies of this Notice Sent to:
Commissioner-Department of Environmental Conservation,50 Wolf Road,Albany,NY
12231
Regional Office-New York State the Department of Environmental Conservation, SUNY @
Stony Brook,Stony Brook, NY
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Department of Planning Commission
NYS Legislative Commission on Water. Resource Needs of Long Island
Southold Town Planning Board"--
Southold
oardSouthold Town Board of Appeals
Southold Town Building Department
Village of Greenport
Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board
Jem Realty Co., c/o Kontokosta, 43 West 54 Street, New York, N.Y. 10019
Page 3 of 3
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS 1P, �✓`a
Richard G.Ward, Chairman v' ;f Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
George Ritchie Latham,Jr. ? P. O. Box 1179
Bennett Orlowski, Jr. �� Southold, New York 11971
Mark S. McDonald .,/ zf u,. Fax (516) 765-3136
Kenneth L. Edwards 7 " Telephone(516) 765-1938
June 27, 1994 PLANNING BOARD OFFICE
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk
Town Hall
Southold, NY 11971
Dear Mrs. Terry:
Re: Change of Zone on Town Board' s Own Motion:
SCTM # 1000-40-4-1 - J. Geier
SCTM # 1000-35-1-25 - LBV Properties
SCTM # 1000-45-2-10. 3 - Richard Mohring (a.k.a. San Simeon
Retirement Community Inc. )
SCTM # 1000-45-2-1 - Siolas & Tsunis
SCTM # 1000-35-1-24 - Jem Realty
SCTM # 1000-40-3-1 - KACE Realty
At its June 24th meeting, the Planning Board adopted the following
report:
The Planning Board endorses the townspeople' s vision for their
Town, which calls for individually distinct or discrete hamlets
separated from each other by open or farmed countryside, and
which calls for the equitable distribution of affordable housing
density throughout the Town.
The Planning Board also recognizes that achieving this vision
will require the careful consideration of the land use within
and adjacent to its hamlet centers; that the Town' s Zoning Map
should reflect the intent of the community' s vision; and that
the Town must weigh the community' s interest in its collective
future against the private interest of individual property
owners in the use of their land.
The Planning Board recognizes that the proposed rezoning of
these properties will not deny these property owners the right
or capacity to develop their land; that the proposed zone of
R-80 is the base zoning of the Town and is by no means the most
restrictive zoning categorization in Southold.
The Planning Board endorses the report: "Review of Hamlet
Density Zoning in Southold Town: Report to the Town Board" , and
its recommendation that the zones of these six properties be
changed from Hamlet Density to a lower density such as R-80.
sigicer
Richard GAWa d�
Chairman
IN
JUDITH T. TERRY ;" Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
z P.O. Box 1179
TOWN CI ERH Southold, New York 11971
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Fax (516) 765-1823
MARRIAGE OFFICER Telephone (516) 765-1801
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
SEQR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
Notice of Determination of Non Significance
DetecminaH of S*n ficance
Lead Agency: Town Board
of the Town of Southold
Address: Town Hall,53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold,New York 11971
Date: May 31, 1994
This notice is issued pursuant to Part 617,of the impplementing regulations pertaining
to Article 8 (State Environmental Quality Review) of the Environ mental Conservation Law.
The lead agency has determined that the proposed action described below will not
have a significant effect on the environment and that a Draft Environmental Impact
Statement need not be prepared
Title of Action: Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-35-1-24
n/s CR 48, 564 feet e/o Sound Road,Greenport
SEQR Status: Unlisted Action
Project Description: The project which is the subject of this Determination,
involves a the change of zone of 623 acres from"Hamlet
Density"to "Residence-80". The project site contains
freshwater wetlands and a mix of forested and old field
Page I of 3
•HD'Change of Zone
SEQR Determination
habitats. The site is also adjacent to Long Island Sound.
The proposed pro'ect is one of six(6) change of zones
being considered�y the Town Board at this time in the
same geographic area
SCTM Number. 1000-35-1-24
Location: The site consists of 623 acres and is located on the north
side CR 48,564 feet east of Sound Road, in the
unincorporated portion of Greenport.
Comments: The Town Board is reviewing this project simultaneously
with the following applications:
Change of Zone on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 100040-3-1
s/s CR 48,more than 1000'e/o Chapel Lane,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000404-1
s/s CR 48,400 feet w/o Moore's Lane,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-35-1-25
n/s CR 48,1,139 feet e/o Sound Road,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
SCTM# 1000-45-2-103
e/s Chapel Lane,Greenport
Proposed COZ on Town Board's Own Motion
`_'•CTM#• 100045-2-1
3/9 CR 48,805 feet e/o Chapel Lane,Greenport
Reasons Supporting This Determination:
This determination is issued in full consideration of the criteria for determination of
significance contained in 6 NYCRR Part 617.11, the Long Environmental Assessment Form
Parts I and II, and the following specific reasons:
(1) The subject change of zoning does not exceed any of the criteria for determining significance of an action
that would warrant the preparation of a Draft EIS. Conversely,the action will minimipotential
environmental impacts thereby providing support for issuance of a Negative Declaration.
(2) The Proposed project will reduce the potential development density on the subject site. As a result,
density derived impacts including:water use;sanitary waste volume;disturbance of land;traffic
generation;and solid waste generation will also be reduced. Accordingly,the subject change of zoning is
expected to reduce the impact of site development with regard to these impact areas,as compared to
current zoning.
Page 2 of 3
•HD'Change of Zone
SEAR Determination
(3) The proposed zoning is consistent with land use and zoning of surrounding lands,and will therefore not
cause a significant impact. As a result,the proposed change of zoning will have a beneficial impact upon
land use in the area of the site.
(4) Consideration has been given to the review of the proposed zone change conducted by a consultant to
the Town Board,which concludes the following with regard to the site in consideration of unique site
resources:"These findings suggest that any development on this site will have environmental impacts.
Our initial impression is that rezoning to"R-W residential will provide a significant increased measure
of protection for the environment than the*M"zoning now provides.
(5) Consideration has been given to a planning document prepared by the Southold Planning Staff entitled,
"Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in Southold Town-Report to rhe Town Board"dated February 1994.
This report concludes the following with regard to the site in consideraiton of unique site resources:
"This parcel could be developed in a manner not requiring mulaple density uses. Rezoning to a lower
dm*u recommended"
(6) The subject site contains unique resources,and approidmately 67 percent of the site is considered
meadow/brushland and the remaining 33 percent of the site is forested The site a also situated on Long
Island Sound The proposed change of zoning will minimize impact upon the Long Island Sound and it's
associated bluffs,as well as the upland resources by reducing the potential land use density adjacent
these habitats In addition,the lower potential land use density will provide more flexible land use
options to madmizP setbacks and ensure preservation of unique wildlife habitat areas.
For Further Information:
Contact Person: Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Town of Southold
Address: Town Hall,53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold,New York 11971
Phone No.: (516) 765-1800
Copies of this Notice Sent to:
Commissioner-Department of Environmental Conservation,50 Wolf Road,Albany, NY
12231
Regional Office-New York State the Department of Environmental Conservation, SUNY @
Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island
Southold Town Planning Board✓
Southold Town Board of Appeals
Southold Town Building Department
Village of Greenport
Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board
Jem Realty Co. , c/o Kontokosta, 43 West 54 Street, New York, N.Y. 10019
Page 3 of 3
9 s. ,Coc&
P�
oSpFfOIKCD
JUDITH T. TERRY Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
TOWN CLERK am P.O. Box 1179
�1+ 1W Southold, New York 11971
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS �. Fax (516) 765-1823
MARRIAGE OFFICER .� � ��� Telephone (516) 765-1801
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
May 20, 1994
Southold Town Planning Board
Southold Town Hall
Southold, New York 11971
Gentlemen:
Transmitted herewith map of of a proposed change of zone on the
Town Board's own motion from Hamlet Density (HD) Residential Districtand
Low Density Residential R-40 District to Low Density Residential R-80
District on the property of Jem Realty Co.
Please prepare an official report with respect to the proposed change
of zone, and transmit same to me. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Attachment
N L
MAY 2 41994
sour►1aD mwH
PLANNING BOARD
oc��EfOLKCO�
JUDITH T. TERRY < Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
TOWN CLERK Lr%N Southold, New York 11971
rzi+ P.O. Box 1179
.�
REGISTRAR OF VITALCATISTICS
MARRIAGE OFFICER
Fax (516) 765-1823
NT CER 0.� 1 �� Telephone (516) 765-1801
RECORDS MANAGEMEOFFICER
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
April 11 , 1994 O Q 0 W a D
APR 13 1994
Lead Agency Coordination Request
SOUTNOLD 'OWN
PLANNING BOARD
The purpose of this request is to determine under Article 8 (State
Environmental Quality Review Act-SEQRA) of the Environmental Conservation Law
and 6NYCRR Part 617 the following:
1 . your jurisdiction in the action described below;
2. your interest in assuming the responsibilities of lead agency; and
3. issues of concern which you believe should be evaluated.
Enclosed you will find the Southold Town Board's findings and a completed Long
Environmental Assessment Form (EAF) to assist you in your response.
Project Name: Jem Realty Co., c/o Kontokosta, 43 West 54 Street, New York, N.Y.
10019, SCTM #1000-035-1-24, property located on the north side of Route 25, 564
feet east of Sound Road, Greenport, N.Y. , containing 62.3 acres.
Requested Action: Change of Zone, on the Town Board's own motion from Hamlet
Density (HD) Residential District and Low Density Residential R-40 District to Low
Density Residential R-80 District.
SEQRA Classification: Type I
Contact Person: Judith T. Terry, Town Clerk, Town of Southold
The lead agency will determine the need for a environmental impact statement
(EIS) on this project. If you have an interest in being lead agency, please contact
this office immediately. If no response is received from you within 30 days of the
date of this letter, it will be assumed that your agency has no interest in being lead
agency.
Page 2
Agency Position:
[ ] This agency has no objection to your agency assuming lead agency status
for this action.
[X) This agency wishes to assume lead agency status for this action.
[ ) Other. (See comments below)
Comments:
Please feel free to contact this office for further information.
Very truly yours,
Judith T. Terry (/
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosures
Copies of this request and all attachments to the following :
Commissioner Langdon Marsh, NYS-DEC, Albany
Robert Greene, NYS-DEC, Stony Brook
NYS Legislative Commission on Water Resource Needs of Long Island
Suffolk County Department of Planning
Suffolk County Department of Health Services
Southold Town Planning Board✓
Southold Town Board of Appeals.
Southold Town Building Department
Southold Town Clerk's Bulletin Board (without attachments)
Jem Realty Co. , c/o Kontokosta, 43 West 54 Street, New York, N.Y. 10019
Village of Greenport
S�FF�IKI'
JUDITH T. TERRY .G Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
TOWN CLERK P.O. Box 1179
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS y ® � g Southold, New
769 823 971
Fax
MARRIAGE OFFICER Oi ' y ��
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER SOI ,` r� Telephone (516) -1823 01
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON APRIL 5, 1994:
OWNER PARCEL # 1000-035-1-24 PROPERTY LOCATION
JEM REALTY CO. North Side Route 25
C/o Kontokosta 564 Feet East of Sound Road
34 West 54 Street Greenport, NY 11944
New York, NY 10019
WHEREAS, the Master Plan of the Town of Southold and the recommendations
of the Town's advisory Stewardship Task Force have increasingly emphasized
the promotion of growth in and around the hamlet centers, to strengthen their
business prospects while keeping open space and farmland undeveloped; and
WHEREAS, the Town Board has examined and extensively discussed a report
entitled "Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold" dated
February 1994 which assessed the appropriateness of the zoning of all
undeveloped HD zoned properties in the Town of Southold;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of
Southold concludes that HD and R-40 zoning of this property are not
appropriate for the following reasons:
1 . The cumulative impact of the recent rezoning of this parcel to HD
raised concerns which prompted the review of all HD zoning to
resolve inconsistencies in the placement of all these zones with the
Town's comprehensive plan;
2. The HD zoning of this site is not consistent with the Town's
comprehensive plan because it encourages high density residential
growth at a significant distance from the nearest hamlet center of
Greenport and encourages suburban sprawl;
3. The development of an. intense residential area near the key
intersection of Route 48 and Route 25 has the potential for
significant traffic generation and will weaken the strength and
economic integrity of the Village of Greenport, a key hamlet to the
Town as a whol•-
4. The HD zoning is, not consistent with the R-40 zoning to the
west, the environmentally fragile shoreline to the north, and the
R-80 zoning east of the adjacent HD property, which is also being
proposed for rezoning to R-80; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Town Board of the Town of Southold
finds that rezoning this property from HD to R-80 is appropriate for the
following reasons:
1. R-80 is the base zoning of the Town because it retains the open
rural environment so highly valued by year-round residents and
those people who support the Town's economy;
2. R-80 zoning is most consistent with the zoning on immediately
adjacent properties;
3. R-80 zoning can best protect those areas with sensitive
environmental features, including aquifer recharge areas and
possible endangered species and the bluffs;
4. R-80 zoning can best protect the irreplaceable scenic features of
this property, particularly the bluffs along the Long Island Sound.
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
April 6, 1994
1 H1 6-2 (2737)-7c
• 617-21 • SEOR
Appendix A
State Envlr%,nmental Cluallty Review
.FULL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FORM
Purpose: The full EAF is designed to help applicants and agencies determine, in an orderly manner, whether a project
or action may be significant. The question of whether an action may be significant is not always easy to answer. Frequent-
ly, there are aspects of a project that are subjective or unmeasureable. It is also understood that those who determine
significance may have little or no formal knowledge of the environment or may be technically expert in environmental
analysis. In addition, many who have knowledge in one particular area may not be aware of the broader concerns affecting
the question of significance.
The full EAF is intended to provide a method whereby applicants and agencies can be assured that the determination
process has been orderly, comprehensive in nature, yet flexible to allow introduction of information to fit a project or action.
Full EAF Components: The full EAF is comprised of three parts:
Part 1: Provides objective data and information about a given project and its site. By identifying basic project
data, it assists a reviewer in the analysis that takes place in Parts 2 and 3.
Part 2: Focuses on identifying the range of possible impacts that may occur from a project or action. It provides
guidance as to whether an impact is likely to be considered small to moderate or whether it is a potentially-
large impact. The form also identifies whether an impact can be mitigated or reduced.
Part 3: If any impact in Part 2 is identified as potentially-large, then Part 3 is used to evaluate whether or not the
impact is actually important.
DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE—Type 1 and Unlisted Actions
Identify the Portions of EAF completed for this project: O Part 1 = Part 2 OPart 3
Upon review of the information recorded on this EAF (Parts 1 and 2 and 3 if appropriate), and any other supporting
information, and considering both the magitude and importance of each impact, it is reasonably determined by the
lead agency that:
A. The project will not result in any large and important impact(s) and, therefore, is one which will not
have a significant impact on the environment, therefore a negative declaration will be prepared.
B. Although the project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant
effect for this Unlisted Action because the mitigation measures described in PART 3 have been required,
therefore a CONDITIONED negative declaration will be Prepared.*
— C. The project may result in one or more large and important impacts that may have a significant impact
on the environment. therefore a positive declaration will be prepared.
A Conditioned Negative Declaration is only valid for Unlisted Actions
Change of zone for SCTM#1000-35-1-24
Name of Action
Town of Southold Town Board
Name of Lead Agency
Print or Type Name of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Title of Responsible Officer
Signature of Responsible Officer in Lead Agency Signature of Preparer(If different from responsible officer)
PART 1—PROJECT INFORMATION
Prepared by Project Sponsor
NOTICE: This document is designed to assist in determining whether the action proposed may ha:: a significant effect
on the environment. Please complete the entire form, Parts A through E. Answers to these questions will be considers
as part of the application for approval and maybe subject to further verification and public review. Provide any additions.
information you believe will be needed to complete Parts 2 and 3.
It is expected that completion of the full EAF will be dependent on information currently available and will not involve
new studies, research or investigation. If information requiring such additional work is unavailable, so indicate and specify
each instance.
NAME OF ACTION
Change of zone for SCTM# 1000-35-1-24
LOCATION OF ACTION (Include Street Address, Municipality and County)
N/O SR25 , 564 feet E/O Sound Drive , Greenport
NAME OF APPLICANTISPONSOR BUSINESS TELEPHONE
Town of Southold Town Board (516) 765-1891
ADDRESS
53095 Main Road
CITY/PO STATE "P CODE 71
1 -
Southold 11�J
NAME OF OWNER(It different) BUSINESS TELEPHONE
Jem Realty Co. / C/O Kor.tokosta ( )
ADDRESS
43 ;West 54th Street
C11Y/PO STATE 21P CODE
New York NY 10019
DESCRIPTION OF ACTION
Change of zone on Town Board' s own motion on this 62 . 3 acre parcel
more specifically known as Suffolk County Tax Map # 1000-35-1-24
located on the north side of CR 48 , 564 feet east of Sound Drive in
Greenport. Change of zone is from HD and R-40 to entirely R-80 .
Please Complete Each Question—Indicate N.A. if not applicable
A. Site Description
Physical setting of overall project, both developed and undeveloped areas.
1. Present land use: ❑Urbar. ❑Industrial ❑Commercial ❑Residential (suburban) ❑Rural (non-fare
%Forest ❑Agriculture POther Vacant land
(Brush) 62 . 3
2. Total acreage of project area: acres.
APPROXIMATE ACREAGE PRESENTLY AFTER COMPLETION
Meadow or Brushland (Nor.-agricultural)Mature brush 41 . 8 acres 41 . 8 acres
Forested 21 . 5 acres 21 . 5 acres
Agricultural (includes orchards, cropland, pasture, etc.) acres acres
Wetland (Freshwater or tidal as per Articles 24, 25 of ECL) acres acres
Water Surface Area acres acres
Unvegetated (Rock, earth or fill) acres acres
Roads, buildings and other paved surfaces acres acres
Other (Indicate type) acres acres
HaA, HaB , RdB , PIB
3. What is predominant soil type(s) on project site? - _ _ --__- ___
a. Soil drainage: Awell drained 85 % of site )JModerately well drained 15 % of site
❑Poorly drained % of site
b. If any agricultural land is involved now many acres of soil are classified within soil group 1 through 4 of the N
Land Classification Systems NA acres (See 1 NYCRR 370)
-. ..,
S.'Approiimate percentage of propos
eObject site with slopes: 90410% -f—% Olo•15% . %
01S% or greater %
6. Is project substantiall, contiguous to, or contain a building, site, or district, listed on the State or the National
Registers of Historic Places? Dyes Flo
7. Is project substantially contiguous to a site listed on the Register of National Natural Landmarks? OYes *o
8..What is the depth of the water table? (in feet)
9. Is site located over a primary, principal, or sole source aquifer? ) Yes ONo
10. Do hunting, fishing or shell fishing opportunities presently exist in the project area? OYes ONo'
11. Does project site contain any species of plant or animal life that is identified as threatened or endangered?
es ONo According to Cramer , Voorhis & Associates , Inc.
Identify each species Northern Harrier
12. Are there any unique or unusual land forms on the project site? (i.e., cliffs• dunes, other geological formations)
X'es ONo Describe Waterfront area , bluffs
-13. is the project site presently used by the community or neighborhood as an open space or recreation area?
OYes )KNo If yes, explain
14. Does the present site include scenic views known to be important to the community?
9iyes ONo
15. Streams within or contiguous to project area: NA
a. Name of Stream and name of River to which it is tributary
16. Lakes, ponds, wetland areas within or contiguous to project area:
Long Island Sound
a. Name b. Size (In acres)
17. Is the site served by existing public utilities? 1ps ONo
a) If Yes, does sufficient capacity exist to allow connection? Oyes )�-No for HD zoning
b) If Yes, will improvements be necessary to allow connection? FYes =No
18. Is the site located in an agricultural district certified pursuant to Agriculture and Markets Law, Article 25-AA.
Section 303 and 304? Oyes —
19. Is the site located in or substantially/contiguous to a Critical Environmental Area designated pursuant to Article 8
of the ECL, and 6 NYCRR 6177 =Yes Po
20. Has the site ever been used for the disposal of solid or hazardous wastes? —'Yes No unknown
B. Project Description
Project is proposed rezoning.
1. Physical dimensions and scale of project (fill in dimensions as appropriate)
a. Total contiguous acreage owned or controlled by project sponsor 62 . 3 acres.
b. Project acreage to be developed: NA . acres initially; NA' acres ultimately. Proposed
c. Project acreage to remain undeveloped NA acres. COz .
d. Length of project, in miles: NA (If appropriate)
e. If the project is an expansion. indicate percent of expansion proposed NA %;
I. Number of off-street parking spaces existing NA ro
p posed
g. Maximum vehicular trips generated per hour NA (upon completion of project)?
h. If residential: Number and type of housing units: NA
One Family Two Family Multiple Family Condominium
Initially
Ultimately
i Dimensions iin feet) of largest proposed structure NA height, width. length
._ . ... .. .
11 570±
2. How much natural material (i.e., rock, earth, etc.) will be removed from the site? 0 tons/cubic yards
3. Will d; urbed areas be reclaimed? OYes ONO */A
a. If yes, for what intend . purpose is the site being reclaimed?
b. Will topsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? OYes ONO
c. Will upper subsoil be stockpiled for reclamation? Oyes ONO
4. How many acres of vegetation (trees, shrubs, ground covers) will be removed from site? - acres.
5. Will any mature forest (over 100 years old) or other locally-important.vegetation be removed by this project?
OYes ;ANO
6. If single phase project: Anticipated period of construction NA months, (including demolition).
7. If multi-phased:
a. Total number of phases anticipated NA (number).
b. Anticipated date of commencement phase 1 month year, (including demolition).
c. Approximate completion date of final phase month year.
d. Is phase 1 functionally dependent on subsequent phases? OYes ONO
8. Will blasting occur during construction? OYes ONO
9. Number of jobs generated: during construction NSA after project is complete
10. Number of jobs eliminated by this project
11. Will project require relocation of any projects or facilities? OYes ANo If yes, explain
12. Is surface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes )INo
a. If yes, indicate type of waste (sewage, industrial, etc.) and amount
b. Name of water body into which effluent will be discharged
13. Is subsurface liquid waste disposal involved? OYes No Type
14. Will surface area of an existing water body increase or decrease by proposal? Oyes ONO NA
Explain
15. Is project or any portion of project located in a 100 year flood plain? OYes ANo
16. Will the project generate solid waste? OYes 1o,(Jo
a. If yes, what is the amount per month tons
b. If yes, will an existing solid waste facility be used? OYes ONo
c. If yes, give name ; location
d. Will any wastes not go into a sewage disposal system or into a sanitary landfill? Oyes [:)No
e. If Yes, explain
17. Will the project involve the disposal of solid waste? OYes lQ)No
a. If yes, what is the anticipated rate of disposal? tons/month.
b. If yes, what is the anticipated site life? years.
18. Will project use herbicides or pesticides? OYes No
19.
19. Will project routinely produce odors (more than one hour per day)? Dyes �No
20. Will project produce operating noise exceeding the local ambient noise levels? OYes NNo
21. Will project result in an increase in energy use? Dyes IAN
If yes , indicate type(s)
22. If water supply is from wells, indicate pumping capacity NA gallons/minute.
23. Total anticipated water usage per day NA gallonslday.
.4 ;vwect mvnlve Local Sate or Federal '..m[iinq' nye, No
2S. Approvals Required • •
Submittal
Type Date
City, Town, Village Board OYes ONo Change of Zone
City, Town. Village Planning Board OYes ONo
City, Town Zoning Board OYes ONo
City, County Health Department OYes ONo
Other Local Agencies Oyes ONo
Other Regional Agencies OYes ONo
State Agencies OYes ONo
Federal Agencies ❑Yes ONo
C. Zoning and Planning Information
1 . Does proposed action involve a planning or zoning decision? ;@Yes ONo
If Yes, indicate decision required:
Ozoning amendment ❑zoning variance Ospecial use permit Osubdivision ❑site plan
Onewlrevision of master plan ❑resource management plan ❑other
2 What is the zoning classification(s)of the site? HD and R-40
3. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the present zoning?
Without ?ubl .o sewer servi-ce/ ill units . With nubli =� sewer service , 202 units
4. What is the proposed zoning of the site? R-80
5. What is the maximum potential development of the site if developed as permitted by the proposed zoning?
31 units
6. Is the proposed action consistent with the recommended uses in adopted local land use plans? AIYes ONo
7. What are the predominant land use(s) and zoning classifications within a Y mile radius of proposed action?
Tos. the east , vacant land/HD (also a proposed change of zone) residential/R4(
Historic building/LB ,,RRestaurant/ B .
8 Is the proposed action compafible with adlolniQ5urrounding land uses within a '/4 mile? Ayes ❑No
9. If the proposed action is the subdivision of land, how many lots are proposed? NA
a. What is the minimum lot size proposed?
10. Will proposed action require any authorization(s) for the formation of sewer or water districts? Dyes ANo
11 . Will the proposed action create a demand for any community provided services (recreation, education, police.
fire protection)? Dyes ❑No potential need if developedunder existing zoning.
a.` If yes, is existing capacity sufficient to handle projected demand? -]Yes ONo Potential (see
above) .
12 . Will the proposed action result in the generation of traffic significantly above present levels? Ayes ❑No
unknown-see above .
a. If yes, is the existing road network adequate to handle the additional traffic? OYes ❑No
unknown-see above .
D. Informational Details
Attach any additional information as may be needed to clarify your project If there are or may be any adverse
impacts associated with your proposal, please discuss such impacts and the measures which you propose to mitigate or
avoid them.
E. Verification
I certify that the t f rmation provided above is true to the best of my knowledge.
ApplicantlSponsor I LA 11 0. fs' 2 :'� Date Og
Signature TitleCt�,LALfflc �' Q2H15f Q�< IAZQ il--C .
CtJ 0 �r/\T7i t1:f'_ i{TP rr)c t(_,Vt l
.n the Cnntjl 4rea. •nd sou are sli!r Jcencs, complele the Coastal A seesment Form before proceeding
Part 2—PROJECT' IMPACTS AND 7KTR VAG " '."N=
Responsibility of Ler/ Agrrmy
General Information (Read Carefully) r, and determinations bee
• In completing the form the reviewer should be guided by the wes:ion: heave my respo
reasonable) The reviewer is not expected to be an expert envirvriffiffliAl, an yst.
• Identifying that an impact will be potentially large (column ;,) does not mean that it is aho necessarily significant-
Any large impact must be evaluated in PART 3 to determine significance. Icentifying an impact in column 2 %imp
asks that it be looked at further.
• The Examples provided are to assist the reviewer by showing 'types cf mpac t. and wherever possible the threshold
magnitude that would trigger a response in column 2. The examples am gerwially applicable throughout tete State a,
for most situations. But, for any specific project or site other examples andor lower thresholds may be appropris
for a Potential Large Impact response, thus requiring evaluation in Part: 3.
• The Impacts of each project on each site, in each locality, will vary. The*fore, the examples are illustrative a_
have leen offered as guidance.They do not constitute an exhaustive IM cf impa,b and thresholds to answer each questi-
• The number of examples per question does not indicate the importance a each question.
• In identifying impacts, consider long term, short term and cumlative effect.
instructions (Read carefully)
a. Answer each of the 19 questions in PART 2. Answer Yes if there will be any impact
b. Maybe answers should be considered as Yes answers.
c. If answering yes to a question then check the appropriate box (column 1 x 2) to indicate the potential size of
impact If impact threshold equals or exceeds any example provided, check c slumn 2. If impact will occur but thresh
is lower than example, check column 1.
d. If reviewer has doubt about size of the impact then consider the impact as potentially large and proceed to PAR
e. If a potentially large impact checked in column 2 can be mitigated by change(s)in the project to a sm311 to model
impact. also check the Yes box in column 3. A No response indicates that such a reduction is not posstbie.
must be explained in Part 3.
2 3
rtull to Potential Can Impact
Moderate Large Mitigated P
IMPACT ON LAND --- - - `rtoa-cy Impact Project CUT
1 . Will the proposed action result in a physical change to the PO
project site?NOYES
—
Examples that would apply to column 2 )`' ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑i
• Any construction on slopes of 15% or greater, (15 foot rise per 100
foot of length), or where the general slopes in the project area exceed
10%. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑
• Construction on land where the depth to the water table is less than
3 feet [j ❑ ❑Yes ❑
• Construction of paved parking area for 1,000 or more vehicles. ❑ Dyes ❑
• Construction on land where bedrock is exposed or generally within ❑
3 feet of existing ground surface. Dyes C
*.Construction that will continue for more than 1 year or involve more Cl ❑
than one phase or stage. ❑ ❑ Dyes
• Excavation for mining purposes that would remove more than 1,000
tons of natural material (i.e., rock or soil) per year.
❑ ❑ Dyes L.
• Construction or expansion of a sanitary landfill. ❑ ❑ Dyes 1-
• Construction in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes I
Change of zone/ No change -
• Other impacts
2. Will there be an effect V _.iy unique or unusual land forms found on
the site? (i.e., cliffs, dunes Bgeological @formations,
dfrontDaO rAYES ❑ ❑ ❑Y� f
• Specific land forms:
r '
dft
i Y 3
IMPACT ON WATER Small to Potential Can Impact :
Moderate Large Mitigated B
3 Will proposed action affect any water body designated as protected? Impact Impact Project Chan
(Under Articles 15, 24, 25 of the Environmental Conservation Law, ECL)
PNO OYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Developable area of site contains a protected water body. ❑ ❑ Oyes ❑t
• Dredging more than 100 cubic yards of material from channel of a ❑ ❑ ❑Yes 0-
protected stream.
• Extension of utility distribution facilities through a protected water body. ❑ ❑ Oyes ❑;
• Construction in a designated freshwater or tidal wetland. ❑ ❑ Oyes ❑t
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑f.
4. Will proposed action affect any non-protected existin or new body
of water? ( NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• A 106 increase or decrease in the surface area of any body of water ❑ ❑ ❑Yes 0 t
or more than a 10 acre increase or decrease.
• Construction of a body of water that exceeds 10 acres of surface area. ❑ ❑; Dyes ON
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ ' ❑Yes ON
5. Will Proposed Action affect surface or groundwater
quality or quantity? XNO OYES
Examples that would apply tq column 2
• Proposed Action will require a discharge permit. ❑ ❑ 1:1 Yes 0
• Proposed Action requires use of a source of water that does not ❑ ' ❑ ❑Yes ON
have approval to serve proposed(proiect) action.
• Proposed Action requires water supply from wells with greater than 45 ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON
gallons per minute pumping eapacity.
• Construction or operation causing any contamination of a water ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON
supply system.
• Proposed Action will adversely affect groundwater. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON
• Liquid effluent will be conveyer off the site to facilities wh::h presently ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON
do not exist or have inadequate capacity.
• Proposed Action would use water in excess of 20,000 gallons per ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ON
day.
• Proposed Action will likel" Lldoie siltation or other discharge into an ❑ ❑ ED Yes CIN
existing body of water w th- e,ment that there will be an obvious visual
contrast to natural conditions.
• Proposed Action will require the storage of petroleum or chemical ❑ ❑ (--)Yes ON
products greater than 1,100 gallons.
• Proposed Action will allow residential uses in areas without water ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑N
and/or sewer services.
• Proposed Action locates commercial and/or industrial uses which may ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑N
require new or expansion of existing waste treatment and/or storage
facilities.
• Other impacts: Chanae of 2nno ; 1 t od-,.,, the eu it ❑ ❑ ❑Yet Or,
of allowable development , the maximum of wh; ,-h—co ld
Potentially effect roUndwat r .
�. Will proposed action al7er ararnage clow or patterns, or surface
water runoff? �NO DYES
Ex--T,plet that would apply to column 2
2 3
Small to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Protect Changs
• Proposed Action may cause substantial erosion. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
D ❑ ❑Yes ONO
• Proposed Action is incompatible with existing drainage patterns. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Proposed Action will allow development in a designated floodway. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO
•• Other impacts:
IMPACT ON AIR
7. Will proposed action affect air quality? NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2 ❑ Dyes ONO
• Proposed Action will induce 1,000 or more vehicle trips in any given ❑
hour. ❑ Dyes ONO
• Proposed Action will result in the incineration of more than 1 ton of ❑
refuse per hour. ❑ D Dyes ONO
• Emission rate of total contaminants will exceed 5 lbs. per hour or a
heat source producing more than 10 million BTU's per hour. ❑ ❑ Dye ONO
• Proposed action will allow an increase in the amount of land committed
to industrial use. D ❑ Dyes ONO
• Proposed action will allow an increase in the density of industrial
development within existing industrial areas. ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
• Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PLANTS AND ANIMALS
b. Will Proposed Action affect any threatened or endangered
OYES
species? I0` NO
Examptes that would apply to column 2 ' D Oyes ONO
• Reduction of one or more species listed on the New York or Federal ❑
list, using the site, over or near site or found on the site. D Dyes ONO
• Removal of any portion of a critical or significant wildlife habitat O ❑ Dyes ONO
• Application of pesticide or herbicide more than twice a, year, other
than for agricultural purposes. D Dyes ONO
• Other impacts:
Change of zone will help protect ❑
the habitat of the Northern Harrier .
9. Will Proposed Action substantially affect non-threatened or
non-endangered species?
NO DYES
Examples that would apply to column 2 D Dyes ONO
• Proposed Action would substantially interfere with any resident or ❑
migratory fish, shellfish or wildlife species. ❑ Oyes ONO
• Proposed Action requires the removal of more than 10 acres ❑
of mature forest (over 100 years of age) or other locally important
vegetationChange of zone will protect loo+ year for st.
IMPACT ON AGRICULTURAL LAND RESOURCFES
10. Will the Proposed Action affect agricultural land resources? PYE5
Examples that would apply to column 2 di ❑ ❑Yes ❑Nc
• The proposed action would sever, cross or limit access to agricultural Y"
land (includes cropland, hayfields, pasture, vineyard. o(chard, etc.)
23
Rall to Potential Can Impact Be
Moderate Large Mitigated By
Impact Impact Project Change
• Construction activity would excavate or compact the soil profile of ❑ Dyes ❑No
agricultural land.
• The proposed action would irreversibly convert more than 10 acres ? ❑ Dyes ONO
of. agricultural land or, if located in an Agricultutal District, more
than 2.5 acres of agricultural land.
• The proposed action would disrupt or prevent installation of agricultural ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ONO
land management systems (e.g., subsurface drain lines, outlet ditches,
strip cropping); or create a need for such measures (e.g. cause a farm
field to drain poorly due to increased runoff)
• Other impacts: Ha Soils exist on site , but Change f ❑ ❑
zone would not alter conditions . Develo ment at ❑Yes ONO
Present zoning would maintain opportunities for
run-off.
IMPACT ON AESTHETIC RESOURCES
11 . Will proposed action affect aesthetic resources? )ONO OYES l
(If necessary, use the Visual EAF Addendum in Section 617.21,
Appendix B.) I
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed land uses, or project components obviously different from ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
or in sharp contrast to current surrounding land use patterns, whether
man-made or natural.
• Proposed land uses, or project components visible to users of ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
aesthetic resources which will eliminate or significantly reduce their
enjoyment of the aesthetic qualities of that resource.
Project components that will result in the elimination or significant ❑ ❑ Dyes 0 N
screening of scenic views known to be important to the area.
• Other impacts. ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
IMPACT ON HISTORIC AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES
12. Will Proposed Action impact any site or structure of historic, pre-
historic or paleontological importance? 5,NO OYES
Examples that would apply to column 2
• Proposed Action occurring wholly or partially within or substantially ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
contiguous to any facility or site listed on the State or National Register
of historic places.
• Any impact to an archaeological site or fossil bed located within the ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
project site.
• Proposed Action will occur in an area designated as sensitive for ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑No
archaeological sites on the NYS Site Inventory.
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
IMPACT ON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION
13. Will Proposed Action affect the quantity or quality of existing or
future open spaces or recreational opportunities?
Examples that would apply to column 2 T).NO DYES
( )The permanent foreclosure of a future recreational opportunity. ❑ ❑ Dyes ONO
Y A major reduction of an open space important to the community. ❑ ❑ Dyes 0 N
• Other impacts: ❑ ❑ 0Yes ❑No
1 2 a
IMPACT ON TRANSPORTATION Small to Potential -Can Imped P
Moderate Large Mitigated EN,
14. Will there be an effect to existing transportation systtermss? OYES Impact Impact Project Chan
Examples that would apply to column 2 ❑ Dyes [IN
• Alteration of present patterns of movement of people and/or goods. O ❑ Dyes ON
• Proposed Action will result in major traffic problems. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑t
• Other impacts: Change of zone will allow less
development and thus , less traffic flow.
IMPACT ON ENERGY "
15. Will proposed action affect the community's sources of fuel DYES
energy supply? ONO
Examples that would apply to column 2 ❑ Dyes ❑i
• Proposed Action will cause a greater than 5% increase in the use of ❑
any form of energy in the municipality. ❑ ❑ Dyes ❑
• Proposed Action will require the creation or extension of an energy
transmission or supply system to serve more than So single or two family
residences or to serve a major commercial or industrial use. ❑ 0 Dyes ❑
• Other impacts:
NOISE AND ODOR IMPACTS
16. Will there be objectionable odors, noise, or vibration aresult
, OYES-
of
YESof the Proposed Action?
Examples that would apply to column 2 ❑ ❑Yes (_
• Blasting within 1,500 feet of a hospital, school or other sensitive ❑
facility. r day/ _ ❑ ❑ Dyes
•
Odors will occur routinely
(more than one hour per ❑ Dyes 1
• Proposed Action will produce operating noise exceeding the local -
ambient noise levels for noise outside of structures. ❑ Dyes i
• Proposed Action will remove natural barriers that would act as a ❑
noise screen. ❑ ❑ Dyes
• Other impacts:
IMPACT ON PUBLIC HEALTH
17. Will Proposed Action affect public health and safety?NO OYES
Examples that would apply to column 2 YY�� ❑ Dyes
• Proposed Action may cause a risk of explosion or release of hazardous ❑
accidententof
(i.e.
orupset ondi tons ornthere may tbenaechron c lowelevel
discharge or emission. ❑ p Dyes
• Proposed Action may result in the burial of "hazardous
wao irritating.
form (i.e. toxic, poisonous, highly reactive, radioactive.
infectious, etc.) ❑ Dyes
• Storage facilities for one million or more gallons of liquified natural ❑
gas or other flammable liquids. ❑ Dyes
• Proposed action may result in excavation disposal of solid turbance ❑
within 2,000 feet of a site used for the
waste. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes
0 Other impacts' --
IMPACT ON GROWTH AND CHARACTER Small to Potential Can Impact Be
OF COMMUNITY OR NE(ur1BORHOOD Moderate Urge Mltlgated By
1e. Will proposed action affect the character of the existing community? Impact Impact Project Change
tANO OYES - -
Examples that would apply to column 2
• The permanent population of the city, town or village in which the ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
project is located is likely to grow by more than S%.
• The municipal budget for capital expenditures or operating services ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
will Increase by more than S% per year as a result of this project.
• Proposed action will conflict with officially adopted plans or goals. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Proposed action will cause a change in the density of land use. ❑ ❑ Oyes ❑No
• Proposed Action will replace or eliminate existing facilities, structures ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
or areas of historic importance to the community.
• Development will create a demand for additional community services ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
(e.g. schools, police and fire, etc.)
• Proposed Action will set an important precedent for future projects. ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
• Proposed Action will create or eliminate employment. ' ❑ ❑ ❑Yes C3 No
• Other impacts:
Change of zone will be more - ❑ ❑ ❑Yes ❑No
compatible with Town ' s Master Plan .
19. Is there, or is there likely to be, public controversy related to
potential adverse environmental impacts? gkNO OYES
If Any Action In Part 2 Is Identified as a Potential Large Impact or
If You Cannot Determine the Magnitude of Impact, Proceed to Part 3
Part 3—EVALUATION OF THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPACTS
Responsibility of Lead Agency
Part 3 must be prepared if one or more impact(s) is considered to be potentially large, even if the impact(s) may
mitigated.
Instructions
Discuss the following for each impact identified in Column 2 of Part 2:
1 . Briefly describe the impact
2. Describe(if applicable)how the impact could be mitigated or reduced to a small to moderate impact by project chang
3. Based on the information available, decide if it is reasonable to conclude that this impact is important.
To answer the question of importance, consider:
• The probability of the impact occurring -
• The duration of the impact
• Its irreversibility, including permanently lost resources of value
• Whether the impact can or will be controlled
• The regional consequence of the impact
• Its potential divergence from local needs and goals
• Whether known objections to the project relate to this impact.
t
(Continue on attachments)
CRAMER, V RHPft(OCIATES
ENVIRONMENT'' ' ` G CONSULTANTS
March 8, 1994
Ms. Valerie Scopaz0 g W D
Planner
Town of Southold ,r^` I G ;��l
Main Road
Southold, New York 11971 TM
RE: Proposal for Services "AMING DOWD
Preparation of Long Environmental Assessment Forms (EAF) for Proposed
Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold
Dear Valerie:
Pursuant to your request, the following will serve as a proposal for services with
regard to the above referenced. It is our understanding that the Town Board wishes to
consider the possible rezoning for six undeveloped parcels from Hamlet Density (HD) to
Residence-80 (R-80). This proposed action is a result of the study prepared by you and the
staff, entitled 'Review of Hamlet Density Zoning in the Town of Southold", dated February
1994. The following are the six parcels that will be considered in the public hearings:
SCTM# Hamlet Location Acreage
100-40-3-1 Greenport, unincorp. 17.1
100-40-4-1 Greenport, unincorp. 10.55
100-35-1-25 Greenport, unincorp. 132.08
100-45-2-10.3 Greenport, unincorp. 20.07
100-45-2-1 Greenport, unincorp. 1.2
100-35-1-24 Greenport, unincorp. 62.3
CVA proposes to complete the Long EAF necessary for coordination with other
involved agencies under the State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act. We will also
carry out field inspections on each of the subject parcels to assist in the preparation on the
documents. It is also our understanding that you have certain information that will be made
available to us to assist in the preparation of the Long EAF's. In consideration of the above
we estimate that the preparation of each Long EAF will cost between $150.00 to $200.00,
with a total sum of not to exceed $1,200.00.
I hope you and the Board find the above proposal acceptable. If there are any
questions with the above please feel free to contact me. If the Board authorizes this
proposal, please let me know and we will begin work immediately as I understand that the
public hearing will be set for March 22. Thank you for your consideration of CVA and I
hope to hear from you shortly.
Very truly yours,
Thomas W. Cramer, ASLA
54 NORTH COUNTRY ROAD, SUITE 2, MILLER PLACE, NY 11764 (516) 331-1455
F01KColi
JUDITH T. TERRY s1 <` Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
TOWN CLERK P.O. Box 1179
v�' x Southold, New York 11971
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS ,�� <-y
MARRIAGE OFFICERFax (516) 765-1823
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER
.�j� Telephone (516) 765-1801
.,'>r/,t I
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
March 10, 1994
Thomas W. Cramer, ASLA
Cramer, Voorhis & Associates
54 North Country Road, Suite 2
Miller Place, New York 11764
Dear Tom:
This is to confirm that the Southold Town Board, at their regular
meeting held on March 8, 1994, adopted a resolution accepting your
proposal to prepare Long Environmental Assessment Forms for six proposed
rezonings to be undertaken on the Town Board's own motion. A certified
copy of the resolution is enclosed.
Very truly yours,
s
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
Enclosure /
cc: V. Scopaz, Senior Plannery
SOUTHOLD TUYrN
PLANNING BOARD
��c�uFFOI,'(C�G
JUDITH T. TERRY
Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
TOWN CLERK P.O. Box 1179
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS f Southold, New York 11971
MARRIAGE OFFICER ��, � -,; ��' Fax (516) 765-1823
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER 6'J a Telephone (516) 765-1801
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT A REGULAR MEETING HELD ON MARCH 8, 1994:
RESOLVED that the Town Board of the Town of Southold hereby accepts
the proposal of Cramer, Voorhis E Associates, dated March 8, 1994, at a
total sum not to exceed $1,200.00, for the preparation of Long
Environmental Assessment Forms for six (6) proposed rezonings to be
undertaken on the Town Board's own motion.
Judith
��ery V
Southold Town Clerk
March 9, 1994
PACHMAN. PACHMAN. BROWN & FARNETI. P.C. �a
ATTORNEYS
366 VETERANS MEMORIAL HIGHWAY
P.O. BOX 273
COMMACK. NEw YORK 11725
(516) 543-2200
TELECOPIER (516) 543-2271
HOWARD E. PACHMAN
MATTHEW E. PACHMAN COUNSEL
KAREN R. BROWN'
HARVEY B. BESUNDER
JOSEPH FARNETI PATRICK A. SWEENEY
wuo wnwirren x xew e xev
February 4 , 1994
Thomas Wickham, Supervisor
and Members of the Town Board
Town Hall
Town of Southold
53095 Main Road
P.O. Box 1179
Southold, New York 11971
RE: Jem Commons
Dear Supervisor Wickham:
As you know, we are the attorneys for Jem Commons.
We are in receipt of Councilwoman Alice J. Hussie's letter to Jem
Commons dated January 26, 1994 . This, coupled with other media
stories, gives us great concern.
As I am sure you are aware, the applicant is following the actions
of the Town Board and other Town agencies with respect to the
status of the parcel recently rezoned to R-40 and HD.
Please be advised that if any action is taken which our client
deems adverse to its civil rights, we are prepared to advise Jem
Commons of their legal right to commence such state or federal
actions which are necessary to protect its interests against the
Town, its agencies and other persons, including Town Board members,
both in their individual and representative capacities. Such
actions would seek compensatory and punitive damages, as well as
attorney's fees as may be appropriate.
FEB 81994
Page 2
Thomas Wickham, Supervisor
February 4, 1994
We trust such action will not be necessary. Given the potential of
such litigation, it may be appropriate for your Board to authorize
the Town Attorney to meet with myself and my client to discuss
these issues.
We will not pursue this matter in the media or at a public hearing,
which may degrade to a circus atmosphere.
1Very trulyours,
HEP/blb HOWARD E. PACHMAN
cc: Jem Commons
Hon. Joseph J. Lizewski, Councilman
Hon. Alice J. Hussie, Councilwoman
Hon. Joseph L. Townsend, Jr. , Councilman
Hon. Ruth D. Oliva, Councilwoman
Judith Terry, Town Clerk
Laury Dowd, Town Attorney
Richard Ward, Chairman
of the Planning Board
CC pD
G za
s
SUPERVISOR o '
Thomas H. Wickham '.
O �.
a Ti
COUNCILMEN � ;y,� � �� y. Town Hall, 53095 Main Road
P. O. Box 1179
Joseph J. Lizewski ='z- Southold, New York 11971
Alice J. Hussie Telephone (516) 765 - 1891
Joseph L.Townsend. Jr. Fax(516) 765 - 1823
Ruth D. Oliva TOWN BOARD
Justice Louisa P. Evans TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
January 26, 1994
Kontakosta Associates
43 West 54th Street
New York, New York 10019
Re: Change of Zone - Jem Commons
Dear Mr. Kontakosta:
On February 8, 1994, the Southold Town Board will be discussing the
annulment of the covenants and restrictions consented to with the change of
zone for Jem Commons.
You are invited to attend this discussion. Should you have any questions,
please feel free to contact me.
Veryy o��yk
Alice J. Hussie
Councilwoman
AJH:mis
cc: Town Board
Planning Board
JAN 27 J
oS�EFOIKC,' S�-s
JUDITH T. TERRY O< Town Hall, 53095 Mi Road
TOWN CLERK `T P.O. Box 1179
REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS Southold, New York 11971
MARRIAGE OFFICERFax (516) 765-1823
RECORDS MANAGEMENT OFFICER +�/ Telephone (516) 765-1801
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION OFFICER [
OFFICE OF THE TOWN CLERK
TOWN OF SOUTHOLD
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS ADOPTED BY THE
SOUTHOLD TOWN BOARD AT THEIR JANUARY 4, 1994 ORGANIZATIONAL MEETING:
WHEREAS, the Town of Southold finds that a considerable time has passed
since the HD zoning within the Town of Southold has been evaluated; and
WHEREAS, during this time there have been considerable changes in the
physical, social and regulatory aspects of development within the Town;
and
WHEREAS, during this time the Town of Southold has revised its
comprehensive plan as regards hamlet density of development throughout
the Town; and
WHEREAS, during this time limitations have arisen in the Village of
Creenport's ability to provide water and sewer infrastructure to support
hamlet density zoning in areas outlying the Village; and
WHEREAS, the R-40 parcel shown on the attached Exhibit A was integrally
related to the Jem Commons HD zone which was granted on December 7,
1993, so that any comprehensive review of that HD zone requires a review
of that R-40 parcel as well; and
WHEREAS, the Southold Town Stewardship Task Force has recommended
the development and adoption of Transfer of Development Rights and other
related programs or techniques which may have an impact on the character
and location of future development within the Town of Southold;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Town Board hereby
resolves to undertake the preparation of a comprehensive review of the
vacant HD zones within the Town of Southold and the described R-40
parcel, and directs the staff to prepare a plan for conducting such review.
Judith T. Terry
Southold Town Clerk
January 5, 1994
1 0 1991
Udo
0'10'31
[ .n t � HD
'e C
LB
RR
B
�-- HD AHD _4 RO _
1
HD RRA, : . C
+apRt /I o c
R-80
LB4" LIO I !
R-40 eN
��QinV HO,Cn �
1
IK 1pY
ol
'E7, 1 / SHE Eq — /51-A N'
L /
�� k 3
T
r
. ,IE—Nl rZEALr}_ r,"c 7. zoo'_/"
N9a 5�ec prif 26, 1994
TUYE, F', G . +.SOF d�ryi
( —� Ary flG .�r,t'v i2�fG7^0 �E1'c? --�--_ — —7-
I Suf�O/�. Courrtt! 't71x Pers'ce�l= 1t7p.:7 -p35� f-Z�i LiCRn3Bd Ler�d ,Survs�ors � _. '1
m Nu W.O.
t~!'BBtl�id/Tt Fl, Y: �sF°tAN.5�i7f'
:N.66 '._O'O•p..r;,
TI 35- 33 -
i '
ff I
O _
V
i
,S00 _
7%
I (N 6r'knfi-Ft e9"E, �
I �
r
4]
Cn I—
s •I II 4j
i W
y
i
� A j
10,
- - - _ - -
"c�o '30'YN• � i, -
z I
16
r,
' I
i
r �P.
I' WWVI
W 2 41994
......_,,..,. _ ----------,_.._,,. SOIIiHOLDiOWN
LONG / SLAND SOUND X
-
I
40—
R I - -
i
� o I
I
\ n,
\
I I I
I
luse,r°.n i I �a
I \ � HD
1
1 \ , , � Ho
� I R-40 i � A_C �V \ p1�.x Ron ���
i I
Q
4Q':
A l.� A,vV v\ mnr�a 1- 11 \ - / / R H� AHD 4 RO •r• tl -
V v v �r s 1 I ' V � � •a,. _g w �
I \ \ tt—
° e�
\ r
\
I
o
\
I i
\
_ B
40
R
I \ e R 80
• b .
L° "A
� -
i \ H v R 40
rt<
i \ I
LIO
A-C - -
\
I — v D
Ie -
I I I �� °mow ► � � 1� �` \ � ' \\ v \ -_ � u R ao o I ✓ � • a $ � f + I€Nr R
R a. n Rfl
\ 1
< I
I
C
- I
1
I � ?1 0 - / - I r-I I - , \ � �\ • 1 � � \ \ � Re L � � �I � 9,� --'h�,y -+-. ' � - I R ® M � M
I
I p
\ \ I J
AIC MATTITUCK o R-80 ,�>° AV v 1 R-80 '� B .M ,je R e R-� �� F - 0
><fl - I I I I A-C \ \ \ \ \ - a' • _ g z M- �\\ RR �,,..p ..,bor OF TNOLO_ s R-80
"is _Sou_ R-200
➢ R 8q Rao Y �R-so �\ I
� R- 0
/r —�\ 1pVl% ?i
80 La
�.,
I
_ I L� �___ ��
_ _ i AN0
' � `� —_— p _ \
gA . Tow / syE e
ti r GJ
nk D
R /
i
4 i
/ 0 c
—8
I
s Y �
I A
B .
n LD
1
I I SOUTH
O
a a I
1 MM J
_ - Q-C � R-80 °� Q�
Ln -80 Arp R-sn
3 R
55�, � p5cknnm I ' I
l —C
M Il V. J Lr.Yh _ B°Y
w-C mdA° R Qe ♦ �'� , --C- - .os•.< \�
Cn.Y DQ ; .4 -
,{' � \ SHELTER ISLAND \
a -
x°
R p CrNk
GREAT PECON/C � _� � n f- R4 �I AMENAED NO.
A-C
BAY £ i qPR . I1, 19$9 f29
a4 L I T TL E PECON/C �� i
e AP CL. 25, 1989 - 131
ryx BAY �. RMR2'.
. A . 11990 132
' sEQr. zo , 1990 133-
1 l6, 1993 134
OEC. IZ, 1993 133
iqUFFOLK
Agricultural Conservation FISHERS ISLAND JAN 31994 -t36
a-c � 8 1
Rte° Residential Low Density AA a•^ R-80
R fl° Residential Low Density A
I - a
R-i2° Residential low Density B
I � R-z°L Residential Low Density C
Ch°C°mWn/ COM
FR-i.90 Residential Low Density D
\ I
®, Ro Hamlet Density Residential yqe
ZONING MAP ADOPTED JANUARY 10, 1989 e M y [
$ EST Bonon � dI'4 Midtl/. Farm
0.R Resort/Residential ' «o 'qe ' Bnne - w rmn
ROBINS ISLAND
I\ D Ro Residential/Office Pontl
\O a EasT a.v Easl
\ • / \ • / \ `+ O F O U L O L
D8--400\V/ IL JI \\\���JJJIIIILII \��// LII w 0 / /s/°ntl T. D
Le Limited Business / ` vnnd % Pan° pYn, e.°ch R-120 Q R-120
SUFFOLK COUNTY Rfl Hamlet Business � - R..w �R-1
NEW YORK 0 General Business R 120 ✓\` Bar/eYr'.1d 5°JIn
MASTER PLAN UPDATE Ra Ara ?+°ez arish $ V{I01r10r I116PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT _CONSUL-%NTS - TARRYTOWN, NEWYORK M r Marine I
_ .-• 5:{ - Mil Marine II 49`OCr
eY°
uo R 400Light Industrial/Office Park /sC
•4 yQ -�
u Light Industrial
AHo Affordable mousing nisi.
Fti